I refuse to carry a portable phone. I never have one and unless things change, I never will. I do use portable phones, lots of different ones. If I needed to call someone right now, I would ask one of you, "Could you please make a call for me?" If I am on a bus and it is late and I need to tell somebody that I am going to arrive late, there is always some other passenger in the bus who will make a call for me or send a text for me. Practically speaking, it is not that hard.
So as long as other people are around who are willing to be exploited slaves, it's all good. You get the benefits of the phones when you need them, while their owners get the drawbacks.
If you are getting a high California salary, and willing to live cheaply, you can save a ton of money.
When I moved to Silicon Valley, I lived in my van for two years. Then I got a private office, and slept on a roll-up mat. After a year of that, I had enough for a downpayment on a house, and rode the California real estate rollercoaster from there.
Er, well, I could save quite a lot of money by living in a cardboard box in flyover country too.
And that money would go farther, so there, nyeah!;)
Why does it have to break the bank for it to make sense? An extra $2 is past the threshold where it is worth it to this person.
Yes but on the face of it, that seems like a strange threshold - as I said you can get, if you will, one "unit" of entertainment from a theater for maybe $16-$20.
So for less than that you get as much video as you want to watch for a whole month from Netflix. The slight change in price seems meaningless compared to value, compared to almost any other form of entertainment. It's also way less than the internet bill alone would be for most people.
Thus to me, the line seems kind of strange, especially that small an increase. Doubling the price, there I could see per year maybe that starts to be too much, even though it's still providing a lot of value. But it's nothing like that.
Well, that's how economics works. On the margin.
In any large enough market (and it doesn't have to be all that large), even a small price increase causes a decrease in sales.
There will always be some percentage of people teetering on the decision edge. Charge an extra $2/mo, and they say "screw it", as they were close to saying it anyway.
Countless suits have said "nobody will make their decision based on this" to their peril.
Farming has already gone this route, it's becoming more automated each year.
If that's the case, why so many still shout out that "we NEED" all these illegal 'guests' in the US from our southern border?
I thought they were so desperately needed by the US food economy to pick/harvest.
If that is no longer the case, why again are people defending letting them in illegally?
Because they vote Democrat.
You have indeed identified the hole in their logic - it's all robots, all the time, until somebody wants to shut that southern door. Then suddenly it's human labor again.
They simultaneously don't matter, and also matter so much that we just can't close the door. Because reasons...
I'm told that Mutually Assured Destruction is good for peace. In that case, shouldn't the US have simply given the Chinese their space tech? Just to keep everyone even, and dissuade anyone from launching.
No, because (on an earthly, relative scale, of course) China's government is in fact bad and we are in fact good.
I know that gives some folks the vapors, but oh well.
I "file" (label) lots of stuff - and my rules label far more than I manually do.
But I also just let other stuff sit in my Inbox. Not hurting anybody other than taking up a smidgen of space. Can find it via search. Maybe someday if I'm sick or super bored I'll file or delete all 30,000+...
Slashdot Mirror
Citing dissents authored by Republican appointees
Oh, well that cinches it.
Dissent is not allowed.
Republicans aren't allowed either. Well, we're working on that one, but we'll get there ...
Everyone is on red alert for Trump to do or say something wrong. He does that anyway but how many damn hit pieces do you need for one person?
Since this is Slashdot, about five or six per day.
And had it been Obama, we'd be talking about how visionary and forward looking and all that he must be ...
I refuse to carry a portable phone. I never have one and unless things change, I never will. I do use portable phones, lots of different ones. If I needed to call someone right now, I would ask one of you, "Could you please make a call for me?" If I am on a bus and it is late and I need to tell somebody that I am going to arrive late, there is always some other passenger in the bus who will make a call for me or send a text for me. Practically speaking, it is not that hard.
So as long as other people are around who are willing to be exploited slaves, it's all good. You get the benefits of the phones when you need them, while their owners get the drawbacks.
Thanks Richard!
Unclean! Unclean!
I'm surprised it isn't higher.
If you are getting a high California salary, and willing to live cheaply, you can save a ton of money.
When I moved to Silicon Valley, I lived in my van for two years. Then I got a private office, and slept on a roll-up mat. After a year of that, I had enough for a downpayment on a house, and rode the California real estate rollercoaster from there.
Er, well, I could save quite a lot of money by living in a cardboard box in flyover country too.
And that money would go farther, so there, nyeah! ;)
Do I have those facts regarding Dr. Rita Kappel correct?
Indeed, you do seem to have those facts right about Rita Kappel and her being disciplined for her postoperative care of a patient. Bravo!
They have decided whether to take a page down -- and why do they have that position?" Van Lynden said.
Because (political biases excepted) they are literally a search engine that just links to what people publish and talk about.
And strangely enough, people publish and talk about medical professionals being disciplined.
Why does it have to break the bank for it to make sense? An extra $2 is past the threshold where it is worth it to this person.
Yes but on the face of it, that seems like a strange threshold - as I said you can get, if you will, one "unit" of entertainment from a theater for maybe $16-$20.
So for less than that you get as much video as you want to watch for a whole month from Netflix. The slight change in price seems meaningless compared to value, compared to almost any other form of entertainment. It's also way less than the internet bill alone would be for most people.
Thus to me, the line seems kind of strange, especially that small an increase. Doubling the price, there I could see per year maybe that starts to be too much, even though it's still providing a lot of value. But it's nothing like that.
Well, that's how economics works. On the margin.
In any large enough market (and it doesn't have to be all that large), even a small price increase causes a decrease in sales.
There will always be some percentage of people teetering on the decision edge. Charge an extra $2/mo, and they say "screw it", as they were close to saying it anyway.
Countless suits have said "nobody will make their decision based on this" to their peril.
So in other words, we have no idea how to model human wisdom and decency.
I'm assuming Facebook must have their own payment system ... surely most FB users don't have a credit card on file with them?
OK, so for those who do ... why would you let your child play with your FB account then?
Do you let your children play with your Amazon account? Or your physical wallet?
Now Jiffy Lube will offer to change your license plate battery for just another $49.99.
WTF could these things do that would possibly justify such a price point?
Er ... um ... you wouldn't need to put a new sticker on it every year?
You'd just have to change a battery instead ... oh yeah.
If that's the case, why so many still shout out that "we NEED" all these illegal 'guests' in the US from our southern border?
I thought they were so desperately needed by the US food economy to pick/harvest.
If that is no longer the case, why again are people defending letting them in illegally?
Because they vote Democrat.
You have indeed identified the hole in their logic - it's all robots, all the time, until somebody wants to shut that southern door. Then suddenly it's human labor again.
They simultaneously don't matter, and also matter so much that we just can't close the door. Because reasons ...
The pincers, on the other hand, are best with small, odd-shaped items.
You insensitive clod! Why I oughta ...
Oh, never mind.
So you've managed to get some guy who is in legal jeopardy to say a lot of stuff. Interesting.
What is all this "sue whenever you don't like something" carp?
It's actually not illegal (yet) just to disagree with past democrat presidents.
My faith in humanity has been a little shaken this year," Musk continues
Well, I'm with you in thinking that humanity is not where to put your faith. You are right that we should put it somewhere else.
And that's why you (and others) are flailing around looking for where to put your faith.
We diverge however when you think that we should put our faith in "AI" ...
Because you don't need to be either of these two to understand the basics of "AI"
I guess that depends on how basic "the basics" are.
And if you're going to say it, Pale Moon already sold out blocking noscript and other blocking tools.
Huh?
I'm reading /. with current PaleMoon, with NoScript, right now.
So, what are you talking about?
I'm told that Mutually Assured Destruction is good for peace. In that case, shouldn't the US have simply given the Chinese their space tech? Just to keep everyone even, and dissuade anyone from launching.
No, because (on an earthly, relative scale, of course) China's government is in fact bad and we are in fact good.
I know that gives some folks the vapors, but oh well.
non-technology experts with no programming experience
OK, beyond the one or two hidden wunderkinds you'll find, how on God's green earth are you going to teach these people "the basics of AI"?
This sort of shrill hyperbolic alarmism is counterproductive to getting people to take climate change seriously.
I keep saying that.
If anybody's wondering why folks like me are skeptical, it's because of decades of shrill alarmism.
If you were trying to make skeptics, you couldn't have done a better job.
Why not both?
I "file" (label) lots of stuff - and my rules label far more than I manually do.
But I also just let other stuff sit in my Inbox. Not hurting anybody other than taking up a smidgen of space. Can find it via search. Maybe someday if I'm sick or super bored I'll file or delete all 30,000+ ...