They current work in Seattle. They are driving to work wondering what it will be like 100 years from now. As a way of explaining WHY they were wondering that, they did a quick flashback to 2046 (which was in the past...but how far back we don't know yet.) At that time the character was a school teacher in China.
I assume they'd continue saying, "It only took [10] years for me to leave China and get a job as as the mascot of the Seattle Mariners." If that much could change in 10 years...what would it be like 100 years from now.
The biggest mistake I see is the sentence fragment "A 100 years from now." That kinda messes up everything because you don't know which sentence it belongs to.
17% of your salary for 2 years, if you get paid over $50,000. 0 if you get less than $50,000. (pause if you get fired)
Math: 17% of 50,000 is $8,500. That means you only pay $17,000 for your degree. (It also means you're only making $41,500, so you're better off negotiating a salary at $49,999.)
That seems like exactly wrong way to do it. If you liked Logan, you would have probably liked it if it took place in the desert with a donkey, and he shaved.
Maybe though, they aren't talking about liking the movie, but rather if the trailer will hook them enough to go see the movie.
Even then, I think their analysis is pretty stupid. (BTW, I didn't read the article.)
That was my reaction as well. When did an 'update' even ask that question. I figured there was the possibility that it was a 'really big' update and so there was extra interaction involved. I wonder if anyone can validate that.
Bonuses do mess up the tax withholding rates though which typically results in more taxes being withheld than should be. This is resolved at tax filing and typically translates into less of an outstanding tax burden, (or a higher refund if you get one of those.)
I'm going to have to try this. I wonder if it will prevent the 'logging out' or 'pausing' of the primary browser account when someone logs out of a GMail session. It's been causing me headaches.
Sorry I can't be as tin-foil hat as the rest of you, but let me tell you how this affected me.
My PC at home is used by all my family. We pop in and out of Gmail users 100 times a day. However my browser always stayed logged in as the primary user, which affected how the extensions worked, among other things.
Recently that all changed and everytime someone would log out of email it would log me out of the browser. (Actually it would say 'Paused' but since you had to log back in to un pause it, it's pretty much the same thing.)
Interestingly, I never noticed it logging into the browser as these other Gmail accounts. It would only log the primary account out.
Correct. It needs to be an 'exchange' vehicle, not an investment vehicle. I'm not sure what to attach it too, but the value of a single bitcoin needs to be tied to something else, and it's worth the exact same value when you put it in as it is when you take it out.
For example...if, lets say, 1 bitcoin is worth $100 (USD). You put in $100 USD and you get 1 Bitcoin. Many years later, you 'cash out' and for your 1 Bitcoin you get $100 (USD). (Depending on inflation that $100 might not be 'worth' as much as it was before...but it's still $100.)
The trouble was because they wanted it to be it's own currency...not tied to anything at all... with the idea of 'exchange rates' and official stuff like that. Instead, it should have been more like the coins and cash of a currency. It represents an amount of a currency and it's used to enable transactions, but it doesn't have any intrinsic worth. (Or rather, its intrinsic worth is unrelated to its face value.)
I'm not 'satisfied' with the teleportation mechanics. I think it's a stop-gap solution.
In your experience, what will replace it? "Seated" VR and 'Room Scale' seem to be working fine, but we're going to need to get out of the box. How is that going to happen? Will 'pull the trigger to walk' ever work in VR, or will it always have these motion problems you mentioned as a physical limitation?
Ready Player One was super strange. (I know...movie) They already had AR/VR devices. At any time and without any action (except thought?) you could look at the real world. They also had wireless connections and during the final battle there were people running through the streets who were supposedly taking part in the battle. I'm not sure how any of this makes any sense at all.
The point is, aside from a brain stem interface like the Matrix...where your brain just 'thinks' it's moving. I don't know how you'll ever by able to do anything.
If you read the comments on the thread with the pictures, one of the top ones says, "the new 16:9 window is too large. I like the smaller window better." Same shape...just a little bigger, but they don't like it.
Like webnut said, gone are the days when someone would sell you a product. Now everyone is just using products as bait in order to hook a recurring revenue stream. They could make things that work 'stand-alone' but it's so much more profitable to make it go through the middle-man....with them being the middle man.
That being said, is there an indie/homegrown market for home automation? Is it all just Raspberry Pi based stuff? Are their light-bulbs that will work on my internal network? Is there a remote door lock system that listens on my own IP address and not routed through a server on the internet?
I think their are. The first security camera flaws were poorly secured little web-servers in the cameras themselves weren't they? But at least they had to come to my house to hack me..rather than hacking everyone all at once by hitting the server.
The distribution is supposed to come in the form of lower-prices. A room that's attended by a robot needs to cost half that as a room with an human attendant. Same with food. When McDonald's replaces all their people with robots, it's supposed to make hamburgers cost 50cents. The balance between robots taking all the jobs is that people won't need as much money, so they won't need as much 'job.' We can cut the work-week down to 15 hours and have 3 people share the job that one was doing previously because the robots have driven cost-of-living down.
That's not socialism, that's capitalism.
The problem is that the prices aren't dropping. As a previous poster said, the money saved on robots is filtering UP and creating wealth rather than reducing prices. Not sure who to blame for that. It's gotta be the people who are willing to pay 'human' price for 'robot' service. Of course, I personally don't know the difference, so I can't make that choice. I guess I'm part of the problem.
The Facebook users don't get financial compensation, but they do get value from the service that Facebook provides.
I wonder though, is Google in a different category? Is it fine to make all your money off of advertising, which is selling your users' eyeballs? If Facebook had ads on every page, would it still count as 'the users being the product?' Oh wait, it says in the Summary that he doesn't like ads or spam. (Not a Facebook user...didn't know how many ads were there.)
So that means Google is exactly the same? They provide a free service, (or dozens of free services) as they sell your eyeballs and clicks to various advertisers. Is he dropping Google as well? Or are Google services worth it while Facebook isn't?
That's what I want to know. If it wasn't Orbitz.com, what was it? Was it the 'old' orbitz.com before they were bought by Expedia? When were they bought by Expedia? My wife said, "Why do they call it Legacy, is it for old people?"
First Airport was in 1910 (approx) It's been 110 years. Will the SF Airport be relevant in 100 years?
Airports are already overcrowded, bottlenecked, and supposedly terrorist targets. The current model has a LOT of problems. Would you really expect the current model to still be relevant in 100 years?
As with all climate change discussions, I wonder why we're so interested in maintaining the status quo. Let's try something different.;)
The thing I've always 'disliked' about 'room-sharing' and 'ride-sharing' (and I guess to some extent E-bay and Youtube) is that people make it a full-time job instead of a 'community' thing.
I don't remember the taxi company complaining about the 'ride-sharing' board at the University. If you were going home for the weekend, why not take along a passenger that was going the same way. In general that's the basic idea of Uber and Lyft. I have a car, you're going my way, hop in.
There was also the 'couch-surfing' phenomenon of a while back. The differences between that and what AirBnB is now are what I see as the problem. It's one thing to allow someone to spend the night in your empty guest room because nobody else is using it. It's a completely different thing to buy a room/ apartment/ house dedicated to having people pay to stay there.
The 'problem' with Uber and AirBnB is that people have transformed the 'occasionality' of it into a permanent full-time job. It's not a sporadic and almost random thing they offer, it's 'the only thing.'
How can a human put the stuff on the grill, or put the cheese on afterwards? Do they have to shut down the robot, enter the safety cage, exit the cage, turn on the robot. I don't see how you can do that with 'food' sitting on the grill.
The pictures in the article don't show any room. The human co-worker would have to slide up next to the robot, get smashed in the gut or the head by a heavy steel pneumatic arm, and then they wouldn't have to worry about their minimum wage job anymore.
Instead of a 'Minecraft Themed' tutorial on how to use Scratch, if they really wanted a Minecraft coding tutorial it should have been in Java and they should have made a Minecraft Mod.
Previous "Hour of Code" themes like Star Wars made a bit of sense to just be some clip art glued to a generic coding tutorial...but Minecraft is already a game and famously moddable. It doesn't make sense to program it in a completely separate language and engine.
It's like if they had a Perl themed 'Hour of Code' and they just used Scratch to march images of Perl code snippets around to form a picture of a program.
At the end of Ghost in the Shell, when they started playing "Making_of_the_cyborg.mp3" I literally did tear up. I sat there on the couch (yes, it was a Redbox rental..not in the theater) and cried the whole time the song was playing. When it finished I turned off the movie and the next time I watch Ghost in the Shell it'll be the one that starts with that song.
BTW, Ghost in the shell has the opposite problem of that mentioned in the OP. It has great visuals, but since it couldn't care less about the actually point of the story it was copying, it was pretty much worthless.
You said 'Court' but I want to point out, it's not for the judge to decide, it's for the Jury. This is why we have Jury trials. Specifically it's supposed to be your 'peers.'
The question is asked, "Do you think this person is guilty of stealing from this company?" The judge says, "This is what the law is and what it says." The lawyers say, "this is what the defendant did or didn't do." Then it's up to the Jury to decide if what the defendant did or didn't do counts as breaking the law.
Sometimes it's cut and dried...but if it was always black and white like that we wouldn't need juries. Juries are specifically for cases like this where the people say, "Yes, I ordered all that stuff, but I didn't think it was breaking the law." The people on the jury say, "You know...I probably wouldn't have known it was against the law either." or they say, "Don't be an idiot. That's obviously against the law." That's why they are supposed to be 'peers.' People who 'generally' think the way you do.
Other examples of 'great jury fodder' is self-defense. "I would have done the exact same thing in the situation."
I think it's interesting how this guy is being shamed for posting a controversial opinion.;) Where did I read about that happening? Oh that's right..it reportedly happens at Google.
I read the manifesto...the whole thing. He makes two spurious and generalizing claims (women are more cooperative, men are driven by status) but everything else in the paper are legitimate concerns about "how" diversity is being enforced. He also gives a lot of suggestions as to how it could be better fostered and/or measured.
The part I dislike the most is how most of the published reactions are couched in damage control and distancing themselves from the author. In reality they needed to be inclusive saying how they want to hear everyone's opinions and how they take those concepts into account when making policy. Basically, the public responses have just reinforced the complaints that the author had with the programs in the first place. (Especially Sarah Mei, who basically just called him names and insulted his intelligence without any sort of direct rebuttal to his claims.)
It seems that Ajit Pai is the most openly corrupt government official that I've seen in United States politics. Am I missing something?
Keep in mind, I'm not saying he's the most 'corrupt,' but rather the most open about it. And when I say 'corrupt' I just mean pandering to special interest groups.
The instant he was appointed he basically said, "We're going to hand the Internet over to big corporations, and smile while we do it." Then just laughed whenever anybody said that it's contrary to what everyone wants. For example, the comments thing, "We nominally have a comment period, but we've decided to just ignore them."
I just don't get it. I'd expect speeches trying to justify what he's been doing, or trying to convince people to come around to his way of thinking...but really it seems like he just doesn't care. On one hand, that's kind of refreshing in a 'no bullshit' kind of way, but on the other hand, I don't agree at all with how he's handling the situation.
Slashdot Mirror
What? I didn't read it like that at all.
They current work in Seattle. They are driving to work wondering what it will be like 100 years from now. As a way of explaining WHY they were wondering that, they did a quick flashback to 2046 (which was in the past...but how far back we don't know yet.) At that time the character was a school teacher in China.
I assume they'd continue saying, "It only took [10] years for me to leave China and get a job as as the mascot of the Seattle Mariners." If that much could change in 10 years...what would it be like 100 years from now.
The biggest mistake I see is the sentence fragment "A 100 years from now." That kinda messes up everything because you don't know which sentence it belongs to.
17% of your salary for 2 years, if you get paid over $50,000.
0 if you get less than $50,000.
(pause if you get fired)
Math:
17% of 50,000 is $8,500. That means you only pay $17,000 for your degree.
(It also means you're only making $41,500, so you're better off negotiating a salary at $49,999.)
That seems like exactly wrong way to do it. If you liked Logan, you would have probably liked it if it took place in the desert with a donkey, and he shaved.
Maybe though, they aren't talking about liking the movie, but rather if the trailer will hook them enough to go see the movie.
Even then, I think their analysis is pretty stupid. (BTW, I didn't read the article.)
That was my reaction as well. When did an 'update' even ask that question. I figured there was the possibility that it was a 'really big' update and so there was extra interaction involved. I wonder if anyone can validate that.
Bonuses do mess up the tax withholding rates though which typically results in more taxes being withheld than should be. This is resolved at tax filing and typically translates into less of an outstanding tax burden, (or a higher refund if you get one of those.)
I'm going to have to try this. I wonder if it will prevent the 'logging out' or 'pausing' of the primary browser account when someone logs out of a GMail session. It's been causing me headaches.
Sorry I can't be as tin-foil hat as the rest of you, but let me tell you how this affected me.
My PC at home is used by all my family. We pop in and out of Gmail users 100 times a day. However my browser always stayed logged in as the primary user, which affected how the extensions worked, among other things.
Recently that all changed and everytime someone would log out of email it would log me out of the browser. (Actually it would say 'Paused' but since you had to log back in to un pause it, it's pretty much the same thing.)
Interestingly, I never noticed it logging into the browser as these other Gmail accounts. It would only log the primary account out.
Correct. It needs to be an 'exchange' vehicle, not an investment vehicle. I'm not sure what to attach it too, but the value of a single bitcoin needs to be tied to something else, and it's worth the exact same value when you put it in as it is when you take it out.
For example...if, lets say, 1 bitcoin is worth $100 (USD). You put in $100 USD and you get 1 Bitcoin. Many years later, you 'cash out' and for your 1 Bitcoin you get $100 (USD). (Depending on inflation that $100 might not be 'worth' as much as it was before...but it's still $100.)
The trouble was because they wanted it to be it's own currency...not tied to anything at all... with the idea of 'exchange rates' and official stuff like that. Instead, it should have been more like the coins and cash of a currency. It represents an amount of a currency and it's used to enable transactions, but it doesn't have any intrinsic worth. (Or rather, its intrinsic worth is unrelated to its face value.)
I'm not 'satisfied' with the teleportation mechanics. I think it's a stop-gap solution.
In your experience, what will replace it? "Seated" VR and 'Room Scale' seem to be working fine, but we're going to need to get out of the box. How is that going to happen? Will 'pull the trigger to walk' ever work in VR, or will it always have these motion problems you mentioned as a physical limitation?
Have you been experimenting with other methods?
Ready Player One was super strange. (I know...movie)
They already had AR/VR devices. At any time and without any action (except thought?) you could look at the real world.
They also had wireless connections and during the final battle there were people running through the streets who were supposedly taking part in the battle. I'm not sure how any of this makes any sense at all.
The point is, aside from a brain stem interface like the Matrix...where your brain just 'thinks' it's moving. I don't know how you'll ever by able to do anything.
If you read the comments on the thread with the pictures, one of the top ones says, "the new 16:9 window is too large. I like the smaller window better." Same shape...just a little bigger, but they don't like it.
And that's called 'hating change.'
Can someone tell me how a physical key makes you 'phish-proof.' Phishing is primarily social engineering isn't it?
Like webnut said, gone are the days when someone would sell you a product. Now everyone is just using products as bait in order to hook a recurring revenue stream. They could make things that work 'stand-alone' but it's so much more profitable to make it go through the middle-man....with them being the middle man.
That being said, is there an indie/homegrown market for home automation? Is it all just Raspberry Pi based stuff? Are their light-bulbs that will work on my internal network? Is there a remote door lock system that listens on my own IP address and not routed through a server on the internet?
I think their are. The first security camera flaws were poorly secured little web-servers in the cameras themselves weren't they? But at least they had to come to my house to hack me..rather than hacking everyone all at once by hitting the server.
The distribution is supposed to come in the form of lower-prices. A room that's attended by a robot needs to cost half that as a room with an human attendant. Same with food. When McDonald's replaces all their people with robots, it's supposed to make hamburgers cost 50cents. The balance between robots taking all the jobs is that people won't need as much money, so they won't need as much 'job.' We can cut the work-week down to 15 hours and have 3 people share the job that one was doing previously because the robots have driven cost-of-living down.
That's not socialism, that's capitalism.
The problem is that the prices aren't dropping. As a previous poster said, the money saved on robots is filtering UP and creating wealth rather than reducing prices. Not sure who to blame for that. It's gotta be the people who are willing to pay 'human' price for 'robot' service. Of course, I personally don't know the difference, so I can't make that choice. I guess I'm part of the problem.
The Facebook users don't get financial compensation, but they do get value from the service that Facebook provides.
I wonder though, is Google in a different category? Is it fine to make all your money off of advertising, which is selling your users' eyeballs? If Facebook had ads on every page, would it still count as 'the users being the product?' Oh wait, it says in the Summary that he doesn't like ads or spam. (Not a Facebook user...didn't know how many ads were there.)
So that means Google is exactly the same? They provide a free service, (or dozens of free services) as they sell your eyeballs and clicks to various advertisers. Is he dropping Google as well? Or are Google services worth it while Facebook isn't?
That's what I want to know. If it wasn't Orbitz.com, what was it? Was it the 'old' orbitz.com before they were bought by Expedia? When were they bought by Expedia? My wife said, "Why do they call it Legacy, is it for old people?"
First Airport was in 1910 (approx) It's been 110 years. Will the SF Airport be relevant in 100 years?
Airports are already overcrowded, bottlenecked, and supposedly terrorist targets. The current model has a LOT of problems. Would you really expect the current model to still be relevant in 100 years?
As with all climate change discussions, I wonder why we're so interested in maintaining the status quo. Let's try something different. ;)
The thing I've always 'disliked' about 'room-sharing' and 'ride-sharing' (and I guess to some extent E-bay and Youtube) is that people make it a full-time job instead of a 'community' thing.
I don't remember the taxi company complaining about the 'ride-sharing' board at the University. If you were going home for the weekend, why not take along a passenger that was going the same way. In general that's the basic idea of Uber and Lyft. I have a car, you're going my way, hop in.
There was also the 'couch-surfing' phenomenon of a while back. The differences between that and what AirBnB is now are what I see as the problem. It's one thing to allow someone to spend the night in your empty guest room because nobody else is using it. It's a completely different thing to buy a room/ apartment/ house dedicated to having people pay to stay there.
The 'problem' with Uber and AirBnB is that people have transformed the 'occasionality' of it into a permanent full-time job. It's not a sporadic and almost random thing they offer, it's 'the only thing.'
How can a human put the stuff on the grill, or put the cheese on afterwards? Do they have to shut down the robot, enter the safety cage, exit the cage, turn on the robot. I don't see how you can do that with 'food' sitting on the grill.
The pictures in the article don't show any room. The human co-worker would have to slide up next to the robot, get smashed in the gut or the head by a heavy steel pneumatic arm, and then they wouldn't have to worry about their minimum wage job anymore.
Instead of a 'Minecraft Themed' tutorial on how to use Scratch, if they really wanted a Minecraft coding tutorial it should have been in Java and they should have made a Minecraft Mod.
Previous "Hour of Code" themes like Star Wars made a bit of sense to just be some clip art glued to a generic coding tutorial...but Minecraft is already a game and famously moddable. It doesn't make sense to program it in a completely separate language and engine.
It's like if they had a Perl themed 'Hour of Code' and they just used Scratch to march images of Perl code snippets around to form a picture of a program.
So funny that you say that.
At the end of Ghost in the Shell, when they started playing "Making_of_the_cyborg.mp3" I literally did tear up. I sat there on the couch (yes, it was a Redbox rental..not in the theater) and cried the whole time the song was playing. When it finished I turned off the movie and the next time I watch Ghost in the Shell it'll be the one that starts with that song.
BTW, Ghost in the shell has the opposite problem of that mentioned in the OP. It has great visuals, but since it couldn't care less about the actually point of the story it was copying, it was pretty much worthless.
"""Monitoring driver attention by measuring the driver's touching of the steering wheel "was a poor surrogate for monitored driving engagement." """
How would you monitor their engagement? Eye tracking? Manual corrections to the car's path/speed?
What happens when people ignore the "please grab the wheel?" Does the car pull over and park? Is that what it should do?
You said 'Court' but I want to point out, it's not for the judge to decide, it's for the Jury. This is why we have Jury trials. Specifically it's supposed to be your 'peers.'
The question is asked, "Do you think this person is guilty of stealing from this company?"
The judge says, "This is what the law is and what it says."
The lawyers say, "this is what the defendant did or didn't do."
Then it's up to the Jury to decide if what the defendant did or didn't do counts as breaking the law.
Sometimes it's cut and dried...but if it was always black and white like that we wouldn't need juries. Juries are specifically for cases like this where the people say, "Yes, I ordered all that stuff, but I didn't think it was breaking the law." The people on the jury say, "You know...I probably wouldn't have known it was against the law either." or they say, "Don't be an idiot. That's obviously against the law." That's why they are supposed to be 'peers.' People who 'generally' think the way you do.
Other examples of 'great jury fodder' is self-defense. "I would have done the exact same thing in the situation."
I think it's interesting how this guy is being shamed for posting a controversial opinion. ;) Where did I read about that happening? Oh that's right..it reportedly happens at Google.
I read the manifesto...the whole thing. He makes two spurious and generalizing claims (women are more cooperative, men are driven by status) but everything else in the paper are legitimate concerns about "how" diversity is being enforced. He also gives a lot of suggestions as to how it could be better fostered and/or measured.
The part I dislike the most is how most of the published reactions are couched in damage control and distancing themselves from the author. In reality they needed to be inclusive saying how they want to hear everyone's opinions and how they take those concepts into account when making policy. Basically, the public responses have just reinforced the complaints that the author had with the programs in the first place. (Especially Sarah Mei, who basically just called him names and insulted his intelligence without any sort of direct rebuttal to his claims.)
It seems that Ajit Pai is the most openly corrupt government official that I've seen in United States politics. Am I missing something?
Keep in mind, I'm not saying he's the most 'corrupt,' but rather the most open about it. And when I say 'corrupt' I just mean pandering to special interest groups.
The instant he was appointed he basically said, "We're going to hand the Internet over to big corporations, and smile while we do it." Then just laughed whenever anybody said that it's contrary to what everyone wants. For example, the comments thing, "We nominally have a comment period, but we've decided to just ignore them."
I just don't get it. I'd expect speeches trying to justify what he's been doing, or trying to convince people to come around to his way of thinking...but really it seems like he just doesn't care. On one hand, that's kind of refreshing in a 'no bullshit' kind of way, but on the other hand, I don't agree at all with how he's handling the situation.