Banks tend to be rather conservative. If it's working now, I would think they wouldn't be too keen to replace it with anything.
This reminds me of something I heard years ago, which I wouldn't at all be surprised is still true: that there are systems at 'the phone company' (I assume they meant AT&T?) that have been sitting there for decades, running the whole time, that nobody even knows what it actually does anymore, but they do know that Bad Things happen if it stops working -- but all they can do when it does stop working, is power-cycle it, cross their fingers, and hope it starts working again. Is this what's going on with the banking industry and their COBOL mainframe systems? Never mind the world being put back into the Stone Age by another subprime lending disaster, how about some ancient mainframe system running COBOL blowing up and taking the worlds' finances with it?
Do me a favor? Stop putting words in my mouth, okay? I never said anything about the value of the money you spent in an arcade, because I didn't think I had to say anything about it: it's implicit. But the fact of the matter is, that you tended to come in and spend what you had in your pockets. That's the only reason arcades existed as long as they did. When home games started reaching the point of parity with arcade games (or close enough at least) coin-op game arcades started dying off -- for that reason, and for the reason that they tended to attract crime, so local LEOs and parents alike didn't really shed a tear when they died off.
Think about this: There really hasn't been much of any new ideas for movie scripts for at least 50 years or more. There are a few exceptions to this, but very, very few.
Sounds to me more like they want to eliminate people's ability to sell used games (because you'll never own a copy, only 'rent' it) and at the same time gain perpetual profit from the 'rental' of 'streaming' games to people. Basically, it's a return to the Video Arcade: you walked in with a pocketful of quarters, and left with your pockets empty. Also reminds me of the original DivX business model: they wanted you to buy a physical disc, but you'd have to pay a fee every time you wanted to watch it. I hope nobody falls for this.
You're obviously not Gen-X yourself because if you were you'd know that the name the person I was responding to was the name of a main character from the 80's show Dukes of Hazzard, and the song lyrics posted are from the theme song to that show, which I posted merely as an acknowledgement of the OP's name. Do try to keep up, AC.
Interesting. I wasn't even sure what the exact definition of 'Gen X' was, checked it: That's what I am, too. So's your attitude towards this subject, and your plan; are you me? Thought I was a total outlier; apparently, I'm not. Should I be happy or sad about that? Not sure. If you like racing bikes, we might be brothers separated at birth, LOL.
Just'a good ol' boys
Never meanin' no harm.
Beats all you never saw
Been in trouble with the law
Since the day they was born
Staightnin' the curves
Flatnin the hills
Someday the mountain might get 'em
But the law never will
Makin' their way
The only way they know how
That's just a little bit more
Than the law will allow.
Best of luck, friend. WIth the way things are going in this country as of this moment, that's what we're going to need lots and lots of.
All wireless companies, broadband providers, cable TV companies, telecom companies, etc, are all greedy bastards who are screwing over their customers in one way or another (usually in several ways) and violating our privacy, so I 'prefer' none of them. I merely put up with them because unless you can manage to live with U.S. Mail and face-to-face meetings with people as your only means of communication and information sources, you end up paying these bastards, and they damned well know it. Landline phone service costs about the same, if not more, than having the cheapest wireless service, and is less convenient or efficient.. I'm not even sure if dialup internet access is even available anymore, but you'd have to have a landline to use it, so it'd cost at least as much if not more than the cheapest broadband connectivity, and you'd be lucky to get 28kbps out of it. DSL costs as much as broadband, and again you'd need a landline, so it costs more. I only put up with AT&T because I haven't had a contract with them for at least 10 years so they have nothing to hold over my head; if there was something significantly cheaper I'd jump. There's only maybe two choices for internet where I live, and unfortunately Comcast is one of them, and the cheapest; I'd go for a fraction of the speed if it would halve the cost. There are shitty choices all around, and again I'd do without all the above if it wouldn't completely sabotage my life. Really, seriously, honestly, there needs to be some sort of reforms on this sort of stuff. It's like paper companies deciding that since you can't live without toilet paper, that they'll start charging you $20 for a four-pack; it's price-gouging and it's wrong. Telephone and internet cost at least twice as much as it should, and that's the main reason I hate all of them.
In light of recent events I'm putting up with using Tor just to give Comcast my middle finger. If I had a viable alternative to them I'd be gone in a heartbeat.
That's what this should be considered. It's not bad enough that corporations and governments profile you, now they want a functional simulation of you as well. Screw that. I'm so glad I have nothing to do with so-called 'social media', it's cancerous.
Optional: Drawing and quartering. That's the fate that should await any company that lies to and sells out it's users like that. Hanging is too good for them. A firing squad is too good for them. Boiling them in oil is too good for them. The WOODCHIPPER is too good for them. Head-on-a-pike in the public square, as a warning to everyone else: STOP VIOLATING OUR PRIVACY ONLINE, YOU BASTARDS!
Or so it seems. Anyone else well past sick-and-tired of all these idiots trying to grab headlines like this by attempting to leverage media hype about so-called 'AI'?
The sky is NOT FALLING. Everyone just RELAX. Your media-fueled anxieties are going to do orders of magnitude more damage than any mythical alleged so-called 'AI' will.
It's simple, really: Miscreant-o-soft understands that the average computer user is not very smart, and couldn't really understand the issues at hand even if you sat them down and spent as much time as your cared to explaining it to them. However, since Miscreant-o-soft is giving them something (ostensibly) worth hundreds of dollars for FREE (i.e., Windows 10), and since Miscreant-o-soft is telling them it's SAFER and MORE SECURE, the average sheep with a computer is going to believe them, not weird geeky computer nerds on the Internets. Really, they don't care so long as they can play their games, watch YouTube, and get their email. So if friendly, security-conscious Microsoft is telling them "hey, we'll do this thing for you for FREE, too, just because we like you so much!", the sheep will likely believe that, too, and give away their Google mail as well as everything else they're giving away.
I tend to agree in this case. The so-called 'article' on CNN is devoid of any hard data, and the links that you'd think would provide hard data, just lead you around in circles and don't show you the actual study data. I went there looking to see which 'artificial sweeteners' they tested in their study because I was interested in whether or not they classified stevia as an 'artificial sweetener'; I found no listings of anything, just more abstract text that basically tells you nothing.
Horse has already left the barn. If he's released the patch into the wild, then there's no stamping it out now, and Miscreant-o-soft is phenomenally dumb if they don't realize that. Sueing the guy at this point would be nigh-unto frivolous. The most they might do is release an update to Windows Update that defeats the patch -- in which case you'd probably just have to re-apply the patch, assuming that is that the update doesn't brick you computer.
I don't care about 'replicating the taste'. I'm saying 'give up fruit juice as a bad idea entirely' and just eat whole fruits and vegetables. You do not NEED fruit juice. You NEED to eat healthy foods, and juice is not on the list. You may as well just drink a soda, or stir a bunch of sugar into a glass of water.
I used to think Elon Musk was the real-life Tony Stark; now I think he's closer to the real-life Nichola Tesla, but in Tesla's final years, when his mental faculties were clearly deteriorating. Elon Musk clearly needs to stop reading so many cautionary science fiction stories, stop watching so much television, and stay out of movie theatres, at least until he can learn to distinguish fantasy from reality again -- assuming that is he's ever known the difference in the first place. We're not going to be 'subjugated' by machines, or even threatened by such a nonsense idea, ever. Also, stay the hell out of my brain! Do. Not. Want.
You fool. Like so many others before you, you clearly haven't learned a damned thing from history. You put the power to alter people's minds en masse into the hands of a government? They'll turn their citizenry into mindless zombies who do what they're told to do, when they're told to it, unquestioningly, even if it means they die. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, and the ability to alter people's minds represents absolute power over a population. I'm not even getting into what out-and-out criminal organizations would do with this sort of technology. This is not the sort of power anyone should have, ever, for any reason. It'd result in a Dystopia that would make all the fictional dystopias ever conceived look pleasant.
You forgot:
- the ability to stock up thrift stores with juicers that were used maybe 5 times then left to collect dust in a kitchen cabinet, until your wife told you to get rid of it
- Getting $10 back from the $400 you spent on your juicer when you sell it at a garage sale
Slashdot Mirror
So, more SPAM in everyones' inbox? Glad I deleted my Amazon account a while back when they had a security breach, then.
Banks tend to be rather conservative. If it's working now, I would think they wouldn't be too keen to replace it with anything.
This reminds me of something I heard years ago, which I wouldn't at all be surprised is still true: that there are systems at 'the phone company' (I assume they meant AT&T?) that have been sitting there for decades, running the whole time, that nobody even knows what it actually does anymore, but they do know that Bad Things happen if it stops working -- but all they can do when it does stop working, is power-cycle it, cross their fingers, and hope it starts working again. Is this what's going on with the banking industry and their COBOL mainframe systems? Never mind the world being put back into the Stone Age by another subprime lending disaster, how about some ancient mainframe system running COBOL blowing up and taking the worlds' finances with it?
Do me a favor? Stop putting words in my mouth, okay? I never said anything about the value of the money you spent in an arcade, because I didn't think I had to say anything about it: it's implicit. But the fact of the matter is, that you tended to come in and spend what you had in your pockets. That's the only reason arcades existed as long as they did. When home games started reaching the point of parity with arcade games (or close enough at least) coin-op game arcades started dying off -- for that reason, and for the reason that they tended to attract crime, so local LEOs and parents alike didn't really shed a tear when they died off.
Think about this: There really hasn't been much of any new ideas for movie scripts for at least 50 years or more. There are a few exceptions to this, but very, very few.
Sounds to me more like they want to eliminate people's ability to sell used games (because you'll never own a copy, only 'rent' it) and at the same time gain perpetual profit from the 'rental' of 'streaming' games to people. Basically, it's a return to the Video Arcade: you walked in with a pocketful of quarters, and left with your pockets empty. Also reminds me of the original DivX business model: they wanted you to buy a physical disc, but you'd have to pay a fee every time you wanted to watch it. I hope nobody falls for this.
You're obviously not Gen-X yourself because if you were you'd know that the name the person I was responding to was the name of a main character from the 80's show Dukes of Hazzard , and the song lyrics posted are from the theme song to that show, which I posted merely as an acknowledgement of the OP's name. Do try to keep up, AC.
Just'a good ol' boys
Never meanin' no harm.
Beats all you never saw
Been in trouble with the law
Since the day they was born
Staightnin' the curves
Flatnin the hills
Someday the mountain might get 'em
But the law never will
Makin' their way
The only way they know how
That's just a little bit more
Than the law will allow.
Best of luck, friend. WIth the way things are going in this country as of this moment, that's what we're going to need lots and lots of.
All wireless companies, broadband providers, cable TV companies, telecom companies, etc, are all greedy bastards who are screwing over their customers in one way or another (usually in several ways) and violating our privacy, so I 'prefer' none of them. I merely put up with them because unless you can manage to live with U.S. Mail and face-to-face meetings with people as your only means of communication and information sources, you end up paying these bastards, and they damned well know it. Landline phone service costs about the same, if not more, than having the cheapest wireless service, and is less convenient or efficient.. I'm not even sure if dialup internet access is even available anymore, but you'd have to have a landline to use it, so it'd cost at least as much if not more than the cheapest broadband connectivity, and you'd be lucky to get 28kbps out of it. DSL costs as much as broadband, and again you'd need a landline, so it costs more. I only put up with AT&T because I haven't had a contract with them for at least 10 years so they have nothing to hold over my head; if there was something significantly cheaper I'd jump. There's only maybe two choices for internet where I live, and unfortunately Comcast is one of them, and the cheapest; I'd go for a fraction of the speed if it would halve the cost. There are shitty choices all around, and again I'd do without all the above if it wouldn't completely sabotage my life. Really, seriously, honestly, there needs to be some sort of reforms on this sort of stuff. It's like paper companies deciding that since you can't live without toilet paper, that they'll start charging you $20 for a four-pack; it's price-gouging and it's wrong. Telephone and internet cost at least twice as much as it should, and that's the main reason I hate all of them.
What do you mean, exactly?
I see no reason why I should do that; why do you? Are you ashamed of your own opinions?
In light of recent events I'm putting up with using Tor just to give Comcast my middle finger. If I had a viable alternative to them I'd be gone in a heartbeat.
That's what this should be considered. It's not bad enough that corporations and governments profile you, now they want a functional simulation of you as well. Screw that. I'm so glad I have nothing to do with so-called 'social media', it's cancerous.
Optional: Drawing and quartering. That's the fate that should await any company that lies to and sells out it's users like that. Hanging is too good for them. A firing squad is too good for them. Boiling them in oil is too good for them. The WOODCHIPPER is too good for them. Head-on-a-pike in the public square, as a warning to everyone else: STOP VIOLATING OUR PRIVACY ONLINE, YOU BASTARDS!
Or so it seems. Anyone else well past sick-and-tired of all these idiots trying to grab headlines like this by attempting to leverage media hype about so-called 'AI'?
The sky is NOT FALLING. Everyone just RELAX. Your media-fueled anxieties are going to do orders of magnitude more damage than any mythical alleged so-called 'AI' will.
It's simple, really: Miscreant-o-soft understands that the average computer user is not very smart, and couldn't really understand the issues at hand even if you sat them down and spent as much time as your cared to explaining it to them. However, since Miscreant-o-soft is giving them something (ostensibly) worth hundreds of dollars for FREE (i.e., Windows 10), and since Miscreant-o-soft is telling them it's SAFER and MORE SECURE, the average sheep with a computer is going to believe them, not weird geeky computer nerds on the Internets. Really, they don't care so long as they can play their games, watch YouTube, and get their email. So if friendly, security-conscious Microsoft is telling them "hey, we'll do this thing for you for FREE, too, just because we like you so much!", the sheep will likely believe that, too, and give away their Google mail as well as everything else they're giving away.
You apparently aren't listening: No one should have the power to rewrite people's minds. EVER. NO GOOD WILL COME OF IT. EVER.
Oh, well, okay then. For future reference, you should probably close such comments like this:
I tend to agree in this case. The so-called 'article' on CNN is devoid of any hard data, and the links that you'd think would provide hard data, just lead you around in circles and don't show you the actual study data. I went there looking to see which 'artificial sweeteners' they tested in their study because I was interested in whether or not they classified stevia as an 'artificial sweetener'; I found no listings of anything, just more abstract text that basically tells you nothing.
Horse has already left the barn. If he's released the patch into the wild, then there's no stamping it out now, and Miscreant-o-soft is phenomenally dumb if they don't realize that. Sueing the guy at this point would be nigh-unto frivolous. The most they might do is release an update to Windows Update that defeats the patch -- in which case you'd probably just have to re-apply the patch, assuming that is that the update doesn't brick you computer.
You forgot to end your comment with '', or 'LOL', or 'xDDDDD', or whatever it is you kids use these days to denote you're kidding around. ;-)
I don't care about 'replicating the taste'. I'm saying 'give up fruit juice as a bad idea entirely' and just eat whole fruits and vegetables. You do not NEED fruit juice. You NEED to eat healthy foods, and juice is not on the list. You may as well just drink a soda, or stir a bunch of sugar into a glass of water.
I used to think Elon Musk was the real-life Tony Stark; now I think he's closer to the real-life Nichola Tesla, but in Tesla's final years, when his mental faculties were clearly deteriorating. Elon Musk clearly needs to stop reading so many cautionary science fiction stories, stop watching so much television, and stay out of movie theatres, at least until he can learn to distinguish fantasy from reality again -- assuming that is he's ever known the difference in the first place. We're not going to be 'subjugated' by machines, or even threatened by such a nonsense idea, ever. Also, stay the hell out of my brain! Do. Not. Want.
You fool. Like so many others before you, you clearly haven't learned a damned thing from history. You put the power to alter people's minds en masse into the hands of a government? They'll turn their citizenry into mindless zombies who do what they're told to do, when they're told to it, unquestioningly, even if it means they die. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, and the ability to alter people's minds represents absolute power over a population. I'm not even getting into what out-and-out criminal organizations would do with this sort of technology. This is not the sort of power anyone should have, ever, for any reason. It'd result in a Dystopia that would make all the fictional dystopias ever conceived look pleasant.
Great. So some criminal scum with their skimmers will now steal my fingerprint, as well as my credit card/debit card information.
You forgot:
- the ability to stock up thrift stores with juicers that were used maybe 5 times then left to collect dust in a kitchen cabinet, until your wife told you to get rid of it
- Getting $10 back from the $400 you spent on your juicer when you sell it at a garage sale