Almost any time someone says these words, the response should be "No, no there shouldn't." Look at how many shitty, obsolete laws are still on the books that don't reflect modern societal values (e.g. Chicken Tax, alimony) that are unlikely to get stricken despite that, even if they're still enforced. We should be loathe to put new, poorly-thought-out laws on the books that are premised on tenuous social values, given this fact. Next year's headline: "After new study, sex offenders leaving prison given mandatory sexbots."
Sooo, younger sperm donors are better, is the takeaway? I thought this was common knowledge. Usually, a prospective mother will want to use her partner's sperm for IVF, and won't say "I'm gonna use someone else's sperm because you're old so the chances of success are lower, sorry honey." even if that means higher cost for more rounds of IVF. If a woman has a partner 10+ years older than her, chances are he's rich enough to afford those extra rounds.
The GIFT doesn't only apply online. Public-facing employees get to act as a sounding board for every fool/nutcase who feels slighted by anything even tangentially related to their job. No matter what the curriculum or teaching method are, someone will still complain that it's wrong. (Philosophy + politics) * 'for the children' = clusterfuck.
The 26 people were being tracked; reading between the lines, I'd say that Stingrays were used to try and find the location of these 26 suspects, and 3.3 million calls were routed through the Stingrays for the duration of their usage. Those calls didn't necessarily have their content 'listened in on.'
Let me guess, M.E.Doc opens a port that expects a certain protocol handshake, upon which an unsigned blob is downloaded then executed? An attacker could connect to any computer with the program installed, and send a malware payload. Either that or their GitHub equivalent was compromised (although given it's happened before, I'd bet on the former.)
How long has that been going on? It might just be a bubble, before a bunch of those online casinos collapse as they realize it's not profitable enough. Remember the Apps bubble circa 2010, when everyone thought making a mobile app would make them an instant millionaire. Given that online casinos have been around for decades, I don't think they could be called "the next big thing," although I could see them being more popular than porn in a more sexually-liberated society.
This reminds me of RMT, or 'Real Money Trading' in games like World of Warcraft, where people pay real money for virtual items. In particular, people purchasing ingame currency using real-world currency. These players would purchase an easily-found item sold by readily-available NPCs in infinite amounts, and then 'sell' that item to another character in exchange for a huge amount of ingame money that they had actually bought ahead of time outside of the game. I believe Runescape was the first online game to crack down on this practice, and World of Warcraft did so later, IIRC.
Ingame gambling was also popular in Everquest (utilizing the ingame random number generator, which was honestly horrible), which carried over to World of Warcraft, but it was banned in the latter shortly after launch.
I agree. In fact, I learned everything I know about socialization from interactions with fast-food cashiers. Thank you for reading this, and I look forward to seeing you on Slashdot again. Have a great day!
By 'minimum wage' most people mean 'near minimum wage', or 'lower than what the minimum wage ought to be.' Some states/regions have local minimum wage laws higher than the federal minimum wage. Also according to your own stats, 97% of people earning minimum wage are over age 25, indicating that it's mostly NOT young people who are working at minimum wage. Some employers give a nominal raise each year to keep up with inflation, or hire at slightly over minimum wage in an attempt to seem generous (or avoid the stigma of 'only pays minimum wage'.) Taking these into account, the proportion of people working at 'minimum wage' is much higher.
Whole Foods has a great selection of gluten-free and lactose-free food (and other stuff) that's hard to find elsewhere. That's great for those intolerant to one or both.
I think the direction cable/satellite companies are going to go, is bundled a la carte. Telecoms make tons of money from bundling (TV/internet/phone) already, and the idea will be pitched to consumers as 'build your own bundle', and pitched to executives as 'giving customers more opportunity to give us their money.' Essentially, instead of tiers (basic cable, expanded cable, ultimate) with multiple over-the-top channels (HBO, Showtime etc.) you pay for individually, there will be small bundles of channels that you can pick and choose from, with no base tiers.
So, there'll likely be a bundle that contains local channels, another that contains a few channels owned by Time Warner, another that contains a few channels owned by Disney, a bundle with a few sports channels, bundles with a few related themes (movie channel/hbo/showtime bundle). It'll be mixed-up enough from how it currently works that it can be advertised as 'pay for the channels you care about, and not the ones you do not', while the price is structured so that people actually pay more to get what they currently get. Few people will notice, thinking "I can just cut out this and this to save money", the additional control obscuring the price hike. Some streaming services like Sling already do something similar, but I think it will be made more granular, and be more heavily advertised. Cordcutters who really only want that one channel are able to do that for potentially less money than Netflix; the cable company will likely even subsidize your bill a little, on the expectation that having you as a customer means you might expand your lineup later, rather than letting you leave and be someone else's customer instead. I expect this will cause a big enough shakeup in the industry that everyone will see it coming years before it happens, and all the telecoms will get onboard at the same time. Thus, there will be rumors coming from industry analysts long before this drops.
But I'll be surprised if this happens any earlier than "too late to stave off irrelevance."
When irate victims kill the scammers, or when the former die penniless in a gutter, leaving only smarter people? A sucker is born every minute so I don't think they'll ever die out; it's not like scams are new.
True, but sandboxing DOES prevent an antivirus app from interacting with (i.e. quarantining/removing) viruses that exist outside of the app. Therefore, unless it roots your phone, it's useless. Apps that root your phone are forbidden in Apple's App Store, I'm pretty sure.
I can't believe the average Bitcoin transaction fee is (currently) $1.50. I swear I read a couple years ago it was a few satoshis (fractions of pennies). How did a decentralized system become more expensive than the credit-card oligopoly's processing fees? Epic fail, Bitcoin. I guess that explains why it wasn't being used for micropayments. I have a feeling this is like the real-estate market, where everyone wanted the prices to go up, and then people wonder why noone's buying homes anymore.
Go look up critic reviews for any movie/show/anything on Metacritic. Anything at all. Even top-rated critics-darling indie films that get standing ovations at Cannes. I guarantee there will be at least one critic who panned it, using similar superlatives. Quoting one critic doesn't say anything about consensus about a show.
If handing over classified info to journalists is made always legal, then the govt. would just use contract law to ruin the leakers financially, or have them assassinated in an exotic way like Polonium poisoning. It'd also make it easier for a real spy to become employed as a journalist and make agents out of intelligence agency employees/contractors.
We'd probably have to use lithography to create these nanomachines in the first place. Using nano-tweezers to manipulate one atom at a time to create an array of nanoconstructors is infeasible, so it's more likely we'll start with larger machines that can make smaller machines. The problem is they'll be so small they can't rely on optics, yet will require some autonomy; humans can't just dump a sack of copper atoms into a hopper, they need to corral the atoms themselves. Is Intel really going to invent a Universal Constructor and then use it to make smaller computer chips? There are thousands of things they could do with it that would be far more profitable than faster computer chips.
Slashdot Mirror
There should be a ban on [,,,]
Almost any time someone says these words, the response should be "No, no there shouldn't." Look at how many shitty, obsolete laws are still on the books that don't reflect modern societal values (e.g. Chicken Tax, alimony) that are unlikely to get stricken despite that, even if they're still enforced. We should be loathe to put new, poorly-thought-out laws on the books that are premised on tenuous social values, given this fact. Next year's headline: "After new study, sex offenders leaving prison given mandatory sexbots."
Sooo, younger sperm donors are better, is the takeaway? I thought this was common knowledge.
Usually, a prospective mother will want to use her partner's sperm for IVF, and won't say "I'm gonna use someone else's sperm because you're old so the chances of success are lower, sorry honey." even if that means higher cost for more rounds of IVF. If a woman has a partner 10+ years older than her, chances are he's rich enough to afford those extra rounds.
The GIFT doesn't only apply online. Public-facing employees get to act as a sounding board for every fool/nutcase who feels slighted by anything even tangentially related to their job. No matter what the curriculum or teaching method are, someone will still complain that it's wrong. (Philosophy + politics) * 'for the children' = clusterfuck.
Binary Capital, the Silicon Valley firm that has collapsed[...]
So, Binary Capital went from 1 to 0?
The 26 people were being tracked; reading between the lines, I'd say that Stingrays were used to try and find the location of these 26 suspects, and 3.3 million calls were routed through the Stingrays for the duration of their usage. Those calls didn't necessarily have their content 'listened in on.'
I wonder if Musk is planning on combining boring, hyperloop, and SpaceX tech to create a maglev space launch system like StarTram.
Let me guess, M.E.Doc opens a port that expects a certain protocol handshake, upon which an unsigned blob is downloaded then executed? An attacker could connect to any computer with the program installed, and send a malware payload.
Either that or their GitHub equivalent was compromised (although given it's happened before, I'd bet on the former.)
I imagine some day, electric boats might swap batteries at floating stations that recharge the depleted batteries via wind turbine or tidal power.
How long has that been going on? It might just be a bubble, before a bunch of those online casinos collapse as they realize it's not profitable enough. Remember the Apps bubble circa 2010, when everyone thought making a mobile app would make them an instant millionaire. Given that online casinos have been around for decades, I don't think they could be called "the next big thing," although I could see them being more popular than porn in a more sexually-liberated society.
This reminds me of RMT, or 'Real Money Trading' in games like World of Warcraft, where people pay real money for virtual items. In particular, people purchasing ingame currency using real-world currency. These players would purchase an easily-found item sold by readily-available NPCs in infinite amounts, and then 'sell' that item to another character in exchange for a huge amount of ingame money that they had actually bought ahead of time outside of the game. I believe Runescape was the first online game to crack down on this practice, and World of Warcraft did so later, IIRC.
Ingame gambling was also popular in Everquest (utilizing the ingame random number generator, which was honestly horrible), which carried over to World of Warcraft, but it was banned in the latter shortly after launch.
Except for a gavel.
I agree. In fact, I learned everything I know about socialization from interactions with fast-food cashiers.
Thank you for reading this, and I look forward to seeing you on Slashdot again. Have a great day!
By 'minimum wage' most people mean 'near minimum wage', or 'lower than what the minimum wage ought to be.' Some states/regions have local minimum wage laws higher than the federal minimum wage. Also according to your own stats, 97% of people earning minimum wage are over age 25, indicating that it's mostly NOT young people who are working at minimum wage. Some employers give a nominal raise each year to keep up with inflation, or hire at slightly over minimum wage in an attempt to seem generous (or avoid the stigma of 'only pays minimum wage'.) Taking these into account, the proportion of people working at 'minimum wage' is much higher.
Whole Foods has a great selection of gluten-free and lactose-free food (and other stuff) that's hard to find elsewhere. That's great for those intolerant to one or both.
I think the direction cable/satellite companies are going to go, is bundled a la carte. Telecoms make tons of money from bundling (TV/internet/phone) already, and the idea will be pitched to consumers as 'build your own bundle', and pitched to executives as 'giving customers more opportunity to give us their money.' Essentially, instead of tiers (basic cable, expanded cable, ultimate) with multiple over-the-top channels (HBO, Showtime etc.) you pay for individually, there will be small bundles of channels that you can pick and choose from, with no base tiers.
So, there'll likely be a bundle that contains local channels, another that contains a few channels owned by Time Warner, another that contains a few channels owned by Disney, a bundle with a few sports channels, bundles with a few related themes (movie channel/hbo/showtime bundle). It'll be mixed-up enough from how it currently works that it can be advertised as 'pay for the channels you care about, and not the ones you do not', while the price is structured so that people actually pay more to get what they currently get. Few people will notice, thinking "I can just cut out this and this to save money", the additional control obscuring the price hike. Some streaming services like Sling already do something similar, but I think it will be made more granular, and be more heavily advertised. Cordcutters who really only want that one channel are able to do that for potentially less money than Netflix; the cable company will likely even subsidize your bill a little, on the expectation that having you as a customer means you might expand your lineup later, rather than letting you leave and be someone else's customer instead. I expect this will cause a big enough shakeup in the industry that everyone will see it coming years before it happens, and all the telecoms will get onboard at the same time. Thus, there will be rumors coming from industry analysts long before this drops.
But I'll be surprised if this happens any earlier than "too late to stave off irrelevance."
When irate victims kill the scammers, or when the former die penniless in a gutter, leaving only smarter people? A sucker is born every minute so I don't think they'll ever die out; it's not like scams are new.
Nm, should've read your post more carefully. Heh.
True, but sandboxing DOES prevent an antivirus app from interacting with (i.e. quarantining/removing) viruses that exist outside of the app. Therefore, unless it roots your phone, it's useless. Apps that root your phone are forbidden in Apple's App Store, I'm pretty sure.
I can't believe the average Bitcoin transaction fee is (currently) $1.50. I swear I read a couple years ago it was a few satoshis (fractions of pennies). How did a decentralized system become more expensive than the credit-card oligopoly's processing fees? Epic fail, Bitcoin. I guess that explains why it wasn't being used for micropayments. I have a feeling this is like the real-estate market, where everyone wanted the prices to go up, and then people wonder why noone's buying homes anymore.
Sounds just as bad as vanilla Paypal.
whatever you call a book that comes between two sequential and previously published books in a series
An interquel
Go look up critic reviews for any movie/show/anything on Metacritic. Anything at all. Even top-rated critics-darling indie films that get standing ovations at Cannes. I guarantee there will be at least one critic who panned it, using similar superlatives. Quoting one critic doesn't say anything about consensus about a show.
If handing over classified info to journalists is made always legal, then the govt. would just use contract law to ruin the leakers financially, or have them assassinated in an exotic way like Polonium poisoning. It'd also make it easier for a real spy to become employed as a journalist and make agents out of intelligence agency employees/contractors.
If there's anything a team of MBAs isn't, it's accountable.
Oh, wait...
We'd probably have to use lithography to create these nanomachines in the first place. Using nano-tweezers to manipulate one atom at a time to create an array of nanoconstructors is infeasible, so it's more likely we'll start with larger machines that can make smaller machines. The problem is they'll be so small they can't rely on optics, yet will require some autonomy; humans can't just dump a sack of copper atoms into a hopper, they need to corral the atoms themselves. Is Intel really going to invent a Universal Constructor and then use it to make smaller computer chips? There are thousands of things they could do with it that would be far more profitable than faster computer chips.