It's pretty simple. Cashless is convenience and if you trust the system that is good value. If you do not trust the system the current one or a possible future one, then cashless means relinguishing control, especially if you lose the option to freely use cashless (that is, with a low threshold, so it has to be easy). Multiple players love getting that control. It means having a record of all your transactions, and having the option to make money with them in all possible manners, including negative interests, and it means you can lock people out as well. There's a lot of power involved and the case of India has shown that the big players are willing to take draconian measures at the expense of a lot of people, hence the name 'the war on cash'.
My point of view is that on principle you need checks and balances to avoid large concentration of power and cash is part of that.
The example is a bit odd and actually, trivial , but it does resemble the idea of VR in curved space (Riemann manifold), like what you have in General Relativity.
The/. crowd does appear to have regressed politically but it never amounted to much. It's a tech site. The main point is that Operation Character Assassination was successful. Assange has contributed a lot to government transparency but it's very hard to fight the PR. The trick is to divert attention to the flaws someone has and make that the whole issue. That has succeeded entirely. I'm not interested in his flaws. He's been very reliable in his job and you can't say that of many. And he's fucking on our side! The other side are a whole bunch of warmongers who are falling over each other to be more extreme. One would at least want to know what they're doing. But no, Assange's personal life, that's the real issue.
If you check the competitor voice generation in the article it's also pretty good. Things have improved since Radiohead's depressing song 'Fitter Happier' https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Interesting argument. One could claim that people who believed the earth was bigger were not going to invest anyway so it there was little use in trying to be credible to them. I don't know the details but to me it sounds plausible that the Spanish Queen was aware that Columbus estimates for the size of the earth were contentious but considering the Portuguese were ahead and found Cape of Good Hope in 1488 she was willing to take a gamble , while she really expected to lose 3 ships.
I could very well believe that these are the same students asking for debt forgiveness and they'd be right. If you hear how many people have to work a large part of their lives to repay their student dept then students investing in cryptocurrency sounds a lot like a desperate gamble to get out of a deep hole.
The whole description of getting a loan "Student loans arenâ(TM)t just for buying textbooks, No. 2 pencils, and apples for bribing teachers anymore. " is ridiculous.
Columbus was not that loopy. His mistake was that he believed in an estimate of the radius of the earth which was too small. Since this belief was instrumental in getting the funding for the journey he also wasn't inclined to listen to those who said he was using the wrong units. On second thought, maybe the comparison with this rocket jock isn't far off.
That's an example of stating something which has some truth in it but isn't very helpful. Cars are steampowered too then but what's the point then in calling them steam-powered? The point in calling something steam-powered is not to say the steam is doing the work, but to indicate that the energy source is separate from the propellant.
Good point, it's a great achievement. The 'american appropriation' bit is contentious. Go West was about enterprise and opportunity. This is more about British bloodyminded individualism which goes against the flow. The consensus was that he was just an idiot about to kill himself.
So if you go to sleep one night and then they fork you and you wake up the next day, then how do you know you're the original or the copy? And do you care?
I consider the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity a very credible source. Their VIPS memos are at consortiumnews.com , Ray Mcgovern has his own site and Scott Horton (libertarianinstitute.org )does an hour long interview with him every few months. The alternative explanation Ray McGovern gives is that when the Clinton campaign found out Wikileaks was going to publish their mails they had to take drastic measures because people were going to find out they bought up the DNC and stole the primaries from Sanders. So they(Jennifer Palmieri) started pushing the idea that the Russians stole the DNC mails and gave them to Wikileaks. It's outrageous that these two stories (stealing the election and manufacturing the Russiagate narrative ) don't even exist in the mainstream. So the DNC under Clinton is the source for the Russiagate narrative and for the analysis of the theft(Crowdstrike), as well as for the Steele dossier.
And I'm sure Sanders knows it but can't do a thing about it.
That wasn't Kelvin's smartest moment. In general though with such quote there is too much eagerness to show them up as outright silly. Too much eagerness to fit a stereotype. Take Thomson, his quote is as follows:
I am afraid I am not in the flight for âoeaerial navigationâ. I was greatly interested in your work with kites; but I have not the smallest molecule of faith in aerial navigation other than ballooning or of expectation of good results from any of the trials we hear of. So you will understand that I would not care to be a member of the aÃronautical Society.
I think that means little more than that heavier than air flight was crackpot territory, no people he took seriously were working on it. It doesn't mean he objected to the idea.
I know the story of Wallace and Darwin and I'm no expert but I simply think it's wrong and I can at least point out an alternative version of history, see here https://www.theguardian.com/sc...
Such a bad example. Darwin delayed much longer than Einstein and it's doubtful whether anyone forced his hand at all. He was a brilliant thinker who deserves full credit. Wallace didn't come close in any way.
Classical physics does not depend on a reference frame as long as the limitspeed is infinite and until 1880 or so that was the assumption. I mean it was known that the lightspeed was finite but there was no reason to believe it was the limitspeed. You can turn newtonian mechanics into a covariant system for general coordinate systems but why would you do that? If you want to describe a merry go round , don't get all that overhead and use a shortcut. Then with special relativity you could again decide to do the same: support general coordinate systems, make it work for accelerated observers. You could still classify it as special relativity.
It was Einstein who decided we couldn't avoid to formulate things in a covariant manner, and the example was that inside an elevator it was strictly impossible to distinguish between floating in space or plummetting towards the earth in free fall and and likewise there was no distinction between standing on the surface of the earth and being pulled in space. Therefore the math had to be the same too.
I didn't know Maxwell ever said that but I know he was pretty damn smart and he knew about the montgolfiere, about catapults and about primitive rockets, so I'm thinking his quotes about flying will have been a bit more subtle than 'it's impossible for heavy things to fly'. There were no lightweight engines at the time that's for sure so technically it was not yet possible.
I can see two types of problems which do not require much investigation to know they exist.
One is the optimal case where information is realtime and possibly even anticipates group movement: if everyone uses one of these realtime routing apps, then traffic spreads out. It will be faster but it will use all the available routes. The other people, including the people trying to manage traffic and who want to strictly guide it along the path they want, simply don't like that.
A second is that there is no optimal case. If route A is stuck and everyone starts moving to route B 10 minutes away then the app does not anticipate that in 10 minutes route B will have a traffic jam. If you make the software smarter though, then it can anticipate. Not perfectly, but it can mitigate problem B and propose C while problem B isn't visible yet.
On the one hand it explains something important about what makes us work. On the other hand it looks more like a strategy paper for the PR industry to me. At least I'm sure that's how it will be treated and what are already the operating guidelines. Forget about truth, reputation is how you get people to do what you want them to do. One track has been to control the channels of authority, say the NYTimes. Another track is to get a grip on the low authority media like facebook.
I don't know the subject of AI well, at least, I have no idea why it became such a hype suddenly (I know the nuclear arms subject and I think Musk doesn't know what he's talking about there) but I don't see why sentience should be an issue. I just imagine what could happen if software became much more powerful, more adaptive. Then it could give more power to a minority, then it could create viral epidemics that are harder to control. You don't need sentience to create problems that run out of control.
Slashdot Mirror
It's pretty simple. Cashless is convenience and if you trust the system that is good value. If you do not trust the system the current one or a possible future one, then cashless means relinguishing control, especially if you lose the option to freely use cashless (that is, with a low threshold, so it has to be easy). Multiple players love getting that control. It means having a record of all your transactions, and having the option to make money with them in all possible manners, including negative interests, and it means you can lock people out as well. There's a lot of power involved and the case of India has shown that the big players are willing to take draconian measures at the expense of a lot of people, hence the name 'the war on cash'.
My point of view is that on principle you need checks and balances to avoid large concentration of power and cash is part of that.
The example is a bit odd and actually, trivial , but it does resemble the idea of VR in curved space (Riemann manifold), like what you have in General Relativity.
The /. crowd does appear to have regressed politically but it never amounted to much. It's a tech site.
The main point is that Operation Character Assassination was successful.
Assange has contributed a lot to government transparency but it's very hard to fight the PR. The trick is to divert attention to the flaws someone has and make that the whole issue. That has succeeded entirely. I'm not interested in his flaws. He's been very reliable in his job and you can't say that of many. And he's fucking on our side!
The other side are a whole bunch of warmongers who are falling over each other to be more extreme. One would at least want to know what they're doing. But no, Assange's personal life, that's the real issue.
If you check the competitor voice generation in the article it's also pretty good. Things have improved since Radiohead's depressing song 'Fitter Happier'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The NSA does speech to text so they can collect all voice calls and index them for textsearch and trigger words. THis is about text to speech.
Interesting argument. One could claim that people who believed the earth was bigger were not going to invest anyway so it there was little use in trying to be credible to them.
I don't know the details but to me it sounds plausible that the Spanish Queen was aware that Columbus estimates for the size of the earth were contentious but considering the Portuguese were ahead and found Cape of Good Hope in 1488 she was willing to take a gamble , while she really expected to lose 3 ships.
I could very well believe that these are the same students asking for debt forgiveness and they'd be right. If you hear how many people have to work a large part of their lives to repay their student dept then students investing in cryptocurrency sounds a lot like a desperate gamble to get out of a deep hole.
The whole description of getting a loan "Student loans arenâ(TM)t just for buying textbooks, No. 2 pencils, and apples for bribing teachers anymore. " is ridiculous.
I was annoyed that nobody would explain all the different rhythms of the machine.
Columbus was not that loopy. His mistake was that he believed in an estimate of the radius of the earth which was too small. Since this belief was instrumental in getting the funding for the journey he also wasn't inclined to listen to those who said he was using the wrong units. On second thought, maybe the comparison with this rocket jock isn't far off.
That's an example of stating something which has some truth in it but isn't very helpful. Cars are steampowered too then but what's the point then in calling them steam-powered? The point in calling something steam-powered is not to say the steam is doing the work, but to indicate that the energy source is separate from the propellant.
One gets claustrophobic in there.Maybe the noise augments it but it's mainly the 'stuck in a tunnel' feeling.
Good point, it's a great achievement.
The 'american appropriation' bit is contentious. Go West was about enterprise and opportunity.
This is more about British bloodyminded individualism which goes against the flow. The consensus was that he was just an idiot about to kill himself.
So if you go to sleep one night and then they fork you and you wake up the next day, then how do you know you're the original or the copy? And do you care?
I consider the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity a very credible source. Their VIPS memos are at consortiumnews.com , Ray Mcgovern has his own site and Scott Horton (libertarianinstitute.org )does an hour long interview with him every few months. The alternative explanation Ray McGovern gives is that when the Clinton campaign found out Wikileaks was going to publish their mails they had to take drastic measures because people were going to find out they bought up the DNC and stole the primaries from Sanders. So they(Jennifer Palmieri) started pushing the idea that the Russians stole the DNC mails and gave them to Wikileaks. It's outrageous that these two stories (stealing the election and manufacturing the Russiagate narrative ) don't even exist in the mainstream.
So the DNC under Clinton is the source for the Russiagate narrative and for the analysis of the theft(Crowdstrike), as well as for the Steele dossier.
And I'm sure Sanders knows it but can't do a thing about it.
That wasn't Kelvin's smartest moment. In general though with such quote there is too much eagerness to show them up as outright silly. Too much eagerness to fit a stereotype.
Take Thomson, his quote is as follows:
I think that means little more than that heavier than air flight was crackpot territory, no people he took seriously were working on it. It doesn't mean he objected to the idea.
I know the story of Wallace and Darwin and I'm no expert but I simply think it's wrong and I can at least point out an alternative version of history, see here https://www.theguardian.com/sc...
Such a bad example. Darwin delayed much longer than Einstein and it's doubtful whether anyone forced his hand at all.
He was a brilliant thinker who deserves full credit. Wallace didn't come close in any way.
Lorentz only considered inertial frames.
Classical physics does not depend on a reference frame as long as the limitspeed is infinite and until 1880 or so that was the assumption. I mean it was known that the lightspeed was finite but there was no reason to believe it was the limitspeed. You can turn newtonian mechanics into a covariant system for general coordinate systems but why would you do that? If you want to describe a merry go round , don't get all that overhead and use a shortcut.
Then with special relativity you could again decide to do the same: support general coordinate systems, make it work for accelerated observers. You could still classify it as special relativity.
It was Einstein who decided we couldn't avoid to formulate things in a covariant manner, and the example was that inside an elevator it was strictly impossible to distinguish between floating in space or plummetting towards the earth in free fall and and likewise there was no distinction between standing on the surface of the earth and being pulled in space.
Therefore the math had to be the same too.
I didn't know Maxwell ever said that but I know he was pretty damn smart and he knew about the montgolfiere, about catapults and about primitive rockets, so I'm thinking his quotes about flying will have been a bit more subtle than 'it's impossible for heavy things to fly'. There were no lightweight engines at the time that's for sure so technically it was not yet possible.
I can see two types of problems which do not require much investigation to know they exist.
One is the optimal case where information is realtime and possibly even anticipates group movement: if everyone uses one of these realtime routing apps, then traffic spreads out. It will be faster but it will use all the available routes. The other people, including the people trying to manage traffic and who want to strictly guide it along the path they want, simply don't like that.
A second is that there is no optimal case. If route A is stuck and everyone starts moving to route B 10 minutes away then the app does not anticipate that in 10 minutes route B will have a traffic jam. If you make the software smarter though, then it can anticipate. Not perfectly, but it can mitigate problem B and propose C while problem B isn't visible yet.
On the one hand it explains something important about what makes us work. On the other hand it looks more like a strategy paper for the PR industry to me. At least I'm sure that's how it will be treated and what are already the operating guidelines. Forget about truth, reputation is how you get people to do what you want them to do. One track has been to control the channels of authority, say the NYTimes. Another track is to get a grip on the low authority media like facebook.
Cool, there's an authority who has the same problem with AI I have:
https://xkcd.com/1968/
So I win. Not sure at what but that's secondary.
I don't know the subject of AI well, at least, I have no idea why it became such a hype suddenly (I know the nuclear arms subject and I think Musk doesn't know what he's talking about there) but I don't see why sentience should be an issue. I just imagine what could happen if software became much more powerful, more adaptive. Then it could give more power to a minority, then it could create viral epidemics that are harder to control. You don't need sentience to create problems that run out of control.
Right. I see I'll have to make a V2.0...