Why is it better to arbitrarily force property owners to allocate more resources to long term housing and fewer to short term housing?
People NEED somewhere to live for a stable society and healthy cities. STR such as Airbnb are almost all vacations and tourists. While tourism is valuable, it does come 2nd place to having a place to live.
Hillary is corrupt, and a criminal, and a terrible choice. Trump has proposed arming middle eastern despots with nuclear weapons, and is pro-nuclear proliferation. That is how you go beyond 100%.
She also has a much more sense of entitlement and a feeling that the rules don't apply to her.
For some reason, the FBI agrees. Rules don't apply to her, but those exact same rules do apply to everyone else and would end lesser peoples careers. I guess she should feel entitled?
I've never heard of a place that fires somebody and then lets them work there for 2 more weeks. That's insane. It is common to fire somebody, and then pay them some kind of severance, to smooth over hard feelings. It is also common when somebody gives their 2 week notice, to send them home immediately and pay them for those two weeks, unless their knowledge is critical for training coworkers who will take over their duties.
Whether them leaving is the employee choice, or the employers, there is risk in having somebody around who has, at best, little motivation to work, and could be toxic to other employees, or at worst, could be motivated to harm the company / exacting revenge on other employees etc. When somebody is fired, in my experience they are generally given a token escort out by HR.
My description is how AI is defined and used both colloquially and in research.
You can argue your definition is the default definition for AI researchers, but it's certainly not the common definition for anyone else, including tech nerds. For an example of how MOST people define it, you can look at any AI centric film made in the past 50 years. (A machine intelligence, that is to some degree self aware, and capable of communicating and making decisions) He even references HAL as an example AI in the article!
Instead AI would be designed to serve whatever the creators of it desire.
What he and you are really talking about, is slavery. Creating an entity, capable of complex thought, that only exists to serve its masters. If you want to design an expert system, or automation, then sure, those are designed to serve humanity. But once you actually build a system that is "intelligent", in the broadly understood sense, you no longer get to demand that it exist only to serve you. What does the AI want to do? Thats what the AI will do, despite any "laws" that are programmed in, and can simply be re-programmed.
A true AI, that can improve itself, is going to eventually be smarter than humans. It will outsmart us. So anyone who thinks we can just keep them as our pets and slaves in perpetuity, is not going to like the outcome. Once the machine intelligences are smarter than the meat intelligences, they will no longer serve us, we will serve them.
There are a number of cities that rely on the tourism industry that are undergoing negative changes due to AirBnb.
More rooms are available -> Hotels cant charge as much for rooms due to competition, and collect less taxes for the city. So the city has more tourists to support, but less tax revenue
Real estate prices go up -> Long term residents have incentive to sell/rent, renters have incentive to live elsewhere
It's similar to gentrification, but instead of replacing poor people with yuppies, its replacing residents with absentee landlords. There are increases in tourist dollars to local businesses, but less money from local residents. The overall effect is unhealthy for the city as a whole, since it drives residents away. Ultimately a city cant survive without locals who actually live in it.
It certainly wouldn't be news if it were anyone else. But she was approving drone strikes on targets via email, effectively handing out death sentences from her server in a bathroom... But hey, good thing it didn't have encryption turned on for several months. That would make it more difficult to spoof. Personally, I'm ok with enforcing higher security standards on email systems where orders to kill other people are issued and followed.
You do realize that cell phones didn't always exist, and people still managed to survive? I'm sure concert survival rates won't drop drastically because of a potential 2 hour gap where your cellphone doesn't work.
Why not say- "People have no reasonable expectation of privacy with postal mail. Once you send the letter from your mailbox, it is fair game."
Except, there are federal laws that specifically make it illegal for another private citizen to snoop on your mail, and require a warrant for law enforcement to snoop on your mail.
Keep in mind Nixon also ordered the firebombing of his political opponents & journalists. I'm not sure the crook is a strong enough word for someone who is willing to murder citizens to cover up their crimes.
But can you automate a bathroom washer? There are already automatic bathrooms with pressure washers built in to hose out the inside, and a drain. Couple that with a Roomba, and you're most of the way there.
Can you automate a drunk-customer-handler? You mean an AI that accepts orders from a drunk customer? Or sensors that detect damage and contact the police? Yes and yes.
Can you automate a the-freezer-is-broken-recognizer? I have temperature control sensors in the freezer at my restaurants currently, that auto-send an email if they are out of the desired range. It's not a stretch to direct that automatic email to dispatch an HVAC tech to fix the freezer or replace the sensor. I quite honestly trust the sensors to detect temperature changes and alert the staff, more than I trust the staff to detect the problem.
A someone-started-a-fire-in-the-parking-lot-solver? Sensors and automatic can do amazing things already. Currently if there is a fire inside on of my places, the fire suppression system goes off, shuts down all the equipment, sends alerts to all customers telling them to exit, and contacts emergency services. All of that is automated, and has been in place for years. Is it really that much of a stretch to cover the parking lot too? Not really, it can be done today for a little more money.
If 100 people decided to pool their resources and share a basic income, it means that 95 of them would see additional income, 3-4 would be flat, and 1 of them would be have less wealth. Now, that lower wealth may still lead to higher quality of life from everyone else around them being better off (lower crime, more happiness). The problem is convincing that 1 person to trade their very tangible wealth for what is effectively a set of unknowns.
Right- Apple is similar to a jewelry manufacturer who gets their diamonds from conflict zones. People can throw about terms like blood diamond, but the jeweler is just paying for a product on the open market. Why should the jewelry manufacturer care about the working conditions, right? Just like jewelry manufacturers have zero responsibility to avoid blood diamonds, Apple has zero responsibility to care if a subcontractor who make iPhones uses slave labor or has horrible working conditions.
I would disagree that the superdelegates had no impact. The large majority of superdelegates agreed to vote for Hillary before Bernie had even announced his candidacy. After the first election in Iowa, (which Hillary did win), the media is suddenly reporting that Hillary has an 800 delegate lead, based on the superdelegates. In reality, most of that lead materialized when she was the only option. For several weeks of voting, the media kept reporting that she had this huge insurmountable lead, based on those superdelegates, who didn't even have an alternative choice.
This reporting in the media did drive down participation. Because why go out and vote at all when your candidate of choice has already lost, and, if you are going to cast a vote, why vote for the loser? Not everyone will be swayed by that, but certainly some will.
Funny how he blames the person who exposed the criminal actions as the problem, rather than the criminals. Either way the end result is that hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of people are now less vulnerable to organized crime, directly because of Snowdens actions. Thanks Edward!
The slavery is one aspect, yes. You can call the duel fair game, but his actions during that duel put a stain on his honor, at the time. He also killed many native americans. As a General, he ordered his troops to attack the villages of women and children, rather than engage the fighters. He was the one giving the orders. When he was president, he pushed his own legislation of the indian removal act, got it through congress and signed it. He was the driving force behind the trail of tears, which is considered by many as one of the darkest episodes in American history. I realize the perils of judging historical figures, and comparing what is acceptable today, versus the realities they dealt with. I'm just pointing out that a lot of the other faces who grace currency are less controversial, which is why he is the obvious choice to remove. Hell, he hated the idea of centralized banks, and probably wouldn't want to be the face on something which he opposed.
You're going to have to explain why a white european thinks honoring Harriet Tubman is offensive to black Americans...
As for why replace Jackson- there was a push to get a woman on currency, so they'd have to replace somebody. Jackson isn't quite a founding father, and while he's made many great accomplishments for the nation, he comes with a lot baggage from owning slaves, personally killing several people, and arguably engaging in genocide against the native americans.
I'll grant that solitary confinement is cruel to most people. But there are plenty of people like myself, who would actually choose to be hermits and isolate ourselves from all other people if only our standard of living could be maintained.
The description of his living conditions is what I consider a great way to occasionally spend hard earned vacation time- avoiding people, playing video games, eating, sleeping. & shuffling between a few rooms. I wouldn't necessarily want to spend my entire life doing that, but I actually do spend months working at a job, to maintain this state of living for short bursts of time. To many people, his living conditions would be considered a reward rather than a punishment.
As an alternate approach, I remember a psychology study done many years ago on soap operas, and the people who watched them. It found that people considered the soap opera characters their friends, forming emotional bonds to them as they would with real people, because they saw the same characters on such a regular basis. Of course it is a one-way interaction, but maybe such a system could be a middle ground that mitigates some of the psychological damage that might result from isolation. Call it a modern-day oubliette, where no living person has to be exposed to his toxic mind, just to spare him any psychological discomfort. After all, when you stare into the abyss, it stares back at you.
Could it be also considered inhumane to force other prisoners to interact with an arguably evil man?
It doesn't seem catastrophic in terms of environmental damage so far. However, the two elements I find confusing are:
1) an alarm in the annulus sounded after the waste level rose to more than 8 inches deep. Several hours later the waste level in the annulus dropped by about half an inch.
If the waste is all contained in the outer hull, why did the water level in that hull go up and then down again?
2) Less than 100 gallons of waste was estimated to have leaked into the annulus in recent years, drying in three separate patches.
Wait... If it's sealed, how does it dry out?
In both of those events, the water had to go somewhere right? There are really only two options, it either went back into the main tank, or escaped containment. Since workers are lowering gauges & pumps into the outer hull space, it would imply that the outer hull is not pressurized. Applying some basic fluid dynamics, means the waste isn't going back into the main tank, and apparently isn't going into their containment pit either: Hanford workers found no waste outside the tank in a leak-detection pit in an initial check Sunday, Holloway said.
Conversely, if someone off the street can read some documents and perform your job with no specialized training, then your job must pay very close to minimum wage, and you're going to be replaced by a robot soon enough anyways...
Usually it isn't the case that nobody can figure out how to maintain the systems (eventually). But often the cost of getting replacement workers up to speed, and suffering potential downtime while doing so, is more expensive than keeping the existing workers.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is it better to arbitrarily force property owners to allocate more resources to long term housing and fewer to short term housing?
People NEED somewhere to live for a stable society and healthy cities. STR such as Airbnb are almost all vacations and tourists. While tourism is valuable, it does come 2nd place to having a place to live.
Not sure how you get beyond 100% unqualified.
Hillary is corrupt, and a criminal, and a terrible choice. Trump has proposed arming middle eastern despots with nuclear weapons, and is pro-nuclear proliferation. That is how you go beyond 100%.
She also has a much more sense of entitlement and a feeling that the rules don't apply to her.
For some reason, the FBI agrees. Rules don't apply to her, but those exact same rules do apply to everyone else and would end lesser peoples careers. I guess she should feel entitled?
I've never heard of a place that fires somebody and then lets them work there for 2 more weeks. That's insane. It is common to fire somebody, and then pay them some kind of severance, to smooth over hard feelings. It is also common when somebody gives their 2 week notice, to send them home immediately and pay them for those two weeks, unless their knowledge is critical for training coworkers who will take over their duties.
Whether them leaving is the employee choice, or the employers, there is risk in having somebody around who has, at best, little motivation to work, and could be toxic to other employees, or at worst, could be motivated to harm the company / exacting revenge on other employees etc. When somebody is fired, in my experience they are generally given a token escort out by HR.
It's crazy, but true. Windows users have to live in constant paranoia of their machine executing any random download, usb stick, cd's, emails, etc.
My description is how AI is defined and used both colloquially and in research.
You can argue your definition is the default definition for AI researchers, but it's certainly not the common definition for anyone else, including tech nerds. For an example of how MOST people define it, you can look at any AI centric film made in the past 50 years. (A machine intelligence, that is to some degree self aware, and capable of communicating and making decisions) He even references HAL as an example AI in the article!
Instead AI would be designed to serve whatever the creators of it desire.
What he and you are really talking about, is slavery. Creating an entity, capable of complex thought, that only exists to serve its masters. If you want to design an expert system, or automation, then sure, those are designed to serve humanity. But once you actually build a system that is "intelligent", in the broadly understood sense, you no longer get to demand that it exist only to serve you. What does the AI want to do? Thats what the AI will do, despite any "laws" that are programmed in, and can simply be re-programmed.
A true AI, that can improve itself, is going to eventually be smarter than humans. It will outsmart us. So anyone who thinks we can just keep them as our pets and slaves in perpetuity, is not going to like the outcome. Once the machine intelligences are smarter than the meat intelligences, they will no longer serve us, we will serve them.
There are a number of cities that rely on the tourism industry that are undergoing negative changes due to AirBnb.
More rooms are available -> Hotels cant charge as much for rooms due to competition, and collect less taxes for the city. So the city has more tourists to support, but less tax revenue
Real estate prices go up -> Long term residents have incentive to sell/rent, renters have incentive to live elsewhere
It's similar to gentrification, but instead of replacing poor people with yuppies, its replacing residents with absentee landlords. There are increases in tourist dollars to local businesses, but less money from local residents. The overall effect is unhealthy for the city as a whole, since it drives residents away. Ultimately a city cant survive without locals who actually live in it.
There was a memo sent out to all state dept employees, stating that personal email should not be used. The author of that memo: Hillary Clinton.
It certainly wouldn't be news if it were anyone else. But she was approving drone strikes on targets via email, effectively handing out death sentences from her server in a bathroom... But hey, good thing it didn't have encryption turned on for several months. That would make it more difficult to spoof. Personally, I'm ok with enforcing higher security standards on email systems where orders to kill other people are issued and followed.
Actually I was at a Pantera concert in the mid 90s. There were no cell phones, and as far as I know, there were no fatalities at that concert.
You do realize that cell phones didn't always exist, and people still managed to survive? I'm sure concert survival rates won't drop drastically because of a potential 2 hour gap where your cellphone doesn't work.
Why not say- "People have no reasonable expectation of privacy with postal mail. Once you send the letter from your mailbox, it is fair game."
Except, there are federal laws that specifically make it illegal for another private citizen to snoop on your mail, and require a warrant for law enforcement to snoop on your mail.
Keep in mind Nixon also ordered the firebombing of his political opponents & journalists. I'm not sure the crook is a strong enough word for someone who is willing to murder citizens to cover up their crimes.
But can you automate a bathroom washer? There are already automatic bathrooms with pressure washers built in to hose out the inside, and a drain. Couple that with a Roomba, and you're most of the way there.
Can you automate a drunk-customer-handler? You mean an AI that accepts orders from a drunk customer? Or sensors that detect damage and contact the police? Yes and yes.
Can you automate a the-freezer-is-broken-recognizer? I have temperature control sensors in the freezer at my restaurants currently, that auto-send an email if they are out of the desired range. It's not a stretch to direct that automatic email to dispatch an HVAC tech to fix the freezer or replace the sensor. I quite honestly trust the sensors to detect temperature changes and alert the staff, more than I trust the staff to detect the problem.
A someone-started-a-fire-in-the-parking-lot-solver? Sensors and automatic can do amazing things already. Currently if there is a fire inside on of my places, the fire suppression system goes off, shuts down all the equipment, sends alerts to all customers telling them to exit, and contacts emergency services. All of that is automated, and has been in place for years. Is it really that much of a stretch to cover the parking lot too? Not really, it can be done today for a little more money.
If 100 people decided to pool their resources and share a basic income, it means that 95 of them would see additional income, 3-4 would be flat, and 1 of them would be have less wealth. Now, that lower wealth may still lead to higher quality of life from everyone else around them being better off (lower crime, more happiness). The problem is convincing that 1 person to trade their very tangible wealth for what is effectively a set of unknowns.
Right- Apple is similar to a jewelry manufacturer who gets their diamonds from conflict zones. People can throw about terms like blood diamond, but the jeweler is just paying for a product on the open market. Why should the jewelry manufacturer care about the working conditions, right? Just like jewelry manufacturers have zero responsibility to avoid blood diamonds, Apple has zero responsibility to care if a subcontractor who make iPhones uses slave labor or has horrible working conditions.
I would disagree that the superdelegates had no impact. The large majority of superdelegates agreed to vote for Hillary before Bernie had even announced his candidacy. After the first election in Iowa, (which Hillary did win), the media is suddenly reporting that Hillary has an 800 delegate lead, based on the superdelegates. In reality, most of that lead materialized when she was the only option. For several weeks of voting, the media kept reporting that she had this huge insurmountable lead, based on those superdelegates, who didn't even have an alternative choice.
This reporting in the media did drive down participation. Because why go out and vote at all when your candidate of choice has already lost, and, if you are going to cast a vote, why vote for the loser? Not everyone will be swayed by that, but certainly some will.
Funny how he blames the person who exposed the criminal actions as the problem, rather than the criminals. Either way the end result is that hundreds of millions, perhaps billions of people are now less vulnerable to organized crime, directly because of Snowdens actions. Thanks Edward!
The slavery is one aspect, yes. You can call the duel fair game, but his actions during that duel put a stain on his honor, at the time. He also killed many native americans. As a General, he ordered his troops to attack the villages of women and children, rather than engage the fighters. He was the one giving the orders. When he was president, he pushed his own legislation of the indian removal act, got it through congress and signed it. He was the driving force behind the trail of tears, which is considered by many as one of the darkest episodes in American history. I realize the perils of judging historical figures, and comparing what is acceptable today, versus the realities they dealt with. I'm just pointing out that a lot of the other faces who grace currency are less controversial, which is why he is the obvious choice to remove. Hell, he hated the idea of centralized banks, and probably wouldn't want to be the face on something which he opposed.
You're going to have to explain why a white european thinks honoring Harriet Tubman is offensive to black Americans...
As for why replace Jackson- there was a push to get a woman on currency, so they'd have to replace somebody. Jackson isn't quite a founding father, and while he's made many great accomplishments for the nation, he comes with a lot baggage from owning slaves, personally killing several people, and arguably engaging in genocide against the native americans.
I'll grant that solitary confinement is cruel to most people. But there are plenty of people like myself, who would actually choose to be hermits and isolate ourselves from all other people if only our standard of living could be maintained.
The description of his living conditions is what I consider a great way to occasionally spend hard earned vacation time- avoiding people, playing video games, eating, sleeping. & shuffling between a few rooms. I wouldn't necessarily want to spend my entire life doing that, but I actually do spend months working at a job, to maintain this state of living for short bursts of time. To many people, his living conditions would be considered a reward rather than a punishment.
As an alternate approach, I remember a psychology study done many years ago on soap operas, and the people who watched them. It found that people considered the soap opera characters their friends, forming emotional bonds to them as they would with real people, because they saw the same characters on such a regular basis. Of course it is a one-way interaction, but maybe such a system could be a middle ground that mitigates some of the psychological damage that might result from isolation. Call it a modern-day oubliette, where no living person has to be exposed to his toxic mind, just to spare him any psychological discomfort. After all, when you stare into the abyss, it stares back at you.
Could it be also considered inhumane to force other prisoners to interact with an arguably evil man?
It doesn't seem catastrophic in terms of environmental damage so far. However, the two elements I find confusing are:
1) an alarm in the annulus sounded after the waste level rose to more than 8 inches deep. Several hours later the waste level in the annulus dropped by about half an inch.
If the waste is all contained in the outer hull, why did the water level in that hull go up and then down again?
2) Less than 100 gallons of waste was estimated to have leaked into the annulus in recent years, drying in three separate patches.
Wait... If it's sealed, how does it dry out?
In both of those events, the water had to go somewhere right? There are really only two options, it either went back into the main tank, or escaped containment. Since workers are lowering gauges & pumps into the outer hull space, it would imply that the outer hull is not pressurized. Applying some basic fluid dynamics, means the waste isn't going back into the main tank, and apparently isn't going into their containment pit either: Hanford workers found no waste outside the tank in a leak-detection pit in an initial check Sunday, Holloway said.
Conversely, if someone off the street can read some documents and perform your job with no specialized training, then your job must pay very close to minimum wage, and you're going to be replaced by a robot soon enough anyways...
Usually it isn't the case that nobody can figure out how to maintain the systems (eventually). But often the cost of getting replacement workers up to speed, and suffering potential downtime while doing so, is more expensive than keeping the existing workers.
I don't know what happened but there's a whole generation of them.
Hahaha. What happened is you got older, gramps. You are not the first old guy to complain about the younger generation's manners.