If we get to half or more of the population being unemployed due to efficient automation, people will be unable to contribute at all. Even though there will be the same wealth in general, it will be concentrated into those few who built the robots and those who own the robots. That is an untenable position (think civil war style untenable, not Occupy).
If you're building a society in which labor is scarce, you have to think about how to support people who would be laborers, and who will therefore be unable to work.
That's the only reason why this might actually work. The Zetas as a group are sociopaths who don't care that lives are going to be lost. And at least part of Anonymous is going to consist of borderline sociopaths who don't care that lives are going to be lost. They have little motivation to back down, since for many of 'em it'll just be a few clickety-clicks.
"We'll kill these random people if you post this." "Okay, we're still going to post this." "Well shit."
If deaththreats do not have a noticeable effect, one might hope they'll eventually stop.
This 'winner/loser' mentality has also given rise to a two-party system. There are no idealist parties in the US, because you only have the Democrats and the Republicans. Sure, there are other parties, but these are marginal, for the reasons you mentioned.
In the Netherlands, we have a Party for the Animals, whose sole purpose is animal wellbeing. Sure, they're not going to run a government, but with somewhat skilled politicians in parliament, they have a voice, and get heard.
Right now, we have a minority government of two parties, condoned by a third party. On points agreed upon beforehand, that third party will vote in favor. On all other points, concensus in parliament will have to be reached.
The system that is in place in the US is one prone to corruption, and dangerous. There are no controls, and people don't care about issues, just about whether they've won.
Several reasons I can think of. Ceglia was embroiled in another legal conflict; don't start a second fight before the first one's done.
But probably the main reason reason is that half of several billion market value is signicantly more than half of several millions in venture capital. Last year, growth was just 38% (compared to nearly 200% the previous year), revenues topped US$ 1 billion. It is no longer a startup whose money evaporates when you try to grab it, it is a legitimate business, and Ceglia wants his cut.
With the iPhone about to get multitasking and more expanded bluetooth support, I'm finally getting close to feature parity with my old N95, a phone that's over 2.5 years old. Not because the hardware was lagging, but because of choices made in software development.
Mind you, I have an iPhone, it's got a great interface and has some interesting software. But it's very restricted, limited, it's tied to iTunes, and in the end I probably should have gone for an Android phone to get full bang-for-buck.
(seriously, three years with a full bluetooth chipset and only *now* they're adding bluetooth keyboard support? It's probably not going to be fully controllable using just the keyboard either, like my N95 was... We'll see.)
I remember that sort of thing from when I was a wee lad. But bike lanes now have sensors specifically for bikes. What astounds me is that in the US, apparently there are no bike lanes in your cities. That's horribly unsafe, and not much of a motivation to go biking.
In Holland, we have bike paths and appropriate sensors (or buttons, like for pedestrians) going all across town, and you can get almost anywhere without having to jostle for position with cars.
My backup for the brakes is the hand brake. That, and I can just roll to a stop once I turn off the engine. And even if I do slam into a wall or some such, cars are safe enough that one can survive impacts very well. Also, there are rarely more than a few people in any one car.
A plane that hits another plane is going to kill everyone on *both* planes, which amounts to a few hundred people. If your sole means of navigation and collision avoidance fails, you are unable to guarantee that that won't happen.
They used two different measuring systems, and diddled the numbers until the graphs overlapped. They used data from measuring stations that were not properly shielded from mundane human activity (I think one was actually near a pub, in Australia?) and whose data could not be normalized using nearby measuring stations. They declined to use proper measuring stations that showed a decline in temperature. And they actively, and conciously, LIED about this.
Carbon good, carbon bad, we don't know. Possibly it's not good, probably we should limit our output of it (can't hurt to be neutral), but to suppose we should spend billions of dollars on fixing a potential non-problem, trusting in what we know to be bad science, that's just fucking bullshit.
The problem isn't simple at all, since we don't even know that there IS a problem here. You're suggesting cutting off a patients arm because he has an odd rash on his little finger; no idea what it is, what it's going to do, or whether it'll do anything, but since it *might* kill him, let's lop off the arm.
Yes, we're removing large amounts of fossil carbon and releasing it into the atmosphere, but how is that necessarily a problem? Does this CO2 have an effect on climate? Well, we just don't know. The group that's been saying that it *is* having an effect, has been doing incredibly bad science, so all their work has to be redone. Their work, just so you know, is measuring and calculating global temperature.
We only define three macro nutrients. Why do you think you can cut one out? I lost about 2lbs a week for 3 months easily, and I ate cereal for breakfast, lots of fruit (almost entirely sugar), bread for lunch, and vegetables, potato and meat for dinner. And I drank about half a liter of cola (none of that diet crap) in the evenings as well.
So why did I lose weight? My meals were small, only just filling enough, and I exercised (with some vigor) four times a week: two times cardio, two times weights. Of course, I also consumed plenty of fat, and the meaty products I ate (dinner, bread toppings) gave me enough protein. I also drank quite a bit of water.
The trick is to have a more or less good balance of the macro-nutrients, made of real food (vegetables, milk, meat, eggs, bread, basically anything that can rot. Cereal is actually not that good), and have small portions. If you're hungry an hour after breakfast, have some more breakfast next morning. If you're not hungry at lunch, have a little less breakfast next morning. Easy peasy.
As long as you go outside, you're going to be seen anyway. You have a simple choice: Do nothing and maybe be ridiculed, or balance your diet, get in shape and maybe be ridiculed.
People see a tubby gal/guy going at the gym will have two reactions (and preferably keep them to themselves, but hey): - Look at that fat joke, or; - That one's working his/her ass off. (literally, even)
The former are reprehensible human beings who never had to work for anything in their lives. The latter are correct.
Almost all Dutch driving schools use diesel cars (they're a bit easier in terms of clutching, and with the mileage they drive, it's more economical), so I've had quite a few hours in one.
They have plenty of kick. They're more comfortable to drive (power curve is less peaked, so at low RPM you have more power, and as I said they clutch easier).
But hey: go to a dealer and take a test drive. Then you'll know. And knowing is half the battle.
Diesel engines are way better at mileage, and is significantly cheaper at the pump. At the same time, though, the stuff they output is worse, lots of fine dust particulates.
Late, but hey: Also, a house door opening outwards is good for smacking guests in the face, who tend to be waiting close by. And perhaps passers-by, in case of appartments.
What I do is I pitch a modified version of the idea where several key components are blatantly impossible, stupid, and possibly illegal. [...] But when I depart, they're left with the overall impression that my idea was retarded and useless.
At which point, the really clever ones will start to fill in your crucial blanks. Most people can implement a brilliant idea once it's proposed to them in some form. It's coming up with the idea from a blank state that almost noone can do consistently.
I'm busy working on a high performance V-8 hemi engine powered by babies. I'm having some troubles with the baby pump getting clogged by babies.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, I guess you like Ayn Rand.
If we get to half or more of the population being unemployed due to efficient automation, people will be unable to contribute at all. Even though there will be the same wealth in general, it will be concentrated into those few who built the robots and those who own the robots. That is an untenable position (think civil war style untenable, not Occupy).
If you're building a society in which labor is scarce, you have to think about how to support people who would be laborers, and who will therefore be unable to work.
That's the only reason why this might actually work. The Zetas as a group are sociopaths who don't care that lives are going to be lost. And at least part of Anonymous is going to consist of borderline sociopaths who don't care that lives are going to be lost. They have little motivation to back down, since for many of 'em it'll just be a few clickety-clicks.
"We'll kill these random people if you post this."
"Okay, we're still going to post this."
"Well shit."
If deaththreats do not have a noticeable effect, one might hope they'll eventually stop.
My dick only rarely gloats.
Which is odd, because it's absolutely fucking amazing.
I'd agree with that, certainly a few years ago. But taxing fuel more won't get you very far as a government when cars go electric.
... a beowulf cluster of tabs!
/.
Or is that joke a little too 20th century these days? Been out of touch with
She got big-boned alright.
Well, they managed to make margarine ("Now with cancer-causing transfats!") the de-facto butter for most people.
This 'winner/loser' mentality has also given rise to a two-party system. There are no idealist parties in the US, because you only have the Democrats and the Republicans. Sure, there are other parties, but these are marginal, for the reasons you mentioned.
In the Netherlands, we have a Party for the Animals, whose sole purpose is animal wellbeing. Sure, they're not going to run a government, but with somewhat skilled politicians in parliament, they have a voice, and get heard.
Right now, we have a minority government of two parties, condoned by a third party. On points agreed upon beforehand, that third party will vote in favor. On all other points, concensus in parliament will have to be reached.
The system that is in place in the US is one prone to corruption, and dangerous. There are no controls, and people don't care about issues, just about whether they've won.
They didn't for the first four releases of OSX. For version 10.4, Apple made a release, after some community work to get the Sun FreeBSD JDK ported.
In short, once a JDK is no longer available from Apple, Java developers will need to move on to Windows for development. Which rather sucks.
Several reasons I can think of. Ceglia was embroiled in another legal conflict; don't start a second fight before the first one's done.
But probably the main reason reason is that half of several billion market value is signicantly more than half of several millions in venture capital. Last year, growth was just 38% (compared to nearly 200% the previous year), revenues topped US$ 1 billion. It is no longer a startup whose money evaporates when you try to grab it, it is a legitimate business, and Ceglia wants his cut.
With the iPhone about to get multitasking and more expanded bluetooth support, I'm finally getting close to feature parity with my old N95, a phone that's over 2.5 years old. Not because the hardware was lagging, but because of choices made in software development.
Mind you, I have an iPhone, it's got a great interface and has some interesting software. But it's very restricted, limited, it's tied to iTunes, and in the end I probably should have gone for an Android phone to get full bang-for-buck.
(seriously, three years with a full bluetooth chipset and only *now* they're adding bluetooth keyboard support? It's probably not going to be fully controllable using just the keyboard either, like my N95 was... We'll see.)
Chuck Norris' DNA will take researchers apart before giving up its secrets.
I remember that sort of thing from when I was a wee lad. But bike lanes now have sensors specifically for bikes. What astounds me is that in the US, apparently there are no bike lanes in your cities. That's horribly unsafe, and not much of a motivation to go biking.
In Holland, we have bike paths and appropriate sensors (or buttons, like for pedestrians) going all across town, and you can get almost anywhere without having to jostle for position with cars.
Finally a CPU that might let Battlefield: Bad Company 2 run at an acceptable framerate.
You're an idiot.
My backup for the brakes is the hand brake. That, and I can just roll to a stop once I turn off the engine. And even if I do slam into a wall or some such, cars are safe enough that one can survive impacts very well. Also, there are rarely more than a few people in any one car.
A plane that hits another plane is going to kill everyone on *both* planes, which amounts to a few hundred people. If your sole means of navigation and collision avoidance fails, you are unable to guarantee that that won't happen.
They used two different measuring systems, and diddled the numbers until the graphs overlapped. They used data from measuring stations that were not properly shielded from mundane human activity (I think one was actually near a pub, in Australia?) and whose data could not be normalized using nearby measuring stations. They declined to use proper measuring stations that showed a decline in temperature. And they actively, and conciously, LIED about this.
Carbon good, carbon bad, we don't know. Possibly it's not good, probably we should limit our output of it (can't hurt to be neutral), but to suppose we should spend billions of dollars on fixing a potential non-problem, trusting in what we know to be bad science, that's just fucking bullshit.
The problem isn't simple at all, since we don't even know that there IS a problem here. You're suggesting cutting off a patients arm because he has an odd rash on his little finger; no idea what it is, what it's going to do, or whether it'll do anything, but since it *might* kill him, let's lop off the arm.
Yes, we're removing large amounts of fossil carbon and releasing it into the atmosphere, but how is that necessarily a problem? Does this CO2 have an effect on climate? Well, we just don't know. The group that's been saying that it *is* having an effect, has been doing incredibly bad science, so all their work has to be redone. Their work, just so you know, is measuring and calculating global temperature.
"Member of Grand Theft Auto programming team, quit at start of crunch period"
The people who'd hire them would expect to abuse them the same way.
Whoah, no Nokia? That's just plain weird. Some of the best phones on the market came from Nokia.
We only define three macro nutrients. Why do you think you can cut one out? I lost about 2lbs a week for 3 months easily, and I ate cereal for breakfast, lots of fruit (almost entirely sugar), bread for lunch, and vegetables, potato and meat for dinner. And I drank about half a liter of cola (none of that diet crap) in the evenings as well.
So why did I lose weight? My meals were small, only just filling enough, and I exercised (with some vigor) four times a week: two times cardio, two times weights. Of course, I also consumed plenty of fat, and the meaty products I ate (dinner, bread toppings) gave me enough protein. I also drank quite a bit of water.
The trick is to have a more or less good balance of the macro-nutrients, made of real food (vegetables, milk, meat, eggs, bread, basically anything that can rot. Cereal is actually not that good), and have small portions. If you're hungry an hour after breakfast, have some more breakfast next morning. If you're not hungry at lunch, have a little less breakfast next morning. Easy peasy.
As long as you go outside, you're going to be seen anyway. You have a simple choice: Do nothing and maybe be ridiculed, or balance your diet, get in shape and maybe be ridiculed.
People see a tubby gal/guy going at the gym will have two reactions (and preferably keep them to themselves, but hey):
- Look at that fat joke, or;
- That one's working his/her ass off. (literally, even)
The former are reprehensible human beings who never had to work for anything in their lives. The latter are correct.
Almost all Dutch driving schools use diesel cars (they're a bit easier in terms of clutching, and with the mileage they drive, it's more economical), so I've had quite a few hours in one.
They have plenty of kick. They're more comfortable to drive (power curve is less peaked, so at low RPM you have more power, and as I said they clutch easier).
But hey: go to a dealer and take a test drive. Then you'll know. And knowing is half the battle.
Diesel engines are way better at mileage, and is significantly cheaper at the pump. At the same time, though, the stuff they output is worse, lots of fine dust particulates.
For the MPG's though, I want one.
Late, but hey:
Also, a house door opening outwards is good for smacking guests in the face, who tend to be waiting close by. And perhaps passers-by, in case of appartments.
At which point, the really clever ones will start to fill in your crucial blanks. Most people can implement a brilliant idea once it's proposed to them in some form. It's coming up with the idea from a blank state that almost noone can do consistently.
In-line blender. You're welcome.