However, I also think it has something to do with the perception that journalism is just a tool for propaganda these days. Journalism has taken a hit in perceived trust on all fronts by all consumers.
"Journalism" has always been about propaganda. That's why there were multiple papers - one for Democrats, one for Republicans, one for businessmen, one for the "wrong" side of the tracks, etc... etc...
The idea that "journalists" were some kind of impartial arbiter of truth came about in the 50's as newspapers (faced with competition from radio for decades and increasingly from TV) fought for readers as the era of closing and consolidation began to take hold. TV took up the idea for much the same reason, a veneer of impartiality sells. The hit in trust isn't because of propaganda - it's because as the number and independence of outlets has shrunk, the odds have increased that you're outside of the propaganda bias. Something the conservatives have brilliantly taken advantage of. The liberals were late to the party, but they're rapidly catching up.
The reality is that we've come full circle - once again there's a 'trusted' source for everyone, and everyone else's trusted source is complete garbage. But where we're screwed... instead of the trusted source(s) being independent, they're all under corporate thumbs.
Today, those newspapers are gone. National conglomerates have bought the small papers
Conglomerates small and large have been slurping up local papers for decades. Either yours was one of the rare ones that was actually independent rather than being owned by a conglomerate... Or you were one of the many people unaware that your local paper wasn't actually local.
What's changed isn't ownership mostly, but "local" papers being treated more explicitly as what they've long been - franchises of a larger group.
and that's including pumped storage facilities to neutralize the baseline canard that is invariably brought up when discussing wind and solar.
Sorry, but bullshit. That wind and solar cannot provide base power isn't a canard - it's a cold hard fact. What's a canard is the nonsensical belief that pumped storage is a magic wand and a universal solution that solves this problem. It isn't. It's very expensive, causes significant ecological damage, limited in applicability, and it's limited in total capacity on top of all that.
This seems a bit...dramatic...in its description. Yes, as of comparatively recently you can now get satellite launch services that are substantially private sector (both in who you buy them from and in the launch vehicle not being some defense contractor's ICBM work warmed over a bit)
It's a lot dramatic. But it's basically the same sentiment as you express above - trying to draw a false distinction between private launch providers and vehicles.
You don't seem to grasp that any tech involving AI/Pattern recognition is going to be error prone and even a.001% error is magnified at the scale at which warehouses and stores are maintained.
And your scales, especially with the low grade sensors you've chosen, won't have any errors?
It'd be around $130K (not taking into account the cost savings Walmart will get to get this in scale).
But not the labor for installing the shelves and all the wiring needed to power them. Nor the labor for maintaining them (at this scale, they'll have to be routinely checked for accuracy).
The software logic would be simple, if one box of Toilet paper is 1kg, then how many toilet paper boxes are there if the weight read is 9kg... 9 boxes.. that is it.
Presuming a single shelf held a single product. That's rarely true. Nor does your (laughably stupid) system account for a product removed and replaced on the wrong shelf. (Or to put it another way, on top of the many clues you lack, is just what's involved here.)
Or, to put it another way, go away and come back when you have even a fraction of a clue as to what you're talking about.
Wouldn't a simple series of interlinked "smart-shelves" that use the weight-differential to figure out the needed quantity of product in a particular aisle/shelf be good enough?
You don't grasp that once you've turned every shelf into a (moderately expensive) scale, you've considerably increased the cost as well as no longer being "simple"?
I was alive and an adult during that time too. It is quite a lie.
We're in this pickle in particular because under President Bush, America didn't hold up the US's end of the bargain. (Not that President Clinton was any better.)
So, you didn't learn anything because you were "were alive, and adult" at the time. You're just repeating the propaganda of right wing nutjobs like a good little comrade.
When people point out that "fiat" currencies are only backed up by government promises, they forget to note that cryptocurrencies are only backed up by "fiat" currency
This is not right and shows you never took an economics class. I'll try to explain it for you briefly, but you should know it is nuanced and complex.
The simpleminded Bitcoin propaganda bullshit you respond with is no substitute for an economics class either.
But that's the question being asked. At what point do we stop believing we cannot deal with them directly and start dealing with them directly?
Are you stupid or just on brain addling drugs?
It's not a matter of "believing", it's a matter of fact.
Yeah, our nuclear response to a nuclear attack would be the sign of a "needledicked bully".
Just how much a moron do you have to be to take my response out of context in that way? Did you not read what I was replying to? Can you read? The original poster was describing a strike, not retaliation.
It is the attitude that "we can't deal with them directly" and it would be bullying to respond that gives NK the idea that they could get away with it.
You have to be the single most ignorant individual I've dealt with today... And that's quite a fucking achievement. Not being able to "deal with them directly" isn't an attitude, it's a fact. And nobody outside of the rotting watermelon you use for brains suggested it would be bullying to respond to an attack.
That isn't accurate at all. Under Clinton NK threatens to nuke us and we say "settle down. we'll give you some stuff if you calm down." NK continues nuclear research. Then under Bush Jr they do the same thing, we respond in the same way and they inch a bit further into being a real threat to us and the region. Obama, same.
As you say - that isn't accurate at all. That's the lie Trump and Faux News have been spreading in order to justify him acting like a schoolyard bully and putting millions of lives at risk.
at what point to we stop appeasing them and start dealing with them directly?
Contrary to the lies you've been told - there's never been a point where we could "deal with them directly". Either they were backed by China, or (not much later), they could hundreds of thousands to millions of people in South Korea with conventional weapons.
The whole point of this isn't to nuke NK. It is to make China realize that we will strike NK if necessary and to finally take responsibility for this crazy nation on their border.
The point is - there's no need to strike North Korea, not unless you're a needledicked bully who needs to threaten others to make yourself feel like a man. Detente and deterrence works, and are the only sane options.
The key piece of this picture that no one (yet, in any of the comments posted thus far) as even mentioned that what we are talking about are books that are out of print.
Completely irrelevant - copyright law doesn't care if the book is out of print or not.
Further it is estimated that half of these books are out of copyright under every iteration and perversion of copyright law and thus are already in the public domain - they belong to the public as is and was the intent of copyright law from the beginning.
Another irrelevancy because it sidesteps the half of the books that are still in copyright - and which Google planned to distribute anyway.
And the Google-Author's Guild deal actually provided a way to provide some revenue to authors of out-of-print books.
And again you leave out the relevant point... Normally, it's the responsibility of the person wishing to reprint material to seek permission to do so. Google wished to turn this idea on it's head, to be free to distribute the material and only on the hook to pay for it when the owners of the material found out that it was being distributed.
Not to mention, they Author's Guild didn't have standing to make a deal with Google in the first place.
So this is a lose-lose-lose situation (for Google, the public, and author's of out of print books).
No, it was win-loss-loss. Google won the right to turn the law on it's head and profit thereby. The public lost because the deal practically ensured Google a monopoly on the material. (The agreement only covered Google, everyone else would still be bound by the law.) The authors lost because now the onus was on them to seek recompense from a third party (the Author's Guild) rather than the infringing party (Google).
However, I can see why a surgeon would want to avoid "non-urgent" surgery on a patient if they could significantly reduce the risk by losing some weight first.
This isn't surgeons evaluating the risk and making an informed decision as to whether or not they could be reduced by losing weight. This is politicians and bureaucrats making the unilateral decision to essentially punish anyone who doesn't meet their arbitrary guidelines.
Toronto is well known for these planned communities that end up becoming total disasters.
I don't think you understand what planned communities mean - because your example are housing projects and apartment complexes, not planned communities.
That would be because it is a major issue - a transaction requires two parties. It doesn't matter how much cash you have if the store can't accept the cash. (And calculate the tax.)
The second you lose power, you're fucked. This is why cash is king
o.0 Seriously? Have you ever actually tried to buy anything when the power is out? Cash is just as useless as cards when the cash register has no power. And that's presuming the items have price stickers on them so you don't need the scanner to have power too.
Slashdot Mirror
"Journalism" has always been about propaganda. That's why there were multiple papers - one for Democrats, one for Republicans, one for businessmen, one for the "wrong" side of the tracks, etc... etc...
The idea that "journalists" were some kind of impartial arbiter of truth came about in the 50's as newspapers (faced with competition from radio for decades and increasingly from TV) fought for readers as the era of closing and consolidation began to take hold. TV took up the idea for much the same reason, a veneer of impartiality sells. The hit in trust isn't because of propaganda - it's because as the number and independence of outlets has shrunk, the odds have increased that you're outside of the propaganda bias. Something the conservatives have brilliantly taken advantage of. The liberals were late to the party, but they're rapidly catching up.
The reality is that we've come full circle - once again there's a 'trusted' source for everyone, and everyone else's trusted source is complete garbage. But where we're screwed... instead of the trusted source(s) being independent, they're all under corporate thumbs.
Conglomerates small and large have been slurping up local papers for decades. Either yours was one of the rare ones that was actually independent rather than being owned by a conglomerate... Or you were one of the many people unaware that your local paper wasn't actually local.
What's changed isn't ownership mostly, but "local" papers being treated more explicitly as what they've long been - franchises of a larger group.
To get the point of the article, one would have to read and think critically. Something that /. is not very good at doing.
Due to sprinkler systems and/or prompt firefighting response... Not because the slab is concrete. (The walls only very rarely concrete.)
Sorry, but bullshit. That wind and solar cannot provide base power isn't a canard - it's a cold hard fact. What's a canard is the nonsensical belief that pumped storage is a magic wand and a universal solution that solves this problem. It isn't. It's very expensive, causes significant ecological damage, limited in applicability, and it's limited in total capacity on top of all that.
It's a lot dramatic. But it's basically the same sentiment as you express above - trying to draw a false distinction between private launch providers and vehicles.
And your scales, especially with the low grade sensors you've chosen, won't have any errors?
But not the labor for installing the shelves and all the wiring needed to power them. Nor the labor for maintaining them (at this scale, they'll have to be routinely checked for accuracy).
Presuming a single shelf held a single product. That's rarely true. Nor does your (laughably stupid) system account for a product removed and replaced on the wrong shelf. (Or to put it another way, on top of the many clues you lack, is just what's involved here.)
Or, to put it another way, go away and come back when you have even a fraction of a clue as to what you're talking about.
You can't possibly have a valid point if you have to cherry pick successes to "prove" it.
It's easy to "prove" something when you cherry pick on the winners as examples.
You don't grasp that once you've turned every shelf into a (moderately expensive) scale, you've considerably increased the cost as well as no longer being "simple"?
I was alive and an adult during that time too. It is quite a lie.
We're in this pickle in particular because under President Bush, America didn't hold up the US's end of the bargain. (Not that President Clinton was any better.)
So, you didn't learn anything because you were "were alive, and adult" at the time. You're just repeating the propaganda of right wing nutjobs like a good little comrade.
The simpleminded Bitcoin propaganda bullshit you respond with is no substitute for an economics class either.
Are you stupid or just on brain addling drugs?
It's not a matter of "believing", it's a matter of fact.
Just how much a moron do you have to be to take my response out of context in that way? Did you not read what I was replying to? Can you read? The original poster was describing a strike, not retaliation.
You have to be the single most ignorant individual I've dealt with today... And that's quite a fucking achievement. Not being able to "deal with them directly" isn't an attitude, it's a fact. And nobody outside of the rotting watermelon you use for brains suggested it would be bullying to respond to an attack.
As you say - that isn't accurate at all. That's the lie Trump and Faux News have been spreading in order to justify him acting like a schoolyard bully and putting millions of lives at risk.
Contrary to the lies you've been told - there's never been a point where we could "deal with them directly". Either they were backed by China, or (not much later), they could hundreds of thousands to millions of people in South Korea with conventional weapons.
The point is - there's no need to strike North Korea, not unless you're a needledicked bully who needs to threaten others to make yourself feel like a man. Detente and deterrence works, and are the only sane options.
ISS is at a relatively low altitude for one reason and one reason only - the Soyuz spacecraft couldn't reach it if it were any higher.
Because this is Slashdot, tinfoil hat central.
Completely irrelevant - copyright law doesn't care if the book is out of print or not.
Another irrelevancy because it sidesteps the half of the books that are still in copyright - and which Google planned to distribute anyway.
And again you leave out the relevant point... Normally, it's the responsibility of the person wishing to reprint material to seek permission to do so. Google wished to turn this idea on it's head, to be free to distribute the material and only on the hook to pay for it when the owners of the material found out that it was being distributed.
Not to mention, they Author's Guild didn't have standing to make a deal with Google in the first place.
No, it was win-loss-loss. Google won the right to turn the law on it's head and profit thereby. The public lost because the deal practically ensured Google a monopoly on the material. (The agreement only covered Google, everyone else would still be bound by the law.) The authors lost because now the onus was on them to seek recompense from a third party (the Author's Guild) rather than the infringing party (Google).
You left out a possibility - your view from inside your bubble might be cloudy and not correspond to reality.
Nope. The IRS doesn't care what you buy and sell, but if you make a profit that profit is taxable.
This isn't surgeons evaluating the risk and making an informed decision as to whether or not they could be reduced by losing weight. This is politicians and bureaucrats making the unilateral decision to essentially punish anyone who doesn't meet their arbitrary guidelines.
You will be healthy comrade!
I don't think you understand what planned communities mean - because your example are housing projects and apartment complexes, not planned communities.
IT is a support function - it's job is to keep the rest of the company moving.
That would be because it is a major issue - a transaction requires two parties. It doesn't matter how much cash you have if the store can't accept the cash. (And calculate the tax.)
o.0 Seriously? Have you ever actually tried to buy anything when the power is out? Cash is just as useless as cards when the cash register has no power. And that's presuming the items have price stickers on them so you don't need the scanner to have power too.
You failed to demonstrate that they don't have a functional cloud based OS, or won't continue to have the same in the future.
Interesting that you criticize the other equipment based on their OS - but you praise the Chromebook based on it's performance.
Apples and oranges much?