Sorry, but the BSD license doesn't say you can't sell it. So BSD is closer to Free as in beer.
Actually the GPL doesn't say you can't sell it, either, but it makes selling it more complicated, so it's closer to free as in speech.
And for MS Windows I would have said "Free as in M.S.", but herpes is a bit clearer, even if M.S. is more immediately damaging. (Not everyone thinks of M.S. as Multiple sclerosis.)
Reference counted pointers eliminate accidental overflow in non-recursive structures, but they don't address memory leaks due to looped links, and they don't address intentional attacks from referencing beyond allocated bounds.
It doesn't matter HOW pointers are taught, they are inherently unsafe. Even reference counted pointers are unsafe, and I don't believe that those are currently a part of C. Pointers are a buffer overflow attack (or error) waiting to happen.
C is actually quite portable. But documenting it correctly so that someone else (or you a few years later) can understand what's going on it a beast.
C is more portable than either assembler or C++ (to bracket it with similar languages). It's not the most portable, for that you need either an interpreted language or one that runs on a virtual machine. Like Java, Python, Smalltalk, Ruby, etc., but it's probably the most portable language that compiles to native code.
Yes. It didn't work. Hillary was a bit slicker. But since them both parties have been "fixing the vote".
In a sense this is making them both true to their roots. The political ancestors of the Republicans believed that only property owning (white) males should vote. The political ancestors of the Democrats believed that the voting process was too restricted. It's too bad that decision can't be made on it's merits, and that neither party is willing to respect the current laws...laws which they, in combination, were in charge of writing.
It was already clear at the time of the Democrat candidate debates that the "fix was in". Anyone who didn't realize it was just not paying attention. It was (and is) less clear that the Democrats have done more to "fix" the election than have the Republicans, though they have both been clearly seen to be doing it.
It's not clear that "the network effect" is sufficient to cause them to be considered a monopoly. And that's the only grounds that I see for calling them a monopoly. Facebook is more like a "public accommodation". The laws regarding that are different from those regarding monopolies, and I don't understand them, but they *do* exist.
Yes... Unfortunately, not increasing the minimum wage only delays the automation by a year or so, as the cost of automation keeps falling.
Defending the status quo in minimum wages is a losing game, because the other side isn't standing still no matter what you do. Even if you cut the minimum wage automation will continue increasing, because there are some jobs that can already be done for considerably less than a person can live on that haven't yet been automated.
The "cheap community college" has also gone away...or at least become a lot less cheap. When I went to college the community college cost $2/semester, currently the same college costs $31/unit. That means a 12 unit load costs $62. but now the cost is per quarter rather than per semester. So that means it what was $4 is now $186. That's a bit of a steep increase, though it's not as bad as the university increase.
There are those whose view of the Technological Singularity is as you describe them. Those believe in the "hard take-off Singularity". Most of those who think seriously about it, however, believe in the "soft take-off". To deny that the technological feedback is happening and increasing is to deny (at least) the last five decades of history. But it never goes the way you predict...unless your prediction is just that it's going to increase.
Clearly there must be a limit. It is, however, not at all clear what the limit is. People keep redesigning things to eliminate bottlenecks and streamline processes. And new gadgets keep making increased streamlining possible. Certain areas have already passed the Singularity (my idea of the Singularity) a long time ago. E.g. the last person reputed to know all human knowledge lived in the 1800's. I doubt that he really did, e.g. I doubt that he knew how to take raw materials (iron ore, etc.) and shoe a horse, but he had that reputation. These days there isn't a single field-theory mathematician who knows all there is to know about field-theory. mathematics. Somewhere in there we passed a kind of Singularity boundary. Nobody noticed.
But your device wouldn't have anything encrypted on it. It would log-on flawlessly, and there wouldn't be anything special on it or about it...whenever you were at the border checkpoint. That's the point of the proposed approach.
It does require that you have a drop-box you can trust to store encrypted data...but the drop-box is out on the internet, probably an ftp server. And it doesn't have the keys to decrypt. It also requires that you actually be able to delete files on your computer...unless you're willing to do a fresh install from a live CD frequently.
There are many reasons why people put up with unduly invasive governments. A revolution is extremely destructive, and you're likely to get in an even worse gang.
It's also true that the US is, essentially, a "water empire". If the government really dislikes your area they can cut off the water. (This is less true east of the Mississippi.) Cutting off the water is as easy as cutting off the electricity, which they can also do. If they, or anyone, were to do that there would be massive deaths within weeks. It's estimated that the average city contains enough food to feed it's citizens for 48 hours. After that people start getting hungry. The population is largely urban and possibly half of them have never seen even a tomato plant.
What *could* happen is internal terrorism...preferably aimed at the oppressors. One can view the recent sniping at police as an example of this starting up...but it's happened before and not gone anywhere. A violent revolution would be much worse for almost everyone, and the people in power are usually of quite limited access...so it's not likely to happen.
FWIW, I think that if anyone were serious about violent revolution they should start killing the tax collectors. A lot of people who wouldn't sensibly support such an act would cheer. In Van Voght's "The Weapon Shops of Isher" the weapon makers had a rule that they could never act directly against the imperial family. This reflects an awareness of social interactions that many people don't possess. A very large number of people identify with the ruler, so to threaten him (or her) is seen as a threat to themselves. Even police, as representatives of power, are unreasonably protected by this attitude. And it may be one of the foundations of "the blue line".
Sorry, but if you get that system you'll need to run it with liquid helium coolant to eliminate noise. For most purposes it's better to use parts 3-4 times as large and need less cooling. You might still need liquid nitrogen, but that's a lot more doable.
Not really. This is more like the shape of the circulatory system. The difference is that the angle at which veins/arteries split off has to do with surface tension, turbulent flow, and various other things that don't affect the topology of internet links. And affect coolers moving large amounts of air through large tubes less than coolers moving smaller amounts of fluid through smaller tubes. There is, however, a large similarity to the vein branching patterns of leaves, probably because that moves a thick fluid (thin sap) at the lowest possible pressure.
FWIW, I believe that even our current technology is sufficient to "achieve the singularity". The thing that's lacking is software. The thing that would be changed it how widely spread the "superhuman AIs" are. Possibly also how fast they are. (You could do it with cog-wheels if you didn't worry about speed.)
Also, I haven't seen anything that would cause me to revise my expected date of 2030 plus or minus 5 years. Even that "plus or minus" doesn't really belong there. as there won't be any sudden change at any particular point. In that sense it's like dropping into a black hole. You don't even notice when you pass the Schwarzschild boundary.
That said, don't believe any particular projection about what happens when you "pass into the singularity". There's not only one, and we've already passed through several. The transitions from vacuum tubes to integrated circuits was one "technological singularity". Nobody could predict ahead of time what it meant, or not accurately. E.g. IBM never foresaw the personal computer.
The thing called "the Singularity" these days generally has to do with AI, but if you look back at the original papers that was just seen as one path, and it's not like the other paths haven't been being developed in parallel.
That's not quite true. Many of the "rights" aren't directly rights, but rather limitations on the authority of the government to act, and often those do not depend on the nationality of the person affected.
I don't know whether they have the right to demand it, but they certainly have the power.
The solution is to use a password you can generate from a key based around a popular book, and carry the key written on a piece of paper that you use as a book-mark (not the same book). (You *could* even e-mail it to yourself as long as the book isn't known.) Then use that to decode some encrypted file out on the net that contains the information you need. (Contact information, etc.)
It's a bother, but easily doable. Just be sure to resave the work encrypted in your drop box, and erase all intermediate stages before the next border crossing.
I acknowledge what you are saying as a big problem. But a part of the answer would be cutting our welfare programs entirely, including the administration of same. Removing most SSI programs (the incompetent would still require care and oversight). Etc. There would probably also need to be higher taxes on income, say an average of $10,000/year (which equals your proposed initial Basic Income).
This isn't actually my preferred approach, I'm merely explaining why your objection to it is invalid. My preferred approach is the linear income taxt:
y = mx + b y is the tax, m is the tax rate, x is the income, and b is the negative of the "base income level" It might be more appropriate to raise x to some power, say the 1.2 power. There should be NO EXEMPTIONS. All income must be counted from whatever source. Income is defined as "money that you receive". For practical reasons this would probably only apply to money that went through a financial institution. It would not apply to barter (so don't raise that exponential too high). In this formulation the "basic income" is equivalent to the amount that the income tax pays you if you have no other source of income. (O, yes. That is income, and therefore taxable.)
While I understand your point, I don't necessarily agree with it. Plagues come in multiple forms. Amphibians are currently experiencing one that has driven many species to extinction...and we've only got theories as to why. One guess is that multiple sub-critical doses (i.e., doses that appear to cause no harm) of various environmental toxins (weed killer, fertilizers, etc.) has weakened their immune systems. Are you going to assert that we aren't experiencing the same actions?
It's true that increased wealth tends to decrease people's rate of reproduction, so that may suffice. It isn't certain, however, that it will suffice if people have lots of time on their hands and no economic pressures. My point was that SOME way will be needed. P.S.: If I understand the data accurately, the correlation is less with wealth, per se, but more with female education, electric lighting, and TV. I suspect that video games and the internet would also count, but the data I was looking at was too old to include that. And even current data is to "old" to include the latest generation of sex toys. P.S.: Another factor that was left out is security during retirement. In traditional societies that depended on care by your children. Remove that reason and part of the goad towards larger families is removed.
Unfortunately, there are still jobs that nobody likes to do that need doing. The problem is that there aren't enough of them to absorb the unemployed, and they tend to be paid at subsistence wages or less. (Perhaps it wouldn't be subsistence in a different area, but the cost of living varies depending on where you live.)
One example of this is WallMart workers getting food stamps and public health care and STILL not having enough to live on. WallMart, however, is just the most notorious example. There are many others.
I don't know a perfect answer, but a Basic Income would be a start. Start it off low, and raise it over time to something reasonable. Eliminate the minimum wage. And add in Basic Health care. Basic Health care should be seen as a necessary Public Health measure.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, but the BSD license doesn't say you can't sell it. So BSD is closer to Free as in beer.
Actually the GPL doesn't say you can't sell it, either, but it makes selling it more complicated, so it's closer to free as in speech.
And for MS Windows I would have said "Free as in M.S.", but herpes is a bit clearer, even if M.S. is more immediately damaging. (Not everyone thinks of M.S. as Multiple sclerosis.)
How do you know it won't auto install, and then auto-debit your credit card?
Reference counted pointers eliminate accidental overflow in non-recursive structures, but they don't address memory leaks due to looped links, and they don't address intentional attacks from referencing beyond allocated bounds.
It doesn't matter HOW pointers are taught, they are inherently unsafe. Even reference counted pointers are unsafe, and I don't believe that those are currently a part of C. Pointers are a buffer overflow attack (or error) waiting to happen.
C is actually quite portable. But documenting it correctly so that someone else (or you a few years later) can understand what's going on it a beast.
C is more portable than either assembler or C++ (to bracket it with similar languages). It's not the most portable, for that you need either an interpreted language or one that runs on a virtual machine. Like Java, Python, Smalltalk, Ruby, etc., but it's probably the most portable language that compiles to native code.
Yes. It didn't work. Hillary was a bit slicker. But since them both parties have been "fixing the vote".
In a sense this is making them both true to their roots. The political ancestors of the Republicans believed that only property owning (white) males should vote. The political ancestors of the Democrats believed that the voting process was too restricted. It's too bad that decision can't be made on it's merits, and that neither party is willing to respect the current laws...laws which they, in combination, were in charge of writing.
Around 1964 in California's Silicon Valley.
It was already clear at the time of the Democrat candidate debates that the "fix was in". Anyone who didn't realize it was just not paying attention. It was (and is) less clear that the Democrats have done more to "fix" the election than have the Republicans, though they have both been clearly seen to be doing it.
It's not clear that "the network effect" is sufficient to cause them to be considered a monopoly. And that's the only grounds that I see for calling them a monopoly. Facebook is more like a "public accommodation". The laws regarding that are different from those regarding monopolies, and I don't understand them, but they *do* exist.
Yes... Unfortunately, not increasing the minimum wage only delays the automation by a year or so, as the cost of automation keeps falling.
Defending the status quo in minimum wages is a losing game, because the other side isn't standing still no matter what you do. Even if you cut the minimum wage automation will continue increasing, because there are some jobs that can already be done for considerably less than a person can live on that haven't yet been automated.
The "cheap community college" has also gone away...or at least become a lot less cheap. When I went to college the community college cost $2/semester, currently the same college costs $31/unit. That means a 12 unit load costs $62. but now the cost is per quarter rather than per semester. So that means it what was $4 is now $186. That's a bit of a steep increase, though it's not as bad as the university increase.
Don't bet too much on that STEM degree. An H1B will work for less, and so will someone in a place with a lower cost of living.
There are those whose view of the Technological Singularity is as you describe them. Those believe in the "hard take-off Singularity". Most of those who think seriously about it, however, believe in the "soft take-off". To deny that the technological feedback is happening and increasing is to deny (at least) the last five decades of history. But it never goes the way you predict...unless your prediction is just that it's going to increase.
Clearly there must be a limit. It is, however, not at all clear what the limit is. People keep redesigning things to eliminate bottlenecks and streamline processes. And new gadgets keep making increased streamlining possible. Certain areas have already passed the Singularity (my idea of the Singularity) a long time ago. E.g. the last person reputed to know all human knowledge lived in the 1800's. I doubt that he really did, e.g. I doubt that he knew how to take raw materials (iron ore, etc.) and shoe a horse, but he had that reputation. These days there isn't a single field-theory mathematician who knows all there is to know about field-theory. mathematics. Somewhere in there we passed a kind of Singularity boundary. Nobody noticed.
But your device wouldn't have anything encrypted on it. It would log-on flawlessly, and there wouldn't be anything special on it or about it...whenever you were at the border checkpoint. That's the point of the proposed approach.
It does require that you have a drop-box you can trust to store encrypted data...but the drop-box is out on the internet, probably an ftp server. And it doesn't have the keys to decrypt. It also requires that you actually be able to delete files on your computer...unless you're willing to do a fresh install from a live CD frequently.
There are many reasons why people put up with unduly invasive governments. A revolution is extremely destructive, and you're likely to get in an even worse gang.
It's also true that the US is, essentially, a "water empire". If the government really dislikes your area they can cut off the water. (This is less true east of the Mississippi.) Cutting off the water is as easy as cutting off the electricity, which they can also do. If they, or anyone, were to do that there would be massive deaths within weeks. It's estimated that the average city contains enough food to feed it's citizens for 48 hours. After that people start getting hungry. The population is largely urban and possibly half of them have never seen even a tomato plant.
What *could* happen is internal terrorism...preferably aimed at the oppressors. One can view the recent sniping at police as an example of this starting up...but it's happened before and not gone anywhere. A violent revolution would be much worse for almost everyone, and the people in power are usually of quite limited access...so it's not likely to happen.
FWIW, I think that if anyone were serious about violent revolution they should start killing the tax collectors. A lot of people who wouldn't sensibly support such an act would cheer. In Van Voght's "The Weapon Shops of Isher" the weapon makers had a rule that they could never act directly against the imperial family. This reflects an awareness of social interactions that many people don't possess. A very large number of people identify with the ruler, so to threaten him (or her) is seen as a threat to themselves. Even police, as representatives of power, are unreasonably protected by this attitude. And it may be one of the foundations of "the blue line".
Sorry, but if you get that system you'll need to run it with liquid helium coolant to eliminate noise. For most purposes it's better to use parts 3-4 times as large and need less cooling. You might still need liquid nitrogen, but that's a lot more doable.
Not really. This is more like the shape of the circulatory system. The difference is that the angle at which veins/arteries split off has to do with surface tension, turbulent flow, and various other things that don't affect the topology of internet links. And affect coolers moving large amounts of air through large tubes less than coolers moving smaller amounts of fluid through smaller tubes. There is, however, a large similarity to the vein branching patterns of leaves, probably because that moves a thick fluid (thin sap) at the lowest possible pressure.
FWIW, I believe that even our current technology is sufficient to "achieve the singularity". The thing that's lacking is software. The thing that would be changed it how widely spread the "superhuman AIs" are. Possibly also how fast they are. (You could do it with cog-wheels if you didn't worry about speed.)
Also, I haven't seen anything that would cause me to revise my expected date of 2030 plus or minus 5 years. Even that "plus or minus" doesn't really belong there. as there won't be any sudden change at any particular point. In that sense it's like dropping into a black hole. You don't even notice when you pass the Schwarzschild boundary.
That said, don't believe any particular projection about what happens when you "pass into the singularity". There's not only one, and we've already passed through several. The transitions from vacuum tubes to integrated circuits was one "technological singularity". Nobody could predict ahead of time what it meant, or not accurately. E.g. IBM never foresaw the personal computer.
The thing called "the Singularity" these days generally has to do with AI, but if you look back at the original papers that was just seen as one path, and it's not like the other paths haven't been being developed in parallel.
That's not quite true. Many of the "rights" aren't directly rights, but rather limitations on the authority of the government to act, and often those do not depend on the nationality of the person affected.
I don't know whether they have the right to demand it, but they certainly have the power.
The solution is to use a password you can generate from a key based around a popular book, and carry the key written on a piece of paper that you use as a book-mark (not the same book). (You *could* even e-mail it to yourself as long as the book isn't known.) Then use that to decode some encrypted file out on the net that contains the information you need. (Contact information, etc.)
It's a bother, but easily doable. Just be sure to resave the work encrypted in your drop box, and erase all intermediate stages before the next border crossing.
While I agree, the abuse by the border police, under whatever name, long precedes the TSA.
I acknowledge what you are saying as a big problem. But a part of the answer would be cutting our welfare programs entirely, including the administration of same. Removing most SSI programs (the incompetent would still require care and oversight). Etc. There would probably also need to be higher taxes on income, say an average of $10,000/year (which equals your proposed initial Basic Income).
This isn't actually my preferred approach, I'm merely explaining why your objection to it is invalid. My preferred approach is the linear income taxt:
y = mx + b
y is the tax,
m is the tax rate,
x is the income, and
b is the negative of the "base income level"
It might be more appropriate to raise x to some power, say the 1.2 power. There should be NO EXEMPTIONS. All income must be counted from whatever source. Income is defined as "money that you receive". For practical reasons this would probably only apply to money that went through a financial institution. It would not apply to barter (so don't raise that exponential too high).
In this formulation the "basic income" is equivalent to the amount that the income tax pays you if you have no other source of income. (O, yes. That is income, and therefore taxable.)
Sorry, I was distinguishing between "Communism" and "communism". Unfortunately, I capitalized "communism" at the beginning of a sentence.
While I understand your point, I don't necessarily agree with it. Plagues come in multiple forms. Amphibians are currently experiencing one that has driven many species to extinction...and we've only got theories as to why. One guess is that multiple sub-critical doses (i.e., doses that appear to cause no harm) of various environmental toxins (weed killer, fertilizers, etc.) has weakened their immune systems. Are you going to assert that we aren't experiencing the same actions?
It's true that increased wealth tends to decrease people's rate of reproduction, so that may suffice. It isn't certain, however, that it will suffice if people have lots of time on their hands and no economic pressures. My point was that SOME way will be needed.
P.S.: If I understand the data accurately, the correlation is less with wealth, per se, but more with female education, electric lighting, and TV. I suspect that video games and the internet would also count, but the data I was looking at was too old to include that. And even current data is to "old" to include the latest generation of sex toys.
P.S.: Another factor that was left out is security during retirement. In traditional societies that depended on care by your children. Remove that reason and part of the goad towards larger families is removed.
Unfortunately, there are still jobs that nobody likes to do that need doing. The problem is that there aren't enough of them to absorb the unemployed, and they tend to be paid at subsistence wages or less. (Perhaps it wouldn't be subsistence in a different area, but the cost of living varies depending on where you live.)
One example of this is WallMart workers getting food stamps and public health care and STILL not having enough to live on. WallMart, however, is just the most notorious example. There are many others.
I don't know a perfect answer, but a Basic Income would be a start. Start it off low, and raise it over time to something reasonable. Eliminate the minimum wage. And add in Basic Health care. Basic Health care should be seen as a necessary Public Health measure.