Everyone should live in a commune for a year in college or there abouts. Naturally, maintain your studies etc but much of the romance of utopian economic models is that people don't really viscerally understand them... understand the pros, the cons, the function, and the dysfunction.
Live in that context and the attraction of the greener grass on the other side of the fence loses its luster.
A problem with liberal arts is that whatever its merits, it frequently isn't applied.
Consider medicine... we value people with medical degrees, right? But what if you don't use it? I mean, you don't do anything with it at all.
It is all well and good to say that some CEOs in tech were able to use it to help their product design. But that is a very obscure and rarefied context. What about everyone else in the company?
Ultimately, you're going to be left arguing it does in "mysterious ways"... that there are subtle influences that help all sorts of things in ways that you can't really prove one way or the other.
You could do that with theology though as well... that's where this argument goes.
And I could show you lots of company heads from times gone by that said as much about their faith in God or whatever as helping them with their company.
I'm not disparaging liberal arts, rather I'm suggesting that they take a greater interest in applying themselves. Instead of going always for this "holistic person" concept, they should look at how language can help an individual... how art and history and philosophy, etc can help.
I'm not saying don't teach roughly the same thing. I'm saying teach it in a different way so that it has a better chance of being used.
Because if it isn't used, it is useless. The most amazing machine for doing whatever has zero value if it isn't used. The most amazing information about whatever is useless if it isn't used.
We have shell commands which allows very simple scripted control of existing text compatible programs.
We also have programs like AutoIt that allows people to create programs that effectively control and manipulate stuff in an automated way.
Now you can say this is just automation and scripting. But your module concept is the same thing. The modules are effectively mini-programs that you're scripting together in some organized way.
Proper programs will not be stitched together modules. And if that is what you want, then use the scripting.
... a big issue especially in the US is that we don't burn our trash anymore. Now to be clear when I advocate for burning trash, I'm advocating for burning it at a very high temperature of around 3000 degrees as they typically do in Western Europe.
This statement gets a knee jerk reaction from people that don't understand waste disposal. To get around some of the initial assumptions, I'll point out that burning trash is actually a big part of waste disposal in Europe and used to be a big part of waste disposal in the US... though when we did it, it was at a low temperature.
We used to burn our trash at the temperature of an open flame. Very basic. And most Americans actually used to burn their trash AT HOME and a big part of waste pick up was collecting ashes. In my grand father's day everyone would burn trash at home, dump the ashes in bins, and the garbage truck would come every OTHER week to get it.
This practice was believed to contribute to poor air quality so burning trash was discouraged in the US. Today we don't burn it at home and it isn't burned at the land fill. It is instead compacted and basically mummified in land fills. That whole thing about some things lasting ten years or more before they break down is because they're packed into airless, lightless, watertight piles where organisms can't break down the trash easily.
An alternative is burning the trash at a very high temperature of about 3000 degrees where the combustion is much more complete and you don't get many complex emissions. Generally at that temperature you don't get much from hydrocarbon trash besides CO2 and water vapor. Most toxic compounds don't survive that temperature. Heavy metals etc remain an issue but the idea is to bury the ashes so it doesn't really matter. Also, it should be noted just for clarity that that is a zero sum game. You're going to have that stuff in the trash regardless.
Ash takes up less space than compacted non-burned garbage. If properly filtered... as in removing the trash that contains things like heavy metals... you can use the ashes for fertilizer. You can also generate electricity. In a few Western European countries they actually IMPORT trash from other countries as fuel for domestic power production from waste disposal.
Now, I know some people are concerned about CO2. Well, that's another zero sum game because EVEN if you don't burn the trash and instead just mummify it in the ground, it will still break down over 50 years or so... and that process will release pretty much everything that would have been released by burning it on day one. Mathematically, over time the difference between burning it on the day and having it release the gas over 50 years is the same. If you add to the pile every day and it releases the gas as material is added to it a little bit over time... then the emissions per day ultimately will equal the same as the emissions if you burn it. It is a zero sum game.
Only if you land fill the compacted trash you generally don't get power out of it and even if you get some natural gas it is much less than what you get if you burn it... it also takes up way more space... and it is much harder to recycle the waste into compost and fertilizer.
What I am saying is that we should be burning the trash at 3000 degrees. All the negatives are shared by any of the other alternatives and thus are irrelevant because we can't avoid those consequences. We do however get more net positives.
Good, it means you can tell the difference between what is real and what is not. The proles saying it is their humanity that forces them to treat an obvious construct as if it is a living feeling being... well, they're just elevating childishness to a virtue.
Exactly, and imagine them as tools of social control and programming.
You integrate them into social networks as pseudo people... and then by manipulating their reactions you and apply peer pressure on all the social groups subtly.
It doesn't merit my compassion. I reserve that for things that feel.
compassion for what amounts to a tape recording that has no feeling behind it.
You might as well have compassion for a piece of paper that says "love me".
Have compassion for people and in some cases animals. But I have no compassion for that which feels nothing.
The machine in this case feels nothing. Its emotions are scripted.
Having compassion for something that does not feel has no justification besides small children playing make believe. And even then most children are frankly more aware than you apparently. Ever seen a girl burn her doll's hair off etc? They know the dolls are not people or animals... they know they are things. And as things... their toys... they can be mutilated without that signifying psychopathy.
Your defense of this overwrought sentimentality run amok is a mistake. This is not a position you want to defend. It will only lead to you appearing foolish.
No, this sentence requires warlock powers: "The people that the psych's are interested in are the people on the ends - the people who cannot figure out that it wasn't a living thing, and those who do not care - like you."
Here you'll just say its obvious or some other sad dodge. Regardless, since you've decided to take the sad tactic of presuming to be an internet psychologist... this discussion is over.
Pretending to a psychologist to throw out insults or some other expert authority... sans both that expertise and the requisite knowledge to even apply such a skill if you had it... is pretty typical.
Nothing productive to be had once some asshat stoops to this... so, we're done.
So you've apparently developed X Man mind reading powers.
Another internet psychic.
You don't know me. You likely are unqualified to make professional estimations of any merit even if you did know me... the compounded absurdity of your pretense is frankly just a "self goal".
Save your silly self defeating insults for someone simple enough for them to work.
The gullible prole puts his neck into the slave yoke and is bread like livestock.
If you are so gullible and easily manipulated that a crude computer program can manipulate your behavior by pulling on your emotional heart strings... then society probably doesn't class you as an adult.
You may have car insurance and pay taxes... but your coworkers know... and your family knows.
When you're manipulated into feeling empathy for a computer program with no legitimate pain or conception of suffering... then you're doing what small children do when they feel compassion for a stuffed animal.
Anyone that doesn't grow out of this cannot be classed as an adult.
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone should live in a commune for a year in college or there abouts. Naturally, maintain your studies etc but much of the romance of utopian economic models is that people don't really viscerally understand them... understand the pros, the cons, the function, and the dysfunction.
Live in that context and the attraction of the greener grass on the other side of the fence loses its luster.
An example of someone that has no civic interest in the matter.
You're part of the reason why an obvious problem doesn't get solved. Congrats, you're cancer.
Everyone knows a million ways to fix this and nearly all of them are better than what we're currently doing.
A problem with liberal arts is that whatever its merits, it frequently isn't applied.
Consider medicine... we value people with medical degrees, right? But what if you don't use it? I mean, you don't do anything with it at all.
It is all well and good to say that some CEOs in tech were able to use it to help their product design. But that is a very obscure and rarefied context. What about everyone else in the company?
Ultimately, you're going to be left arguing it does in "mysterious ways"... that there are subtle influences that help all sorts of things in ways that you can't really prove one way or the other.
You could do that with theology though as well... that's where this argument goes.
And I could show you lots of company heads from times gone by that said as much about their faith in God or whatever as helping them with their company.
I'm not disparaging liberal arts, rather I'm suggesting that they take a greater interest in applying themselves. Instead of going always for this "holistic person" concept, they should look at how language can help an individual... how art and history and philosophy, etc can help.
I'm not saying don't teach roughly the same thing. I'm saying teach it in a different way so that it has a better chance of being used.
Because if it isn't used, it is useless. The most amazing machine for doing whatever has zero value if it isn't used. The most amazing information about whatever is useless if it isn't used.
It MUST be used or it is useless.
We have shell commands which allows very simple scripted control of existing text compatible programs.
We also have programs like AutoIt that allows people to create programs that effectively control and manipulate stuff in an automated way.
Now you can say this is just automation and scripting. But your module concept is the same thing. The modules are effectively mini-programs that you're scripting together in some organized way.
Proper programs will not be stitched together modules. And if that is what you want, then use the scripting.
You might as well suggest that people could master painting or mechanical engineering or something without putting in a time investment.
I'm all for getting more people to code. I'm all for an introductory language for new coders.
But when it comes to the big league heavy lifting coding, it is going to be complicated because it is complicated.
It isn't complicated because some "nerds" made it complicated. It was complicated before anyone coded at all. It is inherently complicated.
... a big issue especially in the US is that we don't burn our trash anymore. Now to be clear when I advocate for burning trash, I'm advocating for burning it at a very high temperature of around 3000 degrees as they typically do in Western Europe.
This statement gets a knee jerk reaction from people that don't understand waste disposal. To get around some of the initial assumptions, I'll point out that burning trash is actually a big part of waste disposal in Europe and used to be a big part of waste disposal in the US... though when we did it, it was at a low temperature.
We used to burn our trash at the temperature of an open flame. Very basic. And most Americans actually used to burn their trash AT HOME and a big part of waste pick up was collecting ashes. In my grand father's day everyone would burn trash at home, dump the ashes in bins, and the garbage truck would come every OTHER week to get it.
This practice was believed to contribute to poor air quality so burning trash was discouraged in the US. Today we don't burn it at home and it isn't burned at the land fill. It is instead compacted and basically mummified in land fills. That whole thing about some things lasting ten years or more before they break down is because they're packed into airless, lightless, watertight piles where organisms can't break down the trash easily.
An alternative is burning the trash at a very high temperature of about 3000 degrees where the combustion is much more complete and you don't get many complex emissions. Generally at that temperature you don't get much from hydrocarbon trash besides CO2 and water vapor. Most toxic compounds don't survive that temperature. Heavy metals etc remain an issue but the idea is to bury the ashes so it doesn't really matter. Also, it should be noted just for clarity that that is a zero sum game. You're going to have that stuff in the trash regardless.
Ash takes up less space than compacted non-burned garbage. If properly filtered... as in removing the trash that contains things like heavy metals... you can use the ashes for fertilizer. You can also generate electricity. In a few Western European countries they actually IMPORT trash from other countries as fuel for domestic power production from waste disposal.
Now, I know some people are concerned about CO2. Well, that's another zero sum game because EVEN if you don't burn the trash and instead just mummify it in the ground, it will still break down over 50 years or so... and that process will release pretty much everything that would have been released by burning it on day one. Mathematically, over time the difference between burning it on the day and having it release the gas over 50 years is the same. If you add to the pile every day and it releases the gas as material is added to it a little bit over time... then the emissions per day ultimately will equal the same as the emissions if you burn it. It is a zero sum game.
Only if you land fill the compacted trash you generally don't get power out of it and even if you get some natural gas it is much less than what you get if you burn it... it also takes up way more space... and it is much harder to recycle the waste into compost and fertilizer.
What I am saying is that we should be burning the trash at 3000 degrees. All the negatives are shared by any of the other alternatives and thus are irrelevant because we can't avoid those consequences. We do however get more net positives.
Good, it means you can tell the difference between what is real and what is not. The proles saying it is their humanity that forces them to treat an obvious construct as if it is a living feeling being... well, they're just elevating childishness to a virtue.
Subject conflation.
Debugging logic error...
Subject which resists manipulation is "me" or the human.
Subject which does not have feelings is "the robot".
Continuing debug...
Variable conflation...
"AI" (Artificial intelligence) = Sapient construct
Example "robot" in this context = scripted movements and recorded sound in response to predicted stimuli
AI = / = Example robot.
QUERY // Does entity "Pem" possess a communications protocol that permits direct mind to mind communication?
IF YES, then does "Pem" have access to mind "Karmashock"?
Y/N?
SPECULATION: "Pem" does not have mind reading powers.
Speculative conclusion: "Pem" does not know psychology of entity "karmashock". "pem" is in error. Telepathic hardware not detected... Failure.
Exactly, and imagine them as tools of social control and programming.
You integrate them into social networks as pseudo people... and then by manipulating their reactions you and apply peer pressure on all the social groups subtly.
It doesn't merit my compassion. I reserve that for things that feel.
compassion for what amounts to a tape recording that has no feeling behind it.
You might as well have compassion for a piece of paper that says "love me".
Have compassion for people and in some cases animals. But I have no compassion for that which feels nothing.
The machine in this case feels nothing. Its emotions are scripted.
Having compassion for something that does not feel has no justification besides small children playing make believe. And even then most children are frankly more aware than you apparently. Ever seen a girl burn her doll's hair off etc? They know the dolls are not people or animals... they know they are things. And as things... their toys... they can be mutilated without that signifying psychopathy.
Your defense of this overwrought sentimentality run amok is a mistake. This is not a position you want to defend. It will only lead to you appearing foolish.
A sucker is born every minute but I've rarely seen so many people in a thread elevate being a sucker to a virtue.
Empathy for an artificial construct that feels nothing?
Do you feel for a doll of cotton and plastic that says "ma ma"?
Unless you're a small child, I should hope not.
You think Thomas Jefferson once explained what a robot was etc would fall prey to what amounts to a doll saying "ma ma"?
You have a very low opinion of the founding fathers.
No, this sentence requires warlock powers:
"The people that the psych's are interested in are the people on the ends - the people who cannot figure out that it wasn't a living thing, and those who do not care - like you."
Here you'll just say its obvious or some other sad dodge. Regardless, since you've decided to take the sad tactic of presuming to be an internet psychologist... this discussion is over.
Pretending to a psychologist to throw out insults or some other expert authority... sans both that expertise and the requisite knowledge to even apply such a skill if you had it... is pretty typical.
Nothing productive to be had once some asshat stoops to this... so, we're done.
Good day, sir.
You're not as mysterious as you think.
So you've apparently developed X Man mind reading powers.
Another internet psychic.
You don't know me. You likely are unqualified to make professional estimations of any merit even if you did know me... the compounded absurdity of your pretense is frankly just a "self goal".
Save your silly self defeating insults for someone simple enough for them to work.
You conflated not being manipulated by a computer program with empathy.
You will be a good slave. Your logic is weak and you lack the control to defend yourself from manipulation.
You will serve well.
The gullible prole puts his neck into the slave yoke and is bread like livestock.
If you are so gullible and easily manipulated that a crude computer program can manipulate your behavior by pulling on your emotional heart strings... then society probably doesn't class you as an adult.
You may have car insurance and pay taxes... but your coworkers know... and your family knows.
And now I know.
You conflated not being manipulated by a computer program with psychopathy.
You will be a good slave. Your logic is weak and you lack the control to defend yourself from manipulation.
You will serve well.
You conflated being gullible enough to be manipulated by a computer program with having compassion.
You will be a good slave. Your logic is weak and you lack the control to defend yourself from manipulation.
You will serve well.
When you're manipulated into feeling empathy for a computer program with no legitimate pain or conception of suffering... then you're doing what small children do when they feel compassion for a stuffed animal.
Anyone that doesn't grow out of this cannot be classed as an adult.
"Appreciate there are people who refuse to kill rattlesnakes."
Darwin is making a list, checking it twice...
You conflated not being manipulated by a computer program with being a sociopath.
You will be a good slave. Your logic is weak and you lack the control to defend yourself from manipulation.
You will serve well.
You conflated not being manipulated by a computer program with not having viable social cohesion.
You will be a good slave. Your logic is weak and you lack the control to defend yourself from manipulation.
You will serve well.