Sorry, haven't gotten around to watching it. All that laser work on the retinas and I ended up with cataracts in both eyes. Can still read with the right one, but it's going.... so next week one of my 4 visits to specialists will be to see what's next, since I also have blood vessels growing in the angle of the lens and iris, which will cause glaucoma as well... oh well, make it better?
Seems to me that most "social media" is exactly the same - everyone consuming - there's very little actual communication going on. Just people screaming past each other like two cats with their tails tied together thrown over a clothes line (and if you want to know what THAT sounds like, just listen to Bohemian Rhapsody).
Except that if nobody but the 0.01% has money, money becomes useless. People will find something else - we always do. Usually that also involves violence. This time around, it may be simpler to just hack into the banks and redistribute the 0.01%'s funds.
Look at all the robots in car manufacturing. Just because a welding robot doesn't look like a human doesn't mean it isn't better than a human, despite the lack of mobility. And if mobility is needed, someone will build it for a price.
Robots are showing up everywhere. They're now doing the cutting for cataract surgery because they can do it better than a trained specialist surgeon. How long before they do the rest of the surgery?
Except that software is already being readied to take over the jobs of programming, same as it took over the job of designing large-scale circuits, etc. Programming will be a dying art (to the extent that it isn't already a half-dead toxic pool).
Or the first mom-and-pop that buys a robot can then start expanding, taking over their non-robotic competitors, until they get large enough to be bought out. Consolidation is a b*tch, and it's also a job destroyer.
If you tax property, that means that people who pay those property taxes have to have jobs to pay them. Without those jobs, they can't pay their property taxes. So, out on the street.
Now, if instead you want to tax non-real-estate property, again people have to have jobs to have money to pay those taxes. Same as they have to have jobs to pay sales and consumption taxes.
The alternative is to tax production directly - a manufacturer's sales tax. And for those companies that try to dodge it by moving operations to where the tax rate is lower, an import tax that makes it cheaper to pay the manufacturer's tax.
The money from that tax can help pay the basic income for those who don't have jobs. Either you use production taxes to subsidize consumption, or you have less consumption, and higher per-unit costs.
You miss the point with your dream world - people work so they can have food to eat, a roof over their head, and clothes on their back - not to entertain themselves. If they don't have a way to buy that food to eat, roof over their head, and clothes on their back, they riot or die. You haven't specified HOW - except with a bit of hand-waving - "they'll have to tax something else to keep the nation running." The devil is in the details, and your story line lacks them.
So, rather than worrying about warehouse employees stealing stock, better start worrying about former warehouse employees stealing robots. If people can fence stolen Cat D10s and Terex Titans from quarries, a truckload of slightly used robots should be a piece of cake - especially given the increased demand worldwide.
I hated the way they'd want your name and address, even though consumer protection legislation said that you don't have to give it to them. "But the system requires it." F*ck your system. I'm paying cash. So, put down "Johnny Cash." The address? Folsom State Prison.
Too bad the Internet hasn't learned the lesson that when you try to data mine the customer, you alienate them.
More bullshit. Just because some clown says his stakeholders include a certain group of people doesn't make it so. This nonexistent laptop is overpriced. Go buy the Dell Xeon quad core with 32 gig of ram and a 1tb ssd drive, nvidia quadro with 4 gig, a 3840x2160 touch screen, it's cheaper than their proposed top-of-the line model, comes with ubuntu pre-installed.
Anyone who is seriously in the market is going to do at least a bit of research - and given the higher specs on the dell, the cheaper price, and the fact it isn't vaporware, anyone who does their research is NOT going to be a stakeholder. Ever.
You're making the mistake of thinking that a potential customer group actually gives a shit because YOU want them to. Until you have actual buy-in, they are NOT stake-holders, any more than someone kicking the tires in a car sales lot is.
Linux users are not even indirectly affected by this. The product DOESN'T EXIST. And when it does, it will be marketed as a Windows gaming laptop, same as it's marketed now. This is just some bullshit that they're throwing together to get some extra publicity. They are NOT a laptop manufacturer, and anything that they do come up with will just be a rebadged machine from a real manufacturer. They have no experience with linux, so forget any issues with drivers, etc., going forward. This has "avoid at all costs" written all over it - especially if you look at the support complaints for their main products - glowing mice and keyboards for gamers that glow in the dark.
Good catch, but the bylaw also states that where there are two or more rules, the most restrictive one applies (section 591.8, page 10). Section 591-2 (on page 5) is "the most restrictive."
No person shall make, cause or permit noise or vibration, at any time, which is likely to disturb the quiet, peace, rest, enjoyment, comfort or convenience of the inhabitants of the City.
So forget that air compressor and air gun to change tires, zip gun or hammering to loosen parts, etc.
Oil change without a lift? Just drive one side onto the sidewalk, and the other part on the road. Plenty of clearance to change the filter and pull the drain plug.
Toronto, the city that is the subject of this article, is one such city. Anti-noise bylaw prohibits repairing vehicles in residential areas. Here's the bylaw. Go to page 8, item 9. Vehicle repairs are prohibited in residential areas at all times.
Fully manua transmissions are still available. The disincentive is that today drivers are too shitty to not break a 10, 13, 15, or 20 speed transmission. Old rock trucks had a 5x4 setup 2 sticks, with a 5-speed transmission feeding into a 4-speed transmission. You kind of had to reach one hand through the steering wheel if you wanted to shift both sticks simultaneously. It was an art.
Not quite. Manual, Automated Manual, and Automatic transmissions are 3 different types of transmissions, and all 3 are available in haulers..
There are currently three types of commonly available transmissions for Class 6 to 8 trucks: manual, automated manual (AMT) and automatic. For many years, the simplicity, reliability and low acquisition cost meant the manual transmissions dominated the market. But as skilled drivers have become scarce and electronic engines allow better communication with the transmissions, there has been an ongoing shift from manual transmissions to automatic and automated manual transmissions. Several new AMT transmission choices in the vocational marketplace are providing popular alternatives to the manual transmission.
However, there is often confusion in the terminology “automatic” and “automated.” These terms cannot be used interchangeably. While AMTs and automatic transmissions both automate the shifting process for the driver and allow the driver to concentrate on the task at hand, they are very distinct products that accomplish this task using very different methods.
An AMT, as its name implies, is an automated version of a standard mechanical transmission in which an on-board computer communicates with solenoids to electronically operate the clutch and shifter. Electronic sensors, processors and actuators do the shifting to match travel speed with the load and job application.
Unimogs were utility vehicles with up to 20 speeds - lowest gave a gear reduction of 4000:1. They were used for all sorts of stuff. You could get them with a backhoe in the cargo bed, a loader or snow plow in the front, etc. Think of them as a one-ton-class pickup with a radical frame, wheels, transmission, and cab.
The proper descriptive term in this case is sucker, not stakeholder. It's a Windows gaming laptop, not a laptop specially designed to run linux. Only a linux user who's a fool would want to buy into this, especially given that their facebook page is full of support complaints for their main product - which has nothing to do with linux, it's just frigging add-ons for gamers.
Would you argue that someone who uses Windows is somehow a linux and.or Apple stakeholder, or vice versa?
Just because they're trying to throw more shit at the wall to see what sticks doesn't mean that the people they hope it sticks to are automagically stake holders. According to your expansive interpretation, even my DOG is a stake-holder, because somehow or other, through some weird chain of events, it *might* affect him.
A stakeholder is generally thought to be someone actively affected or involved, not people who haven't bought into it and will avoid it like the plague because they checked behind the marketing bs to see the reality.
According to your definition, every linux user would have a stake in every single Windows laptop. That's just delusional. Same as their bs claim that "The Razer Blade series have become the default coding machine for many out there." No statistics, just claims. And they don't make a linux laptop, and like so many other such efforts, until it's actually made and sold and in people's hands, it's no more real than anything on kickstarter. There's been a few vaporware linux projects - this will be just another Windows computer with a few sales of linux on the side - IF it ever gets made.
allows us to better protect instructor intellectual property from 'pirates' who have reused content for personal profit without consent."
Every time I learned something in school, it profited me, at least in the sense that I knew more than before. The whole idea of education is that people benefit from it. If you make something available to world+dog, do they need to get your permission to actually personally profit from it in some fashion? Of course not.
Anyone who actually read the article would be aware that no causal chain has been identified - yet - in this study. However, such studies are not isolated from real world existence. Sitting in the same room as someone who is glued to their phone is like going to the movies - you're both sitting in the same place, but there's no real communications going on, except for their occasional grunting OMG or LOL or WTF.
I've visited people where all the adults and kids are glued to the wifi, each doing their separate thing (game video, facebook, twitter, game, whatever), and after a while I left to join the real world. They didn't even notice. Same as the woman who was so glued to her phone that she walked between 2 subway cars and got herself killed. Just off in a fake world of their own where the people beside them are just ghosts because they're not maintaining a digital presence that is directly in their view.
Now to the real point: Does it matter which comes first? We've identified a problem, We don't have to know everything about it to try to come up with solutions. We know that usage over 2 hours is an indicator of increased isolation. Doesn't matter if it causes the isolation, or if it's because people who are prone to isolation tend to spend more time on social media. The isolation itself is a danger to mental health, and cutting down the usage is an obvious action to take.
Only to those who don't read the article, perhaps? The same article that goes into detail to explain how we don't know which came first, the use of social media, or the sense of isolation, or if there's not a self-selection process going on where people who would be isolated anyway tend to go to social media?
Spending more time doing anything leaves you with less time for doing other things... this is not a theory and TFA is vague.
Tell that to all the people listening to music while coding, or getting exercise while walking the dog - on the way to or from the grocery store - with a friend - while making plans for the weekend.
Or even reading while sitting on the toilet. Or replying on slashdot while eating supper.
I would posit that spending more time outdoors walking the dog also gives me far more opportunity for simultaneous real-world interaction with other people and healthy exercise than any amount of hanging out on social media does.
"We do not yet know which came first - the social media use or the perceived social isolation,"
. . . so we just said, "fuck it!", and committed the most notorious fallacy of pop science and muddled the distinction betwee (sic) correlation and causation
How is acknowledging that they don't know what the actual causation or correlation is "muddling the distinction between correlation and causation"?
Slashdot Mirror
Funny, I always just politely refused and they just rang my purchases up.
Probably because they had run into people like me who had pointed out that it's illegal too many times.
Sorry, haven't gotten around to watching it. All that laser work on the retinas and I ended up with cataracts in both eyes. Can still read with the right one, but it's going .... so next week one of my 4 visits to specialists will be to see what's next, since I also have blood vessels growing in the angle of the lens and iris, which will cause glaucoma as well ... oh well, make it better?
Seems to me that most "social media" is exactly the same - everyone consuming - there's very little actual communication going on. Just people screaming past each other like two cats with their tails tied together thrown over a clothes line (and if you want to know what THAT sounds like, just listen to Bohemian Rhapsody).
Except that if nobody but the 0.01% has money, money becomes useless. People will find something else - we always do. Usually that also involves violence. This time around, it may be simpler to just hack into the banks and redistribute the 0.01%'s funds.
What does that have to do with the topic at hand, which is automation taking away jobs?
Robots are showing up everywhere. They're now doing the cutting for cataract surgery because they can do it better than a trained specialist surgeon. How long before they do the rest of the surgery?
Except that software is already being readied to take over the jobs of programming, same as it took over the job of designing large-scale circuits, etc. Programming will be a dying art (to the extent that it isn't already a half-dead toxic pool).
Or the first mom-and-pop that buys a robot can then start expanding, taking over their non-robotic competitors, until they get large enough to be bought out. Consolidation is a b*tch, and it's also a job destroyer.
If you tax property, that means that people who pay those property taxes have to have jobs to pay them. Without those jobs, they can't pay their property taxes. So, out on the street.
Now, if instead you want to tax non-real-estate property, again people have to have jobs to have money to pay those taxes. Same as they have to have jobs to pay sales and consumption taxes.
The alternative is to tax production directly - a manufacturer's sales tax. And for those companies that try to dodge it by moving operations to where the tax rate is lower, an import tax that makes it cheaper to pay the manufacturer's tax.
The money from that tax can help pay the basic income for those who don't have jobs. Either you use production taxes to subsidize consumption, or you have less consumption, and higher per-unit costs.
You miss the point with your dream world - people work so they can have food to eat, a roof over their head, and clothes on their back - not to entertain themselves. If they don't have a way to buy that food to eat, roof over their head, and clothes on their back, they riot or die. You haven't specified HOW - except with a bit of hand-waving - "they'll have to tax something else to keep the nation running." The devil is in the details, and your story line lacks them.
So, rather than worrying about warehouse employees stealing stock, better start worrying about former warehouse employees stealing robots. If people can fence stolen Cat D10s and Terex Titans from quarries, a truckload of slightly used robots should be a piece of cake - especially given the increased demand worldwide.
I hated the way they'd want your name and address, even though consumer protection legislation said that you don't have to give it to them. "But the system requires it." F*ck your system. I'm paying cash. So, put down "Johnny Cash." The address? Folsom State Prison.
Too bad the Internet hasn't learned the lesson that when you try to data mine the customer, you alienate them.
More bullshit. Just because some clown says his stakeholders include a certain group of people doesn't make it so. This nonexistent laptop is overpriced. Go buy the Dell Xeon quad core with 32 gig of ram and a 1tb ssd drive, nvidia quadro with 4 gig, a 3840x2160 touch screen, it's cheaper than their proposed top-of-the line model, comes with ubuntu pre-installed.
Anyone who is seriously in the market is going to do at least a bit of research - and given the higher specs on the dell, the cheaper price, and the fact it isn't vaporware, anyone who does their research is NOT going to be a stakeholder. Ever.
You're making the mistake of thinking that a potential customer group actually gives a shit because YOU want them to. Until you have actual buy-in, they are NOT stake-holders, any more than someone kicking the tires in a car sales lot is.
Linux users are not even indirectly affected by this. The product DOESN'T EXIST. And when it does, it will be marketed as a Windows gaming laptop, same as it's marketed now. This is just some bullshit that they're throwing together to get some extra publicity. They are NOT a laptop manufacturer, and anything that they do come up with will just be a rebadged machine from a real manufacturer. They have no experience with linux, so forget any issues with drivers, etc., going forward. This has "avoid at all costs" written all over it - especially if you look at the support complaints for their main products - glowing mice and keyboards for gamers that glow in the dark.
Good catch, but the bylaw also states that where there are two or more rules, the most restrictive one applies (section 591.8, page 10). Section 591-2 (on page 5) is "the most restrictive."
No person shall make, cause or permit noise or vibration, at any time, which is likely to disturb the quiet, peace, rest, enjoyment, comfort or convenience of the inhabitants of the City.
So forget that air compressor and air gun to change tires, zip gun or hammering to loosen parts, etc.
Oil change without a lift? Just drive one side onto the sidewalk, and the other part on the road. Plenty of clearance to change the filter and pull the drain plug.
Toronto, the city that is the subject of this article, is one such city. Anti-noise bylaw prohibits repairing vehicles in residential areas. Here's the bylaw. Go to page 8, item 9. Vehicle repairs are prohibited in residential areas at all times.
So sort of like the conflict between the GNU and BSD licence crowds - they want it open, but not completely.
Not quite. Manual, Automated Manual, and Automatic transmissions are 3 different types of transmissions, and all 3 are available in haulers..
There are currently three types of commonly available transmissions for Class 6 to 8 trucks: manual, automated manual (AMT) and automatic. For many years, the simplicity, reliability and low acquisition cost meant the manual transmissions dominated the market. But as skilled drivers have become scarce and electronic engines allow better communication with the transmissions, there has been an ongoing shift from manual transmissions to automatic and automated manual transmissions. Several new AMT transmission choices in the vocational marketplace are providing popular alternatives to the manual transmission.
However, there is often confusion in the terminology “automatic” and “automated.” These terms cannot be used interchangeably. While AMTs and automatic transmissions both automate the shifting process for the driver and allow the driver to concentrate on the task at hand, they are very distinct products that accomplish this task using very different methods.
An AMT, as its name implies, is an automated version of a standard mechanical transmission in which an on-board computer communicates with solenoids to electronically operate the clutch and shifter. Electronic sensors, processors and actuators do the shifting to match travel speed with the load and job application.
Unimogs were utility vehicles with up to 20 speeds - lowest gave a gear reduction of 4000:1. They were used for all sorts of stuff. You could get them with a backhoe in the cargo bed, a loader or snow plow in the front, etc. Think of them as a one-ton-class pickup with a radical frame, wheels, transmission, and cab.
The proper descriptive term in this case is sucker, not stakeholder. It's a Windows gaming laptop, not a laptop specially designed to run linux. Only a linux user who's a fool would want to buy into this, especially given that their facebook page is full of support complaints for their main product - which has nothing to do with linux, it's just frigging add-ons for gamers.
Would you argue that someone who uses Windows is somehow a linux and.or Apple stakeholder, or vice versa?
Just because they're trying to throw more shit at the wall to see what sticks doesn't mean that the people they hope it sticks to are automagically stake holders. According to your expansive interpretation, even my DOG is a stake-holder, because somehow or other, through some weird chain of events, it *might* affect him.
A stakeholder is generally thought to be someone actively affected or involved, not people who haven't bought into it and will avoid it like the plague because they checked behind the marketing bs to see the reality.
According to your definition, every linux user would have a stake in every single Windows laptop. That's just delusional. Same as their bs claim that "The Razer Blade series have become the default coding machine for many out there." No statistics, just claims. And they don't make a linux laptop, and like so many other such efforts, until it's actually made and sold and in people's hands, it's no more real than anything on kickstarter. There's been a few vaporware linux projects - this will be just another Windows computer with a few sales of linux on the side - IF it ever gets made.
allows us to better protect instructor intellectual property from 'pirates' who have reused content for personal profit without consent."
Every time I learned something in school, it profited me, at least in the sense that I knew more than before. The whole idea of education is that people benefit from it. If you make something available to world+dog, do they need to get your permission to actually personally profit from it in some fashion? Of course not.
The way print media such as books get around the obligation to provide access for handicapped people is that copyright allows for 3rd parties that specialize in services to the blind, etc., to make copies of non-dramatic works (written, audio, etc) without having to seek the permission of the copyright owner. Seems to me all the uni should have to do is appeal, and point out that there is already a legal remedy that exempts publishers of copyright non-dramatic media from having to comply with the act, given that the law shifts that right and responsibility to authorized 3rd parties.
Anyone who actually read the article would be aware that no causal chain has been identified - yet - in this study. However, such studies are not isolated from real world existence. Sitting in the same room as someone who is glued to their phone is like going to the movies - you're both sitting in the same place, but there's no real communications going on, except for their occasional grunting OMG or LOL or WTF.
I've visited people where all the adults and kids are glued to the wifi, each doing their separate thing (game video, facebook, twitter, game, whatever), and after a while I left to join the real world. They didn't even notice. Same as the woman who was so glued to her phone that she walked between 2 subway cars and got herself killed. Just off in a fake world of their own where the people beside them are just ghosts because they're not maintaining a digital presence that is directly in their view.
Now to the real point: Does it matter which comes first? We've identified a problem, We don't have to know everything about it to try to come up with solutions. We know that usage over 2 hours is an indicator of increased isolation. Doesn't matter if it causes the isolation, or if it's because people who are prone to isolation tend to spend more time on social media. The isolation itself is a danger to mental health, and cutting down the usage is an obvious action to take.
Only to those who don't read the article, perhaps? The same article that goes into detail to explain how we don't know which came first, the use of social media, or the sense of isolation, or if there's not a self-selection process going on where people who would be isolated anyway tend to go to social media?
Spending more time doing anything leaves you with less time for doing other things... this is not a theory and TFA is vague.
Tell that to all the people listening to music while coding, or getting exercise while walking the dog - on the way to or from the grocery store - with a friend - while making plans for the weekend.
Or even reading while sitting on the toilet. Or replying on slashdot while eating supper.
I would posit that spending more time outdoors walking the dog also gives me far more opportunity for simultaneous real-world interaction with other people and healthy exercise than any amount of hanging out on social media does.
"We do not yet know which came first - the social media use or the perceived social isolation,"
. . . so we just said, "fuck it!", and committed the most notorious fallacy of pop science and muddled the distinction betwee (sic) correlation and causation
How is acknowledging that they don't know what the actual causation or correlation is "muddling the distinction between correlation and causation"?