You can give it the spin you want, but what you cannot say is that the earphones plug has fallen into disuse. I think it's the single most used phone accessory nowadays, with no second competitor in sight.
So you remove a widely used feature, and you provide a worse alternative, or rather, you simply point out that an alternative has always existed. The glaring fact that practically nobody used that existing alternative is gloriously lost on you. Or rather, you don't care.
So basically you are doing something to screw your users, thinking that it will improve your company. Again the glaring fact that your company is nothing without your clients, is lost in the glare of your new shiny state-of-the-art office.
Let's see how it plays out. People can be really dumb that way, and certainly that's not a deal breaker. Also, there is always the possibility of backtracking. Never underestimate the marketing department ingenuity of selling an Apple 7 Super Plus "With earphones plug!!!", only for 100$ more. But IMHO, Apple is accumulating small mistakes with a sore lack of the former big hits that could,in past times, have covered them.
First they will edit the genes of embryos with a high risk of some terrible sickness. That will be accepted because poor kids.
Then they will edit some less terrible sicknesses. That will generate a heated debate, with stern posturing and unbreakable red lines.
Then the Chinese will start editing their embryos massively for higher intelligence and all kind of sickness resistance, and everybody will panic.
Some things are meant to be, and this is one of this. There is no sense in arguing about it, when the tech is ready, the people will follow the tech, or follow the Neanderthal.
We are interfering with Nature in all ways every day. Species are disappearing because some assholes want to cut some square miles of woods for small gain. I say, if we can, sure we should go full genocidal on the mosquitoes. Sure it will have unintended consequences, but if it has only a few of the intended ones, I'm IN.
Good thing that the article states that "American officials say Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks probably have no direct ties to Russian intelligence services." In the same spirit I can also state that probably, Glenn Beck didn't rape and murder a young girl In 1990.
Anybody else has the impression that the Slashdot editors are trolling us?
Better use emule to share, with Kad network if all emule servers are down. You don't have URLs to block there.
I know that the issue here is the outrageous punishment of the law, but the situation here is asymmetrical in that the content creators have all the financial incentive to fight legally, and the content sharers very little of it. However, the asymmetry is reversed on the technical side, so that's where you can play your cards.
Please tell me which kind of general public will download and open any kind of leaked information from Wikileaks, and then I'll worry.
On second thoughts, if that happened, it would mean that the public had started going to the source of the news to build their own opinions. So a couple of viruses would be a small price to pay for such a positive development.
Well, you can try to abolish the H-1B Visas, but then, perhaps, American firms will be less competitive. And then, perhaps, the next Google will appear in China. Who knows, after some time of it, perhaps it's the Chinese who will be complaining of all those American cheap programmers that are willing to work for pennies because there is no work in their own country.
You have to recognize that America is now the leader in software services, and I'd guess that the H-1B visa program has helped it getting to that position. Of course the right equilibrium is difficult to get, but you can't have it both ways.
True, but that is just one kind of application. You don't need to suddenly lose all developers to slowly drift to irrelevance. What happens when your local bus company only has an Android app? That kind of things move just by percentages. Or when most apps that want to be the next cool thing appear in iOS only six months after getting to be the next cool thing, because if you can develop just for one market, you aren't going for the 12%. Then it's 10%, then 8%, then you die.
Ask Microsoft, they have lived both sides of the story.
12% market share approaches the danger zone. For some applications, perhaps just 5% of your potential public will use iOS. Then you don't develop the iOS version. Market dominance snowballs in this kind of situations, as we regrettably know from the Windows story.
Focusing efforts on the neediest is exactly what it's being done nowadays. It isn't working so swell, and that's the reason the Universal Basic Income idea is floating.
The truth is that nobody knows how UBI is going to work out, it would be an experiment. So this kind of "studies" are just adding some numbers and pretending that they tell you something. Nobody will know anything till it's tried in some country, and we are not there yet.
The real reason why UBI is being talked about is not the present, but the future. If and when robots take the jobs of half the people in a country, you have to be ready for it or face social unrest. For that situation, where the 1% could have the 99% of the rents, you need UBI or other similar redistribution mechanism, or face revolt and people with torches in the streets.
At last a Linux development post where everybody can have an opinion! Gone are the obscure race conditions and unstable semaphores, where prudent programmers preferred to watch in silence and seem ignorant, rather than open their mouths and dispel all doubts.
You cannot check this for causation. Does the habit cause later protection, or does per-existing protection cause the habit? No way of doing a controlled study, as feeding nails to random children (even own nails) can be frowned upon.
Anyway, if it can help reduce the all-encompassing parent anxiety about anything their precious child does, it's welcome.
Licensing, not exceptions to copyright, drives innovation.
How true! Almost forgotten is the fact that it was only through a carefully structured licensing strategy that William Shakespeare managed to innovate so much.
-We use only the finest baby rats, dew picked and flown from Iraq, cleansed in finest quality spring water, lightly killed, and then sealed in a succulent Swiss quintuple smooth treble cream milk chocolate envelope and lovingly frosted with glucose.
I'd say that in any discussion of this kind, you should first have a very clear idea of what is the situation now. What does the current driver do in these situations. Which are the outcomes.
I'd say the best defense for any algorithm would be that, in all (or most) situations, saves more pedestrian lives AND more passenger lives than the current situation.
That's the only way, I think, of reconciling people with the worst user-wise handicap for these technologies, that is the loss-of-control sensation.
That's not so easy to do well. We are not talking criminal masterminds here. They are rejects from the plow that value their own lives at null, and who are we to argue about that.
I read about this in The Economist, somebody saying that I buy from Costco (or whatever) much more than Costco buys from me, but still I have little pricing power.
There are to many individual member states that have specific industrial relationships who would quietly support generally good trade terms with UK out of their own self interest.
That's the exact same reason given to explay why sanctions to Russia were a non-starter. And see what? They got approved, later made stronger, and still keep.
If that's so, people won't like the new "feature" and won't buy un-jacked phones. If they buy them, then it's not such a big problem. As long as there is competition, natural selection should take care of the problem, if there is a problem. I, for myself, welcome our... I mean I'll add the "having a 3.5mm jack" to the list of things my phones must have.
Slashdot Mirror
After deciphering, they will find out that they were saying:
- I think they are on to us.
- Yes, perhaps it's time to search for another planet.
You can give it the spin you want, but what you cannot say is that the earphones plug has fallen into disuse. I think it's the single most used phone accessory nowadays, with no second competitor in sight.
So you remove a widely used feature, and you provide a worse alternative, or rather, you simply point out that an alternative has always existed. The glaring fact that practically nobody used that existing alternative is gloriously lost on you. Or rather, you don't care.
So basically you are doing something to screw your users, thinking that it will improve your company. Again the glaring fact that your company is nothing without your clients, is lost in the glare of your new shiny state-of-the-art office.
Let's see how it plays out. People can be really dumb that way, and certainly that's not a deal breaker. Also, there is always the possibility of backtracking. Never underestimate the marketing department ingenuity of selling an Apple 7 Super Plus "With earphones plug!!!", only for 100$ more. But IMHO, Apple is accumulating small mistakes with a sore lack of the former big hits that could ,in past times, have covered them.
First they will edit the genes of embryos with a high risk of some terrible sickness. That will be accepted because poor kids.
Then they will edit some less terrible sicknesses. That will generate a heated debate, with stern posturing and unbreakable red lines.
Then the Chinese will start editing their embryos massively for higher intelligence and all kind of sickness resistance, and everybody will panic.
Some things are meant to be, and this is one of this. There is no sense in arguing about it, when the tech is ready, the people will follow the tech, or follow the Neanderthal.
We are interfering with Nature in all ways every day. Species are disappearing because some assholes want to cut some square miles of woods for small gain. I say, if we can, sure we should go full genocidal on the mosquitoes. Sure it will have unintended consequences, but if it has only a few of the intended ones, I'm IN.
Good thing that the article states that "American officials say Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks probably have no direct ties to Russian intelligence services." In the same spirit I can also state that probably, Glenn Beck didn't rape and murder a young girl In 1990.
Anybody else has the impression that the Slashdot editors are trolling us?
Better use emule to share, with Kad network if all emule servers are down. You don't have URLs to block there.
I know that the issue here is the outrageous punishment of the law, but the situation here is asymmetrical in that the content creators have all the financial incentive to fight legally, and the content sharers very little of it. However, the asymmetry is reversed on the technical side, so that's where you can play your cards.
Please tell me which kind of general public will download and open any kind of leaked information from Wikileaks, and then I'll worry.
On second thoughts, if that happened, it would mean that the public had started going to the source of the news to build their own opinions. So a couple of viruses would be a small price to pay for such a positive development.
Well, you can try to abolish the H-1B Visas, but then, perhaps, American firms will be less competitive. And then, perhaps, the next Google will appear in China. Who knows, after some time of it, perhaps it's the Chinese who will be complaining of all those American cheap programmers that are willing to work for pennies because there is no work in their own country.
You have to recognize that America is now the leader in software services, and I'd guess that the H-1B visa program has helped it getting to that position. Of course the right equilibrium is difficult to get, but you can't have it both ways.
True, but that is just one kind of application. You don't need to suddenly lose all developers to slowly drift to irrelevance. What happens when your local bus company only has an Android app? That kind of things move just by percentages. Or when most apps that want to be the next cool thing appear in iOS only six months after getting to be the next cool thing, because if you can develop just for one market, you aren't going for the 12%. Then it's 10%, then 8%, then you die.
Ask Microsoft, they have lived both sides of the story.
12% market share approaches the danger zone. For some applications, perhaps just 5% of your potential public will use iOS. Then you don't develop the iOS version. Market dominance snowballs in this kind of situations, as we regrettably know from the Windows story.
...they are simply more sincere :-)
Focusing efforts on the neediest is exactly what it's being done nowadays. It isn't working so swell, and that's the reason the Universal Basic Income idea is floating.
The truth is that nobody knows how UBI is going to work out, it would be an experiment. So this kind of "studies" are just adding some numbers and pretending that they tell you something. Nobody will know anything till it's tried in some country, and we are not there yet.
The real reason why UBI is being talked about is not the present, but the future. If and when robots take the jobs of half the people in a country, you have to be ready for it or face social unrest. For that situation, where the 1% could have the 99% of the rents, you need UBI or other similar redistribution mechanism, or face revolt and people with torches in the streets.
At last a Linux development post where everybody can have an opinion! Gone are the obscure race conditions and unstable semaphores, where prudent programmers preferred to watch in silence and seem ignorant, rather than open their mouths and dispel all doubts.
You cannot check this for causation. Does the habit cause later protection, or does per-existing protection cause the habit? No way of doing a controlled study, as feeding nails to random children (even own nails) can be frowned upon.
Anyway, if it can help reduce the all-encompassing parent anxiety about anything their precious child does, it's welcome.
The causes of death know only one thing, and it's that they will always add up to 100%.
Licensing, not exceptions to copyright, drives innovation.
How true! Almost forgotten is the fact that it was only through a carefully structured licensing strategy that William Shakespeare managed to innovate so much.
-We use only the finest baby rats, dew picked and flown from Iraq, cleansed in finest quality spring water, lightly killed, and then sealed in a succulent Swiss quintuple smooth treble cream milk chocolate envelope and lovingly frosted with glucose.
-That's as maybe, it's still a rat.
- What else?
I've been to that big New York Falls, but don't know exactly what do they mean by the Seattle Rises. Is some kind of known mountain range?
Anyway, nice to see that natural spaces get to make the list of top ten tech cities.Way to go, Nature!
I'd say that in any discussion of this kind, you should first have a very clear idea of what is the situation now. What does the current driver do in these situations. Which are the outcomes.
I'd say the best defense for any algorithm would be that, in all (or most) situations, saves more pedestrian lives AND more passenger lives than the current situation.
That's the only way, I think, of reconciling people with the worst user-wise handicap for these technologies, that is the loss-of-control sensation.
...it doesn't end well.
That's not so easy to do well. We are not talking criminal masterminds here. They are rejects from the plow that value their own lives at null, and who are we to argue about that.
I read about this in The Economist, somebody saying that I buy from Costco (or whatever) much more than Costco buys from me, but still I have little pricing power.
There are to many individual member states that have specific industrial relationships who would quietly support generally good trade terms with UK out of their own self interest.
That's the exact same reason given to explay why sanctions to Russia were a non-starter. And see what? They got approved, later made stronger, and still keep.
If that's so, people won't like the new "feature" and won't buy un-jacked phones. If they buy them, then it's not such a big problem. As long as there is competition, natural selection should take care of the problem, if there is a problem. I, for myself, welcome our... I mean I'll add the "having a 3.5mm jack" to the list of things my phones must have.
Far more likely that the NSA would eliminate him.