Commie users certainly would have viewed their machine being called a "PC" as an insult.
Well, I don't know about insulting, but at the time I would have considered it confusing. After all PCs were for boring things like spreadsheets or cooking recipe databases, my C64 is for rocking the video games man!
and you have a system that can take a very serious dent out of the daily energy peak
This is the best use of rooftop solar. It makes efficient use of our current infrastructure and actually makes the existing plants more effective. We should change building codes to require all new buildings to provide solar capacity equal to their peak usage - base load.
I am less concerned if Facebook wants to know if I'm more interested in Pampers or Depends than of government tracking...
Which just goes to show that you've totally underestimated the ability of private organizations to abuse power. There are many forms of power, not all of them come from the barrel of a gun.
Sure, that statement could have used a few caveats for things like access to birth control and the capacity for rational thought that make us a tad different than the other predator comparisons.
Certain studies have done Cost analysis that takes into account the environmental impacts of coal (but not the environmental impacts of solar) and concluded that solar was cheaper.
That's interesting and may or may not be true by the time you figure in things like transmission infrastructure and power storage but it's irrelevant to the discussion of whether there are currently cities that grow enough food to feed themselves without the need to import food from surrounding farming areas.
Sure, it's a threat, just not for the reasons you outlined. The problem is that it would imperil our fuel supplies and shipping lanes. Personally I think the military is taking a prudent approach, risk management is after all one of their designated functions.
I've seen plenty of proposals on how it might be possible at some point in the future, but that's not what you claimed. You said that it was already happening which sounds highly unlikely. The square footage requirements alone would require a highly specialized design and any project of that size and nature would be all over the news and frankly Slashdot. China has a few small pilot project communities (though even those don't appear to be food sufficient) and has discussed plans to make cities that are more sustainable but I found nothing like what you were suggesting. If you can't be bothered to provide even one piece of evidence then I'll just assume that you're blowing smoke to put it politely.
There is a wonderful book "Spiritual Capital", which should be recommended again and again to get the picture and ideas of cure.
Read the book description, it's basically a bunch of high sounding ideals backed by little more than hope. That's why both communism and anarchy fail miserably, they fail to take human nature into account. Capitalism is ugly, brutal and dispiriting but it's built on the reliable principle of self interest. I'm all for alternatives but you need to find one that doesn't rely on magic unicorns to function.
All plants and animals except humans form a natural balance and live in harmony
They all try to kill or outbreed each other and steal each others food or habitat as much as possible. We're just better at it. The only thing that limits the population of an apex predator is food supply.
All those in favor of mandated population control please report to your nearest friendly government population reduction center for immediate "processing".
It seems very unlikely we could possible reduce population growth enough in a couple generations to stop the inevitable wars for resources.
Actually population growth is coming down and total population is projected to top out at around 10.1 Billion or so. There will still be conflicts over resources, but that will be because of the rising standards of living world wide rather than total population issues.
Should a hostile AI want to do ill to humanity, it would either require support from some portion of humanity, or it would be limited to a small set of engagements until its machines-as-appendages ran out of supplies or broke down.
Fortunately humans have been shown to prioritize self over larger groupings so finding a small army of AI sympathizers and quislings shouldn't pose too much of a challenge for the budding AI overlords.
Because if the government doesn't do it then it will never happen. Construction companies in particular will never switch unless it is mandated by law.
Bah, why waste time with mandates. Just impose an imperial units labeling tax of 5% and watch the free market do its thing. Metric would become standard nearly overnight.
You realize that MBAs are mostly middle management right? Sure, they're easy to blame because they're the public face of a lot of unpopular decisions, but that doesn't make them the primary drivers of the issue.
In USA, probably 50% of federal tax dollars are wasted
I'm registered Libertarian and not a fan of big government but this figure strikes me as hyperbole rather than any sort of rational evaluation. Sure, the government is inefficient and wastes money by the bucket load, but you'd have to have a very unusual definition of waste for it to equal anything like 50%.
Yes, but it's a blatant violation of the program to use people you employ to train the h1-b applicants. The program is there for when you can't find employees that are qualified. If they're able to train the replacements then they're clearly qualified to do the job.
And so we'll all hold our breath waiting for the huge influx of federal agents who are going to swoop into Disney Headquarters, arrest the entire executive staff and cart away all of their equipment and correspondence as evidence. There will be perp walks and a massive parade of criminal trials where the lawbreakers will be given harsh sentences as a warning to any others who consider abusing the system. Oh wait, no rich people were harmed? Nevermind, it's all good.
Yes, trains are nice where there are tracks and you're shipping the right kind of load. Despite trains many advantages trucks are often better for a variety of reasons, that has little to do with whether they're automated or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Commie users certainly would have viewed their machine being called a "PC" as an insult.
Well, I don't know about insulting, but at the time I would have considered it confusing. After all PCs were for boring things like spreadsheets or cooking recipe databases, my C64 is for rocking the video games man!
So you want to nuke a large part of humanity
No, I'm saying we don't want them to be able to nuke us. That said, the comment was meant as more of a humorous and cynical observation.
and you have a system that can take a very serious dent out of the daily energy peak
This is the best use of rooftop solar. It makes efficient use of our current infrastructure and actually makes the existing plants more effective. We should change building codes to require all new buildings to provide solar capacity equal to their peak usage - base load.
I am less concerned if Facebook wants to know if I'm more interested in Pampers or Depends than of government tracking...
Which just goes to show that you've totally underestimated the ability of private organizations to abuse power. There are many forms of power, not all of them come from the barrel of a gun.
Sure, that statement could have used a few caveats for things like access to birth control and the capacity for rational thought that make us a tad different than the other predator comparisons.
Certain studies have done Cost analysis that takes into account the environmental impacts of coal (but not the environmental impacts of solar) and concluded that solar was cheaper.
That's interesting and may or may not be true by the time you figure in things like transmission infrastructure and power storage but it's irrelevant to the discussion of whether there are currently cities that grow enough food to feed themselves without the need to import food from surrounding farming areas.
Sure, it's a threat, just not for the reasons you outlined. The problem is that it would imperil our fuel supplies and shipping lanes. Personally I think the military is taking a prudent approach, risk management is after all one of their designated functions.
You do realize China cranks out new cities the way we crank out cars, don't you?
Sure, though that trend seems to be on the decline now that they've overbuilt, besides it has nothing to do with this discussion.
Look, I'm quite serious. Now get with the 21st Century.
Be as serious as you like, without evidence it's all just conjecture.
Do I think it's possible that at some point in the future we might build self-sustaining arcologies, sure, do they exist now, no.
I've seen plenty of proposals on how it might be possible at some point in the future, but that's not what you claimed. You said that it was already happening which sounds highly unlikely. The square footage requirements alone would require a highly specialized design and any project of that size and nature would be all over the news and frankly Slashdot. China has a few small pilot project communities (though even those don't appear to be food sufficient) and has discussed plans to make cities that are more sustainable but I found nothing like what you were suggesting. If you can't be bothered to provide even one piece of evidence then I'll just assume that you're blowing smoke to put it politely.
There is a wonderful book "Spiritual Capital", which should be recommended again and again to get the picture and ideas of cure.
Read the book description, it's basically a bunch of high sounding ideals backed by little more than hope. That's why both communism and anarchy fail miserably, they fail to take human nature into account. Capitalism is ugly, brutal and dispiriting but it's built on the reliable principle of self interest. I'm all for alternatives but you need to find one that doesn't rely on magic unicorns to function.
Unlikely, those most likely to migrate or starve don't have nuclear capability and we're working hard to make sure they don't get it.
All plants and animals except humans form a natural balance and live in harmony
They all try to kill or outbreed each other and steal each others food or habitat as much as possible. We're just better at it. The only thing that limits the population of an apex predator is food supply.
They've done it in a number of cities in China already.
Ok, now I'm curious about your outlandish claim. Citation please?
All those in favor of mandated population control please report to your nearest friendly government population reduction center for immediate "processing".
It seems very unlikely we could possible reduce population growth enough in a couple generations to stop the inevitable wars for resources.
Actually population growth is coming down and total population is projected to top out at around 10.1 Billion or so. There will still be conflicts over resources, but that will be because of the rising standards of living world wide rather than total population issues.
Should a hostile AI want to do ill to humanity, it would either require support from some portion of humanity, or it would be limited to a small set of engagements until its machines-as-appendages ran out of supplies or broke down.
Fortunately humans have been shown to prioritize self over larger groupings so finding a small army of AI sympathizers and quislings shouldn't pose too much of a challenge for the budding AI overlords.
Agreed, he's guilty as sin, but he did the right thing morally and for the country at great personal cost, we should pardon him.
I have a general distrust of government agencies who have experienced regulatory capture, that doesn't mean there is no one that I trust.
Well, what should we do vs what can we do becomes the biggest question.
Before you can answer that question you have to answer this one first: "How much is it rational to spend on this project?"
Of course not. You'd need something properly Orwellian like the "Freedom in labeling act".
Because if the government doesn't do it then it will never happen. Construction companies in particular will never switch unless it is mandated by law.
Bah, why waste time with mandates. Just impose an imperial units labeling tax of 5% and watch the free market do its thing. Metric would become standard nearly overnight.
Save the world, shoot an MBA.
You realize that MBAs are mostly middle management right? Sure, they're easy to blame because they're the public face of a lot of unpopular decisions, but that doesn't make them the primary drivers of the issue.
In USA, probably 50% of federal tax dollars are wasted
I'm registered Libertarian and not a fan of big government but this figure strikes me as hyperbole rather than any sort of rational evaluation. Sure, the government is inefficient and wastes money by the bucket load, but you'd have to have a very unusual definition of waste for it to equal anything like 50%.
Yes, but it's a blatant violation of the program to use people you employ to train the h1-b applicants. The program is there for when you can't find employees that are qualified. If they're able to train the replacements then they're clearly qualified to do the job.
And so we'll all hold our breath waiting for the huge influx of federal agents who are going to swoop into Disney Headquarters, arrest the entire executive staff and cart away all of their equipment and correspondence as evidence. There will be perp walks and a massive parade of criminal trials where the lawbreakers will be given harsh sentences as a warning to any others who consider abusing the system. Oh wait, no rich people were harmed? Nevermind, it's all good.
Yes, trains are nice where there are tracks and you're shipping the right kind of load. Despite trains many advantages trucks are often better for a variety of reasons, that has little to do with whether they're automated or not.