Although I am not the original poster, and I am definitely not denying smart phones have legitimate advantages. They also have disadvantages, not being connected all the time is a good thing as well, not knowing that an issue has occurred until you come into work takes away stress. Having to talk to people, instead of taking the easy route and just playing with your phone the moment you get bored. Sometimes getting lost and exploring your environment. Talking to people is a much better way of communicating that text message.
It is because Linux doesn't run the software users want.
If you want to play games, run windows sure there are a reasonable amount of games for linux but all major PC games support windows.
If you want to use photoshop run windows
Most good Linux applications are ported to windows anyway.
Also windows comes preinstalled on your computer, so no matter how easy it is to install Linux, and it is fairly easy, it is easier to do nothing, so if you are just running a web browser why bother? I suppose it the simplest way of getting rid of all the adware that comes preinstalled too.
Lying is not a sign of incompetence, every one lies. Excessive lying is a sign of dishonesty, and should disqualify you being president, but it clearly doesn't. In a democracy it is up to the public to decide if that lying is excessive.
Just because Muslims are responsible for trade towers, doesn't mean we should hate or ban Muslims it is wrong and an overreaction. Same with free speech just because there are people out there that say stupid or racist things doesn't mean we should banning all speech that we disagree with. You maybe right and society may do this, but it shouldn't.
Yes a computer system without users would be very safe but not that useful. But the real problem is that systems themselves allow users do stupid things in the first place or provide no easy alternative. Here is an example:
I want to download and run an application from the internet, seems like reasonably common thing to do. However how do I know it is safe? Search the internet OK, but there maybe fake sites saying it is safe or it maybe piggybacking on a valid program. Run a virus checker, well OK but it could be virus that isn't picked up by that checker, and the virus checker should run automatically anyway. But you need to run the program so you do.
What would be nice is option like run un-trusted, which starts a VM automatically and runs that, checks that nothing bad has happened to your computer as well
I believe the responsibility lies mainly with IT, we should make easy for the user to do what they need to do, we are the experts, we need to take responsibility for it. Yes it is hard and you cannot always fix it but we should always be trying and not just blame it on the user.
Gift cards are another rip off, give them some money and it expires. The reason they state it needs to expire is they don't want a liability on their books. Next time you go into a bank tell that the mortgage has expired after 2 years because you don't want that liability on our books see what they say.
Just give cash, no fees, no expiry.
He is right, (apart from intended not pretended) it is signed not encrypted, if it was encrypted then nobody else would be able to validate the transactions. The summary even states
A blockchain is an encrypted database that runs on multiple computers, potentially cutting out the need for centralized authorities
How could it possibly run on multiple decentralized computers, if those computers don't know what the data is in the database since it is encrypted? And if it is encrypted and everyone knows the encryption key then it is not encrypted it is encoded.
It is true that parts of the block chain can be encrypted, but nothing in blockchain requires anything to be encrypted.
But you may not trust some random guy on the internet so here is a link:
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/ar...
note the "How is anonymity defeated?" section where it says:
But perhaps most importantly, all transactions over the Bitcoin network are completely transparent and traceable by anyone. It's typically this complete transparency that allows multiple Bitcoin addresses to be clustered together, and be tied to the same user. Therefore, if just one of these clustered addresses is linked to a real-world identity through one or several of the other de-anonymizing methods, all clustered addresses can be.
Google, and well every publicly funded company are not evil, but by definition they are their number on priority is to their shareholders, if would be unethical for them not to try to make as much money as LEGALLY possible. Think about it if you where a debt collector and just wrote off debts of people who you thought where truly in need your employer would have every right to be angry with you.
The governments role should be to state and enforce what is legal. The problem is that through lobbing and campaign funding companies control the law, and it is their duty to make the law so they can once again maximize profit. Campaign contributions and lobbying should be illegal, campaigning should be publicly funded, and allow small players to have a fair say. I know it may cost, but allowing the rich and companies to determine our laws costs you much more. Also if a company has some valuable input into a law then it should be in public, and up for debate, not a some private lunch or club.
P.S. the reason I don't believe they are evil, it is nature of what a company is. You don't say a cat is evil because it kills mice, it is just what cats do. Same with google, it is not evil because tries to make as much profit as possible, that's just what companies do.
If you are talking about republicans and democrats, then yes of course. If you are talking about nazis then no. Also you can have good parts an and bad parts to their personality, just because they believe in one thing that is wrong does not make them an all round bad person.
I don't know? I think the problem is the internet is now full of noise and advertising, but very little actual information. I think censoring is not the way to go, who is going to do that? Companies like facebook, and google? Yeah right, I don't want them to be the guardians of our mortality. Governments? Of course they would never abuse that power.
Maybe we just need a chain of trust, to be able to tell what a posters credentials are? If references are given, then be able to tell the credentials of those references. Also teach people from a young age how to validate information on the internet. We have not evolved to handle this much data, we need time to learn how to cope.
Possibly credibility can be the currency of the future, instead of buying more and more crap to show how successful you are, people will be judged on how much they contribute to society, and how honest they are. Someone will probably find a way to game that system as well.
I think the internet has the potential to be a great tool to advance humanity, but it seems to have devolved into a place to show off (sell yourself), waste time, and sell stuff
Pure anything will always fail (technically everything will fail eventually), In pure capitalism there is no idea of fairness, the rich will just acquire more power, until the people revolt. It is about striking balance between allowing people to become successful through their efforts, and ensuring fairness, and providing safeguards if something wrong.
Also it is just semantics saying "Those examples are capitalist countries with social programs." you could equally say "Those examples are socialist countries with capitalist programs.", no country in the world is completely capitalist or socialist.
Why do you think banks don't do stupid things with security, I used to work for a bank and I assure you they do. Ok when the screw up they get bailed out by the public, that is better? maybe?
The lesson here is you need base your trust in the company that you invest in on something, that should require having transparency of process.
also, was there a backup for this laptop?
Another of Mozilla’s core principles is that an individual’s security and privacy on the internet are fundamental and must not be treated as optional.
It does make sense that they provide a common API with google, it makes developers lives easier and means extensions that would not be developed for Firefox because it is now a small part of the browser market would be. However if that API makes developers life hard or violates the core principles then that adhering only to that api makes less sense and they may change.
no, but we could bots to pretend to be firefox and visit the sites that record stats for browser usage, The main problem with using firefox is some sites clearly don't test for it anymore so don't work. The experience will improve it people believe it is used.
It really depends what the debt is for, buying an asset that appreciates in value like a house sure, invest in a business that is going fine, education that is going to earn you more money in the long run why not. Buying the latest shinny gadget, taking a holiday, getting a car, (take public transport usually cheaper than maintaining a car). Even buying a house that is excessive to your needs.
Net worth is not everything either, if you are living paycheck to paycheck because you are paying of your mortgage for the rest of you life, that is not a good way to live.
A bit of round about logic, yes the tax take would be lower, but the reason we are in debt is that we spend (consume) more than we produce, the solution consume less, yes we could also produce more stuff that we really don't and sell it to other countries that really don't need it either, but there are environmental impacts to that.
I could pay off my portion of national debt out of savings, however I would never do it because all that would happen is politicians would say look we have no debt we could borrow and build a new stadium, overpriced piece of art or other unnecessary thing.
Even if we where all green eyed, brown haired copies of each other we would form ourselves into groups and be biased against the other, its called the minimal group paradigm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimal_group_paradigm).
Yeah, but being a millionaire means very little now, you own your own home and little more. Yeah there are plenty of people who don't but you are by no means rich.
Also although actively managed funds are a rip off they charge you for their "expert" knowledge but generally under perform the market, and charge you a percentage of what you invested. To be fair they should charge a percentage of what they earn't over the market average (how you would expect monkeys to perform), and if they are below give you the same percentage back.
Still the cost of passive funds is to high what exactly do they need to do apart from setup the index and get a computer to buy the stock, it should be cents to invest with no ongoing fee. But fund managers/bankers make real fortunes just moving peoples money around and they like it that way.
Because having educated people, no just a bunch of fruit pickers, and shop assistants who can't do simple maths, benefits all society, not just the educated person. On the other side the educated person should realize that society helped them get that education and squeeze every last penny you can out of your customers.
I think education is an answer, a democracy works well only in a well educated society, which keeps practicing it. And the education not as just preparing for a job, but wide and thorough. There are societies (few but still), where democracy is practiced by majority and which put education as an important part of their state responsibilities voting participation [followmyvote.com].
I disagree, people are now more educated than any time in history, we have access to more (dis)information. The reason I think we don't vote is we don't think it makes any difference and all politicians are just liars
Here are things that I think we need for democracy to work better:
1. Public political funding, sure it costs but I would rather pay taxes than have companies and the rich donate because it will cost me more in the long run. Also once money can buy votes you no longer have a democracy you have a cashcracy. Also you have to have a funding system that allows small parties to have their say.
2. Transparency, everything should be made public (sometimes eventually). You are doing things in the public's name, binding them to agreements you make. The public is your boss, you wouldn't get away with secret negotiations at work which you didn't tell your boss about. Yes somethings have to be kept secret for a while but you should have to provide reasons why and know that your actions will be made public eventually.
Sure you should be able to get advice from companies, and companies should be able to lobby you, but only in public. If they are not willing to give their input in public then they should not give it.
3. Honesty, this goes hand in hand with forgiveness of mistakes. Deceiving (relating to policies) should be less accepted, if you made a mistake you should admit it. The public should also accept that politicians are human and make mistakes, if they do not the only way a politician can keep there job is through lies. So you get liars, and honest people are removed.
4. Stop saying everyone should vote, yes it would be ideal if everyone cared and voted, but if you can't be bothered getting of your butt for 30 minutes to vote then you probably haven't put in the time to learn about the issues. All this does, is you will vote by name recognition, keeping small parties with possibly good ideas out.
No of course not nothing about the size of his hands, relate to the size of his penis. The reason it was picked up, is because it seemed to bother him so the media (not some random jerk on the internet) went with it.
The people write these type of studies are the ones trying to use the fact that women are weak. Boo hoo women are getting insulted how shocking. Women are not weak, in my experience much more emotionally strong (and nasty) than men, but acting the victim gets them what they want. Women don't buy the sob stories from women as much as men. It has been men's role in society to be the protectors, if you truly want equality protect your own self, and stop whining about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Although I am not the original poster, and I am definitely not denying smart phones have legitimate advantages. They also have disadvantages, not being connected all the time is a good thing as well, not knowing that an issue has occurred until you come into work takes away stress. Having to talk to people, instead of taking the easy route and just playing with your phone the moment you get bored. Sometimes getting lost and exploring your environment. Talking to people is a much better way of communicating that text message.
It is because Linux doesn't run the software users want.
If you want to play games, run windows sure there are a reasonable amount of games for linux but all major PC games support windows.
If you want to use photoshop run windows
Most good Linux applications are ported to windows anyway.
Also windows comes preinstalled on your computer, so no matter how easy it is to install Linux, and it is fairly easy, it is easier to do nothing, so if you are just running a web browser why bother? I suppose it the simplest way of getting rid of all the adware that comes preinstalled too.
Lying is not a sign of incompetence, every one lies. Excessive lying is a sign of dishonesty, and should disqualify you being president, but it clearly doesn't. In a democracy it is up to the public to decide if that lying is excessive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Just because Muslims are responsible for trade towers, doesn't mean we should hate or ban Muslims it is wrong and an overreaction. Same with free speech just because there are people out there that say stupid or racist things doesn't mean we should banning all speech that we disagree with. You maybe right and society may do this, but it shouldn't.
Yes a computer system without users would be very safe but not that useful. But the real problem is that systems themselves allow users do stupid things in the first place or provide no easy alternative. Here is an example:
I want to download and run an application from the internet, seems like reasonably common thing to do. However how do I know it is safe? Search the internet OK, but there maybe fake sites saying it is safe or it maybe piggybacking on a valid program. Run a virus checker, well OK but it could be virus that isn't picked up by that checker, and the virus checker should run automatically anyway. But you need to run the program so you do.
What would be nice is option like run un-trusted, which starts a VM automatically and runs that, checks that nothing bad has happened to your computer as well
I believe the responsibility lies mainly with IT, we should make easy for the user to do what they need to do, we are the experts, we need to take responsibility for it. Yes it is hard and you cannot always fix it but we should always be trying and not just blame it on the user.
Gift cards are another rip off, give them some money and it expires. The reason they state it needs to expire is they don't want a liability on their books. Next time you go into a bank tell that the mortgage has expired after 2 years because you don't want that liability on our books see what they say. Just give cash, no fees, no expiry.
A blockchain is an encrypted database that runs on multiple computers, potentially cutting out the need for centralized authorities
How could it possibly run on multiple decentralized computers, if those computers don't know what the data is in the database since it is encrypted? And if it is encrypted and everyone knows the encryption key then it is not encrypted it is encoded.
It is true that parts of the block chain can be encrypted, but nothing in blockchain requires anything to be encrypted.
But you may not trust some random guy on the internet so here is a link: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/ar... note the "How is anonymity defeated?" section where it says:
But perhaps most importantly, all transactions over the Bitcoin network are completely transparent and traceable by anyone. It's typically this complete transparency that allows multiple Bitcoin addresses to be clustered together, and be tied to the same user. Therefore, if just one of these clustered addresses is linked to a real-world identity through one or several of the other de-anonymizing methods, all clustered addresses can be.
Google, and well every publicly funded company are not evil, but by definition they are their number on priority is to their shareholders, if would be unethical for them not to try to make as much money as LEGALLY possible. Think about it if you where a debt collector and just wrote off debts of people who you thought where truly in need your employer would have every right to be angry with you.
The governments role should be to state and enforce what is legal. The problem is that through lobbing and campaign funding companies control the law, and it is their duty to make the law so they can once again maximize profit. Campaign contributions and lobbying should be illegal, campaigning should be publicly funded, and allow small players to have a fair say. I know it may cost, but allowing the rich and companies to determine our laws costs you much more. Also if a company has some valuable input into a law then it should be in public, and up for debate, not a some private lunch or club.
P.S. the reason I don't believe they are evil, it is nature of what a company is. You don't say a cat is evil because it kills mice, it is just what cats do. Same with google, it is not evil because tries to make as much profit as possible, that's just what companies do.
If you are talking about republicans and democrats, then yes of course. If you are talking about nazis then no. Also you can have good parts an and bad parts to their personality, just because they believe in one thing that is wrong does not make them an all round bad person.
I don't know? I think the problem is the internet is now full of noise and advertising, but very little actual information. I think censoring is not the way to go, who is going to do that? Companies like facebook, and google? Yeah right, I don't want them to be the guardians of our mortality. Governments? Of course they would never abuse that power.
Maybe we just need a chain of trust, to be able to tell what a posters credentials are? If references are given, then be able to tell the credentials of those references. Also teach people from a young age how to validate information on the internet. We have not evolved to handle this much data, we need time to learn how to cope.
Possibly credibility can be the currency of the future, instead of buying more and more crap to show how successful you are, people will be judged on how much they contribute to society, and how honest they are. Someone will probably find a way to game that system as well.
I think the internet has the potential to be a great tool to advance humanity, but it seems to have devolved into a place to show off (sell yourself), waste time, and sell stuff
perhaps people with better graphics cards have better mice?
Pure anything will always fail (technically everything will fail eventually), In pure capitalism there is no idea of fairness, the rich will just acquire more power, until the people revolt. It is about striking balance between allowing people to become successful through their efforts, and ensuring fairness, and providing safeguards if something wrong.
Also it is just semantics saying "Those examples are capitalist countries with social programs." you could equally say "Those examples are socialist countries with capitalist programs.", no country in the world is completely capitalist or socialist.
I don't know wouldn't you see the wallet in the block chain if it was used?
Why do you think banks don't do stupid things with security, I used to work for a bank and I assure you they do. Ok when the screw up they get bailed out by the public, that is better? maybe? The lesson here is you need base your trust in the company that you invest in on something, that should require having transparency of process. also, was there a backup for this laptop?
Another of Mozilla’s core principles is that an individual’s security and privacy on the internet are fundamental and must not be treated as optional.
It does make sense that they provide a common API with google, it makes developers lives easier and means extensions that would not be developed for Firefox because it is now a small part of the browser market would be. However if that API makes developers life hard or violates the core principles then that adhering only to that api makes less sense and they may change.
no, but we could bots to pretend to be firefox and visit the sites that record stats for browser usage, The main problem with using firefox is some sites clearly don't test for it anymore so don't work. The experience will improve it people believe it is used.
It really depends what the debt is for, buying an asset that appreciates in value like a house sure, invest in a business that is going fine, education that is going to earn you more money in the long run why not. Buying the latest shinny gadget, taking a holiday, getting a car, (take public transport usually cheaper than maintaining a car). Even buying a house that is excessive to your needs.
Net worth is not everything either, if you are living paycheck to paycheck because you are paying of your mortgage for the rest of you life, that is not a good way to live.
A bit of round about logic, yes the tax take would be lower, but the reason we are in debt is that we spend (consume) more than we produce, the solution consume less, yes we could also produce more stuff that we really don't and sell it to other countries that really don't need it either, but there are environmental impacts to that. I could pay off my portion of national debt out of savings, however I would never do it because all that would happen is politicians would say look we have no debt we could borrow and build a new stadium, overpriced piece of art or other unnecessary thing.
Even if we where all green eyed, brown haired copies of each other we would form ourselves into groups and be biased against the other, its called the minimal group paradigm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimal_group_paradigm).
Yeah, but being a millionaire means very little now, you own your own home and little more. Yeah there are plenty of people who don't but you are by no means rich.
Also although actively managed funds are a rip off they charge you for their "expert" knowledge but generally under perform the market, and charge you a percentage of what you invested. To be fair they should charge a percentage of what they earn't over the market average (how you would expect monkeys to perform), and if they are below give you the same percentage back.
Still the cost of passive funds is to high what exactly do they need to do apart from setup the index and get a computer to buy the stock, it should be cents to invest with no ongoing fee. But fund managers/bankers make real fortunes just moving peoples money around and they like it that way.
Because having educated people, no just a bunch of fruit pickers, and shop assistants who can't do simple maths, benefits all society, not just the educated person. On the other side the educated person should realize that society helped them get that education and squeeze every last penny you can out of your customers.
Don't pay and see if they say you owe them money.
I think education is an answer, a democracy works well only in a well educated society, which keeps practicing it. And the education not as just preparing for a job, but wide and thorough. There are societies (few but still), where democracy is practiced by majority and which put education as an important part of their state responsibilities voting participation [followmyvote.com].
I disagree, people are now more educated than any time in history, we have access to more (dis)information. The reason I think we don't vote is we don't think it makes any difference and all politicians are just liars
Here are things that I think we need for democracy to work better:
1. Public political funding, sure it costs but I would rather pay taxes than have companies and the rich donate because it will cost me more in the long run. Also once money can buy votes you no longer have a democracy you have a cashcracy. Also you have to have a funding system that allows small parties to have their say.
2. Transparency, everything should be made public (sometimes eventually). You are doing things in the public's name, binding them to agreements you make. The public is your boss, you wouldn't get away with secret negotiations at work which you didn't tell your boss about. Yes somethings have to be kept secret for a while but you should have to provide reasons why and know that your actions will be made public eventually.
Sure you should be able to get advice from companies, and companies should be able to lobby you, but only in public. If they are not willing to give their input in public then they should not give it.
3. Honesty, this goes hand in hand with forgiveness of mistakes. Deceiving (relating to policies) should be less accepted, if you made a mistake you should admit it. The public should also accept that politicians are human and make mistakes, if they do not the only way a politician can keep there job is through lies. So you get liars, and honest people are removed.
4. Stop saying everyone should vote, yes it would be ideal if everyone cared and voted, but if you can't be bothered getting of your butt for 30 minutes to vote then you probably haven't put in the time to learn about the issues. All this does, is you will vote by name recognition, keeping small parties with possibly good ideas out.
The people write these type of studies are the ones trying to use the fact that women are weak. Boo hoo women are getting insulted how shocking. Women are not weak, in my experience much more emotionally strong (and nasty) than men, but acting the victim gets them what they want. Women don't buy the sob stories from women as much as men. It has been men's role in society to be the protectors, if you truly want equality protect your own self, and stop whining about it.