If you cannot see the difference between removing a specific video where people were recently murdered and state-wide oppression of even verbal opposition, I pity you.
So, would you then say, in the words of TFA, that you have become more selfish, less self-critical, and more prone to discrimination? Equivalently, if I may use my own words, more experienced?
I must say that the authors are unprofessionally biased. None of these qualities are necessarily negative, but they are phrased in an incredibly negative way in TFA.
Yes, there is a license on the software, and while I don't like that, it's pretty standard by now. Fair enough. The part I consider monopoly abuse is that I'm locked into it in a practical sense. I don't mind wiping the phone at all, but it is a non-trivial effort for most people. If it was available as a simple service for *everyone* I would be content. Though at that point it would probably be easier (and better) if Apple simply allowed non-Apple marketplaces.
But the thing is, I bought a *phone*. I did not buy a service, I did not buy a license. I bought a physical product, a phone. And I should be able to use that phone as I wish. If I bought an Intel CPU, and Intel told me that I would only be able to play Intel approved games on it (so they could charge developers 30%), that would be a serious abuse of monopoly powers. It doesn't matter that I could buy AMD, it's still abuse of their position. If I buy a physical product, I should be able to use that physical product according to my needs and desires.
Should your car brand be allowed to determine where you are allowed to drive with your car? Because that is exactly what Apple is doing. They are selling a physical product and then deciding how you are allowed to use it. Just like that short bout of draconian DRM where you bought a physical disc for a game but you were only allowed to install it 3 times.
The situation is not quite as simple as that though. Apple has a monopoly on the market for everyone that uses iPhone while a brick and mortar store would have to compete against other stores. It's more comparable to Visa and Mastercard taking a 30% cut of each sale made at every store unless it's a store owned by Visa/Mastercard.
If Apple had a completely unlocked phone where multiple appmarketplaces could compete for customers they could charge a 90% cut for all I care. But when they lock out the competition it gets very shady. In my mind they are abusing their monopoly position just like Microsoft and Intel did in their heydays, to the detriment of us all.
I very much doubt the AI can spot challenging views. It is however capable of identifying most slurs and invective, making it effective in reducing the number of low-content posts and pointless insults. Rest assured that you are still free to post Trump propaganda or whatever you wish as long as you are capable of doing so without adding personal attacks.
Like parents who don't vaccinate do so because they are noticing signs of autism and sometimes they are right. Or something else entirely. In either case, you can't claim both that there is no link and that vaccine cuts down on autism. If authors really wanted to claim no link, they should have said that the difference is below statistical noise at their sample size.
No, they didn't want to draw those conclusions since there were confounding factors.
From TFA:
"Another drawback is the potential for some kids to have undiagnosed autism before getting the MMR vaccine, which could make the MMR vaccine appear linked to autism when it really isn’t connected, the study authors note. It’s also possible that the onset of autism symptoms might lead parents to skip the vaccine. "
They don't feel confident noting a correlation since the numbers are within the margin of error. What can safely be concluded is that there is no increase in autism in the vaccinated group.
"Uh, yeah.. Well Sir, Putin recently informed us about the secret Mexicans, the deep down underground Mexicans. They steal even more jobs per Mexican. While your standard Mexican can only steal one job, the deep underground Mexicans can steal up to 3.3 jobs per Mexican. They are stronger and even more Mexican. Like Raichu to the standard Pikachu. You really don't want these underground Mexicans even within a hundred feet of your daughter's job."
"Will it be the best underground wall?"
"Of course, Mr President. The best underground wall ever."
No, most of the resistance comes from political polarization and industry organizations. If climate change was considered a Republican invention instead of a liberal one, the camps would be the opposite as well.
And if you think solar power is inefficient, just add the pollution cleanup cost to the coal and oil power. As it is now, oil and coal makes a tremendous profit specifically because the cost of cleaning up after all that is conveniently shifted onto the public.
If it's a public space you have no right to exclude visitors that do not agree to your terms. You only have the right to enforce terms in your own private space. You can't go into a market square and start kicking people out. And if it's private space, then it's private for the user as well, meaning you cannot record it without consent.
But if the internet is indeed considered a public place, you have made your resources open to public visitation. How can you exclude anyone from using a public area?
If it's a private space, then you have no right to listen in because the person visiting is doing so from a private location. But that is also the only scenario where you may set rules.
Did the hype/ads/visibility of the movie ramp up heavily during that time? I don't know much about movie marketing, but when does the viewer interest peak?
This kind of thinking depends heavily on where you live. A happy liberal in a white suburb values individual freedom much more than a poor liberal in a ghetto. It's always easy to talk about individual freedom when you're not the one getting shot.
That's not to diminish your position; freedom is in some way a cornerstone of a solid and strong society. But freedom means different things in different situations. I value the freedom from violence, abuse, and robbery, higher than individual freedom, as the former if left unchecked causes the downfall of a society.
Yes, exactly. Ticks are well known to cause serious issues and serve as a vector for many diseases, Lyme disease being the most well known. But I've never heard of horseflies doing the same, and they exist all over the world. I would also expect many different species to develop horsefly-specific traits if they were such a problem as well, not just zebras, but I haven't heard or seen anything about that either.
I still do not fully understand the evolutionary reasoning here. If horse flies are a "nuisance", why was there evolutionary pressure to avoid them?
Generally speaking, according to the point equilibrium evolutionary theory, there should only be a trivial level of positive selection for traits that reduce trivial problems, and the selection should disappear once the problem disappeared. Are horse flies a continuous and meaningful problem for zebras? Furthermore, there cannot be an initial barrier to the positive trait, meaning that the stripes would have to emerge as an initial pattern immediately, it cannot have developed as first turning black and then developing white stripes (or vice versa) unless black (or white) colors also repel horse flies.
Slashdot Mirror
Would you say that it's fully operational?
Then perhaps you shouldn't have spent all that money on a super-intelligent wallet with inbuilt head-slapping capabilities.
That's pretty cool though. I bet it saves you a lot of money when you go to IKEA.
If you cannot see the difference between removing a specific video where people were recently murdered and state-wide oppression of even verbal opposition, I pity you.
Are we talking old Linus or new Linus?
So, would you then say, in the words of TFA, that you have become more selfish, less self-critical, and more prone to discrimination? Equivalently, if I may use my own words, more experienced?
I must say that the authors are unprofessionally biased. None of these qualities are necessarily negative, but they are phrased in an incredibly negative way in TFA.
If he's the Beto, when do we get the Release Candidate?
Good comment.
Yes, there is a license on the software, and while I don't like that, it's pretty standard by now. Fair enough. The part I consider monopoly abuse is that I'm locked into it in a practical sense.
I don't mind wiping the phone at all, but it is a non-trivial effort for most people. If it was available as a simple service for *everyone* I would be content. Though at that point it would probably be easier (and better) if Apple simply allowed non-Apple marketplaces.
But the thing is, I bought a *phone*. I did not buy a service, I did not buy a license. I bought a physical product, a phone. And I should be able to use that phone as I wish. If I bought an Intel CPU, and Intel told me that I would only be able to play Intel approved games on it (so they could charge developers 30%), that would be a serious abuse of monopoly powers. It doesn't matter that I could buy AMD, it's still abuse of their position. If I buy a physical product, I should be able to use that physical product according to my needs and desires.
Should your car brand be allowed to determine where you are allowed to drive with your car? Because that is exactly what Apple is doing. They are selling a physical product and then deciding how you are allowed to use it. Just like that short bout of draconian DRM where you bought a physical disc for a game but you were only allowed to install it 3 times.
The situation is not quite as simple as that though. Apple has a monopoly on the market for everyone that uses iPhone while a brick and mortar store would have to compete against other stores. It's more comparable to Visa and Mastercard taking a 30% cut of each sale made at every store unless it's a store owned by Visa/Mastercard.
If Apple had a completely unlocked phone where multiple appmarketplaces could compete for customers they could charge a 90% cut for all I care. But when they lock out the competition it gets very shady. In my mind they are abusing their monopoly position just like Microsoft and Intel did in their heydays, to the detriment of us all.
I very much doubt the AI can spot challenging views. It is however capable of identifying most slurs and invective, making it effective in reducing the number of low-content posts and pointless insults. Rest assured that you are still free to post Trump propaganda or whatever you wish as long as you are capable of doing so without adding personal attacks.
Like parents who don't vaccinate do so because they are noticing signs of autism and sometimes they are right. Or something else entirely. In either case, you can't claim both that there is no link and that vaccine cuts down on autism. If authors really wanted to claim no link, they should have said that the difference is below statistical noise at their sample size.
No, they didn't want to draw those conclusions since there were confounding factors.
From TFA:
"Another drawback is the potential for some kids to have undiagnosed autism before getting the MMR vaccine, which could make the MMR vaccine appear linked to autism when it really isn’t connected, the study authors note. It’s also possible that the onset of autism symptoms might lead parents to skip the vaccine. "
They don't feel confident noting a correlation since the numbers are within the margin of error. What can safely be concluded is that there is no increase in autism in the vaccinated group.
But unfortunately, the key to a free society is law. The most important freedom (to me) is to not get raped/murdered/stolen.
It's not an easy balancing act.
"Why would we build the wall underground?"
"Uh, yeah.. Well Sir, Putin recently informed us about the secret Mexicans, the deep down underground Mexicans. They steal even more jobs per Mexican. While your standard Mexican can only steal one job, the deep underground Mexicans can steal up to 3.3 jobs per Mexican. They are stronger and even more Mexican. Like Raichu to the standard Pikachu. You really don't want these underground Mexicans even within a hundred feet of your daughter's job."
"Will it be the best underground wall?"
"Of course, Mr President. The best underground wall ever."
"Okay. Now, how does my hair look?"
"Not like a wig at all, Sir."
No, most of the resistance comes from political polarization and industry organizations. If climate change was considered a Republican invention instead of a liberal one, the camps would be the opposite as well.
And if you think solar power is inefficient, just add the pollution cleanup cost to the coal and oil power. As it is now, oil and coal makes a tremendous profit specifically because the cost of cleaning up after all that is conveniently shifted onto the public.
Not with that attitude it won't.
SAME SPEED AHEAD!
Noobtube killstreak
If it's a public space you have no right to exclude visitors that do not agree to your terms. You only have the right to enforce terms in your own private space. You can't go into a market square and start kicking people out. And if it's private space, then it's private for the user as well, meaning you cannot record it without consent.
So which one is it?
But if the internet is indeed considered a public place, you have made your resources open to public visitation. How can you exclude anyone from using a public area?
If it's a private space, then you have no right to listen in because the person visiting is doing so from a private location. But that is also the only scenario where you may set rules.
Addendum: When did Brie Larson make all these controversial statements?
Did the hype/ads/visibility of the movie ramp up heavily during that time? I don't know much about movie marketing, but when does the viewer interest peak?
... one that I hope people aren't willing to pay.
This kind of thinking depends heavily on where you live. A happy liberal in a white suburb values individual freedom much more than a poor liberal in a ghetto. It's always easy to talk about individual freedom when you're not the one getting shot.
That's not to diminish your position; freedom is in some way a cornerstone of a solid and strong society. But freedom means different things in different situations. I value the freedom from violence, abuse, and robbery, higher than individual freedom, as the former if left unchecked causes the downfall of a society.
Dude, you can't just leave a goddamn open parenthesis on Slashdot. My programming autism is spiking and I need to lie down now. Thanks a bunch.
Yes, exactly. Ticks are well known to cause serious issues and serve as a vector for many diseases, Lyme disease being the most well known. But I've never heard of horseflies doing the same, and they exist all over the world. I would also expect many different species to develop horsefly-specific traits if they were such a problem as well, not just zebras, but I haven't heard or seen anything about that either.
I still do not fully understand the evolutionary reasoning here. If horse flies are a "nuisance", why was there evolutionary pressure to avoid them?
Generally speaking, according to the point equilibrium evolutionary theory, there should only be a trivial level of positive selection for traits that reduce trivial problems, and the selection should disappear once the problem disappeared. Are horse flies a continuous and meaningful problem for zebras? Furthermore, there cannot be an initial barrier to the positive trait, meaning that the stripes would have to emerge as an initial pattern immediately, it cannot have developed as first turning black and then developing white stripes (or vice versa) unless black (or white) colors also repel horse flies.
Yeah, we do this a lot. Specially if there is a latin root for the word.