From the smug "genius" who tried to blame the owner for the problem, who kept asking if they had dropped it, who insisted that Apple just doesn't make faulty products.
Many Apple IIIs were thought to have failed due to their inability to properly dissipate heat. inCider stated in 1986 that "Heat has always been a formidable enemy of the Apple///",[12] and some users reported that their Apple IIIs became so hot that the chips started dislodging from the board, causing the screen to display garbled data or their disk to come out of the slot "melted". BYTE wrote, "the integrated circuits tended to wander out of their sockets".[11] The fix Apple suggested in a technical bulletin was to lift the Apple III off the desk until it was three inches in the air and then drop it, repeating the procedure until the symptoms disappeared. While the fix was quite effective, many purchasers found the process alarming.
You cannot even prove that everything out of your perceptive range continues to exist for the time that you cannot perceive it.
So that crazy old guy who came up behind me and whacked me on the head with a rake (I was picking up my dog poop on public property, but he hates dogs) didn't exist until the rake hit me? And after the cops took him away he went back to fairytale land?
This is proof that objects don't have to be perceived by you to be real. Any argument that tries to work around that requires so many absurd assumptions that it's just not worth it.
Unfortunately this is such a bad, outdated idea that the government will probably go for it.
We already have digital currency - those bits that record our current balances, etc in our bank accounts, etc. It's not like the bank takes physical money and moves it from one drawer to the other, or that when you pay with a credit card that the credit card company sends the merchant a wad of cash and some coins.
And as I pointed out, men have legal recourse, because it's NOT legal to knowingly put down the wrong name. So men can avoid the legal responsibility by going to court. Kind of puts a hole in your claim that this sort of fraud "makes him legal (sic) responsible for a child no matter what."
But the longer the delay in taking action once you find out, the harder it is to challenge it, since any court will ask why you didn't take action within a reasonable delay of finding out. An unreasonable delay tends to indicate that you originally were in agreement. Many states only allow 1 year to contest.
I never accused anyone of "not wading instantly through mounds of paternity law when the fraud is against them (you)". The proper action if you feel defrauded is to get a lawyer and head to court, or at least try to get the mother to admit she lied and change the birth certificate..
There is NOTHING that I have posted that indicates that I in any way condone fraud against someone, no matter who they are. Again, show me one place. And it should be obvious, when I focus on the child and their right to know who their real father is (and that overrides any embarrassment or trouble or other conflict others may feel) that I'm advocating for "people's rights" - in this case, a child who cannot do so themselves.
You don't seem to understand that just because women are able to name anyone as the father doesn't mean that naming the wrong person is legal. It's, as you pointed out, fraud. It's also creating a forged document. That's why you can go to court and get it reversed - because it's NOT legal.
Further evidence the you would rather ruin someone's professional, personal, and legal standing than admit that women are enabled to commit fraud against men by most current paternity laws around the world. Counts as one instance of you advocating illegal activity from my POV.
Where have I said that women should be allowed to lie about who the father is? Show me ONE place where I advocate that. If you choose not to avail yourself of the means to rectify the situation, that doesn't give you ANY right to claim that I'm advocating illegal activity. To the contrary, YOU are, by your inaction, condoning that same illegal activity.
And don't start whining about how I'm engaging in "blaming the victim" here. You ARE at fault for not taking the steps necessary to rectify this matter. Just as the mother is at fault for lying about who the real father is. There is also the problem that, in some jurisdictions, if you don't challenge it within a certain delay after you become aware of it, then you cannot go to court - you've been assumed to have accepted the situation.
Instead of whining, go see a lawyer. Or be prepared to accept that this child is in the eyes of the law yours. Instead of whining on a blog, take action. Instead of casting unwarranted aspersions at others, fix the problem that is the source of your concern.
If you're conflicted about it, or not ready to take such a step yet but it's still causing you grief, why not see a therapist to help you find out why you can't seem to do what is obvious to pretty much everyone. It can't hurt and it might help.:-)
Good points. I can see that most of these revolve around the presence of kids in the family. These things should ideally be discussed in advance, but unfortunately people do change their minds, so there are no guarantees.
I'm just glad that my kids are grown up (which is a different set of problems, but hey... it's all good) and that I'm happy to be single.
They were informed of the acceptance by email, and the error by email a few hours later. The university could do something positive for those rejected by helping them get into a similar program at another university.
If everyone has a guaranteed income, but other income claws it back at the rate of, say, 50 cents on the dollar, people still have the incentive to work to have more money. And of course, someone making 3x or 5x or 10x the guaranteed income doesn't give a hoot anyway.
That's how we do it here with income redistribution for seniors.
Hey, that's great. It's just that a lot of people change in non-compatible ways over the years. Religious believers switch religions or become atheists and vice versa. Prolonged hours at jobs really mess up home lives, and even worse if children are involved, as parenting falls to one person. People get together or married for the wrong reasons in good faith, then... oh oh. And then there are the in-laws, who many times should be called out-laws.
I know I'm not the same person I was years ago (obviously:-), though I'' admit mine might be an extreme case.
Part of the whole "wining and dining and meeting in clubs, etc" is a way for people to self-select - there are those who can navigate that, and those who can't. Maybe it's different levels of extroversion / introversion... maybe it's partly self-confidence... I don't know.
Question - if you didn't have the same values but still respected each other, shouldn't it still be "all good"? Same as with friends and family (and some really, really annoying co-workers)?
As I said, I don't have the resources to brute-force, so I came up with a better way. However, given enough resources (sometime before we reduce the solar system to computronium particles, I hope) others have already said it's possible.
Of course. One of the articles I found proposed to do brute force solutions, and given the terabytes of code out there, it should be possible. Even the creation of the original modules should be open to brute-forcing.
But note I described the results I wanted - not the code to achieve them. And since I've already written code to do it that way around the turn of the decade, and I don't have the resources to brute-force code creation, I'm figuring I'll go with automated code generation from a simple wish list.
But even as your average Joe, I would also argue that men don't pay for sex
There are plenty of guys who complain that they've got to pay for dinners, entertainment, etc. just in the hope of getting lucky, and that it would be cheaper to visit a hooker. But they don't, because they still hold onto the dream of "finding the right one."
I don't blame them... but it might be more practical to realize that the "right one" isn't going to stay with the same figure, the same hair color, the same likes (people evolve); that cute little laugh gets nerve-grating after a few years, she doesn't like your friends and your friends don't like her, she's developed a taste for booze or coke, etc.
Better to not look, or at least not too hard (you'll come across as desperate, which is a turnoff), and if you find someone, great, but if not, don't sweat it. Just be yourself and give it time.
put currently-unemployed people into a job where they have the chance to gain experience and learn new skills (which can turn into future productivity).
With fewer and fewer jobs not susceptible to automation, you'll just end up worse than the current situation, where students do an extra year or 3 of university in a doomed and debt-ridden quest to improve their chances of eventually getting a job (hey, can you say "overqualified"? I knew you could). Adults are in the same bind - more of them being funneled into the competition for fewer jobs.
Only two things can work - either lower the number of hours worked, so that more workers are required to produce the same amount of work (pay for it by taking back some of the productivity gains made in the last 40 years while wages were stagnant after inflation), or a guaranteed minimum income that can be clawed back, say, 50 cents on the dollar for earnings over a certain amount, to provide an incentive to work. One spreads the work around, the other gets workers out of the job market, creating openings.
How am I in any way excusing this? It's outright fraud, and since it's "supposed" to be yours, why not demand that "your child" be given a DNA test so you can "decide whether or not to apply for custody?" That might shake something loose.
Unfortunately it's also the law here in Canada. The only thing to do is to get a court order demanding a test. You have enough to "show cause" for one.
You can also tip off the real father that the kid is his - maybe he would like some visiting rights?
Strange - I post an article about an upcoming advance in birth control for men, and everyone focuses on "how unfair it is that the woman has total control," when in fact she has not got total control. Condoms work. Oral sex works. Anal sex works. Vasectomies work. Finding a partner who has had an IUD inserted, or a tubal ligation or a hysterectomy works. Guys have options - this just adds two more to the mix at some future date.
This is NOT about paternity fraud. That's going to happen even if the guy's on the pill. "Did you take it every day?" "Guess it didn't work?" "Are you sure you even took it instead of wanting to spread your demon seed?" "Maybe there was a drug interaction - what other meds are you on? Other drugs?"
Same as now happens to women who get pregnant despite being on the pill.
Most important of all - the kid has the right to know the truth, especially since it could be important in a medical emergency.
Somehow, I think you continue to excuse any sort of illegal activity for your social justice activism
Show me one place in this thread where I have excused or encouraged any sort of illegal activity. And accusing me of being a SJW, when I have been quite vocal here in denouncing the bogus claims of Brianna Wu in particular? Doesn't stick. And I've also said several times that making "Depression Quest" does not qualify Zoe Quinn as a game developer. It's just a template-driven flip book.
BTW, the domain for depression quest (depressionquest.com) is up for grabs, if you or someone else you know wants it for the lulz.
It doesn't have to be called a form of contraception to be used as one, just like a screwdriver doesn't have to be called a chisel to be used as one. Same as plenty of medications have off-label uses.
A hearing has to be held, and justification for varying from the schedule has to be given. "Because we want to" is not sufficient. It has to be shown to be in the best interests of the child.
Again, procedures vary from province to province. As I said before, " just go to the Percepteur des pensions alimentare with the agreement, and the seizure goes through automatically." The percepteur is a government agency. Judgements after 1997 are even simpler - the money is paid to the Percepteur, usually but not always by your employer being required to deduct it from your salary. Don't pay (you changed jobs or lost your job), they go after everything. They have the power to seize your belongings, bank account, any other money such as a pension, etc. And the feds are quite happy to cancel your passport at the percepteur's request. And the province will happily yank your drivers and other licenses.
The onus is upon the alleged debtor to go to court to prove either that payment has been made, or the amounts aren't owing (they won't even check to see if the children are now adults in their mid-twenties and the "custodial parent" isn't really their custodial parent - either produce proof that they are independent adults or have them testify). Alternatively, go to court when the kids are no longer children and get a court order ending support. The percepteur cannot modify or terminate the judgment themselves. Only a judge can.
You're assuming there is only one solution, and that we have to search the whole problem space to find it by brute force with only a few optimizations.
I've already posted one solution here. And yes, I'm well aware of how quickly numbers expand (the "I'll put a dollar on the first checkerboard square, the same on the next, etc. You just have to put a penny on the first, and double the amount every day. When we finish the 64th square, you take the money I put down, and I take the money you put down" being a simple-to-comprehend example).
Example - you have several different database crud operation code modules to choose from.
You also have several different database user interface to pick from.
Additionally, you have several database schemas to choose from, including different indexing options depending on what is important to get fast, the mix of reads, deletes, writes, and rewrites, etc..
And several data input modules - keyboard, external data feed, whatever.
And several logging modules, each compatible with the back end.
And several different error-reporting modules (do we put up a user alert and give a chance to edit it, do we not allow it and send a text message to a phone, whatever).
It would be able to give a list of data we want, like Name, etc. without specifiying the data size or internal type, because that's all been standardized (last name, first name, middle name, etc).
Given the requirements in more or less plain english, it should be possible to come up with the optimal solution pretty quickly, since each module has standard interfaces to the others.
For example, I need a way to track a million people. The information that's mandatory is their name and address, date of birth, and gender. When the address changes, the old address should be preserved so that I can trace back if necessary.
Optional fields are cell number, email, home and work phone numbers, and 1 or more emergency contacts. When any of these change, the old ones should be preserved so I can trace back if necessary.
Initial input is via a record dump on a usb key stored in SDF format, with updates being done by either using the same method or by someone typing them in.
A sequential account number should be auto-generated for those records that don't have an account number from the initial dump. The account number is 2 letters, 6 digits, then 2 random digits to help detect bad account numbers.
I should be able to search by account number, name, or any phone number.
Input data from the initial dump should be flagged if not valid, and input data from later should only be entered if all required fields are there.
Auto-generating such an application should be doable now.
Slashdot Mirror
From the smug "genius" who tried to blame the owner for the problem, who kept asking if they had dropped it, who insisted that Apple just doesn't make faulty products.
You're supposed to drop it:
Many Apple IIIs were thought to have failed due to their inability to properly dissipate heat. inCider stated in 1986 that "Heat has always been a formidable enemy of the Apple ///",[12] and some users reported that their Apple IIIs became so hot that the chips started dislodging from the board, causing the screen to display garbled data or their disk to come out of the slot "melted". BYTE wrote, "the integrated circuits tended to wander out of their sockets".[11] The fix Apple suggested in a technical bulletin was to lift the Apple III off the desk until it was three inches in the air and then drop it, repeating the procedure until the symptoms disappeared. While the fix was quite effective, many purchasers found the process alarming.
You cannot even prove that everything out of your perceptive range continues to exist for the time that you cannot perceive it.
So that crazy old guy who came up behind me and whacked me on the head with a rake (I was picking up my dog poop on public property, but he hates dogs) didn't exist until the rake hit me? And after the cops took him away he went back to fairytale land?
This is proof that objects don't have to be perceived by you to be real. Any argument that tries to work around that requires so many absurd assumptions that it's just not worth it.
Unfortunately this is such a bad, outdated idea that the government will probably go for it.
We already have digital currency - those bits that record our current balances, etc in our bank accounts, etc. It's not like the bank takes physical money and moves it from one drawer to the other, or that when you pay with a credit card that the credit card company sends the merchant a wad of cash and some coins.
I don't know ... there are so many people that act like they've been injected with extract of Mickey Mouse ...
I am not sure what bears would do with weapons. How are they going to use them while we have their arms?
I guess you never read "Bears Discover Fire" (full text of the short story)
More important, they can continue to function even in snowstorms, albeit at a slower pace because the drones won't be usable.
And as I pointed out, men have legal recourse, because it's NOT legal to knowingly put down the wrong name. So men can avoid the legal responsibility by going to court. Kind of puts a hole in your claim that this sort of fraud "makes him legal (sic) responsible for a child no matter what."
But the longer the delay in taking action once you find out, the harder it is to challenge it, since any court will ask why you didn't take action within a reasonable delay of finding out. An unreasonable delay tends to indicate that you originally were in agreement. Many states only allow 1 year to contest.
I never accused anyone of "not wading instantly through mounds of paternity law when the fraud is against them (you)". The proper action if you feel defrauded is to get a lawyer and head to court, or at least try to get the mother to admit she lied and change the birth certificate..
There is NOTHING that I have posted that indicates that I in any way condone fraud against someone, no matter who they are. Again, show me one place. And it should be obvious, when I focus on the child and their right to know who their real father is (and that overrides any embarrassment or trouble or other conflict others may feel) that I'm advocating for "people's rights" - in this case, a child who cannot do so themselves.
You don't seem to understand that just because women are able to name anyone as the father doesn't mean that naming the wrong person is legal. It's, as you pointed out, fraud. It's also creating a forged document. That's why you can go to court and get it reversed - because it's NOT legal.
Further evidence the you would rather ruin someone's professional, personal, and legal standing than admit that women are enabled to commit fraud against men by most current paternity laws around the world. Counts as one instance of you advocating illegal activity from my POV.
Where have I said that women should be allowed to lie about who the father is? Show me ONE place where I advocate that. If you choose not to avail yourself of the means to rectify the situation, that doesn't give you ANY right to claim that I'm advocating illegal activity. To the contrary, YOU are, by your inaction, condoning that same illegal activity.
And don't start whining about how I'm engaging in "blaming the victim" here. You ARE at fault for not taking the steps necessary to rectify this matter. Just as the mother is at fault for lying about who the real father is. There is also the problem that, in some jurisdictions, if you don't challenge it within a certain delay after you become aware of it, then you cannot go to court - you've been assumed to have accepted the situation.
Instead of whining, go see a lawyer. Or be prepared to accept that this child is in the eyes of the law yours. Instead of whining on a blog, take action. Instead of casting unwarranted aspersions at others, fix the problem that is the source of your concern.
If you're conflicted about it, or not ready to take such a step yet but it's still causing you grief, why not see a therapist to help you find out why you can't seem to do what is obvious to pretty much everyone. It can't hurt and it might help. :-)
Isn't feasible for ME. Doesn't mean it isn't feasible for someone with adequate resources.
Genetic algorithms are one form of brute forcing (as opposed to introspection/design) that can work.
Good points. I can see that most of these revolve around the presence of kids in the family. These things should ideally be discussed in advance, but unfortunately people do change their minds, so there are no guarantees.
I'm just glad that my kids are grown up (which is a different set of problems, but hey ... it's all good) and that I'm happy to be single.
They were informed of the acceptance by email, and the error by email a few hours later. The university could do something positive for those rejected by helping them get into a similar program at another university.
If everyone has a guaranteed income, but other income claws it back at the rate of, say, 50 cents on the dollar, people still have the incentive to work to have more money. And of course, someone making 3x or 5x or 10x the guaranteed income doesn't give a hoot anyway.
That's how we do it here with income redistribution for seniors.
Hey, that's great. It's just that a lot of people change in non-compatible ways over the years. Religious believers switch religions or become atheists and vice versa. Prolonged hours at jobs really mess up home lives, and even worse if children are involved, as parenting falls to one person. People get together or married for the wrong reasons in good faith, then ... oh oh. And then there are the in-laws, who many times should be called out-laws.
I know I'm not the same person I was years ago (obviously :-), though I'' admit mine might be an extreme case.
Part of the whole "wining and dining and meeting in clubs, etc" is a way for people to self-select - there are those who can navigate that, and those who can't. Maybe it's different levels of extroversion / introversion ... maybe it's partly self-confidence ... I don't know.
Question - if you didn't have the same values but still respected each other, shouldn't it still be "all good"? Same as with friends and family (and some really, really annoying co-workers)?
As I said, I don't have the resources to brute-force, so I came up with a better way. However, given enough resources (sometime before we reduce the solar system to computronium particles, I hope) others have already said it's possible.
For now, there's still room for humans :-)
Of course. One of the articles I found proposed to do brute force solutions, and given the terabytes of code out there, it should be possible. Even the creation of the original modules should be open to brute-forcing.
But note I described the results I wanted - not the code to achieve them. And since I've already written code to do it that way around the turn of the decade, and I don't have the resources to brute-force code creation, I'm figuring I'll go with automated code generation from a simple wish list.
No offense taken :-)
But even as your average Joe, I would also argue that men don't pay for sex
There are plenty of guys who complain that they've got to pay for dinners, entertainment, etc. just in the hope of getting lucky, and that it would be cheaper to visit a hooker. But they don't, because they still hold onto the dream of "finding the right one."
I don't blame them ... but it might be more practical to realize that the "right one" isn't going to stay with the same figure, the same hair color, the same likes (people evolve); that cute little laugh gets nerve-grating after a few years, she doesn't like your friends and your friends don't like her, she's developed a taste for booze or coke, etc.
Better to not look, or at least not too hard (you'll come across as desperate, which is a turnoff), and if you find someone, great, but if not, don't sweat it. Just be yourself and give it time.
put currently-unemployed people into a job where they have the chance to gain experience and learn new skills (which can turn into future productivity).
With fewer and fewer jobs not susceptible to automation, you'll just end up worse than the current situation, where students do an extra year or 3 of university in a doomed and debt-ridden quest to improve their chances of eventually getting a job (hey, can you say "overqualified"? I knew you could). Adults are in the same bind - more of them being funneled into the competition for fewer jobs.
Only two things can work - either lower the number of hours worked, so that more workers are required to produce the same amount of work (pay for it by taking back some of the productivity gains made in the last 40 years while wages were stagnant after inflation), or a guaranteed minimum income that can be clawed back, say, 50 cents on the dollar for earnings over a certain amount, to provide an incentive to work. One spreads the work around, the other gets workers out of the job market, creating openings.
How am I in any way excusing this? It's outright fraud, and since it's "supposed" to be yours, why not demand that "your child" be given a DNA test so you can "decide whether or not to apply for custody?" That might shake something loose.
Unfortunately it's also the law here in Canada. The only thing to do is to get a court order demanding a test. You have enough to "show cause" for one.
You can also tip off the real father that the kid is his - maybe he would like some visiting rights?
Strange - I post an article about an upcoming advance in birth control for men, and everyone focuses on "how unfair it is that the woman has total control," when in fact she has not got total control. Condoms work. Oral sex works. Anal sex works. Vasectomies work. Finding a partner who has had an IUD inserted, or a tubal ligation or a hysterectomy works. Guys have options - this just adds two more to the mix at some future date.
This is NOT about paternity fraud. That's going to happen even if the guy's on the pill. "Did you take it every day?" "Guess it didn't work?" "Are you sure you even took it instead of wanting to spread your demon seed?" "Maybe there was a drug interaction - what other meds are you on? Other drugs?"
Same as now happens to women who get pregnant despite being on the pill.
Most important of all - the kid has the right to know the truth, especially since it could be important in a medical emergency.
Somehow, I think you continue to excuse any sort of illegal activity for your social justice activism
Show me one place in this thread where I have excused or encouraged any sort of illegal activity. And accusing me of being a SJW, when I have been quite vocal here in denouncing the bogus claims of Brianna Wu in particular? Doesn't stick. And I've also said several times that making "Depression Quest" does not qualify Zoe Quinn as a game developer. It's just a template-driven flip book.
BTW, the domain for depression quest (depressionquest.com) is up for grabs, if you or someone else you know wants it for the lulz.
NOTE: If you're on the Slashdot main page and click the 'Read' link below this paragraph, the video will autoplay.
Why? Slashdot is already having multiple daily outages. When users are allready cheesed off, autoplayiing a video is not a smart move.
It doesn't have to be called a form of contraception to be used as one, just like a screwdriver doesn't have to be called a chisel to be used as one. Same as plenty of medications have off-label uses.
there is a high chance of testicular cancer where they have to chop off your balls. Most don't want to go through this extreme.
And a lot of people do ;-) And it was probably rated informative because funny doesn't give you karma.
A hearing has to be held, and justification for varying from the schedule has to be given. "Because we want to" is not sufficient. It has to be shown to be in the best interests of the child.
Again, procedures vary from province to province. As I said before, " just go to the Percepteur des pensions alimentare with the agreement, and the seizure goes through automatically." The percepteur is a government agency. Judgements after 1997 are even simpler - the money is paid to the Percepteur, usually but not always by your employer being required to deduct it from your salary. Don't pay (you changed jobs or lost your job), they go after everything. They have the power to seize your belongings, bank account, any other money such as a pension, etc. And the feds are quite happy to cancel your passport at the percepteur's request. And the province will happily yank your drivers and other licenses.
The onus is upon the alleged debtor to go to court to prove either that payment has been made, or the amounts aren't owing (they won't even check to see if the children are now adults in their mid-twenties and the "custodial parent" isn't really their custodial parent - either produce proof that they are independent adults or have them testify). Alternatively, go to court when the kids are no longer children and get a court order ending support. The percepteur cannot modify or terminate the judgment themselves. Only a judge can.
You're assuming there is only one solution, and that we have to search the whole problem space to find it by brute force with only a few optimizations.
I've already posted one solution here. And yes, I'm well aware of how quickly numbers expand (the "I'll put a dollar on the first checkerboard square, the same on the next, etc. You just have to put a penny on the first, and double the amount every day. When we finish the 64th square, you take the money I put down, and I take the money you put down" being a simple-to-comprehend example).
Example - you have several different database crud operation code modules to choose from.
You also have several different database user interface to pick from.
Additionally, you have several database schemas to choose from, including different indexing options depending on what is important to get fast, the mix of reads, deletes, writes, and rewrites, etc..
And several data input modules - keyboard, external data feed, whatever.
And several logging modules, each compatible with the back end.
And several different error-reporting modules (do we put up a user alert and give a chance to edit it, do we not allow it and send a text message to a phone, whatever).
It would be able to give a list of data we want, like Name, etc. without specifiying the data size or internal type, because that's all been standardized (last name, first name, middle name, etc).
Given the requirements in more or less plain english, it should be possible to come up with the optimal solution pretty quickly, since each module has standard interfaces to the others.
For example, I need a way to track a million people. The information that's mandatory is their name and address, date of birth, and gender. When the address changes, the old address should be preserved so that I can trace back if necessary.
Optional fields are cell number, email, home and work phone numbers, and 1 or more emergency contacts. When any of these change, the old ones should be preserved so I can trace back if necessary.
Initial input is via a record dump on a usb key stored in SDF format, with updates being done by either using the same method or by someone typing them in.
A sequential account number should be auto-generated for those records that don't have an account number from the initial dump. The account number is 2 letters, 6 digits, then 2 random digits to help detect bad account numbers.
I should be able to search by account number, name, or any phone number.
Input data from the initial dump should be flagged if not valid, and input data from later should only be entered if all required fields are there.
Auto-generating such an application should be doable now.