True, but if you can raise the cost you cut the occurrence rate. There is no law preventing them from having police officers tail every citizen, they don't because it would be prohibitively expensive.
How about a piece of software that does for current coding what the compiler did for assembler and the assembler did for machine code? (Thereby pushing most programming up the stack an abstraction level)
So it's inevitable that lots of content will be mis-identified as extremist by use of the convenient reporting button. Who gets to decide? Inevitably this will end up being about the biases of whoever is in charge.
I believe in the power of self interest to create good things for society with the right structures in place. I also know that with the wrong structures in place self interest can create horrible problems. Greed can be yoked to the wheel of progress and you shouldn't bind the mouth of the kine that tread that grain but it's important that the yoke be strong and the lash quick or they just eat the grain and don't do any pushing.
My direct supervisor is technical, and I'm a technical manager, but the guys running the show don't have to be tech guys for things to run correctly, they need to be good managers.
Supervisors should be technically competent. For managers this isn't as big a deal. Your CIO sounds like he has exactly the right way to approach the problem. Hire the right people, then listen to them.
The correct solution is to ensure that all costs of energy production, including things like air pollution and strip mining runoff, are re-internalized to the companies producing them. Then we let the free market sort things out by true cost. Under that scenario coal is not the cheapest option and the problem resolves itself.
I'm not so sure about that. I play Warframe which is F2P and have yet to see anything I'd have to pay money for if I didn't feel like it. It's a great game too.
The most likely application of this software is not to maximize the retention of top performers. Rather they will seek to minimize the amount of benefits paid for a given level of quit risk for the employee population. In other words, how much can we squeeze them without them doing anything about it? Not that this is new, but now they'll be able to do it more efficiently! Ahh, progress, how much we love thee.
I went back and re-read the summary, and you're right it's engineered into a virus not a bacterium. I'm not sure that really changes my question much but consider me corrected.
Sure, I knew all that. I'm just unaware of how likely things like genetic transcription errors, possible mistakes by the researcher, contamination issues and other process problems could result in things going not as planned. Is this so safe any grad student could do it in their garage or more on the level of this should only be done in a level four biohazard facility in the Arctic?
Apparently as a layman I have no understanding of the dangers, or lack thereof, of viral payloads genetically engineered into bacterium as on the face of it that sounds ridiculously dangerous.
Both of those countries use parliamentary systems which are different in nature from the US system. Due to the fact that the elected members have to "form a government" parties outside of the main two have some hope of wielding power and avoiding consolidation, this partially ameliorates the effects of first past the post voting. Many other democratic style systems use "proportional representation" which bypasses the problem.
Slashdot Mirror
This isn't about system admins.
Of course not, that would suggest that the primary users actually have influence on the development process. It's just unthinkable.
True, but if you can raise the cost you cut the occurrence rate. There is no law preventing them from having police officers tail every citizen, they don't because it would be prohibitively expensive.
How about a piece of software that does for current coding what the compiler did for assembler and the assembler did for machine code? (Thereby pushing most programming up the stack an abstraction level)
So it's inevitable that lots of content will be mis-identified as extremist by use of the convenient reporting button. Who gets to decide? Inevitably this will end up being about the biases of whoever is in charge.
-1 Socialism Is Not The Same As Stalinism
Certainly not! Sadly, despite it's good intentions, the one inevitably leads to the other.
Although Portland's public transit is much better than many other US Cities, frankly it still sucks for most purposes.
I believe in the power of self interest to create good things for society with the right structures in place. I also know that with the wrong structures in place self interest can create horrible problems. Greed can be yoked to the wheel of progress and you shouldn't bind the mouth of the kine that tread that grain but it's important that the yoke be strong and the lash quick or they just eat the grain and don't do any pushing.
I thin that, if we could get a Libertarian leaning wing of the democrats to... then we'd really be on to something.
Interesting idea I suppose but progressives are fundamentally statists. I just don't see how that's going to work.
My direct supervisor is technical, and I'm a technical manager, but the guys running the show don't have to be tech guys for things to run correctly, they need to be good managers.
Supervisors should be technically competent. For managers this isn't as big a deal. Your CIO sounds like he has exactly the right way to approach the problem. Hire the right people, then listen to them.
Good for the individual / group in question of course, good for society as whole, no.
The correct solution is to ensure that all costs of energy production, including things like air pollution and strip mining runoff, are re-internalized to the companies producing them. Then we let the free market sort things out by true cost. Under that scenario coal is not the cheapest option and the problem resolves itself.
Hard work is for proles.
I'm not so sure about that. I play Warframe which is F2P and have yet to see anything I'd have to pay money for if I didn't feel like it. It's a great game too.
The most likely application of this software is not to maximize the retention of top performers. Rather they will seek to minimize the amount of benefits paid for a given level of quit risk for the employee population. In other words, how much can we squeeze them without them doing anything about it? Not that this is new, but now they'll be able to do it more efficiently! Ahh, progress, how much we love thee.
The way to fix the economy is for the government to stop meddling with it by picking winners and losers.
Oh, you mean like the current practice of taxing capital gains and dividends at a lower rate than income?
Bad example. Anti-vagrancy laws have tended to make it illegal to "live in a cave in the woods."
Well, we can't have people avoiding property taxes by living in free shelters now can we?
Minneapolis (in Minnesota) now has ranked-choice voting.
I think that's probably the best and simplest solution. It's not perfect, but no system is and it'll tend to produce more consensus candidates.
So there's still hope for flying armored dirigibles with particle cannon death rays?
I went back and re-read the summary, and you're right it's engineered into a virus not a bacterium. I'm not sure that really changes my question much but consider me corrected.
Sure, I knew all that. I'm just unaware of how likely things like genetic transcription errors, possible mistakes by the researcher, contamination issues and other process problems could result in things going not as planned. Is this so safe any grad student could do it in their garage or more on the level of this should only be done in a level four biohazard facility in the Arctic?
Yes, it was a typo, yes I know the difference, yes English is a stupid language for punctuation. I'm sure you feel much better now.
Apparently as a layman I have no understanding of the dangers, or lack thereof, of viral payloads genetically engineered into bacterium as on the face of it that sounds ridiculously dangerous.
Both of those countries use parliamentary systems which are different in nature from the US system. Due to the fact that the elected members have to "form a government" parties outside of the main two have some hope of wielding power and avoiding consolidation, this partially ameliorates the effects of first past the post voting. Many other democratic style systems use "proportional representation" which bypasses the problem.
There are at least two states in the Union (Louisiana, Georgia) that mandate runoff elections if any candidate fails to get 50%+1;
Runoff elections don't change the first past the post system and it's effects.
Even Gerrymandering isn't the real problem. The real issue is first past the post voting, it inevitably leads to two party politics.