Casino dealers likely won't go away anytime soon as the gamblers who play tables like the human element, otherwise they'd all be only using the video poker machines and such that have already existed for decades now.
I agree with this. It seems like a rather glaring flaw in TFA. People like people, and as such, the service industry will exist for a very long time. People like waiters, bar tenders, dealers, etc. should continue to do pretty well. OTOH, the people in the service industry that you don't see, are in real danger. People don't care about people they don't see, such as line cooks and dish washers.
I notice there's some duplication in this discussion, and I'm late to the party.
But I think we're actually saying the same thing. I'm not sure where the idea of a "hive mind" came from, but it's certainly not what I'm envisioning. Both of "you" would believe that they are "you", and they'd both be absolutely correct,
"You" is physically tied to your brain, or any number of exact copies of your brain. Do you expect that an exact copy of you is going to believe they're not you?
Let's say you are placed on a bed and anesthetized, and while you're out, an exact copy is made and placed on an identical bed, and the two beds are rolled into a different room. When you wake up, you find yourself in an unfamiliar room, with an exact copy of you waking up on another bed. Which one is the original?
If you make a perfect copy of me, down to the sub-atomic level and that copy walks into my room, then I will not suddenly confuse that copy with myself.
How would you know which one of you was walking into the room, and which one was already there?
Let's partially reverse the order of operation here. Is the teleporter building a virtual model of the person, transmitting it to the receiving end, creating a new copy of the person, and then killing the original by ripping it apart?
I think it's painfully obvious that the person dies, and that a copy lives on. Logically, it's like forking a process. The parent and child process are identical aside from their process IDs and the values returned by fork(). In order for only one of the processes to exist, the other must die.
In fact, there's no absolute reason to kill the original at all. Such a transporter could produce unlimited exact copies of a person. The killing part is just a practical measure necessary to be able to call it a transporter, and not a copier.
The lesson for the dead person would have been to look both ways. The lesson for the rest of us is that Uber's self driving technology is not ready for prime time, for whatever reason(s).
I doubt (based, obviously, just on the video) that you would have avoided the collision entirely. What I am fairly certain of is that any attentive driver would have hit the brakes and at least begun to swerve before impact, reducing the force of the impact, perhaps significantly. The autonomous car should (must, actually) be able to react much more quickly than an attentive driver. The software failed, absolutely. It didn't engage the brakes at all. This accident is a show stopper.
This is a complete non-argument. If a car behind you rear-ends you when you dynamite the brakes, then they are at fault due to following too closely and/or not paying attention.
If you're trying to say that restricting missile launchers and grenades is not unconstitutional, strictly speaking, why not just say that? I'm sure you could come up with a nice, not-completely-arbitrary explanation of what makes a musket different from a rocket launcher within the framework of "arms".
I don't think you know how to read. The amendment says "the people", not "the militia".
And strictly speaking, restricting missile launchers and grenades is unconstitutional. It's just really hard to find many people who think those restrictions aren't reasonable..
As the weights move outward from center of gravity, the rotation of the assembly will slow down, making the weights "weigh" less, causing the clock to run slower.
In other words, "somewhat less effectively in space".
You expect anyone to believe the very last time you called someone a name was in third grade? I think we can add "Big Fat Lying Liar Pants" to the list.
Slashdot Mirror
TFA says that Market Research Analysts and Marketing Specialists have a 61% risk of being automated. How about that?
Casino dealers likely won't go away anytime soon as the gamblers who play tables like the human element, otherwise they'd all be only using the video poker machines and such that have already existed for decades now.
I agree with this. It seems like a rather glaring flaw in TFA. People like people, and as such, the service industry will exist for a very long time. People like waiters, bar tenders, dealers, etc. should continue to do pretty well. OTOH, the people in the service industry that you don't see, are in real danger. People don't care about people they don't see, such as line cooks and dish washers.
I notice there's some duplication in this discussion, and I'm late to the party.
But I think we're actually saying the same thing. I'm not sure where the idea of a "hive mind" came from, but it's certainly not what I'm envisioning. Both of "you" would believe that they are "you", and they'd both be absolutely correct,
"You" is physically tied to your brain, or any number of exact copies of your brain. Do you expect that an exact copy of you is going to believe they're not you?
Let's say you are placed on a bed and anesthetized, and while you're out, an exact copy is made and placed on an identical bed, and the two beds are rolled into a different room. When you wake up, you find yourself in an unfamiliar room, with an exact copy of you waking up on another bed. Which one is the original?
If you make a perfect copy of me, down to the sub-atomic level and that copy walks into my room, then I will not suddenly confuse that copy with myself.
How would you know which one of you was walking into the room, and which one was already there?
Let's partially reverse the order of operation here. Is the teleporter building a virtual model of the person, transmitting it to the receiving end, creating a new copy of the person, and then killing the original by ripping it apart?
I think it's painfully obvious that the person dies, and that a copy lives on. Logically, it's like forking a process. The parent and child process are identical aside from their process IDs and the values returned by fork(). In order for only one of the processes to exist, the other must die.
In fact, there's no absolute reason to kill the original at all. Such a transporter could produce unlimited exact copies of a person. The killing part is just a practical measure necessary to be able to call it a transporter, and not a copier.
The lesson for the dead person would have been to look both ways. The lesson for the rest of us is that Uber's self driving technology is not ready for prime time, for whatever reason(s).
Are you really attempting to say that the victim wasn't at least partly to blame?
Didn't look like a driver. either. Looked like a Facebook checker.
I doubt (based, obviously, just on the video) that you would have avoided the collision entirely. What I am fairly certain of is that any attentive driver would have hit the brakes and at least begun to swerve before impact, reducing the force of the impact, perhaps significantly. The autonomous car should (must, actually) be able to react much more quickly than an attentive driver. The software failed, absolutely. It didn't engage the brakes at all. This accident is a show stopper.
This is a complete non-argument. If a car behind you rear-ends you when you dynamite the brakes, then they are at fault due to following too closely and/or not paying attention.
Sounds good on paper, but it sucks up north. Getting dark at 4:30 PM is just shit.
Right, because bouncing the clocks around twice a year is not confusing at all.
With the popularity of that position, what makes you think GP is a troll?
If you're trying to say that restricting missile launchers and grenades is not unconstitutional, strictly speaking, why not just say that? I'm sure you could come up with a nice, not-completely-arbitrary explanation of what makes a musket different from a rocket launcher within the framework of "arms".
I don't think you know how to read. The amendment says "the people", not "the militia".
And strictly speaking, restricting missile launchers and grenades is unconstitutional. It's just really hard to find many people who think those restrictions aren't reasonable..
Printers are about as dead to me as Flash.
In other words, there's plenty of solar energy available exactly when it's needed to cool the class rooms.
So, as GP asked, what's the point of the batteries?
As the weights move outward from center of gravity, the rotation of the assembly will slow down, making the weights "weigh" less, causing the clock to run slower.
In other words, "somewhat less effectively in space".
I suspect the "weight hanging on a gear" mechanism would operate somewhat less effectively in space.
Yes, especially the ones cast by a random person in their back yard.
Yes, because casting aluminum, iron, and steel is "pretty easy"...
Satirist? Troll? Idiot? Who can tell?
You expect anyone to believe the very last time you called someone a name was in third grade? I think we can add "Big Fat Lying Liar Pants" to the list.
Now maybe we can get back to mining coal.