You mean that yuor industrial robot collects the raw metal, cuts it into the right size, selects bolts from a drawer, assembles handles, paints the panels, and installs the air vents in a car? Not bloody likely. Each robot is in a fixed position doing a very specific part of the task.
Now, I don't have a robot which collects or sorts my clothes any more than an industrial robot removes nuts from a shipping crate and sorts them by size into a hopper to be used to assemble something. But machines do have automatic actuators which are controlled by microprocessors to complete the specific task they have been designed for.
Whomever thinks this is a lot of money for a nationwide transportation network should definitely not look into what it cost to building interstate highway system (About $500B in todays dollars) or the US airport system (we spend $20 Billion *every year* on airports in the US - 80% of that on the 67 largest - just in capital costs).
Could they actually do it for that little money? That's the bigger question.
The first electric programmable computer was installed in 1943, and now there pretty ubiquitous. Give robots another decade and they'll catch up.
Or you could say they're already here. I have a robot which washes and drys my dishes, another that washes my clothes, two that make me ice. Several which play video content. One which opens and closes my garage door. Heck, they're everywhere.
You might be surprised that this is the extent of the ability for a great number of workers out there. It's easy to forget when you're in an all-white collar environment that there is a large portion of the population which has close to zero independent problem solving ability, and an overlapping portion which has almost zero reliability. As someone who deals with these people on a regular basis, I can tell you that they are some of the nicest people I know, and yet sometime during their lifetime there will be a robot which can do their job better and more reliably at a fraction of what it costs to feed, clothe and house them.
What is this, some grade school hack? If you produce more stuff with the same number of people, you've just told me that you've used robots to replace workers. Because if you can make and sell more stuff, then you can hire more people to make that stuff. Hiring robots instead of people costs humans jobs, plain and simple. I'd also be interested in seeing if "robots" included self-service terminals or whether they just count robots that move and build things.
It would be one thing if we were losing population and there weren't enough workers to fill the demand, but there are 80,000,000 more people in the world every year, and we keep making more.
Monitoring wildfires is probably a better use so that resources can be deployed more efficiently. Sending drones out as forward recon for significant police calls might be valuable.
With the right back end, it could allow for regular low level photography of the entire county so that their property tax records can be sync'd with the actual # and size of structures on land, but that's probably no something the population would be interested in (and it can be done with sat photos for less).
Besides, I would presume that each drone in flight would need at least one operator - which means at least 12 positions in order to operate them simultaneously. Even if you're on a schedule and most are "on call", that's half a million a year (prob closer to 3/4 million including g&a and overhead) in addition to the cost of the units and hangers and an airstrip.
7.5 is about perfect for me on an ongoing basis. I'm just as productive / alert after 6 for periods of a 5-10 days, but then it starts catching up with me. My wife needs 9, and anything less than 7 for more than a single night is asking for trouble.
The military has studied this quite a bit, and there has been no way to achieve a statistically significant reduction in sleep requirements over long term studies.
So it's not just about data. You could argue that the data should be inaccessible, but this prevents people with large app libraries from being out cash in the event they lose their code. I have more than one friend who has no idea what their wifi password is - they set it up initially and then lost their random password. I suspect this is now becoming a problem with Apple - it's one thing to set up 2 factor, its another to remember what you did with the recovery key after an extended period of time. And Apple is about holding their technologically-unsavvy customers hands, not hanging them out to dry when they do something stupid (as karmic as that might be).
My first thought was that this might fix all those MAC gymnastics needed to get Chromecast working on in a hotel room - at least cheaper than bringing a second router/AP to plug into the hardwired outlet..
I suppose there are a few 5 pound laptops out there for power users that still use the 2.5" form factor, but they're disappearing rapidly. Things are moving fast in the SSD storage area and many are moving to the M.2 format. Though I suppose any increase in density is good as it means higher cap small format drives and cheaper options*.
*so that Microsoft and Apple can increase their profit margins on storage. The great thing about impossible to open PCs is that they can charge whatever the fuck they want for storage no matter how cheap it gets.
Actually, they're not. The ads which were shown were for executive coaching services, not actual job advertisements. Other examples, which were not noted explicitly in the article, were identified as "not statistically significant."
It seems insidious when Google is appearing to favor men over women for high priced jobs, so lets look at a different advertiser - Me.
A few years ago I was the music director for an all male chorus in a neighboring town. Every year we have a "guest night" where we invite people to come and join us, sing a couple a songs, and hope to get new men to audition and join our group. Advertising dollars are tight, so rather than ask Facebook to show our ad to everyone within 25 miles of our rehearsal spot, we asked just for men. Pretty simple, really.
Google isn't really "choosing" who gets served ads as much as advertisers do. They ask for specific demographics, and the Google engine matches users to those demographics. If you want to serve your ads to males between 35 and 50 with an estimated gross income above $150k. It's not detailed *how* they made sure the browsing was identical.
I'd be curious what the results would be if you set up the profiles and surfed, but had only female subjects running "male" profiles and visa versa.
It looks chunky enough it should have had room for at least an optional extra battery to last more than 3-4 hours under real use. And, seriously, how can you make a tablet without a real digitizer these days? Why must I use a crayon or my finger to draw figures or edit photos in tablet mode? (Don't even get me started with that Adonis bullshit - been there, done that, not worth a penny much less $100).
Do you have enough contacts to start free-lancing/troubleshooting/consulting? If you can swing it financially (and it sound like you can), you might find it's a better option in the long run. It might take 12-24 months before you're pulling even a basic salary, but it can be both rewarding and liberating.
Or you make your own job. You become an independent consultant. Sell yourself and build clients.
As a point of reference, my accountant said that if you can make it for 18 months and start producing a solid income stream, you're likely to keep it going for as long as you like (major market force shifts notwithstading). I'm in year 12, fwiw, and it's got it's ups and downs, but it would take a *lot* to trade it for a 9-5 office job again.
You, sir, are no libertarian. Anyone can give things that don't affect them the finger, but the true test is if you can eschew logic even for things you DO care about.
So, for farming, the best libertarian course of action would be to allow the market to run its course. The smart farmers will grow a variety of crops, neither making a killing nor perishing. Some farmers will guess and go all in on the next big thing and we'll have a few billionaire bulb farmers from time to time, and a bunch of people will lose everything and become destitute, willing to work for the smart farmers for a fraction of what they're worth - a capitalistic utopia.
The current system really is just the government fucking with the natural, capitalistic order and stealing money from the common citizen to prop up the stupid farmers. A real libertarian would realize that.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, don't really have a lengthy comment, it's all in the subject.
Really?
You mean that yuor industrial robot collects the raw metal, cuts it into the right size, selects bolts from a drawer, assembles handles, paints the panels, and installs the air vents in a car? Not bloody likely. Each robot is in a fixed position doing a very specific part of the task.
Now, I don't have a robot which collects or sorts my clothes any more than an industrial robot removes nuts from a shipping crate and sorts them by size into a hopper to be used to assemble something. But machines do have automatic actuators which are controlled by microprocessors to complete the specific task they have been designed for.
Whomever thinks this is a lot of money for a nationwide transportation network should definitely not look into what it cost to building interstate highway system (About $500B in todays dollars) or the US airport system (we spend $20 Billion *every year* on airports in the US - 80% of that on the 67 largest - just in capital costs).
Could they actually do it for that little money? That's the bigger question.
The first electric programmable computer was installed in 1943, and now there pretty ubiquitous. Give robots another decade and they'll catch up.
Or you could say they're already here. I have a robot which washes and drys my dishes, another that washes my clothes, two that make me ice. Several which play video content. One which opens and closes my garage door. Heck, they're everywhere.
"crappy, boring, mind-numbingly repetitive tasks"
You might be surprised that this is the extent of the ability for a great number of workers out there. It's easy to forget when you're in an all-white collar environment that there is a large portion of the population which has close to zero independent problem solving ability, and an overlapping portion which has almost zero reliability. As someone who deals with these people on a regular basis, I can tell you that they are some of the nicest people I know, and yet sometime during their lifetime there will be a robot which can do their job better and more reliably at a fraction of what it costs to feed, clothe and house them.
What is this, some grade school hack? If you produce more stuff with the same number of people, you've just told me that you've used robots to replace workers. Because if you can make and sell more stuff, then you can hire more people to make that stuff. Hiring robots instead of people costs humans jobs, plain and simple. I'd also be interested in seeing if "robots" included self-service terminals or whether they just count robots that move and build things.
It would be one thing if we were losing population and there weren't enough workers to fill the demand, but there are 80,000,000 more people in the world every year, and we keep making more.
Yeah, it's a very poor example.
Monitoring wildfires is probably a better use so that resources can be deployed more efficiently. Sending drones out as forward recon for significant police calls might be valuable.
With the right back end, it could allow for regular low level photography of the entire county so that their property tax records can be sync'd with the actual # and size of structures on land, but that's probably no something the population would be interested in (and it can be done with sat photos for less).
Besides, I would presume that each drone in flight would need at least one operator - which means at least 12 positions in order to operate them simultaneously. Even if you're on a schedule and most are "on call", that's half a million a year (prob closer to 3/4 million including g&a and overhead) in addition to the cost of the units and hangers and an airstrip.
So if it would have cost $120,000 to litigate, the software company will lease you the code for an $80,000 per-dispute fee.
Somehow, I think the bloodsucking will simply change parasites.
No sense in missing an opportunity to get those lazy Americans a few extra hours of productivity, amirite?
7.5 is about perfect for me on an ongoing basis. I'm just as productive / alert after 6 for periods of a 5-10 days, but then it starts catching up with me. My wife needs 9, and anything less than 7 for more than a single night is asking for trouble.
The military has studied this quite a bit, and there has been no way to achieve a statistically significant reduction in sleep requirements over long term studies.
FTFS: "lose access forever to purchases..."
So it's not just about data. You could argue that the data should be inaccessible, but this prevents people with large app libraries from being out cash in the event they lose their code. I have more than one friend who has no idea what their wifi password is - they set it up initially and then lost their random password. I suspect this is now becoming a problem with Apple - it's one thing to set up 2 factor, its another to remember what you did with the recovery key after an extended period of time. And Apple is about holding their technologically-unsavvy customers hands, not hanging them out to dry when they do something stupid (as karmic as that might be).
My first thought was that this might fix all those MAC gymnastics needed to get Chromecast working on in a hotel room - at least cheaper than bringing a second router/AP to plug into the hardwired outlet..
I suppose there are a few 5 pound laptops out there for power users that still use the 2.5" form factor, but they're disappearing rapidly. Things are moving fast in the SSD storage area and many are moving to the M.2 format. Though I suppose any increase in density is good as it means higher cap small format drives and cheaper options*.
*so that Microsoft and Apple can increase their profit margins on storage. The great thing about impossible to open PCs is that they can charge whatever the fuck they want for storage no matter how cheap it gets.
Actually, they're not. The ads which were shown were for executive coaching services, not actual job advertisements. Other examples, which were not noted explicitly in the article, were identified as "not statistically significant."
It seems insidious when Google is appearing to favor men over women for high priced jobs, so lets look at a different advertiser - Me.
A few years ago I was the music director for an all male chorus in a neighboring town. Every year we have a "guest night" where we invite people to come and join us, sing a couple a songs, and hope to get new men to audition and join our group. Advertising dollars are tight, so rather than ask Facebook to show our ad to everyone within 25 miles of our rehearsal spot, we asked just for men. Pretty simple, really.
Google isn't really "choosing" who gets served ads as much as advertisers do. They ask for specific demographics, and the Google engine matches users to those demographics. If you want to serve your ads to males between 35 and 50 with an estimated gross income above $150k. It's not detailed *how* they made sure the browsing was identical.
I'd be curious what the results would be if you set up the profiles and surfed, but had only female subjects running "male" profiles and visa versa.
It looks chunky enough it should have had room for at least an optional extra battery to last more than 3-4 hours under real use. And, seriously, how can you make a tablet without a real digitizer these days? Why must I use a crayon or my finger to draw figures or edit photos in tablet mode? (Don't even get me started with that Adonis bullshit - been there, done that, not worth a penny much less $100).
Do you have enough contacts to start free-lancing/troubleshooting/consulting? If you can swing it financially (and it sound like you can), you might find it's a better option in the long run. It might take 12-24 months before you're pulling even a basic salary, but it can be both rewarding and liberating.
Or you make your own job. You become an independent consultant. Sell yourself and build clients.
As a point of reference, my accountant said that if you can make it for 18 months and start producing a solid income stream, you're likely to keep it going for as long as you like (major market force shifts notwithstading). I'm in year 12, fwiw, and it's got it's ups and downs, but it would take a *lot* to trade it for a 9-5 office job again.
You, sir, are no libertarian. Anyone can give things that don't affect them the finger, but the true test is if you can eschew logic even for things you DO care about.
So, for farming, the best libertarian course of action would be to allow the market to run its course. The smart farmers will grow a variety of crops, neither making a killing nor perishing. Some farmers will guess and go all in on the next big thing and we'll have a few billionaire bulb farmers from time to time, and a bunch of people will lose everything and become destitute, willing to work for the smart farmers for a fraction of what they're worth - a capitalistic utopia.
The current system really is just the government fucking with the natural, capitalistic order and stealing money from the common citizen to prop up the stupid farmers. A real libertarian would realize that.
That's because they're your friends; it is intrinsic to Facebook.
What you see on FB reflects the kind of people you hang out with. My feed has been filled with God damned rainbows for two weeks.
Not that there's anything wrong with that...
I mean, if you're going to go full religious nutjob, might was well make your own country.
Now it's $48,200...
Now it's $46,900...
Now it's $45,700... ...