What we need is an imprisonment clause, If you as a person take somebodies money illegally you can go to jail, companies want the same rights as individual, they should have the same consequences. If it happens send the responsible person(people) (CEO) to jail, see how fast the accounting, and infringing stops.
The answer is simple $70,000 would be the new low wage, inflation would see to that what you need is to reduce the top wages to compensate.
There is more than enough resources in western countries for everyone to live a comfortable life, look at food waste 40%, obesity the main health problem.
Distribution of wealth should be fairer (note I do not mean every should get the same but 422:1 (CSV Caremark) is on the ridiculous side)
Also we actually need bacteria to live, there is a lot of bacteria in your mouth that is good, aids in digestion, protects against decay, I find it bazaar that so many people seem tho think that all bacteria and must be eliminated.
Even most "bad" bacteria helps us build up immunity, of course there are exceptions, and limits, but this anti bacterial craze, is just crazy, driven by an attempt for some companies to make money of our phobias.
Don't get me wrong, I do not believe in intelligent design at all, but deaf and decay seem like a integral part of society progressing. If I was to "design" life may well be part of it, even though the individual organisms in it may not like it.
If people did not die you would be stuck with your parent's ideas for ever. The older generation would never release there resources to the younger one, that is if they would even have children in the first place, why would they, if they are going to live forever. Death even though horrible seems like a necessary part of life.
This is even more silly, where I live if you simply put your card in backwards, the reader will say read error, ask you to swipe, then ask to put the card in again, if you put the card in backwards again it will ask to swipe and accept that. Yes you need to know the pin but you don't need the chip.
It reminds me of Microsoft Bob's security if you entered your password wrong 3 times it would ask if you wanted to change it.
While true, the you don't generally carry the same amount of cash as you do in your bank account or your available credit, that being said you can already use a credit card without a pin, order something online, or contactless payment.
I think it is strange that the pin is simply not put in as part of the response, to the challenge response, I think it is strange the actual card says pin ok, as opposed to sending that information off to the bank to validate.
The answer is simple it is not socially acceptable claim men are underprivileged in any aspect of life.
In New Zealand it is illegal to give a scholarship to a man, even though they maybe underrepresented in an area like education, it is not illegal to do so for a woman.
women are far worse at committing suicide than men usually there rates of attempted suicide are higher, just that men's actual suicide rate much higher.
Even assuming males where like that, it is probably important to expose children to horrible males. My daughter actually like their male teachers better.
I don't think this is actually true, the last time I checked the proportion of male teachers hasn't gone changed significantly, in recent years, although it is remarkably low. although not many years http://data.worldbank.org/indi...
You can't speak for women as a straight white male. Check your privilege.
Just like a woman can't speak for the discrimination against men. In fact I can't even speak for all men, or white men, or whatever social group you put me in, unless the size of that group is 1. I don't believe I was given that right, just like just because you are a women doesn't give you the right to speak for all women.
All we can ever do is give our opinions, and supporting arguments and evidence for them.
That statement, is just excluding a section of society that you think may disagrees with you.
Also I can deny that sexism is rampant in this industry (I assume you mean towards women), Not once have I ever seen a woman denied a job, or put down because she was a woman. If you mean men hitting on women, then yes that happens, if men where not attracted to women (or vice versa), then humanity would die out, and our "rampant sexism" problem would be solved.
Its not necessarily about being the best either, it is about selling the most, at the highest markup.
Marketing is important as well, and apple is incredibly good at that. Probably its best skill, people want iphones because they are cool, that reason is purely marketing.
Because it is not at all obvious that an human augmented vehicle would be better. At some point if you take enough of the task away from humans they will simply lose the skills needed to drive in the first place, people already talk on cell phones, do their makeup while driving, if you make driving easier it is quite possible people will simple start paying less attention.
The article's argument states that the endpoint should augmented human control rather than fully autonomous and uses the example of current extreme environment vehicles aren't autonomous so cars shouldn't be.
This argument has some flaws, first we haven't developed any fully autonomous vehicles so of course no existing existing vehicles are autonomous. Secondly vehicles like the mars rover, or deep sea exploration vehicles have a different purpose, which is to explore, this requires a more fine grain of control, not just go to point A. Thirdly these vehicles are in unknown environments so it is harder to program them cope with unknowns, you can't send machine into a well mapped environment if its job is to map that environment.
Ultimately it probably would be an ultimate goal to send out fully autonomous robots to discover interesting things on other planets, unless we discover a means of faster than light communications.
I think the money substitute that will happen in a post scarcity economy will not give extra buying power to stuff, but will give you extra reputation in order to get other people to help you do your bidding (waa ha ha).
That is actually the main reason why we buy most stuff we buy of the stuff over and what we need. Why do so may people want a Ferrari? It is a highly impractical car, very low to the ground, can't fit much in it, bad fuel economy, expensive to maintain, can't drive it anywhere near its actual top speed. The reason is, it is a statement, "Look I am so successful that I can waste this much money". What we need is a more direct way of indicating success without being so wasteful.
Think about it, even in Star Trek they still had rank, clearly those people who attained higher rank either worked hard or where skilled at their job, or had the right connections.
Not really, we can afford much more now than we ever could and even what you say is true, it is more likely to be an allocation issue rather than there is not enough basic resources for everyone to survive, reasonably comfortably.
Most western countries have an obesity problem, that should tell you something.
The user should be able to lie and say yes, but actually not grant access,
Want access to my contacts sure, here is my fake contacts. Want access to my phone calls sure, but it will look like I make none. Want microphone access sure here is some random noise....
The problem with forcing a yes/no answer if you answer no you can't run the app, that means people will generally just say yes.
Slashdot Mirror
What we need is an imprisonment clause, If you as a person take somebodies money illegally you can go to jail, companies want the same rights as individual, they should have the same consequences. If it happens send the responsible person(people) (CEO) to jail, see how fast the accounting, and infringing stops.
Maybe I am missing something but do SSD have RPM, nothing spins in them, or has the metric just continued for comparison sake?
That is simply not true, we do pollute more, that is because we have more people and are much more effective at getting resources.
But killing is just wrong while we do kill people, we probably live in the most peaceful time in human existence.
Here are murder rates:
http://marginalrevolution.com/...
if you want a citation from wars:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
also think about deaths from illness,
Also in the past remember slavery was acceptable,
I am as pessimistic as the next person but don't blind yourself with false assumptions.
The answer is simple $70,000 would be the new low wage, inflation would see to that what you need is to reduce the top wages to compensate.
There is more than enough resources in western countries for everyone to live a comfortable life, look at food waste 40%, obesity the main health problem.
Distribution of wealth should be fairer (note I do not mean every should get the same but 422:1 (CSV Caremark) is on the ridiculous side)
Accountants do risk benefit calculations, not lawyers.
Also we actually need bacteria to live, there is a lot of bacteria in your mouth that is good, aids in digestion, protects against decay, I find it bazaar that so many people seem tho think that all bacteria and must be eliminated.
Even most "bad" bacteria helps us build up immunity, of course there are exceptions, and limits, but this anti bacterial craze, is just crazy, driven by an attempt for some companies to make money of our phobias.
Don't get me wrong, I do not believe in intelligent design at all, but deaf and decay seem like a integral part of society progressing. If I was to "design" life may well be part of it, even though the individual organisms in it may not like it.
If people did not die you would be stuck with your parent's ideas for ever. The older generation would never release there resources to the younger one, that is if they would even have children in the first place, why would they, if they are going to live forever. Death even though horrible seems like a necessary part of life.
main reason, electric kettles turn off by themselves.
This is even more silly, where I live if you simply put your card in backwards, the reader will say read error, ask you to swipe, then ask to put the card in again, if you put the card in backwards again it will ask to swipe and accept that. Yes you need to know the pin but you don't need the chip.
It reminds me of Microsoft Bob's security if you entered your password wrong 3 times it would ask if you wanted to change it.
While true, the you don't generally carry the same amount of cash as you do in your bank account or your available credit, that being said you can already use a credit card without a pin, order something online, or contactless payment.
I think it is strange that the pin is simply not put in as part of the response, to the challenge response, I think it is strange the actual card says pin ok, as opposed to sending that information off to the bank to validate.
The answer is simple it is not socially acceptable claim men are underprivileged in any aspect of life.
In New Zealand it is illegal to give a scholarship to a man, even though they maybe underrepresented in an area like education, it is not illegal to do so for a woman.
women are far worse at committing suicide than men usually there rates of attempted suicide are higher, just that men's actual suicide rate much higher.
Even assuming males where like that, it is probably important to expose children to horrible males. My daughter actually like their male teachers better.
I don't think this is actually true, the last time I checked the proportion of male teachers hasn't gone changed significantly, in recent years, although it is remarkably low.
although not many years
http://data.worldbank.org/indi...
You can't speak for women as a straight white male. Check your privilege.
Just like a woman can't speak for the discrimination against men. In fact I can't even speak for all men, or white men, or whatever social group you put me in, unless the size of that group is 1. I don't believe I was given that right, just like just because you are a women doesn't give you the right to speak for all women.
All we can ever do is give our opinions, and supporting arguments and evidence for them.
That statement, is just excluding a section of society that you think may disagrees with you.
Also I can deny that sexism is rampant in this industry (I assume you mean towards women), Not once have I ever seen a woman denied a job, or put down because she was a woman. If you mean men hitting on women, then yes that happens, if men where not attracted to women (or vice versa), then humanity would die out, and our "rampant sexism" problem would be solved.
I typical user runs a web browser. That is 90% of your usage right there. Unless you are playing games you can do pretty much everything on linux.
The can stop you taking photos a concerts
http://www.adweek.com/news/tec...
just have the correct set o pixels in your picture.
A degree in a field is one thing, working knowledge of how things actually happen is another.
Its not necessarily about being the best either, it is about selling the most, at the highest markup.
Marketing is important as well, and apple is incredibly good at that. Probably its best skill, people want iphones because they are cool, that reason is purely marketing.
Firewire also allows direct memory access I believe. Yes USB has security flaws, but that is a bug no a design flaw, of allowing DMA access.
http://www.hermann-uwe.de/blog...
Because it is not at all obvious that an human augmented vehicle would be better. At some point if you take enough of the task away from humans they will simply lose the skills needed to drive in the first place, people already talk on cell phones, do their makeup while driving, if you make driving easier it is quite possible people will simple start paying less attention.
The article's argument states that the endpoint should augmented human control rather than fully autonomous and uses the example of current extreme environment vehicles aren't autonomous so cars shouldn't be.
This argument has some flaws, first we haven't developed any fully autonomous vehicles so of course no existing existing vehicles are autonomous. Secondly vehicles like the mars rover, or deep sea exploration vehicles have a different purpose, which is to explore, this requires a more fine grain of control, not just go to point A. Thirdly these vehicles are in unknown environments so it is harder to program them cope with unknowns, you can't send machine into a well mapped environment if its job is to map that environment.
Ultimately it probably would be an ultimate goal to send out fully autonomous robots to discover interesting things on other planets, unless we discover a means of faster than light communications.
robots could perform menial labour
I think the money substitute that will happen in a post scarcity economy will not give extra buying power to stuff, but will give you extra reputation in order to get other people to help you do your bidding (waa ha ha).
That is actually the main reason why we buy most stuff we buy of the stuff over and what we need. Why do so may people want a Ferrari? It is a highly impractical car, very low to the ground, can't fit much in it, bad fuel economy, expensive to maintain, can't drive it anywhere near its actual top speed. The reason is, it is a statement, "Look I am so successful that I can waste this much money". What we need is a more direct way of indicating success without being so wasteful.
Think about it, even in Star Trek they still had rank, clearly those people who attained higher rank either worked hard or where skilled at their job, or had the right connections.
Not really, we can afford much more now than we ever could and even what you say is true, it is more likely to be an allocation issue rather than there is not enough basic resources for everyone to survive, reasonably comfortably.
Most western countries have an obesity problem, that should tell you something.
The user should be able to lie and say yes, but actually not grant access,
Want access to my contacts sure, here is my fake contacts. ...
Want access to my phone calls sure, but it will look like I make none.
Want microphone access sure here is some random noise.
The problem with forcing a yes/no answer if you answer no you can't run the app, that means people will generally just say yes.