I want to extract a timeline of specific events (in this case, the scheduling for corporate earnings announcements and conference calls) from some giant news feed like BusinessWire.
Is there a very easy way to do this?
I know it's not rocket science. I could write code to do it. But I like easy answers. Is there a super easy way to generate this data?
Never. Not now. Not then. Not tomorrow. It's a fictional scenario.
Or, to state an actual transition, when farming was mechanized. It happened over a couple hundred years. It wasn't a "time in history". People adjusted.
What's the practical benefit of "tracking news" supposed to be? News makes for poor entertainment. "Breaking" news tends to be inaccurate and the corrections usually don't rate headlines. It's also full of nonsense, like "someone said XYZ thing on twitter", or 50 different kinds of clickbait, or the latest dramatic semi-truthful story to troll the news consumers.
Conversations about the latest news are tedious. People just repeat the shit the newscasters and writers say, and most of them are repeating shit from other news. They all think very highly of themselves.
Unless you're tracking news for professional reasons, you're better off just reading it the next day on some web site. Or not reading it.
It's not everyone. They're in a few categories: - The entitled. Their greed is simply unchecked by any normal sense of decency, like a very young child's. - The haters. They hate and want to hurt the people they hate by bullying and stealing. They might as well be Klan members. - The useful idiots. They believe storytellers. Make up a story about robots taking all the jobs and they believe it -- even though there are a 1000 historical examples that prove these problems are temporary and almost everyone adapts and finds new, better work in a more prosperous society. It'll be different this time, just like they said all the other times. - The community organizers. They make up the stories, feed the fires of hatred and try to blur the lines of decency. They want to divide us into warring groups so they can be powerful, wealthy political leaders. When you're at war, you need strong leaders. "War is the health of the state."
There may be others -- maybe even some that aren't evil (or foolish), though I haven't seen much sign of that.
Yeah, energy use is the #1 or #2 factor for CPUs. But Moore's Law is not about energy use, it's about device sizing and economics. Transistor scaling is not primarily limited by energy use.
So the ethical concern is using a position of authority to push -- advocate the purchase of -- commercial products to children for personal gain.
Thanks. It's something that can easily be expressed in one or two sentences rather than 6 or 7 paragraphs. It's strange that that seems so difficult for you.
So your argument is that Google's actions are not within the precise, technical definition of the word "censorship". Agreed. They have the same effect though, which is why I used the words "effectively censor", meaning to take an action that has the effect of censoring.
Google should stop bullying people. You should stop defending their bullying behavior.
If you can't simply state the ethical concern without "now imagine", then perhaps the ethical concern is imaginary. Why can't you make a clear, simple statement?
Still kind of assholish to name-call. It's long past time Americans stopped being jerks to each other over stupid shit. (And for the record, I opposed Obama and voted against him.)
The guy that said Article 1 Section 1 was correct:
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
To illustrate the problem, let me suggest something Trump could do:
Trump wants Congress to pass a business tax cut. But why bother with Congress? The President could simply direct the IRS to issue rules telling companies to pay their taxes as if the rate were 15% instead of 35+%. Along with your business taxes, include a letter asking for a binding settlement. The IRS settles with delinquent taxpayers all the time, often for much less than the amount owed. Trump could direct the IRS to automatically settle for 15%. Why shouldn't he do this?
Because the US Constitution is to be obeyed, not worked around.
The President takes an oath to "faithfully" execute the office. Creating workaround schemes to circumvent Congress is executing the office in bad faith.
Kids could be taught the motivation behind ads. If kids are being deceived or misled, then that would indeed be an ethical concern. It's not clear whether that's the case.
Thanks for answering clearly. People deserve better than ethics cloud innuendo.
Tenure is gone. Pensions are gone. Seniority is gone. Teachers are evaluated yearly... Salaries are flat and losing ground against inflation. Health care costs are skyrocketing.
So just like every other job then, except with 3 months off every summer?
Please state it clearly. Clearly. What's the ethical concern? No weird stories, no "perhaps", no "what if they did XYZ instead". Just state the ethical concern.
If you want to say she has a conflict of interest, putting her personal enrichment ahead of her responsibility to teach the children, then say that for fuck's sake.
Why are we permitting [government] intrusion? Why are we permitting [idealogical] intrusion?
Corporations, governments, and ideas are real. Are classrooms supposed to teach about reality or hide children from reality?
If you want to censor one set of ideas from classrooms, that's a good argument for getting rid of government schools and letting people like you and other people unlike you have separate schools dedicated to whichever one-sided ideology each of you favor.
The headline mentions an ethical concern, but the summary doesn't. What's the concern? Please state it clearly.
Please also consider that not everyone hates commerce. So if your ethical concern is "commerce may occur", you might want to explain how that's an ethical problem.
Teachers in government schools are rarely held to any standard at all. So if your ethical concern is that one teaching style might not meet some standard, please show how that standard would be otherwise enforced in classrooms.
I said they started down the road, not that they'd already reached the end of it.
I was responding to a "they could never do it to me" comment. They could. They haven't yet. They've started down the road that leads there. Their minor abuses of power will lead to more severe abuses of power unless and until they decide to take a different road.
You don't need that conspiracy stuff. I know it feels good to think you have it all figured out and are smarter and better informed than everyone else. But you really don't need it. Facts are enough. No need to also believe in stories. There are better hobbies.
Slashdot Mirror
Side question, if you have such a view, why are you commenting on Slashdot
I like news and discussion. I don't "track" it. I browse.
I "track" some other tech news for professional reasons.
I want to extract a timeline of specific events (in this case, the scheduling for corporate earnings announcements and conference calls) from some giant news feed like BusinessWire.
Is there a very easy way to do this?
I know it's not rocket science. I could write code to do it. But I like easy answers. Is there a super easy way to generate this data?
Never. Not now. Not then. Not tomorrow. It's a fictional scenario.
Or, to state an actual transition, when farming was mechanized. It happened over a couple hundred years. It wasn't a "time in history". People adjusted.
Specific stories can be interesting to read, but you don't need to track news to read them. They'll be interesting tomorrow.
Everything else is more-or-less the same as yesterday.
Maybe it's better outside the US. News in the US is mostly written by jerks.
What's the practical benefit of "tracking news" supposed to be? News makes for poor entertainment. "Breaking" news tends to be inaccurate and the corrections usually don't rate headlines. It's also full of nonsense, like "someone said XYZ thing on twitter", or 50 different kinds of clickbait, or the latest dramatic semi-truthful story to troll the news consumers.
Conversations about the latest news are tedious. People just repeat the shit the newscasters and writers say, and most of them are repeating shit from other news. They all think very highly of themselves.
Unless you're tracking news for professional reasons, you're better off just reading it the next day on some web site. Or not reading it.
It's not everyone. They're in a few categories:
- The entitled. Their greed is simply unchecked by any normal sense of decency, like a very young child's.
- The haters. They hate and want to hurt the people they hate by bullying and stealing. They might as well be Klan members.
- The useful idiots. They believe storytellers. Make up a story about robots taking all the jobs and they believe it -- even though there are a 1000 historical examples that prove these problems are temporary and almost everyone adapts and finds new, better work in a more prosperous society. It'll be different this time, just like they said all the other times.
- The community organizers. They make up the stories, feed the fires of hatred and try to blur the lines of decency. They want to divide us into warring groups so they can be powerful, wealthy political leaders. When you're at war, you need strong leaders. "War is the health of the state."
There may be others -- maybe even some that aren't evil (or foolish), though I haven't seen much sign of that.
Music will always be an entertainment business regardless of blockchain.
Will blockchain save some specific business model? Who cares.
It does seem interesting, but the article has limited info of how it could be practical.
Some sort of very fancy reversible charge storing logic would be good for an ADC design.
Yeah, energy use is the #1 or #2 factor for CPUs. But Moore's Law is not about energy use, it's about device sizing and economics. Transistor scaling is not primarily limited by energy use.
Moore's Law is about device sizes and economics, not about energy use.
So the ethical concern is using a position of authority to push -- advocate the purchase of -- commercial products to children for personal gain.
Thanks. It's something that can easily be expressed in one or two sentences rather than 6 or 7 paragraphs. It's strange that that seems so difficult for you.
So your argument is that Google's actions are not within the precise, technical definition of the word "censorship". Agreed. They have the same effect though, which is why I used the words "effectively censor", meaning to take an action that has the effect of censoring.
Google should stop bullying people. You should stop defending their bullying behavior.
Potential conflicts of interest. Got it. That's at least mostly clear. Thanks.
Conflicts of interest can be eliminated satisfactorily with carefully-followed rules.
You didn't explain why. Nice try though. Ethics are specific, not a free floating cloud of uncertainties and opinions and biases and fears.
If you can't simply state the ethical concern without "now imagine", then perhaps the ethical concern is imaginary. Why can't you make a clear, simple statement?
Still kind of assholish to name-call. It's long past time Americans stopped being jerks to each other over stupid shit. (And for the record, I opposed Obama and voted against him.)
The guy that said Article 1 Section 1 was correct:
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
To illustrate the problem, let me suggest something Trump could do:
Trump wants Congress to pass a business tax cut. But why bother with Congress? The President could simply direct the IRS to issue rules telling companies to pay their taxes as if the rate were 15% instead of 35+%. Along with your business taxes, include a letter asking for a binding settlement. The IRS settles with delinquent taxpayers all the time, often for much less than the amount owed. Trump could direct the IRS to automatically settle for 15%. Why shouldn't he do this?
Because the US Constitution is to be obeyed, not worked around.
The President takes an oath to "faithfully" execute the office. Creating workaround schemes to circumvent Congress is executing the office in bad faith.
Kids could be taught the motivation behind ads. If kids are being deceived or misled, then that would indeed be an ethical concern. It's not clear whether that's the case.
Thanks for answering clearly. People deserve better than ethics cloud innuendo.
Tenure is gone.
Pensions are gone.
Seniority is gone.
Teachers are evaluated yearly...
Salaries are flat and losing ground against inflation.
Health care costs are skyrocketing.
So just like every other job then, except with 3 months off every summer?
Please state it clearly. Clearly. What's the ethical concern? No weird stories, no "perhaps", no "what if they did XYZ instead". Just state the ethical concern.
If you want to say she has a conflict of interest, putting her personal enrichment ahead of her responsibility to teach the children, then say that for fuck's sake.
Why are we permitting [government] intrusion? Why are we permitting [idealogical] intrusion?
Corporations, governments, and ideas are real. Are classrooms supposed to teach about reality or hide children from reality?
If you want to censor one set of ideas from classrooms, that's a good argument for getting rid of government schools and letting people like you and other people unlike you have separate schools dedicated to whichever one-sided ideology each of you favor.
The headline mentions an ethical concern, but the summary doesn't. What's the concern? Please state it clearly.
Please also consider that not everyone hates commerce. So if your ethical concern is "commerce may occur", you might want to explain how that's an ethical problem.
Teachers in government schools are rarely held to any standard at all. So if your ethical concern is that one teaching style might not meet some standard, please show how that standard would be otherwise enforced in classrooms.
Thanks in advance.
I said they started down the road, not that they'd already reached the end of it.
I was responding to a "they could never do it to me" comment. They could. They haven't yet. They've started down the road that leads there. Their minor abuses of power will lead to more severe abuses of power unless and until they decide to take a different road.
...the Rothschilds are running the...
You don't need that conspiracy stuff. I know it feels good to think you have it all figured out and are smarter and better informed than everyone else. But you really don't need it. Facts are enough. No need to also believe in stories. There are better hobbies.
Which superhero do you work for?