The fact is, Americans have no choice but to buy things from the American economy. If you are in an industry that decides they only have to pay people according to another country's economy, then all members in that industry are being undermined in regards to their relation to peers to function in the local economy. If everyone was being affected across the board then it wouldn't be such a big deal because costs would be coming down. But this is very specific to technology workers mostly, so we are not only having the job market dropped out from underneath us, but we are also not having our economy reflect costs that balance with our income as we should have in a healthy economy.
You don't factor in the fact that the boys cotton shorts made in the US will likely last a lot longer and most of the cost of having local workers will be recovered. Chinese factories use the thinnest cheapest fabrics they can. I've seen a big change in the quality of clothing in my life time. So we will buy something for more but it will last longer. Besides, who says we need to put as much labor into clothes. Maybe simpler easier to make clothes such as rugby pants become more fashionable, rather than blue jeans with all the stitches and rivets. There are a whole hell of a lot more factors to consider than you are taking into account.
Yet has any anti-complete ever been successful of winning such a broad claim? They can write anything they want in a contract, doesn't mean it is enforceable. Why tempt fate by using company equipment.
This is a case of a smart person being dumb. If you want technology to be yours, you don't let it touch any machine owned by another company and you do it all on your own time. How a person could muddy the waters like this when the stakes are so high is beyond me.
Well congratulations! If AI has nothing to do with being human like then I guess you have solved the entire field of AI since computers have been able to do raw calculations better than a human since their inception!
I didn't say AI is whatever a computer can't do. I guess if AI is about a computer's ability to calculate better than a human we have had it for 50 years now, all further study into the area should cease. I mean really, computers were beating people at poker 30 years ago.
But what element of human psychology was there in the way that the computer played? AI is not about winning games over humans, it is about mimicing human psychology.
You can't claim it's AI if you are using computer math skills. DIal it back to human math skills and augment that with an ability to read people with a camera, and then you have real AI.
It must win by judging the tells of its opponents though a camera, not calculate the possible outcomes which have a greater chance of success. This would make it AI.
SQLite is a single user database that stores a lot of data for a single user quickly efficiently and reliably. To say that there is no industrial use case for it is to say that there is no situation where a single user application needs to store a lot of data. Furthermore it would be overkill to use a database server to store some application data.
I'm not really getting the motivation for Doritos to keep this honest. What will keep it from going to the truth, to 'have half a drink and we make money on an uber for you'.
I think the problem is that they are locked into a business plan that does not support reasonable payments. Aren't these the corporations that are supposed to dissolve into newer better companies which are stronger, and paying more and employing more people in a capitalist system?
Really? Because I hear people saying things like "no software is perfect", and "this only needs to be better than an average human". So when it is not superhuman and someone dies, will people just to make the excuse that they are saving lives overall? What if the open source software is proven to be safer than an average human, than the person using the software should be able to make the same excuse that the commercial automakers are... that it is supposed to be safer on average, so a few deaths don't matter.
I don't know why a lot of people go on about how we are getting more square footage for the dollar today when we buy a house. What matters to me when I buy a house is the area that it exists in, as well as whether it will work for me. Perhaps 950 square feet worked for a family back then, but today even if I wanted to buy such a small house I would be living under a freeway and not living in an area conducive to family living. So there are limits to the kind of house I can buy today, you cannot ignore it. I found an interesting comparison of the cost of living between 1975 and now on this page: http://www.mybudget360.com/cos....
The average cost of a house has gone from 209k to 270k. The average cost of a car has doubled from $16.5k to $31k and I dare say a vehicle is more expensive to maintain today and more necessary than ever before as public transportation is stretched to meet today's population in most districts. The cost of schooling, also more necessary today, has gone from $8k to $19k for public college and $16k to $42k for private. These are the costs that make up a life and people are being dragged out more and more. The article also correctly brings up the fact that the price of a barrel of oil seems to rise and fall but the cost at the pump only rises.
Google on the decrease of the output of the American worker over the last few years, there are several articles on it. In spite of technological increases the amount produced by the American worker is steadily decreasing today. People are out there working hard and their families are only falling further behind for it. Salaries have not increased as much as prices have risen in the last 40 years. Lack of performance is the result. People are tired.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a race to the bottom. Maybe with more money in the nation and in the hands of consumers it begins to sustain itself.
The fact is, Americans have no choice but to buy things from the American economy. If you are in an industry that decides they only have to pay people according to another country's economy, then all members in that industry are being undermined in regards to their relation to peers to function in the local economy. If everyone was being affected across the board then it wouldn't be such a big deal because costs would be coming down. But this is very specific to technology workers mostly, so we are not only having the job market dropped out from underneath us, but we are also not having our economy reflect costs that balance with our income as we should have in a healthy economy.
You don't factor in the fact that the boys cotton shorts made in the US will likely last a lot longer and most of the cost of having local workers will be recovered. Chinese factories use the thinnest cheapest fabrics they can. I've seen a big change in the quality of clothing in my life time. So we will buy something for more but it will last longer. Besides, who says we need to put as much labor into clothes. Maybe simpler easier to make clothes such as rugby pants become more fashionable, rather than blue jeans with all the stitches and rivets. There are a whole hell of a lot more factors to consider than you are taking into account.
....if you're a sociopathic diva who likes to get a lot of attention.
And for heaven's sake, don't TALK about it at work.
Yet has any anti-complete ever been successful of winning such a broad claim? They can write anything they want in a contract, doesn't mean it is enforceable. Why tempt fate by using company equipment.
This is a case of a smart person being dumb. If you want technology to be yours, you don't let it touch any machine owned by another company and you do it all on your own time. How a person could muddy the waters like this when the stakes are so high is beyond me.
Well congratulations! If AI has nothing to do with being human like then I guess you have solved the entire field of AI since computers have been able to do raw calculations better than a human since their inception!
I didn't say AI is whatever a computer can't do. I guess if AI is about a computer's ability to calculate better than a human we have had it for 50 years now, all further study into the area should cease. I mean really, computers were beating people at poker 30 years ago.
I just don't see why it is news. It's another 'NEWS FLASH! Computers can out calculate humans" story.
But what element of human psychology was there in the way that the computer played? AI is not about winning games over humans, it is about mimicing human psychology.
You can't claim it's AI if you are using computer math skills. DIal it back to human math skills and augment that with an ability to read people with a camera, and then you have real AI.
It must win by judging the tells of its opponents though a camera, not calculate the possible outcomes which have a greater chance of success. This would make it AI.
This is nothing about race. This is only about nationality.
+1 Score: 6
SQLite is a single user database that stores a lot of data for a single user quickly efficiently and reliably. To say that there is no industrial use case for it is to say that there is no situation where a single user application needs to store a lot of data. Furthermore it would be overkill to use a database server to store some application data.
I'm not really getting the motivation for Doritos to keep this honest. What will keep it from going to the truth, to 'have half a drink and we make money on an uber for you'.
I think the problem is that they are locked into a business plan that does not support reasonable payments. Aren't these the corporations that are supposed to dissolve into newer better companies which are stronger, and paying more and employing more people in a capitalist system?
Here come the goons to break people's kneecaps.
Really? Because I hear people saying things like "no software is perfect", and "this only needs to be better than an average human". So when it is not superhuman and someone dies, will people just to make the excuse that they are saving lives overall? What if the open source software is proven to be safer than an average human, than the person using the software should be able to make the same excuse that the commercial automakers are... that it is supposed to be safer on average, so a few deaths don't matter.
Who is going to be responsible for it, open source or not.
Sadly, the people who know this are commonly determined to be too expensive to employ. So, they get what they pay for.
Ability to charge the phone is lost in that case. Plus a big kick in the ass if you forgot your dongle.
The business model of 'VPN provider' kind of begs that you look the other way.
I don't know why a lot of people go on about how we are getting more square footage for the dollar today when we buy a house. What matters to me when I buy a house is the area that it exists in, as well as whether it will work for me. Perhaps 950 square feet worked for a family back then, but today even if I wanted to buy such a small house I would be living under a freeway and not living in an area conducive to family living. So there are limits to the kind of house I can buy today, you cannot ignore it. I found an interesting comparison of the cost of living between 1975 and now on this page: http://www.mybudget360.com/cos....
The average cost of a house has gone from 209k to 270k. The average cost of a car has doubled from $16.5k to $31k and I dare say a vehicle is more expensive to maintain today and more necessary than ever before as public transportation is stretched to meet today's population in most districts. The cost of schooling, also more necessary today, has gone from $8k to $19k for public college and $16k to $42k for private. These are the costs that make up a life and people are being dragged out more and more. The article also correctly brings up the fact that the price of a barrel of oil seems to rise and fall but the cost at the pump only rises.
Google on the decrease of the output of the American worker over the last few years, there are several articles on it. In spite of technological increases the amount produced by the American worker is steadily decreasing today. People are out there working hard and their families are only falling further behind for it. Salaries have not increased as much as prices have risen in the last 40 years. Lack of performance is the result. People are tired.