People should pay for work, work but historically end results are a good way of judging work, In your example of a fancy chair you judge the quality and quantity of work required to make the chair. Allowing other people to make the chair gives you a comparison and forces continual improvements in either cost or quality. If someone can make the chair better or cheaper than the original creator they should, that is what is best for society.
The problem with patents and copyright is you basically stop other people from making a chair because somebody came up with it first. So they can charge an unfair price up until the point people will just sit on the floor, there is no incentive to improve your product or make production more efficient. If you need any evidence of that look at car keys, to get one cut if it has an immobilizer in it, cost at the lower end $400, You can get an entire new alarm system for less than that, but because the hold a monopoly they can charge, not what they want because you will simply get a new car, or walk but a vastly unfair price.
For movies and electronic devices this is bad, but things like medicine this is down right mass murder, you are basically giving the customer an ultimatum give me all your money or die, oh by the way no guarantees you will live. I understand that it requires money but giving someone the power of life and death over someone in a bargaining situation is not going to end up with a fair deal. What you need to do is say Ok you can have a monopoly for a limited time but you have to prove you are not overcharging, and if it is discovered that you are using creative account practices to over inflate expenses, you will be charge with the crime you are actually guilty of which is mass murder.
I don't know if this scalping but I don't know why scalping is self evidently wrong. Yes it may be illegal, but scalping is simply buying something and selling at a profit. I do not see why it is anybodies business what someone does with tickets after they buy them. If they wish to use them as toilet paper just to deny other people the ability to watch an event, so be it. That scenario is of course legal but selling at a profit isn't.
I do see scalping as slightly unethical, however I see other similar things that are perfectly legal, but much worse in my eyes, such as drug companies charging exorbitant prices for drug, in effect letting people die in order make some money. The difference is scalpers are generally small time businesses whereas drug companies are multi-billion dollar industries so they can afford to buy off politicians, oops I meant to say lobby.
From the summary, no I didn't read the article. All these people did was take advantage of a tax loophole, google or the president elect of course would never do such a thing,
Well my house has walls primarily to keep the weather out. Yes it has locks on the doors to keep opportunistic thieves out, I don't think the locks would stop any thief with so much as a crow bar, or a rock though the window. What primarily keeps the thieves out is a society that doesn't allow people to get so desperate that they need to steal to survive.
Yes there are the few that would break in and steal anyway but they are in the minority.
Although you are right that a study is the right way to get the answer to the question, opinions matter much more than they should. People are not logical, they will not say your study is accurate, and based on sound principles, we will believe you. They will have there own biases, and keep there options.
If people do not trust automated cars, no matter how safe studies show they are, automated cars will not succeed.
Where does unskilled manual labor pay $100/h in the US. if it is costing you $200/h then you are doing it wrong and you SHOULD go out of business. At no point does it become ethical to use slave labor, bypass laws, safety laws in order to make more money. If the laws are unreasonable should be changed, if safety regulations, (companies never lobby the government to change unreasonable laws, oh wait) worker compensation are reasonable they should be applied to workers no matter where they are.
If you product cannot be produced ethically for a cost that is acceptable to consumers perhaps you should not be producing it at all.
What does it matters what it costs, if you have no job to pay for it, or food.
Sure you can get a cheaper phone, with free trade, but that is because produced by effectively slave labor overseas. Guess who gets to keep the lions share of the benefit? While the average workers assets slowly degrade to nothing, buying trinkets that quickly fall apart or go out of date.
This is what get when the only metric you judge success by is how much money is going into someone pocket.
Now they want to own ideas, so you can't even use them without paying a price. Guess what every day people have good ideas all the time, they just don't patient every dam thought that crosses there mind. Even if they did they couldn't afford to defend those patients in court. Ideas are most benefit when they are shared and built upon freely, but that doesn't count to the almighty GDP.
Passing around functions are fine, having final variable are fine (technically there are no variables in true functional programing since the can't change) it is the lame scoping in javascript that lets you pass variables from anywhere to anything without having specify it.
Doubles my have more precision, you start getting inaccurate very quickly when you start using decimal points, if you want accuracy for things like currency you are better to use something like cents instead of dollars, than a double 0.01 is actually 0.01000000000000000020816681711721685132943093776702880859375, that may not seem like much out but start multiplying or doing running totals you will get out significantly. Of course if you stick to integers doubles will be fine as long as you do not exceed a 53 bits.
There are a lot of decimal number that you cannot represent exactly a binary decimal, just like you can't represent 1/3 in decimal, but easy in ternary 0.1
floats use scientific base 2 not base 10, so it is obvious why 0.1 = 0.100000001490116119384765625, its because it has to represented ?.??????????????????? x 2^x where ? is either 0 or 1, if we counted in base 2 it would be fine but we don't so we get non obvious results.
also in scientific notation there is no negate zero
That probably says more about his opinion of voters, than anything else.
Unless that statement meaningless nonsense, by defining some as more than one. Of course you can fool some people. If some people is significant number then that becomes a problem.
You should always take all information with some level of skepticism, whether it is from Facebook, other internet source, TV news, news paper, preacher, monarch or religious leader.
He has no way of telling what proportion of people believe lies posted on facebook, or any other (dis)information source.
I don't think smart watches are a failure, they are before there time, they don't provide the functionality required to make them useful enough, because the technology isn't there yet.
What I want is one that doesn't require a phone, has better input (maybe voice, maybe detects hand movement, don't know), maybe a projector. maybe some form of kinetic charging.
This was the same with phone, the iPhone was not the first smart phone, but had the right level of marketing, usability to make smartphones popular.
There is no free payment system full stop, cash or electronic, banks charge cash handling fees for large cash deposits, they charge monthly fees, and charges, they may simply pay less interest, they WILL recoup their costs and make a profit.
Unless you deal only with people who store their money under a "mattress" some money will go to management of the transaction, even if it is stored under the "mattress" you need to pay for the mattress, and securing it. I also assume the government uses taxes to print money.
I am not at all convinced he is an idiot, (don't get me wrong most of the things that he says are stupid) he is at least a semi successful business man who has ripped of plenty of people. He has manipulated a significant portion of the population into supporting him, with his hate speech. You can't do that being a total moron. What I am convinced of is he only cares only about himself, it doesn't mater if you are a woman, man, Mexican, Arab,... or a White middle class American, if it is in his best interest, he will screw you, given half the chance,
It is irrelevant, long power press has never failed me, were software shutdown, or system hanging, so I cannot do a shutdown has, pair that with a possibly non-removable battery then your computer is useless until your battery goes flat.
I don't like either, couldn't we find a better candidate in a country of 318 million people, but if must I chose X
If that option wins X gets put in a caretaker role while another election is started to find a better candidate.
Or alternatively a more practical solution (since I don't think you would ever find a candidate that wasn't useless) simply rank your preferred candidates in order, if your top choice does not win your vote goes to the next option an so on.
That means your vote is never wasted by voting for a minor candidate.
The solution is not with person you elect, it is with checks and balances you place on those people, anyone can be corrupt. When you start down the corrupt path it only gets harder to stop. You have to use more corruption to cover up previous corruption, you are indebted to the people that helped you on your way. You start feeling entitled the benefits you got. Go give someone $100 a week for a while then take it away from them, they will upset, even though they are better off than they would of been without the money in the first place.
There needs to be a system that is transparent, that the politicians know that there actions will be revealed, even top secret stuff should have an expiry date.
There should be private funding of political campaigns at all, all that does is leave politicians indebted to there donors. The current system forces you to be indebted straight away. A political candidate should win on their ideas not on the size of their, or the people they ow favors to wallets. The usual argument to that is do you want to pay, and my answer is YES, because I am going to pay either way either directly or through laws that are designed benefit the donors. The latter is probably going to be much more expensive in the long run.
How do you get 100% accurate translation anyway? These things are up to interpretation, not all words have an exact translation, meaning is more important than the actual correct words. Language is ambiguous.
Also every error is not necessarily equal, some errors are irrelevant, while some are more important, e,g. the quick car, or the fast car, mean the same thing.
The word would be popular not open. It is not even the most popular if you include mobile. But your argument seems to arguing which is more accessible. The word "open" has a very specific meaning here and he is trying to dilute it.
Linux is more accessible to developers, (no need to buy anything to write drivers), any develop can download it and write for free. Linux is more accessible to IT and even users, it is free do download and install for anybody, windows is not. Since linux very popular for servers, which IT have more control over I would say IT think linux is more accessible.
Linux desktop will never catch on until it comes pre-loaded the computer and games run on it. The average user just doesn't care what OS is loaded, they can still run their applications. IT professional actually need advanced operating system functionality that is why they take the time to install Linux.
Maybe, maybe not, what I was saying is that it is not obvious that it is safer. The tests that are currently done are under limited conditions with human supervisors.
Having you seen the DARPA robotics challenge https://www.youtube.com/watch?... although impressive and more general purpose than self driving cars, they are still slow and prone to failure at tasks that humans find easy. It is not at all obvious that sticking one of these in front of the wheel will be safer.
This testing also only tests a particular software/hardware version, you are not including the possibility of a software update with a bug, killing thousands if not millions of people.
Slashdot Mirror
People should pay for work, work but historically end results are a good way of judging work, In your example of a fancy chair you judge the quality and quantity of work required to make the chair. Allowing other people to make the chair gives you a comparison and forces continual improvements in either cost or quality. If someone can make the chair better or cheaper than the original creator they should, that is what is best for society.
The problem with patents and copyright is you basically stop other people from making a chair because somebody came up with it first. So they can charge an unfair price up until the point people will just sit on the floor, there is no incentive to improve your product or make production more efficient. If you need any evidence of that look at car keys, to get one cut if it has an immobilizer in it, cost at the lower end $400, You can get an entire new alarm system for less than that, but because the hold a monopoly they can charge, not what they want because you will simply get a new car, or walk but a vastly unfair price.
For movies and electronic devices this is bad, but things like medicine this is down right mass murder, you are basically giving the customer an ultimatum give me all your money or die, oh by the way no guarantees you will live. I understand that it requires money but giving someone the power of life and death over someone in a bargaining situation is not going to end up with a fair deal. What you need to do is say Ok you can have a monopoly for a limited time but you have to prove you are not overcharging, and if it is discovered that you are using creative account practices to over inflate expenses, you will be charge with the crime you are actually guilty of which is mass murder.
Really its hard to have a lot of confidence without ignorance,
once you realize how little you know, its hard to be confident.
I don't know if this scalping but I don't know why scalping is self evidently wrong. Yes it may be illegal, but scalping is simply buying something and selling at a profit. I do not see why it is anybodies business what someone does with tickets after they buy them. If they wish to use them as toilet paper just to deny other people the ability to watch an event, so be it. That scenario is of course legal but selling at a profit isn't.
I do see scalping as slightly unethical, however I see other similar things that are perfectly legal, but much worse in my eyes, such as drug companies charging exorbitant prices for drug, in effect letting people die in order make some money. The difference is scalpers are generally small time businesses whereas drug companies are multi-billion dollar industries so they can afford to buy off politicians, oops I meant to say lobby.
From the summary, no I didn't read the article. All these people did was take advantage of a tax loophole, google or the president elect of course would never do such a thing,
funny 8-).
Well my house has walls primarily to keep the weather out. Yes it has locks on the doors to keep opportunistic thieves out, I don't think the locks would stop any thief with so much as a crow bar, or a rock though the window. What primarily keeps the thieves out is a society that doesn't allow people to get so desperate that they need to steal to survive.
Yes there are the few that would break in and steal anyway but they are in the minority.
Although you are right that a study is the right way to get the answer to the question, opinions matter much more than they should. People are not logical, they will not say your study is accurate, and based on sound principles, we will believe you. They will have there own biases, and keep there options.
If people do not trust automated cars, no matter how safe studies show they are, automated cars will not succeed.
Where does unskilled manual labor pay $100/h in the US. if it is costing you $200/h then you are doing it wrong and you SHOULD go out of business. At no point does it become ethical to use slave labor, bypass laws, safety laws in order to make more money. If the laws are unreasonable should be changed, if safety regulations, (companies never lobby the government to change unreasonable laws, oh wait) worker compensation are reasonable they should be applied to workers no matter where they are.
If you product cannot be produced ethically for a cost that is acceptable to consumers perhaps you should not be producing it at all.
What does it matters what it costs, if you have no job to pay for it, or food.
Sure you can get a cheaper phone, with free trade, but that is because produced by effectively slave labor overseas. Guess who gets to keep the lions share of the benefit? While the average workers assets slowly degrade to nothing, buying trinkets that quickly fall apart or go out of date.
This is what get when the only metric you judge success by is how much money is going into someone pocket.
Now they want to own ideas, so you can't even use them without paying a price. Guess what every day people have good ideas all the time, they just don't patient every dam thought that crosses there mind. Even if they did they couldn't afford to defend those patients in court. Ideas are most benefit when they are shared and built upon freely, but that doesn't count to the almighty GDP.
Passing around functions are fine, having final variable are fine (technically there are no variables in true functional programing since the can't change)
it is the lame scoping in javascript that lets you pass variables from anywhere to anything without having specify it.
Doubles my have more precision, you start getting inaccurate very quickly when you start using decimal points,
if you want accuracy for things like currency you are better to use something like cents instead of dollars, than a double 0.01 is actually
0.01000000000000000020816681711721685132943093776702880859375, that may not seem like much out but start multiplying or doing running totals you will get out significantly. Of course if you stick to integers doubles will be fine as long as you do not exceed a 53 bits.
There are a lot of decimal number that you cannot represent exactly a binary decimal, just like you can't represent 1/3 in decimal, but easy in ternary 0.1
floats use scientific base 2 not base 10, so it is obvious why 0.1 = 0.100000001490116119384765625,
its because it has to represented ?.??????????????????? x 2^x where ? is either 0 or 1, if we counted in base 2 it would be fine but we don't so we get non obvious results.
also in scientific notation there is no negate zero
That probably says more about his opinion of voters, than anything else.
Unless that statement meaningless nonsense, by defining some as more than one. Of course you can fool some people. If some people is significant number then that becomes a problem.
You should always take all information with some level of skepticism, whether it is from Facebook, other internet source, TV news, news paper, preacher, monarch or religious leader.
He has no way of telling what proportion of people believe lies posted on facebook, or any other (dis)information source.
Trust me, random guy on internet.
Source matters, it may not make sense but a doodle by Da Vinci is worth a lot more than a doodle by me even if they have the same aesthetic appeal.
If people perceive precious then they are by definition precious, people don't always make sense.
I don't think smart watches are a failure, they are before there time, they don't provide the functionality required to make them useful enough, because the technology isn't there yet.
What I want is one that doesn't require a phone, has better input (maybe voice, maybe detects hand movement, don't know), maybe a projector. maybe some form of kinetic charging.
This was the same with phone, the iPhone was not the first smart phone, but had the right level of marketing, usability to make smartphones popular.
There is no free payment system full stop, cash or electronic, banks charge cash handling fees for large cash deposits, they charge monthly fees, and charges, they may simply pay less interest, they WILL recoup their costs and make a profit.
Unless you deal only with people who store their money under a "mattress" some money will go to management of the transaction, even if it is stored under the "mattress" you need to pay for the mattress, and securing it. I also assume the government uses taxes to print money.
I am not at all convinced he is an idiot, (don't get me wrong most of the things that he says are stupid) he is at least a semi successful business man who has ripped of plenty of people. He has manipulated a significant portion of the population into supporting him, with his hate speech. You can't do that being a total moron. What I am convinced of is he only cares only about himself, it doesn't mater if you are a woman, man, Mexican, Arab, ... or a White middle class American, if it is in his best interest, he will screw you, given half the chance,
It is irrelevant, long power press has never failed me, were software shutdown, or system hanging, so I cannot do a shutdown has, pair that with a possibly non-removable battery then your computer is useless until your battery goes flat.
See other post, but one of the things I think is needed, is public (not private) funding of election campaigns,
what there needs to be is the following options:
I don't like either, couldn't we find a better candidate in a country of 318 million people, but if must I chose X
If that option wins X gets put in a caretaker role while another election is started to find a better candidate.
Or alternatively a more practical solution (since I don't think you would ever find a candidate that wasn't useless)
simply rank your preferred candidates in order, if your top choice does not win your vote goes to the next option an so on.
That means your vote is never wasted by voting for a minor candidate.
The solution is not with person you elect, it is with checks and balances you place on those people, anyone can be corrupt. When you start down the corrupt path it only gets harder to stop. You have to use more corruption to cover up previous corruption, you are indebted to the people that helped you on your way. You start feeling entitled the benefits you got. Go give someone $100 a week for a while then take it away from them, they will upset, even though they are better off than they would of been without the money in the first place.
There needs to be a system that is transparent, that the politicians know that there actions will be revealed, even top secret stuff should have an expiry date.
There should be private funding of political campaigns at all, all that does is leave politicians indebted to there donors. The current system forces you to be indebted straight away. A political candidate should win on their ideas not on the size of their, or the people they ow favors to wallets. The usual argument to that is do you want to pay, and my answer is YES, because I am going to pay either way either directly or through laws that are designed benefit the donors. The latter is probably going to be much more expensive in the long run.
The future is uncertain, and yes it maybe worse, but in order to improve we must take risks, otherwise we will surely stagnate.
Quote:
The definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Hillary is a liar, and manipulative, but how is that different from any other politician.
However the same thing is probably better than electing a sociopath like Trump.
How do you get 100% accurate translation anyway? These things are up to interpretation, not all words have an exact translation, meaning is more important than the actual correct words. Language is ambiguous.
Also every error is not necessarily equal, some errors are irrelevant, while some are more important, e,g. the quick car, or the fast car, mean the same thing.
The word would be popular not open. It is not even the most popular if you include mobile. But your argument seems to arguing which is more accessible. The word "open" has a very specific meaning here and he is trying to dilute it.
Linux is more accessible to developers, (no need to buy anything to write drivers), any develop can download it and write for free.
Linux is more accessible to IT and even users, it is free do download and install for anybody, windows is not. Since linux very popular for servers, which IT have more control over I would say IT think linux is more accessible.
Linux desktop will never catch on until it comes pre-loaded the computer and games run on it. The average user just doesn't care what OS is loaded, they can still run their applications. IT professional actually need advanced operating system functionality that is why they take the time to install Linux.
Not by all accounts at all, there system is more like a VM that you can run linux in.
for example want to git, go apt-get install git great but if you want to use it outside of the shell install it again for windows.
cygwin I can run windows executables in it and cygwin executables from windows.
accessing the linux file system is a bit contrived from windows, some app data directory under the users directory I think
ping, sudo doesn't work (at least when I tried it)
For now I will stick to cygwin
Maybe, maybe not, what I was saying is that it is not obvious that it is safer. The tests that are currently done are under limited conditions with human supervisors.
Having you seen the DARPA robotics challenge https://www.youtube.com/watch?... although impressive and more general purpose than self driving cars, they are still slow and prone to failure at tasks that humans find easy. It is not at all obvious that sticking one of these in front of the wheel will be safer.
This testing also only tests a particular software/hardware version, you are not including the possibility of a software update with a bug, killing thousands if not millions of people.