is why I feel secure in saying that we absolutely need self-driving cars. Stupid Humans make traffic a nightmare. Self driving cars won't stop three lanes of traffic trying to cut ahead of everyone at an exit, block the passing lane, weave all over because they're too busy on the phone, or make congestion worse by constantly trying to change lanes.
I had an audiophile friend (yeah, weirdos) whose primary complaint with Bose was that they are overpriced for what you get. Bit like Apple if you ask me.
They just stop supporting it unconscionably early. The last OS update available for a first gen iPad is 5.1.1. An iPhone 4, released at the same time with the same hardware still gets updates.
Screw you Apple. You've made my iPad an insecure piece of junk.
Oh, I'm not saying that marketers aren't bad people whose job it is to deceive and mislead consumers, but there are rules and agencies that enforce those rules. Spammers and scammers don't have to worry about their company being punished so there is nothing holding them back.
Advertisers and marketeers are trying to sell something real (that might not be interesting enough to click), and aren't allowed to lie. Phishers are already breaking the law, so no worries about false advertising or dull products.
Though perhaps it would be more fair if, in exchange for being allowed to sell data about you, Verizon provided your cell service for free. Or at least reduced so that FinalBill = BaseFee - ValueOfYourData
The numbers don't actually change all that much. Those that succumb to the temptation when the numbers go up cancel out those who think it's 'too much'. I've only seen it tested up to about a hundred bucks (scarce funding for the research), but the composition of the sample group has more of an effect on the percentage of cheaters than the amount of money on the table.
What I've found to be the most interesting result is that the vast majority behave altruistically/honestly/fairly.
As autocracy increases, private interests are crowded out by the increasing dominance of state interests. As private space shrinks, private interests can only survive by being captured by the state. The inverse is not really possible as the state is just too damn big to be captured. There isn't enough room for any private interest to become powerful enough to attempt it.
Practically, what tends to happen is that corruption increases, allowing private interests to prevail on an increasingly large scale. But as this continues the state weakens and eventually collapses.
Individual wealth is not a good predictor of ethical behavior. There's no real correlation there, but what little there is suggests that poverty and altruism are positively correlated. What this study shows is that growing up in a corrupt system correlates with corrupt behavior.
Which is why relatively small amounts are used. The researchers are going after a baseline, not extreme cases. Someone who doesn't cheat for $6 might cheat for $10k, but someone who will cheat for $6 will almost certainly cheat for any larger value.
What's really interesting about this study is that normally, an individual's social or economic background is not a good predictor of the likelihood they will cheat.
There's a big flaw in the post. Insurance companies offer savings if you have a box in your car. Very different from charging you extra for eating too much ice-cream. There's a big difference between incentivising good behavior and punishing bad.
Sounds more like a modern take on the traditional apprenticeship system than "taking advantage" of students. Why should these kids have to go to college to get a bit of paper proving they have skills they can already demonstrate?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes.
produced oxygen. Doesn't it photosynthesize?
is why I feel secure in saying that we absolutely need self-driving cars. Stupid Humans make traffic a nightmare. Self driving cars won't stop three lanes of traffic trying to cut ahead of everyone at an exit, block the passing lane, weave all over because they're too busy on the phone, or make congestion worse by constantly trying to change lanes.
There are no lobbyists or campaigns in North Korea.
I had an audiophile friend (yeah, weirdos) whose primary complaint with Bose was that they are overpriced for what you get. Bit like Apple if you ask me.
Dre sold it off just in time for a patent suit to come down the line. Luck or sneakiness?
Screw you Apple. You've made my iPad an insecure piece of junk.
Bit too "on the nose" right?
Oh, I'm not saying that marketers aren't bad people whose job it is to deceive and mislead consumers, but there are rules and agencies that enforce those rules. Spammers and scammers don't have to worry about their company being punished so there is nothing holding them back.
Okay then, I'll find someone who is actually interested in intelligent discourse.
Advertisers and marketeers are trying to sell something real (that might not be interesting enough to click), and aren't allowed to lie. Phishers are already breaking the law, so no worries about false advertising or dull products.
Though perhaps it would be more fair if, in exchange for being allowed to sell data about you, Verizon provided your cell service for free. Or at least reduced so that FinalBill = BaseFee - ValueOfYourData
Irrelevant. ExxonMobil is worth over ten North Koreas, and has zero influence. A state cannot both be strong and beholden to outside influence.
What I've found to be the most interesting result is that the vast majority behave altruistically/honestly/fairly.
Practically, what tends to happen is that corruption increases, allowing private interests to prevail on an increasingly large scale. But as this continues the state weakens and eventually collapses.
Individual wealth is not a good predictor of ethical behavior. There's no real correlation there, but what little there is suggests that poverty and altruism are positively correlated. What this study shows is that growing up in a corrupt system correlates with corrupt behavior.
I disagree. For private interests to dominate, a weak state is required. Powerful states do not share their power.
A corrupt system corrupts the people.
What's really interesting about this study is that normally, an individual's social or economic background is not a good predictor of the likelihood they will cheat.
I'm Netflix...
It's not a software bug, it's self-awareness! And Foxbots want to die!
There's a big flaw in the post. Insurance companies offer savings if you have a box in your car. Very different from charging you extra for eating too much ice-cream. There's a big difference between incentivising good behavior and punishing bad.
Sounds more like a modern take on the traditional apprenticeship system than "taking advantage" of students. Why should these kids have to go to college to get a bit of paper proving they have skills they can already demonstrate?
Way too much market power for one company.
The fact that my cucumbers aren't on my home network is a source of constant shame and sorrow.