We programmers have been automating our own work for decades now. One could argue that we are working ourselves out of a job, but somehow there always seems to be more work--more automating--to do!
Back in the 30s, Keynes predicted we would all be working four-hour days by now. Somehow, that didn't quite work out. https://www.theguardian.com/bu...
I love all the automated tools I can now use every day, to do the drudge work I used to have to do manually. Who would want to go back to those days? What actually happens is that automation allows us to do MORE than we could do before, and to do NEW things we could never do before. The total amount of work doesn't seem to be shrinking at all.
Life is biased, not just the tax system. And not just towards the uber-rich.
Employees have always been near the bottom of the wealth spectrum. It's natural.
I know a kit who started mowing lawns for people. He made $30 per lawn, about an hour's work. That's a lot better than minimum wage.
This kid got so many customers he couldn't do them all, so he started hiring friends. Not only did he make money on his own work, but on the work of others.
When he went to college, he sold his business to a landscaping company, making enough money to take a significant bite out of his college bill.
Many people who complain about the very wealthy simply have no idea how work and trade relate to income. Personally, I prefer the stability of employment to the wealth that I could earn by taking greater risks. But that's my choice, nobody did me wrong.
The study started with organic, pesticide-free apples. The researchers sprayed the pesticides on the apples, then washed them off with the various solutions.
This method does not really mimic real life, where pesticides are sprayed on plants repeatedly over periods of weeks or months. In real life, some of the pesticides would soak into the apples, where it wouldn't be possible to wash them off using ANY solution.
If your description is accurate, then this is nothing new at all. Tokens and coupons are commonplace, and just because it's "on a computer" or "uses encryption" doesn't make it a new concept, nor does it make it currency.
Yes, of course that "agreed-upon" value changes constantly. That's what inflation is about. Still, every time you purchase something, you and the seller "agree" that the money is a fair exchange for the item or service you are purchasing. You may not be "happy" about the exchange, but you agree enough to carry out the transaction.
Nope, it's not about contracts. The signature is only used for dispute resolution.
If you dispute a charge, MC may go to the vendor with a request for the signature. They then compare the signature to the one they have on file, to see if it matches.
That's it. The signature doesn't bind you any more than using your card online. You are agreeing to the "contract" just by using the card, the signature doesn't add anything to it.
The seller doesn't use the signature, unless there is a dispute. If you dispute a charge, MC may (only rarely) go to the vendor, who produces the signature. They then compare it to yours to see if it matches. That's it.
I happen to own a 2006 Ridgeline, and I love it. Because it doesn't have wheel wells in the bed area, it hauls plywood and sheetrock far better than an F-150. It hoses down just fine.
No, it doesn't have a big bed, but this is fine for your typical pickup owner. These days, most pickup owners live in cities.
Sure, it competes more directly with SUVs than with full-size trucks. But that works for me!
They never said they "dislike" it. But based on their annual subscriber survey data, they find that Microsoft laptops and tablets have a failure rate exceeding 25% over a two year period. This rate, they say, is significantly higher than other brands, and based on this difference, they cannot recommend Microsoft Surface products, for now.
The whole point of currency, whether it's official government currency or cryptocurrency, is that it has an agreed-upon value by everyone who uses it. That seems to be a missing element in this "personal" cryptocurrency.
OK, so maybe it doesn't do it offline. But who cares? I can already ask my Moto G "What song is this?" It listens, and tells me what's playing. I've used it numerous times, and it got it right every time!
Nature tries really hard to produce "average" people. That's why we have a think called the "normal curve"--the majority of people are within the "average" intelligence range, and are "average" in most ways. Only a very few are exceptionally beautiful, or smart, or strong, or whatever other superlative quality might be desirable.
Most extremely talented people I know are somewhat out of balance. Extremely gifted artists tend to struggle with logic, and brilliant scientists tend to struggle with social relationships. These gifted people are blessed--or cursed--with a kind of imbalance that gives them their gift, and also gives them struggles in other areas.
I'd guess that this phenomenon is linked, that when more of a person's brain is devoted to a "gift," it takes away from other areas considered "normal."
It's not at all surprising to me that gifted people might suffer more often from mental illnesses.
ATMs started coming out in the 1970s. People back them wondered what would become of all the teller jobs these machines would replace.
In the 90s it was automatic deposit of payroll that kept people from having to talk to a human at a bank.
Nowadays, it's been months since I set foot in a bank. I'd guess that's true for many slashdot readers. Still, the banking industry is employing more people, not less!
According to BLS, there are 8.4 million people employed in the US financial sector, and this is expected to go up by half a million in the next 10 years.
It seems the robot apocalypse isn't all it's cracked up to be.
Disabling antivirus might work for computer-savvy people like yourself. But consider the many employees and individual users who have no clue about safe links! Trust me, if an unknown person sends an email to all your employees promising something free for clicking a link, some people WILL click it. I know because my company conducts regular security audits which include just this kind of simulated attack. At least one person in every department clicks the suspicious link, every time.
I bank with Chase because they bought WaMu, who bought my community bank. I've turned down offers for as much as $500 to switch banks, because of the sheer hassle of changing banks.
Likewise, it's hard to switch grocery stores because of the hassle of learning a whole new set of products.
Your email provider has you locked in because...who wants to transfer all your old emails to a new provider?
This is life. Every service you use wants to lock you in.
Human employees learn about their environment, accumulating deep knowledge about corporate processes and knowledge. When you have to fire one, you have to re-train your new assistant, and that process takes a lot of time and effort.
It's the same problem with digital assistants. With both human and digital assistants, it's on YOU to make sure that your assistant isn't the sole keeper of knowledge about what they do, whether that is passwords, preferences, priorities, etc. No assistant is ever going to be motivated to keep its (or his or her) knowledge in such a way that it's easy to transfer to another assistant.
When TV came out, it was widely predicted that it would replace radio. Obviously, it didn't, but it did change the way we use radio. Before TV, people regularly listened to radio shows, glued to the set to hear the end of the story. Now, radio has become more of a background music device, or a medium for talk shows, while TV has taken over the story-telling role.
Sure, there will be input methods that replace some of what keyboards now do: touch screen input, voice input, mouse input, and so on. But none of these replace what can be done with a keyboard. They each fill a niche.
The phone and tablet DID replace the desktop computer for many households, but the computer isn't going anywhere. Neither is the keyboard.
A lot of the comments here are based on the idea that this is yet another hyperbolic use of the term AI to refer to "smarter" coding languages. It's not. This is actually talking about neural networks, which you don't actually code.
The author seems to be thinking that neural networks will take over the tasks now performed by traditional coding. This isn't so. Neural networks, for example, aren't really all the good at math. What they ARE good at is pattern recognition. Thing like reading, recognizing images, driving cars, speech recognition, and so on.
There's a major role for neural networks in our technological future. But it will never replace many of the things good old "code" does today.
Slashdot Mirror
We programmers have been automating our own work for decades now. One could argue that we are working ourselves out of a job, but somehow there always seems to be more work--more automating--to do!
Back in the 30s, Keynes predicted we would all be working four-hour days by now. Somehow, that didn't quite work out.
https://www.theguardian.com/bu...
I love all the automated tools I can now use every day, to do the drudge work I used to have to do manually. Who would want to go back to those days? What actually happens is that automation allows us to do MORE than we could do before, and to do NEW things we could never do before. The total amount of work doesn't seem to be shrinking at all.
Life is biased, not just the tax system. And not just towards the uber-rich.
Employees have always been near the bottom of the wealth spectrum. It's natural.
I know a kit who started mowing lawns for people. He made $30 per lawn, about an hour's work. That's a lot better than minimum wage.
This kid got so many customers he couldn't do them all, so he started hiring friends. Not only did he make money on his own work, but on the work of others.
When he went to college, he sold his business to a landscaping company, making enough money to take a significant bite out of his college bill.
Many people who complain about the very wealthy simply have no idea how work and trade relate to income. Personally, I prefer the stability of employment to the wealth that I could earn by taking greater risks. But that's my choice, nobody did me wrong.
...downloading Chrome or Firefox!
The study started with organic, pesticide-free apples. The researchers sprayed the pesticides on the apples, then washed them off with the various solutions.
This method does not really mimic real life, where pesticides are sprayed on plants repeatedly over periods of weeks or months. In real life, some of the pesticides would soak into the apples, where it wouldn't be possible to wash them off using ANY solution.
If your description is accurate, then this is nothing new at all. Tokens and coupons are commonplace, and just because it's "on a computer" or "uses encryption" doesn't make it a new concept, nor does it make it currency.
And this guys' brand means nothing to me, therefore his personal currency is worth nothing to me.
Yes, of course that "agreed-upon" value changes constantly. That's what inflation is about. Still, every time you purchase something, you and the seller "agree" that the money is a fair exchange for the item or service you are purchasing. You may not be "happy" about the exchange, but you agree enough to carry out the transaction.
Nope, it's not about contracts. The signature is only used for dispute resolution.
If you dispute a charge, MC may go to the vendor with a request for the signature. They then compare the signature to the one they have on file, to see if it matches.
That's it. The signature doesn't bind you any more than using your card online. You are agreeing to the "contract" just by using the card, the signature doesn't add anything to it.
The seller doesn't use the signature, unless there is a dispute. If you dispute a charge, MC may (only rarely) go to the vendor, who produces the signature. They then compare it to yours to see if it matches. That's it.
I happen to own a 2006 Ridgeline, and I love it. Because it doesn't have wheel wells in the bed area, it hauls plywood and sheetrock far better than an F-150. It hoses down just fine.
No, it doesn't have a big bed, but this is fine for your typical pickup owner. These days, most pickup owners live in cities.
Sure, it competes more directly with SUVs than with full-size trucks. But that works for me!
Here's what Consumer Reports actually said: https://www.consumerreports.or...
They never said they "dislike" it. But based on their annual subscriber survey data, they find that Microsoft laptops and tablets have a failure rate exceeding 25% over a two year period. This rate, they say, is significantly higher than other brands, and based on this difference, they cannot recommend Microsoft Surface products, for now.
The whole point of currency, whether it's official government currency or cryptocurrency, is that it has an agreed-upon value by everyone who uses it. That seems to be a missing element in this "personal" cryptocurrency.
Of course, ALL money is just fancy bartering!
OK, so maybe it doesn't do it offline. But who cares? I can already ask my Moto G "What song is this?" It listens, and tells me what's playing. I've used it numerous times, and it got it right every time!
Nature tries really hard to produce "average" people. That's why we have a think called the "normal curve"--the majority of people are within the "average" intelligence range, and are "average" in most ways. Only a very few are exceptionally beautiful, or smart, or strong, or whatever other superlative quality might be desirable.
Most extremely talented people I know are somewhat out of balance. Extremely gifted artists tend to struggle with logic, and brilliant scientists tend to struggle with social relationships. These gifted people are blessed--or cursed--with a kind of imbalance that gives them their gift, and also gives them struggles in other areas.
I'd guess that this phenomenon is linked, that when more of a person's brain is devoted to a "gift," it takes away from other areas considered "normal."
It's not at all surprising to me that gifted people might suffer more often from mental illnesses.
ATMs started coming out in the 1970s. People back them wondered what would become of all the teller jobs these machines would replace.
In the 90s it was automatic deposit of payroll that kept people from having to talk to a human at a bank.
Nowadays, it's been months since I set foot in a bank. I'd guess that's true for many slashdot readers. Still, the banking industry is employing more people, not less!
According to BLS, there are 8.4 million people employed in the US financial sector, and this is expected to go up by half a million in the next 10 years.
It seems the robot apocalypse isn't all it's cracked up to be.
I think that's what I said!
You are clearly not like most Americans.
Have you been to Trader Joe's, or Sprouts, or Whole Foods, or Aldi? These stores have wildly differing selections of products.
How many non-technical people run--or could run--their own mail server?
The point isn't that you CAN'T change providers. You can switch from iPhone to Android, but it's painful. That's what lock-in means.
Disabling antivirus might work for computer-savvy people like yourself. But consider the many employees and individual users who have no clue about safe links! Trust me, if an unknown person sends an email to all your employees promising something free for clicking a link, some people WILL click it. I know because my company conducts regular security audits which include just this kind of simulated attack. At least one person in every department clicks the suspicious link, every time.
I bank with Chase because they bought WaMu, who bought my community bank. I've turned down offers for as much as $500 to switch banks, because of the sheer hassle of changing banks.
Likewise, it's hard to switch grocery stores because of the hassle of learning a whole new set of products.
Your email provider has you locked in because...who wants to transfer all your old emails to a new provider?
This is life. Every service you use wants to lock you in.
Human employees learn about their environment, accumulating deep knowledge about corporate processes and knowledge. When you have to fire one, you have to re-train your new assistant, and that process takes a lot of time and effort.
It's the same problem with digital assistants. With both human and digital assistants, it's on YOU to make sure that your assistant isn't the sole keeper of knowledge about what they do, whether that is passwords, preferences, priorities, etc. No assistant is ever going to be motivated to keep its (or his or her) knowledge in such a way that it's easy to transfer to another assistant.
When TV came out, it was widely predicted that it would replace radio. Obviously, it didn't, but it did change the way we use radio. Before TV, people regularly listened to radio shows, glued to the set to hear the end of the story. Now, radio has become more of a background music device, or a medium for talk shows, while TV has taken over the story-telling role.
Sure, there will be input methods that replace some of what keyboards now do: touch screen input, voice input, mouse input, and so on. But none of these replace what can be done with a keyboard. They each fill a niche.
The phone and tablet DID replace the desktop computer for many households, but the computer isn't going anywhere. Neither is the keyboard.
A lot of the comments here are based on the idea that this is yet another hyperbolic use of the term AI to refer to "smarter" coding languages. It's not. This is actually talking about neural networks, which you don't actually code.
The author seems to be thinking that neural networks will take over the tasks now performed by traditional coding. This isn't so. Neural networks, for example, aren't really all the good at math. What they ARE good at is pattern recognition. Thing like reading, recognizing images, driving cars, speech recognition, and so on.
There's a major role for neural networks in our technological future. But it will never replace many of the things good old "code" does today.
The mining tool works by hijacking a computer's central processing unit (CPU), commonly referred to as "the brains" of a computer
Wow, that's amazing! Who would have thought of carrying out an attack in this manner!
And somebody was happy to take that money!