Aren't Apple the company that has 150+B in the bank.
How much do you have in the bank? The fact you're accessing Slashdot probably puts you in the top 10% globally, very possibly the top 1 or 2%
So, given that you're probably already incredibly wealthy compared with most other humans, why do *you* want more money? Why do you go to work? Why do you make the salary or hourly rate that you do - why not do it for 10% less - is it because you're greedy?
In my mind, that's creating a fake profile, and pretending to be someone else. In my opinion, a specious use of the phrase "Man in the Middle" because at no point has party A or party C confirmed their identities.
How hard can this be... when you request a pickup, the self-driving car begins driving to you, and a pin is placed on the map where it *thinks* it should pick you up. You review the pin, and move it to whatever door / street corner you want. The self-driving car then re-routes to pick you up where you placed the pin.
On future visits through the same provider, it will remember where you dropped the map pin and default to picking you up there. If you choose to move the pin again (say, you're coming out of a door the other side of the building) it then obeys that, and the app prompts you to give "friendly" names to those two points. Next time you choose to be picked up from the same vicinity, you are presented with a simple dropdown that offers you three options:
"The Green Door"
"The Other Side With The Cafe"
"Choose Another Location"
Am I missing something that makes this problem unsolvable with today's tech?
But looking at how people disrespect other people propriety, there's no way in hell any sane person would allow total strangers to use their cars, unsupervised.
That's not how it will work, most of the cars will be centrally owned as a fleet, not by individuals. The better the service get, the less sense it makes for individuals to own cars in the first place.
If the US is allowed to seize assets located in country D, of person A, from country B living in country C, who has never been to the US, it means that Saudia Arabia could introduce civil forfeiture laws for the offence of "Driving While Female", and then seize all assets of all women in the US with a driving license (proof of the crime) including those who don't even own a passport.
This is clearly morally wrong, and as such we must hope for calmer heads to prevail.
I feel that taking Dotcoms assets *inside the US* is not a stretch - but internationally is a joke.
No, you won't have a damned clue how much it'll cost until you get the bill.
It might not be "obvious" but a little modelling and some small-scale trials will let you know roughly what you're going to have to pay for production workloads.
AWS is very cheap - so if your projects are so small that costs like research / trials are too expensive, chances are it's cheapest just to pop it on AWS anyway.
The point of this app was to generate profit for the company developing it, not to do anything useful.
To expect it to be useful is naive in the extreme.
If this grows, this is great, it will do two possible things:
1] Make people more aware of paid product placement (educational, good).
2] Democratize paid product placement - instead of one account with a hundred million followers being paid ALL the ad money, instead a hundred DIFFERENT accounts with a million viewers each will split that money. And eventually a million small accounts with a hundred followers could - I'm sure there's a floor, but it's probably quite low, lower than YouTube videos.
This empowers your average person, and decreases the power of huge celebrities - looks like a win-win to me.
The "cash" they hold isn't held as actual cash, it's just very liquid investments. Even if they did hold it in "cash" it wouldn't be cash, it would be a current account balance with a bank.
That bank is VERY busy investing that money elsewhere - so the fact that they hold "cash" (liquid investments) is utterly irrelevant to whether or not that money is ACTUALLY being invested somewhere.
Wow how wrong could I be? On a second look, it appears that his entire range is pretty good satire/parody across the range of the political spectrum. This will teach me not to look at one page and post just after waking up ill and grumpy!
This guy is making a profit, by using someone elses' likeness without their permission, making false political statements about them, and could actually be harming Sanders' campaign... and he doesn't seem to understand that he's being wrong at all.
The guy making the T-shirts is a douchebag - he is exactly the reason why the law exists, and he should be shut down.
Asshat
True, but if you're making a loss, that just means someone else (or you) is paying for the task. That means that eventually that money will run out, and you will have to stop doing the task. "Making a loss" is the financial equivalent of "Environmentally unstable" - you can do it for a while, maybe even a long time, but eventually have to stop doing it. And in the same way, people prefer to stop doing it NOW if it's anticipated to always make a loss, just like many people would prefer to stop burning fossil fuels now, rather than in a hundred years.
So while your statement is technically true, everything *should* be about making a profit under the proviso that we put the right incentives in place - for example, preventing companies from externalising their costs onto the environment or communities.
Every echo chamber just got that much bigger.
I'm sure this is a victory for centrism, moderation and social education, helping to bring people with radical opposing views back towards a healthier, humanist center. No wait...
Here is how Israel does it, does it for free and very effectively: they let the screening agents to pick and choose any passenger that they want or have a hunch.
Yeah but errr... they're not private. What's your argument? We should privatise? OR we should do it like Israel? To do it like Israel will cost billions of dollars of public money because... the Israelis hire they're smart people and give them a great deal of training. Your average TSA grunt is so dumb they would have died off before reaching breeding age if they were born more than a few generations ago.
Preferably ones who understand things like the law and how it relates to tech.
Of course you have to give a license to Oculus to use something which you created and THEN SEND TO THEM, otherwise they couldn't transmit that thing to other users without violating your copyright.
Storm in a teacup. Outrage industry marches on. News at eleven.
I don't know if any space faring alien society would necessarily be evil.
Evil is a human concept, it does not apply to aliens. Take morals out of any deals with aliens, we have no idea if they would even have such concepts, and if they did they would almost certainly be so different to ours as to make conjecture at this point useless.
But you can consider some more basic concepts that might have a bearing on the actions that an alien species might take upon discovering the earth.
Consider that to be a civilization capable of interstellar travel, they would almost certainly have a good understanding of math, physics, risk mitigation and many more.
Risk mitigation is the interesting one. If we met a warlike species in possession of a planet, who show practical propensity to absorb our technologies and become more like us would we:
1] Wipe them out before they are a threat to us.
2] Allow them to grow and progress to the point where they could wipe us out.
Answers are interesting - I lean very much towards [1]
> Business accounts of any importance usually don't get done that way.
What? You can easily host a business with 10,000 users on AWS which supports a small business with dozens of employees.
That said, at some point if you sign up for AWS with a credit card via their site and get to that size, you will start to get calls from physical humans about a proper account manager, sales etc. - but you can ignore all that and just continue being a "digital" customer.
Slashdot Mirror
How much do you have in the bank? The fact you're accessing Slashdot probably puts you in the top 10% globally, very possibly the top 1 or 2%
So, given that you're probably already incredibly wealthy compared with most other humans, why do *you* want more money? Why do you go to work? Why do you make the salary or hourly rate that you do - why not do it for 10% less - is it because you're greedy?
In my mind, that's creating a fake profile, and pretending to be someone else. In my opinion, a specious use of the phrase "Man in the Middle" because at no point has party A or party C confirmed their identities.
How hard can this be... when you request a pickup, the self-driving car begins driving to you, and a pin is placed on the map where it *thinks* it should pick you up. You review the pin, and move it to whatever door / street corner you want. The self-driving car then re-routes to pick you up where you placed the pin.
On future visits through the same provider, it will remember where you dropped the map pin and default to picking you up there. If you choose to move the pin again (say, you're coming out of a door the other side of the building) it then obeys that, and the app prompts you to give "friendly" names to those two points. Next time you choose to be picked up from the same vicinity, you are presented with a simple dropdown that offers you three options:
"The Green Door"
"The Other Side With The Cafe"
"Choose Another Location"
Am I missing something that makes this problem unsolvable with today's tech?
Yeah, their OS is never going to take off ...
That's not how it will work, most of the cars will be centrally owned as a fleet, not by individuals. The better the service get, the less sense it makes for individuals to own cars in the first place.
Guy killed me, Mal. He killed me with a sword.
If the US is allowed to seize assets located in country D, of person A, from country B living in country C, who has never been to the US, it means that Saudia Arabia could introduce civil forfeiture laws for the offence of "Driving While Female", and then seize all assets of all women in the US with a driving license (proof of the crime) including those who don't even own a passport. This is clearly morally wrong, and as such we must hope for calmer heads to prevail. I feel that taking Dotcoms assets *inside the US* is not a stretch - but internationally is a joke.
It might not be "obvious" but a little modelling and some small-scale trials will let you know roughly what you're going to have to pay for production workloads.
AWS is very cheap - so if your projects are so small that costs like research / trials are too expensive, chances are it's cheapest just to pop it on AWS anyway.
The point of this app was to generate profit for the company developing it, not to do anything useful. To expect it to be useful is naive in the extreme.
If this grows, this is great, it will do two possible things: 1] Make people more aware of paid product placement (educational, good). 2] Democratize paid product placement - instead of one account with a hundred million followers being paid ALL the ad money, instead a hundred DIFFERENT accounts with a million viewers each will split that money. And eventually a million small accounts with a hundred followers could - I'm sure there's a floor, but it's probably quite low, lower than YouTube videos. This empowers your average person, and decreases the power of huge celebrities - looks like a win-win to me.
Put the pitchfork back, bubba, it's opt-in
So by definition they do not think it's overpriced.
The "cash" they hold isn't held as actual cash, it's just very liquid investments. Even if they did hold it in "cash" it wouldn't be cash, it would be a current account balance with a bank. That bank is VERY busy investing that money elsewhere - so the fact that they hold "cash" (liquid investments) is utterly irrelevant to whether or not that money is ACTUALLY being invested somewhere.
Yeah errrr.... never because that's not remotely realistic. Calm down.
Wow how wrong could I be? On a second look, it appears that his entire range is pretty good satire/parody across the range of the political spectrum. This will teach me not to look at one page and post just after waking up ill and grumpy!
This guy is making a profit, by using someone elses' likeness without their permission, making false political statements about them, and could actually be harming Sanders' campaign... and he doesn't seem to understand that he's being wrong at all. The guy making the T-shirts is a douchebag - he is exactly the reason why the law exists, and he should be shut down. Asshat
OOOPS! Should read:
"Making a loss" is the financial equivalent of "Environmentally unsustainable"
> Not everything is about making a profit.
True, but if you're making a loss, that just means someone else (or you) is paying for the task. That means that eventually that money will run out, and you will have to stop doing the task. "Making a loss" is the financial equivalent of "Environmentally unstable" - you can do it for a while, maybe even a long time, but eventually have to stop doing it. And in the same way, people prefer to stop doing it NOW if it's anticipated to always make a loss, just like many people would prefer to stop burning fossil fuels now, rather than in a hundred years.
So while your statement is technically true, everything *should* be about making a profit under the proviso that we put the right incentives in place - for example, preventing companies from externalising their costs onto the environment or communities.
Every echo chamber just got that much bigger. I'm sure this is a victory for centrism, moderation and social education, helping to bring people with radical opposing views back towards a healthier, humanist center. No wait...
Yeah but errr... they're not private. What's your argument? We should privatise? OR we should do it like Israel? To do it like Israel will cost billions of dollars of public money because... the Israelis hire they're smart people and give them a great deal of training. Your average TSA grunt is so dumb they would have died off before reaching breeding age if they were born more than a few generations ago.
Preferably ones who understand things like the law and how it relates to tech. Of course you have to give a license to Oculus to use something which you created and THEN SEND TO THEM, otherwise they couldn't transmit that thing to other users without violating your copyright. Storm in a teacup. Outrage industry marches on. News at eleven.
Evil is a human concept, it does not apply to aliens. Take morals out of any deals with aliens, we have no idea if they would even have such concepts, and if they did they would almost certainly be so different to ours as to make conjecture at this point useless.
But you can consider some more basic concepts that might have a bearing on the actions that an alien species might take upon discovering the earth.
Consider that to be a civilization capable of interstellar travel, they would almost certainly have a good understanding of math, physics, risk mitigation and many more.
Risk mitigation is the interesting one. If we met a warlike species in possession of a planet, who show practical propensity to absorb our technologies and become more like us would we:
1] Wipe them out before they are a threat to us.
2] Allow them to grow and progress to the point where they could wipe us out.
Answers are interesting - I lean very much towards [1]
> Business accounts of any importance usually don't get done that way.
What? You can easily host a business with 10,000 users on AWS which supports a small business with dozens of employees.
That said, at some point if you sign up for AWS with a credit card via their site and get to that size, you will start to get calls from physical humans about a proper account manager, sales etc. - but you can ignore all that and just continue being a "digital" customer.
Came to post exactly this.