This is effectively a different way of saying the same thing. As mentioned, Utopia is possible, but we have to get past the greed first.
Machines can replace everyone eventually, but if only the owner of the machines benefits, and nobody else, the world will be no better off than it is now, and likely worse as those "ownership" positions are being consolidated in to fewer and fewer hands all the time.
Again, the problem isn't the replacing of people with machines, nor is it people being unemployed. The problem is, as you put it, distribution of wealth. Unfortunately our current system for wealth distribution doesn't scale well if there is no reason for everyone to be employed.
Now there are other ways of doing it. going back to your baking example, previously 20 people needed to work 10 hour days to make bread, now 2 people work 10 hour days watching/fixing/maintaining the machines. Maybe it's better if 20 people work 1 hours days... (or the weekly equivelant) to make things fair. The reason though that we end up with the former, rather than the latter, is that the person owning the company makes more money if he has 2 staff members than if he has 20. This isn't inherently a bad thing, but it does have limitations
Sci-fi often shows what COULD be, rather than what is LIKELY to be. The world COULD transition to a utopian lifestyle where machines work for the benefit of everyone.... or the world COULD decend in to complete anarchy and conflict... unfortunately I don't honestly believe we will get the former without going through the later first.
When has any part of the government had any interest at all in REDUCING paperwork?
Your suggestion is however exactly the way income tax is dealt with. Tax is deducted from your paycheque before you get it, and then at the end of the year you adjust the correct amount with the government in case your employer over/under deducted.
It does however require MASSIVE amounts of paperwork, cost billions of dollars, and employ a very large number of people...
It's not just sci-fi, I know I've been saying this for years too.
I truly believe that eventually society will end up in some variation of the sci-fi utopia we see so frequently, where automation and technological progress allow people to no longer worry about financial burdens, and simply do whatever they enjoy, or work to better themselves and humanity. A world where everyone is "wealthy" and where money no longer rules our lives.
Unfortunately, I also strongly believe that things will get much much worse before we even start heading that direction. As things stand right now, if a manager replaces 100 people with 1 machine, he gets a big bonus, and those 100 people lose their jobs. The economy can absorb that to some extent for a limited time (more available people can be put to work accomplishing more things) however as you continue to automate more and more, you do eventually run out of things for those people to do. This generates high unemployment at the bottom, while making the people at the top very rich. Eventually though a couple of things happen. First the poor people at the bottom no longer have any money to inject in to the economy, and the rich people simply have nowhere to get their money from anymore, and the whole thing crumbles under it's own weight. The second thing that happens is mass rioting, insurrection, and widespread revolt (or generally, a big mess that I know I don't want to be around for!)
I would love to believe that humanity is capable of making the transition from where we are today, to the utopian future I believe in without going through full out civil war, and complete economic breakdown... but unfortunately history and human nature indicate that this is not likely.
One of my favourite sci-fi stories related to this is http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm I find that some parts of it hit a little to close to reality, With a rather novel way of transitioning to utopia... I don't know if it's workable, but it is certainly interesting to read.
now obviously I've only had my account for a very short time now... but that's an interesting question. If I share something with one of my circles which includes several people who only have email and not a G+ account, will they automatically be emailed what I write? I'm not sure I want that, if they're going to get it by email anyway, I'd rather it be an email from me, not one from google+... I suppose I could skip adding people to my circles until I know they have an account, but then I'd have to constantly search to check if they do...
I buried the request in there for a couple reasons... first is that I didn't really want to be just another "me too" without adding something to the conversation, second is because the request is only secondary, while I want in, as I pointed out, it's not worth all that much until other people I know are on there (of course someone has to be first I guess!)
Thank you to the 3 people who sent me invites though! now to see where it leads and how many of my friends/colleagues I can pry off facebook to join (I have never actually had a facebook account)
I have been saying for years that facebook is just a fad, just like myspace was, and ICQ, and geocities, and who knows how many others, all of whom were seen as the place to be in their heyday. And yet facebook seemed to entrench itself well enough in the public mindset that I was starting to second guess my judgment.
Now google+ seems to be generating quite a bit of buzz of it's own, and amazingly enough, not just among the tech crowd. My girlfriend (a nurse) was commenting yesterday that all her co-workers were talking about it at work the other night, so maybe Google can really pull this off?
The part that makes this whole launch seems strange though is that what makes a social networking site work properly is the ability to find everyone you know on it, the idea of limiting who can apply seems rather counterproductive. And yet somehow it's working for Google.
Either way, I'm eager to get in and see how it works. I've been periodically checking to see when they open the floodgates, and I suppose I really wouldn't mind an invite either, after all, I do use google for pretty much everything else, (I have my radio callsign (VE6RAH) as my existing account on gmail if anyone is so inclined)
The big question though is one that nobody can answer yet with any certainty... will google+ manage to draw enough people away from facebook... will people who already use facebook for everything see a reason to switch... I guess only time will tell.
I have to admit that I use my credit card for pretty much everything, they pay me a cash dividend, and as I always pay my balance in full on the due date, they never charge me a penny of interest or other fees. It's convenient, and it saves me money.
I have received a total of 2 phone calls from the credit card company since signing up for the card 10 years ago. The first was them trying to sell me on a "premium" card with yearly fees. I declined and asked to stop receiving such offers. I've never been called for one again. The second was their fraud department, and they had legitimately flagged a purchase I didn't make, they refunded the purchase, cancelled my card, and couriered me a new one right away.
I have received 7 pieces of mail from the credit card company since signing up, 4 included new cards (initial card, replacement for the fraud case, replacement for expiry, "upgrade" to chip) the other 3 were offers to increase my credit limit (with no catch other than the responsibility that comes with being able to borrow larger amounts of money at a time)
I have never received a single ad by phone, mail, or email, that I have any reason to suspect has had anything at all to do with my credit card usage. The most I have ever had was the small box at the bottom of my monthly bill suggesting I upgrade to one of their "premium" cards with yearly fees, it's unobtrusive, and it's from the credit card company themselves, I always decline.
I don't know if Canadian privacy laws are just that much better, or if my bank is just a little less corrupt, but that's been my experience so far.
how much effort is it to recognize a quote as being from a specific show when the name of the show is in the quote? I've never seen a single full episode, but even I could tell that it had to come from that show.
Well... hard to say, their official reason for terminating me was due to budget cuts, and they did not fill my position once I was gone, it was termed a lay-off and not a firing. (It was actually somewhat satisfying to hear from a co-worker I ran in to almost a year later that the whole IT infrastructure in the company basically fell apart after that.) There's no way I could prove otherwise, so a wrongful dismissal case would have been an uphill battle to say the least. I suppose it's possible that it was all just a coincidence and that being let go had nothing to do with being out of town when the server broke... but it seemed pretty suspicious, especially after they made me fix it before telling me I no longer had a job.
My boss actually gave me a really good letter of recommendation, but I suspect he had nothing to do with the decision to let me go, I'm pretty sure it came from higher up (the recommendation was on his own letterhead, not the company's as it was "against company policy to write references")
It actually turned out better for me in the long run anyway, I now make about three times what I did there, plus benefits (which I did not have at that company), and I enjoy my new job a lot more than I ever did that one.
At a previous company I worked for I went away for 3 days (friday-sunday) at a company that only worked mon-fri, so it was essentially just a single day off. I made everyone well aware that I would be out of town and unreachable.
I returned on Monday to find my boss had flown in from out of town and was sitting cross legged on the server room floor with one of our servers in pieces all around him. He informed me that there had been a hardware failure over the weekend and that I should have been there to deal with it. After I finished fixing the original problem, and the problems he had created by trying to fix things, and once everything was up and running again, he asked me for my security pass and escorted me off the premises citing "budget cuts".
Probably much better that I don't work there anymore...
Why not? Big industry does it all the time, the trick is manipulating the laws so that the bribes don't need to be reported to anyone and you're home free...
In my wallet I have the following: -cash (many places accept no substitute, and I refuse to pay a middleman to process the payment) -cheques (the easiest, and cheapest, way to give a private individual more cash than you have on you at any given time) -driver's license (in addition to allowing me to drive, it is used as ID to pick up parcels or prescriptions, prove my age, etc) -vehicle registration (where I live it's a bad idea to leave it in the vehicle, because simply signing the back of it states that you have sold the vehicle to whoever is holding on to it, I'd rather that if someone steals my car, they don't automatically have a piece of paper that states I sold it to them!) -credit card (more convenient than cash, and many places won't discount cash, additionally there are places that don't take cash, especially online) -debit card (to get more cash when I need it) -vehicle breakdown coverage card (if they send a tow truck they won't accept anything other than the real card, but they'll accept if for any vehicle I happen to be in, even if not mine, so better to have it with me, than in my car) -health care card (if I'm injured the hospital will need this, as will an ambulance) -drug plan card (I could leave this one at home and only bring it to the store when I need to get a prescription filled, but that guarantees I will forget it and not have it when I need it) -loyalty cards for 2 supermarket chains, a fast food place, and a fuel station (I hate these things, but as long as they charge me extra for not having them I guess I better have them (there are 4 more of these that I don't carry because I know those stores will accept my phone number in lieu of the physical card)) -2 radio licenses (theoretically I must have these on my person to operate amateur radio, or air band radios... in practice I could probably not carry these, but you never really know do you... just like the driver's license I guess, I've never been asked to show it while driving, but I bet the cops wouldn't be too happy if I didn't have it with me when I got pulled over!) -EMS practice permits (a total of 3 cards that I need to carry when working on an ambulance to prove I'm certified to do so) -business cards (easiest way to give someone all your contact info) -spare vehicle key (I've watched too many of my friends lock their keys in their car and be sorry...)
Other cards that I sometimes carry: - power boat operators card (like a driver's license, but for power boats, generally left at home unless I'm expecting to drive a boat) - scuba diver certification (needed to rent scuba gear, participate in scuba tours/charters/events, generally left at home unless I'm expecting to go diving) - SIN card (government issued number used for taxes... but also used for all sorts of other forms such as employment info, pensions, health insurance, etc. Usually they only need the number off it which I've memorized, but sometimes you need the physical card such as when it is used as an additional form of ID) - Telecommunication Journeyman certificate (theoretically I need to carry this at all times when working in the telecom field, but I have never even heard of anyone being asked to present it, so I don't bother except when starting a new job)
I could shrink this down a bit, but it's a risk, any card I don't have when I need it is a real pain. sometimes when going out in the evenings I'll carry a minimal wallet that includes only cash, credit card, driver's license, vehicle registration, vehicle breakdown coverage, and health care card. but even that is enough to justify a wallet.
As for what the original article is about... not a chance until they allow me to do so without paying the currently insane fees associated with phone based payment systems.
How about an even bigger reason to use cash, the lack of a desire to pay some other company to process the payment.
I work hard to earn my income, if I am giving someone my hard earned money it is either because I am legally obliged to (taxes) or because they are providing a service/product that I deem valuable (we could argue whether the former is a subset of the later or not, but that's a discussion for a different thread).
The ability to avoid carrying cash is not a service that I am willing to pay for. Especially not at the rates charged by every one of these schemes set up so far.
I use a bank that both pays interest, and charges no fees. I have a credit card and a debit card, but neither one charges me any fees at all. (I know the retailer pays fees, but if they don't offer me a way to save those fees by paying cash, then there isn't really any benefit to me either way). But when it comes to systems to pay with your mobile phone I have never seen one that doesn't charge the end user large sums of money.
Until I can use my mobile phone to pay, without incurring any additional fees, I will not be doing so at all.
The problem isn't that American banks are any better or worse than European banks, or Canadian banks, or any other banks (that's a completely different argument) The problem is that paypal is only regulated as a bank in one jurisdiction. Which means that unless you are in that particular jurisdiction, paypal is free to ignore all the rules that would make it behave like a real bank. As long as they continue to arbitrarily seize funds, cancel transaction, withhold payments, etc. they simply can't be trusted. I'd be ok with them being regulated as a bank in pretty much any of the major first world areas, as long as it affected all of their operations worldwide, but as long as it only affects their operations in that one area it won't help until it's the same area in which I reside.
A free market does not necessarily preclude taxation, it does however require that everyone is taxed equally, and that none of that tax money is spent on any program or policy that gives advantage to any one party over any other.
I never said they were right. Only that you will have bigger problems than restoring backups, and that doing so will likely cause them to get you in further trouble specifically because, as you say, they don't care, and they seldom admit they are wrong.
I also stated how to get around that particular problem further down in my post.
If one platform gets 1000 calls, 100 of which are hardware, this article would say 10% hardware calls, another platform gets 10000 calls 200 of which are hardware and it would say 2% hardware calls. while they are technically right, the later one would, assuming equal number of users, actually have worse hardware.
Now I'm not saying that any one platform is better or worse than the other, or even that their conclusion is wrong, only that the article lacks enough information to actually back up what they are claiming. More useful information would be number of support calls equalized for user base, percentage hardware, percentage software, percentage instructional.. with those 4 numbers you could actually start to draw some reasonable conclusions about ease of use, and the quality of both the hardware and software.
Monetary systems around the world learned long ago that tying your currency to something specific (ie gold) was a really bad idea, that's why the USD is no longer backed by gold.
Why make the same mistake again with a new currency?
Additionally, why would you want to tie your new currency to one that is worth less and less each day?
If you are the true target of the FBI raid, you probably have bigger problems than the lost data, and in fact restoring the data may in fact cause you to be in even more legal trouble as they likely seized the servers specifically to stop you from continuing what you were doing. If you really do want to be immune to this sort of raid I would recommend your off site backups be stored in a different country than your primary server, and ideally in a jurisdiction with little history of cooperation with American law enforcement agencies (you probably want backup copies of your staff in those foreign countries too, as the primary staff members were likely "seized" as well)
If however you are simply part of the collateral damage of an FBI raid (you are one of 10 clients on a rack, not the one being investigated, but the FBI took the whole rack anyway) then the odds of your off site backups being seized in the same action are rather slim (unless you somehow managed to choose the same off site storage location for your backups as the other company did, in which case you really are insanely unlucky!) So in respect to the innocent companies that were taken down through no fault of their own, any disaster recovery plan that would cover the data centre burning to the ground/washing out to sea/being hit by a hijacked jetliner/etc should be quite sufficient to restore their services.
The bigger problem is that if a fire had destroyed their server, their insurance company would probably help with costs, an FBI raid (even if not directed at you) is likely not covered by insurance, leaving these people in worse shape financially, even if not technically.
Slashdot Mirror
This is effectively a different way of saying the same thing. As mentioned, Utopia is possible, but we have to get past the greed first.
Machines can replace everyone eventually, but if only the owner of the machines benefits, and nobody else, the world will be no better off than it is now, and likely worse as those "ownership" positions are being consolidated in to fewer and fewer hands all the time.
Again, the problem isn't the replacing of people with machines, nor is it people being unemployed. The problem is, as you put it, distribution of wealth. Unfortunately our current system for wealth distribution doesn't scale well if there is no reason for everyone to be employed.
Now there are other ways of doing it. going back to your baking example, previously 20 people needed to work 10 hour days to make bread, now 2 people work 10 hour days watching/fixing/maintaining the machines. Maybe it's better if 20 people work 1 hours days... (or the weekly equivelant) to make things fair. The reason though that we end up with the former, rather than the latter, is that the person owning the company makes more money if he has 2 staff members than if he has 20. This isn't inherently a bad thing, but it does have limitations
Sci-fi often shows what COULD be, rather than what is LIKELY to be. The world COULD transition to a utopian lifestyle where machines work for the benefit of everyone.... or the world COULD decend in to complete anarchy and conflict... unfortunately I don't honestly believe we will get the former without going through the later first.
When has any part of the government had any interest at all in REDUCING paperwork?
Your suggestion is however exactly the way income tax is dealt with. Tax is deducted from your paycheque before you get it, and then at the end of the year you adjust the correct amount with the government in case your employer over/under deducted.
It does however require MASSIVE amounts of paperwork, cost billions of dollars, and employ a very large number of people...
It's not just sci-fi, I know I've been saying this for years too.
I truly believe that eventually society will end up in some variation of the sci-fi utopia we see so frequently, where automation and technological progress allow people to no longer worry about financial burdens, and simply do whatever they enjoy, or work to better themselves and humanity. A world where everyone is "wealthy" and where money no longer rules our lives.
Unfortunately, I also strongly believe that things will get much much worse before we even start heading that direction. As things stand right now, if a manager replaces 100 people with 1 machine, he gets a big bonus, and those 100 people lose their jobs. The economy can absorb that to some extent for a limited time (more available people can be put to work accomplishing more things) however as you continue to automate more and more, you do eventually run out of things for those people to do. This generates high unemployment at the bottom, while making the people at the top very rich. Eventually though a couple of things happen. First the poor people at the bottom no longer have any money to inject in to the economy, and the rich people simply have nowhere to get their money from anymore, and the whole thing crumbles under it's own weight. The second thing that happens is mass rioting, insurrection, and widespread revolt (or generally, a big mess that I know I don't want to be around for!)
I would love to believe that humanity is capable of making the transition from where we are today, to the utopian future I believe in without going through full out civil war, and complete economic breakdown... but unfortunately history and human nature indicate that this is not likely.
One of my favourite sci-fi stories related to this is http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm I find that some parts of it hit a little to close to reality, With a rather novel way of transitioning to utopia... I don't know if it's workable, but it is certainly interesting to read.
now obviously I've only had my account for a very short time now... but that's an interesting question. If I share something with one of my circles which includes several people who only have email and not a G+ account, will they automatically be emailed what I write? I'm not sure I want that, if they're going to get it by email anyway, I'd rather it be an email from me, not one from google+... I suppose I could skip adding people to my circles until I know they have an account, but then I'd have to constantly search to check if they do...
not sure what the right answer is...
Wow, what a response... I'm up to 7 invites so far... people can stop sending them to me now!
I suppose now that I was invited, it's only fair for me to do the same for others. Done.
someone else was kind enough to invite me, so I am returning the favour.
someone was kind enough to invite me, so I am returning the favour...
someone else was kind enough to invite me, so I am returning the favour...
I buried the request in there for a couple reasons... first is that I didn't really want to be just another "me too" without adding something to the conversation, second is because the request is only secondary, while I want in, as I pointed out, it's not worth all that much until other people I know are on there (of course someone has to be first I guess!)
Thank you to the 3 people who sent me invites though! now to see where it leads and how many of my friends/colleagues I can pry off facebook to join (I have never actually had a facebook account)
I have been saying for years that facebook is just a fad, just like myspace was, and ICQ, and geocities, and who knows how many others, all of whom were seen as the place to be in their heyday. And yet facebook seemed to entrench itself well enough in the public mindset that I was starting to second guess my judgment.
Now google+ seems to be generating quite a bit of buzz of it's own, and amazingly enough, not just among the tech crowd. My girlfriend (a nurse) was commenting yesterday that all her co-workers were talking about it at work the other night, so maybe Google can really pull this off?
The part that makes this whole launch seems strange though is that what makes a social networking site work properly is the ability to find everyone you know on it, the idea of limiting who can apply seems rather counterproductive. And yet somehow it's working for Google.
Either way, I'm eager to get in and see how it works. I've been periodically checking to see when they open the floodgates, and I suppose I really wouldn't mind an invite either, after all, I do use google for pretty much everything else, (I have my radio callsign (VE6RAH) as my existing account on gmail if anyone is so inclined)
The big question though is one that nobody can answer yet with any certainty... will google+ manage to draw enough people away from facebook... will people who already use facebook for everything see a reason to switch... I guess only time will tell.
I have to admit that I use my credit card for pretty much everything, they pay me a cash dividend, and as I always pay my balance in full on the due date, they never charge me a penny of interest or other fees. It's convenient, and it saves me money.
I have received a total of 2 phone calls from the credit card company since signing up for the card 10 years ago. The first was them trying to sell me on a "premium" card with yearly fees. I declined and asked to stop receiving such offers. I've never been called for one again. The second was their fraud department, and they had legitimately flagged a purchase I didn't make, they refunded the purchase, cancelled my card, and couriered me a new one right away.
I have received 7 pieces of mail from the credit card company since signing up, 4 included new cards (initial card, replacement for the fraud case, replacement for expiry, "upgrade" to chip) the other 3 were offers to increase my credit limit (with no catch other than the responsibility that comes with being able to borrow larger amounts of money at a time)
I have never received a single ad by phone, mail, or email, that I have any reason to suspect has had anything at all to do with my credit card usage. The most I have ever had was the small box at the bottom of my monthly bill suggesting I upgrade to one of their "premium" cards with yearly fees, it's unobtrusive, and it's from the credit card company themselves, I always decline.
I don't know if Canadian privacy laws are just that much better, or if my bank is just a little less corrupt, but that's been my experience so far.
how much effort is it to recognize a quote as being from a specific show when the name of the show is in the quote? I've never seen a single full episode, but even I could tell that it had to come from that show.
Well... hard to say, their official reason for terminating me was due to budget cuts, and they did not fill my position once I was gone, it was termed a lay-off and not a firing. (It was actually somewhat satisfying to hear from a co-worker I ran in to almost a year later that the whole IT infrastructure in the company basically fell apart after that.) There's no way I could prove otherwise, so a wrongful dismissal case would have been an uphill battle to say the least. I suppose it's possible that it was all just a coincidence and that being let go had nothing to do with being out of town when the server broke... but it seemed pretty suspicious, especially after they made me fix it before telling me I no longer had a job.
My boss actually gave me a really good letter of recommendation, but I suspect he had nothing to do with the decision to let me go, I'm pretty sure it came from higher up (the recommendation was on his own letterhead, not the company's as it was "against company policy to write references")
It actually turned out better for me in the long run anyway, I now make about three times what I did there, plus benefits (which I did not have at that company), and I enjoy my new job a lot more than I ever did that one.
At a previous company I worked for I went away for 3 days (friday-sunday) at a company that only worked mon-fri, so it was essentially just a single day off. I made everyone well aware that I would be out of town and unreachable.
I returned on Monday to find my boss had flown in from out of town and was sitting cross legged on the server room floor with one of our servers in pieces all around him. He informed me that there had been a hardware failure over the weekend and that I should have been there to deal with it. After I finished fixing the original problem, and the problems he had created by trying to fix things, and once everything was up and running again, he asked me for my security pass and escorted me off the premises citing "budget cuts".
Probably much better that I don't work there anymore...
I can't even get them to open my carry-on in my presence, let alone my checked luggage.
The only reason I have ever found for opening and inspecting your luggage without you present is to encourage theft. There is simply no other excuse.
Why not? Big industry does it all the time, the trick is manipulating the laws so that the bribes don't need to be reported to anyone and you're home free...
In my wallet I have the following:
-cash (many places accept no substitute, and I refuse to pay a middleman to process the payment)
-cheques (the easiest, and cheapest, way to give a private individual more cash than you have on you at any given time)
-driver's license (in addition to allowing me to drive, it is used as ID to pick up parcels or prescriptions, prove my age, etc)
-vehicle registration (where I live it's a bad idea to leave it in the vehicle, because simply signing the back of it states that you have sold the vehicle to whoever is holding on to it, I'd rather that if someone steals my car, they don't automatically have a piece of paper that states I sold it to them!)
-credit card (more convenient than cash, and many places won't discount cash, additionally there are places that don't take cash, especially online)
-debit card (to get more cash when I need it)
-vehicle breakdown coverage card (if they send a tow truck they won't accept anything other than the real card, but they'll accept if for any vehicle I happen to be in, even if not mine, so better to have it with me, than in my car)
-health care card (if I'm injured the hospital will need this, as will an ambulance)
-drug plan card (I could leave this one at home and only bring it to the store when I need to get a prescription filled, but that guarantees I will forget it and not have it when I need it)
-loyalty cards for 2 supermarket chains, a fast food place, and a fuel station (I hate these things, but as long as they charge me extra for not having them I guess I better have them (there are 4 more of these that I don't carry because I know those stores will accept my phone number in lieu of the physical card))
-2 radio licenses (theoretically I must have these on my person to operate amateur radio, or air band radios... in practice I could probably not carry these, but you never really know do you... just like the driver's license I guess, I've never been asked to show it while driving, but I bet the cops wouldn't be too happy if I didn't have it with me when I got pulled over!)
-EMS practice permits (a total of 3 cards that I need to carry when working on an ambulance to prove I'm certified to do so)
-business cards (easiest way to give someone all your contact info)
-spare vehicle key (I've watched too many of my friends lock their keys in their car and be sorry...)
Other cards that I sometimes carry:
- power boat operators card (like a driver's license, but for power boats, generally left at home unless I'm expecting to drive a boat)
- scuba diver certification (needed to rent scuba gear, participate in scuba tours/charters/events, generally left at home unless I'm expecting to go diving)
- SIN card (government issued number used for taxes... but also used for all sorts of other forms such as employment info, pensions, health insurance, etc. Usually they only need the number off it which I've memorized, but sometimes you need the physical card such as when it is used as an additional form of ID)
- Telecommunication Journeyman certificate (theoretically I need to carry this at all times when working in the telecom field, but I have never even heard of anyone being asked to present it, so I don't bother except when starting a new job)
I could shrink this down a bit, but it's a risk, any card I don't have when I need it is a real pain. sometimes when going out in the evenings I'll carry a minimal wallet that includes only cash, credit card, driver's license, vehicle registration, vehicle breakdown coverage, and health care card. but even that is enough to justify a wallet.
As for what the original article is about... not a chance until they allow me to do so without paying the currently insane fees associated with phone based payment systems.
How about an even bigger reason to use cash, the lack of a desire to pay some other company to process the payment.
I work hard to earn my income, if I am giving someone my hard earned money it is either because I am legally obliged to (taxes) or because they are providing a service/product that I deem valuable (we could argue whether the former is a subset of the later or not, but that's a discussion for a different thread).
The ability to avoid carrying cash is not a service that I am willing to pay for. Especially not at the rates charged by every one of these schemes set up so far.
I use a bank that both pays interest, and charges no fees. I have a credit card and a debit card, but neither one charges me any fees at all. (I know the retailer pays fees, but if they don't offer me a way to save those fees by paying cash, then there isn't really any benefit to me either way). But when it comes to systems to pay with your mobile phone I have never seen one that doesn't charge the end user large sums of money.
Until I can use my mobile phone to pay, without incurring any additional fees, I will not be doing so at all.
The problem isn't that American banks are any better or worse than European banks, or Canadian banks, or any other banks (that's a completely different argument)
The problem is that paypal is only regulated as a bank in one jurisdiction. Which means that unless you are in that particular jurisdiction, paypal is free to ignore all the rules that would make it behave like a real bank.
As long as they continue to arbitrarily seize funds, cancel transaction, withhold payments, etc. they simply can't be trusted. I'd be ok with them being regulated as a bank in pretty much any of the major first world areas, as long as it affected all of their operations worldwide, but as long as it only affects their operations in that one area it won't help until it's the same area in which I reside.
A free market does not necessarily preclude taxation, it does however require that everyone is taxed equally, and that none of that tax money is spent on any program or policy that gives advantage to any one party over any other.
Unfortunately neither case exists currently.
I never said they were right. Only that you will have bigger problems than restoring backups, and that doing so will likely cause them to get you in further trouble specifically because, as you say, they don't care, and they seldom admit they are wrong.
I also stated how to get around that particular problem further down in my post.
If one platform gets 1000 calls, 100 of which are hardware, this article would say 10% hardware calls, another platform gets 10000 calls 200 of which are hardware and it would say 2% hardware calls.
while they are technically right, the later one would, assuming equal number of users, actually have worse hardware.
Now I'm not saying that any one platform is better or worse than the other, or even that their conclusion is wrong, only that the article lacks enough information to actually back up what they are claiming. More useful information would be number of support calls equalized for user base, percentage hardware, percentage software, percentage instructional.. with those 4 numbers you could actually start to draw some reasonable conclusions about ease of use, and the quality of both the hardware and software.
Monetary systems around the world learned long ago that tying your currency to something specific (ie gold) was a really bad idea, that's why the USD is no longer backed by gold.
Why make the same mistake again with a new currency?
Additionally, why would you want to tie your new currency to one that is worth less and less each day?
If you are the true target of the FBI raid, you probably have bigger problems than the lost data, and in fact restoring the data may in fact cause you to be in even more legal trouble as they likely seized the servers specifically to stop you from continuing what you were doing. If you really do want to be immune to this sort of raid I would recommend your off site backups be stored in a different country than your primary server, and ideally in a jurisdiction with little history of cooperation with American law enforcement agencies (you probably want backup copies of your staff in those foreign countries too, as the primary staff members were likely "seized" as well)
If however you are simply part of the collateral damage of an FBI raid (you are one of 10 clients on a rack, not the one being investigated, but the FBI took the whole rack anyway) then the odds of your off site backups being seized in the same action are rather slim (unless you somehow managed to choose the same off site storage location for your backups as the other company did, in which case you really are insanely unlucky!) So in respect to the innocent companies that were taken down through no fault of their own, any disaster recovery plan that would cover the data centre burning to the ground/washing out to sea/being hit by a hijacked jetliner/etc should be quite sufficient to restore their services.
The bigger problem is that if a fire had destroyed their server, their insurance company would probably help with costs, an FBI raid (even if not directed at you) is likely not covered by insurance, leaving these people in worse shape financially, even if not technically.