Well, you're only half right. There are other reasons why you would want IPv6 besides addresses. Like not needing to NAT everything (cludge) and faster/lower overhead routing.
Bundy Ranch wasn't violent. Threats only. Malheur refuge, it was the FBI that fired first (shouldn't you be supporting fighting the man? And OK city was one guy, not a violent group. Or...
Oh yeah, you think Group Riots are nicer because you support their cause. Got it. BLM, Union Thugs, anti Trump.... The fact that there is WAY more left leaning means nothing to you. Got it.
1) Physical Keyboard, how quaint. I can't stand physical keyboards once I learned "Swype" style typing. 2) You obviously like pushing buttons. That's kinda cute. 3) You can get a phone, put Cyanogen on, and never touch Google, or Apple. Good luck having it be useful. But seeing you only use a feature phone, you don't want any of that new fangled tools like maps and stuff on your phone. 4) Compile your own version of Android after reviewing the code. Its all there. Oh wait, you're just saying "I'm lazy, and subscribe to conspiracy theories without proof",,, my bad 5) Hey, there are cameras on just about every corner, and in just about every store. The system is already watching you. Go get your tin-foil hat. (aluminum doesn't work)
No it isn't. They thought they had the market, acted like Android/iPhone wasn't a threat, created bloated server based software and charged a fortune for it, and expected to thrive.
I had a Blackberry, and as a customer, I couldn't have been more insulted in the nickel and dime approach Blackberry took to me.
"You want access to GPS built into your phone? Great pay us $5 month"
The moment iPhones came out, they were in trouble. The moment Android got mainstream, they were doomed. They failed to adjust to the marketplace and rested on their laurels. THEN after they became an afterthought, they tried to re-invent themselves while maintaining proprietary control of their phones (Like Apple), without any of the things Apple had going for them.
At one point, it was BB or Palm for "smart" phones. They both failed to innovate and got caught with their pants down.
Moral Equivocation is how hypocrites justify people acting badly on their side of things.
The difference between the Tea Party and hell even the despicable WBC haven't physically attacked people. These people rioting on behalf of the left, are thugs. And as long as people use moral equivocation (like you just did), we can ascribe that to the entire class of left wing protestors. I mean, if you want to judge the Tea Party as a whole, based on some imaginary violence, then please be willing to accept the same with Left Wing Rioters (only more so).
I remember after an earthquake in LA that part of the I10 freeway had collapsed, and was a major disruption. The contractor that won the bid, put in a clause that he would be paid a sum of money per day it was completed ahead of the schedule put forth in the RFP for the repairs. He completed the project 74 days ahead of schedule.
Here is the most interesting quote: "Caltrans Director James van Loben Sels estimated that without the accelerated effort the project would probably have taken two years to complete."
And people say that Government bureaucracy isn't expensive. It is HUGELY expensive, in time, effort and money, and often (as in this case) causes as many (or more) problems as it actually solves. All those licenses, permits, fees, approvals..... have a cost, and they are often unquantified and unknown.
The Loony Left (as you call it) is actually trying to suppress free speech, or haven't you seen pictures of the Left wing rioting and attacking of Trump supporters for being nothing but Trump Supporters. If the roles were reversed, it would be called "Hate" and Misogyny (for the physical attacks on women). But alas, it is against Trump supporters so... we're good!
FYI, I am not voting for Trump, was never going to vote for GOP either.
To be honest, the Liberal Left has made Mockery (see John Stewart) a viable political commentary tool. If people don't like it with the tables are turned, then they are simply hypocrites.
Actually you are correct. There are other forces at work here, like attitude. I've seen black people be quite evil to members of their own community who are trying to escape. The bright young black people who are studying trying to learn are castigated for trying to "be white" or "Uncle Tom" and are bullied and beaten for being "nerds".
Mostly people who are hailed as heroes are the entertainers (Music, Sports, TV/Movie). And while I can understand that Sports / Music is a pathway out of the "hood", I also recognize that most people aren't gifted or talented enough to make it that way.
I don't think I am misguided, as we aren't looking at my ideas for a solution, just more of the same thing that we currently have. Where are the vouchers that will enable parents to find better schools than the crappy ones assigned to them by the state? How does keeping kids locked up in the same system help them escape? Please help me understand why we can't do vouchers to break the crappy education systems currently failing these neighborhoods?
API makes it easier... yes. I never said anything about "easier". I said it would be "fairly easy", meaning once you had access to the data, it is all that is needed.
Having seen a McDonalds (and most Fast food) kitchen, I wouldn't call it "safe". The kitchen itself may be acceptable, but the weak spot is always the worker. There is NO permit for the cook with a dripping nose, or sneezing or coughing or jacking off in a hamburger...
But if if makes you feel good that there is a big fat "A" rating on the door, by all means feel good.
Which lowers the cost through competition, to the point of... equilibrium between supply and demand. (Efficiency).
IMHO it would be fairly easy to build in a couple layers to separate Uber Pricing from Urbanhail statistics. If Urbanhail avoids using the Uber API for gathering data (perhaps another party [independent] has that information) Urbanhail could then use that source for their info. Not sure how Uber could keep them from publishing already public information (facts).
Over 99% of climate scientists say that humans are the primary reason.
Primary reason for what, exactly? The Ice Caps being gone by 2015 (Al Gore) ? The Greening of Africa? The record low number of hurricanes in the Atlantic for the last 10 years in spite of all the dire predictions to the contrary?
Also, I would LOVE to point out that Consensus isn't science. Once upon a time, Piltdown Man was consensus science. Turned out to be a manipulated hoax. If the data is not reliable, the predictions fail, then the result is NOT science, it is something else.
Further, Science has yet to prove that it is a bad thing. Warm, wet, CO2 is great for plants.
Meanwhile, all the rain in Texas, I've heard plenty of "Global Warming/Climate Change" where it is nothing but weather. The problem here, is EVEN if AGW is happening, the RESULTS have been nothing like what was predicted, but we should trust the 99% of scientists who believe it, but are wrong on so much of it.
Again, I am not doubting Man's impact of the environment. But there are MUCH better arguments for it than AGW. Stick to those, and I'm with you.
I work in Public Education. I can assure you that it does not reduce stupid. All you need to do is watch some Mark Dice (or any number of other Street interviewers) interviews on college campuses. These (the interviewed) are people who are supposedly educated for 12 years in public schools, and they can't answer basic history questions. But they can tell you who Snookie is, or all about Kim/Kanye .
Stupid people are stupid. Education doesn't change that. Smart people will get educated, and school doesn't change that.
Or, as my dad used to say, "Son, think about how dumb the average person is, and realize that 1/2 the people are dumber than that".
AI leads to "artificial consciousness" at some point. It is a thousand tiny steps, and we should be asking these questions every step of the way. Because to NOT ask the questions, every step of the way, we'll end up at a point where we should have asked the question, and never did, and it will be too late.
Nearly every culture had slaves. The only reason why we are fixated on Black Africans as slaves, because it is much easier to physically tell them apart from whites slave owners. It is much harder to tell the difference between Irish and English, so we don't care about them as slaves. So, we fixate on the physical appearances and not who were actually slaves or that slavery was bad. So now, anyone with darker skin can take up the mantle of "we were slaves" even if they had no slaves in their own heritage.
IMHO it is this soft bigotry that keeps black people enslaved to a sub-culture that they could have long ago escaped.
The problem with automated systems that simply change the liquidity from very liquid to ultra liquid, is that when they get stuck in a spiral, it is often too late before the humans shut things down. Now, imagine an AI getting stuck in a spiral and humans not being able to shut it down, after it is already too late.
This is not just a thought project, we are slowly advancing ourselves to the point where that particular problem is ever more likely. We want to see what is possible so badly, that we don't think long enough about whether we should or shouldn't do it in the first place. It is like we're still three years old, and mom is telling us "don't touch the pan, it is hot and will burn you" and yet we still touch it, and get burned. We don't learn the real lesson, because we keep doing the same thing.
You're under the assumption that an AI would be owned by a human, and not make a request with the friendliest judge to declare it a "non-biological citizen" with all the rights of a human. See the Episode of STtNG where Data was on "trial" for being Starfleet Property, and not a sentient being for a decent reference.
Once AI achieves Self Awareness (sentience) of a significant amount, it is all over for us Humans. But that seems to be the goal.
Our Laws are not sufficient enough to prevent a "legal entity" from having human rights. This is why I truly believe that RIGHTS belong to the individual, and shouldn't be ascribed to groups. Group Rights are nothing more than tyranny in the making.
Perhaps. However, maybe they believe in the Placebo Effect and want to help people with non-harmful alternatives. And why does it bother you anyways, what is it to you?
Violent Crimes stemming from Poverty ? Define "poverty" and explain why lots of poor people NEVER commit violent crimes?
I would suggest to you, that violence stemming from Poverty is caused by lack of opportunity based on very low expectations (a kind of subtle racism), and dense public housing (city size cages). If you treat people like zoo animals, feeding, clothing them, housing them in cages, expect them to act like animals. If you treat them like equals (not lessor but equal) and hold onto expectations you have for everyone else, then I would suggest to you, that the results would be different.
And by "poverty" you mean, "Still richer than 80% of the worlds population", right?
Police are violent because we have them "policing" things that shouldn't be crimes, drugs, prostitution, selling cigarettes without a government license etc. However the statists want to control everything, requires taxes on everything, requires licenses to operate a business. Hell, even selling lemonade is a crime, if you don't have a license.
Imagine for a second, that the police were charged with actually PROTECTING rights instead of violating them. (I am a libertarian)
Spousal Violence is not a social Structure I've ever heard of. It is almost universally condemned, and the few outliers are not from American Culture, but rather 3rd world cultures that do not value women at all, but as property.
There is a fundamental problem with our current social structure, and that is that power is gravatating away from the people, into the elite political class. You can see the people are finally recognizing it with Trump and Sanders (two sides of the wrong coin). The solution is to remove power from the ruling elites (two parties) and give it back to the people directly, and locally. Where if you don't like how you're being ruled, it is much easier to change it.
I dare say, that if you were to ask a singular question in a poll, you'd find nearly unanimous decree from all over the political spectrum: "Does the Federal Government have your consent to govern your life to the degree it currently is governing?" A good followup (for clarity) would be "Do you believe the Federal Government govern your life too much, too little, or just about right? "
And that is the problem with our politics. IMHO I believe most people think Government has too much influence in their life, but that they believe that more government influence over others is what is needed to fix their problems. Not realizing that their solution is exactly their problem.;)
You get idiots in Congress who don't know the difference between weather and climate
Well, when a vast number of AGW proponents point to weather as evidence of climate, I would suggest to you that plenty of people don't have a clue about the difference.
Its really hot ---- "GLOBAL WARMING!!!!" Its snowing really late ---- Its just weather, nothing to see here
To be honest climate has always changed. It will always change. We might even be responsible for some of it. But the Ice Caps are still there, even after Al Gore said they would be gone.
The two choices are dichotomy based on the previous point "(assuming he reported it, and they all said "tough shit" or similar)"
He skipped at least one, probably all three boxes before Ammo. As far as I know, he didn't sue the professor and a jury didn't say "tough shit" (or similar)
Slashdot Mirror
We Need MORE TAXES to solve this problem. More government rules. We need Bernie! Content to the PEOPLE!
Well, you're only half right. There are other reasons why you would want IPv6 besides addresses. Like not needing to NAT everything (cludge) and faster/lower overhead routing.
Bundy Ranch wasn't violent. Threats only. Malheur refuge, it was the FBI that fired first (shouldn't you be supporting fighting the man? And OK city was one guy, not a violent group. Or ...
Oh yeah, you think Group Riots are nicer because you support their cause. Got it. BLM, Union Thugs, anti Trump .... The fact that there is WAY more left leaning means nothing to you. Got it.
1) Physical Keyboard, how quaint. I can't stand physical keyboards once I learned "Swype" style typing. ,,, my bad
2) You obviously like pushing buttons. That's kinda cute.
3) You can get a phone, put Cyanogen on, and never touch Google, or Apple. Good luck having it be useful. But seeing you only use a feature phone, you don't want any of that new fangled tools like maps and stuff on your phone.
4) Compile your own version of Android after reviewing the code. Its all there. Oh wait, you're just saying "I'm lazy, and subscribe to conspiracy theories without proof"
5) Hey, there are cameras on just about every corner, and in just about every store. The system is already watching you. Go get your tin-foil hat. (aluminum doesn't work)
No it isn't. They thought they had the market, acted like Android/iPhone wasn't a threat, created bloated server based software and charged a fortune for it, and expected to thrive.
I had a Blackberry, and as a customer, I couldn't have been more insulted in the nickel and dime approach Blackberry took to me.
"You want access to GPS built into your phone? Great pay us $5 month"
The moment iPhones came out, they were in trouble. The moment Android got mainstream, they were doomed. They failed to adjust to the marketplace and rested on their laurels. THEN after they became an afterthought, they tried to re-invent themselves while maintaining proprietary control of their phones (Like Apple), without any of the things Apple had going for them.
At one point, it was BB or Palm for "smart" phones. They both failed to innovate and got caught with their pants down.
Moral Equivocation is how hypocrites justify people acting badly on their side of things.
The difference between the Tea Party and hell even the despicable WBC haven't physically attacked people. These people rioting on behalf of the left, are thugs. And as long as people use moral equivocation (like you just did), we can ascribe that to the entire class of left wing protestors. I mean, if you want to judge the Tea Party as a whole, based on some imaginary violence, then please be willing to accept the same with Left Wing Rioters (only more so).
M-Kay?
THIS!
I remember after an earthquake in LA that part of the I10 freeway had collapsed, and was a major disruption. The contractor that won the bid, put in a clause that he would be paid a sum of money per day it was completed ahead of the schedule put forth in the RFP for the repairs. He completed the project 74 days ahead of schedule.
You can read about it here. http://articles.latimes.com/19...
Here is the most interesting quote: "Caltrans Director James van Loben Sels estimated that without the accelerated effort the project would probably have taken two years to complete."
And people say that Government bureaucracy isn't expensive. It is HUGELY expensive, in time, effort and money, and often (as in this case) causes as many (or more) problems as it actually solves. All those licenses, permits, fees, approvals ..... have a cost, and they are often unquantified and unknown.
The Loony Left (as you call it) is actually trying to suppress free speech, or haven't you seen pictures of the Left wing rioting and attacking of Trump supporters for being nothing but Trump Supporters. If the roles were reversed, it would be called "Hate" and Misogyny (for the physical attacks on women). But alas, it is against Trump supporters so ... we're good!
FYI, I am not voting for Trump, was never going to vote for GOP either.
To be honest, the Liberal Left has made Mockery (see John Stewart) a viable political commentary tool. If people don't like it with the tables are turned, then they are simply hypocrites.
Actually you are correct. There are other forces at work here, like attitude. I've seen black people be quite evil to members of their own community who are trying to escape. The bright young black people who are studying trying to learn are castigated for trying to "be white" or "Uncle Tom" and are bullied and beaten for being "nerds".
Mostly people who are hailed as heroes are the entertainers (Music, Sports, TV/Movie). And while I can understand that Sports / Music is a pathway out of the "hood", I also recognize that most people aren't gifted or talented enough to make it that way.
I don't think I am misguided, as we aren't looking at my ideas for a solution, just more of the same thing that we currently have. Where are the vouchers that will enable parents to find better schools than the crappy ones assigned to them by the state? How does keeping kids locked up in the same system help them escape? Please help me understand why we can't do vouchers to break the crappy education systems currently failing these neighborhoods?
API makes it easier ... yes. I never said anything about "easier". I said it would be "fairly easy", meaning once you had access to the data, it is all that is needed.
food safety permit
Having seen a McDonalds (and most Fast food) kitchen, I wouldn't call it "safe". The kitchen itself may be acceptable, but the weak spot is always the worker. There is NO permit for the cook with a dripping nose, or sneezing or coughing or jacking off in a hamburger ...
But if if makes you feel good that there is a big fat "A" rating on the door, by all means feel good.
No, just the insistence of capitalism
Which lowers the cost through competition, to the point of ... equilibrium between supply and demand. (Efficiency).
IMHO it would be fairly easy to build in a couple layers to separate Uber Pricing from Urbanhail statistics. If Urbanhail avoids using the Uber API for gathering data (perhaps another party [independent] has that information) Urbanhail could then use that source for their info. Not sure how Uber could keep them from publishing already public information (facts).
Over 99% of climate scientists say that humans are the primary reason.
Primary reason for what, exactly? The Ice Caps being gone by 2015 (Al Gore) ? The Greening of Africa? The record low number of hurricanes in the Atlantic for the last 10 years in spite of all the dire predictions to the contrary?
Also, I would LOVE to point out that Consensus isn't science. Once upon a time, Piltdown Man was consensus science. Turned out to be a manipulated hoax. If the data is not reliable, the predictions fail, then the result is NOT science, it is something else.
Further, Science has yet to prove that it is a bad thing. Warm, wet, CO2 is great for plants.
Meanwhile, all the rain in Texas, I've heard plenty of "Global Warming/Climate Change" where it is nothing but weather. The problem here, is EVEN if AGW is happening, the RESULTS have been nothing like what was predicted, but we should trust the 99% of scientists who believe it, but are wrong on so much of it.
Again, I am not doubting Man's impact of the environment. But there are MUCH better arguments for it than AGW. Stick to those, and I'm with you.
I work in Public Education. I can assure you that it does not reduce stupid. All you need to do is watch some Mark Dice (or any number of other Street interviewers) interviews on college campuses. These (the interviewed) are people who are supposedly educated for 12 years in public schools, and they can't answer basic history questions. But they can tell you who Snookie is, or all about Kim/Kanye .
Stupid people are stupid. Education doesn't change that. Smart people will get educated, and school doesn't change that.
Or, as my dad used to say, "Son, think about how dumb the average person is, and realize that 1/2 the people are dumber than that".
AI leads to "artificial consciousness" at some point. It is a thousand tiny steps, and we should be asking these questions every step of the way. Because to NOT ask the questions, every step of the way, we'll end up at a point where we should have asked the question, and never did, and it will be too late.
AI evolution is a slippery slope argument.
Nearly every culture had slaves. The only reason why we are fixated on Black Africans as slaves, because it is much easier to physically tell them apart from whites slave owners. It is much harder to tell the difference between Irish and English, so we don't care about them as slaves. So, we fixate on the physical appearances and not who were actually slaves or that slavery was bad. So now, anyone with darker skin can take up the mantle of "we were slaves" even if they had no slaves in their own heritage.
IMHO it is this soft bigotry that keeps black people enslaved to a sub-culture that they could have long ago escaped.
They already have been. Seems the joke is on you.
The problem with automated systems that simply change the liquidity from very liquid to ultra liquid, is that when they get stuck in a spiral, it is often too late before the humans shut things down. Now, imagine an AI getting stuck in a spiral and humans not being able to shut it down, after it is already too late.
This is not just a thought project, we are slowly advancing ourselves to the point where that particular problem is ever more likely. We want to see what is possible so badly, that we don't think long enough about whether we should or shouldn't do it in the first place. It is like we're still three years old, and mom is telling us "don't touch the pan, it is hot and will burn you" and yet we still touch it, and get burned. We don't learn the real lesson, because we keep doing the same thing.
You're under the assumption that an AI would be owned by a human, and not make a request with the friendliest judge to declare it a "non-biological citizen" with all the rights of a human. See the Episode of STtNG where Data was on "trial" for being Starfleet Property, and not a sentient being for a decent reference.
Once AI achieves Self Awareness (sentience) of a significant amount, it is all over for us Humans. But that seems to be the goal.
Our Laws are not sufficient enough to prevent a "legal entity" from having human rights. This is why I truly believe that RIGHTS belong to the individual, and shouldn't be ascribed to groups. Group Rights are nothing more than tyranny in the making.
Perhaps. However, maybe they believe in the Placebo Effect and want to help people with non-harmful alternatives. And why does it bother you anyways, what is it to you?
Violent Crimes stemming from Poverty ? Define "poverty" and explain why lots of poor people NEVER commit violent crimes?
I would suggest to you, that violence stemming from Poverty is caused by lack of opportunity based on very low expectations (a kind of subtle racism), and dense public housing (city size cages). If you treat people like zoo animals, feeding, clothing them, housing them in cages, expect them to act like animals. If you treat them like equals (not lessor but equal) and hold onto expectations you have for everyone else, then I would suggest to you, that the results would be different.
And by "poverty" you mean, "Still richer than 80% of the worlds population", right?
Police are violent because we have them "policing" things that shouldn't be crimes, drugs, prostitution, selling cigarettes without a government license etc. However the statists want to control everything, requires taxes on everything, requires licenses to operate a business. Hell, even selling lemonade is a crime, if you don't have a license.
Imagine for a second, that the police were charged with actually PROTECTING rights instead of violating them. (I am a libertarian)
Spousal Violence is not a social Structure I've ever heard of. It is almost universally condemned, and the few outliers are not from American Culture, but rather 3rd world cultures that do not value women at all, but as property.
There is a fundamental problem with our current social structure, and that is that power is gravatating away from the people, into the elite political class. You can see the people are finally recognizing it with Trump and Sanders (two sides of the wrong coin). The solution is to remove power from the ruling elites (two parties) and give it back to the people directly, and locally. Where if you don't like how you're being ruled, it is much easier to change it.
I dare say, that if you were to ask a singular question in a poll, you'd find nearly unanimous decree from all over the political spectrum: "Does the Federal Government have your consent to govern your life to the degree it currently is governing?" A good followup (for clarity) would be "Do you believe the Federal Government govern your life too much, too little, or just about right? "
And that is the problem with our politics. IMHO I believe most people think Government has too much influence in their life, but that they believe that more government influence over others is what is needed to fix their problems. Not realizing that their solution is exactly their problem. ;)
Why not use any number of alternatives that aren't Facebook? FB Messenger is probably the last resort for me.
"safe from violence"
I wonder if you're one of those Anti-Trump people rioting in city after city, or if you are actively condemning it.
Perhaps you're the guy blaming Trump for the Anti-Trump rioters instead of the Anti-Trump Rioters.
Or, perhaps you're one of the very quiet "I hate Trump" people, who sort of condemn the violence, but not really.
Please note, I am NOT a Trump fan (for obvious reasons) but I am less of a fan of people rioting in protest him. They are much much worse.
You get idiots in Congress who don't know the difference between weather and climate
Well, when a vast number of AGW proponents point to weather as evidence of climate, I would suggest to you that plenty of people don't have a clue about the difference.
Its really hot ---- "GLOBAL WARMING!!!!"
Its snowing really late ---- Its just weather, nothing to see here
To be honest climate has always changed. It will always change. We might even be responsible for some of it. But the Ice Caps are still there, even after Al Gore said they would be gone.
Boxes: Soap, Ballot, Jury, Ammo
The two choices are dichotomy based on the previous point "(assuming he reported it, and they all said "tough shit" or similar)"
He skipped at least one, probably all three boxes before Ammo. As far as I know, he didn't sue the professor and a jury didn't say "tough shit" (or similar)