As much as I hate to admit it, this is true. While I could very easily trade my labor and the fruits thereof for anything that can be made or acquired locally, if I want an orange or banana, I'm going to need some way to pay to have it shipped here.
You could always pay for oranges or bananas with other commodities like a pound of beef or a hunk of iron.
Not directly I couldn't; the nearest climate that oranges and bananas will grow in is almost a thousand miles to the south. In a barter based economy, how would I get that hunk of iron down to the orange grower, assuming he would accept it as payment (which I would have no way of knowing without communicating with him, which I would have to find a way to pay for as well)? It would have to be transported, which means I would also have to find out what the transporter wanted in exchange, and acquire that. The orange/banana grower would have to do the same thing to have the produce transported back to me, and lord knows what the people doing the transportation would be willing to accept in exchange.
It is interesting that when a group of people get together in most situations that involve economic activity, something ends up as a medium of exchange even if there is no legal tender. An example of how this happened was in POW prison camps during World War II, where Red Cross packages would include a couple cigarettes with each POW ration. Cigarettes became a medium of exchange because it fit several properties useful as money, and even non-smokers collected cigarettes.
I've seen similar kinds of things happen in multi-player video games and other situations. If a game doesn't have any in-game currency (aka "gold coins" or "credits"), it doesn't take long for players to end up finding some other medium of exchange. To use an example from multi-player Minecraft servers, it is quite common for diamonds to be used as a medium of exchange (and a lesser extent stacks of stone blocks).
These are bad examples, as the barter economies you mention are both localized - the POW's trade cigarettes with other POWs in the same camp, and the Minecraft players are trading blocks with players on the same server.
Gee, I guess you're right. Shame on me for thinking that humans make mistakes, computers don't always function exactly as they're supposed to, and that every product Google has put on the market hasn't necessarily performed flawlessly.
Such a bad person I must be, for having doubts and questioning the Great and Powerful Google.../sarc
So... Euros and Pounds aren't money? Or has the IRS changed their policies to allow payment in foreign currencies?
FWIW, even still I don't pay taxes in actual Dollars; it's all bits. Bits are moved from my bank's computers to the government's, and no physical notes are ever actually exchanged.
There is no way Western Civilization would be where it is today if we only had barter as a means of trade. Currencies were essential.
As much as I hate to admit it, this is true. While I could very easily trade my labor and the fruits thereof for anything that can be made or acquired locally, if I want an orange or banana, I'm going to need some way to pay to have it shipped here.
Impressive and touching as this demonstration is, it is also deceptive. Googleâ(TM)s cars follow a route that has already been driven at least once by a human, and a driver always sits behind the wheel, or in the passenger seat, in case of mishap. This isnâ(TM)t purely to reassure pedestrians and other motorists. No system can yet match a human driverâ(TM)s ability to respond to the unexpected, and sudden failure could be catastrophic at high speed.
Google has cars driving around almost everywhere for their map feature, I'd have no problems with a first edition limited to what they already know. And they're legally obligated to have a driver ready to take over, even if they wanted to go solo. Miiiiiiiiinor detail.
Scenario - you get one of the first automated cars, and take it on a test drive down a road that has been mapped by one of Google's Streetview cars.
Unfortunately, it rained a LOT since the Streetview image was taken, and part of your route is 4 feet under water.
What happens next? I know, you, being a responsible person, will take control and stop the vehicle once you notice it's about to drive right into a lake. But what about the less responsible passengers (not really a driver if you aren't controlling the vehicle, regardless of what seat you occupy), who will be too busy Tweeting about how 'OMG Car iz driving itself!' instead of being prepared to take manual control?
If you really think about it, that "miiiiiinor detail" is a actually a pretty damn major one.
The street view cars have driven the bulk of roads in most major US cities at least once documenting everything along the way.
... which would work perfectly, if not for the fact roads deteriorate, get re-routed, have lanes shut down for construction, become flooded, etc., etc., etc...
Left unsaid by Google is how many human interventions were required, (for what ever reason).
My guess is, more than what Google would consider acceptable, hence the tight lips.
whats really needed to make it work is a road infrastructure designed around this.
Came here to say that myself.
Also, the issue of liability is another major barrier; until the government figures out who to blame when something goes awry and one of these things causes damage to life/property, you can bet your bonnet that Uncle Sam will not allow driverless cars on "his" streets.
In-before-the-trolls PS: by "What has happened" I of course mean in regards to the posting/re-posting of sensationalist video and social networking posts, not the actual bombing itself.
Not going to speculate as to whether what has happened is or is not morally correct, but that's precisely how for-profit business works in a capitalist society - whatever gets the dollars coming in is posted, regardless of how tasteless or unoriginal the content may be.
Read the UI guidelines [google.com]. The display resolution is 640x360.
Read the summary...
Novel idea:
That aforementioned screen, in the words of Google's just-released specs sheet, "is the equivalent of a 25-inch high definition screen from eight feet away."
"If you got a ham sandwich in Jamaica or the Dominican Republic, or an orange, and you didn't eat it all and you bring it back into the States and then you discard it, at some point, things can emerge from those products," Feiber said.
This public service message brought to you by the Pork Council and American Fruit Growers Association.
'Tis why I still buy CDs. It makes me a luddite, sure, but I can easily digitize it and so long as I delete the copies, I am still protected by first sale. (Guess this only works if you only buy music where you get it for the entire album experience)
Give yourself a bit of credit, man; refusing to be a sucker != being a Luddite.
That's the point at which you, as a responsible parent, are supposed to bust a move with your best Thriller dance, singing along as you do, subsequently embarrassing the hell out of your progeny.
Bonus points if you can make this happen in a crowded public place; Extra bonus points if your daughter's friends happen to be within view.
The founding fathers made that as clear as they could...
If you think the founding fathers acted as one on anything, much less made the 2nd Amendment clear, then your opinion of their actions really can't be trusted.
Yea, sure, and if OP had actually said that, I would agree.
However, "Making things as clear as they could" != assuming they agreed on everything.
Stronger human beings have been killing weaker human beings throughout history. Firearms changed that, so they must be a good thing. Welcome to the XVIII century!
"God created men; Samuel Colt made them equals." - Unknown
Slashdot Mirror
For the exact same reason Microsoft doesn't make new patches for Windows 95, Windows 3.1 or DOS 6.22.
Uh, no. Comparing a 2-3 year old OS with a 10-20 year old one is disingenuous at best, and downright stupid at worst.
Had you said, "Microsoft doesn't make new patches for Window XP, or Vista, or 7" I would be with you, except for the fact that they totally still do.
Pretty sure he was being rhetorical.
As much as I hate to admit it, this is true. While I could very easily trade my labor and the fruits thereof for anything that can be made or acquired locally, if I want an orange or banana, I'm going to need some way to pay to have it shipped here.
You could always pay for oranges or bananas with other commodities like a pound of beef or a hunk of iron.
Not directly I couldn't; the nearest climate that oranges and bananas will grow in is almost a thousand miles to the south. In a barter based economy, how would I get that hunk of iron down to the orange grower, assuming he would accept it as payment (which I would have no way of knowing without communicating with him, which I would have to find a way to pay for as well)? It would have to be transported, which means I would also have to find out what the transporter wanted in exchange, and acquire that. The orange/banana grower would have to do the same thing to have the produce transported back to me, and lord knows what the people doing the transportation would be willing to accept in exchange.
It is interesting that when a group of people get together in most situations that involve economic activity, something ends up as a medium of exchange even if there is no legal tender. An example of how this happened was in POW prison camps during World War II, where Red Cross packages would include a couple cigarettes with each POW ration. Cigarettes became a medium of exchange because it fit several properties useful as money, and even non-smokers collected cigarettes.
I've seen similar kinds of things happen in multi-player video games and other situations. If a game doesn't have any in-game currency (aka "gold coins" or "credits"), it doesn't take long for players to end up finding some other medium of exchange. To use an example from multi-player Minecraft servers, it is quite common for diamonds to be used as a medium of exchange (and a lesser extent stacks of stone blocks).
These are bad examples, as the barter economies you mention are both localized - the POW's trade cigarettes with other POWs in the same camp, and the Minecraft players are trading blocks with players on the same server.
Gee, I guess you're right. Shame on me for thinking that humans make mistakes, computers don't always function exactly as they're supposed to, and that every product Google has put on the market hasn't necessarily performed flawlessly.
Such a bad person I must be, for having doubts and questioning the Great and Powerful Google... /sarc
Well, thank goodness that computers never malfunction, amirite?
So... Euros and Pounds aren't money? Or has the IRS changed their policies to allow payment in foreign currencies?
FWIW, even still I don't pay taxes in actual Dollars; it's all bits. Bits are moved from my bank's computers to the government's, and no physical notes are ever actually exchanged.
"Everything floats... down here." -- Pennywise the Clown
There is no way Western Civilization would be where it is today if we only had barter as a means of trade. Currencies were essential.
As much as I hate to admit it, this is true. While I could very easily trade my labor and the fruits thereof for anything that can be made or acquired locally, if I want an orange or banana, I'm going to need some way to pay to have it shipped here.
Impressive and touching as this demonstration is, it is also deceptive. Googleâ(TM)s cars follow a route that has already been driven at least once by a human, and a driver always sits behind the wheel, or in the passenger seat, in case of mishap. This isnâ(TM)t purely to reassure pedestrians and other motorists. No system can yet match a human driverâ(TM)s ability to respond to the unexpected, and sudden failure could be catastrophic at high speed.
Google has cars driving around almost everywhere for their map feature, I'd have no problems with a first edition limited to what they already know. And they're legally obligated to have a driver ready to take over, even if they wanted to go solo. Miiiiiiiiinor detail.
Scenario - you get one of the first automated cars, and take it on a test drive down a road that has been mapped by one of Google's Streetview cars.
Unfortunately, it rained a LOT since the Streetview image was taken, and part of your route is 4 feet under water.
What happens next? I know, you, being a responsible person, will take control and stop the vehicle once you notice it's about to drive right into a lake. But what about the less responsible passengers (not really a driver if you aren't controlling the vehicle, regardless of what seat you occupy), who will be too busy Tweeting about how 'OMG Car iz driving itself!' instead of being prepared to take manual control?
If you really think about it, that "miiiiiinor detail" is a actually a pretty damn major one.
The street view cars have driven the bulk of roads in most major US cities at least once documenting everything along the way.
... which would work perfectly, if not for the fact roads deteriorate, get re-routed, have lanes shut down for construction, become flooded, etc., etc., etc...
Left unsaid by Google is how many human interventions were required, (for what ever reason).
My guess is, more than what Google would consider acceptable, hence the tight lips.
whats really needed to make it work is a road infrastructure designed around this.
Came here to say that myself.
Also, the issue of liability is another major barrier; until the government figures out who to blame when something goes awry and one of these things causes damage to life/property, you can bet your bonnet that Uncle Sam will not allow driverless cars on "his" streets.
In-before-the-trolls PS: by "What has happened" I of course mean in regards to the posting/re-posting of sensationalist video and social networking posts, not the actual bombing itself.
Welcome
To
Capitalism.
Not going to speculate as to whether what has happened is or is not morally correct, but that's precisely how for-profit business works in a capitalist society - whatever gets the dollars coming in is posted, regardless of how tasteless or unoriginal the content may be.
Read the UI guidelines [google.com]. The display resolution is 640x360.
Read the summary...
Novel idea:
"If you got a ham sandwich in Jamaica or the Dominican Republic, or an orange, and you didn't eat it all and you bring it back into the States and then you discard it, at some point, things can emerge from those products," Feiber said.
This public service message brought to you by the Pork Council and American Fruit Growers Association.
Go, go, escargo-dzilla?
Yea...
'Tis why I still buy CDs. It makes me a luddite, sure, but I can easily digitize it and so long as I delete the copies, I am still protected by first sale. (Guess this only works if you only buy music where you get it for the entire album experience)
Give yourself a bit of credit, man; refusing to be a sucker != being a Luddite.
That's the point at which you, as a responsible parent, are supposed to bust a move with your best Thriller dance, singing along as you do, subsequently embarrassing the hell out of your progeny.
Bonus points if you can make this happen in a crowded public place; Extra bonus points if your daughter's friends happen to be within view.
The founding fathers made that as clear as they could...
If you think the founding fathers acted as one on anything, much less made the 2nd Amendment clear, then your opinion of their actions really can't be trusted.
Yea, sure, and if OP had actually said that, I would agree.
However, "Making things as clear as they could" != assuming they agreed on everything.
tools designed exclusively to kill human beings
Stronger human beings have been killing weaker human beings throughout history. Firearms changed that, so they must be a good thing. Welcome to the XVIII century!
"God created men; Samuel Colt made them equals." - Unknown
So we should stop the government from doing anything "good," like limiting guns and providing health care, because they do some things that are "bad?"
"Good" and "Bad," especially in the context of government action, is purely subjective, evidenced by the sentence I qouted.
FWIW, not everyone thinks limiting guns and providing health care is a good thing for the government to do.
The fact that Apple apparently sees nothing particularly compelling this device should tell you something, then.
Um... isn't Apple considering a useless-as-tits-on-a-bull-gator "smartwatch" that ties into iPhones?
It tells me something, alright.
Not before I pitch my "Bridge to the Moon" business plan!
no its true
you sell a house to the wife, not the husband
You, obviously, were not the guy we bought our house from.
What can I say, I'm a picky BOFH.
I still look at people oddly when they talk on a blue-tooth headset, because it looks like they're talking to themselves.
What chaps my ass is when they look at me like I'm the crazy one, when I mistakenly think they're talking to me.