Off-brand medication is the better choice nearly 100% of the time.
The active ingredient is what you're buying. So long as it has the same amount per dose, and the same delivery method (gel capsule, pill, injection, etc.), the effect will be the same. So yes, cheap knockoff medicine is *exactly* what we need.
i am still not sold on this whole watching of sports... i mean yes you can waste multiple hours but in the end its the score that maybe matters... i say maybe because why does it matter again?
Do you also skip to the last 30 seconds of every movie and then complain that you don't get why people watch the first 2 hours of it?
Assuming they stick to their guns and really *don't* release any new GPUs for a couple years, you can expect the next release to be celebrated with as much fanfare as they can muster while they talk about how it's the "single largest jump in GPU technology in the history of the company" or something equally misleading.
I wonder if this has something to do with the fact that they're having a hard time churning out faster and faster cards? So instead of dropping a card that's 20% faster each year, they release one that's 30% faster every other year, for instance.
I can assure you they promised certain profits to their shareholders which they cannot possibly meet at lower prices, so they're instead trying to drive up demand by promising the current available GPU is the best you can get for years to come.
While I agree at the ridiculousness of this... Apparently Facebook won't be getting a cut of this money? That's blowing my MIND. I can't imagine a bigger missed opportunity. Billions of users, probably tens of millions of groups (if not hundreds of millions). If even a small percentage of them charge just $5 to everyone who wants to be a member... scraping a few cents or even a buck here and there would be a big cashflow, and it would help inject more sustainability into the company's income model. Like what the hell? lol
That profit margin is entirely thanks to movie studios, not movie theaters, FYI.
For popular movies (like Star Wars), there's a good to great chance that theaters are making $0 on each ticket sale for the first few weeks, because in order to show those movies, 100% of proceeds must go back to the studio.
For less popular movies, maybe only 85% of the proceeds go back to the studio. Yay.
If they charged reasonable amounts on concessions, they'd all go out of business. If they don't play by the rules of the studio, they get blacklisted and don't get to show the popular movies anymore.
Yeah, they've already done this. 1TB/mo cap on my data in a US city with >750k population. I get charged $X/GB every time I go over the limit. They don't want to throttle users at high levels of usage because that reduces how much money they'll fuck you for. Holy shit I hate Comcast. Good thing they're the only provider in my area (aside from the providers leasing Comcast's lines, naturally).
I was curious about the legality of refusing all cash payments, so I did a little research.
Apparently, so long as the policy is stated *before* any debts are incurred, any business may set any monetary policy it desires. That's why it's legal to say things like "no bills larger than $20" or whatever. The only time this isn't the case is if there's a state law in place that requires businesses to accept cash or something along those lines.
This is Microsoft talking about, so look forward to randomly not being charged for your purchases up until about version 3.
Unfortunately, you'll also sometimes be double-charged for things, too.
Is that a joke? I mean everything was fine until 2015 when this whole concept took root, so you expect that it will rock along fine until November 2018 and then we are all dead?
2005 - Madison River Communications blocked VOIP services. The FCC put a stop to that.
2005 - Comcast denied access to p2p services without notifying customers.
2007 - AT&T blocked Skype and other VOIPs because they didn't like the competition for their cellphone services.
2011 - MetroPCS tried to block all streaming except YouTube. They actually sued the FCC over this.
2011 - AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon blocked access to tethering apps on the Android marketplace, with Google's help.
2011 - AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon blocked access to Google Wallet because it competed with their own payment apps.
2012 - Verizon demanded Google to block tethering apps on Android because it let owners avoid the $20 tethering fee. This was despite guaranteeing they wouldn't do it as part of a winning bid on a airwaves auction. They were fined 1.25 million over this.
2012 - AT&T tried to block access to FaceTime unless customers paid more money.
2013 - Verizon stated that the only thing stopping them from favoring some content providers over other providers were the Net Neutrality rules in place.
2016 - Comcast instituted a mandatory data cap on all services with a $50 fee to get unlimited data. This allowed them to slow the bleeding of cord cutters, trapping them with fees from trying services like Sling or DirecTV Now.
2017 - Time Warner Cable refused to upgrade their lines in order to get more money out of Riot Games (creators of League of Legends) and Netflix.
ISPs already have proven that without rules in place, they will behave in a way that can dictate how you use your internet connection.
Are you too stupid to realize there's a difference between a tool, primarily used for a single function (helping with math calculations) and a toy which CAN have that kind of functionality, or are you just trolling?
“We will reserve the right to prevent or stop uses of our technology if we become aware of uses that are inconsistent with these principles,” the company said.
Like most of the top corporate A.I. labs, which are laden with former and current academics, Google openly publishes much of its A.I. research. That means others can recreate and reuse many of its methods and ideas. But Google is joining other labs in saying it may hold back certain research if it believes others will misuse it.
The article didn't contain the 7 specific principles from what I saw.
Well folks, they said it, you heard it! Google promises to be good boys and never do anything evil with their AI, so it's $100% guaranteed safe for everyone. Thank you Sundar! PACK IT UP BOYS, CONVERSATION OVER.
"Silly users - the onus is completely on you to just not use anything that infringes on your rights and privacy!"
So I guess I'm not getting on the internet, driving a car, going to the mall, or doing literally anything else in fucking life. What a stupid premise. Companies track your progress through a building to see how they can more efficiently lay out their stores or products. Insurance companies buy your totaled car so they can access the data saved on there and change your insurance prices as a result. Target tracks exactly what you buy and uses that information to make conclusions about your life and send related coupons as a result.
How about companies just stop doing shitty stuff for once? Maybe I shouldn't have to read every single 90-page agreement for every calculator app to find the one that doesn't record all numbers pressed? Maybe there should just be some solid fucking consume protection laws? But no - the person who doesn't devote massive amounts of time to ensure everything they agree to is actually acceptable to them is the one in the wrong here.
Not to mention, your analogy is shit. I know how to use a grocery store, numbnuts. I don't know about the processes that are intentionally obfuscated because they don't want me to know about them. Just like I know how to use a parachute - that doesn't mean I know a damn thing about how they're built or the engineered mechanics behind them.
It's a pretty sad day when people argue that items already in the Bill of Rights should be removed so that the government can more freely infringe on the rights of the people.
It's a pretty sad day when people put owning guns over the lives of human beings. Chill out, it's a fucking toy 80% of the time. A little regulation won't hurt anybody. Nobody cares about you enough to specifically come out to murder you, and if they're coming into your house, it's probably for your TV or jewelry. Give it up and let insurance buy you a new one. Holy shit.
people should be free to choose what is done with their own bodies.
But these people aren't really free to choose. They have a "gun" to their head in the form of a sickness, and they're being told to do whatever it takes at *any* cost to cure it. They're ripe for being taken advantage of by well-meaning scientists hoping to solve their problem
There absolutely needs to be someone to step in and say "Hold up, let's make sure this is a smart approach first." You could tell these people that sucking on a tube of U-238 will cure them and they'd give it a try. Hell, people will give it a try to solve something as silly as baldness, let alone cancer or some disease that causes extreme, life-long suffering.
This was a statement for the masses. If you said the "far" side of the moon, it would sound odd and confusing to the majority of people. Those who know there's no such thing as a "dark" side of the moon are probably smart enough to know that the guys sending the satellite up into space know this as well.
I disagree. Big Oil pollutes. Big Pharma locks life-saving drugs behind massive cost barriers. Big Tech gathers every piece of data they possibly can and monitors everything you do to the highest extent possible.
Not to mention, 95% of the secret behind defense contractors is just software. Bombs, jets, spy satellites, autonomous killing drones, etc. all have the potential to affect your life in a much bigger way than an expensive pill or a puff of gas from a car ever would. You just don't notice it because it's either working too discreetly for you to notice, or because you're not in the kind of country where you have to worry about a drone blowing up your house because there's a wanted man next door.
who is this tech for? I don't need an AI assistant to *call* a restaurant and make a reservation for me, I just need a reservation. Why are people involved at all? Why go through so much trouble? 90% of restaurants didn't have delivery services until Grubhub and other similar services came around and they were able to create a system that generates an order for a store without ever having had to talk to anyone.
This should just be a similar system. No stupid staged calls, no massively-expensive AI system to handle talking to people - systems don't need to maintain the same method of interaction once you take the customer out of the equation to save them some hassle. Just generate a dynamic framework that allows companies to receive automated requests from an application on the customer's side which grabs an appointment for them.
At most, all you need is for a phone to accept something like "Hey Siri, please make an appointment for me at 10:00 am on Friday at my favorite hair salon". Followed by a response of "It looks like that timeslot is taken. We could do Thursday at 10:00 am or we could do Friday at 9:00 or 11:00. I see that your schedule is free for 11:00 as well - should we do it then?" and then a final "Okay, I sent the request over to the salon and it's been accepted. I've added that appointment to your schedule."
So much easier, no stupid AI calls, and it achieves the exact same end-goal.
Slashdot Mirror
Off-brand medication is the better choice nearly 100% of the time. The active ingredient is what you're buying. So long as it has the same amount per dose, and the same delivery method (gel capsule, pill, injection, etc.), the effect will be the same. So yes, cheap knockoff medicine is *exactly* what we need.
This implies, of course, that the government isn't one of the main customers.
"How can we keep doing this without pissing people off?"
The only thing that will be discussed.
i am still not sold on this whole watching of sports... i mean yes you can waste multiple hours but in the end its the score that maybe matters... i say maybe because why does it matter again?
Do you also skip to the last 30 seconds of every movie and then complain that you don't get why people watch the first 2 hours of it?
Krzanich's immediate resignation was accepted to show "that all employees will respect Intel's values and adhere to the company's code of conduct"
after being caught
No shit, Sherlock. If nobody knows something is going on, then how the fuck would they enforce the rules?
Assuming they stick to their guns and really *don't* release any new GPUs for a couple years, you can expect the next release to be celebrated with as much fanfare as they can muster while they talk about how it's the "single largest jump in GPU technology in the history of the company" or something equally misleading.
I wonder if this has something to do with the fact that they're having a hard time churning out faster and faster cards? So instead of dropping a card that's 20% faster each year, they release one that's 30% faster every other year, for instance.
I can assure you they promised certain profits to their shareholders which they cannot possibly meet at lower prices, so they're instead trying to drive up demand by promising the current available GPU is the best you can get for years to come.
While I agree at the ridiculousness of this... Apparently Facebook won't be getting a cut of this money? That's blowing my MIND. I can't imagine a bigger missed opportunity. Billions of users, probably tens of millions of groups (if not hundreds of millions). If even a small percentage of them charge just $5 to everyone who wants to be a member... scraping a few cents or even a buck here and there would be a big cashflow, and it would help inject more sustainability into the company's income model. Like what the hell? lol
That profit margin is entirely thanks to movie studios, not movie theaters, FYI.
For popular movies (like Star Wars), there's a good to great chance that theaters are making $0 on each ticket sale for the first few weeks, because in order to show those movies, 100% of proceeds must go back to the studio.
For less popular movies, maybe only 85% of the proceeds go back to the studio. Yay.
If they charged reasonable amounts on concessions, they'd all go out of business. If they don't play by the rules of the studio, they get blacklisted and don't get to show the popular movies anymore.
Yeah, they've already done this. 1TB/mo cap on my data in a US city with >750k population. I get charged $X/GB every time I go over the limit. They don't want to throttle users at high levels of usage because that reduces how much money they'll fuck you for. Holy shit I hate Comcast. Good thing they're the only provider in my area (aside from the providers leasing Comcast's lines, naturally).
I was curious about the legality of refusing all cash payments, so I did a little research.
Apparently, so long as the policy is stated *before* any debts are incurred, any business may set any monetary policy it desires. That's why it's legal to say things like "no bills larger than $20" or whatever. The only time this isn't the case is if there's a state law in place that requires businesses to accept cash or something along those lines.
The more you know, I guess
This is Microsoft talking about, so look forward to randomly not being charged for your purchases up until about version 3. Unfortunately, you'll also sometimes be double-charged for things, too.
I will return to resolve one of these problems.
Is that a joke? I mean everything was fine until 2015 when this whole concept took root, so you expect that it will rock along fine until November 2018 and then we are all dead?
2005 - Madison River Communications blocked VOIP services. The FCC put a stop to that.
2005 - Comcast denied access to p2p services without notifying customers.
2007 - AT&T blocked Skype and other VOIPs because they didn't like the competition for their cellphone services.
2011 - MetroPCS tried to block all streaming except YouTube. They actually sued the FCC over this.
2011 - AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon blocked access to tethering apps on the Android marketplace, with Google's help.
2011 - AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon blocked access to Google Wallet because it competed with their own payment apps.
2012 - Verizon demanded Google to block tethering apps on Android because it let owners avoid the $20 tethering fee. This was despite guaranteeing they wouldn't do it as part of a winning bid on a airwaves auction. They were fined 1.25 million over this.
2012 - AT&T tried to block access to FaceTime unless customers paid more money.
2013 - Verizon stated that the only thing stopping them from favoring some content providers over other providers were the Net Neutrality rules in place.
2016 - Comcast instituted a mandatory data cap on all services with a $50 fee to get unlimited data. This allowed them to slow the bleeding of cord cutters, trapping them with fees from trying services like Sling or DirecTV Now.
2017 - Time Warner Cable refused to upgrade their lines in order to get more money out of Riot Games (creators of League of Legends) and Netflix.
ISPs already have proven that without rules in place, they will behave in a way that can dictate how you use your internet connection.
Are you too stupid to realize there's a difference between a tool, primarily used for a single function (helping with math calculations) and a toy which CAN have that kind of functionality, or are you just trolling?
“We will reserve the right to prevent or stop uses of our technology if we become aware of uses that are inconsistent with these principles,” the company said.
Like most of the top corporate A.I. labs, which are laden with former and current academics, Google openly publishes much of its A.I. research. That means others can recreate and reuse many of its methods and ideas. But Google is joining other labs in saying it may hold back certain research if it believes others will misuse it.
The article didn't contain the 7 specific principles from what I saw.
Well folks, they said it, you heard it! Google promises to be good boys and never do anything evil with their AI, so it's $100% guaranteed safe for everyone. Thank you Sundar! PACK IT UP BOYS, CONVERSATION OVER.
I don't have to do CVE search to know that it is exactly zero, and if some are found they are fixed pronto.
Translation: "We don't know how many there are, but fixing these issues is a very high priority
So, they're about on par with pretty much every software company out there?
"Silly users - the onus is completely on you to just not use anything that infringes on your rights and privacy!"
So I guess I'm not getting on the internet, driving a car, going to the mall, or doing literally anything else in fucking life. What a stupid premise. Companies track your progress through a building to see how they can more efficiently lay out their stores or products. Insurance companies buy your totaled car so they can access the data saved on there and change your insurance prices as a result. Target tracks exactly what you buy and uses that information to make conclusions about your life and send related coupons as a result.
How about companies just stop doing shitty stuff for once? Maybe I shouldn't have to read every single 90-page agreement for every calculator app to find the one that doesn't record all numbers pressed? Maybe there should just be some solid fucking consume protection laws? But no - the person who doesn't devote massive amounts of time to ensure everything they agree to is actually acceptable to them is the one in the wrong here.
Not to mention, your analogy is shit. I know how to use a grocery store, numbnuts. I don't know about the processes that are intentionally obfuscated because they don't want me to know about them. Just like I know how to use a parachute - that doesn't mean I know a damn thing about how they're built or the engineered mechanics behind them.
total surveillance increases stress levels, since employers can use anything minor against them now.
Employers in at-will states can fire you for anything they want anyways, so long as it's not illegal (like race or religion).
It's a pretty sad day when people argue that items already in the Bill of Rights should be removed so that the government can more freely infringe on the rights of the people.
It's a pretty sad day when people put owning guns over the lives of human beings. Chill out, it's a fucking toy 80% of the time. A little regulation won't hurt anybody. Nobody cares about you enough to specifically come out to murder you, and if they're coming into your house, it's probably for your TV or jewelry. Give it up and let insurance buy you a new one. Holy shit.
people should be free to choose what is done with their own bodies.
But these people aren't really free to choose. They have a "gun" to their head in the form of a sickness, and they're being told to do whatever it takes at *any* cost to cure it. They're ripe for being taken advantage of by well-meaning scientists hoping to solve their problem
There absolutely needs to be someone to step in and say "Hold up, let's make sure this is a smart approach first." You could tell these people that sucking on a tube of U-238 will cure them and they'd give it a try. Hell, people will give it a try to solve something as silly as baldness, let alone cancer or some disease that causes extreme, life-long suffering.
This was a statement for the masses. If you said the "far" side of the moon, it would sound odd and confusing to the majority of people. Those who know there's no such thing as a "dark" side of the moon are probably smart enough to know that the guys sending the satellite up into space know this as well.
I disagree. Big Oil pollutes. Big Pharma locks life-saving drugs behind massive cost barriers. Big Tech gathers every piece of data they possibly can and monitors everything you do to the highest extent possible.
Not to mention, 95% of the secret behind defense contractors is just software. Bombs, jets, spy satellites, autonomous killing drones, etc. all have the potential to affect your life in a much bigger way than an expensive pill or a puff of gas from a car ever would. You just don't notice it because it's either working too discreetly for you to notice, or because you're not in the kind of country where you have to worry about a drone blowing up your house because there's a wanted man next door.
who is this tech for? I don't need an AI assistant to *call* a restaurant and make a reservation for me, I just need a reservation. Why are people involved at all? Why go through so much trouble? 90% of restaurants didn't have delivery services until Grubhub and other similar services came around and they were able to create a system that generates an order for a store without ever having had to talk to anyone.
This should just be a similar system. No stupid staged calls, no massively-expensive AI system to handle talking to people - systems don't need to maintain the same method of interaction once you take the customer out of the equation to save them some hassle. Just generate a dynamic framework that allows companies to receive automated requests from an application on the customer's side which grabs an appointment for them.
At most, all you need is for a phone to accept something like "Hey Siri, please make an appointment for me at 10:00 am on Friday at my favorite hair salon". Followed by a response of "It looks like that timeslot is taken. We could do Thursday at 10:00 am or we could do Friday at 9:00 or 11:00. I see that your schedule is free for 11:00 as well - should we do it then?" and then a final "Okay, I sent the request over to the salon and it's been accepted. I've added that appointment to your schedule."
So much easier, no stupid AI calls, and it achieves the exact same end-goal.
[CITATION NEEDED]