Oh, and I forgot recently paying to replace everyone's cards with chip cards, in an act of pure show to throw us off on their cash cow conspiracy. Those banksters!
Actually, that's the one part where (while the GP post didn't know this aspect) the banks are completely acting in their own interest and NOT their customers. They spent a bunch of money to replace everyone's cards with chip AND SIGNATURE system cards, which do make it harder for large scale counterfeiting, but do very little to protect their customers when they get their cards stolen.
If they had adopted chip and pin like Europe did it would have made customer issues with CC loss/theft almost nonexistent. But that would have also required that customers remember and enter pins whenever they use it, and that extra friction scared VISA, et al so they didn't use it.
I was relaying other peoples' complaints about the costs.
Yeah, but why would anyone find it useful for someone who doesn't use credit cards to explain credit cards second hand to a bunch of people who do?:)
But now I am finding out that cash or credit, we all subsidize the industry. Turns out that simple credit card theft is very profitable for more people than just the thief. You may think you aren't paying for it, but just the opposite is happening, we all are.
No, it's not profit, it's a risk that the banks take into account. Actual theft costs them money and the customers time. Now, you could argue fear of theft makes them more profitable... but not the actual theft. Same with any type of insurance.
Ask yourself why the banks are dragging their feet in securing the system.
Because it will cost them $$$ to do a REAL upgrade, and the results will make it more cumbersome for customers to use their product. It's absolutely not that they make money from theft. It's that they want people to feel safe while minimizing their costs of upgrade.
Don't get me wrong - not a fan of VISA, etc, the CC companies only care about themselves. That's why chip and signature security that is rolling out in the US really ONLY protects the banks from credit card counterfeiting, it does almost nothing to protect customers from the horrible inconvenience of having their CC# stolen. Chip and pin (which Europe, etc, uses) would have solved most of the consumer problems but the banks were too worried that the extra friction of entering a pin would discourage use and therefore hurt their revenue... fuckers.
It has flaws, but what doesn't? Cash is flawed, it can be counterfeited. And you have NO resource if you take counterfeit cash.
The credit card system includes fraud in their business model. As long as their profits exceed their losses, they are fine with it. Yes, it's often a pain in the ass for the customer to clean up, but if your CC is stolen you are not responsible for the charges in the end.
This is the dumbest (or maybe just trolliest?) statement of the day...
Please explain how *anyone* can predict someone's next CC number. If you can't explain it exactly, it's bullshit, since I assume you are included in "anyone"...
A responsible credit card user pays their bills at the end of the month and doesn't rack up interest of fees. And, no, they do not raise the fees to the vendor, in fact they have recently lowered them since they have had their ass reamed in lawsuits for overcharging.
Yes, VISA, etc charges a small fee for transactions, they make a (sometimes too healthy) profit, but fraud protection is one of the major FEATURES of using a credit card. Go pay cash to a shady person for something and then try to get your money back later when you got screwed. Use a credit card? If it was the vendor's fault you will get your money back.
Threatening to ignore a member state when they invoke Article 5 is basically the same thing as dismantling NATO. The whole point of the treaty is "attack one of us, you attack all of us".
I said "IF", and yes I phrased it intentionally in EXACTLY the same way Trump phrases all of his insane tweets. Though honestly, it's at least 10x more worthy of investigation than Trump's batshit crazy claim that Ted Cruz's father was part of the plot to assassinate Kennedy - among DOZENS of other similar things where he said to the effect of "I didn't say it WAS true, I just said what IF it were true!"
If the Republican candidate's campaign is working with the Russian intelligence agencies to sabotage the opposition, it sure as fuck matters more who did it.
A bunch of petty, unethical DNC employees (which is highly shitty, no question) still pales compared to a Manchurian candidate.
I'm honestly struggling for what information you'd want to overlay over reality that you can't get quicker, easier and less obtrusively by just holding the same device in your hand and looking at it.
Wow, then you REALLY need to get a bit more imaginative. Big hint: don't just think of basic GPS, think about all possible sensory inputs to drive the AR data.
Here's a scary but entirely possible scenario in the near future: you hold up your phone and use the camera to scan the room. It automatically recognizes everyone you point at via facial recognition (Facebook already has something like 500M+ people's faces that it can use, and growing). That will tell you at *minimum* their name (which is highly useful in itself) and likely a lot more - possibly showing who in the group knows each other, whether they are married or dating, their musical or other tastes, political leanings, job, etc.
Less creepy but also useful, you could point at a business and it could instantly show you a detailed description, Yelp review, restaurant menu, hours, etc.
There ya go. And that took me a few minutes to come up with. I'm sure in an hour I could write a small book on potential AR ideas.
Anyone can FILE a patent, but it's a different story to get it issued.
"flat rectangular panels with rounded corners" is not a utility patent, anyway, it's a design patent. Good luck to him if he doesn't even know the difference.
Obfuscation != minification or compression. Obfuscation is for making the Javascript harder to read (in an imperfect attempt to provide extra security or protect IP). Minification is for making the text smaller (though it's usually pretty good at obfuscating in the process), and compression is for making the transfer smaller.
If you just wanted to do something very simple, you could embed Javascript in an HTML attribute value. You can't do that if you require line endings and white-space as part of the language syntax.
Yes! Please show me a valid Python function in a single line embedded in HTML. Python devs made their choices and adamantly stick to them, but sometimes choices can limit the application of a language in theory or practice...
The funniest part of this bullshit claim is that whatever you've supposedly done using Python, well, it likely depends on and uses the C and Python code I've contributed to the CPython implementation over the years! Son, you're out of your league.
Who cares? If you run Linux or streamed video you are probably using code I contributed, big fucking deal. In the end you are STILL posting AC, so you are by definition a bullshitter until proven otherwise. And WTF is with the "son"? Get your own voice, don't borrow it from whatever shitty media you borrowed it from. It helps your argument ZERO to sound condescending without any advantage.
You're the one who is out of touch, clearly. We serve compressed content these days
Not sure who "we" is, but web servers serve what browsers, CDNs, etc support. You'd be surprised at how many CDNs and embedded browsers have issues with compressions/w HTTP(S). To just "leave it up to someone else" as your solution implies is lazy, to say the least.
Or Python's bytecode could potentially be served up instead, were the browsers ever to support Python for client-side scripting.
But really in the end that's pretty much it. I can give you the benefit of the doubt that you have done a lot of work on Python, but it still means jack and shit in this context until someone actually DOES that. And they won't. Because Python is a decent language in some respects, but it's horribly shitty for this purpose.
Replying twice to you since my other thought is totally different:)
An uncooked pizza is an ideal robotic product.
Maybe true for mass market GENERIC delivery pizza, but not for truly *good* or distinctive/local pizza (which makes up a surprising amount of the pizza in the US). Robots are far away from hand tossing, and farther from assembling and cooking a decent Margherita (which you probably *can't* cook at home), let alone many other decent Neapolitan style pizzas where ingredients are added after cooking (or of course, Chicago style, St. Louis Style, New Haven Style, etc).
But with Papa Mucphy's you have to cook it yourself! At that end of the pizza market (take and bake), why not just give you a prepared crust and individual bags of the ingredients you want, and let you finish it at home where you have to cook it anyway!?
It would take you 2 extra minutes to assemble it and save all of that work and delay at the store... (now THAT seems like a much better startup idea than Zume... you are welcome, just credit "Dahamma from Slashdot" after your first million...)
Seriously, though - you want a GOOD food business idea? Enable people to do more things theirselves at home for little to no effort (and cost) rather than pass on trivial preparation steps with 500% markup. That's basically Keurig's model. They have made billions, and yet their coffee STILL kinda sucks (it's just good enough to justify a $0.50 pod vs a $2 Starbucks).
That is just the language issues, there are/were political issues as well with Guido, I remember being a bit of a pain to work with when it came to controversial features and 'reworking' the languages caused Python 1-2-3 to be practically different languages. JavaScript from the early era still works just as well in current browsers as modern JavaScript and doesn't need individual interpreters.
Good point. The default browser scripting language is not going to work out well with a language whose creator basks in his designation of "Benevolent Disctoros For Life" (BDFL).
When somebody makes this "argument", it's a sure sign that they've never actually used Python, and that they're just spewing bullshit.
I am 100% sure I have done more with Python in the last few years than you will ever in your career, so, bzzt. There is a reason the most popular Linux server distros lag so far behind on Python versions - upgrading to a new version almost always breaks *something* in existing code. Have had it happen SO many times... (and I still use it! It's a decent scripting language for readable, modular projects. Doesn't mean it's that good at backwards compatibility compared to other languages...)
Anyone who has used Python knows that this is totally a non issue. PEP 8 [python.org] explains very clearly how to avoid and any all problems: "Use 4 spaces per indentation level."
THIS clearly proves you have no clue about any modern deployment techniques for HTML5 apps (minification, obfuscation, etc). Yes, of course you can minify Python, but it's just not going to be as efficient. But whatever. The fact is the current mainstream implementations are not designed for client-side browsers. Someone could build/integrate something (maybe PyPy?) but they haven't. Clearly there is a reason for that - and that is that Python doesn't really solve many of the problems people have with Javascript, so why bother?
I'm sorry, son, but you clearly don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
Oh fuck off. Feel free to post as non-AC, otherwise your opinion is useless. I have (non-Python) code used on many millions of consumer devices, and Python scripts on backend projects generating video content for those devices. Come back when you have ANYTHING useful to contribute to the discussion...
Yikes, Python is NOT an alternative to Javascript in any reasonable way. The whitespace issue alone would make it a nightmare as a browser language. The poor record of backwards compatibility doesn't help, either.
The crazy thing is, a reasonable alternative to Javascript that would be trivial for JS programmers to learn already exists: TYPESCRIPT. It's even supported by Node.js and a lot of (smart) developers are using it in that case to get reasonable type safety and decent class/interface/module support, among other things.
Somebody who thinks human beings have a higher purpose in life than doing a robot's job badly?
Have you ever SEEN the kinds of people who work in many pizza restaurants? I'm not even joking or being insulting, just telling the truth. My brother worked in half a dozen over the years and not one, but two of those (one a Papa John's chain) were busted for drug dealing out of the restaurant. The others may not have gone that far, but the most popular "leisure activity" of most of the employees was to get stoned and play video games.
So yeah, replace them with robots and I'm sure they'd find another job curing cancer.
Depends where you go. Visit the local popular non-chain places and yes, you often get 3rd generation pizza makers with skills passed down from their family...
Or go to a decent Neapolitan pizza restaurant and pizza isn't considered a mass market delivery item, but a fine dining Italian entree like any other. If you don't think a hand tossed and prepared pizza fired for 2 minutes in a 1000 degree wood fired oven isn't better than a mass produced chain pizza, then you are seriously missing out.
The thing is, there is no actual REASON those even have to be more expensive. Go to Italy and you can get an amazing hand made pizza with fresh ingredients for about €6-7. Wish there were more places in the US that could figure out how to do that.
Of course, the big question, is, WHY? Given the volume of a Papa Murphy's location, a couple of employees (who would need to be there anyway to oversee and service the robots) could easily do all of the prep work, anyway...
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, and I forgot recently paying to replace everyone's cards with chip cards, in an act of pure show to throw us off on their cash cow conspiracy. Those banksters!
Actually, that's the one part where (while the GP post didn't know this aspect) the banks are completely acting in their own interest and NOT their customers. They spent a bunch of money to replace everyone's cards with chip AND SIGNATURE system cards, which do make it harder for large scale counterfeiting, but do very little to protect their customers when they get their cards stolen.
If they had adopted chip and pin like Europe did it would have made customer issues with CC loss/theft almost nonexistent. But that would have also required that customers remember and enter pins whenever they use it, and that extra friction scared VISA, et al so they didn't use it.
I was relaying other peoples' complaints about the costs.
Yeah, but why would anyone find it useful for someone who doesn't use credit cards to explain credit cards second hand to a bunch of people who do? :)
But now I am finding out that cash or credit, we all subsidize the industry. Turns out that simple credit card theft is very profitable for more people than just the thief. You may think you aren't paying for it, but just the opposite is happening, we all are.
No, it's not profit, it's a risk that the banks take into account. Actual theft costs them money and the customers time. Now, you could argue fear of theft makes them more profitable... but not the actual theft. Same with any type of insurance.
Ask yourself why the banks are dragging their feet in securing the system.
Because it will cost them $$$ to do a REAL upgrade, and the results will make it more cumbersome for customers to use their product. It's absolutely not that they make money from theft. It's that they want people to feel safe while minimizing their costs of upgrade.
Don't get me wrong - not a fan of VISA, etc, the CC companies only care about themselves. That's why chip and signature security that is rolling out in the US really ONLY protects the banks from credit card counterfeiting, it does almost nothing to protect customers from the horrible inconvenience of having their CC# stolen. Chip and pin (which Europe, etc, uses) would have solved most of the consumer problems but the banks were too worried that the extra friction of entering a pin would discourage use and therefore hurt their revenue... fuckers.
Flawed is relative.
It has flaws, but what doesn't? Cash is flawed, it can be counterfeited. And you have NO resource if you take counterfeit cash.
The credit card system includes fraud in their business model. As long as their profits exceed their losses, they are fine with it. Yes, it's often a pain in the ass for the customer to clean up, but if your CC is stolen you are not responsible for the charges in the end.
This is the dumbest (or maybe just trolliest?) statement of the day...
Please explain how *anyone* can predict someone's next CC number. If you can't explain it exactly, it's bullshit, since I assume you are included in "anyone"...
Then why are you trying to explain how they work?
A responsible credit card user pays their bills at the end of the month and doesn't rack up interest of fees. And, no, they do not raise the fees to the vendor, in fact they have recently lowered them since they have had their ass reamed in lawsuits for overcharging.
Yes, VISA, etc charges a small fee for transactions, they make a (sometimes too healthy) profit, but fraud protection is one of the major FEATURES of using a credit card. Go pay cash to a shady person for something and then try to get your money back later when you got screwed. Use a credit card? If it was the vendor's fault you will get your money back.
Threatening to ignore a member state when they invoke Article 5 is basically the same thing as dismantling NATO. The whole point of the treaty is "attack one of us, you attack all of us".
I think you meant "Trump's campaign manager"...
http://www.politifact.com/glob...
I said "IF", and yes I phrased it intentionally in EXACTLY the same way Trump phrases all of his insane tweets. Though honestly, it's at least 10x more worthy of investigation than Trump's batshit crazy claim that Ted Cruz's father was part of the plot to assassinate Kennedy - among DOZENS of other similar things where he said to the effect of "I didn't say it WAS true, I just said what IF it were true!"
Which one, Uday or Qusay?
If the Republican candidate's campaign is working with the Russian intelligence agencies to sabotage the opposition, it sure as fuck matters more who did it.
A bunch of petty, unethical DNC employees (which is highly shitty, no question) still pales compared to a Manchurian candidate.
How about "unnecessary language?"
I'm honestly struggling for what information you'd want to overlay over reality that you can't get quicker, easier and less obtrusively by just holding the same device in your hand and looking at it.
Wow, then you REALLY need to get a bit more imaginative. Big hint: don't just think of basic GPS, think about all possible sensory inputs to drive the AR data.
Here's a scary but entirely possible scenario in the near future: you hold up your phone and use the camera to scan the room. It automatically recognizes everyone you point at via facial recognition (Facebook already has something like 500M+ people's faces that it can use, and growing). That will tell you at *minimum* their name (which is highly useful in itself) and likely a lot more - possibly showing who in the group knows each other, whether they are married or dating, their musical or other tastes, political leanings, job, etc.
Less creepy but also useful, you could point at a business and it could instantly show you a detailed description, Yelp review, restaurant menu, hours, etc.
There ya go. And that took me a few minutes to come up with. I'm sure in an hour I could write a small book on potential AR ideas.
Anyone can FILE a patent, but it's a different story to get it issued.
"flat rectangular panels with rounded corners" is not a utility patent, anyway, it's a design patent. Good luck to him if he doesn't even know the difference.
Not after he spent it all on scratchers and Boone's.
Obfuscation != minification or compression. Obfuscation is for making the Javascript harder to read (in an imperfect attempt to provide extra security or protect IP). Minification is for making the text smaller (though it's usually pretty good at obfuscating in the process), and compression is for making the transfer smaller.
If you just wanted to do something very simple, you could embed Javascript in an HTML attribute value. You can't do that if you require line endings and white-space as part of the language syntax.
Yes! Please show me a valid Python function in a single line embedded in HTML. Python devs made their choices and adamantly stick to them, but sometimes choices can limit the application of a language in theory or practice...
The funniest part of this bullshit claim is that whatever you've supposedly done using Python, well, it likely depends on and uses the C and Python code I've contributed to the CPython implementation over the years! Son, you're out of your league.
Who cares? If you run Linux or streamed video you are probably using code I contributed, big fucking deal. In the end you are STILL posting AC, so you are by definition a bullshitter until proven otherwise. And WTF is with the "son"? Get your own voice, don't borrow it from whatever shitty media you borrowed it from. It helps your argument ZERO to sound condescending without any advantage.
You're the one who is out of touch, clearly. We serve compressed content these days
Not sure who "we" is, but web servers serve what browsers, CDNs, etc support. You'd be surprised at how many CDNs and embedded browsers have issues with compressions /w HTTP(S). To just "leave it up to someone else" as your solution implies is lazy, to say the least.
Or Python's bytecode could potentially be served up instead, were the browsers ever to support Python for client-side scripting.
But really in the end that's pretty much it. I can give you the benefit of the doubt that you have done a lot of work on Python, but it still means jack and shit in this context until someone actually DOES that. And they won't. Because Python is a decent language in some respects, but it's horribly shitty for this purpose.
Replying twice to you since my other thought is totally different :)
An uncooked pizza is an ideal robotic product.
Maybe true for mass market GENERIC delivery pizza, but not for truly *good* or distinctive/local pizza (which makes up a surprising amount of the pizza in the US). Robots are far away from hand tossing, and farther from assembling and cooking a decent Margherita (which you probably *can't* cook at home), let alone many other decent Neapolitan style pizzas where ingredients are added after cooking (or of course, Chicago style, St. Louis Style, New Haven Style, etc).
But with Papa Mucphy's you have to cook it yourself! At that end of the pizza market (take and bake), why not just give you a prepared crust and individual bags of the ingredients you want, and let you finish it at home where you have to cook it anyway!?
It would take you 2 extra minutes to assemble it and save all of that work and delay at the store... (now THAT seems like a much better startup idea than Zume... you are welcome, just credit "Dahamma from Slashdot" after your first million...)
Seriously, though - you want a GOOD food business idea? Enable people to do more things theirselves at home for little to no effort (and cost) rather than pass on trivial preparation steps with 500% markup. That's basically Keurig's model. They have made billions, and yet their coffee STILL kinda sucks (it's just good enough to justify a $0.50 pod vs a $2 Starbucks).
That is just the language issues, there are/were political issues as well with Guido, I remember being a bit of a pain to work with when it came to controversial features and 'reworking' the languages caused Python 1-2-3 to be practically different languages. JavaScript from the early era still works just as well in current browsers as modern JavaScript and doesn't need individual interpreters.
Good point. The default browser scripting language is not going to work out well with a language whose creator basks in his designation of "Benevolent Disctoros For Life" (BDFL).
When somebody makes this "argument", it's a sure sign that they've never actually used Python, and that they're just spewing bullshit.
I am 100% sure I have done more with Python in the last few years than you will ever in your career, so, bzzt. There is a reason the most popular Linux server distros lag so far behind on Python versions - upgrading to a new version almost always breaks *something* in existing code. Have had it happen SO many times... (and I still use it! It's a decent scripting language for readable, modular projects. Doesn't mean it's that good at backwards compatibility compared to other languages...)
Anyone who has used Python knows that this is totally a non issue. PEP 8 [python.org] explains very clearly how to avoid and any all problems: "Use 4 spaces per indentation level."
THIS clearly proves you have no clue about any modern deployment techniques for HTML5 apps (minification, obfuscation, etc). Yes, of course you can minify Python, but it's just not going to be as efficient. But whatever. The fact is the current mainstream implementations are not designed for client-side browsers. Someone could build/integrate something (maybe PyPy?) but they haven't. Clearly there is a reason for that - and that is that Python doesn't really solve many of the problems people have with Javascript, so why bother?
I'm sorry, son, but you clearly don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
Oh fuck off. Feel free to post as non-AC, otherwise your opinion is useless. I have (non-Python) code used on many millions of consumer devices, and Python scripts on backend projects generating video content for those devices. Come back when you have ANYTHING useful to contribute to the discussion...
Yikes, Python is NOT an alternative to Javascript in any reasonable way. The whitespace issue alone would make it a nightmare as a browser language. The poor record of backwards compatibility doesn't help, either.
The crazy thing is, a reasonable alternative to Javascript that would be trivial for JS programmers to learn already exists: TYPESCRIPT. It's even supported by Node.js and a lot of (smart) developers are using it in that case to get reasonable type safety and decent class/interface/module support, among other things.
Who the *$%* does this moron think he is?
Somebody who thinks human beings have a higher purpose in life than doing a robot's job badly?
Have you ever SEEN the kinds of people who work in many pizza restaurants? I'm not even joking or being insulting, just telling the truth. My brother worked in half a dozen over the years and not one, but two of those (one a Papa John's chain) were busted for drug dealing out of the restaurant. The others may not have gone that far, but the most popular "leisure activity" of most of the employees was to get stoned and play video games.
So yeah, replace them with robots and I'm sure they'd find another job curing cancer.
Depends where you go. Visit the local popular non-chain places and yes, you often get 3rd generation pizza makers with skills passed down from their family...
Or go to a decent Neapolitan pizza restaurant and pizza isn't considered a mass market delivery item, but a fine dining Italian entree like any other. If you don't think a hand tossed and prepared pizza fired for 2 minutes in a 1000 degree wood fired oven isn't better than a mass produced chain pizza, then you are seriously missing out.
The thing is, there is no actual REASON those even have to be more expensive. Go to Italy and you can get an amazing hand made pizza with fresh ingredients for about €6-7. Wish there were more places in the US that could figure out how to do that.
Of course, the big question, is, WHY? Given the volume of a Papa Murphy's location, a couple of employees (who would need to be there anyway to oversee and service the robots) could easily do all of the prep work, anyway...