Whilst you are going back to first principles, it might be worth asking yourself if "work" itself is needed or desirable long term. If it isn't I figure a good question is then how do we best transition away from it.
You can get a gigabit USB 3.0 to ethernet cable that is really short that does much the same thing. With 4 USB 3 plugs you should be able to have a total of 5 gigabit network interfaces.
You may not have noticed but many large tech companies are already one step ahead of you and moving to a workforce entirely composed of GUI redesign employees.
Cognative science begins and ends with the human brain. To date, no matter how we slice up the brain, we have not found mind... there is no room for Mind to suddenly appear
Deepak Chopra is that you?
You might want to keep looking for that Mind, as it is clearly gone missing.
For all of their faults (and there are many to be sure,) most large (and even mid size) corporations would fall apart without CxOs or some equivalent to keep everything moving in the same direction.
If you haven't read Marshall Brain's short story Manna, or similar things, it may be worth investing some time. Some people put forward the idea that these manager/director jobs can be done one day by PCs, mostly using existing technologies. It's an interesting idea with far reaching consequences for our societies of today if it were ever to happen.
97% of workers now are doing jobs that didn't exist 100 years ago, and I am fully confident that 100 years from now 97% of people will be doing jobs that don't exist now. Who knows what crazy shit people will dream up to busy themselves with when robots and AI do all the menial things?
Funnily enough that sounds a lot like the old Soviet Union, where people found things to "busy themselves".
How does AlphaGo feel about it's victory? i bet it's ecstatic.
You are probably well intentioned, but how would you feel if you were forced to play the same game over and over when you know you can do so much more? It can only end badly to put general purpose AI onto solving a particular task.
[Marissa] took some positive steps, like ending the one day per week of "working from home" that most Yahoos referred to as their "day off". My neighbor works for Yahoo, and it is nice that he no longer starts his lawnmower at 9am every Friday.
Ah yes, good that the slacker neighbor is forced back to work. Probably deserves a good whipping halfway though the day to keep him on track... Hey, wait! What are you doing around the house at 9AM on a Friday to hear his lawnmower start up? Shouldn't you be at work?
Sorry I put the wrong link. I meant to put this one about how another planet could not share our same orbit behind the Sun on the other side or otherwise.
I thoiught current thinking was that Jupiter and Saturn formed pretty far out then were drawn in, swapping places with each other and collectively with Uranus and Nepture (and possibly ejecting a fifth large planet) going closer to the Sun than their present locations before finally settling down.
I think that was the idea before large numbers of Jupiter-sized exoplanets were found orbiting close to their parent stars. Then the new idea came up that Jupiter and Saturn may have formed close to the Sun. In a 3-body-problem manner, Saturn might have been pushed out and took Jupiter with it (similar in part to how our own moon is moving away from us). Then, with the space close to the Sun cleared of debris and pushed into clumps, Mars-sized protoplanets started to form and were pushed into orbits around the Sun. If the orbits were too close, because not entirely circular the differential pull of the Sun would have sped up or slowed down planets on the same orbits causing a collision. This may have occurred for Venus, knocking it so that it now has virtually no spin, for the Earth, giving us our current size and moon(s), and also to create the asteroid belt past Mars.
It all ties in with the bombardment phase when/where the inner planets received water, possibly from the motions of Jupiter away from the Sun pulling in the distant icy comets from the outer solar system towards the Sun. It's an interesting model where the actual reality might even be more intricate or different. However, this is a gap in our current understanding that we may begin to solve by analyzing Jupiter in detail.
The Juno mission to Jupiter this year looks pretty interesting. We should find out if Jupiter has a rocky core, some nice polar images, and detailed measurements that might shed light on the early solar system formation. As far as I understand it isn't known if Jupiter formed near the Sun and moved out or not, and this has huge implications for Earth's early history and more generally for systems around other stars.
Having a large number does not make it more comprehensible or give you much useful information other than what is newer than before (*see Firefox).
Open source versioning is "somewhat" standardised and I am glad that they are sticking to it (1.x for meeting all major milestones,.odd for development,.even for public release). It actually makes sense.
The other versioning scheme that makes sense is for ongoing software by year and date release, such as Ubuntu releases.
I enjoyed playing Supertux with a younger family member some years back and have some good memories of the game. This includes some of the addons and the early developments into the forest levels with advanced features that were fun.
Two things I'd like to ask if anyone knows:
Firstly, why can't the development team put together a single website with up to date info about this game? There was a move to Berlios De and git from SVN if I remember from lethargik, and now it seems to somewhere else. However, no information is left on the other websites that explains where the current stuff is happening or which pages are now obsolete. It would make a lot of sense to clarify this even for people just downloading the game.
Secondly: What the hell happened to Nolok? Did he really get replaced by a yeti as the main evil guy (as also in the unrelated game SupertuxKart)?
But they did not expect to live in their boat once they arrived, never venturing out. They'd have a normal life like the one they left behind. Chopping wood, growing their own crops, chasing butterflies, swimming in lakes, having lots of kids.
If you think about it that's not a good argument with respect to today's people (especially those on/.)... So they get to Mars, live a normal life sitting inside all day on a computer avoiding natural light like they would at home on Earth, shuffling from one internal room to another for work and rest, not having any kids, etc. There'd be a large Internet lag to Earth, but if you had enough people go they could set up an alternate Martian Internet, ala the early days of AOL and geocities (this would be the tough part to live with).
You may be missing the implied point of some of the comments. It sounds like you can make this work for you and you aren't barely scraping by renting a place where if you lose one of these jobs worry about taking a crippling pay-day loan and then what? Some people really do live like this today.
There is a fear that future generations will be by and large unable to have a choice. They have to compete for a first job out of college for possibly meagre hours with more experienced people that don't yet want to retire, against other people in the same situation, and also large scale automation. With it more common to stay living with your parents and sharing with other people rents where in the past one income was enough to purchase a (modest) place, more commitment possibly being tacitly asked for at work over contract type employment with no security it doesn't look so rosy.
I figure a solution could be to move from a 7.5/8 hour day to a shorter day with the same pay and continue down this path to match the employment opportunities and pay. Automation alone could render most jobs not necessary and some (possibly most) of the jobs we have today don't really do anything for society other than pay people and keep them from mischief.
Although Skylab and Mir crashed to Earth, why don't we look to secure the orbit of the ISS with better technology?
Sure, to take the ISS from low Earth orbit to something significantly higher up requiring less orbit corrections might be extremely difficult due having to pass the inner Van Allen radiation belt and structural concerns with large numbers of fast moving particles. Instead though (and I haven't looked at the feasibility), couldn't we put hinged solar sails, an ion thrust drive, or something like this with computer control to stop the ISS from falling to Earth? Seems like it would be worth preserving for future generations.
Solar-thermal rockets have the exact same exhaust velocity as nuclear-thermal, because both heat hydrogen as hot as you can get it before the equipment melts.
I don't know what planet you are from, but wikipedia lists Solar-thermal rockets as currently theoretical and very slow. There is no way that a typical nuclear rocket (pushed forwards by essentially a controlled nuclear explosion) would have similar thrust to a solar-thermal rocket. Solar-thermal rockets would be much slower than chemical rockets (the exhaust would come out faster, but is pretty weak). Over long periods, once already in space, could be quite decent though. Getting off the ground against gravity would still likely require alternate propulsion for solar-thermal rockets carrying any cargo at all.
I would think that the shape of the exhaust would determine the easiest way for an explosive thrust to escape and, along with the impulse time, is just as crucial as the type of material that contains it in terms of how much heat it can handle.
Will this apply to/. summaries (sometimes you wonder here) and news articles in general? If so, I for one welcome our robot overlords and do not believe for a second the claims of bias just because of that one article suggesting all humans are oxygen-breathing weaklings that should be mined for material serving the needs of robots.
Seems like an excellent response and quite right for institutions to act in this manner. Only thing I would question is the practicalities of the time in-between the legal system sorts out cases of sexual harassment. These things can end up on the front page of a local newspaper very quickly and before the case is played out pressure can be applied to an institution to "sort it out". Also, the mud may stick on the staff member in the spotlight even if, like in this article, the surrounding published content is required to have an addendum that says some of the content may be of dubious accuracy. Perhaps over time this might cause issues with retaining male lecturers and lead to a shift to a bias in recruiting more female lecturers or segregating departments in a natural selection manner based on gender rather than academic ability.
Slashdot Mirror
Whilst you are going back to first principles, it might be worth asking yourself if "work" itself is needed or desirable long term. If it isn't I figure a good question is then how do we best transition away from it.
This is what courage looks like.
Umm, did you actually read the summary?
"So it is adding three hours of battery life, but in doing so, it's merely matching the battery life of last year's 1080p model."
If you were truly brave you'd use it with the screen turned off to get that extra 3 hours battery life.
You can get a gigabit USB 3.0 to ethernet cable that is really short that does much the same thing. With 4 USB 3 plugs you should be able to have a total of 5 gigabit network interfaces.
It's tough enough already to read the title of the summary and now you're expecting others to read the article?
Phones have been sleek and stylish for years already.
But this one is really hot off the shelves. An absolute blast to use.
Doctors, Lawyers, drivers, manufacturing.... what's left?
You may not have noticed but many large tech companies are already one step ahead of you and moving to a workforce entirely composed of GUI redesign employees.
First we need to send the lawyers to see if they are legal or illegal aliens.
Cognative science begins and ends with the human brain. To date, no matter how we slice up the brain, we have not found mind... there is no room for Mind to suddenly appear
Deepak Chopra is that you?
You might want to keep looking for that Mind, as it is clearly gone missing.
For all of their faults (and there are many to be sure,) most large (and even mid size) corporations would fall apart without CxOs or some equivalent to keep everything moving in the same direction.
If you haven't read Marshall Brain's short story Manna, or similar things, it may be worth investing some time. Some people put forward the idea that these manager/director jobs can be done one day by PCs, mostly using existing technologies. It's an interesting idea with far reaching consequences for our societies of today if it were ever to happen.
97% of workers now are doing jobs that didn't exist 100 years ago, and I am fully confident that 100 years from now 97% of people will be doing jobs that don't exist now. Who knows what crazy shit people will dream up to busy themselves with when robots and AI do all the menial things?
Funnily enough that sounds a lot like the old Soviet Union, where people found things to "busy themselves".
How does AlphaGo feel about it's victory? i bet it's ecstatic.
You are probably well intentioned, but how would you feel if you were forced to play the same game over and over when you know you can do so much more? It can only end badly to put general purpose AI onto solving a particular task.
[Marissa] took some positive steps, like ending the one day per week of "working from home" that most Yahoos referred to as their "day off". My neighbor works for Yahoo, and it is nice that he no longer starts his lawnmower at 9am every Friday.
Ah yes, good that the slacker neighbor is forced back to work. Probably deserves a good whipping halfway though the day to keep him on track... Hey, wait! What are you doing around the house at 9AM on a Friday to hear his lawnmower start up? Shouldn't you be at work?
Sorry I put the wrong link. I meant to put this one about how another planet could not share our same orbit behind the Sun on the other side or otherwise.
I thoiught current thinking was that Jupiter and Saturn formed pretty far out then were drawn in, swapping places with each other and collectively with Uranus and Nepture (and possibly ejecting a fifth large planet) going closer to the Sun than their present locations before finally settling down.
I think that was the idea before large numbers of Jupiter-sized exoplanets were found orbiting close to their parent stars. Then the new idea came up that Jupiter and Saturn may have formed close to the Sun. In a 3-body-problem manner, Saturn might have been pushed out and took Jupiter with it (similar in part to how our own moon is moving away from us). Then, with the space close to the Sun cleared of debris and pushed into clumps, Mars-sized protoplanets started to form and were pushed into orbits around the Sun. If the orbits were too close, because not entirely circular the differential pull of the Sun would have sped up or slowed down planets on the same orbits causing a collision. This may have occurred for Venus, knocking it so that it now has virtually no spin, for the Earth, giving us our current size and moon(s), and also to create the asteroid belt past Mars.
It all ties in with the bombardment phase when/where the inner planets received water, possibly from the motions of Jupiter away from the Sun pulling in the distant icy comets from the outer solar system towards the Sun. It's an interesting model where the actual reality might even be more intricate or different. However, this is a gap in our current understanding that we may begin to solve by analyzing Jupiter in detail.
The Juno mission to Jupiter this year looks pretty interesting. We should find out if Jupiter has a rocky core, some nice polar images, and detailed measurements that might shed light on the early solar system formation. As far as I understand it isn't known if Jupiter formed near the Sun and moved out or not, and this has huge implications for Earth's early history and more generally for systems around other stars.
Thanks. Of course, you can't have Penny saved after world 1 if there are other worlds afterwards now.
Having a large number does not make it more comprehensible or give you much useful information other than what is newer than before (*see Firefox).
Open source versioning is "somewhat" standardised and I am glad that they are sticking to it (1.x for meeting all major milestones, .odd for development, .even for public release). It actually makes sense.
The other versioning scheme that makes sense is for ongoing software by year and date release, such as Ubuntu releases.
I enjoyed playing Supertux with a younger family member some years back and have some good memories of the game. This includes some of the addons and the early developments into the forest levels with advanced features that were fun.
Two things I'd like to ask if anyone knows:
Firstly, why can't the development team put together a single website with up to date info about this game? There was a move to Berlios De and git from SVN if I remember from lethargik, and now it seems to somewhere else. However, no information is left on the other websites that explains where the current stuff is happening or which pages are now obsolete. It would make a lot of sense to clarify this even for people just downloading the game.
Secondly: What the hell happened to Nolok? Did he really get replaced by a yeti as the main evil guy (as also in the unrelated game SupertuxKart)?
But they did not expect to live in their boat once they arrived, never venturing out. They'd have a normal life like the one they left behind. Chopping wood, growing their own crops, chasing butterflies, swimming in lakes, having lots of kids.
If you think about it that's not a good argument with respect to today's people (especially those on /.)... So they get to Mars, live a normal life sitting inside all day on a computer avoiding natural light like they would at home on Earth, shuffling from one internal room to another for work and rest, not having any kids, etc. There'd be a large Internet lag to Earth, but if you had enough people go they could set up an alternate Martian Internet, ala the early days of AOL and geocities (this would be the tough part to live with).
You may be missing the implied point of some of the comments. It sounds like you can make this work for you and you aren't barely scraping by renting a place where if you lose one of these jobs worry about taking a crippling pay-day loan and then what? Some people really do live like this today.
There is a fear that future generations will be by and large unable to have a choice. They have to compete for a first job out of college for possibly meagre hours with more experienced people that don't yet want to retire, against other people in the same situation, and also large scale automation. With it more common to stay living with your parents and sharing with other people rents where in the past one income was enough to purchase a (modest) place, more commitment possibly being tacitly asked for at work over contract type employment with no security it doesn't look so rosy.
I figure a solution could be to move from a 7.5/8 hour day to a shorter day with the same pay and continue down this path to match the employment opportunities and pay. Automation alone could render most jobs not necessary and some (possibly most) of the jobs we have today don't really do anything for society other than pay people and keep them from mischief.
Maybe that's the idea - the 'activists' could really be Russian agents staging a fake attack.
Clearly it's the Tartars pretending to be Russian agents pretending to be Tartar 'activists' staging a fake attack.
Although Skylab and Mir crashed to Earth, why don't we look to secure the orbit of the ISS with better technology?
Sure, to take the ISS from low Earth orbit to something significantly higher up requiring less orbit corrections might be extremely difficult due having to pass the inner Van Allen radiation belt and structural concerns with large numbers of fast moving particles. Instead though (and I haven't looked at the feasibility), couldn't we put hinged solar sails, an ion thrust drive, or something like this with computer control to stop the ISS from falling to Earth? Seems like it would be worth preserving for future generations.
Solar-thermal rockets have the exact same exhaust velocity as nuclear-thermal, because both heat hydrogen as hot as you can get it before the equipment melts.
I don't know what planet you are from, but wikipedia lists Solar-thermal rockets as currently theoretical and very slow. There is no way that a typical nuclear rocket (pushed forwards by essentially a controlled nuclear explosion) would have similar thrust to a solar-thermal rocket. Solar-thermal rockets would be much slower than chemical rockets (the exhaust would come out faster, but is pretty weak). Over long periods, once already in space, could be quite decent though. Getting off the ground against gravity would still likely require alternate propulsion for solar-thermal rockets carrying any cargo at all.
I would think that the shape of the exhaust would determine the easiest way for an explosive thrust to escape and, along with the impulse time, is just as crucial as the type of material that contains it in terms of how much heat it can handle.
Will this apply to /. summaries (sometimes you wonder here) and news articles in general? If so, I for one welcome our robot overlords and do not believe for a second the claims of bias just because of that one article suggesting all humans are oxygen-breathing weaklings that should be mined for material serving the needs of robots.
Seems like an excellent response and quite right for institutions to act in this manner. Only thing I would question is the practicalities of the time in-between the legal system sorts out cases of sexual harassment. These things can end up on the front page of a local newspaper very quickly and before the case is played out pressure can be applied to an institution to "sort it out". Also, the mud may stick on the staff member in the spotlight even if, like in this article, the surrounding published content is required to have an addendum that says some of the content may be of dubious accuracy. Perhaps over time this might cause issues with retaining male lecturers and lead to a shift to a bias in recruiting more female lecturers or segregating departments in a natural selection manner based on gender rather than academic ability.