So what happened to the free market?
Does Best Buy have a good reason for thinking they know better than their customers?
What's next? Linux gets a ban in the US?
Good luck with not being in that dataset. Just checked my against one of the other two today, and they have my checking account on file, and one loan from the same bank.
What if they don't charge it against your checking accound or CC number? What if they only use your name and SSN, tying it to your credit score, and leaving it between you, the big three, and the debt collector to sort how who is on the hook for the debt.
Only matters if we as a nation allow it to continue to matter.
Equifax is not the only game in town.
Just depends on how stupid we are, or how stupid our Executives are.
Never thought of it that way. It has always been referred to as identity theft.
Perhaps because the SSN is so closely and so nearly permanently tied to one's identity.
Is there some archaic manner of loading certain sites which requires they be loaded into a blank page?
Or is there some requirement of a link somewhere, which Microsoft provides support for, that cannot be loaded with different restrictions by any other means than an exploit?
Something about Microsoft thinks users are to dumb to tie their own shoes perhaps?
The question is whether it WILL be cheaper and faster enough, within a reasonable time frame which would likely affect the current labor force, say within about 10 years from now.
Is it possible to create optimizations in centralized manufacturing which make enough of a difference to make an impact? Will those optimizations outpace optimizations in other areas of manufacturing and/or distribution?
Hence my statement about "unmanaged" wealth increases. Things tend to get bigger when they are unmanaged, and just taking the path of least resistance.
By "managed" wealth increases, I mean taking efforts to optimize wealth increases under various pressures. Optimizations, and increases in efficiency being choice among them.
City planning, or otherwise making it possible to expand upwards rather than outwards is another.
But yeah, if we can manage what we have, and scale it down, we can make room for more stuff. Like merging computers and televisions with telephones.
First wave. This is how it starts. We learn from this.
The question is how much of a diagnosis requires the human element? Are there clues from reading body language or other non-verbal cues that the human gut/intuition would diagnose against?
Or does it truly all boil down to data sets, and getting accurate data? Because a machine can hold a larger repository of data, and cost less to maintain than army of doctors, and handle the same number of patients.
Do doctors perform better when following a system? Systems favor AI implementation. Or do doctors work better "cowboying" it, and shooting from the hip? Human intuition is much more accurate than randomly generated reactions from an AI.
AI has been used to refer to computer controlled opponents in video games for so long, that is what I associate AI with. A program that can react according to very specific data sets. Otherwise just brain dead stupid. Makes me appreciate the level of intelligence my pets have.
When I think of AI, I might think of Siri, or Cortana (Microsoft, not UNSC.), or Alexa, or Google's assistant.
I don't think of AI in real life as a Star Wars droid, K.I.T.T., or Skynet, or hologram like Voyagers Doctor, or Halo's Cortana, or Ultron or Vision.
Iron Man's Jarvis or Star Trek's "computer" seem to be idealized AI.
Probably stupid of me to reply to an AC,... The government "losing" money via tax cuts comes from a business mindset. Lower taxes means lower "profits". This is viewed as a loss in their revenue stream. Thus there is less money to budget with. Now budgetting against an economy is a little more complex, discounts and sales can increase revenue, and tax cuts could have a similar effect on the economy, and thus overall taxes.
Maybe that is a better way to describe it. "Positive feedback", or a "feedback loop".
The thing is that positive feedback isn't in the effort, but the idea. So the money goes to whoever owns or controls that idea. Sometimes its the guy who had the idea, but usually it is the guys who control the company. Be that shareholders or the executive staff.
So the positive feedback isn't being distributed evenly. And wealth isn't being distributed in a manner beneficial to a jobless, or low wage economy.
Ah, you're thinking smaller deliveries, like to convience stores or restaurants and such.
Those can be automated. Such automation isn't restricted by multiple stops, it is restricted by commodotization of infrastructure. Once the infrastructure is commodotized, it becomes affordable/cheaper than a human, and a part of running the business for all parties involved.
The Earth is a fixed size pie which we cannot expand beyond. Thus wealth is a fixed size pie.
This doesn't mean we are close to reaching the limits of that wealth. Just the limits of unmanaged "wealth".
Hate that was posted as an AC. Tough to have a proper discussion with an AC.
Self-reliance in small groups defers manpower and brainpower to necessities. Ie. No solar panels.
Self-reliance as a nation results in increasing efficiencies to free up resources, manpower and brainpower, to do innovative work, such as creating computers and solar panels and medicine and such.
So self-reliance as a nation, or very large group, causes this scenario. Capitalism is the other half of the equation, the "job loss due to unprofitability" part. In capitalism nearly everything, if not everything, is profit driven. We've also got this "minimum wage" thing which pushes capitalism to improve life rather than reduce it to a disposable commodity.
Well, to be be fair, it is actually the phone that is to blame. One doesn't know how many notifications they will recieve when they enable notifications for any particular app. It is quite natural to attempt to manage those notifications, which are distracting when they arrive on a device usually attached to one's person, and which is designed to get one's attention when a communication is recieved. It has to get to a point where a person decides that the quanitity of notifications are too many before they will likely do something about it. That threshold is different for everybody. There is also a matter of priorities, but all of this would be moot if a phone was not set up to be utilized as a communication device for that which was designed to be "distracting".
The iOS has a few options. "Banners"/"Alerts", which are the most intrusive, can be turned off. Additionally you can disable sounds and vibrations, and "lock screen", which limits the notifications to the queue. Or as a little red number on the icon for the app which recieved the update. For a few apps I have no notifications whatsoever, since the app itself has a queue when you run it.
I was talking about making the Ok/Apply/Cancel buttons local to the tab only, not just in appearance. Reduce UI clutter by eliminating an unnecessary design element.
You went on to say that it was a good distinction to allow a user to change settings individually, and then apply them globally.
This is what I was getting at. That sounds efficient, given that it hypothetically reduces button clicks. However the presence of an "Apply" button in addition to the "Ok" indicates that most of these settings will be tested individually anyway, and the Apply button is often tab specific as opposed to global as Ok and Cancel are (denoted by the Apply button alternating between being grayed out or not depending on whether the tab has unapplied changes). If I know what settings need to be made, perhaps it is a little more inconvenient to have to click the "Save and Apply" button on each tab.
However, Microsoft itself also breaks this UI design metaphor with menubars, and the Ribbon. They are present globally, but do not operate globally.
Yeah, the 9x style GUI does provide feedback, and it is good UI design against that implementation, but is the implementation that the UI feedback exists for necessary for that particular control panel?
Isn't UI design and usability both representing what the application does, and the actual layout and design of the application?
Windows 95 definitely wasn't "flat". It just wasn't "round" or "gradient" or transparent. I mean look at all the UI elements in the background, those icons are not flat, those toolbars have non-flat handles and elements. The "address bar" has more than a simple color change to distinguish it, and the status bar and system tray are both receeded.
Windows 3.1 was mostly flat, with some 3D elements. It was almost like they needed something to keep it from being too flat.
Modern UIs are typically flat. No 3D, no shadows, no gradients. Just a thin gray line, or change of color, if you're lucky.
Slashdot Mirror
So what happened to the free market? Does Best Buy have a good reason for thinking they know better than their customers? What's next? Linux gets a ban in the US?
The SSN is not meant to be used as an identifier for things like credit. It is being misused.
Good luck with not being in that dataset. Just checked my against one of the other two today, and they have my checking account on file, and one loan from the same bank.
Is there an edit button should my proof reading skills fail me? iOS' spellchecker is crappier than I am,...
What if they don't charge it against your checking accound or CC number? What if they only use your name and SSN, tying it to your credit score, and leaving it between you, the big three, and the debt collector to sort how who is on the hook for the debt.
Only matters if we as a nation allow it to continue to matter. Equifax is not the only game in town. Just depends on how stupid we are, or how stupid our Executives are.
Never thought of it that way. It has always been referred to as identity theft. Perhaps because the SSN is so closely and so nearly permanently tied to one's identity.
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." We need a weapon of a more civilized era, like a TRS-80!
We don't know who struck first, us or them, but we know that it was us that scorched the sky.
Office 365?
Is there some archaic manner of loading certain sites which requires they be loaded into a blank page? Or is there some requirement of a link somewhere, which Microsoft provides support for, that cannot be loaded with different restrictions by any other means than an exploit? Something about Microsoft thinks users are to dumb to tie their own shoes perhaps?
The question is whether it WILL be cheaper and faster enough, within a reasonable time frame which would likely affect the current labor force, say within about 10 years from now. Is it possible to create optimizations in centralized manufacturing which make enough of a difference to make an impact? Will those optimizations outpace optimizations in other areas of manufacturing and/or distribution?
Hence my statement about "unmanaged" wealth increases. Things tend to get bigger when they are unmanaged, and just taking the path of least resistance. By "managed" wealth increases, I mean taking efforts to optimize wealth increases under various pressures. Optimizations, and increases in efficiency being choice among them. City planning, or otherwise making it possible to expand upwards rather than outwards is another. But yeah, if we can manage what we have, and scale it down, we can make room for more stuff. Like merging computers and televisions with telephones.
Obligatory: "I for one welcomeour AI overlords!"
First wave. This is how it starts. We learn from this. The question is how much of a diagnosis requires the human element? Are there clues from reading body language or other non-verbal cues that the human gut/intuition would diagnose against? Or does it truly all boil down to data sets, and getting accurate data? Because a machine can hold a larger repository of data, and cost less to maintain than army of doctors, and handle the same number of patients. Do doctors perform better when following a system? Systems favor AI implementation. Or do doctors work better "cowboying" it, and shooting from the hip? Human intuition is much more accurate than randomly generated reactions from an AI.
AI has been used to refer to computer controlled opponents in video games for so long, that is what I associate AI with. A program that can react according to very specific data sets. Otherwise just brain dead stupid. Makes me appreciate the level of intelligence my pets have. When I think of AI, I might think of Siri, or Cortana (Microsoft, not UNSC.), or Alexa, or Google's assistant. I don't think of AI in real life as a Star Wars droid, K.I.T.T., or Skynet, or hologram like Voyagers Doctor, or Halo's Cortana, or Ultron or Vision. Iron Man's Jarvis or Star Trek's "computer" seem to be idealized AI.
Probably stupid of me to reply to an AC,... The government "losing" money via tax cuts comes from a business mindset. Lower taxes means lower "profits". This is viewed as a loss in their revenue stream. Thus there is less money to budget with. Now budgetting against an economy is a little more complex, discounts and sales can increase revenue, and tax cuts could have a similar effect on the economy, and thus overall taxes.
Maybe that is a better way to describe it. "Positive feedback", or a "feedback loop". The thing is that positive feedback isn't in the effort, but the idea. So the money goes to whoever owns or controls that idea. Sometimes its the guy who had the idea, but usually it is the guys who control the company. Be that shareholders or the executive staff. So the positive feedback isn't being distributed evenly. And wealth isn't being distributed in a manner beneficial to a jobless, or low wage economy.
Ah, you're thinking smaller deliveries, like to convience stores or restaurants and such. Those can be automated. Such automation isn't restricted by multiple stops, it is restricted by commodotization of infrastructure. Once the infrastructure is commodotized, it becomes affordable/cheaper than a human, and a part of running the business for all parties involved.
The Earth is a fixed size pie which we cannot expand beyond. Thus wealth is a fixed size pie. This doesn't mean we are close to reaching the limits of that wealth. Just the limits of unmanaged "wealth".
Hate that was posted as an AC. Tough to have a proper discussion with an AC. Self-reliance in small groups defers manpower and brainpower to necessities. Ie. No solar panels. Self-reliance as a nation results in increasing efficiencies to free up resources, manpower and brainpower, to do innovative work, such as creating computers and solar panels and medicine and such. So self-reliance as a nation, or very large group, causes this scenario. Capitalism is the other half of the equation, the "job loss due to unprofitability" part. In capitalism nearly everything, if not everything, is profit driven. We've also got this "minimum wage" thing which pushes capitalism to improve life rather than reduce it to a disposable commodity.
Well, to be be fair, it is actually the phone that is to blame. One doesn't know how many notifications they will recieve when they enable notifications for any particular app. It is quite natural to attempt to manage those notifications, which are distracting when they arrive on a device usually attached to one's person, and which is designed to get one's attention when a communication is recieved. It has to get to a point where a person decides that the quanitity of notifications are too many before they will likely do something about it. That threshold is different for everybody. There is also a matter of priorities, but all of this would be moot if a phone was not set up to be utilized as a communication device for that which was designed to be "distracting".
The iOS has a few options. "Banners"/"Alerts", which are the most intrusive, can be turned off. Additionally you can disable sounds and vibrations, and "lock screen", which limits the notifications to the queue. Or as a little red number on the icon for the app which recieved the update. For a few apps I have no notifications whatsoever, since the app itself has a queue when you run it.
I was talking about making the Ok/Apply/Cancel buttons local to the tab only, not just in appearance. Reduce UI clutter by eliminating an unnecessary design element. You went on to say that it was a good distinction to allow a user to change settings individually, and then apply them globally. This is what I was getting at. That sounds efficient, given that it hypothetically reduces button clicks. However the presence of an "Apply" button in addition to the "Ok" indicates that most of these settings will be tested individually anyway, and the Apply button is often tab specific as opposed to global as Ok and Cancel are (denoted by the Apply button alternating between being grayed out or not depending on whether the tab has unapplied changes). If I know what settings need to be made, perhaps it is a little more inconvenient to have to click the "Save and Apply" button on each tab. However, Microsoft itself also breaks this UI design metaphor with menubars, and the Ribbon. They are present globally, but do not operate globally. Yeah, the 9x style GUI does provide feedback, and it is good UI design against that implementation, but is the implementation that the UI feedback exists for necessary for that particular control panel? Isn't UI design and usability both representing what the application does, and the actual layout and design of the application?
Windows 95 definitely wasn't "flat". It just wasn't "round" or "gradient" or transparent. I mean look at all the UI elements in the background, those icons are not flat, those toolbars have non-flat handles and elements. The "address bar" has more than a simple color change to distinguish it, and the status bar and system tray are both receeded. Windows 3.1 was mostly flat, with some 3D elements. It was almost like they needed something to keep it from being too flat. Modern UIs are typically flat. No 3D, no shadows, no gradients. Just a thin gray line, or change of color, if you're lucky.