(He actually pokes fun at the media coverage rather than at Teh Loop itself.)
Sure, I saw it. It was strings of jokes that were criticizing the idea based on the headlines and sound bytes regarding the idea, rather than the idea itself. It was a disappointingly shallow assessment of the idea.
Maybe it sounds crazy, but a lot of revolutionary ideas sounded crazy to everyone before they became common.
How about Steampower and the famous Napoleon quote, "Would you make a ship sail against the wind and currents by lighting a bonfire under her deck? I pray you, excuse me, I have not the time to listen to such nonsense."
fuel usage is already included into the pricing. You could say, the hyperloop has the potential to be cheaper, but I would say back that ass up? $100 is already pretty cheap. It costs $200 to drive on fuel alone.
Musk's estimate (in the paper that nobody bothered to read, yet addresses most of the wild speculation people throw out here) is that tickets would be $20 per passenger.
His proposal is that it will be mostly self-powered, using the area of the loop itself to capture solar power. His proposal seems to be more for mid-range traveling where the costs associated with take-off and landing make air travel less efficient.
Er...I think those arguments predate that movie. If we have to limit ourselves to movies any self-respecting nerd would be quoting Dark Star...
Speaking of Star Wars... I haven't read the article, but I assume that they implanted the false memories that the Star Wars had "Episode IV: A New Hope" in the opening of the original release?
This experiment has already been performed rather successfully on nerds, so mice seem like a natural next step.
This is the problem, companies these days don't want to train their employees to do their jobs, they want them to come pre-trained which is of course ideal but hardly realistic for sufficiently complicated job duties.
That was my point. Companies would rather waste time and resources looking for an ideal candidate than helping create one. Companies have themselves to blame.
It's one of many ways they sabotage themselves, then complain about it.
From what I can see, it seems like many companies just sit around waiting and hoping for ideal employees to be trained and produced by other companies, and that those employees will be willing to leave the company that trained them for another company that doesn't want to pay a competitive salary for them.
I recently got hired to a very large SV tech firm to do a job for which they had not found *anyone* (let alone an american) to fill for a full year. They're still looking for more people to do the same job, and still after a further 6 months can't find any americans suitable.
It's not about wanting more scientists and engineers, it's about wanting specific scientists and engineers.
I doubt there is any job that is so specialized that they couldn't have used their time, money, and resources to find someone that is in the ball park and then train them to bridge the gap of what they wanted, rather than spend a year and a half looking for a 100% match.
I was mostly just trying to interject humor, but I suppose it is unfair to characterize the dinosaurs as only knowing one language. I've actually used JCL, though I suppose I didn't count that in my mental list of languages I've used...
The truth is, even during an experience where I was working with dinosaurs maintaining legacy systems, updating some code which hadn't been updated in more than 20 years using systems that had strong links to punch-cards, it was still expected that the programmers know more than one language. We used COBOL, Mark IV, Natural, JCL, and Java there.
Sure, and I realize that there are exceptions, which is why I said "most languages". But the vast majority of commonly used languages are in a small number of families, even even most of those families of languages aren't so radically different that an experienced programmer couldn't pick up on it fairly quickly.
On multiple occasions, I've been able to look at languages I've never touched before and with my programming knowledge (and a few Google searches to help with syntax and keywords) have been able to write useful programs or modify existing ones, and I'm not a particularly accomplished programmer.
Most computer programmers learn one programming language.
I think the technical term usually referred to those programmers is "unemployed". It could be argued that other acceptable terms are, "lazy", "dinosaurs", "students", and "People who switched to a major like Business or Human Resources after they realized Comp Sci was too tough for them."
I don't know a single good programmer who only knows 1 language... Many I know will try to at least get familiarized with a new language 1 or 2 years.
Comparing knowing a number of computer languages to a number of spoken languages is absurd.
Two computer languages is probably closer to the difference in writing a novel in English vs a screenplay in English. It's mostly format and structure for most languages.
Personally, I thought people had given up doing the "movie thing" as a social escape for the most part... but I guess the current set of teens is getting reeled back into it again, at least in some places.
Pairing a less creative person with a more creative person doesn't simply only result in imitation.
Creativity isn't simply creating something out of nothing. Creativity is building on a foundation. It is making connections between things that others overlook, and that is a skill that can be taught by opening someone's eyes to the fact that these non-obvious connections exist. Witnessing this process has the potential to create an epiphany that can open someone's eyes into making non-obvious connections themselves in completely different areas.
Teaching someone to see the world differently can essentially teach someone creativity, so I think creativity absolutely can be taught. It's not magic.
Some people will pirate if they find the DRM too restrictive or inconvenient even when they would have otherwise paid.
Some people will pirate just because they can, and would have never paid even if piracy wasn't possible.
Some people will pirate in order to format/device shift (where they already own the content in one format and want to have it in another).
Some people will pirate out of curiosity, or to evaluate, and may or may not pay later.
Some people will pirate as either a hobby or compulsion. The biggest pirates I've known are like data hoarders. They download TV shows and movies and only end up watching 10% or 20% of them. They will download tons of games and not even get around to playing them, or maybe only play them a few minutes. They might pirate $100,000 of content in a year, even they they make $25,000 a year... obviously this isn't truly $100,000 in lost sales.
The problem is that people calculating the "losses" to piracy never get that pirated copies does not equal lost sales. It's probably a small percentage of that. The real equation would look something like:
Loss $ to Piracy = $P - $E
Where: $P = Amount people would have paid if piracy wasn't an option. $E = Amount of sales increased due to exposure that was the result of piracy.
I think it's really hard to guess what the $P and $E is. Maybe there still is an overall loss, but I think it's generally exagerated because none of the other groups of pirates really matter, only those who would have paid.
Gun Rights advocate frequently use the reasons of sports, hunting, and collectors as defenses against restrictions. Of course they are going to stand for collector guns (that don't function) for being restricted. But who is going to stand up to banning replicas?
Gun Lobbyists are far more effective than Replica Lobbyists.
In America, about 90% of diagnosed DS fetuses are aborted. That is an interesting percentage, since polls indicate that more that 20% of Americans think...
It's more interesting that you are comparing 90% of diagnosed DS fetuses being aborted with 20% of the American population, and calming that half of the 20% are hypocrites because they think that abortion should be illegal. Are you deliberately misleading the reader, or do you really believe the number of diagnosed DS fetuses is equal to the entire population of America?
Are you trying to deliberately mislead the reader that you require a sample size of 100% in order to come to an accurate conclusion?
Besides, if there isn't an even distribution between these two groups, and there is a correlation between people being willing to make exceptions and the possibility that they carry a DS fetus, doesn't that just further support his argument?
Google threw out Eclipse to replace it with IntelliJ IDEA as a basis for its Android Studio
Threw out? It certainly seems like they are in the transition, but they also give a pretty strong disclaimer that the new Android Studio might not be ready for primetime, and advises that some might want to stick to Eclipse.
"This guy has a biomarker for violence... Shoot him! Get him before he attacks!"
I'm reminded of the parody video from The Onion (I think) where you had a jock who was killing the misfits at his high school so that they wouldn't snap and create another columbine.
The employers are very fussy. They are really only interested in a perfect match to their needs. They don't want the cost to develop talent internally.
I think this is a systemic problem in the marketplace these days, it seems to be the case for any job (especially in IT). And of course since the _perfect_ candidate, who is also willing to work for the salary you offer, is rare - companies then start moaning about 'lack of talent' and the need to import skilled workers.
It's even worse than that.
Not only do they not want to train or pay much, the don't want to hire you unless you are already have a job. Being currently unemployed is a stain on your resume. Also, you have to be willing to work for a wage that probably isn't worth leaving your present company for.
In some industries and companies, you also have to deal with lucking out in the HR screening. Even if you are a 100% fit, you might get screened out by HR screening software that is searching for one specific skill, but you happened to just use a different synonymous term to describe that skill than the software is looking for. Too bad.
American companies are completely clueless about the fact that they are complaining about a situation that they are causing...
Slashdot Mirror
See John Oliver's take on it.
(He actually pokes fun at the media coverage rather than at Teh Loop itself.)
Sure, I saw it. It was strings of jokes that were criticizing the idea based on the headlines and sound bytes regarding the idea, rather than the idea itself. It was a disappointingly shallow assessment of the idea.
Maybe it sounds crazy, but a lot of revolutionary ideas sounded crazy to everyone before they became common.
How about Steampower and the famous Napoleon quote, "Would you make a ship sail against the wind and currents by lighting a bonfire under her deck? I pray you, excuse me, I have not the time to listen to such nonsense."
fuel usage is already included into the pricing. You could say, the hyperloop has the potential to be cheaper, but I would say back that ass up? $100 is already pretty cheap. It costs $200 to drive on fuel alone.
Musk's estimate (in the paper that nobody bothered to read, yet addresses most of the wild speculation people throw out here) is that tickets would be $20 per passenger.
His proposal is that it will be mostly self-powered, using the area of the loop itself to capture solar power. His proposal seems to be more for mid-range traveling where the costs associated with take-off and landing make air travel less efficient.
It's funny how suddenly phrases like 'I have a 13" retina' don't raise an eyebrow anymore... no pun intended.
...I like my computer generated joke examples like I like my MSDN how-to articles...terrible?
I like my computer generated jokes like I like my computer joke generator errors...
They gain the right to success by producing something people want, just like any other line of work.
So, the best method to produce art is to leave it to the free market?
Sure, not everyone gets a big break, and sure, not everyone who gets one deserves it.
So, the free market isn't the best method of producing art?
im a hardcore atheist
Same, except I'm merely a softcore atheist... I like to leave something to the imagination.
Who is Rufford Murdoch?
You don't know Rufus? Rufus is Rupert's Cajun, cantankerous old coot of a cousin that hails from the Bayou.
Ah, that Rufus... what a character.
Enterprise becomes much more tolerable if you skip the intro credits.
I wouldn't say it was greatly underrated. I wouldn't even say it was good, but it was still better than Voyager.
Er...I think those arguments predate that movie. If we have to limit ourselves to movies any self-respecting nerd would be quoting Dark Star...
Speaking of Star Wars... I haven't read the article, but I assume that they implanted the false memories that the Star Wars had "Episode IV: A New Hope" in the opening of the original release?
This experiment has already been performed rather successfully on nerds, so mice seem like a natural next step.
This is the problem, companies these days don't want to train their employees to do their jobs, they want them to come pre-trained which is of course ideal but hardly realistic for sufficiently complicated job duties.
That was my point. Companies would rather waste time and resources looking for an ideal candidate than helping create one. Companies have themselves to blame.
It's one of many ways they sabotage themselves, then complain about it.
From what I can see, it seems like many companies just sit around waiting and hoping for ideal employees to be trained and produced by other companies, and that those employees will be willing to leave the company that trained them for another company that doesn't want to pay a competitive salary for them.
I recently got hired to a very large SV tech firm to do a job for which they had not found *anyone* (let alone an american) to fill for a full year. They're still looking for more people to do the same job, and still after a further 6 months can't find any americans suitable.
It's not about wanting more scientists and engineers, it's about wanting specific scientists and engineers.
I doubt there is any job that is so specialized that they couldn't have used their time, money, and resources to find someone that is in the ball park and then train them to bridge the gap of what they wanted, rather than spend a year and a half looking for a 100% match.
...The thing is, the Xbox3 is basically a PC
Which is different from the XBox and XBox2, how?
And it's not "XBox3", it's "XBox One", sometimes abbreviated "XBOne" (but I prefer "XBone").
I was mostly just trying to interject humor, but I suppose it is unfair to characterize the dinosaurs as only knowing one language. I've actually used JCL, though I suppose I didn't count that in my mental list of languages I've used...
The truth is, even during an experience where I was working with dinosaurs maintaining legacy systems, updating some code which hadn't been updated in more than 20 years using systems that had strong links to punch-cards, it was still expected that the programmers know more than one language. We used COBOL, Mark IV, Natural, JCL, and Java there.
Even dinosaurs are multilingual...
Sure, and I realize that there are exceptions, which is why I said "most languages". But the vast majority of commonly used languages are in a small number of families, even even most of those families of languages aren't so radically different that an experienced programmer couldn't pick up on it fairly quickly.
On multiple occasions, I've been able to look at languages I've never touched before and with my programming knowledge (and a few Google searches to help with syntax and keywords) have been able to write useful programs or modify existing ones, and I'm not a particularly accomplished programmer.
Just as long as you don't have coffee in the morning.
Most computer programmers learn one programming language.
I think the technical term usually referred to those programmers is "unemployed". It could be argued that other acceptable terms are, "lazy", "dinosaurs", "students", and "People who switched to a major like Business or Human Resources after they realized Comp Sci was too tough for them."
I don't know a single good programmer who only knows 1 language... Many I know will try to at least get familiarized with a new language 1 or 2 years.
Comparing knowing a number of computer languages to a number of spoken languages is absurd.
Two computer languages is probably closer to the difference in writing a novel in English vs a screenplay in English. It's mostly format and structure for most languages.
Personally, I thought people had given up doing the "movie thing" as a social escape for the most part... but I guess the current set of teens is getting reeled back into it again, at least in some places.
Are you sure you aren't just projecting?
I think you are being dense...
Pairing a less creative person with a more creative person doesn't simply only result in imitation.
Creativity isn't simply creating something out of nothing. Creativity is building on a foundation. It is making connections between things that others overlook, and that is a skill that can be taught by opening someone's eyes to the fact that these non-obvious connections exist. Witnessing this process has the potential to create an epiphany that can open someone's eyes into making non-obvious connections themselves in completely different areas.
Teaching someone to see the world differently can essentially teach someone creativity, so I think creativity absolutely can be taught. It's not magic.
Add to that list...
The problem is that people calculating the "losses" to piracy never get that pirated copies does not equal lost sales. It's probably a small percentage of that. The real equation would look something like:
Loss $ to Piracy = $P - $E
Where:
$P = Amount people would have paid if piracy wasn't an option.
$E = Amount of sales increased due to exposure that was the result of piracy.
I think it's really hard to guess what the $P and $E is. Maybe there still is an overall loss, but I think it's generally exagerated because none of the other groups of pirates really matter, only those who would have paid.
Gun Rights advocate frequently use the reasons of sports, hunting, and collectors as defenses against restrictions. Of course they are going to stand for collector guns (that don't function) for being restricted. But who is going to stand up to banning replicas?
Gun Lobbyists are far more effective than Replica Lobbyists.
Unfortunately, it's not always clear what exactly these permissions mean.
In America, about 90% of diagnosed DS fetuses are aborted. That is an interesting percentage, since polls indicate that more that 20% of Americans think...
It's more interesting that you are comparing 90% of diagnosed DS fetuses being aborted with 20% of the American population, and calming that half of the 20% are hypocrites because they think that abortion should be illegal. Are you deliberately misleading the reader, or do you really believe the number of diagnosed DS fetuses is equal to the entire population of America?
Are you trying to deliberately mislead the reader that you require a sample size of 100% in order to come to an accurate conclusion?
Besides, if there isn't an even distribution between these two groups, and there is a correlation between people being willing to make exceptions and the possibility that they carry a DS fetus, doesn't that just further support his argument?
Google threw out Eclipse to replace it with IntelliJ IDEA as a basis for its Android Studio
Threw out? It certainly seems like they are in the transition, but they also give a pretty strong disclaimer that the new Android Studio might not be ready for primetime, and advises that some might want to stick to Eclipse.
"This guy has a biomarker for violence... Shoot him! Get him before he attacks!"
I'm reminded of the parody video from The Onion (I think) where you had a jock who was killing the misfits at his high school so that they wouldn't snap and create another columbine.
The employers are very fussy. They are really only interested in a perfect match to their needs. They don't want the cost to develop talent internally.
I think this is a systemic problem in the marketplace these days, it seems to be the case for any job (especially in IT). And of course since the _perfect_ candidate, who is also willing to work for the salary you offer, is rare - companies then start moaning about 'lack of talent' and the need to import skilled workers.
It's even worse than that.
Not only do they not want to train or pay much, the don't want to hire you unless you are already have a job. Being currently unemployed is a stain on your resume. Also, you have to be willing to work for a wage that probably isn't worth leaving your present company for.
In some industries and companies, you also have to deal with lucking out in the HR screening. Even if you are a 100% fit, you might get screened out by HR screening software that is searching for one specific skill, but you happened to just use a different synonymous term to describe that skill than the software is looking for. Too bad.
American companies are completely clueless about the fact that they are complaining about a situation that they are causing...