Nuclear is very powerful! Listen carefully to what the President of the United States of America has to say about that:
Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart—you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you're a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.
Don't save money with the motherboard. I've got a b350 MSI Tomahawk this January and dearly regret it. The forums are full with stories from people who bricked their machine with UEFI updates, and I'm not even sure it will support future chips.:(
Sure, that's a possibility and viable opinion. I'm undecided myself, as I've seen calculations and arguments both for and against UBI but haven't really taken a closer look at it myself.
I merely wanted to point out that UBI was not proposed or implemented in any communist and socialist countries. UBI is actually very much against the ideals of communism. Communism is collectivist, in communism everybody is supposed to work for the common cause 'by insight' (==political indoctrination by Marxism-Leninism). UBI is individualist and egoistic, based on the capitalist-liberalist idea of maximizing individual freedom.
What are you talking about? There was not a single socialist or communist country with UBI ever.
In socialism and communism people were forced into labour, unemployment figures were neglectable and everybody was "dragged along" at the work place, whether they were drunk and incapable or not. It was the worst case scenario for the productivity and for those who weren't willing or capable of doing the work they had chosen or were chosen for. The people who didn't meet expectations were constantly cautioned and 'educated', and it was hard and took serious efforts to change workplace, especially if you weren't in line with the party.
UBI is the opposite of that concept. The only similarity is that less people had to live on the street and people were less afraid of their future, after that the similarities end. UBI has never tried in any country so far.
No, it's even simpler than that. What reddit is doing is exactly the same as when a bar owner kicks a bunch of loud, drunk,stupid idiots out of his bar when they start insulting other guests. There is nothing wrong with that, and in fact, every responsible bar owner on the planet would kick someone out of his establishment shouts shout the kind of things at him and his other guests that you habitually see from trolls and all sorts of creeps and whackos on public Internet forums. And there is nothing wrong whatsoever with kicking them out the bar. And yes, it's totally okay if the bar owner is also personally biased.
Nobody should have a problem with not giving Marxists a public forum. Or Stalinists. Or Nazis. Very loosely paraphrasing Sir Karl Popper, there is no need at all to be tolerant to intolerant people. On the contrary, you have to fight them actively and one reasonable and legitimate means of doing that is to not give them public forums and advertisement platforms.
It's really pretty simple and kind of sad how so many conservative people in the US seem to have lost their moral compass:
* tolerant people who support democracy and discuss with at least a minimal amount of honesty, civility, respect, and politeness == the good guys
* intolerant people who support totalitarianism, spew hatred, disinformation, propagate genocide or homicide, and have no respect for others and lack all politeness == the bad guys
Russia has invaded Georgia and split off part of it, invaded Ukraine and annexed a large part of it, and there is also Transistria, a charming military nostalgia self-proclaimed republic that split off from Moldavia and is directly subsidized and indirectly administered by Russia. So yeah, Russia could invade Estonia any time if they weren't in the NATO. You'd need to be blind on both eyes to not see that.
I first welcomed Estonia's online program, which is truly unique and remarkable. It's very modern. But over the time, I've become more wary of it.
The problem is that like for all Baltic country's the biggest threat for Estonia is currently Russia - which has unfortunately demonstrated multiple times recently that they have no moral problems with invading neighbouring countries, undermining their political system, or annexing large parts of them. NATO can protect Estonia against a physical attack, although in numbers the NATO forces are spread dangerously thin. However, there is a real potential for dangerous online attacks, including e.g. messing with e-voting systems and other central government services.
Of course, Estonian authorities are fully aware of that, but without their fault endpoint security is overall so bad that there is reason to worry that they might be unable to prevent a serious attack some day.
I've had a slightly overclocked i7 920 until a few weeks ago and it was perfectly capable of running yesteryears games. I've only upgraded in order to be able to play this years games, and even those didn't really require the CPU update but rather need more than 6GB RAM and upgrading such an old machine wasn't worth it.
So yeah, for standard tasks like web browsing, development without large compilations, writing, and so on, even an i7 920 would be perfectly fine if it weren't for Intel's fuck-up. It kind of bothers me that by not fixing older CPUs they might make even more money.
That being said, I bought an AMD 1800x so the joke's on them.
However, Americans are inherently more violent than people in other countries, they are inherently blood-lusty and that's why more gun regulations couldn't possibly work in the US. They would strangle other people to death with toilet paper, and you can't prohibit toilet paper.
I agree that it's about demand generation to sell more hardware, but I disagree about the quality of rasterization. I've bought an AMD 1800x with Geoforce GTX 1080, which is not the latest highest high end but still fairly high end, and the high end games I've looked at since then still smear everything with post-shaders and have not enough level of detail at a distance (with crap like "depth of field" turned off, of course). I don't know, maybe game designers are blind but when I look out of my windows I see trees with may more branches and leaves and much more detail very sharply until the horizon.
Consumer CPU/GPU combos have by far not reached the tipping point yet where landscapes really look realistic, and as it seems due to technical limitations.
For that reason I'm sceptical about introducing ray-tracing now. A rasterization-based game will be way more performant than a ray-tracing game, so I find it hard to imagine that ray-tracing game engines can compete with traditional rendering techniques in the near future.
Also, he was arrested in 2012. Now it's 2018 and he's still fighting against his extradition to a country that has declared him a fugitive even though has never set a foot on its soil, based on shaky evidence and illegal surveillance.
On the contrary, almost any human driver would have spotted that women from far away. Don't be fooled by the artificially darkened video, as others have noted in reality the lighting conditions on that road are pretty good, and she was also not jumping on the road but crossing it slowly and under perfect weather conditions. As some autonomous driving expert on HN as commented, the sensors should have had no problem picking her up from far apart and this looks a lot like a problem with the LIDAR software.
Two evils don't make a right. Besides, the US government has only prohibited government agencies from using Kaspersky on their official government machines. Anybody is free to use Kaspersky at home or for their private company.
That's very reasonable. I would personally go much farther. I personally don't think that government agencies should use anything else than software from their own country or (even better) open source software. It's crazy that people in government institutions in my country are allowed to use Gmail for their official mail, thereby allowing the NSA to siphon off all the data that is potentially confidential (e.g. for in-house use only). Stricter rules would make sense - though not all countries can afford those without exception, as e.g. my country of work&residence does not have any company that produces antivirus software of acceptable quality.
Uhm, no, anecdotal 'evidence' aside, very few people are killed by elevators per year. Elevators belong to the safest machines in everyday life. Escalators are dangerous, though.
Generally speaking, that argument is nonsense. If for example engineers left out certain safety measures for sheer convenience or cost reduction, because their robots already perform overall better than humans, then that would still be at least gross negligence. There are many legal and moral considerations that have nothing to do with statistical reliability (e.g. Who's the agent? Who is responsible? How to assign partial cause and partial responsibility, What's the role of the passive driver who could have intervened?, and so forth).
Statistical data should count but it cannot be the only criterion.
There is a huge difference between being killed or injured by a human driver and being killed or injured by a self-driving mechanism. In the first case, the human driver is either to be blamed or not. In the second case, you or your next of kin have to deal with a large corporation that is guaranteed to have top lawyers, and they will be constantly shifting the blame.
Well, if nobody reads those papers then nobody can have shown that their results are not reproducible either. If you want to be a trendy science critic, you should at least pick a consistent position.
That suggestion is totally crazy. Almost all foundational research in all sciences is and has always been state-funded, and even in the rare places where research is done in companies (e.g. pharmaceutical industry) this research would be impossible without the more foundational state-funded research & education.
If you remove that funding in a highly industrialized country, the quality and quantity of scientific research in that country would fall down to ridiculous levels, those of 3rd world countries or even lower, within one or two generations.
I think the OP wanted to say (or should have said) is that almost nobody is interested in either propaganda, whether "progressive-left neo marxist" or "alt-right neo-nazi" and that it's totally okay for the vast majority of people on earth when neither progressive-left neo-marxists nor alt-right neo-nazis make money from advertisement on their channel.
Note that demonetization doesn't mean that the propaganda is removed.
That being said, I'm personally also fine with remove all this trash. I have watched ISIS videos on Youtube, for instance, but they are not really illuminating or informative in the end. The same for alt-right neo-nazi videos or "progressive-left neo-marxist propaganda". Nothing of value is lost by sending this trash to the digital nirvana where it belongs.
Slashdot Mirror
Nuclear is very powerful! Listen carefully to what the President of the United States of America has to say about that:
Look, having nuclear—my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart—you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I'm one of the smartest people anywhere in the world—it’s true!—but when you're a conservative Republican they try—oh, do they do a number—that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune—you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged—but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me—it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are (nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what's going to happen and he was right—who would have thought?), but when you look at what's going on with the four prisoners—now it used to be three, now it’s four—but when it was three and even now, I would have said it's all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don't, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years—but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.
Don't save money with the motherboard. I've got a b350 MSI Tomahawk this January and dearly regret it. The forums are full with stories from people who bricked their machine with UEFI updates, and I'm not even sure it will support future chips. :(
Sure, that's a possibility and viable opinion. I'm undecided myself, as I've seen calculations and arguments both for and against UBI but haven't really taken a closer look at it myself.
I merely wanted to point out that UBI was not proposed or implemented in any communist and socialist countries. UBI is actually very much against the ideals of communism. Communism is collectivist, in communism everybody is supposed to work for the common cause 'by insight' (==political indoctrination by Marxism-Leninism). UBI is individualist and egoistic, based on the capitalist-liberalist idea of maximizing individual freedom.
What are you talking about? There was not a single socialist or communist country with UBI ever.
In socialism and communism people were forced into labour, unemployment figures were neglectable and everybody was "dragged along" at the work place, whether they were drunk and incapable or not. It was the worst case scenario for the productivity and for those who weren't willing or capable of doing the work they had chosen or were chosen for. The people who didn't meet expectations were constantly cautioned and 'educated', and it was hard and took serious efforts to change workplace, especially if you weren't in line with the party.
UBI is the opposite of that concept. The only similarity is that less people had to live on the street and people were less afraid of their future, after that the similarities end. UBI has never tried in any country so far.
No, it's even simpler than that. What reddit is doing is exactly the same as when a bar owner kicks a bunch of loud, drunk,stupid idiots out of his bar when they start insulting other guests. There is nothing wrong with that, and in fact, every responsible bar owner on the planet would kick someone out of his establishment shouts shout the kind of things at him and his other guests that you habitually see from trolls and all sorts of creeps and whackos on public Internet forums. And there is nothing wrong whatsoever with kicking them out the bar. And yes, it's totally okay if the bar owner is also personally biased.
It's as simple as that.
Nobody should have a problem with not giving Marxists a public forum. Or Stalinists. Or Nazis. Very loosely paraphrasing Sir Karl Popper, there is no need at all to be tolerant to intolerant people. On the contrary, you have to fight them actively and one reasonable and legitimate means of doing that is to not give them public forums and advertisement platforms.
It's really pretty simple and kind of sad how so many conservative people in the US seem to have lost their moral compass:
* tolerant people who support democracy and discuss with at least a minimal amount of honesty, civility, respect, and politeness == the good guys
* intolerant people who support totalitarianism, spew hatred, disinformation, propagate genocide or homicide, and have no respect for others and lack all politeness == the bad guys
Got it?
If that was the case, then why is there so much irrational nipple fear in the US? And why do you cunts bleep every swear word on TV?
All wedding cakes are gay.
I wasn't relying on hearsay, I was listing facts.
Russia has invaded Georgia and split off part of it, invaded Ukraine and annexed a large part of it, and there is also Transistria, a charming military nostalgia self-proclaimed republic that split off from Moldavia and is directly subsidized and indirectly administered by Russia. So yeah, Russia could invade Estonia any time if they weren't in the NATO. You'd need to be blind on both eyes to not see that.
I first welcomed Estonia's online program, which is truly unique and remarkable. It's very modern. But over the time, I've become more wary of it.
The problem is that like for all Baltic country's the biggest threat for Estonia is currently Russia - which has unfortunately demonstrated multiple times recently that they have no moral problems with invading neighbouring countries, undermining their political system, or annexing large parts of them. NATO can protect Estonia against a physical attack, although in numbers the NATO forces are spread dangerously thin. However, there is a real potential for dangerous online attacks, including e.g. messing with e-voting systems and other central government services.
Of course, Estonian authorities are fully aware of that, but without their fault endpoint security is overall so bad that there is reason to worry that they might be unable to prevent a serious attack some day.
I've had a slightly overclocked i7 920 until a few weeks ago and it was perfectly capable of running yesteryears games. I've only upgraded in order to be able to play this years games, and even those didn't really require the CPU update but rather need more than 6GB RAM and upgrading such an old machine wasn't worth it.
So yeah, for standard tasks like web browsing, development without large compilations, writing, and so on, even an i7 920 would be perfectly fine if it weren't for Intel's fuck-up. It kind of bothers me that by not fixing older CPUs they might make even more money.
That being said, I bought an AMD 1800x so the joke's on them.
It worked in Australia.
However, Americans are inherently more violent than people in other countries, they are inherently blood-lusty and that's why more gun regulations couldn't possibly work in the US. They would strangle other people to death with toilet paper, and you can't prohibit toilet paper.
If it's not scripted, then this is very impressive. He should have tried "Could you tell me more about what happened on Tiananmen Square?", though.
I agree that it's about demand generation to sell more hardware, but I disagree about the quality of rasterization. I've bought an AMD 1800x with Geoforce GTX 1080, which is not the latest highest high end but still fairly high end, and the high end games I've looked at since then still smear everything with post-shaders and have not enough level of detail at a distance (with crap like "depth of field" turned off, of course). I don't know, maybe game designers are blind but when I look out of my windows I see trees with may more branches and leaves and much more detail very sharply until the horizon.
Consumer CPU/GPU combos have by far not reached the tipping point yet where landscapes really look realistic, and as it seems due to technical limitations.
For that reason I'm sceptical about introducing ray-tracing now. A rasterization-based game will be way more performant than a ray-tracing game, so I find it hard to imagine that ray-tracing game engines can compete with traditional rendering techniques in the near future.
Also, he was arrested in 2012. Now it's 2018 and he's still fighting against his extradition to a country that has declared him a fugitive even though has never set a foot on its soil, based on shaky evidence and illegal surveillance.
On the contrary, almost any human driver would have spotted that women from far away. Don't be fooled by the artificially darkened video, as others have noted in reality the lighting conditions on that road are pretty good, and she was also not jumping on the road but crossing it slowly and under perfect weather conditions. As some autonomous driving expert on HN as commented, the sensors should have had no problem picking her up from far apart and this looks a lot like a problem with the LIDAR software.
This accident was fully preventable.
Two evils don't make a right. Besides, the US government has only prohibited government agencies from using Kaspersky on their official government machines. Anybody is free to use Kaspersky at home or for their private company.
That's very reasonable. I would personally go much farther. I personally don't think that government agencies should use anything else than software from their own country or (even better) open source software. It's crazy that people in government institutions in my country are allowed to use Gmail for their official mail, thereby allowing the NSA to siphon off all the data that is potentially confidential (e.g. for in-house use only). Stricter rules would make sense - though not all countries can afford those without exception, as e.g. my country of work&residence does not have any company that produces antivirus software of acceptable quality.
Uhm, no, anecdotal 'evidence' aside, very few people are killed by elevators per year. Elevators belong to the safest machines in everyday life. Escalators are dangerous, though.
Generally speaking, that argument is nonsense. If for example engineers left out certain safety measures for sheer convenience or cost reduction, because their robots already perform overall better than humans, then that would still be at least gross negligence. There are many legal and moral considerations that have nothing to do with statistical reliability (e.g. Who's the agent? Who is responsible? How to assign partial cause and partial responsibility, What's the role of the passive driver who could have intervened?, and so forth).
Statistical data should count but it cannot be the only criterion.
There is a huge difference between being killed or injured by a human driver and being killed or injured by a self-driving mechanism. In the first case, the human driver is either to be blamed or not. In the second case, you or your next of kin have to deal with a large corporation that is guaranteed to have top lawyers, and they will be constantly shifting the blame.
Well, if nobody reads those papers then nobody can have shown that their results are not reproducible either. If you want to be a trendy science critic, you should at least pick a consistent position.
That suggestion is totally crazy. Almost all foundational research in all sciences is and has always been state-funded, and even in the rare places where research is done in companies (e.g. pharmaceutical industry) this research would be impossible without the more foundational state-funded research & education.
If you remove that funding in a highly industrialized country, the quality and quantity of scientific research in that country would fall down to ridiculous levels, those of 3rd world countries or even lower, within one or two generations.
I think the OP wanted to say (or should have said) is that almost nobody is interested in either propaganda, whether "progressive-left neo marxist" or "alt-right neo-nazi" and that it's totally okay for the vast majority of people on earth when neither progressive-left neo-marxists nor alt-right neo-nazis make money from advertisement on their channel.
Note that demonetization doesn't mean that the propaganda is removed.
That being said, I'm personally also fine with remove all this trash. I have watched ISIS videos on Youtube, for instance, but they are not really illuminating or informative in the end. The same for alt-right neo-nazi videos or "progressive-left neo-marxist propaganda". Nothing of value is lost by sending this trash to the digital nirvana where it belongs.
I don't understand. Why would demonetization make the videos more suitable for children? AFAIK, it just leads to less clickbait.