All devices will tend to use more OSS and be less locked down, because it's a potential well in terms of market competition (less investment, longer duration, better image,...). The gradient may be smooth now (and has been close to 0 in the past) but in the long term the world will be mainly OSS.
Re:I'm reminded of the EU referendum in Ireland
on
Bye ACTA, Hello CETA
·
· Score: 2
France was way more efficient at this. The French voted against the referendum, but former president Sarkozy decided to sign the treaty anyway...
No it's not exactly the case, and you gave a perfect example right after. Are you advancing the civilization by being more efficient at your job thanks to a tool you don't understand? I don't think so. You are surely advancing the profits of your company, or your own profit if the paycheck at the end of the month is all you are looking for. But for the somewhat positive evolution of of masses behavior that you named civilization advancement, it's another story.
Civilization changes due to a deeper comprehension of the universe, be it mathematics, sciences or psychology, sociology or whatever else. This better comprehension allows us as a whole to build new tools (either material like your car or immaterial like equality among sex and races) that in fact will change our global behavior. But restrict the understanding and you get stagnation, which was exactly what happened in the middle-age in Europe.
In the case of computer programming, if you focus on learning the tool (the syntax of the language or the usage of your IDE) and forget the underlying problem, you just won't be able to do anything useful. The key question in programming is not how to write that damn loop, but what to put in it. Because, you know, syntax is easy: read the manual and type what the hell they say is correct. And if it's not working, read the output of that damn compiler, check the manual again and guess what's wrong. But to answer the question "what are the steps needed to reach this result?", you need a deeper comprehension of the underlying problem. Oh god, you may even have to think for yourself, and there's no tool for that.
Add to this the fact that targeted managers have no technical background at all, and do not even have a clue of what the words "operating system" mean. It's easier to sell something to an ignorant than to the perfect layman.
How do you make money from free cloud apps, if it's not by selling the private information you extract from your customers files? I thought the cloud efficiency (good service at low cost) came by design from taping into privacy.
The real question is what would be the resolution of such device. Can it be so precise that a reasonable area of skin could be used to read message? Or to restore sight to blind people or to make a non visual augmented reality?
If this is more than a binary variable (vibrate or not), then it opens the doors to much more creative applications.
Said like this, it looks like a system with a retroactive loop that keeps it balanced. Indeed, it seems quiet reasonable. Everything that looks like a self-balanced system is surely reasonable.
However one of the questions that pops inside my head from time to time is the following: is it that much safe? It's easy to find counter-examples of dynamical systems for which the feedback loop does not stabilize the system. What if the path of the most profitable leads us beyond some event horizon of doom? Is it possible that we may overuse some resources because of profitability, but that by the time they become no longer profitable, there is no other solution? Or that we break something before realizing it's broken?
What if the actions taken 20 or 30 years ago by a profit-based heuristic have put us on a route to something very annoying we cannot avoid because the point of no return was met many years before the profit-based heuristic choose another way?
Is capitalism only a blind faith that our environment is so stable we can do whatever we want with it?
The future is already here, its just unevenly distributed. This will be coming to the USA soon, although with christian PR, its just not here yet. Give it time.
Also the guy is an idiot. Don't just make a statement, issue a challenge, like "If god existed he would strike me with lightning". That makes for a much more entertaining court trial.
Until they find the electric chair to be "God's lightning". Whenever religion enters, rationality exits.
Plus, I'm doubtful about the robustness of these cotton crossings. It take a single broken thread to break the entire system, which is quiet common with clothes.
Climate change denial is an act of treason against life on Earth.
Now let's not get hasty. Life on Earth will do just fine, it'll be just another mass extinction from which new life will spring forth, as it always has.
Now act of treason against humanity, that might fit...
Well, not so much. As you stated, there might be another mass extinction. This, Sir, is an act of treason against the current life on Earth.
Does the fact that we estimate life will still grow strong after the disaster gives us the right to wipe out billions of species? I'm all fine with the human race disappearing. We do want we want with our kind. But for all the other living things that are going to be lost, isn't it like a kind of a genocide?
(Obviously, all this discussion is considering that GW hypothesis is true, which I tend to believe, otherwise there's no culpability or whatsoever)
Everything will then be mechanized, just like Foxconn plans it to be (Foxconn is Chinese, btw). It means, it will always be possible to produce at a lower cost regarding human labor.
Is it compatible with the current redistribution of profits? Probably not. So the coming changes are not about manufacturing processes, but more likely about the inner structure of the economic system.
Slashdot Mirror
Haven't you recognized her cries when she heard the news of her destitution? You insensitive clod!
All devices will tend to use more OSS and be less locked down, because it's a potential well in terms of market competition (less investment, longer duration, better image, ...). The gradient may be smooth now (and has been close to 0 in the past) but in the long term the world will be mainly OSS.
France was way more efficient at this. The French voted against the referendum, but former president Sarkozy decided to sign the treaty anyway...
Again, democracy in action.
Without tinkering, you will never get any evolution. The market law is milk them till you can't. Without tinkering, it's forever.
I'm sure we will adapt. However, I'm much in doubt that the new world environment will be as pleasant as it was before.
The crime is not to change the world. The crime is to change it for the worse.
That is actually how civilization advances.
No it's not exactly the case, and you gave a perfect example right after. Are you advancing the civilization by being more efficient at your job thanks to a tool you don't understand? I don't think so. You are surely advancing the profits of your company, or your own profit if the paycheck at the end of the month is all you are looking for. But for the somewhat positive evolution of of masses behavior that you named civilization advancement, it's another story.
Civilization changes due to a deeper comprehension of the universe, be it mathematics, sciences or psychology, sociology or whatever else. This better comprehension allows us as a whole to build new tools (either material like your car or immaterial like equality among sex and races) that in fact will change our global behavior. But restrict the understanding and you get stagnation, which was exactly what happened in the middle-age in Europe.
In the case of computer programming, if you focus on learning the tool (the syntax of the language or the usage of your IDE) and forget the underlying problem, you just won't be able to do anything useful. The key question in programming is not how to write that damn loop, but what to put in it. Because, you know, syntax is easy: read the manual and type what the hell they say is correct. And if it's not working, read the output of that damn compiler, check the manual again and guess what's wrong. But to answer the question "what are the steps needed to reach this result?", you need a deeper comprehension of the underlying problem. Oh god, you may even have to think for yourself, and there's no tool for that.
Add to this the fact that targeted managers have no technical background at all, and do not even have a clue of what the words "operating system" mean. It's easier to sell something to an ignorant than to the perfect layman.
How do you make money from free cloud apps, if it's not by selling the private information you extract from your customers files? I thought the cloud efficiency (good service at low cost) came by design from taping into privacy.
The real question is what would be the resolution of such device. Can it be so precise that a reasonable area of skin could be used to read message? Or to restore sight to blind people or to make a non visual augmented reality?
If this is more than a binary variable (vibrate or not), then it opens the doors to much more creative applications.
It's much much much more simple than that. Be usable, have a massive pile of good applications.
much more simpler: get your OS pre-installed on millions on computer worldwide thanks to aggressive partnership with constructors.
I guess if you have some tens of billions to spend on that project, it would work just as well.
Oh yeah, really interesting.
http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=liberty%2Csecurity&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=0&smoothing=3
Or at least, a visible proof of it. Perhaps it ended long ago, but now there is no possible denial.
Said like this, it looks like a system with a retroactive loop that keeps it balanced. Indeed, it seems quiet reasonable. Everything that looks like a self-balanced system is surely reasonable.
However one of the questions that pops inside my head from time to time is the following: is it that much safe? It's easy to find counter-examples of dynamical systems for which the feedback loop does not stabilize the system. What if the path of the most profitable leads us beyond some event horizon of doom? Is it possible that we may overuse some resources because of profitability, but that by the time they become no longer profitable, there is no other solution? Or that we break something before realizing it's broken?
What if the actions taken 20 or 30 years ago by a profit-based heuristic have put us on a route to something very annoying we cannot avoid because the point of no return was met many years before the profit-based heuristic choose another way?
Is capitalism only a blind faith that our environment is so stable we can do whatever we want with it?
The first and foremost advantage is to have a pleasant wait for your train. I would love to have classical music at my train stations.
If it can act as a deterrent for inamical people, I take it as a bonus.
Unfortunately, horses may exhibit terror behavior and run totally amok.
These news are always amazing and at the same time a bit scary. Or is it only just me?
And then watch carefuly the bubble explode...
The future is already here, its just unevenly distributed. This will be coming to the USA soon, although with christian PR, its just not here yet. Give it time.
Also the guy is an idiot. Don't just make a statement, issue a challenge, like "If god existed he would strike me with lightning". That makes for a much more entertaining court trial.
Until they find the electric chair to be "God's lightning". Whenever religion enters, rationality exits.
This is one of the numerous examples why death penalty should never exist.
It could really ease the evaluation step :)
Plus, I'm doubtful about the robustness of these cotton crossings. It take a single broken thread to break the entire system, which is quiet common with clothes.
Would it had been only 2 species, the point would still stand. Try to have a broader look at arguments.
Climate change denial is an act of treason against life on Earth.
Now let's not get hasty. Life on Earth will do just fine, it'll be just another mass extinction from which new life will spring forth, as it always has.
Now act of treason against humanity, that might fit...
Well, not so much. As you stated, there might be another mass extinction. This, Sir, is an act of treason against the current life on Earth.
Does the fact that we estimate life will still grow strong after the disaster gives us the right to wipe out billions of species? I'm all fine with the human race disappearing. We do want we want with our kind. But for all the other living things that are going to be lost, isn't it like a kind of a genocide?
(Obviously, all this discussion is considering that GW hypothesis is true, which I tend to believe, otherwise there's no culpability or whatsoever)
Everything will then be mechanized, just like Foxconn plans it to be (Foxconn is Chinese, btw). It means, it will always be possible to produce at a lower cost regarding human labor.
Is it compatible with the current redistribution of profits? Probably not. So the coming changes are not about manufacturing processes, but more likely about the inner structure of the economic system.
Maybe you didn't know this, but not every country in the world is as energy hungry as the US. Just sayin'...