Since what you propose is contrary to what an ordinary person can easily perceive
Herein lies your problem. Your beliefs get the default position and everyone else is wrong. This is how religion works.
Science works on observation and explanation. If you have never observed people behaving differently from the biblical version of 'man' and 'woman', then the further discussion is pointless. If you have observed this, which you imply you have, and even Donald Trump has, then what is your explanation that describes this behaviour?
Second, for a theory to be scientific, it needs to provide testable predictions.
Sure, just like Gravity and Evolution. But even then it doesn't stop the nutbags form denying it.
So where is the scientific explanation for the observations? The gender studies people might have it wrong, but that doesn't make you right by default.
you are looking at a total cost ranging from $37,500,000 to $250,000,000..
I just looked it up, its a shame the President couldn't spend the same 2 minutes on research as I did to save himself from looking like a complete tool.
The cost to support all Trans military personal is estimated at $8M/year, compared with $84M/year the military spends annually just on erectile dysfunction medicines. http://www.militarytimes.com/p... How does that fit with your hypothesis?
I'm also going to guess that removing all those people from active service will cost more than $8M, so it has precisely zero to do with cost.savings.
We don't have to make up numbers to suit our agenda. Figures for medical costs already exist and I'm sure Trump will publish them with his solid justification for the shift in policy.... oh wait...
Seems like the trans SJW crowd pushed their luck too far on this one by trying to get Uncle Sam and the US taxpayer to pay for their surgeries.
In every other developed country the tax payer would fund most surgery anyway. So it wouldn't matter. It's only because the US is so fucked to begin with that this is even an issue.
Agree. Why should tech CEO's or celebrities be a better source of general political ideas than Joe Sixpack?
Because leaders of massive companies have more experience managing large workforces than joe sixpack working for the man. So their opinion of the impacts of diversity in the workforce are somewhat relevant to the discussion (and it is a discussion, we need more discussing and less ramming down throats)
The idea that someone is going to physically alter their body in extremely intrusive fashion that requires all kinds of lifetime medical and even surgical regimens to maintain them and the military is supposed to 1.) pay for it...
Seems like an odd statement considering what the military inflict on a lot of its employees. If you had to some up the US military in one sentence then physically altering bodies in an extremely intrusive fashion that requires all kinds of lifetime medical and even surgical regimens to maintain them, is about as accurate a statement as you can get.
But I get your point, and I could buy into it if Trump provided some numbers to back up the logic, eg Trans medical costs are X which is negatively affecting our defence capability for reasons Y. But from what I've seen, were talking numbers of 1 tomahawk missle per year total, ie chicken feed.
So it has nothing to costs (if it did I could support it), it has to do with the politics of division which the GOP are becoming addicted to. And this division is only weakening the country overall.
That's not the Universe, that's only your stupid country.
A while ago, you couldn't say the Earth rotates around the Sun. Today, dare to say humans have exactly two genders, etc.
You're confused, which is generally the case with religious zealots. Two genders is the established belief based on nothing but what feels right ie Religion. Science, like with the heliocentric solar system, has now challenged the traditional views which don't explain the observations around gender behaviour.
To call it a "lie" implies some sort of bias. Assumptions are often built in to such statistical analysis. Why is it a lie this time?
There's a clear word; "unemployment"; which means "people who want work but don't have work".
Not it doesn't. There are many definitions, full time, part time, under employed, not wanting work etc, all of which are covered in the statistics. Just because you read a headline and believe it on face value doesn't make the original report wrong.
What I disagree with is that it was "obvious" to anyone who is an event planner.
Based on the numerous comments in here it seems obvious. But I'm not sure what the qualification is for event planning, is it to not know anything about planning events?
Competent in what? Precisely what kind of event has taken place before where 20000 people simultaneously need to use data from the same area. It's easy from the IT sidelines to see the obvious, but given an event with these requirements hasn't happened before
Ok just stop. Have you heard of the Olympics, or any of the thousands of sporting or music events that happen every week somewhere in the world that have more than 20000 people all snapchatting, facebooking, twittering etc?
I was doing this in 2010 and 3G (at the time) was on the same list as power, water, toilets and transport. This is a massive fail for a company that's primary product relies on a cellular network to function.
An experienced event planner would likely have made the situation worse. At a typical event, maybe 10-20% are on their cell at any time, mostly using low bandwidth voice and text.
What is this 2008? Anyone involved with any sort of event in the last 5 years knows that 99% of the crowd will be on Snapchat, FB, Twitter, Whatsapp, WeChat, Telegram, Viber, Maps, Uber etc It's all data these days, has been for years.
Yes, but they are a software company, not an ISP / cell carrier. They obviously did not consider the fact that the existing cellular networks could not handle that many customers in one small area accessing high bandwidth resources at the same time.
They are clearly stupid then. I've been involved with similar sorts of events and the first items on the list for any sort of event is power, water, toilets and telecoms.
This company relies on cellular networks for its business and not one person thought to check on capacity requirements?
How often in an infomercial do you see "published in so and so scientific journal"
Honestly? Never. Maybe because I don't watch infomercials. But if you do, and you act on the information supplied, then you get what you deserve. Fools and money etc.
I spend a bit of time with my pets so feel I have a good grasp of their thoughts. There isn't much there outside of sad, happy, hungry, tired etc. Most owners know these signs already, so can't imagine AI will add much value. It's not like a kids movie where you're going to have a political discussion with your dog. The most it will get is the blubbering of a three year old. Compared with that I prefer the communications I have now.
Like, be able to tell what a person is *really* thinking based on body language, tone, etc?
The implications are somewhere between awesome and concerning.
There's no magic here, body language is relatively straight forward if you know what to look for. The obvious ones are things like folded arms for defence, hands on hips for feeling threatened/trying to show strength, palm up handshake for willing to listen, palm down for aggressiveness etc.
There's books and books on this stuff, even a light read will reveal quite a lot about the people you deal with every day.
But in the USA, we all aspire to move to the big end of town.
Everyone aspires to moving up, it's just whether you allow others an equal opportunity to also move up too. America out of all western nations seems to be one of the worst at this https://www.oecd.org/eco/growt...
How is making your contribution to the public purse public anything soviet like? By keeping this information the shadows you allow the thieves at the big end of town to continue to allow steal from the rest of us. .
I can't even stand the 5 seconds youtube makes you watch an ad before you can skip it. There's a reason adblockers are so popular, and it isn't only Millenials.
No idea. I'd never heard of them until last year then I saw some in the shops that looked just like an iPhone 6 for 1/4 of the price. I did a quick Google and they are a Chinese brand deliberately designed to be an Apple clone but for the developing markets. They're the highest selling phone in China now, and after a recent holiday in Indonesia it seemed every second person had one there too.
I've had iPhones and Galaxies but my Oppo is close enough that I won't bother paying that much for a phone again.
Ehm, no it's not. You mustn't have been to Spain but I can tell you the hottest time of day is definitely around 2-5pm and in summer you shouldn't be doing any strenuous exercise outside in the sun until let's say 8pm,.
I'm from Australia and seem to manage it ok. Why are the Spaniards so soft?
A long time ago, news was spoken, and you decided to believe, or not to believe, the person telling the tale.
A while ago, news was written, and you decided to believe, or not to believe, the author writing it.
Somewhere along the way, more and more people began to presume that everything is true -- maybe because most of it was, or maybe because they were just that stupid.
Congrats! Those times are over.
Now, once again, you get to spend more time evaluating the source than the content. Enjoy!
I think you have that wrong. A long time a go there was a cost to distributing information, so only a few could do it, and those people sent consistent messages (rightly or wrongly). Over time the information source was mostly reliable so trust was developed.
Now information is free to create, distribute and imitate, and the messages are inconsistent and unreliable. This creates a situation where no information can be trusted. Not even smart people will have the means to validate the information since the validation sources can also be easily faked. the result is no information is trusted, thus information becomes worthless. I feel a prophecy of doom coming on...
Slashdot Mirror
Since what you propose is contrary to what an ordinary person can easily perceive
Herein lies your problem. Your beliefs get the default position and everyone else is wrong. This is how religion works.
Science works on observation and explanation. If you have never observed people behaving differently from the biblical version of 'man' and 'woman', then the further discussion is pointless. If you have observed this, which you imply you have, and even Donald Trump has, then what is your explanation that describes this behaviour?
Second, for a theory to be scientific, it needs to provide testable predictions.
Sure, just like Gravity and Evolution. But even then it doesn't stop the nutbags form denying it.
So where is the scientific explanation for the observations? The gender studies people might have it wrong, but that doesn't make you right by default.
you are looking at a total cost ranging from $37,500,000 to $250,000,000. .
I just looked it up, its a shame the President couldn't spend the same 2 minutes on research as I did to save himself from looking like a complete tool.
The cost to support all Trans military personal is estimated at $8M/year, compared with $84M/year the military spends annually just on erectile dysfunction medicines. http://www.militarytimes.com/p... How does that fit with your hypothesis?
I'm also going to guess that removing all those people from active service will cost more than $8M, so it has precisely zero to do with cost.savings.
There are estimates of...
If everyone of them opted to...
We don't have to make up numbers to suit our agenda. Figures for medical costs already exist and I'm sure Trump will publish them with his solid justification for the shift in policy.... oh wait...
Seems like the trans SJW crowd pushed their luck too far on this one by trying to get Uncle Sam and the US taxpayer to pay for their surgeries.
In every other developed country the tax payer would fund most surgery anyway. So it wouldn't matter. It's only because the US is so fucked to begin with that this is even an issue.
A sky fairy that does things based on what you quietly mumble: belief without any basis.
then proceeds to makes belief statements without any basis Do you even read what you write before making a fool of yourself?
Agree. Why should tech CEO's or celebrities be a better source of general political ideas than Joe Sixpack?
Because leaders of massive companies have more experience managing large workforces than joe sixpack working for the man. So their opinion of the impacts of diversity in the workforce are somewhat relevant to the discussion (and it is a discussion, we need more discussing and less ramming down throats)
The idea that someone is going to physically alter their body in extremely intrusive fashion that requires all kinds of lifetime medical and even surgical regimens to maintain them and the military is supposed to 1.) pay for it...
Seems like an odd statement considering what the military inflict on a lot of its employees. If you had to some up the US military in one sentence then physically altering bodies in an extremely intrusive fashion that requires all kinds of lifetime medical and even surgical regimens to maintain them, is about as accurate a statement as you can get.
But I get your point, and I could buy into it if Trump provided some numbers to back up the logic, eg Trans medical costs are X which is negatively affecting our defence capability for reasons Y. But from what I've seen, were talking numbers of 1 tomahawk missle per year total, ie chicken feed.
So it has nothing to costs (if it did I could support it), it has to do with the politics of division which the GOP are becoming addicted to. And this division is only weakening the country overall.
In our universe, religion supersedes facts...
That's not the Universe, that's only your stupid country.
A while ago, you couldn't say the Earth rotates around the Sun. Today, dare to say humans have exactly two genders, etc.
You're confused, which is generally the case with religious zealots. Two genders is the established belief based on nothing but what feels right ie Religion.
Science, like with the heliocentric solar system, has now challenged the traditional views which don't explain the observations around gender behaviour.
To call it a "lie" implies some sort of bias. Assumptions are often built in to such statistical analysis. Why is it a lie this time?
There's a clear word; "unemployment"; which means "people who want work but don't have work".
Not it doesn't. There are many definitions, full time, part time, under employed, not wanting work etc, all of which are covered in the statistics. Just because you read a headline and believe it on face value doesn't make the original report wrong.
Right, the real lie about unemployment figures is that they don't account for underemployment.
Yes they do. You are falling for the common mistake that headlines = science. If you want science, read the actual science and not the headlines.
What I disagree with is that it was "obvious" to anyone who is an event planner.
Based on the numerous comments in here it seems obvious. But I'm not sure what the qualification is for event planning, is it to not know anything about planning events?
Must be pretty easy to see them all from your high horse.
How is this event any different from, say, Comic-Con or any other fan fest?
Nothing, they are all equally stupid. Now running around a field with a ball, that is the real deal...
Competent in what? Precisely what kind of event has taken place before where 20000 people simultaneously need to use data from the same area. It's easy from the IT sidelines to see the obvious, but given an event with these requirements hasn't happened before
Ok just stop. Have you heard of the Olympics, or any of the thousands of sporting or music events that happen every week somewhere in the world that have more than 20000 people all snapchatting, facebooking, twittering etc? I was doing this in 2010 and 3G (at the time) was on the same list as power, water, toilets and transport. This is a massive fail for a company that's primary product relies on a cellular network to function.
An experienced event planner would likely have made the situation worse. At a typical event, maybe 10-20% are on their cell at any time, mostly using low bandwidth voice and text.
What is this 2008? Anyone involved with any sort of event in the last 5 years knows that 99% of the crowd will be on Snapchat, FB, Twitter, Whatsapp, WeChat, Telegram, Viber, Maps, Uber etc It's all data these days, has been for years.
Yes, but they are a software company, not an ISP / cell carrier. They obviously did not consider the fact that the existing cellular networks could not handle that many customers in one small area accessing high bandwidth resources at the same time.
They are clearly stupid then. I've been involved with similar sorts of events and the first items on the list for any sort of event is power, water, toilets and telecoms.
This company relies on cellular networks for its business and not one person thought to check on capacity requirements?
How often in an infomercial do you see "published in so and so scientific journal"
Honestly? Never. Maybe because I don't watch infomercials. But if you do, and you act on the information supplied, then you get what you deserve. Fools and money etc.
I suspect the AI will be about as intelligent as the image recognition is today. ie rubbish.
I spend a bit of time with my pets so feel I have a good grasp of their thoughts. There isn't much there outside of sad, happy, hungry, tired etc. Most owners know these signs already, so can't imagine AI will add much value. It's not like a kids movie where you're going to have a political discussion with your dog. The most it will get is the blubbering of a three year old. Compared with that I prefer the communications I have now.
Like, be able to tell what a person is *really* thinking based on body language, tone, etc?
The implications are somewhere between awesome and concerning.
There's no magic here, body language is relatively straight forward if you know what to look for. The obvious ones are things like folded arms for defence, hands on hips for feeling threatened/trying to show strength, palm up handshake for willing to listen, palm down for aggressiveness etc. There's books and books on this stuff, even a light read will reveal quite a lot about the people you deal with every day.
But in the USA, we all aspire to move to the big end of town.
Everyone aspires to moving up, it's just whether you allow others an equal opportunity to also move up too. America out of all western nations seems to be one of the worst at this https://www.oecd.org/eco/growt...
How is making your contribution to the public purse public anything soviet like? By keeping this information the shadows you allow the thieves at the big end of town to continue to allow steal from the rest of us. .
But it's 'from a report' so it must be important...
I can't even stand the 5 seconds youtube makes you watch an ad before you can skip it. There's a reason adblockers are so popular, and it isn't only Millenials.
No idea. I'd never heard of them until last year then I saw some in the shops that looked just like an iPhone 6 for 1/4 of the price. I did a quick Google and they are a Chinese brand deliberately designed to be an Apple clone but for the developing markets. They're the highest selling phone in China now, and after a recent holiday in Indonesia it seemed every second person had one there too.
I've had iPhones and Galaxies but my Oppo is close enough that I won't bother paying that much for a phone again.
Ehm, no it's not. You mustn't have been to Spain but I can tell you the hottest time of day is definitely around 2-5pm and in summer you shouldn't be doing any strenuous exercise outside in the sun until let's say 8pm, .
I'm from Australia and seem to manage it ok. Why are the Spaniards so soft?
A long time ago, news was spoken, and you decided to believe, or not to believe, the person telling the tale.
A while ago, news was written, and you decided to believe, or not to believe, the author writing it.
Somewhere along the way, more and more people began to presume that everything is true -- maybe because most of it was, or maybe because they were just that stupid.
Congrats! Those times are over.
Now, once again, you get to spend more time evaluating the source than the content. Enjoy!
I think you have that wrong. A long time a go there was a cost to distributing information, so only a few could do it, and those people sent consistent messages (rightly or wrongly). Over time the information source was mostly reliable so trust was developed. Now information is free to create, distribute and imitate, and the messages are inconsistent and unreliable. This creates a situation where no information can be trusted. Not even smart people will have the means to validate the information since the validation sources can also be easily faked. the result is no information is trusted, thus information becomes worthless. I feel a prophecy of doom coming on...