The Chinese Communist Party recently issued a proclamation that students educated in the west may not be compatible with "Chinese cultural values". I.e not be able to join the CCP upon returning, having difficulty getting a good job.
Most enlightened people coming to the US in the 20th century bought a one way ticket. If the US was truly great, those gifted Chinese students wouldn't care about coming back.
This is changing because US leadership is dropping the ball on staying globally competitive.
Also the world is more than just China...
It doesn't come as as surprise to me, and I don't think Trump is to blame. The world is constantly evolving - universities worldwide are getting better, why do we think that, because we had an edge at one point, that we have some sort of right to it?
Because that's how being competitive and successful works. You strive to stay ahead of the pack to earn all the rewards of your efforts
You are implying that when Samsung released a smartphone Apple should've just given up and said, other phones are better than us now, let's call it a day?
This is what Trump is doing. Close the doors, build the walls, let's not compete. Good luck with that as a strategy...
I'm sorry, but what has Google contributed to society that's apparently so unique and unreproducible...
Chill, it's merely an example. America is successful because post war it attracted a *lot* of successful and ambitious people. The last 70 years of American success is a direct byproduct of this.
GP is merely making the point that if you change this dynamic, you might have to get used wealthy and successful industries no longer making America their home. This flows on to employees and taxes and overall economic growth. If you turn the tap off, don't be surprised when you get thirsty.
We should be honoring people like the Wright Brothers,
This is the point. The next Wright Brothers might not be American, so wouldn't you prefer they came to America to start their industry and share the prosperity, or stay in their home country and make other people rich instead?
Here's the funny part - these gents all came in legally under the immigration laws of their respective times, which is actually perfectly cool.
.
And they came because they wanted to come. The likes of Trump is ensuring that they no longer want to come. How do you MAGA if you can't attract all the great minds from around the world?
During normal operations, I did notice Japanese trains run to the second when I was there a while back. There's no similar sense of urgency here in the US.
In Hong Kong there is no timetable. The trains run so frequently and reliably that you just turn up at a station a train is either there or will be in 2 minutes. That is how public transport should be done.
Japan's must be really awesome if it's better than that.
What wowed me about the first time I used Tokyo network was despite all signs being in Japanese and all staff speaking Japanese, and me not understanding any of it, it was easier to move around the city than my own local system. Hong Kong and Singapore are also world class.
Out of all the major global cities I've been to, the US is still stuck in the 1970's by comparison.
I've only played a little LoL, but it is effectively abstract too. You have a pool of characters to choose from with special powers which compliment or contradict each other (think paper/scissors/rock on steroids). The people who do well are able to process the various combinations more quickly than others, which is effectively is the same as an IQ test.
Or, Or, Or, If...
Of course, you could spend all day making wild guesses about it, or you could actually do a study and document the process you used and the results you found. You know, exactly like TFA has...
Like any kind of basic test, IQ tests aren't terribly abstractable.
What does that even mean? The IQ tests I've done were abstract, and by that I mean the tests where about pattern matching so required no prior knowledge, and weren't specific to any cultural or social standard. eg series of shapes guess the next one, rotating shapes to find match etc. That is about as abstract as a test can get.
Therefore, the supposed correlation between this type of games and IQ tests isn't terribly indicative of intelligence.
I've only played a little LoL, but it is effectively abstract too. You have a pool of characters to choose from with special powers which compliment or contradict each other (think paper/scissors/rock on steroids). The people who do well are able to process the various combinations more quickly than others, which is effectively is the same as an IQ test.
People who boast about their IQ are losers
Not sure how this is relevant. TFA is merely pointing out a connection being some types of games which are very similar to some IQ tests, therefore have corresponding results.
There are some core constituent users of Bitcoins that represent non-speculative demand:
You missed the most important one, the one that has driven all the most profitable companies in the last 200 years, that is people who are interested in innovative and disruptive technology. Blockchain and Crypto Cuurency is the next steam engine, airplane, or car. Even if Bitcoin doesn't survive, the technology isn't going anywhere. And a lot of people in Finance and Tech are interested in that.
The reality is, outside of speculation, Bitcoin doesn't offer any material advantages over existing currencies or currency analogues (e.g., credit cards) for most people.
Right, by why is 'most people' important? The most popular shows on TV gets less than 10% of the population watching it (usually closer to 2-3%), yet TV shows are a thing (Ironically TV was considered a fad for quite a long time too)
Supply and Demand is all that matters in economics, so you all have to ask yourself is either of those things going to change anytime soon? Supply is fixed and demand is still in the hobbiest/enthusiast stage, which means it's still early days. Which is I why I made the comment about my mum. When regular people are talking about their BTC 'investment' then I'll start to worry, but right now there's plenty of movement before we get to that stage.
It's harder to use, fewer vendors accept them, it takes 10-15 minutes on average for the first transfer confirmation, and longer for a complete resolution
All true for daily transactions, not true for moving money around esp overseas where banks take much longer and charger higher fees. In this space Bitcoin is already winning which is a big driver of demand. Billions of Indians, Chinese and Russians who want to move money around.
But it's all speculative, and the collapsing function will be time.
All new technology is speculative. And the key is whether that time function is 5 minutes or 50 years. There's nothing to suggest that Crypto currencies are going away soon.
There is an inherent risk of CC popping back to close to nothing (relative to their current valuations) depending on what happens in the next couple of years or so.
Of course. there's also a chance that the real market for CC is in the hundreds of millions of people and we're not even close to that yet. Supply is fixed, so if demand continues to go up, then the price will continue to rise to the actual market value. The only question is where that actually is.
So, what you're saying is they any person who disagrees with me is a Russian agent. Got it.
Not quite, It think the point is that anyone deliberately trying to divide or inflame a discussion should be treated suspiciously. I saw an example the other day of how the Russians hosted two opposing FB sites in small town USA. One pro-something, one anti, and then they just fed the flames. The even organised rallies on the same day to kick off some unrest.
The goal is to disrupt and divide. If you find yourself contributing to the division then you are unwittingly being played by our enemies.
Maybe this coming out will help the general population adapt actual critical thinking skills.
I doubt it. But hopefully it will force improved regulations against social media companies to be more proactive is vetting the material they allow to be published.
Are you complaining about the wording of labels, or something deeper?
Well it does seem a little odd that these people are supposed to be 'scientists', who you know, have a reputation for rigour, yet can't demonstrate a high school level science by not referencing sources correctly. I mean come on, I don't doubt the actual science, but this looks as dodgy as fuck.
It's crystal-clear this is just 15k+ random people signing a feel-good petition. Any claim that these signatories are "scientists" in general, much less ones in appropriate fields to make authoritative comments about the subject matter, is unadulterated horseshit.
Now that I have a source to verify I agree. And this is how it should work. Make claims, provide evidence, win friends and influence people...
you have the model used to apply a valuation to an asset.
Is that what they teach you at MBA school? Because I'm pretty sure that's the same model that said Google and Facebook had no value right before they did.
I really do not understand the "Windows ONLY" need at all.
And not understanding something automatically makes it false? My current project is public sector and we have just over 300 apps and service in our scope. This is in the normal range in my experience.
By programs, they probably mean individual applications and services, and not all apps or services are monolithic. For example I'm working on a project now for an ERP system which could be considered one app by regular people, but under the hood there's about 70 different 'apps' that make it all work. Also once you take into account multiple versions (eg a lot of java apps require a specific JVM, so you could end up with 10 versions of Java), you easily end up with hundreds of individual bits of code.
WTH? E-mail is one of the easiest systems to NOT use any Windows-specific software with --- in fact, the more mature implementations of SMTP and IMAP servers run on Linux and much more robustly,
And here-in lies your problem. When you hear email you think SMTP and IMAP. When regular humans hear email they hear email, calendars, presence, chat, tasks, integration to voice, video, CMS and Colloboration etc etc.
Exchange is the most popular corporate email system for a reason. But if all you want is SMTP, then sure just use Sendmail...
When (if ever) we get a big country committed to Linux we would see drivers being developed for all kind of peripherals...
This sums up the problem with the Linux movement. You don't seem to look at this as a problem/solution issue, you seem to see it as a how can we get our pets in more homes.
People just want stuff that works, and for the last 20 years, Windows has been the least worst option.
This really puzzles me. Christopher Tolkien has said many times, some in court, that no further words of his father's will ever be filmed.
Who said it's his words? As with things like Riverdale, they could just buy the rights to the characters (if they haven't already) and do whatever they like with them
LotR was an epic tale of the plight of humanity against malicious and demonic adversaries.
What humans? LotR was just a never ending borefest of ghosts and goblins. I didn't get what anyone got excited about. The material while original in it's day (ie the book in the 50's), has been retold so many times in every fantasy/sci-fi genre ever since that it was all a bit predictable.
I watched the trilogy but baulked at the thought of doing it all again for the Hobbit. Enough flogging, the horse is dead...
You're conflating asset appreciation (and speculative appreciation at that) with the earnings of that asset.
No I'm stating that there's no such thing as intrinsic value. All value is applied and can evaporate equally for anything. Pretending that shares somehow have intrinsic value is ridiculous.
Bitcoin doesn't earn anything - it doesn't earn interest, profit, or pay dividends. Assets such as stocks do.
My house doesn't earn anything other than capital growth. It still has value. My car actually loses me money, yet it also has value.
The claim here is that "a bubble is pricing an asset beyond it's value". Since value is not a concrete thing than has any substance, effectively everything is a bubble, therefore the statement is meaningless.
Enron's earnings were fraudulent so that's not a relevant comparison.
They had value while everyone believed they were still solvent. That is the point. Value is merely what everyone thinks at any given time, and right now a lot of people see value in Bitcoin.
Slashdot Mirror
The Chinese Communist Party recently issued a proclamation that students educated in the west may not be compatible with "Chinese cultural values". I.e not be able to join the CCP upon returning, having difficulty getting a good job.
Most enlightened people coming to the US in the 20th century bought a one way ticket. If the US was truly great, those gifted Chinese students wouldn't care about coming back.
This is changing because US leadership is dropping the ball on staying globally competitive.
Also the world is more than just China...
It doesn't come as as surprise to me, and I don't think Trump is to blame. The world is constantly evolving - universities worldwide are getting better, why do we think that, because we had an edge at one point, that we have some sort of right to it?
Because that's how being competitive and successful works. You strive to stay ahead of the pack to earn all the rewards of your efforts
You are implying that when Samsung released a smartphone Apple should've just given up and said, other phones are better than us now, let's call it a day?
This is what Trump is doing. Close the doors, build the walls, let's not compete. Good luck with that as a strategy...
I'm sorry, but what has Google contributed to society that's apparently so unique and unreproducible...
Chill, it's merely an example. America is successful because post war it attracted a *lot* of successful and ambitious people. The last 70 years of American success is a direct byproduct of this.
GP is merely making the point that if you change this dynamic, you might have to get used wealthy and successful industries no longer making America their home. This flows on to employees and taxes and overall economic growth. If you turn the tap off, don't be surprised when you get thirsty.
We should be honoring people like the Wright Brothers,
This is the point. The next Wright Brothers might not be American, so wouldn't you prefer they came to America to start their industry and share the prosperity, or stay in their home country and make other people rich instead?
The real solutions are hard, and blaming immigrants and globalisation is easy. That's the problem.
Exactly this!
Here's the funny part - these gents all came in legally under the immigration laws of their respective times, which is actually perfectly cool.
.
And they came because they wanted to come. The likes of Trump is ensuring that they no longer want to come. How do you MAGA if you can't attract all the great minds from around the world?
During normal operations, I did notice Japanese trains run to the second when I was there a while back. There's no similar sense of urgency here in the US.
In Hong Kong there is no timetable. The trains run so frequently and reliably that you just turn up at a station a train is either there or will be in 2 minutes. That is how public transport should be done.
Japan's must be really awesome if it's better than that.
What wowed me about the first time I used Tokyo network was despite all signs being in Japanese and all staff speaking Japanese, and me not understanding any of it, it was easier to move around the city than my own local system. Hong Kong and Singapore are also world class.
Out of all the major global cities I've been to, the US is still stuck in the 1970's by comparison.
Trump compared to the Japanese is a baby.
A man-baby to be more precise...
I've only played a little LoL, but it is effectively abstract too. You have a pool of characters to choose from with special powers which compliment or contradict each other (think paper/scissors/rock on steroids). The people who do well are able to process the various combinations more quickly than others, which is effectively is the same as an IQ test.
Or, Or, Or, If...
Of course, you could spend all day making wild guesses about it, or you could actually do a study and document the process you used and the results you found. You know, exactly like TFA has...
Like any kind of basic test, IQ tests aren't terribly abstractable.
What does that even mean? The IQ tests I've done were abstract, and by that I mean the tests where about pattern matching so required no prior knowledge, and weren't specific to any cultural or social standard. eg series of shapes guess the next one, rotating shapes to find match etc. That is about as abstract as a test can get.
Therefore, the supposed correlation between this type of games and IQ tests isn't terribly indicative of intelligence.
I've only played a little LoL, but it is effectively abstract too. You have a pool of characters to choose from with special powers which compliment or contradict each other (think paper/scissors/rock on steroids). The people who do well are able to process the various combinations more quickly than others, which is effectively is the same as an IQ test.
People who boast about their IQ are losers
Not sure how this is relevant. TFA is merely pointing out a connection being some types of games which are very similar to some IQ tests, therefore have corresponding results.
There are some core constituent users of Bitcoins that represent non-speculative demand:
You missed the most important one, the one that has driven all the most profitable companies in the last 200 years, that is people who are interested in innovative and disruptive technology. Blockchain and Crypto Cuurency is the next steam engine, airplane, or car. Even if Bitcoin doesn't survive, the technology isn't going anywhere. And a lot of people in Finance and Tech are interested in that.
The reality is, outside of speculation, Bitcoin doesn't offer any material advantages over existing currencies or currency analogues (e.g., credit cards) for most people.
Right, by why is 'most people' important? The most popular shows on TV gets less than 10% of the population watching it (usually closer to 2-3%), yet TV shows are a thing (Ironically TV was considered a fad for quite a long time too)
Supply and Demand is all that matters in economics, so you all have to ask yourself is either of those things going to change anytime soon? Supply is fixed and demand is still in the hobbiest/enthusiast stage, which means it's still early days. Which is I why I made the comment about my mum. When regular people are talking about their BTC 'investment' then I'll start to worry, but right now there's plenty of movement before we get to that stage.
It's harder to use, fewer vendors accept them, it takes 10-15 minutes on average for the first transfer confirmation, and longer for a complete resolution
All true for daily transactions, not true for moving money around esp overseas where banks take much longer and charger higher fees. In this space Bitcoin is already winning which is a big driver of demand. Billions of Indians, Chinese and Russians who want to move money around.
But it's all speculative, and the collapsing function will be time.
All new technology is speculative. And the key is whether that time function is 5 minutes or 50 years. There's nothing to suggest that Crypto currencies are going away soon.
There is an inherent risk of CC popping back to close to nothing (relative to their current valuations) depending on what happens in the next couple of years or so.
Of course. there's also a chance that the real market for CC is in the hundreds of millions of people and we're not even close to that yet. Supply is fixed, so if demand continues to go up, then the price will continue to rise to the actual market value. The only question is where that actually is.
So, what you're saying is they any person who disagrees with me is a Russian agent. Got it.
Not quite, It think the point is that anyone deliberately trying to divide or inflame a discussion should be treated suspiciously. I saw an example the other day of how the Russians hosted two opposing FB sites in small town USA. One pro-something, one anti, and then they just fed the flames. The even organised rallies on the same day to kick off some unrest.
The goal is to disrupt and divide. If you find yourself contributing to the division then you are unwittingly being played by our enemies.
Maybe this coming out will help the general population adapt actual critical thinking skills.
I doubt it. But hopefully it will force improved regulations against social media companies to be more proactive is vetting the material they allow to be published.
Are you complaining about the wording of labels, or something deeper?
Well it does seem a little odd that these people are supposed to be 'scientists', who you know, have a reputation for rigour, yet can't demonstrate a high school level science by not referencing sources correctly. I mean come on, I don't doubt the actual science, but this looks as dodgy as fuck.
It's crystal-clear this is just 15k+ random people signing a feel-good petition. Any claim that these signatories are "scientists" in general, much less ones in appropriate fields to make authoritative comments about the subject matter, is unadulterated horseshit.
Now that I have a source to verify I agree. And this is how it should work. Make claims, provide evidence, win friends and influence people...
doesn't mean there is no intrinsic value.
Nothing has intrinsic value.
you have the model used to apply a valuation to an asset.
Is that what they teach you at MBA school? Because I'm pretty sure that's the same model that said Google and Facebook had no value right before they did.
I really do not understand the "Windows ONLY" need at all.
And not understanding something automatically makes it false? My current project is public sector and we have just over 300 apps and service in our scope. This is in the normal range in my experience.
They have 800 programs they use?
Color me sceptical.
By programs, they probably mean individual applications and services, and not all apps or services are monolithic. For example I'm working on a project now for an ERP system which could be considered one app by regular people, but under the hood there's about 70 different 'apps' that make it all work. Also once you take into account multiple versions (eg a lot of java apps require a specific JVM, so you could end up with 10 versions of Java), you easily end up with hundreds of individual bits of code.
we are forced to use... I just despise Outlook...we ran ... I could write ... I wanted and ...I loved
That's great. Now what did your customers think? Or do you even care?
WTH? E-mail is one of the easiest systems to NOT use any Windows-specific software with --- in fact, the more mature implementations of SMTP and IMAP servers run on Linux and much more robustly,
And here-in lies your problem. When you hear email you think SMTP and IMAP. When regular humans hear email they hear email, calendars, presence, chat, tasks, integration to voice, video, CMS and Colloboration etc etc. Exchange is the most popular corporate email system for a reason. But if all you want is SMTP, then sure just use Sendmail...
When (if ever) we get a big country committed to Linux we would see drivers being developed for all kind of peripherals...
This sums up the problem with the Linux movement. You don't seem to look at this as a problem/solution issue, you seem to see it as a how can we get our pets in more homes.
People just want stuff that works, and for the last 20 years, Windows has been the least worst option.
It is very hard to take this (or their agenda) seriously when they won't even do the basic science of vetting a list of "scientists".
This would carry more weight if:
You weren't AC
You cited your source, because I searched and can't find the official list of names to verify
This really puzzles me. Christopher Tolkien has said many times, some in court, that no further words of his father's will ever be filmed.
Who said it's his words? As with things like Riverdale, they could just buy the rights to the characters (if they haven't already) and do whatever they like with them
LotR was an epic tale of the plight of humanity against malicious and demonic adversaries.
What humans? LotR was just a never ending borefest of ghosts and goblins. I didn't get what anyone got excited about. The material while original in it's day (ie the book in the 50's), has been retold so many times in every fantasy/sci-fi genre ever since that it was all a bit predictable.
I watched the trilogy but baulked at the thought of doing it all again for the Hobbit. Enough flogging, the horse is dead...
You're conflating asset appreciation (and speculative appreciation at that) with the earnings of that asset.
No I'm stating that there's no such thing as intrinsic value. All value is applied and can evaporate equally for anything. Pretending that shares somehow have intrinsic value is ridiculous.
Bitcoin doesn't earn anything - it doesn't earn interest, profit, or pay dividends. Assets such as stocks do.
My house doesn't earn anything other than capital growth. It still has value. My car actually loses me money, yet it also has value.
The claim here is that "a bubble is pricing an asset beyond it's value". Since value is not a concrete thing than has any substance, effectively everything is a bubble, therefore the statement is meaningless.
Enron's earnings were fraudulent so that's not a relevant comparison.
They had value while everyone believed they were still solvent. That is the point. Value is merely what everyone thinks at any given time, and right now a lot of people see value in Bitcoin.
So the first nation isn't a nation by any definition yet here we are...
Fuck Slashdot