but it takes so much longer to instantiate the disaster when the only buttons you can press are "release more greenhouse gases", "let the miners frack the ground", and "clear the land"
It's because of insurance. No system, company, etc is perfect. Of course banks do stupid shit. But they're insured. It's the social arrangements that make them valuable, not that they're magically filled with perfect people.
So your logic is... we should use a "trusted" system because they have insurance (which we pay for) for their stupid mistakes, and insurance to be sustainable for the insurer will always cost you more in the long run than you get back.
So effectively the "trusted" system is a stupidity tax we all need to pay.
Suddenly I don't mind the idea of the untrusted player - and have the freedom to decide on the appropriate hedge/insurance.
Javascript, Python, vbscript and a number of other scripting languages are to programming like a tricycle for kids is to a long haul truck. You can get to the goal, but you will hit a number of snags and it takes time to find coding errors that a full-blown fully type-safe compiler would have found.
With many scripting languages you find the typing faults at runtime and not when compiling.
But if you want some small isolated functionality maintained by a single programmer and it's only something around 100 lines of code then a scripting language is sufficient.
Scripting languages suffers from the same limitations as Basic did in the 80's - a great instep, but prone to 'bit rot'.
You remind me of a tradesman that can only put in nails using a nailgun, because the hammer is prone to error.
If you can't build a serious program in Python (note: can != want to) as well as any other language then please hand back your programmer's license.
This is tiresome. As I said it is easy to solve, just unpopular. And harder to solve with slightly less unfair systems.
For this example, it doesn't matter what it cost, where it was made. If it sold in US for $500 tax the $500. Yes prices will rise. However that is just an acknowledgement that currently the business is not paying its tax. Now it has to, so it has to either be less profitable or pass it on.
The key point was you pay under the normal systems if you are not tax dodging. You pay under this "unfair" system if you aren't, and that is done by saying this "unfair" system is an unaviodable floor being put underneath the tax dodge. There will always be a corner case that seems unfair, but allowing that is what opens the lovely loopholes that they use.
For the taxing gross revenue, a sale of $500 in US would result in paying tax on that $500 in the US. That would close the US loophole. It opens questions about the multi-lateral agreements between many countries about avoiding double taxation, but like all agreements that could also be walked away from. Short answer is that it is a solvable problem for someone with adequate political spine.
Ok language nerd. You are literally the stupidest person I have heard from today (take whichever meaning for the word you want there).
Language exists only to transfer information and ideas between people (or animals,...). Words can take on completely opposite meanings over time (see origin of word stakeholder).
No matter how smart you are in thinking you can close up the loopholes there are armies of accountants and lawyers who are WAAAY smarter and can figure out a way around it.
Sick of this quote. It is easy to close the loopholes. It is just not a good move politically as you would be painted as introducing something "unfair" (or some other smear campaign).
First easy solution: You pay the greater of X% on profit with existing rules OR Y% on gross revenue.
This puts a hard floor on how much they can avoid. Companies only are in control of shifting costs creatively. The sale must always happen, so the revenue will always happen. You only need to make it 2% or something to be effective. You will be shouted down that "[some imaginary store] operates on razor thin margins in bulk and will go out of business"... but if they aren't profitable enough to pay their fair share of taxes - they shouldn't continue to exist on government subsidy (which is what tax evasion is... as they benefit from roads, police, etc without paying for them).
Yet plenty of people in Europe and other places have no problem with cycling in rain/snow. So I know it isn't cool but maybe hold back on the accusations of others being in a bubble, because it might just be you that is in the bubble.
For starters, a computer acts for more like a "dickish aspie" than Linus ever will.
Wrong. A computer responds predictably and unemotionally. It will say "invalid command" not "that command was stupid" So yes like a person who is particular (so some aspies) but not a person who is a "dickish" anything.
Furthermore, actual aspies make good code testers, and often good programmers.
No one said they (we) didn't. But if that same aspie can learn a few heuristics on how to deliver things in a more sensitive way, then they will become a BETTER tester or programmer. It is not an "either or" situation. I speak from experience here.
Also, a hostile environment may actually be preferable, because it keeps the lowest common denominator higher.
citation needed. It will leave the people who ignore what others have to say, it will leave those who have agendas, it will leave the "stupid and opinionated". It will drive away the people who value a sense of community, the people who don't want hate in their life. So it will drive away a lot of the talent. I would place money on hostile environments having a lower common denominator.
Finally, I have to say there's a bit of irony in you describing Linus in a way that denigrates the autistic, while Linus himself has not used criticism in such a bigoted way. By the very notions behind such community conduct standards, you need to take a break before he does.
Yay we agree! There is no place for personal attacks in any community group.
Nice, can't beat'em so call them Russian. A sure sign of a strong intellect.
Russian, Republican... same thing nowadays.
(for those Republicans foaming at the mouth typing replies accusing me of Liberal/left/... save your breath. I'm not American - I don't care who runs your country, I just feel sorry for your citizens that no one is looking after them - only caring about which side scores points)
STEM in high school means nothing without the college degree to back it up and if LeBron isn't going to fund these kids THROUGH college its a fruitless endeavor.
citation please? If you make a claim the burden is on you to provide the proof.
Some food for thought about why your claim might not be right: Giving them a good high school STEM education might open doors to scholarships for college A lot of the benefits in STEM curriculum apply to everyday life (critical thinking, numeracy,...) - so will help them with everyday life cp not having these skills Not every single job in STEM fields needs a degree - most of the interesting ones maybe, but this might open the door to say "data entry" jobs where previous opportunities might have only been menial/retail jobs.
Would it be more beneficial to have high school AND college - absolutely. But improving 10 lives a little or 1 life a lot is an ethics problem, and a choice that you can't dictate to others.
So your turn. Prove your claim that it is fruitless. Cite your data.
"I have a 32GB Android phone and Google apps consume less than 500MB of space"
You lying sack of shit.
Fact #1: GOOGLE PLAY SERVICES ALONE is 538 MB. Fact #2: Chrome is 203 MB. Fact #3: "Google" itself is 214 MB. Fact #4: Google Maps is 181 MB.
With 4 facts we're more than double your '500MB' bullshit claim. All that took was sorting by fucking size in the app manager.
Fact #5: You have no fucking clue what you're talking about.
Actually you assumed something. He could be right. He never said what version of Android. The entire Android OS and Apps would fit in 500Mb if you take an early enough version, the question is what is the earliest version a 32Gb phone gets shipped with (assuming some cheap chinese no name brand).
They do have a choice, go and buy property in New Zealand, Australia or Vancouver and utterly destroy the housing market for the locals.
Would you say I'm bitter about this?
Fuck yes I am, extremely, the governments of those 3 places should be fucking executed for treason for what has gone on to the 50 and under people who aren't in the housing market, we've been robbed due to their greed (allowing it to happen)
Wow... so the property market problems in Australia are solely as a result of Chinese investors? Not generous negative gearing concessions that see a flood of money put in as a tax shelter? Not due to artificial restrictions on supply by policy makers scared of upsetting the large baby boomers voting block that don't want development in their inner city neighbourhoods? Not due to inadequate infrastructure spend on connections and development of regional suburbs and smaller cities that has lead to almost half the nation living in just 2 cities? Not due to...
Oh forget it. Xenophobes won't be convinced the problem is largely the fault of Australian citizens.
FACTS: Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but some people's opinions are wrong (eg "I think the earth is flat"). Everyone is entitled to give their opinion, but not entitled to have their opinion listened to. (assuming US audience where there is freedom of speech) And not listening or telling you that you are wrong is not censorship. And if you posit your opinion as a fact (like you did as there was no "in my opinion" or "I think that" etc), it can be treated like any statement of fact, including outright rejection if incorrect.
SUMMARY if you want to claim your opinion and not have it nullified say "I think that joke isn't funny" not "that joke isn't funny".
Personally I'm on the fence, (see what I did there) but it irks me when people claim their opinion in absolutes. Same reason I have a problem with most religions.
Are you trying to tell me that the US political system exercises its power for the good of all citizens rather than for the corporations and the rich that can buy the politicians?
The only way the US is a republic is in name only.
Senators and Representatives are often loyal in this order: Campaign donors, Noisy Extremists, Party, State, Country
...or more accurately
Campaign donors, Noisy Extremists, Media, Party, Potential future employers, State, Country, People of the State, People of the Country,... and then a long way behind the environment and people of the world.
Slashdot Mirror
but it takes so much longer to instantiate the disaster when the only buttons you can press are "release more greenhouse gases", "let the miners frack the ground", and "clear the land"
This seems like a solution in search of a problem.
That sums up most of what Samsung develops
Agreed, but that Galaxy Fold is still pretty cool (when they cut the thickness by a third)
Nintendo: "Back off! That's our job! And don't even dare consider using any of our IP under the fair use doctrine"
It's because of insurance. No system, company, etc is perfect. Of course banks do stupid shit. But they're insured. It's the social arrangements that make them valuable, not that they're magically filled with perfect people.
So your logic is... we should use a "trusted" system because they have insurance (which we pay for) for their stupid mistakes, and insurance to be sustainable for the insurer will always cost you more in the long run than you get back.
So effectively the "trusted" system is a stupidity tax we all need to pay.
Suddenly I don't mind the idea of the untrusted player - and have the freedom to decide on the appropriate hedge/insurance.
Javascript, Python, vbscript and a number of other scripting languages are to programming like a tricycle for kids is to a long haul truck. You can get to the goal, but you will hit a number of snags and it takes time to find coding errors that a full-blown fully type-safe compiler would have found.
With many scripting languages you find the typing faults at runtime and not when compiling.
But if you want some small isolated functionality maintained by a single programmer and it's only something around 100 lines of code then a scripting language is sufficient.
Scripting languages suffers from the same limitations as Basic did in the 80's - a great instep, but prone to 'bit rot'.
You remind me of a tradesman that can only put in nails using a nailgun, because the hammer is prone to error.
If you can't build a serious program in Python (note: can != want to) as well as any other language then please hand back your programmer's license.
This is tiresome. As I said it is easy to solve, just unpopular. And harder to solve with slightly less unfair systems.
For this example, it doesn't matter what it cost, where it was made. If it sold in US for $500 tax the $500. Yes prices will rise. However that is just an acknowledgement that currently the business is not paying its tax. Now it has to, so it has to either be less profitable or pass it on.
The key point was you pay under the normal systems if you are not tax dodging. You pay under this "unfair" system if you aren't, and that is done by saying this "unfair" system is an unaviodable floor being put underneath the tax dodge. There will always be a corner case that seems unfair, but allowing that is what opens the lovely loopholes that they use.
For the taxing gross revenue, a sale of $500 in US would result in paying tax on that $500 in the US. That would close the US loophole. It opens questions about the multi-lateral agreements between many countries about avoiding double taxation, but like all agreements that could also be walked away from. Short answer is that it is a solvable problem for someone with adequate political spine.
Ok language nerd. You are literally the stupidest person I have heard from today (take whichever meaning for the word you want there).
Language exists only to transfer information and ideas between people (or animals, ...). Words can take on completely opposite meanings over time (see origin of word stakeholder).
Also Oxford dictionary seems to think it is acceptable:
https://blog.oxforddictionarie...
https://en.oxforddictionaries....
No matter how smart you are in thinking you can close up the loopholes there are armies of accountants and lawyers who are WAAAY smarter and can figure out a way around it.
Sick of this quote. It is easy to close the loopholes. It is just not a good move politically as you would be painted as introducing something "unfair" (or some other smear campaign).
First easy solution: You pay the greater of X% on profit with existing rules OR Y% on gross revenue.
This puts a hard floor on how much they can avoid. Companies only are in control of shifting costs creatively. The sale must always happen, so the revenue will always happen. You only need to make it 2% or something to be effective. You will be shouted down that "[some imaginary store] operates on razor thin margins in bulk and will go out of business"... but if they aren't profitable enough to pay their fair share of taxes - they shouldn't continue to exist on government subsidy (which is what tax evasion is... as they benefit from roads, police, etc without paying for them).
Yet plenty of people in Europe and other places have no problem with cycling in rain/snow. So I know it isn't cool but maybe hold back on the accusations of others being in a bubble, because it might just be you that is in the bubble.
For starters, a computer acts for more like a "dickish aspie" than Linus ever will.
Wrong. A computer responds predictably and unemotionally. It will say "invalid command" not "that command was stupid"
So yes like a person who is particular (so some aspies) but not a person who is a "dickish" anything.
Furthermore, actual aspies make good code testers, and often good programmers.
No one said they (we) didn't. But if that same aspie can learn a few heuristics on how to deliver things in a more sensitive way, then they will become a BETTER tester or programmer. It is not an "either or" situation. I speak from experience here.
Also, a hostile environment may actually be preferable, because it keeps the lowest common denominator higher.
citation needed. It will leave the people who ignore what others have to say, it will leave those who have agendas, it will leave the "stupid and opinionated". It will drive away the people who value a sense of community, the people who don't want hate in their life. So it will drive away a lot of the talent. I would place money on hostile environments having a lower common denominator.
Finally, I have to say there's a bit of irony in you describing Linus in a way that denigrates the autistic, while Linus himself has not used criticism in such a bigoted way. By the very notions behind such community conduct standards, you need to take a break before he does.
Yay we agree! There is no place for personal attacks in any community group.
Nice, can't beat'em so call them Russian. A sure sign of a strong intellect.
Russian, Republican... same thing nowadays.
(for those Republicans foaming at the mouth typing replies accusing me of Liberal/left/... save your breath. I'm not American - I don't care who runs your country, I just feel sorry for your citizens that no one is looking after them - only caring about which side scores points)
"They are a democratic presidential republic like the US.... a failed one you can say that fell into dictatorship...."
C'mon, Trump just wants to be a dictator. The US isn't a failed republic (yet).
I wouldn't say "I own a penetrator" and "it rides fine" if I were you.
That's nice. The OP is probably more comfortable with their sexuality than you, and realise that anything can be a double entendre to a juvenile mind.
STEM in high school means nothing without the college degree to back it up and if LeBron isn't going to fund these kids THROUGH college its a fruitless endeavor.
citation please?
If you make a claim the burden is on you to provide the proof.
Some food for thought about why your claim might not be right: ...) - so will help them with everyday life cp not having these skills
Giving them a good high school STEM education might open doors to scholarships for college
A lot of the benefits in STEM curriculum apply to everyday life (critical thinking, numeracy,
Not every single job in STEM fields needs a degree - most of the interesting ones maybe, but this might open the door to say "data entry" jobs where previous opportunities might have only been menial/retail jobs.
Would it be more beneficial to have high school AND college - absolutely. But improving 10 lives a little or 1 life a lot is an ethics problem, and a choice that you can't dictate to others.
So your turn. Prove your claim that it is fruitless. Cite your data.
Similarly 0 falls of 1m is also "up to" 15
“Up to" means "less than".
I have up to a billion dollars in my pocket.
That is the OP's point. Up to gives no meaningful information
I can certify any glass can withstand a million falls of "up to" a metre - by having those million falls be from a millimeter high.
"I have a 32GB Android phone and Google apps consume less than 500MB of space"
You lying sack of shit.
Fact #1: GOOGLE PLAY SERVICES ALONE is 538 MB.
Fact #2: Chrome is 203 MB.
Fact #3: "Google" itself is 214 MB.
Fact #4: Google Maps is 181 MB.
With 4 facts we're more than double your '500MB' bullshit claim. All that took was sorting by fucking size in the app manager.
Fact #5: You have no fucking clue what you're talking about.
Actually you assumed something. He could be right.
He never said what version of Android.
The entire Android OS and Apps would fit in 500Mb if you take an early enough version, the question is what is the earliest version a 32Gb phone gets shipped with (assuming some cheap chinese no name brand).
Never assume you have all the facts.
They do have a choice, go and buy property in New Zealand, Australia or Vancouver and utterly destroy the housing market for the locals.
Would you say I'm bitter about this?
Fuck yes I am, extremely, the governments of those 3 places should be fucking executed for treason for what has gone on to the 50 and under people who aren't in the housing market, we've been robbed due to their greed (allowing it to happen)
Wow... so the property market problems in Australia are solely as a result of Chinese investors? Not generous negative gearing concessions that see a flood of money put in as a tax shelter? Not due to artificial restrictions on supply by policy makers scared of upsetting the large baby boomers voting block that don't want development in their inner city neighbourhoods? Not due to inadequate infrastructure spend on connections and development of regional suburbs and smaller cities that has lead to almost half the nation living in just 2 cities? Not due to...
Oh forget it. Xenophobes won't be convinced the problem is largely the fault of Australian citizens.
FACTS:
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but some people's opinions are wrong (eg "I think the earth is flat").
Everyone is entitled to give their opinion, but not entitled to have their opinion listened to. (assuming US audience where there is freedom of speech)
And not listening or telling you that you are wrong is not censorship.
And if you posit your opinion as a fact (like you did as there was no "in my opinion" or "I think that" etc), it can be treated like any statement of fact, including outright rejection if incorrect.
SUMMARY
if you want to claim your opinion and not have it nullified say "I think that joke isn't funny" not "that joke isn't funny".
Personally I'm on the fence, (see what I did there) but it irks me when people claim their opinion in absolutes. Same reason I have a problem with most religions.
Everyone in the world should just use Gmail then. Duh!
Cheers
L. Page & S.Brin
My breaking "algorithm"
You mean the algorithm you use to determine if you are going to break pedestrians with your car?
It is not the setting that is the problem. The problem is socalled AIs with less intelligence than a cockroach being put behind the wheel of cars.
Well they did pass their driving test, so there's not much we can do about that... oh wait you meant the driverless cars.
Are you trying to tell me that the US political system exercises its power for the good of all citizens rather than for the corporations and the rich that can buy the politicians?
The only way the US is a republic is in name only.
Senators and Representatives are often loyal in this order: Campaign donors, Noisy Extremists, Party, State, Country
...or more accurately
Campaign donors, Noisy Extremists, Media, Party, Potential future employers, State, Country, People of the State, People of the Country, ... and then a long way behind the environment and people of the world.