There is a significant difference between "killing some jobs", and "killing all jobs". When the latter happens, we will see capitalism as never before: starting with two empty hands is not very easy if no one wants anything done. If you allow me to go out on a limb, seeing the increasing youth unemployment makes me believe we are already pretty far down the path of making workers redundant and useless.
When the OS requests the BIOS to flash itself, the old bios should check that the new one has a correct public key signature from the manufacturer. Three could be a physical switch on the mobo for (the tiny minority of) people who wanted to use an unsigned bios.
My proposal: Make trading a turn based game instead of real time game. Bids/Asks are matched once every, say 5 seconds. At end of turn, order book data and made orders are made public.
It is important to take a stance on issues like this, because if companies didn't get bad press and less sales when they are up to no good, they have no incentive not to.
The policies on games you don't play will soon come to games you do
Exactly what do you even mean when you say blame? Should she pay damages to her self? In order for the situation to become interesting, we have to have someone who can blame her for something. What if she lost someone else's property? What about her insurance company?
I think that yes, these parties have a right to blame her for her negligence and carelessness. Needless to say, this doesn't make the robber any less responsible. I think the error you make is that the blame must sum up to 100%. I would say that the robber is 100% to blame, and she is 10% to blame.
"Blaming people for taking risks is a convenience, not a respectable moral standpoint - we all take risks."
The issue is not whether people take risks or not, it is how big those risks are.
It is possible that the death of your dog affects your life more than the death of 10k random people you never knew, even IRL. Ever thought about that?
Imagine a logic bomb, or rootkit which one morning, during rush hour, causes everyone to accelereate to top speed, and steers randomly. Entire productive population of a country wiped out just like that.
It would take decades for that country to recover
Slashdot Mirror
There is a significant difference between "killing some jobs", and "killing all jobs". When the latter happens, we will see capitalism as never before: starting with two empty hands is not very easy if no one wants anything done. If you allow me to go out on a limb, seeing the increasing youth unemployment makes me believe we are already pretty far down the path of making workers redundant and useless.
When the OS requests the BIOS to flash itself, the old bios should check that the new one has a correct public key signature from the manufacturer. Three could be a physical switch on the mobo for (the tiny minority of) people who wanted to use an unsigned bios.
A car that can only drive 50km/h is so slow it wouldn't even be allowed on all roads.
My proposal: Make trading a turn based game instead of real time game. Bids/Asks are matched once every, say 5 seconds. At end of turn, order book data and made orders are made public.
In some situations: Rewrite it silently
Mine goes to 11
Why couldn't they just whitelist the most critical, known-legit, certs instead?
It is not unreasonable at all. People perform better at IQ tests if they are offered a financial reward for instance.
Really? Anecdotic proof on my slashdot? Surely it is not the existence, but the prevalence of the phenomenon that is interesting
Your points are irrelevant and your anti-intellectualism unappealing
Becau.... I see what you did there!
It is important to take a stance on issues like this, because if companies didn't get bad press and less sales when they are up to no good, they have no incentive not to. The policies on games you don't play will soon come to games you do
Exactly what do you even mean when you say blame? Should she pay damages to her self? In order for the situation to become interesting, we have to have someone who can blame her for something. What if she lost someone else's property? What about her insurance company? I think that yes, these parties have a right to blame her for her negligence and carelessness. Needless to say, this doesn't make the robber any less responsible. I think the error you make is that the blame must sum up to 100%. I would say that the robber is 100% to blame, and she is 10% to blame. "Blaming people for taking risks is a convenience, not a respectable moral standpoint - we all take risks." The issue is not whether people take risks or not, it is how big those risks are.
It is possible that the death of your dog affects your life more than the death of 10k random people you never knew, even IRL. Ever thought about that?
The conspiracy goes deeper than I thought!
Or maybe, they WANTED exactly this to happen. They come out looking good to the people they want to sell to.
It'sn't impossible that it did help. Since names contain information about gender, class and race it could definitely influence this kind of decision.
In all seriousness, the world knows how to deal with serial killers, but would be stumped by parallel ones
Imagine a logic bomb, or rootkit which one morning, during rush hour, causes everyone to accelereate to top speed, and steers randomly. Entire productive population of a country wiped out just like that. It would take decades for that country to recover
David D Burns is master troll.
If I spend money on my friend, and he spends money on me, everyone wins!
This is easily doable already with facebook social graph api