We have free education through 12th grade. The overwhelming majority of people making minimum wage didn't graduate high school. So what good what more free education do?
I hear a lot of people implying that a higher minimum wage somehow forces "evil corporations" to "pay their fair share" without actually addressing the reality of a minimum wage that exceeds the exchanged labor value. Why would an employer want to hire somebody at $15.00/hr who's only making them $7.00/hour??
This is getting fun. You DO realize the middle class was proportionally larger, there was less government debt, and there was higher taxes on the upper class and corps when government spending was lower?
what is wrong with having people who are accepting of the fact that society does not produce enough jobs for everyone?
That's hard to parse, so I'm not sure what you mean. But assuming there's a societal obligation to "produce enough jobs for everyone" might be a stumbling point, as it asserts without proof that "society" can perform the necessary economic calculations to do so, and has a collective moral obligation to do so. That's not the least bit clear.
You think mass-mailings are an effective way to communicate with parents who abuse or neglect their kids? Have you dealt with dysfunctional families in any clinical or direct service setting?
It has always been this way. I honestly think the martini culture was people self-medicating. I think much more of the population is prone to anxiety and/or depression than is generally accepted. Also, since it's a continuum of dysfunction, some people may struggle along not quite needing/getting a diagnosis, whereas others may be profound obvious cases. Lots of people probably hover around some line of "functional" by using various avoidance tactics and/or substances.
Get there and get it out...assuming you control the dongle, you cut the breaks via SMS, you should beat the cops to the scene? Seems risky. I don't really think it's an issue, but I see how some might.
If only the state sent out pamphlets and video and announcements on good parenting, attacking solid issues like maximizing cohesion between parents and children so your kids don't piss you off so much by acting like little motherfuckers, or improving their academic performance so their teachers stop fucking calling you all the damn time, or keeping them engaged in a positive social atmosphere so the police stop coming to your house and charging you fines, we might encourage little changes that give big effects.
At the very least, we could make parents more self-conscious about the judgment of their peers about their parenting.
In the current culture, it's not even permitted to plainly point out that kids from lower SES do better when they spend more time at school, but kids from higher SES don't need more school time. The code phrase in the psychological studies is "more research is needed".
I don't know what you think of political correctness or cultural sensitivity, but when it's verboten to plainly speak the truth in psychology and the social sciences, I don't know what kind of message to make parents "more self-conscious" you think you'd be able to send - it's almost delusional to think you wouldn't be met with a cry of "CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE!".
Not that I disagree with the idea of actually telling people "Breeding and not caring for children properly is totally unacceptable." I just don't think there's much realism in thinking you're going to be allowed to A) pay for that behavior, and B) dictate social norms.
You can't remove a bomb (or its fragments) after killing the driver in an explosion. I don't know how hard it would be to leave no traceable evidence you cut the brakes with a dongle, but I'm guessing it's a concern.
It is an abuse to call the lawless behavior of a person whose children are starving "criminal", because what the fuck do you expect a person to do?
I'm not talking about people stealing to buy food. That, as far as I know, doesn't happen very much. People steal to buy themselves drugs, but I'm talking about gross child abuse, negligence, or general violence in and around the home, or having additional children in a "home" that's already damaging children on a daily basis.
I'm not in the least concerned of the cost of feeding people. Housing, even, probably isn't *that* bad to pay for. The problem is that income doesn't actually equate to people choosing to raise children properly. To not abuse them, do drugs while they're pregnant, make sure they go to school, and what not. I raise the point because of what my wife saw while working in a poor school district. Basic civilized behavior seems to go by the wayside for a high enough percentage of a community that already gets food and housing. When it goes by the wayside, the criminal behavior becomes incredibly expensive.
I just see GMI as a subsidy for breeding criminality into a greater and greater portion of the population.
Insightful. It is interesting that people DO NOT WANT TO TALK ABOUT the revenge effect of the social democracy facing immigration. It's notable how badly things are ghetto-ized in France. It's notable that the countries with the biggest cultural/ethnic supermajorities (the scandinavian countries) are also the ones with the most virulent anti-immigrant minority parties. Germany seems to be dealing better than some, but even they aren't actually doing as well welcoming immigrants as the USA. People forget that the USA has one of the top five most liberal legal immigration policies.
I never hear anyone advocating GMI or your version of it address the pathologies that come with people not having to work for a living. You don't forsee any unintended consequences/social pathologies with this plan?
Who? TinEye does not almost exclusively use binary hashes. I've tested their stuff. It deals with flipping, overlap/underlap, and is even good at picking things up from different angles and partial image matching.
Well, execution of any implementation plan is going to be limited by the competence of the implementors, huh? Doesn't mean the idea itself is unrealistic.
The only thing this actually accomplishes is empowering the totalitarian state.
Since I'm usually on your side of that argument, I will respond by saying that there are already plenty of filtering/sifting technologies in place. I think you're getting to the point in your argument where "anything that can be used by the totalitarian state is a bad thing", which almost sounds like insisting we don't build or implement anything new that's useful to deal with large amounts of information.
How dumb do you have to be to post child pornography to Twitter or Facebook?
Think of the 17 yo girl who sends her boob pic to her boyfriend. This protects her against her own bad judgment, or against the bad judgment of her boyfriend, or the many, many "friends" who will see and re-share that pic, which to the casual observer could just as easily be an 18yo.
A couple of simple methods to avoid false positives include including a couple other generated or inherent values (image size, a few pixel colors, etc.). Hash lookup does five-nines of sorting through that, then a quick set of comparisons like those narrows it to one or two images, which can be compared using image recognition. Do the cheap comparisons first, and only do more expensive false-positive checks for the positive matches.
I've had a couple of instances where a couple (not all) severs were configured differently, and applications would perform differently, depending on what server you were currently randomly connected to
That's a system management issue, not a capacity planning issue.
Slashdot Mirror
We have free education through 12th grade. The overwhelming majority of people making minimum wage didn't graduate high school. So what good what more free education do?
Huh? You broke the pattern.
I hear a lot of people implying that a higher minimum wage somehow forces "evil corporations" to "pay their fair share" without actually addressing the reality of a minimum wage that exceeds the exchanged labor value. Why would an employer want to hire somebody at $15.00/hr who's only making them $7.00/hour??
This is getting fun. You DO realize the middle class was proportionally larger, there was less government debt, and there was higher taxes on the upper class and corps when government spending was lower?
You do realize the middle class was proportionally larger when there was less government debt?
what is wrong with having people who are accepting of the fact that society does not produce enough jobs for everyone?
That's hard to parse, so I'm not sure what you mean. But assuming there's a societal obligation to "produce enough jobs for everyone" might be a stumbling point, as it asserts without proof that "society" can perform the necessary economic calculations to do so, and has a collective moral obligation to do so. That's not the least bit clear.
Is Bennett Haseltron. Exactly what the hype is, we're not sure. But it lives up to it.
You think mass-mailings are an effective way to communicate with parents who abuse or neglect their kids? Have you dealt with dysfunctional families in any clinical or direct service setting?
It has always been this way. I honestly think the martini culture was people self-medicating. I think much more of the population is prone to anxiety and/or depression than is generally accepted. Also, since it's a continuum of dysfunction, some people may struggle along not quite needing/getting a diagnosis, whereas others may be profound obvious cases. Lots of people probably hover around some line of "functional" by using various avoidance tactics and/or substances.
Get there and get it out...assuming you control the dongle, you cut the breaks via SMS, you should beat the cops to the scene? Seems risky. I don't really think it's an issue, but I see how some might.
If only the state sent out pamphlets and video and announcements on good parenting, attacking solid issues like maximizing cohesion between parents and children so your kids don't piss you off so much by acting like little motherfuckers, or improving their academic performance so their teachers stop fucking calling you all the damn time, or keeping them engaged in a positive social atmosphere so the police stop coming to your house and charging you fines, we might encourage little changes that give big effects.
At the very least, we could make parents more self-conscious about the judgment of their peers about their parenting.
In the current culture, it's not even permitted to plainly point out that kids from lower SES do better when they spend more time at school, but kids from higher SES don't need more school time. The code phrase in the psychological studies is "more research is needed".
I don't know what you think of political correctness or cultural sensitivity, but when it's verboten to plainly speak the truth in psychology and the social sciences, I don't know what kind of message to make parents "more self-conscious" you think you'd be able to send - it's almost delusional to think you wouldn't be met with a cry of "CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE!".
Not that I disagree with the idea of actually telling people "Breeding and not caring for children properly is totally unacceptable." I just don't think there's much realism in thinking you're going to be allowed to A) pay for that behavior, and B) dictate social norms.
Ah, I wasn't clear. Poorly worded on my part. After it was taken down and added to the list, it couldn't be reposted.
You can't remove a bomb (or its fragments) after killing the driver in an explosion. I don't know how hard it would be to leave no traceable evidence you cut the brakes with a dongle, but I'm guessing it's a concern.
It is an abuse to call the lawless behavior of a person whose children are starving "criminal", because what the fuck do you expect a person to do?
I'm not talking about people stealing to buy food. That, as far as I know, doesn't happen very much. People steal to buy themselves drugs, but I'm talking about gross child abuse, negligence, or general violence in and around the home, or having additional children in a "home" that's already damaging children on a daily basis.
I'm not in the least concerned of the cost of feeding people. Housing, even, probably isn't *that* bad to pay for. The problem is that income doesn't actually equate to people choosing to raise children properly. To not abuse them, do drugs while they're pregnant, make sure they go to school, and what not. I raise the point because of what my wife saw while working in a poor school district. Basic civilized behavior seems to go by the wayside for a high enough percentage of a community that already gets food and housing. When it goes by the wayside, the criminal behavior becomes incredibly expensive.
I just see GMI as a subsidy for breeding criminality into a greater and greater portion of the population.
Insightful. It is interesting that people DO NOT WANT TO TALK ABOUT the revenge effect of the social democracy facing immigration. It's notable how badly things are ghetto-ized in France. It's notable that the countries with the biggest cultural/ethnic supermajorities (the scandinavian countries) are also the ones with the most virulent anti-immigrant minority parties. Germany seems to be dealing better than some, but even they aren't actually doing as well welcoming immigrants as the USA. People forget that the USA has one of the top five most liberal legal immigration policies.
I never hear anyone advocating GMI or your version of it address the pathologies that come with people not having to work for a living. You don't forsee any unintended consequences/social pathologies with this plan?
Who? TinEye does not almost exclusively use binary hashes. I've tested their stuff. It deals with flipping, overlap/underlap, and is even good at picking things up from different angles and partial image matching.
You mean like towards homosexuals, or transgendered people?
At close range (inside 5 yards), birdshot is quite deadly.
Well, execution of any implementation plan is going to be limited by the competence of the implementors, huh? Doesn't mean the idea itself is unrealistic.
The only thing this actually accomplishes is empowering the totalitarian state.
Since I'm usually on your side of that argument, I will respond by saying that there are already plenty of filtering/sifting technologies in place. I think you're getting to the point in your argument where "anything that can be used by the totalitarian state is a bad thing", which almost sounds like insisting we don't build or implement anything new that's useful to deal with large amounts of information.
How dumb do you have to be to post child pornography to Twitter or Facebook?
Think of the 17 yo girl who sends her boob pic to her boyfriend. This protects her against her own bad judgment, or against the bad judgment of her boyfriend, or the many, many "friends" who will see and re-share that pic, which to the casual observer could just as easily be an 18yo.
A couple of simple methods to avoid false positives include including a couple other generated or inherent values (image size, a few pixel colors, etc.). Hash lookup does five-nines of sorting through that, then a quick set of comparisons like those narrows it to one or two images, which can be compared using image recognition. Do the cheap comparisons first, and only do more expensive false-positive checks for the positive matches.
Law enforcement agencies are allowed to hold this stuff for training and evidence. If it's for enforcement purposes, they can do it.
I've had a couple of instances where a couple (not all) severs were configured differently, and applications would perform differently, depending on what server you were currently randomly connected to
That's a system management issue, not a capacity planning issue.