I used to think that it was a disease that came in 2 forms:
* Those born with a known genetic anomaly. (Type I) * Dumbfucks who can't stop stuffing their mouths with food. (Type II)
It turns out, though, that I was wrong; while it's true that there are a lot of dumbfucks out there, people don't really know what causes Type I diabetes—it just appears to have some kind of heritable quality to it. Yikes!
Regarding type II though- it's not just what food they eat. You can have two obese men of the same height and weight that eat a similar diet.
Man 1 has diabetes. Man 2 does not.
Both of them could probably lose the diabetes by losing weight so it's not Type I, but it isn't just from being obese either. Some people are more genetically predisposed to getting diabetes even if they are not necessarily of Type I.
Its not callous to point out our insane response. We have been on a war footing ever since. 3000 lives pales in comparison to the blood spent since 9/11
I'm curious how many we have "killed" in response to that 3,000. I really don't know if we've killed that many or less. Certainly we've impacted millions, some for the better, some for the worse.
So this is really a law signed by Obama and Trump is just enforcing the law. Makes it sound like Trump is the bad guy. Sorta like the border prisons.Trump just is enforcing existing law.
"Bad Guy" is subjective. IDing faces at airports is one thing; there is a legitimate risk of attack during air travel. I wouldn't agree to this technology being used almost anywhere else.
As long as government facial recognition and tracking doesn't become normalized and spread to other place it may not be so bad. If we start seeing this in shopping centers, and fuel stations, and cameras pointing down from the interstates- then we are truly in the surveillance state.
When did slashdot become a politics site where propaganda sources are allowed like salon? Np, we do not want this in our nerd news. Keep this crap on twitter.
There's been the occasional politics piece on Slashdot for at least a decade or more. This isn't new.
for the party the coined the term 'fake news' (and 'alternative facts'), the Republicans seem to generate more of it than the rest of the world combined.
That's like giving Apple credit for inventing the smart phone, or Edison for inviting the light bulb.
Trump may have popularized the expression "fake news", but it was already beginning to gain a foothold several years before he ran for President. He took a phrase he liked and ran with it.
"Alternative Facts" however- that's ALL the Trump Whitehouse, they came up with that one.
Yeah, now we can subscribe to 15 different streaming services that each have 1 title we're interested in. So much better than cable....
The best solution is to not sign up for Disney+ and CBS all Access; etc.
Help make those splinter sites fail! If you succeed, stuff returns to the main streaming sites. If you fail- meh, there's plenty to watch on Netflix/Hulu without signing up for all the extra splinter sites- you've saved yourself $360 a year.
So the world did turn 180 degrees while I wasn't looking...
Both parties are having a bit of an identity crisis at the moment.
Republicans are splitting between the traditional pro-business, pro-capitalism, small government Republicans and the more authoritarian, high-spending, big government protectionist Trumpist Republicans driven by populists.
Democrats are splitting into a Northern European, larger government style social democrat party also driven by populists and a "republican light" style group with people like Cory Booker who at one time in history could have been considered a moderate/fringe republican. Essentially they're splitting between the center and what would be considered the far left of American politics.
Splitting up companies under monopoly legislation doesn't really belong to either party or either ideology- I think it is more a symptom of populism's rise on both the left and the right.
It will be interesting to see how the parties fare 10 years from now and which wing takes over....I could easily see the current course of action causing the Democrats and Republicans to switch sides of the aisle again like happened once before. If Trump's populists retain control of the Republicans I can see them slowly shifting to the left- and if the Booker/Clinton pro-business/wall street side wins the democrats somehow beating the socialist populists in the democrat party I can see them slowly shifting to the right.
This. People have a choice when it comes to using Google, Amazon or Facebook -- and not to defend Facebook, but I don't know what breaking it up would accomplish, since for many people the only reason they're on Facebook is because that's where everyone else is (though I guess there's a good argument for breaking off WhatsApp and Instragram).
Facebook is the only one you could really legally make a case for. Google only has near-monopoly on searches, but even for that there is viable opposition- and you can't split a search engine into two.
Splitting off any of the other companies doesn't make sense because they don't have anything near a monopoly on any of their other companies.
Same with Amazon- they're not nearly a monopoly for ANYTHING.
Facebook on the other hand keeps buying up competitors and DOES have a near monopoly on Social Media. It's the only one that I could see any sort of legal excuse for splitting... but I'm against splitting it, even though I hate it.
Monopoly legislation is for common good- not for petty vendettas against companies you dislike. People need to be responsible.
Bernie Sanders is polling ahead of Warren right now. Warren is getting a lot of coaching and her on-camera persona is improving quite a bit.
Bernie doesn't seem likely to drop out though, unless he drops dead/sick.
Unfortunately neither have the appeal for independents and/or moderate republicans that don't like Trump so either of them winning would hand 2020 to Trump.
Google and Amazon have good and bad sides and might need some regulation,
Yes, regulation like being broken up.
Not liking a company is not a good reason to break up a monopoly- you need an actual reason.
Google it could be said has a near-monopoly on search results but there is no way to split that up. The only way to split Alphabet would be along lines like Waymo, Hardware, Search, and Software. Doing so would not solve the issue of monopoly in search. Google doesn't have a monopoly in any other area.
Amazon has a monopoly on... well nothing.
The only excuse to break any of these companies up is "I don't like them" or "they're too big"; neither of which are legal reasons to break a company up.
As a techie I know technology sometimes do freak up. No way I will let myself inside a self-driving car.
People make more mistakes than a well-written and tested application that is working within the scope it was designed for.
That's what worries me most about these "half-way-there" solutions. You do things enough for people to trust them and people's focus drifts. If you expect your car to do everything, you won't be prepared when it doesn't. I don't even like to use Cruise Control for that reason.
It seems that the screen was able to act at the speaker that you place next to your ear.
Interesting... I can't imagine that working very well. And if you need to pull up something whilst on a phone call- surely your fingers touching the screen would ruin the quality.
So the only possible way to even use this thing as a phone is with a separate blue tooth device? That's fine if you're anticipating a call, but a bit cumbersome if you're walking down main street and not hooked up.
This is moving the smart phone even further away from being a phone and more into being a PDA.
The problem for Facebook is the amount of personal data that is uploaded to Instagram is vastly less valuable.
Instagram accounts are for the most part just a username, some banal tag line, and a bunch of emojis along with the stream of lifestyle photos. Valuable, yes, but nowhere near the comprehensive personal data that Facebook users were uploading to their accounts.
With improvements to photo recognizing algorithms, those photos could become more valuable than text.
I bought a premium phone in 2016 (Galaxy S7) and was fine with it until it died on me.
After less than three years? What kind of PoS is that? In my family we own eight old phones, none of them Samsung, none of them premium, at least six of them more than three years old - and all of them still functional.
Typically it is the battery that goes first (which is a great thing about the phone he switched to, batteries are easily replaced by end user)
I think things like this are how the GIF pronunciation debate will finally be settled, we'll just have AI correct us all to use one definition until the other is forgotten.
Good luck having people not rage quit the app when being told to pronounce "GIF" the "wrong way".
I learnt a lot from Sim City, I know all cities on earth will inevitably get destroyed when the town planners get bored and call on all sorts of disasters to wipe the slate clean and start again.
Slashdot Mirror
I used to think that it was a disease that came in 2 forms:
* Those born with a known genetic anomaly. (Type I)
* Dumbfucks who can't stop stuffing their mouths with food. (Type II)
It turns out, though, that I was wrong; while it's true that there are a lot of dumbfucks out there, people don't really know what causes Type I diabetes—it just appears to have some kind of heritable quality to it. Yikes!
Regarding type II though- it's not just what food they eat.
You can have two obese men of the same height and weight that eat a similar diet.
Man 1 has diabetes. Man 2 does not.
Both of them could probably lose the diabetes by losing weight so it's not Type I, but it isn't just from being obese either. Some people are more genetically predisposed to getting diabetes even if they are not necessarily of Type I.
You forgot option 3: realize that the world is far safer than it's ever been and options 1 and 2 are paranoia stemming from hype over rare incidents.
How much of that is down to intelligence though? If our intelligence communities didn't do such a good job, how many 9/11s would there be?
How do you pay your rent/mortgage/ISP/insurance/IRS? You're toast.
You don't need a facebook account to pay your taxes. If you're paying taxes to someone over facebook you're probably being scammed. :p
Its not callous to point out our insane response. We have been on a war footing ever since. 3000 lives pales in comparison to the blood spent since 9/11
I'm curious how many we have "killed" in response to that 3,000. I really don't know if we've killed that many or less. Certainly we've impacted millions, some for the better, some for the worse.
"Only 3,000 people died on 9/11"?
What was it Stalin said?
"1 death is a tragedy, 1 million is a statistic," or something along those lines.
AC seems to think like Stalin.
So this is really a law signed by Obama and Trump is just enforcing the law. Makes it sound like Trump is the bad guy. Sorta like the border prisons.Trump just is enforcing existing law.
"Bad Guy" is subjective. IDing faces at airports is one thing; there is a legitimate risk of attack during air travel. I wouldn't agree to this technology being used almost anywhere else.
As long as government facial recognition and tracking doesn't become normalized and spread to other place it may not be so bad. If we start seeing this in shopping centers, and fuel stations, and cameras pointing down from the interstates- then we are truly in the surveillance state.
When did slashdot become a politics site where propaganda sources are allowed like salon? Np, we do not want this in our nerd news. Keep this crap on twitter.
There's been the occasional politics piece on Slashdot for at least a decade or more. This isn't new.
for the party the coined the term 'fake news' (and 'alternative facts'), the Republicans seem to generate more of it than the rest of the world combined.
That's like giving Apple credit for inventing the smart phone, or Edison for inviting the light bulb.
Trump may have popularized the expression "fake news", but it was already beginning to gain a foothold several years before he ran for President. He took a phrase he liked and ran with it.
"Alternative Facts" however- that's ALL the Trump Whitehouse, they came up with that one.
Yeah, now we can subscribe to 15 different streaming services that each have 1 title we're interested in. So much better than cable....
The best solution is to not sign up for Disney+ and CBS all Access; etc.
Help make those splinter sites fail! If you succeed, stuff returns to the main streaming sites. If you fail- meh, there's plenty to watch on Netflix/Hulu without signing up for all the extra splinter sites- you've saved yourself $360 a year.
Breaking up monopolies is socialist now?
So the world did turn 180 degrees while I wasn't looking...
Both parties are having a bit of an identity crisis at the moment.
Republicans are splitting between the traditional pro-business, pro-capitalism, small government Republicans and the more authoritarian, high-spending, big government protectionist Trumpist Republicans driven by populists.
Democrats are splitting into a Northern European, larger government style social democrat party also driven by populists and a "republican light" style group with people like Cory Booker who at one time in history could have been considered a moderate/fringe republican. Essentially they're splitting between the center and what would be considered the far left of American politics.
Splitting up companies under monopoly legislation doesn't really belong to either party or either ideology- I think it is more a symptom of populism's rise on both the left and the right.
It will be interesting to see how the parties fare 10 years from now and which wing takes over....I could easily see the current course of action causing the Democrats and Republicans to switch sides of the aisle again like happened once before. If Trump's populists retain control of the Republicans I can see them slowly shifting to the left- and if the Booker/Clinton pro-business/wall street side wins the democrats somehow beating the socialist populists in the democrat party I can see them slowly shifting to the right.
This. People have a choice when it comes to using Google, Amazon or Facebook -- and not to defend Facebook, but I don't know what breaking it up would accomplish, since for many people the only reason they're on Facebook is because that's where everyone else is (though I guess there's a good argument for breaking off WhatsApp and Instragram).
Facebook is the only one you could really legally make a case for. Google only has near-monopoly on searches, but even for that there is viable opposition- and you can't split a search engine into two.
Splitting off any of the other companies doesn't make sense because they don't have anything near a monopoly on any of their other companies.
Same with Amazon- they're not nearly a monopoly for ANYTHING.
Facebook on the other hand keeps buying up competitors and DOES have a near monopoly on Social Media. It's the only one that I could see any sort of legal excuse for splitting... but I'm against splitting it, even though I hate it.
Monopoly legislation is for common good- not for petty vendettas against companies you dislike. People need to be responsible.
Bernie Sanders is polling ahead of Warren right now. Warren is getting a lot of coaching and her on-camera persona is improving quite a bit.
Bernie doesn't seem likely to drop out though, unless he drops dead/sick.
Unfortunately neither have the appeal for independents and/or moderate republicans that don't like Trump so either of them winning would hand 2020 to Trump.
Google and Amazon have good and bad sides and might need some regulation,
Yes, regulation like being broken up.
Not liking a company is not a good reason to break up a monopoly- you need an actual reason.
Google it could be said has a near-monopoly on search results but there is no way to split that up. The only way to split Alphabet would be along lines like Waymo, Hardware, Search, and Software. Doing so would not solve the issue of monopoly in search. Google doesn't have a monopoly in any other area.
Amazon has a monopoly on... well nothing.
The only excuse to break any of these companies up is "I don't like them" or "they're too big"; neither of which are legal reasons to break a company up.
I really am curious to see who wins Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon. Who will control the future tech?
IBM?
Sinclair will re-emerge from the ashes and defeat them all.
As a techie I know technology sometimes do freak up. No way I will let myself inside a self-driving car.
People make more mistakes than a well-written and tested application that is working within the scope it was designed for.
That's what worries me most about these "half-way-there" solutions. You do things enough for people to trust them and people's focus drifts. If you expect your car to do everything, you won't be prepared when it doesn't. I don't even like to use Cruise Control for that reason.
It seems that the screen was able to act at the speaker that you place next to your ear.
Interesting... I can't imagine that working very well. And if you need to pull up something whilst on a phone call- surely your fingers touching the screen would ruin the quality.
So the only possible way to even use this thing as a phone is with a separate blue tooth device? That's fine if you're anticipating a call, but a bit cumbersome if you're walking down main street and not hooked up.
This is moving the smart phone even further away from being a phone and more into being a PDA.
If you need a real friend, I'm here.
I need a real friend!
The problem for Facebook is the amount of personal data that is uploaded to Instagram is vastly less valuable.
Instagram accounts are for the most part just a username, some banal tag line, and a bunch of emojis along with the stream of lifestyle photos. Valuable, yes, but nowhere near the comprehensive personal data that Facebook users were uploading to their accounts.
With improvements to photo recognizing algorithms, those photos could become more valuable than text.
People still use Facebook?
I didn't use Facebook before it was cool to not use Facebook.
I bought a premium phone in 2016 (Galaxy S7) and was fine with it until it died on me.
After less than three years? What kind of PoS is that? In my family we own eight old phones, none of them Samsung, none of them premium, at least six of them more than three years old - and all of them still functional.
Typically it is the battery that goes first (which is a great thing about the phone he switched to, batteries are easily replaced by end user)
Recently the second patient was cured.
Hopefully there will be more and more as time goes by- but this doesn't seem to be a technique that can be done en masse yet.
To be honest, I get the feeling it might be exhausting to live in a house that's working harder than I am.
You must not be one of my coworkers.
I think things like this are how the GIF pronunciation debate will finally be settled, we'll just have AI correct us all to use one definition until the other is forgotten.
Good luck having people not rage quit the app when being told to pronounce "GIF" the "wrong way".
I learnt a lot from Sim City, I know all cities on earth will inevitably get destroyed when the town planners get bored and call on all sorts of disasters to wipe the slate clean and start again.