Mass transit DOES help people get around. Anyone on mass transit is someone who isn't on the highway. You build a light rail line, it carries 50000 commuters per day, that's 50000 less people on the freeway. That doesn't mean the freeway is less congested, because 50000 new people will start using the freeway. But it does mean 50000 more people are capable of moving around.
Can anyone justify the expense and bureaucracy of taxi medallions when passenger safety isn't an issue?
Yes - traffic congestion. According to Uber's own study, Uber operations in central Manhattan have decreased average traffic speeds for all vehicles by 8%.
Adolf would have killed off most of the world's population, and dead people don't use coal or oil. By stopping Adolf, we made the world's environmental problems much worse.
The ethical issues here have nothing to do with abortion.
With abortion, the fetus lives a "normal life" until, one day, you decide to put an end to it. If you think that a fetus is a real live human being (as do certain religions), then abortion is murder. If you don't think this, then abortion is more like plastic surgery for the mom, or at most, like putting a pet to sleep when you can no longer take care of it. In short, momentary pain which is justified by other needs.
With this brain, the problem is not ending a life, but the life itself. If this brain were indeed conscious, it is not having a "normal life". It could be in a continual state of stress and panic due to not receiving the sensory input it expects. Keeping it alive could mean subjecting it to nonstop emotional torture. That's not a specifically religious concern - anyone who cares about not inflicting pain should be bothered by it.
This brain does not show brain waves, so it's probably not conscious. But the next brain this group develops will be more developed. So we need to figure out how to morally safeguard this kind of research, sooner rather than later.
I know a number of women who got married and then, within a year, their weight ballooned by a hundred pounds or so. Finally they felt they did not have to starve themselves in order to impress potential mates. So they let themselves go.
The good news is that after the first year, they mostly lost a significant chunk of what they had gained. It was nice not having to worry about diet, but in the long run most people want to live responsibly and healthily.
Yeah, but do you trust a random product purchased from AliExpress to actually meet the certifications it claims to? AliExpress has the problems of online merchants and contemporary Chinese business ethics all put together.
This test has two main parts. First it asks you to sort between "white people and positive words" vs "black people and negative words". Then you sort between "white people and negative words" and "black people and positive words". Since you probably do the first task faster, it says you are the biased towards seeing white people as positive and black people as negative.
The problem is that just doing the test affects your judgment. When you do the first half, it trains you to build up an association between white people and positive words. Then you have to switch all of a sudden, and you are force to unlearn that association and learn a different association. Of course that is mentally confusing and you don't do as well. But that says nothing about whether you had any biases before you started taking the test.
If government imposed artificial scarcity and price controls is such great idea for taxis, then why shouldn't the same model be good for other areas of the economy?
Because there is only space for a certain number of vehicles on the street, and if too many taxis are circulating, there will be massive congestion?
One of the problems with Concorde and the Tu-144's operation was the high engine noise levels, associated with very high jet velocities used during take-off, and even more importantly flying over communities near the airport. SST engines need a fairly high specific thrust (net thrust/airflow) during supersonic cruise, to minimize engine cross-sectional area and, thereby, nacelle drag. Unfortunately this implies a high jet velocity, which makes the engines noisy which causes problems particularly at low speeds/altitudes and at take-off. Therefore, a future SST might well benefit from a variable cycle engine, where the specific thrust (and therefore jet velocity and noise) is low at take-off, but is forced high during supersonic cruise.
One difference is that the intercontinental travel market has grown immensely since the days of the Concorde. US-Asia and Europe-Asia are gigantic flight markets that barely existed when the Concorde flew.
Also, the Concorde was designed in the 50s and 60s. There's been a lot of innovation in aeronautical engineering since then. A new supersonic plane would take advantage of that to be more efficient and quieter than the Concorde.
Is it just you? Once I visited home and walked around with my dad, and ran into my friend's dad, Bill. All I could think was "two old men having an old-man conversation". Afterwards my dad told he he was surprised how much Bill had aged, while he himself had barely aged at all!
but I'm surprised how low the level of discussion has been here.
Amazon, Google, etc are private companies. They are not the government. They can remove whatever they want and it's not a free speech issue.
Or have these companies reached a level of market dominance where they are like "common carriers", and if they stop selling something for political reasons, it basically means that you can't buy it anywhere and it becomes a sort of free speech issue?
That's the only potentially interesting discussion here - and nobody's having it.
Good, useful reviews don't appear every day. If a review is 2 years old and hundreds of people have said that it's useful, that's probably because it IS useful.
This change seems designed to turn the review section into a discussion forum where you have to reload every few minutes to participate in the latest discussion. I suppose this is good for Amazon's advertising revenue, but it's bad for customers who want to know what to buy or not to buy.
Slashdot Mirror
Mass transit DOES help people get around. Anyone on mass transit is someone who isn't on the highway. You build a light rail line, it carries 50000 commuters per day, that's 50000 less people on the freeway. That doesn't mean the freeway is less congested, because 50000 new people will start using the freeway. But it does mean 50000 more people are capable of moving around.
Can anyone justify the expense and bureaucracy of taxi medallions when passenger safety isn't an issue?
Yes - traffic congestion. According to Uber's own study, Uber operations in central Manhattan have decreased average traffic speeds for all vehicles by 8%.
Adolf would have killed off most of the world's population, and dead people don't use coal or oil. By stopping Adolf, we made the world's environmental problems much worse.
Priorities, baby :)
So them giving 1 million euros is about proportionate to me giving 1 dollar to help refugees.
Plus they get useful good PR from this, unlike me.
So this isn't especially impressive.
You have this backwards. French is an unimportant well-known language, not an important obscure language.
The ethical issues here have nothing to do with abortion.
With abortion, the fetus lives a "normal life" until, one day, you decide to put an end to it. If you think that a fetus is a real live human being (as do certain religions), then abortion is murder. If you don't think this, then abortion is more like plastic surgery for the mom, or at most, like putting a pet to sleep when you can no longer take care of it. In short, momentary pain which is justified by other needs.
With this brain, the problem is not ending a life, but the life itself. If this brain were indeed conscious, it is not having a "normal life". It could be in a continual state of stress and panic due to not receiving the sensory input it expects. Keeping it alive could mean subjecting it to nonstop emotional torture. That's not a specifically religious concern - anyone who cares about not inflicting pain should be bothered by it.
This brain does not show brain waves, so it's probably not conscious. But the next brain this group develops will be more developed. So we need to figure out how to morally safeguard this kind of research, sooner rather than later.
Any computing task will eventually complete eventually.
Are you sure about that? Church and Turing weren't.
Any *true* computer task will complete eventually.
I know a number of women who got married and then, within a year, their weight ballooned by a hundred pounds or so. Finally they felt they did not have to starve themselves in order to impress potential mates. So they let themselves go.
The good news is that after the first year, they mostly lost a significant chunk of what they had gained. It was nice not having to worry about diet, but in the long run most people want to live responsibly and healthily.
There will be more ads.
Like the aircraft carrier that was planned to be made out of ice?
Yeah, but do you trust a random product purchased from AliExpress to actually meet the certifications it claims to? AliExpress has the problems of online merchants and contemporary Chinese business ethics all put together.
This test has two main parts. First it asks you to sort between "white people and positive words" vs "black people and negative words". Then you sort between "white people and negative words" and "black people and positive words". Since you probably do the first task faster, it says you are the biased towards seeing white people as positive and black people as negative.
The problem is that just doing the test affects your judgment. When you do the first half, it trains you to build up an association between white people and positive words. Then you have to switch all of a sudden, and you are force to unlearn that association and learn a different association. Of course that is mentally confusing and you don't do as well. But that says nothing about whether you had any biases before you started taking the test.
Because there is only space for a certain number of vehicles on the street, and if too many taxis are circulating, there will be massive congestion?
source
One difference is that the intercontinental travel market has grown immensely since the days of the Concorde. US-Asia and Europe-Asia are gigantic flight markets that barely existed when the Concorde flew.
Also, the Concorde was designed in the 50s and 60s. There's been a lot of innovation in aeronautical engineering since then. A new supersonic plane would take advantage of that to be more efficient and quieter than the Concorde.
Is it just you?
Once I visited home and walked around with my dad, and ran into my friend's dad, Bill.
All I could think was "two old men having an old-man conversation".
Afterwards my dad told he he was surprised how much Bill had aged, while he himself had barely aged at all!
the most effective way to do this would be to crowdsource it. :)
Except for the 4000-foot mountain range that surrounds Los Angeles.
But denser areas require less road spending per person, because people have to travel less on average. So adding density saves each taxpayer money.
but I'm surprised how low the level of discussion has been here.
Amazon, Google, etc are private companies. They are not the government. They can remove whatever they want and it's not a free speech issue.
Or have these companies reached a level of market dominance where they are like "common carriers", and if they stop selling something for political reasons, it basically means that you can't buy it anywhere and it becomes a sort of free speech issue?
That's the only potentially interesting discussion here - and nobody's having it.
Good, useful reviews don't appear every day. If a review is 2 years old and hundreds of people have said that it's useful, that's probably because it IS useful.
This change seems designed to turn the review section into a discussion forum where you have to reload every few minutes to participate in the latest discussion. I suppose this is good for Amazon's advertising revenue, but it's bad for customers who want to know what to buy or not to buy.
Talk about pirating :)
And how exactly do you get to those links from the homepage?
I've seen sites where reading is free but you have to pay to comment.
The downside was that so few people paid that there wasn't a vibrant discussion.
at this pace, within a couple years I'll like Microsoft more than I like Mozilla.