To be fair, he wasn't asked to right any wrongs this time. He was asked to write the forward to a book about drone warfare, which he did, probably for money. This "press release," as you call it, is just a reprint of that essay.
If the method of obtaining it was illegal, *let the facts stand as they are*--use them to prosecute the first crime, but *also* prosecute the 2nd crime that was committed!
You're using an everyday, dictionary-definition version of the word "illegal." If evidence was obtained through illegal means, no crime was committed. The only penalty is that the evidence is excluded from trial. You would need a whole new set of laws to be passed if you wanted to start prosecuting cops for failing to get a proper search warrant. Those laws would never be passed because they would grind law enforcement to a halt.
More money available means that people will afford more and more expensive goods, services and housing.
I'm not sure anyone is talking about making more money available, i.e. printing more money. I think this is another flavor at looking at the negative effects on society of extreme wealth inequality of the type we have in the US. If more of that money was circulated to more people, it would also find its way into the hands of people who produce goods and services, enabling innovation and potentially (not necessarily) driving prices down, not up.
The entire American capitalist system is predicated on the idea that workers don't have the freedom to just leave their jobs, no matter how bad the conditions.
And yet I see plenty of people quitting their jobs. I quit my last job and spent four months deciding what I'd like to do next. My local economy didn't collapse.
It may be possible that Theranos has been experiencing problems because one or more of the entrenched interests in the pharm industry wants to slow the company down so they can catch up and come up with competing products with a known brand name.
That doesn't really make any sense. If there really was some kind of Big Pharma conspiracy like that, the smart move would be to wish Theranos godspeed, let them come up with their big breakthrough, and then right when they're ready to go to market, use Big Pharma influence to trip them onto their faces. File lawsuits, file objections with regulators, what-have-you, the whole time Theranos is bleeding money, and then finally Big Pharma says, "Look, all of this can end tomorrow if you just let us buy a controlling stake in you."
You'd better build the power plant next door. Imagine the energy that thing would consume.
The actual contest entry specified that the Data Tower would be built in Iceland, where it would be powered by 100 percent geothermal energy. (Whether that's actually possible, I couldn't tell you.)
Maybe. I would be impressed if someone showed me a chatbot that I could pull up and say, "There was an extra $10 charge on my cable bill this month, can you explain?" and the interaction would end with the charge being removed.
I have a hard time believing this "technology" will yield anything better than the infuriatingly scripted interactions we have with call center workers today. The only benefit is for companies who can now cancel their contracts with their offshore call centers.
You don't have to insult them. Just do their job for them and they'll get the point.
Having edited (read: rewritten) countless manuscripts in my time, with no reaction from the writer other than "Looks great!", I can assure you this is not the case.
I suspected as much. In the US you typically have an "exit interview" where you have the opportunity to vent, if you wish, but I don't know of anything formal you can invoke.
Dedicated chat bots are stupid, but if you can tell a bot to do X, and it does X, it is programming through natural language, that is pretty neat.
I guess I have yet to see a concrete example of what all these bot freaks are talking about.
When I can say into thin air, "Make me a sandwich" and a machine will produce whichever sandwich I usually eat on Tuesdays, I suppose that would be pretty impressive. Somehow I don't get the impression that's what this hype is about, though.
OK I officially don't get it. OLD MAN CHECKING IN HERE!!
Is anybody actually interested in interacting with machines via chatbots? Seriously.
The Japanese, they are geniuses. In Tokyo, every three square feet that doesn't have anything in it, they put a vending machine. Pepsi, water, coffee hot or cold, sandwiches, anything you want, you can get from a vending machine. Push a few buttons and it's yours. Don't worry about going to a store and talking to someone. And now here, we have the fuckin brilliant idea that we want machines to talk like people so you have to waste your time talking to them instead of just pushing the button.
What. The. FUCK?
It reminds me of the whole virtual reality/cyberspace craze back in the 90s. Everybody was so excited about the idea that you would be flying through space modeled with 3D graphics to get to whatever you needed on the internet... when we ALREADY HAD everything on the internet right at our fingertips and we didn't have to waste our time "going" anywhere... when eliminating distance and scarcity was the WHOLE POINT of the internet.
Who are these people and where do they come up with their dumb fuckin ideas?
I agree with most of your user interface principles, except for the the "fifth grade reading level" one. You might have a point, but I really don't like talking down to grown-ass adults.
Speaking as a professional writer, I don't think you quite grasp the principle.
A while ago, I saw a bunch of conservative commentators mocking the President because his speeches scored (via various accepted algorithms) at an eighth grade reading level. Their take was that he was either an idiot himself or that he thought everybody else was stupid and was condescending to them. On the contrary; his speeches score at an eighth grade level because he has some of the best speechwriters in the business.
Look at it this way, and imagine you're writing copy for a dialog box:
"Touching the active heating element is extremely dangerous and can result in burns." -- Score: Grade 10.4 "Don't put your hand on the stove." -- Score: -0.7
The second version literally scores as sub-zero grade level, meaning ANYONE who can read can understand it. So you tell me. If you used the second version in your dialog box, would you be "talking down to people"?
2. Any person who operates a motor vehicle in this state shall be deemed to have given consent to a portable electronic device field test for the purpose of determining portable electronic device usage when involved in an accident while operating a motor vehicle including phone activity for the period of time immediately preceding the accident...
[ALL CAPS removed to get around/.'s loudness filter]
Ha! I remember back then when it was a thing to save money by buying your computer stuff from Chen's Shady Gray Market Computer Shoppe, or from a computer swap, and paying cash. So I'd literally ride the bus with $1,500 cash in my pocket, all basically so I could avoid paying sales tax. And half the time the stuff you'd get would be junk -- like a motherboard that advertised it could hold X amount of RAM, only you'd find out after the fact that your OS couldn't access that much RAM. Or a video card that supported some crazy, wild hi-res mode that no games used.
Slashdot Mirror
I did my taxes on the web this year. The online app had everything I needed, and TaxAct charged me less than if I had downloaded the application.
Thing is, here in San Francisco, Taxis are doing rather well, despite all the publicity to the contrary.
Yellow Cab might beg to differ.
To be fair, he wasn't asked to right any wrongs this time. He was asked to write the forward to a book about drone warfare, which he did, probably for money. This "press release," as you call it, is just a reprint of that essay.
One of my friends has a wind chime hanging on his front porch.
Made of shotgun shells.
The home security industry really just plays on people's fear about getting broken into than actually offering any real benefit.
I'm sure homeowner's insurance premiums play a role, too.
No commercials during the movie
You're kidding, surely. Comedies, especially, are full of them these days.
Reporter: I'm the one who's got to do the singin'! I'm the one that gets the razzberries! Why don't you leave me alone?
If the method of obtaining it was illegal, *let the facts stand as they are*--use them to prosecute the first crime, but *also* prosecute the 2nd crime that was committed!
You're using an everyday, dictionary-definition version of the word "illegal." If evidence was obtained through illegal means, no crime was committed. The only penalty is that the evidence is excluded from trial. You would need a whole new set of laws to be passed if you wanted to start prosecuting cops for failing to get a proper search warrant. Those laws would never be passed because they would grind law enforcement to a halt.
Good lord, man ... and judging by your UID you're not even that new here!
More money available means that people will afford more and more expensive goods, services and housing.
I'm not sure anyone is talking about making more money available, i.e. printing more money. I think this is another flavor at looking at the negative effects on society of extreme wealth inequality of the type we have in the US. If more of that money was circulated to more people, it would also find its way into the hands of people who produce goods and services, enabling innovation and potentially (not necessarily) driving prices down, not up.
The entire American capitalist system is predicated on the idea that workers don't have the freedom to just leave their jobs, no matter how bad the conditions.
And yet I see plenty of people quitting their jobs. I quit my last job and spent four months deciding what I'd like to do next. My local economy didn't collapse.
It may be possible that Theranos has been experiencing problems because one or more of the entrenched interests in the pharm industry wants to slow the company down so they can catch up and come up with competing products with a known brand name.
That doesn't really make any sense. If there really was some kind of Big Pharma conspiracy like that, the smart move would be to wish Theranos godspeed, let them come up with their big breakthrough, and then right when they're ready to go to market, use Big Pharma influence to trip them onto their faces. File lawsuits, file objections with regulators, what-have-you, the whole time Theranos is bleeding money, and then finally Big Pharma says, "Look, all of this can end tomorrow if you just let us buy a controlling stake in you."
Oh wow! The tests are fast, cheap and come in on an APP (because a website is just too unfashionable now).
Pfffff! Chatbot or no sale.
You'd better build the power plant next door. Imagine the energy that thing would consume.
The actual contest entry specified that the Data Tower would be built in Iceland, where it would be powered by 100 percent geothermal energy. (Whether that's actually possible, I couldn't tell you.)
And yet the 1920s really were a pretty long time ago.
Maybe. I would be impressed if someone showed me a chatbot that I could pull up and say, "There was an extra $10 charge on my cable bill this month, can you explain?" and the interaction would end with the charge being removed.
I have a hard time believing this "technology" will yield anything better than the infuriatingly scripted interactions we have with call center workers today. The only benefit is for companies who can now cancel their contracts with their offshore call centers.
You don't have to insult them. Just do their job for them and they'll get the point.
Having edited (read: rewritten) countless manuscripts in my time, with no reaction from the writer other than "Looks great!", I can assure you this is not the case.
I suspected as much. In the US you typically have an "exit interview" where you have the opportunity to vent, if you wish, but I don't know of anything formal you can invoke.
Dedicated chat bots are stupid, but if you can tell a bot to do X, and it does X, it is programming through natural language, that is pretty neat.
I guess I have yet to see a concrete example of what all these bot freaks are talking about.
When I can say into thin air, "Make me a sandwich" and a machine will produce whichever sandwich I usually eat on Tuesdays, I suppose that would be pretty impressive. Somehow I don't get the impression that's what this hype is about, though.
OK I officially don't get it. OLD MAN CHECKING IN HERE!!
Is anybody actually interested in interacting with machines via chatbots? Seriously.
The Japanese, they are geniuses. In Tokyo, every three square feet that doesn't have anything in it, they put a vending machine. Pepsi, water, coffee hot or cold, sandwiches, anything you want, you can get from a vending machine. Push a few buttons and it's yours. Don't worry about going to a store and talking to someone. And now here, we have the fuckin brilliant idea that we want machines to talk like people so you have to waste your time talking to them instead of just pushing the button.
What. The. FUCK?
It reminds me of the whole virtual reality/cyberspace craze back in the 90s. Everybody was so excited about the idea that you would be flying through space modeled with 3D graphics to get to whatever you needed on the internet ... when we ALREADY HAD everything on the internet right at our fingertips and we didn't have to waste our time "going" anywhere ... when eliminating distance and scarcity was the WHOLE POINT of the internet.
Who are these people and where do they come up with their dumb fuckin ideas?
For cause is vote of no confidence in your management.
But who hears the vote after you quit? Your manager?
I agree with most of your user interface principles, except for the the "fifth grade reading level" one. You might have a point, but I really don't like talking down to grown-ass adults.
Speaking as a professional writer, I don't think you quite grasp the principle.
A while ago, I saw a bunch of conservative commentators mocking the President because his speeches scored (via various accepted algorithms) at an eighth grade reading level. Their take was that he was either an idiot himself or that he thought everybody else was stupid and was condescending to them. On the contrary; his speeches score at an eighth grade level because he has some of the best speechwriters in the business.
Look at it this way, and imagine you're writing copy for a dialog box:
"Touching the active heating element is extremely dangerous and can result in burns." -- Score: Grade 10.4
"Don't put your hand on the stove." -- Score: -0.7
The second version literally scores as sub-zero grade level, meaning ANYONE who can read can understand it. So you tell me. If you used the second version in your dialog box, would you be "talking down to people"?
But there is no implied consent for submitting your phone.
That's what buying your local legislator is for, sonny. From the actual text of the proposed New York bill:
2. Any person who operates a motor vehicle in this state shall be ...
deemed to have given consent to a portable electronic device field test
for the purpose of determining portable electronic device usage when
involved in an accident while operating a motor vehicle including phone
activity for the period of time immediately preceding the accident
[ALL CAPS removed to get around /.'s loudness filter]
Unicode on Slashdot is dead!
Ha! I remember back then when it was a thing to save money by buying your computer stuff from Chen's Shady Gray Market Computer Shoppe, or from a computer swap, and paying cash. So I'd literally ride the bus with $1,500 cash in my pocket, all basically so I could avoid paying sales tax. And half the time the stuff you'd get would be junk -- like a motherboard that advertised it could hold X amount of RAM, only you'd find out after the fact that your OS couldn't access that much RAM. Or a video card that supported some crazy, wild hi-res mode that no games used.