The real moral issues are what to do with the unemployable for decades or perhaps even forever. The social change which would be required to handle a 60% U3 unemployment rate is likely to be messy.
Ah, a solution for that has long been proposed (indirectly) by Isaac Asimov in The Naked Sun (Spoilers in the plot summary but not in the following!):
Massively reduce the number of humans and occupy them with leisurely hobbies, arts, gardening,.... and have basically all work done by AIs (or for Asimov: Robots). Main problem will be the reduction of inhabitants on earth and keeping them AIs from trying to fill all the niches leaving no resources for the humans.
No the real message (of the friendly (and unread) article) is that the author wonders how a non-profit, which is supposed to give away all results for free, solves the problem of capitalistic companies afterwards taking those results and doing evil AI things with them. And he points out that some of the largest capitalistic companies are currently lead by the founders of the non-profit.
Slashdot is getting more and more worthless by the day:-(
No, Slashdot is more and more going the way of Usenet (before it became a warez distributor). It was a much more efficient, easily searchable "forum" with a centralized content hierarchy making it easy to find new topics. But no user-access control.
When it was a mostly used by university students and other techies, peer-pressure still worked somewhat keeping signal/noise high enough to be worthwhile. Then computers became more user-friendly and everyone with an agenda discovered it and waged its wars there (or spammed it). No user-access control meant no way to exclude them. Thus in the end most people moved to the much inferior web-forums which had user-access control (and the ability to embed kitten pictures;-).
When slashdot was still a site mostly used by techies - known (or feared) by the rest mainly for slashdotting - editors, submitters, commenters and moderators mostly had the same agenda: Read interesting stuff within tech and science (and fiction). But nowadays "the rest" has learned in three ways:
Other sites emerged catering for the same audience (and slashdot went commercial) so the editors need to find stories which appeal to as much potential readers as possible.
The web altogether has become a race for attention. So submitters now contain many attention seekers promoting their own sites/blogs irrelevant of relevance/newness because they want to be slashdotted (for financial gains).
With a greater audience (and probably also the original techies becoming older and more opinionated) more people came wanting to push an agenda (or being paid to push an agenda) causing comments and moderation to deteriorate.
So, learning from Usenet, if you want to have your nice old slashdot again, you have to make a new service which at least at first is not attractive to or to complicated to use for the non-techies. Otherwise just be happy in knowing that yes, capitalism works in bringing all the good things to the masses..... reducing their quality on the way;-)
You might want to read the whole article, including the Mathematical Details --- snip --- ... given two massive bodies in orbits around their common barycenter, there are five positions in space where a third body, of comparatively negligible mass, could be placed so as to maintain its position relative to the two massive bodies. --- snip ---
Admittedly, the German version, which I read first, mentions this already in the summary.
Perhaps Islam is not a religion based on fear like Christianity.
Yes, a lot of perhaps and maybe. Because actually google shows quite a lot of fear in the quaran. Someone even made the effort to determine the ratio being "fear" mentioned in every 10th verse. And while the latter author is clearly an opponent of islam, the first source looks quite legit. I cannot see fewer mentions of fear there than in the bible. So much for "not based on fear like Christianity".
Maybe not doing something because it is wrong is more important than not doing something due to the consequences.
Oh, they do quote consequences. Yet as I wrote, they are all surprisingly utilitarian. That fits more to secular leaders than religious ones. Especially those having the power of a feared god behind them (see above).
Perhaps the Imams also do not think they speak for Allah as Christianity seems to so often.
Yet on other not so past occasions some of the highest authorities of Sunni or Shia Islam found it appropriate to call for a holy war or murder. That is rather a lot to ask for when not being authorized by Allah to do so. Yet when speaking out against barbarism, terrorism and the killing of innocents these "legal" formalisms are suddenly important? Or is it because infidels are not innocent according to the later parts of the quaran?
Indeed an interesting link you present there as proof that muslims condem terroristic actions. It shows they do but it also shows something you may not have intended. The statements mostly follow along the lines of "does not represent islam or its principles", "is a danger to islam and muslims, too", "hugely damaging islam by giving it a bad image", "violates sharia law and human rights", "are crimes against humanity" ,....
Yet, even though most statements come from religious authorities such as imans, muftis,... not once I read a statement such as "These terrorist actions are completely opposite to the will of Allah. Everyone performing or willingly supporting them (including monetarily) will burn in hell forever."
It is interesting for two reasons: First, assuming that at least most followers (maybe not the leaders) of ISIS actually belief in Allah, such a statement might have more weight with them than some reference to "western" human rights. And it might discomfort quite some people on the Arab peninsula. Second, I start to wonder whether the reason is that there are too many verses in the quaran saying otherwise that even these authorities cannot say such a thing without being labeled as apostates.
> there is rational basis for U.S. gun owners to want high capacity magazines, concealed weapon carry, semiauto rifles with features for convenient combat use.
While I agree that some armed people in a crowd could reduce the death toll, would you care to explain what you want with high-capacity magazines and semi-automatic rifles?
If you are caught in such an attack, you are not likely to have any rifle with you. Or do you typically carry one in a cafe or a rock concert? You will at best have a pistol with you. If instead you think of hearing the news on the radio (much later than the police), gearing up in your garage, driving to the scene (slower than the police due to lack emergency lights) and then deploying your mil-spec equipment against the attackers, you will probably be killed by the already fighting police which will assume you are one of the attackers. So there are no advantages gained by those extensions of your right to bear arms.
On the other hand having high-capacity magzines, (semi-)automatic rifles,... will make it much harder for "normally" armed citizens to kill you should you go nuts,.
Come on. EXIF arrived only lately on the scene.... around 1995. Obviously Nerds would not know about something that new.... or at least the editors wouldn't.
Slashdot, News for Nerds, Edited by Jocks.
Can an editor please retract this article. This is a disgrace for this site!
Obviously all the questions you posed are culturally biased because they all ask for knowledge (partially even of cultural norms). IQ test do not ask for knowledge but the ability to process knowledge. I.e. they normally provide all the information you need. See e.g. http://www.intelligencetest.co... .
Surely, one can train to be good at such test (simply doing them once or twice will probably enormously help as one then has some basic understanding on how they work). So there will be a bias towards parents who care enough to run their child through them at least once, which tend to be the middle-class and up. But it has nothing to do with your made up questions.
Because it is a vulnerability NOT in Android but in 3rd party remote control software installed by HTC. Please RTFA.
Vulnerable components of these 3rd party mRSTs are often pre-loaded on devices or included as part of a manufacturer or network provider’s approved software build for a device.
For your car analogy: If "TurboTuning Inc." broke your Chevy while trying to make it able to go 200 mph, would you sue Chevrolet to fix it? Well, obviously in the U.S.....
one thing FIFA realized that Microsoft didn't is that if you want girls to play your sport, you don't take away their ball!
Well they didn't try to take away the ball but tried it on the non-skimpy shorts and succeeded on the natural gras. Now if that sets a standard on what the author of the summary expects from companies to do to entice women to come to IT......
No, you may want to read that letter again: They are expected to ask for consent before flying. As I wrote: If one wants to do a record flight with such a clause in the loan contract, one would be well advised to get consent in writing before announcing it in the press (and awakening competitors).
Except that they already had an agreement with Siemens and their plan to fly over water has been known for over a year.
The letter from Siemens claims otherwise: "It came to our attention and you confirmed yesterday..." sounds like Siemens had to find out on their own. If one loans a prototype motor from a big company with the limit "[nobody] may use our motor without our consent during any flight whatsoever", one better has consent in a provable paper trail before informing the press (but seemingly not the motor owner) about a record flight attempt.
Not only the title is wrong. Also no grabbing was involved.
The sentence in the summary (and article) that the robot "grabbed him" appears to me as a non-native speaker's translation of this newspaper artikel. It says "Der Mann sei von dem Roboter erfasst und gegen eine Metallplatte gedrückt worden." Yes "erfassen" can mean "to grab" (although one would normally just use "fassen" for that) but in this context it means "to hit and push". You will find lots of sentences were people were "erfasst" by a car and I think we can all agree that cars usually do not grab people.
So instead of a malicious robot grabbing his tormentor and throwing him against a wall, the poor guy probably was just caught between one of the joints of the robot and a metal plate when the respective part of the robots arm moved towards that plate.
You know, before making fun of someone due to an unknown abbreviation you might want to google forit first. Otherwise you only make your lack of knowledge obvious. One can definitely argue whether MISRA really prevents "most of the coding issues" as claimed by the GP (or whether it is the rigorous testing) but restricting C definitely helps.
This is the third submission of "arctother" pointing to "taxicabsubjects.blogspot.com". Taking the the frequency of posts on that blog into account, about every third post there is seemingly slashdot material. One wonders whose blog that is.
The Doppler effect only comes in to explain how one can get atoms to actually slow down (thus cool down) when absorbing laser light while vibrating back and forth (so the absorption could hinder them or speed them up). The main mechanism is the absorption of photons and respective transfer of momentum. Georgia state university has a very nice explanation except that they are loosing me in the last but one paragraph when it really gets interesting.
Great, so you acknowledge that the German constitution allows different treatment of foreigners (i.e. non-citizens) in many areas which BTW has nothing to do with "done like that everywhere" because law does not work that way.
Why, then, do you think that the constitution prohibits different treatment of foreigners with respect to tuition fees?
There is simply no way for a university to charge a foreign student for a service a german student is not charged for.
The (very elaborate) nonsense is actually in your article. As pointed out by ttsai there are other things than race or place of birth. The relevant here is Citizenship Only German citizens can vote in federal or state elections. That is a discrimination. Only German citizens can demand to be let into Germany at a German border. That is a discrimination. Only German citizens can demand welfare without having ever worked in Germany. That is a discrimination. Only German citizens are entitled to diplomatic support by a German embassy should the need arise. That is a discrimination. .......
The law you quote prevents in no way demanding a tuition fee from non-German-citizens (or rather non-EU-citizens due to the EU freedom of movement act but that's not a German law and its under significant discussion within the EU due to e.g. the migration of German student to Austria overloading the Austrian universities while there were general tuition fees (about $1000 a year) in many German states).
Slashdot Mirror
The real moral issues are what to do with the unemployable for decades or perhaps even forever. The social change which would be required to handle a 60% U3 unemployment rate is likely to be messy.
Ah, a solution for that has long been proposed (indirectly) by Isaac Asimov in The Naked Sun (Spoilers in the plot summary but not in the following!):
Massively reduce the number of humans and occupy them with leisurely hobbies, arts, gardening, .... and have basically all work done by AIs (or for Asimov: Robots). Main problem will be the reduction of inhabitants on earth and keeping them AIs from trying to fill all the niches leaving no resources for the humans.
No the real message (of the friendly (and unread) article) is that the author wonders how a non-profit, which is supposed to give away all results for free, solves the problem of capitalistic companies afterwards taking those results and doing evil AI things with them.
And he points out that some of the largest capitalistic companies are currently lead by the founders of the non-profit.
Slashdot is getting more and more worthless by the day :-(
No, Slashdot is more and more going the way of Usenet (before it became a warez distributor). It was a much more efficient, easily searchable "forum" with a centralized content hierarchy making it easy to find new topics. But no user-access control.
When it was a mostly used by university students and other techies, peer-pressure still worked somewhat keeping signal/noise high enough to be worthwhile. Then computers became more user-friendly and everyone with an agenda discovered it and waged its wars there (or spammed it). No user-access control meant no way to exclude them. Thus in the end most people moved to the much inferior web-forums which had user-access control (and the ability to embed kitten pictures ;-).
When slashdot was still a site mostly used by techies - known (or feared) by the rest mainly for slashdotting - editors, submitters, commenters and moderators mostly had the same agenda: Read interesting stuff within tech and science (and fiction). But nowadays "the rest" has learned in three ways:
So, learning from Usenet, if you want to have your nice old slashdot again, you have to make a new service which at least at first is not attractive to or to complicated to use for the non-techies. Otherwise just be happy in knowing that yes, capitalism works in bringing all the good things to the masses ..... reducing their quality on the way ;-)
You might want to read the whole article, including the Mathematical Details
... given two massive bodies in orbits around their common barycenter, there are five positions in space where a third body, of comparatively negligible mass, could be placed so as to maintain its position relative to the two massive bodies.
--- snip ---
--- snip ---
Admittedly, the German version, which I read first, mentions this already in the summary.
According to newspaper and magazine reports most recruitment happens in personal contact with radical preachers.
Perhaps Islam is not a religion based on fear like Christianity.
Yes, a lot of perhaps and maybe. Because actually google shows quite a lot of fear in the quaran. Someone even made the effort to determine the ratio being "fear" mentioned in every 10th verse. And while the latter author is clearly an opponent of islam, the first source looks quite legit. I cannot see fewer mentions of fear there than in the bible. So much for "not based on fear like Christianity".
Maybe not doing something because it is wrong is more important than not doing something due to the consequences.
Oh, they do quote consequences. Yet as I wrote, they are all surprisingly utilitarian. That fits more to secular leaders than religious ones. Especially those having the power of a feared god behind them (see above).
Perhaps the Imams also do not think they speak for Allah as Christianity seems to so often.
Yet on other not so past occasions some of the highest authorities of Sunni or Shia Islam found it appropriate to call for a holy war or murder. That is rather a lot to ask for when not being authorized by Allah to do so. Yet when speaking out against barbarism, terrorism and the killing of innocents these "legal" formalisms are suddenly important? Or is it because infidels are not innocent according to the later parts of the quaran?
Indeed an interesting link you present there as proof that muslims condem terroristic actions. It shows they do but it also shows something you may not have intended. ....
The statements mostly follow along the lines of "does not represent islam or its principles", "is a danger to islam and muslims, too", "hugely damaging islam by giving it a bad image", "violates sharia law and human rights", "are crimes against humanity" ,
Yet, even though most statements come from religious authorities such as imans, muftis, ... not once I read a statement such as
"These terrorist actions are completely opposite to the will of Allah. Everyone performing or willingly supporting them (including monetarily) will burn in hell forever."
It is interesting for two reasons:
First, assuming that at least most followers (maybe not the leaders) of ISIS actually belief in Allah, such a statement might have more weight with them than some reference to "western" human rights. And it might discomfort quite some people on the Arab peninsula.
Second, I start to wonder whether the reason is that there are too many verses in the quaran saying otherwise that even these authorities cannot say such a thing without being labeled as apostates.
Do this long enough and you are endangering the survival of the religion in question as external pressure mounts.
So as elsewhere nowadays: Short term profit causing long-term loss.
> there is rational basis for U.S. gun owners to want high capacity magazines, concealed weapon carry, semiauto rifles with features for convenient combat use.
While I agree that some armed people in a crowd could reduce the death toll, would you care to explain what you want with high-capacity magazines and semi-automatic rifles?
If you are caught in such an attack, you are not likely to have any rifle with you. Or do you typically carry one in a cafe or a rock concert? You will at best have a pistol with you.
If instead you think of hearing the news on the radio (much later than the police), gearing up in your garage, driving to the scene (slower than the police due to lack emergency lights) and then deploying your mil-spec equipment against the attackers, you will probably be killed by the already fighting police which will assume you are one of the attackers.
So there are no advantages gained by those extensions of your right to bear arms.
On the other hand having high-capacity magzines, (semi-)automatic rifles, ... will make it much harder for "normally" armed citizens to kill you should you go nuts,.
Come on. EXIF arrived only lately on the scene .... around 1995. Obviously Nerds would not know about something that new .... or at least the editors wouldn't.
Slashdot, News for Nerds, Edited by Jocks.
Can an editor please retract this article. This is a disgrace for this site!
A house elephant? Careful what you ask for. A German child series thought this through already ;-)
> could the very word "permissions" get any closer to "privilege"???
Hey, at least they are fighting against priviledge escalation.
And don't forget the drives to move more code into user-space to reduce overhead.
So code is not so one-sided assembled as you make it sound. After all, all of it gets executed sooner or later. That merges.
Obviously all the questions you posed are culturally biased because they all ask for knowledge (partially even of cultural norms).
IQ test do not ask for knowledge but the ability to process knowledge. I.e. they normally provide all the information you need. See e.g. http://www.intelligencetest.co... .
Surely, one can train to be good at such test (simply doing them once or twice will probably enormously help as one then has some basic understanding on how they work). So there will be a bias towards parents who care enough to run their child through them at least once, which tend to be the middle-class and up.
But it has nothing to do with your made up questions.
My feeling, too.
Either we have to work on the questions (some were probably not that new to him) or he had just a bad day.
Because it is a vulnerability NOT in Android but in 3rd party remote control software installed by HTC. Please RTFA.
Vulnerable components of these 3rd party mRSTs are often pre-loaded on devices or included as part of a manufacturer or network provider’s approved software build for a device.
For your car analogy: If "TurboTuning Inc." broke your Chevy while trying to make it able to go 200 mph, would you sue Chevrolet to fix it? Well, obviously in the U.S. ....
And in addition the summary praises FIFA for
one thing FIFA realized that Microsoft didn't is that if you want girls to play your sport, you don't take away their ball!
Well they didn't try to take away the ball but tried it on the non-skimpy shorts and succeeded on the natural gras. ......
Now if that sets a standard on what the author of the summary expects from companies to do to entice women to come to IT
No, you may want to read that letter again: They are expected to ask for consent before flying. As I wrote: If one wants to do a record flight with such a clause in the loan contract, one would be well advised to get consent in writing before announcing it in the press (and awakening competitors).
Except that they already had an agreement with Siemens and their plan to fly over water has been known for over a year.
The letter from Siemens claims otherwise: "It came to our attention and you confirmed yesterday ..." sounds like Siemens had to find out on their own.
If one loans a prototype motor from a big company with the limit "[nobody] may use our motor without our consent during any flight whatsoever", one better has consent in a provable paper trail before informing the press (but seemingly not the motor owner) about a record flight attempt.
Not only the title is wrong. Also no grabbing was involved.
The sentence in the summary (and article) that the robot "grabbed him" appears to me as a non-native speaker's translation of this newspaper artikel. It says "Der Mann sei von dem Roboter erfasst und gegen eine Metallplatte gedrückt worden."
Yes "erfassen" can mean "to grab" (although one would normally just use "fassen" for that) but in this context it means "to hit and push". You will find lots of sentences were people were "erfasst" by a car and I think we can all agree that cars usually do not grab people.
So instead of a malicious robot grabbing his tormentor and throwing him against a wall, the poor guy probably was just caught between one of the joints of the robot and a metal plate when the respective part of the robots arm moved towards that plate.
You know, before making fun of someone due to an unknown abbreviation you might want to google for it first. Otherwise you only make your lack of knowledge obvious.
One can definitely argue whether MISRA really prevents "most of the coding issues" as claimed by the GP (or whether it is the rigorous testing) but restricting C definitely helps.
This is the third submission of "arctother" pointing to "taxicabsubjects.blogspot.com". Taking the the frequency of posts on that blog into account, about every third post there is seemingly slashdot material. One wonders whose blog that is.
Upps, posting to undo mismoderation.
The Doppler effect only comes in to explain how one can get atoms to actually slow down (thus cool down) when absorbing laser light while vibrating back and forth (so the absorption could hinder them or speed them up). The main mechanism is the absorption of photons and respective transfer of momentum. Georgia state university has a very nice explanation except that they are loosing me in the last but one paragraph when it really gets interesting.
Great, so you acknowledge that the German constitution allows different treatment of foreigners (i.e. non-citizens) in many areas which BTW has nothing to do with "done like that everywhere" because law does not work that way.
Why, then, do you think that the constitution prohibits different treatment of foreigners with respect to tuition fees?
Wow, articles about nonsense,...
There is simply no way for a university to charge a foreign student for a service a german student is not charged for.
The (very elaborate) nonsense is actually in your article. As pointed out by ttsai there are other things than race or place of birth. The relevant here is
.......
Citizenship
Only German citizens can vote in federal or state elections. That is a discrimination.
Only German citizens can demand to be let into Germany at a German border. That is a discrimination.
Only German citizens can demand welfare without having ever worked in Germany. That is a discrimination.
Only German citizens are entitled to diplomatic support by a German embassy should the need arise. That is a discrimination.
The law you quote prevents in no way demanding a tuition fee from non-German-citizens (or rather non-EU-citizens due to the EU freedom of movement act but that's not a German law and its under significant discussion within the EU due to e.g. the migration of German student to Austria overloading the Austrian universities while there were general tuition fees (about $1000 a year) in many German states).