One of these days, people will realize that using one single number as the password to all of their financial accounts is amongst the dumbest idea ever conceived.
Took the words right out of my mouth. Opening a line of credit should require a public notary as witness, with associated identity checks done in person. And the whole process should be video taped.
The current situation is made worse by the fact that as the identity theft victim, you're the one who needs to prove it was fraud, rather than the bank needing to prove it was you who opened it, meaning you need to cough up lawyer money exactly when you have the least control over your finances.
If a person is on the black list (late payments) they will not be allowed ANY credit.
That's a bit harsh, no? I've been late on payments once or twice and I'm not even struggling financially. It's easy to forget the due date or mixup the amount. Can't imagine how bad it would be for someone who has several credit cards.
Plastics that don't dissolve in stomach acid won't get absorbed by the intestines, so I imagine they'll just pass through. Breathing it in is probably worse for you. Some fibrous materials like asbestos can cause cancer. The complication is how many different kinds of plastics there are, some might be entirely harmless, others not so much.
It's much easier to build a robot-building robot than it is to build the robot. One is a series of deterministic steps, taking raw materials at one end and spitting out robots on the other. The other is an endless combination of vague and sometimes unknown steps that does everything a human does.
Programming the robots will be a lot of work. But the vast majority of people hold a very small number of job types. You might need a few thousand software guys to automate the most common jobs, but that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the tens of millions of jobs they will make obsolete.
I'm asking what the studies that backs this TV segment actually tested, which you didn't answer and then proceeded to accuse me of group think and being incurious.
By the way, I checked and couldn't find any studies that support there being no innate gender differences (since that's the question we're trying to answer), only the ones that show the opposite.
A lot of what we think is genetic is actually just us influencing the unscientific test. I imagine the monkeys, which will have been interacting with humans their whole lives, are being influenced similarly.
I don't think what you described, that is, giving a boy "girls toys" and vice versa, is any sort of scientific test either. What was the falsifiable hypothesis? What's the sample size? And how does it relate to the topic at hand?
If anything, the study only showed that nurture can override nature up until whatever age the study ended at. This is nothing new or interesting. Humans do not naturally wear clothing, but if you walk into a mall, you'll see very few people walking around naked. The real question is whether there is a natural bias in interests due to gender, and following that, what are the harms and benefits of forcefully removing that bias.
I don't think this has anything to do with you or GP being in this profession, rather, I think most people would prefer realism from stories set in the real world. A spaceship with FTL is fine if you're watching a sci-fi movie, but it's not okay for the Titanic to be saved at the last minute by a hidden FTL drive in the 4th smokestack.
The suspension of disbelief only goes so far, and getting critical details wrong, as is often the case when something needs to be hacked into, it breaks down completely and people who notice would find it hard to enjoy the remainder of the movie.
You make fun of avocado toast, but the ones I had were pretty decent snacks. They each consist of a sunny-side-up egg and a piece of toast, held together with avocado paste and some garnish on top. For $5, it's not that expensive. Breakfast in SF generally starts at $10.
what I need are engineers that can manage their own projects, use Revit, and manage one or two designers when project workload dictates. This is a skill level I had two years out of college, but we find people with 20 years that can't do all three.
I don't know much about construction, but isn't Autocad the industry standard? Maybe you should drop the Revit requirement and replace it with "any 3D modeling tool", then train the guy on Revit over the course of a few months.
On a related note, how would you interview someone to know whether they're able to manage a project or work with designers?
You're not going to win that argument. Rich and poor are relative. Some consider a roof over their heads to be a luxury, while others consider any house under $1 million to be too pedestrian.
Deaths don't need to happen. We can have an egalitarian society of 10 billion people, with robots feeding and clothing everyone. It might seem impossible today because socialism is taboo in the US, but that's not the case in the rest of the world. Besides, even in the US, it only takes one generation for view points to completely flip around, which is really just 30 years or so.
The problem with these things is not the speed : we can get to high speed with mag-lev, it'll obviously be faster with less/no air resistance. The problem is the reliable manufacturing and resilience to accidents of huge vacuum tubes that transport vital cargo like human lives.
I think that LHC was the largest, it was far from easy and it's only 27 Km.
The stuff in the LHC goes at 99.999999% the speed of light. Nobody's in that much of a hurry.
Security will be done by robots too. They're more accurate, more deadly and more trustworthy than their human counter parts.
Data gathering is already being done automatically, using things like web forms. Scientific instruments already produce computer-consumable data.
Maids will always be expensive. You're paying someone else's entire living cost. So unless you're way above average income, their wage will put a deep dent in your pocket. Not to mention, robot maids will be here sooner or later.
Once you get rid of the human cost by automating, what's left is the one-time material cost and the energy cost to run it.
Ordinary rail is much cheaper to build than freeways ($1-$10 million vs. $50 million per mile). Plus it's much narrower, meaning you don't need to purchase as much land.
Trucks fare even worse on the energy front. It takes 3357 BTU to transport 1 ton of cargo for 1 mile on a truck, vs. 289 BTU per mile per ton on a train.
The thing GP is missing is politics. Existing rail in the US is already saturated with trains. You simply can't send any more cargo without expanding the rail network. But you can't build railways without government support, and frankly, nobody cares. Neither the politicians nor the people. So despite rail being better all around, it never gets expanded on.
I wouldn't consider any grocery store that did not have fresh produce and meat to be a grocery store. As such, every grocery store I ever visited have had a good selection of low-carb foods.
What's the point of scaring everyone with this? If it's a missile test, it would have been announced beforehand to anyone who cares to listen. If it's a real attack, then there's no point telling people to put out fires started by the missile. I suspect there's a political reason they're doing this, maybe to get the public riled up to join a US-led coalition agains NK, or maybe just for more defense budget.
It's illegal to sell a car that doesn't meet emission standards, but it's perfectly legal to design one. Last I checked, engineers are not involved in sales and marketing.
The level of evidence required isn't even that high. All you'd really need (assuming that you have a reasonably good employment record) is an email or memo exchange showing that you were told to do something obviously illegal and that you refused to do it, and that you were fired or otherwise punished afterwards.
Which is why these conversations are always done face to face.
Have you considered the possibility that women also watch porn? Or are they supposed to be pure little angels with 0 knowledge of human reproduction because that suits your world view?
Slashdot Mirror
One of these days, people will realize that using one single number as the password to all of their financial accounts is amongst the dumbest idea ever conceived.
Took the words right out of my mouth. Opening a line of credit should require a public notary as witness, with associated identity checks done in person. And the whole process should be video taped.
The current situation is made worse by the fact that as the identity theft victim, you're the one who needs to prove it was fraud, rather than the bank needing to prove it was you who opened it, meaning you need to cough up lawyer money exactly when you have the least control over your finances.
If a person is on the black list (late payments) they will not be allowed ANY credit.
That's a bit harsh, no? I've been late on payments once or twice and I'm not even struggling financially. It's easy to forget the due date or mixup the amount. Can't imagine how bad it would be for someone who has several credit cards.
Plastics that don't dissolve in stomach acid won't get absorbed by the intestines, so I imagine they'll just pass through. Breathing it in is probably worse for you. Some fibrous materials like asbestos can cause cancer. The complication is how many different kinds of plastics there are, some might be entirely harmless, others not so much.
It's much easier to build a robot-building robot than it is to build the robot. One is a series of deterministic steps, taking raw materials at one end and spitting out robots on the other. The other is an endless combination of vague and sometimes unknown steps that does everything a human does.
Programming the robots will be a lot of work. But the vast majority of people hold a very small number of job types. You might need a few thousand software guys to automate the most common jobs, but that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the tens of millions of jobs they will make obsolete.
I'm asking what the studies that backs this TV segment actually tested, which you didn't answer and then proceeded to accuse me of group think and being incurious.
By the way, I checked and couldn't find any studies that support there being no innate gender differences (since that's the question we're trying to answer), only the ones that show the opposite.
According to SJW's, Asians are successful and therefore white.
A lot of what we think is genetic is actually just us influencing the unscientific test. I imagine the monkeys, which will have been interacting with humans their whole lives, are being influenced similarly.
I don't think what you described, that is, giving a boy "girls toys" and vice versa, is any sort of scientific test either. What was the falsifiable hypothesis? What's the sample size? And how does it relate to the topic at hand?
If anything, the study only showed that nurture can override nature up until whatever age the study ended at. This is nothing new or interesting. Humans do not naturally wear clothing, but if you walk into a mall, you'll see very few people walking around naked. The real question is whether there is a natural bias in interests due to gender, and following that, what are the harms and benefits of forcefully removing that bias.
I don't think this has anything to do with you or GP being in this profession, rather, I think most people would prefer realism from stories set in the real world. A spaceship with FTL is fine if you're watching a sci-fi movie, but it's not okay for the Titanic to be saved at the last minute by a hidden FTL drive in the 4th smokestack.
The suspension of disbelief only goes so far, and getting critical details wrong, as is often the case when something needs to be hacked into, it breaks down completely and people who notice would find it hard to enjoy the remainder of the movie.
You make fun of avocado toast, but the ones I had were pretty decent snacks. They each consist of a sunny-side-up egg and a piece of toast, held together with avocado paste and some garnish on top. For $5, it's not that expensive. Breakfast in SF generally starts at $10.
what I need are engineers that can manage their own projects, use Revit, and manage one or two designers when project workload dictates. This is a skill level I had two years out of college, but we find people with 20 years that can't do all three.
I don't know much about construction, but isn't Autocad the industry standard? Maybe you should drop the Revit requirement and replace it with "any 3D modeling tool", then train the guy on Revit over the course of a few months.
On a related note, how would you interview someone to know whether they're able to manage a project or work with designers?
I consider owning any house ... the minimum threshold for being actually not poor by non-relative standards.
That's still relative. You can own a house in the Philippines for $10k.
You're not going to win that argument. Rich and poor are relative. Some consider a roof over their heads to be a luxury, while others consider any house under $1 million to be too pedestrian.
Deaths don't need to happen. We can have an egalitarian society of 10 billion people, with robots feeding and clothing everyone. It might seem impossible today because socialism is taboo in the US, but that's not the case in the rest of the world. Besides, even in the US, it only takes one generation for view points to completely flip around, which is really just 30 years or so.
The problem with these things is not the speed : we can get to high speed with mag-lev, it'll obviously be faster with less/no air resistance. The problem is the reliable manufacturing and resilience to accidents of huge vacuum tubes that transport vital cargo like human lives. I think that LHC was the largest, it was far from easy and it's only 27 Km.
The stuff in the LHC goes at 99.999999% the speed of light. Nobody's in that much of a hurry.
That would be time to get off this rock.
Security will be done by robots too. They're more accurate, more deadly and more trustworthy than their human counter parts.
Data gathering is already being done automatically, using things like web forms. Scientific instruments already produce computer-consumable data.
Maids will always be expensive. You're paying someone else's entire living cost. So unless you're way above average income, their wage will put a deep dent in your pocket. Not to mention, robot maids will be here sooner or later.
There is a few hours of down time for maintenance.
Once you get rid of the human cost by automating, what's left is the one-time material cost and the energy cost to run it.
Ordinary rail is much cheaper to build than freeways ($1-$10 million vs. $50 million per mile). Plus it's much narrower, meaning you don't need to purchase as much land.
Trucks fare even worse on the energy front. It takes 3357 BTU to transport 1 ton of cargo for 1 mile on a truck, vs. 289 BTU per mile per ton on a train.
The thing GP is missing is politics. Existing rail in the US is already saturated with trains. You simply can't send any more cargo without expanding the rail network. But you can't build railways without government support, and frankly, nobody cares. Neither the politicians nor the people. So despite rail being better all around, it never gets expanded on.
93% according to statistics. There are 100 billion humans in all of history and 7 billion are still alive.
I wouldn't consider any grocery store that did not have fresh produce and meat to be a grocery store. As such, every grocery store I ever visited have had a good selection of low-carb foods.
What's the point of scaring everyone with this? If it's a missile test, it would have been announced beforehand to anyone who cares to listen. If it's a real attack, then there's no point telling people to put out fires started by the missile. I suspect there's a political reason they're doing this, maybe to get the public riled up to join a US-led coalition agains NK, or maybe just for more defense budget.
It's illegal to sell a car that doesn't meet emission standards, but it's perfectly legal to design one. Last I checked, engineers are not involved in sales and marketing.
The level of evidence required isn't even that high. All you'd really need (assuming that you have a reasonably good employment record) is an email or memo exchange showing that you were told to do something obviously illegal and that you refused to do it, and that you were fired or otherwise punished afterwards.
Which is why these conversations are always done face to face.
Both hypocrisy and sexism in one post!
Have you considered the possibility that women also watch porn? Or are they supposed to be pure little angels with 0 knowledge of human reproduction because that suits your world view?