Capitalism has raised more people out of poverty & starvation, has raised the average standard of living higher and faster for more people, done more to advance science and technology, done more to empower the poorest and provide a way out of poverty, and has provided more charitable assistance worldwide than any other system yet devised by Man. And that's just a partial listing. As the saying goes, capitalism is a deeply flawed system but it beats anything else that's been tried.
Pure capitalism is an extremely ruthless and egoistic system and far from the "best we've tried". We've chained the beast in a ton of laws for it to treat the consumers decently, the workers decently, the competitors decently, the environment decently, pay their share of taxes for public education, infrastructure and so on but it's a slippery eel when it comes to anything that affects the bottom line. A few philanthropists who've accumulated so much wealth they'd like to create a legacy, allegedly for charity but I suspect just as much for vanity doesn't make up for the fact that to most capitalists you're only worth anything as long as you're useful. Pretty much every concession for the weakest in the form of consumer rights, worker's rights and so on have been fought long and hard using the most heavily marketed lie in capitalism, that the invisible hand of the market will fix it.
The "invisible hand" wants to get rid of troublesome people as cheaply as possible, because usually you're not in a position to create a big enough stink to matter. As in, it's cheaper to put you on a support line with a heavily accented Indian reading a script until you give up than to actually fix the problem. You're an economic problem to be solved, solving it to your satisfaction is not necessarily the plan. That's why you have terms of service that are absolutely horrible and nobody reads or cares because usually you get the service you want. If you make any kind of "trouble" though the terms are effectively a kill switch. The gig economy is perfect for this, if you drive for a taxi company you call in sick. If you drive for Uber you don't get paid. It's the capitalist dream, a sick worker is a useless worker so why should he get paid? It's back to the old days of working in the coal mines until you got sick/injured, then you pick the next in line...
From what I understand it's essentially like a theme park where you must buy everything with funny money. The investors buy funny money on the theory that if the park is successful lots of people will want funny money and the value will rise. If it flops, tough. First issue is that they can just burn through the money and fold, people have no ownership and unlike Kickstarter they haven't been "promised" any product or service. You're an investor, the investment failed, too bad. The executive strategy session was a blast though. The real problem though is it if you actually struck gold it would be trivial for the owners to turn your funny money into nearly worthless money and pocket pretty much all the profit themselves. It's a heads I win, tails you lose proposition.
Posting conspiracy theories that can be disproven with a single click doesn't make you look good. Nobody modded the AC down. You're logged in, so you can click score in the title of the post. if it's been modded up or down, you'll see the initial posting score and a summary of the mods applied. As I post this, it was posted at zero and there's no history to show..
Pretty sure that if you post to undo a moderation it magically disappears.
Well the database wouldn't have information about "fighter pilots, SEAL team operators, police suspects, people under witness relocation" but it would have information about people who happen to be those sorts of things. The Scandinavian countries and quite a few other European countries all have a unique "person ID" which essentially an SSN on steroids. Pretty much any official service or registry that needs to identify you uses that number, so does the bank (no anonymous accounts), the phone company (no anonymous burner phones), your job (because they deduct income taxes directly to the government) and so on.
The basic information is kept in a single place, they're probably close to what a census agency would be in the US. The random public can't query it, but quite a few private and public institutions can. Some people are far more restricted though, but if you have a legitimate need you can get access. Here in Norway not to absolutely everyone - the most heavily guarded access level is kept by the registry itself and everyone else needs to contact those people via a re-mailer, but I guess in Sweden they can get everyone if they have a need. And apparently they thought their version of the DMV had that need and since most adults have a driver's license...
Presumably this should be some kind of anonymous result like: SELECT age, sex INTO ExportDB..Statistics FROM DriversLicenses
and somebody massively fucked up and did a: SELECT * INTO ExportDB..Statistics FROM DriversLicenses
Sweden only got a population of about 10 million, say 2 million are underage and another million don't have one so maybe 7 million records. With lots of common street names, first and last names with compression I suppose getting it down to email size is doable. So if you have a list of person IDs that are interesting and you want to know where they live, this is great. If you want to find out if they're interesting and why, it's probably not that useful. Unless they got the security level too, that'd narrow it down to just the special ones just like that. Not why they're restricted of course, but searching for the names you'd probably get a hint...
"... don't count as part of the workforce" what is the lie? at worst it might be a case of badly defined? what is the lie? people not looking for work... are not part of workforce. it would be a "lie" to include those that don't want/cant work as well!!
Well, if the unemployment figure is supposed to show the "true" need for work, one issue is that the statistics generally capture the people looking for work right now. If students stay in school, get discouraged from trying, manage to get a medical disability etc. they disappear from the statistic but if the economy is booming people want to get out and make money now. So if you have 8% unemployment and get work for 5% of them you don't end up with 3% but maybe 5% as the "hidden" unemployed return, how quickly they enter and exit the workforce differs.
And then there's the standard for employed, if you get called in as an extra for one shift at McD because you're #14 on their call list or as a substitute teacher one day because someone got sick this month are you employed? I don't know if you have something like that in the US but here we have like shielded labor for the mildly mentally challenged, does that count as "real work"? Retraining programs? There's lots of different ways to measure it and there's no acknowledged global standard.
If you want to do an apples-to-apples comparison you really ought to start with the employed to population ratio and work your way backwards from there as to where the rest end up. What kind of provision you make for marginal jobs that I have heard of from the US like greeter or bagging groceries or gas pump attendant, around here I don't see anything like that and I think the social system is expected to pick them up. Like the higher the minimum wage, the less "barely employable" people will be employed but the expected tax return on the employed should be higher.
And then you have all the funny business in countries with supposedly extreme unemployment where they usually really work off the record for somebody else, illegal immigrants that don't show up in any statistics but none the less affect the job market and whatnot... There's lots of issues getting real, comparable numbers. Usually the number is a pretty good temperature gauge, like is the economy cooling or heating up. The absolute value should be taken with quite a few grains of salt.
Nobody said it was. But to steal an expression from 4chan of all places, the open source community is not your personal army. It's got lots of activists and wannabe generals who wants to tell "the community" what to do and by that they mean the rank and file developers because they're too busy leading. To which the developers generally reply that they're doing their own thing for their own reasons and if you're not happy with it, you can fork it and do your own thing for your own reasons. Sure most take input from users and other developers, but only as advice - it's not a democracy.
The result is that 99.9% of the time it's just a lot of huffing and puffing but nobody willing to actually do the job or try organizing an effort to do the job or it fizzles almost immediately as said person loses interest. The company level is essentially the same, Red Hat, Mozilla and Sun/Oracle/Apache does what they want. They don't owe you a version of Linux/Firefox/OpenOffice that works the way you want. The code is free, but the labor is not so if you want it done differently it's up to you. It's the open source way of saying no. Not proprietary software-no, but as in "you're on your own there buddy".
The US doesn't have any real existential threats (Canada? Mexico? Russian tanks rolling into Alaska?) short of a full WW3 and that kind of total war for survival would play by completely different rules. For every other kind of proxy/support war like against IS etc. efficiency is not really the primary measure of success. The US wants to play the good guys which means that they use great discretion in who, when and where they attack because it's in urban areas, against adversaries in civilian clothing and with extensive use of human shields. The enemy is actively trying to create PR disasters to gather support.
I think the general is afraid of having to explain "inhuman" decisions that may make military sense, like if there's a sniper up in the hills you can call in the artillery. If there's a sniper on top of a school or hospital, maybe calling in the artillery is a very bad idea. I think there's currently a lot of judgement calls that are very vague and difficult to put into a weapons system and that will also be the case in the future. And that if you're worried about WW3 you build more ICBMs and nuclear subs to launch Armageddon. It doesn't sound like he's against technology and smart weapons, just taking the human out of the equation.
When there's enough of them and someone (a body of people, an organization, what have you) figures out how to seize complete control of them is when the world takes a sharp turn into something nobody really wants.
You seem to be assuming that we shouldn't be worried about the people who built them in the first place. Unless autonomous weapon systems will be built with strong AI and a concept of "war crimes" which we know they will not, they can be ordered to do anything. Humanity has done some pretty terrible things with human soldiers to carry out their atrocities, don't assume there'll be less with fewer humans in the loop. And with fewer friendly casualties the threshold for resorting to the use of violence is also probably lower. Whatever advantages it might have in theory, I doubt robotic wars will get better for the civilians caught up in it.
See my sig -- we're getting more and more proofs that copyright is one of worst long-term evils.
Yeah, that you can't copy music for free - other than those the artist has given permission or that's older than Mickey Mouse - is clearly one of the true great evils. I mean it's not like the world is now accumulating every shitty two-bit wannabe who knows how to abuse an instrument and there's enough music, TV series, movies, porn and computer games to waste several lifetimes. It's not like we got any more serious issues going on we should fix first...
It would seem that the U.S. has a pretty poor constitution if it can be superceded by contract law. Isn't the whole point of a country's constitution that it stands above all "lesser" principles and laws.
The US constitution was written with the mindset that it should be a meta-law to limit the power of an oppressive government, so it only says things like "Congress shall make no law (...) abridging the freedom of speech" and doesn't really deal with people at all except in the context of government action like giving you a fair trial. Everything else is just law, it's illegal to murder you not unconstitutional. So if Congress wants to do something about this, they should pass a law. The flip side of this is that despite being called the Bill of Rights there are actually no rights granted. If the government did absolutely nothing, didn't hold any trials because it didn't bother to prosecute any criminals that would not violate the constitution. I think the closest thing you get to a "right" in the constitution is the 13th that says: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude (..) shall exist within the United States" but the wording is more to say that such contracts are null and void so the usual laws apply.
You could write an entirely different constitution centering on people, saying basic things like that people have a right to freedom so that slavery and involuntary servitude is outlaws is merely a consequence. That everyone is entitled to equal protection by the law so for example selective enforcement would be unconstitutional. But that would be an entirely different way of thinking about what the role and purpose of what the constitution should be. It's probably more in line with the way we think about civil rights today, but it's a very different world today than in the 1700s. Even basic things we take for granted today like elementary public education didn't exist, you had some free schools run by churches but it was neither universal nor compulsory. The government was mostly the law, the rest you had to take care of on your own.
Of course sci-fi also doesn't need to take reality into account. Assuming the poor are incapable of sustaining themselves, they must be given wealth. Why would rich people give more to the poor than what is absolutely necessary to maintain a civil society where the masses don't riot and start a revolution? Consumption is only good if you don't have to supply the money they consume with, otherwise it's just an inversion of the broken glass parable. If you can break glass and generate business for yourself, great. If you also have to pay the repair bill you're going to end up with less than you put in. Purely destructive activity doesn't benefit society, if you really believe that go out and create jobs through vandalism. While somebody will get paid to fix things, as a whole the community will be poorer.
Are you sure that wasn't a tongue-in-cheek answer to the fact that Linux didn't have any of the software he's used to, only "equivalents" he'd have to learn from scratch? Because I have made that switch and it was almost a broken record "Does Linux have X? No, but Linux has Y which is kinda like X...", he probably just realized exactly what he asked for and decided to bail.
It's a bit of a cascading network effect. Some people at work use the advanced features of MS Office or interchange documents with other businesses that use MS Office and the people they hire are more likely to have used MS Office, thus the workplace standardizes on MS Office. Since people use MS Office at work, it's easier to get MS Office at home because everything is in the same place and they can apply any free practice/training they got at work.
You might think it would be a trivial effort to switch or use both because you understand the abstract concepts... but most people aren't there. The big blue e is the Internet, the Internet is the big blue e. I'm occasionally there about other things I don't care much about, I know how this product works and it gets the job done so... even though I know it might not be the only or best tool for the job. Mental effort isn't an infinite resource, sometimes you just don't care enough to bother.
I agree, you need one - the version you launched the update from because you know that one boots and can access the repositories. If it breaks something else, you can always manually reinstall and pin the older kernel.
You are talking about two different things, a disturbance in the environment can be tested by trying in another environment. If the flaw is inherent to the technique that's a different problem, but then at least you have two studies coming to the same result. That's a much stronger result than one experiment, which could be flawed in a million ways you can't even imagine. Even if it's wrong, knowing that the experiments must share a common flaw narrows down the search immensely.
I am trying to write the sarcasm ending tag (meant to be within the parenthesis in that previous comment) but it gets always deleted?! Someone here should review the HTML parsing part!
/. doesn't allow direct HTML in comments, been that way 20 years. If you want to do quasi-HTML, learn to write HTML entities. Like </sarcasm> has to be written like </sarcasm> Oh and the & itself is written & in case you're wondering. Lots of entities won't work though, only a small white-list. Particularly I miss the Greek letters for formulas, though most western characters are there like üöæøåñçß. Forget the rest of Unicode though, not happening...
Back when I used Ubuntu, I dreaded every upgrade because I knew something would konk out and force me to either reinstall or hammer the configuration until it worked. It's been ages, though, so maybe things are better now?
Doesn't that describe like every upgrade, ever? Even with the best of intentions things can break and then you have all those pushing the new shiny who wants to break things. The question is how often do you want/need it compared to the benefit of getting new hardware support, new software features and fixes quicker. Every day, taking it in stride (until it breaks in the most inconvenient way at the most inconvenient time), every six months, every two years... you can skip an LTS and do it once every four years, the choice is yours.
The only real downside I saw was that even with backports and PPAs occasionally sorting it out you sometimes had cascading dependencies where you wanted to upgrade just one software package and it set off a chain reaction. I mean the software already exists in a newer distro, if there was a simple way to say "Take application X from distro version N+1/2/3, put it in an AppImage/Flatpak/Snap/chroot container and let me run that isolated from the rest of the system" that would be great. Ideally integrated into apt-get so that branch would get updates along with the rest. If you upgrade your distro and "catch up" later, you can uninstall the container and install it the ordinary way. That way you'd have a vast library of "free" backports.
Note: I might be unaware what actually exists now, there's some years since I last ran Linux.
Personal preference has nothing to do with it. We're running a business, not a kindergarten. We need professional tools.
So availability of applications have what do to with support window? Maybe you shouldn't be running anything, since you can't seem to make a coherent argument.
Wine just announced it fixed the last compatiblity issues and Notepad is now a Platinum-certified app.
Well that's up to the WINE project... if the problem is patents, all you can do is wait. Besides there's nothing wrong with a high bit rate MP3, except that it's maybe a MB or two bigger than an equivalent AAC. If it lacked quality it would be different.
Yes, probably he did ask Trump. And Trump probably did say yes. Because that's the kind of thing Trump does.
Well, if Musk is anything like a friend of mine then "That sounds like a good idea, why don't you draft up a proposal?" counts as approval. Then again he'll also take any casual remark on something that might happen at some unspecified point in the future as a done deal coming any day now and any girl that looks his way or says two kind words is flirting with him.
Yeah, and they were trying out never-before used titanium grid fins, too. But that was their highest energy trajectory yet (as noted, they keep pushing the bounds on trying to land more and more difficult trajectories). I imagine they'll cut back on that a lot once the Heavy is in full service and they can just offload heavier payloads to the Heavy.
Maybe, but there seems to be a sliding scale from landing all three back at the launch site to landing one or all on drone ships to using them as expendables so they probably want the most aggressive landing profile possible for a given weight. With three first stages to one second stage I guess the value of reuse and quick turn-around goes up. And if I understand it correctly the center stage will go longer and faster than the side boosters, that one is probably always coming in hot.
The pretext is to ensure better compatibility but it seems a lot more likely this is to ensure that if you're in a Windows environment, you're on an upgrade treadmill.
It absolutely is. I used the small open source patch that lets you continue to install updates, everything has drivers from the manufacturer and everything works. Maybe Win7 isn't doing everything optimally, but there's no compelling reason for Windows to refuse to run.
Microsoft confirmed. Instead, they'll simply be offered the Windows 10 Anniversary Update, plus security updates through January, 2023, the end of the original Windows 8.1 support period.
So Microsoft is going to give the Anniversary Update 7 years of security updates, that's great. Now give everybody else the chance to step off the upgrade bandwagon. Seriously it's proven time and time again that they could let you do it and it wouldn't really cost them anything because they're going to make those patches anyway, but they won't.
I hope this kid recovers and gives the operation two thumbs up!
Well looking at the video... I doubt he can despite it being a "success". He seems to have a slight squeeze/release control which is of course infinitely more useful to grab things than a stub, but he doesn't seem to have any motor control over individual fingers and certainly couldn't do a shirt button or tie a shoe lace. I've seen people with a simple claw prosthetic do more, of course the upside is that these hands look human but as long as he can't hold them naturally it's only half way there in that department too. Of course don't let perfect be the enemy of good but it's very far from true replacement hands.
Slashdot Mirror
Capitalism has raised more people out of poverty & starvation, has raised the average standard of living higher and faster for more people, done more to advance science and technology, done more to empower the poorest and provide a way out of poverty, and has provided more charitable assistance worldwide than any other system yet devised by Man. And that's just a partial listing. As the saying goes, capitalism is a deeply flawed system but it beats anything else that's been tried.
Pure capitalism is an extremely ruthless and egoistic system and far from the "best we've tried". We've chained the beast in a ton of laws for it to treat the consumers decently, the workers decently, the competitors decently, the environment decently, pay their share of taxes for public education, infrastructure and so on but it's a slippery eel when it comes to anything that affects the bottom line. A few philanthropists who've accumulated so much wealth they'd like to create a legacy, allegedly for charity but I suspect just as much for vanity doesn't make up for the fact that to most capitalists you're only worth anything as long as you're useful. Pretty much every concession for the weakest in the form of consumer rights, worker's rights and so on have been fought long and hard using the most heavily marketed lie in capitalism, that the invisible hand of the market will fix it.
The "invisible hand" wants to get rid of troublesome people as cheaply as possible, because usually you're not in a position to create a big enough stink to matter. As in, it's cheaper to put you on a support line with a heavily accented Indian reading a script until you give up than to actually fix the problem. You're an economic problem to be solved, solving it to your satisfaction is not necessarily the plan. That's why you have terms of service that are absolutely horrible and nobody reads or cares because usually you get the service you want. If you make any kind of "trouble" though the terms are effectively a kill switch. The gig economy is perfect for this, if you drive for a taxi company you call in sick. If you drive for Uber you don't get paid. It's the capitalist dream, a sick worker is a useless worker so why should he get paid? It's back to the old days of working in the coal mines until you got sick/injured, then you pick the next in line...
From what I understand it's essentially like a theme park where you must buy everything with funny money. The investors buy funny money on the theory that if the park is successful lots of people will want funny money and the value will rise. If it flops, tough. First issue is that they can just burn through the money and fold, people have no ownership and unlike Kickstarter they haven't been "promised" any product or service. You're an investor, the investment failed, too bad. The executive strategy session was a blast though. The real problem though is it if you actually struck gold it would be trivial for the owners to turn your funny money into nearly worthless money and pocket pretty much all the profit themselves. It's a heads I win, tails you lose proposition.
Posting conspiracy theories that can be disproven with a single click doesn't make you look good. Nobody modded the AC down. You're logged in, so you can click score in the title of the post. if it's been modded up or down, you'll see the initial posting score and a summary of the mods applied. As I post this, it was posted at zero and there's no history to show..
Pretty sure that if you post to undo a moderation it magically disappears.
Well the database wouldn't have information about "fighter pilots, SEAL team operators, police suspects, people under witness relocation" but it would have information about people who happen to be those sorts of things. The Scandinavian countries and quite a few other European countries all have a unique "person ID" which essentially an SSN on steroids. Pretty much any official service or registry that needs to identify you uses that number, so does the bank (no anonymous accounts), the phone company (no anonymous burner phones), your job (because they deduct income taxes directly to the government) and so on.
The basic information is kept in a single place, they're probably close to what a census agency would be in the US. The random public can't query it, but quite a few private and public institutions can. Some people are far more restricted though, but if you have a legitimate need you can get access. Here in Norway not to absolutely everyone - the most heavily guarded access level is kept by the registry itself and everyone else needs to contact those people via a re-mailer, but I guess in Sweden they can get everyone if they have a need. And apparently they thought their version of the DMV had that need and since most adults have a driver's license...
Presumably this should be some kind of anonymous result like:
SELECT age, sex
INTO ExportDB..Statistics
FROM DriversLicenses
and somebody massively fucked up and did a:
SELECT *
INTO ExportDB..Statistics
FROM DriversLicenses
Sweden only got a population of about 10 million, say 2 million are underage and another million don't have one so maybe 7 million records. With lots of common street names, first and last names with compression I suppose getting it down to email size is doable. So if you have a list of person IDs that are interesting and you want to know where they live, this is great. If you want to find out if they're interesting and why, it's probably not that useful. Unless they got the security level too, that'd narrow it down to just the special ones just like that. Not why they're restricted of course, but searching for the names you'd probably get a hint...
"... don't count as part of the workforce" what is the lie? at worst it might be a case of badly defined? what is the lie? people not looking for work... are not part of workforce. it would be a "lie" to include those that don't want/cant work as well!!
Well, if the unemployment figure is supposed to show the "true" need for work, one issue is that the statistics generally capture the people looking for work right now. If students stay in school, get discouraged from trying, manage to get a medical disability etc. they disappear from the statistic but if the economy is booming people want to get out and make money now. So if you have 8% unemployment and get work for 5% of them you don't end up with 3% but maybe 5% as the "hidden" unemployed return, how quickly they enter and exit the workforce differs.
And then there's the standard for employed, if you get called in as an extra for one shift at McD because you're #14 on their call list or as a substitute teacher one day because someone got sick this month are you employed? I don't know if you have something like that in the US but here we have like shielded labor for the mildly mentally challenged, does that count as "real work"? Retraining programs? There's lots of different ways to measure it and there's no acknowledged global standard.
If you want to do an apples-to-apples comparison you really ought to start with the employed to population ratio and work your way backwards from there as to where the rest end up. What kind of provision you make for marginal jobs that I have heard of from the US like greeter or bagging groceries or gas pump attendant, around here I don't see anything like that and I think the social system is expected to pick them up. Like the higher the minimum wage, the less "barely employable" people will be employed but the expected tax return on the employed should be higher.
And then you have all the funny business in countries with supposedly extreme unemployment where they usually really work off the record for somebody else, illegal immigrants that don't show up in any statistics but none the less affect the job market and whatnot... There's lots of issues getting real, comparable numbers. Usually the number is a pretty good temperature gauge, like is the economy cooling or heating up. The absolute value should be taken with quite a few grains of salt.
"Just fork it" isn't that easy.
Nobody said it was. But to steal an expression from 4chan of all places, the open source community is not your personal army. It's got lots of activists and wannabe generals who wants to tell "the community" what to do and by that they mean the rank and file developers because they're too busy leading. To which the developers generally reply that they're doing their own thing for their own reasons and if you're not happy with it, you can fork it and do your own thing for your own reasons. Sure most take input from users and other developers, but only as advice - it's not a democracy.
The result is that 99.9% of the time it's just a lot of huffing and puffing but nobody willing to actually do the job or try organizing an effort to do the job or it fizzles almost immediately as said person loses interest. The company level is essentially the same, Red Hat, Mozilla and Sun/Oracle/Apache does what they want. They don't owe you a version of Linux/Firefox/OpenOffice that works the way you want. The code is free, but the labor is not so if you want it done differently it's up to you. It's the open source way of saying no. Not proprietary software-no, but as in "you're on your own there buddy".
The US doesn't have any real existential threats (Canada? Mexico? Russian tanks rolling into Alaska?) short of a full WW3 and that kind of total war for survival would play by completely different rules. For every other kind of proxy/support war like against IS etc. efficiency is not really the primary measure of success. The US wants to play the good guys which means that they use great discretion in who, when and where they attack because it's in urban areas, against adversaries in civilian clothing and with extensive use of human shields. The enemy is actively trying to create PR disasters to gather support.
I think the general is afraid of having to explain "inhuman" decisions that may make military sense, like if there's a sniper up in the hills you can call in the artillery. If there's a sniper on top of a school or hospital, maybe calling in the artillery is a very bad idea. I think there's currently a lot of judgement calls that are very vague and difficult to put into a weapons system and that will also be the case in the future. And that if you're worried about WW3 you build more ICBMs and nuclear subs to launch Armageddon. It doesn't sound like he's against technology and smart weapons, just taking the human out of the equation.
When there's enough of them and someone (a body of people, an organization, what have you) figures out how to seize complete control of them is when the world takes a sharp turn into something nobody really wants.
You seem to be assuming that we shouldn't be worried about the people who built them in the first place. Unless autonomous weapon systems will be built with strong AI and a concept of "war crimes" which we know they will not, they can be ordered to do anything. Humanity has done some pretty terrible things with human soldiers to carry out their atrocities, don't assume there'll be less with fewer humans in the loop. And with fewer friendly casualties the threshold for resorting to the use of violence is also probably lower. Whatever advantages it might have in theory, I doubt robotic wars will get better for the civilians caught up in it.
See my sig -- we're getting more and more proofs that copyright is one of worst long-term evils.
Yeah, that you can't copy music for free - other than those the artist has given permission or that's older than Mickey Mouse - is clearly one of the true great evils. I mean it's not like the world is now accumulating every shitty two-bit wannabe who knows how to abuse an instrument and there's enough music, TV series, movies, porn and computer games to waste several lifetimes. It's not like we got any more serious issues going on we should fix first...
It would seem that the U.S. has a pretty poor constitution if it can be superceded by contract law. Isn't the whole point of a country's constitution that it stands above all "lesser" principles and laws.
The US constitution was written with the mindset that it should be a meta-law to limit the power of an oppressive government, so it only says things like "Congress shall make no law (...) abridging the freedom of speech" and doesn't really deal with people at all except in the context of government action like giving you a fair trial. Everything else is just law, it's illegal to murder you not unconstitutional. So if Congress wants to do something about this, they should pass a law. The flip side of this is that despite being called the Bill of Rights there are actually no rights granted. If the government did absolutely nothing, didn't hold any trials because it didn't bother to prosecute any criminals that would not violate the constitution. I think the closest thing you get to a "right" in the constitution is the 13th that says: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude (..) shall exist within the United States" but the wording is more to say that such contracts are null and void so the usual laws apply.
You could write an entirely different constitution centering on people, saying basic things like that people have a right to freedom so that slavery and involuntary servitude is outlaws is merely a consequence. That everyone is entitled to equal protection by the law so for example selective enforcement would be unconstitutional. But that would be an entirely different way of thinking about what the role and purpose of what the constitution should be. It's probably more in line with the way we think about civil rights today, but it's a very different world today than in the 1700s. Even basic things we take for granted today like elementary public education didn't exist, you had some free schools run by churches but it was neither universal nor compulsory. The government was mostly the law, the rest you had to take care of on your own.
Of course sci-fi also doesn't need to take reality into account. Assuming the poor are incapable of sustaining themselves, they must be given wealth. Why would rich people give more to the poor than what is absolutely necessary to maintain a civil society where the masses don't riot and start a revolution? Consumption is only good if you don't have to supply the money they consume with, otherwise it's just an inversion of the broken glass parable. If you can break glass and generate business for yourself, great. If you also have to pay the repair bill you're going to end up with less than you put in. Purely destructive activity doesn't benefit society, if you really believe that go out and create jobs through vandalism. While somebody will get paid to fix things, as a whole the community will be poorer.
Are you sure that wasn't a tongue-in-cheek answer to the fact that Linux didn't have any of the software he's used to, only "equivalents" he'd have to learn from scratch? Because I have made that switch and it was almost a broken record "Does Linux have X? No, but Linux has Y which is kinda like X...", he probably just realized exactly what he asked for and decided to bail.
It's a bit of a cascading network effect. Some people at work use the advanced features of MS Office or interchange documents with other businesses that use MS Office and the people they hire are more likely to have used MS Office, thus the workplace standardizes on MS Office. Since people use MS Office at work, it's easier to get MS Office at home because everything is in the same place and they can apply any free practice/training they got at work.
You might think it would be a trivial effort to switch or use both because you understand the abstract concepts... but most people aren't there. The big blue e is the Internet, the Internet is the big blue e. I'm occasionally there about other things I don't care much about, I know how this product works and it gets the job done so... even though I know it might not be the only or best tool for the job. Mental effort isn't an infinite resource, sometimes you just don't care enough to bother.
Do you really need to have 16 fallback kernels?
I agree, you need one - the version you launched the update from because you know that one boots and can access the repositories. If it breaks something else, you can always manually reinstall and pin the older kernel.
You are talking about two different things, a disturbance in the environment can be tested by trying in another environment. If the flaw is inherent to the technique that's a different problem, but then at least you have two studies coming to the same result. That's a much stronger result than one experiment, which could be flawed in a million ways you can't even imagine. Even if it's wrong, knowing that the experiments must share a common flaw narrows down the search immensely.
I am trying to write the sarcasm ending tag (meant to be within the parenthesis in that previous comment) but it gets always deleted?! Someone here should review the HTML parsing part!
/. doesn't allow direct HTML in comments, been that way 20 years. If you want to do quasi-HTML, learn to write HTML entities. Like </sarcasm> has to be written like </sarcasm> Oh and the & itself is written & in case you're wondering. Lots of entities won't work though, only a small white-list. Particularly I miss the Greek letters for formulas, though most western characters are there like üöæøåñçß. Forget the rest of Unicode though, not happening...
Back when I used Ubuntu, I dreaded every upgrade because I knew something would konk out and force me to either reinstall or hammer the configuration until it worked. It's been ages, though, so maybe things are better now?
Doesn't that describe like every upgrade, ever? Even with the best of intentions things can break and then you have all those pushing the new shiny who wants to break things. The question is how often do you want/need it compared to the benefit of getting new hardware support, new software features and fixes quicker. Every day, taking it in stride (until it breaks in the most inconvenient way at the most inconvenient time), every six months, every two years... you can skip an LTS and do it once every four years, the choice is yours.
The only real downside I saw was that even with backports and PPAs occasionally sorting it out you sometimes had cascading dependencies where you wanted to upgrade just one software package and it set off a chain reaction. I mean the software already exists in a newer distro, if there was a simple way to say "Take application X from distro version N+1/2/3, put it in an AppImage/Flatpak/Snap/chroot container and let me run that isolated from the rest of the system" that would be great. Ideally integrated into apt-get so that branch would get updates along with the rest. If you upgrade your distro and "catch up" later, you can uninstall the container and install it the ordinary way. That way you'd have a vast library of "free" backports.
Note: I might be unaware what actually exists now, there's some years since I last ran Linux.
Personal preference has nothing to do with it. We're running a business, not a kindergarten. We need professional tools.
So availability of applications have what do to with support window? Maybe you shouldn't be running anything, since you can't seem to make a coherent argument.
fraudulently claiming to employ competent editors who are actually illiterate millennials
That would be satire, not fraud.
Wine just announced it fixed the last compatiblity issues and Notepad is now a Platinum-certified app.
Well that's up to the WINE project... if the problem is patents, all you can do is wait. Besides there's nothing wrong with a high bit rate MP3, except that it's maybe a MB or two bigger than an equivalent AAC. If it lacked quality it would be different.
Yes, probably he did ask Trump. And Trump probably did say yes. Because that's the kind of thing Trump does.
Well, if Musk is anything like a friend of mine then "That sounds like a good idea, why don't you draft up a proposal?" counts as approval. Then again he'll also take any casual remark on something that might happen at some unspecified point in the future as a done deal coming any day now and any girl that looks his way or says two kind words is flirting with him.
Yeah, and they were trying out never-before used titanium grid fins, too. But that was their highest energy trajectory yet (as noted, they keep pushing the bounds on trying to land more and more difficult trajectories). I imagine they'll cut back on that a lot once the Heavy is in full service and they can just offload heavier payloads to the Heavy.
Maybe, but there seems to be a sliding scale from landing all three back at the launch site to landing one or all on drone ships to using them as expendables so they probably want the most aggressive landing profile possible for a given weight. With three first stages to one second stage I guess the value of reuse and quick turn-around goes up. And if I understand it correctly the center stage will go longer and faster than the side boosters, that one is probably always coming in hot.
The pretext is to ensure better compatibility but it seems a lot more likely this is to ensure that if you're in a Windows environment, you're on an upgrade treadmill.
It absolutely is. I used the small open source patch that lets you continue to install updates, everything has drivers from the manufacturer and everything works. Maybe Win7 isn't doing everything optimally, but there's no compelling reason for Windows to refuse to run.
Microsoft confirmed. Instead, they'll simply be offered the Windows 10 Anniversary Update, plus security updates through January, 2023, the end of the original Windows 8.1 support period.
So Microsoft is going to give the Anniversary Update 7 years of security updates, that's great. Now give everybody else the chance to step off the upgrade bandwagon. Seriously it's proven time and time again that they could let you do it and it wouldn't really cost them anything because they're going to make those patches anyway, but they won't.
I hope this kid recovers and gives the operation two thumbs up!
Well looking at the video... I doubt he can despite it being a "success". He seems to have a slight squeeze/release control which is of course infinitely more useful to grab things than a stub, but he doesn't seem to have any motor control over individual fingers and certainly couldn't do a shirt button or tie a shoe lace. I've seen people with a simple claw prosthetic do more, of course the upside is that these hands look human but as long as he can't hold them naturally it's only half way there in that department too. Of course don't let perfect be the enemy of good but it's very far from true replacement hands.