*Some positive energy/global warming related article is posted that does not explicitly attribute nuclear power*
Some grumpy./er grumbles: "but,but,but. . . NUCLEAR!"
Well, they would need to know they exist, first. . . If such a law ever passed, it would be trivial to make detecting such cameras near impossible. . .
Correct. However, Orwell did not anticipate that the general public would be the ones to have the majority of networked cameras that they could use to keep tabs on the government. I have cameras installed at my home, but I am not just going to share with anyone unconditionally. A string of events would have to occur first before I would even consider sharing specific footage with the local police. I believe anyone else (including in the UK) shelling out their own money would be inclined to do the same (else risk their own footage being used against themselves).
So, in short, yes, everything will be recorded just like Orwell's predicted. However, the economic tendency is for everyone to have a piece of the footage pie and be able to choose when and with whom they share it with.
You get the awesomeness of dataframes in an awesome language with an awesome community (that's 3 awesomes!). Use the Python Notebook tutorials and go do awesome things . . .
OK, now I think you are just being stubborn. . . You are doing yourself a disservice. Think about this for a while:
1) We were keeping all other factors constant and only changing mortgage period.
2) In this scenario, mortgage period only impacts monthly payments of principle.
3) Prepayments are payments of principle above and beyond what is determined by the mortgage period.
4) Accordingly, you want your required principle payments as low as possible because you can also prepay to turn your mortgage period into any mortgage period shorter than your originally contracted period. For instance, I could get a 60 year mortgage and pay it off in 30 years by prepaying every month (it would look identical to a 30 year mortgage)
I hope human life is extended just so that you live long enough to understand this concept.
Here is a more simple explanation. You have two choices:
A. You are forced to pay monthly principle payments of $1000
B. You are forced to pay monthly principle payments of $500 but can also prepay another $500, if you want (depending on alternative investment opportunities).
Option B. allows me to choose between both options, every month. If I choose option A, I am stuck with option A every month. Consequently, a rational person would choose the longest mortgage period possible because they could artificially create ANY shorter mortgage period option through prepayments.
Seems like if you are in the desert, the cost of water is a bigger issue than the environmentalists. . .
There are big trade-offs to be made between using water and having a more efficient (less polluting) plant.
Sure, until you start considering technologies like NGCC, NGCT, PV, and wind. Might be related to why, in the U.S., that is where the major investment in power is going. . .
assuming some level of rational financial decisions
Assuming income is the same in both situations, if I am not earning higher than 3% on my investments, then why am I not paying off my mortgage with my surplus monthly net cashflow (which is higher in the second scenario)? If I am earning higher than 3% on my investments then I am earning a spread and making easy money, like a bank (I am earning a higher interest rate than I am being charged).
Twice the mortgage period length gives me twice as long an opportunity to take advantage of advantageous investments when they are above 3% (earn a spread), so, all else equal, I am better off financially.
Yeah, that was my thought: desert, very hot water (at least 2/3 of overall energy output is lost to heat), and cooling pounds. . . Me thinks that evaporation would need to be significant to get the water cool enough to run back through the plant.
Is this better than letting the water run downstream and be utilized for other purposes? Is this really "water conservation" or "water cost minimization?"
. . . or how some people will try anything including poking a sleeping bear with a stick just to get 15 min of fame . ..
Yes. . . you do remember that thing they call the "Internet." Technology is just making the real world more like that. . . You can wish people were different all you want, but, for better or worse, it is what it is. You cannot change human nature. . . best to accept and move on.
NK already kills people all the time for just being human. I think that is a problem with the NK regime, not human nature.
What could possibly be done to prevent this? You really do not need to announce something like this to the world (like through Kickstarter). Technology to do something like this exists now and is just getting cheaper and cheaper. People have been sending balloons over for years. . . just a matter of time until they start sending drones. . .
It is simply the new reality we are living in. If NK starts killing people over it, it is only a testament to how out of touch with reality their regime is. . .
I agree that I am not understanding your point. However, I can't help but think that our disagreement stems from your seeing this as a zero sum game. Robert Wright has very compelling arguments that human civilization is moving towards nonzero sum games, and this is improving the lives of everyone. I recommend you test your views against the arguments he makes to support this claim.
Computational technological advances have greatly increased our ability to generate wealth. Your point seems to be about wealth distribution. However, it is far easier for a society to redistribute wealth than it is to generate wealth (this is easiest to see in developing nations). The harder problem is already being addressed by technology. Technology's propensity to decentralize concentrations of power will eventually solve the easier problem.
Overall, it is hard for me to accept your point that longer, healthier lives will not make people more wealthy. Most mortgages are ~30years. If you double the time period people can work without having to worry about a mortgage, you definitely have improved their financial situation (assuming some level of rational financial decisions).
The longer people live, the higher probability they will be directly impacted by short sighted decisions, like not increasing the retirement age. Longer life will result in more long term thinking.
People are going to retire at 65, and then collect benefits for the next 55 years.
If aging can be postponed, then so can retirement. Also, perhaps work will become more pleasant without the pressure of having to rush and save up for retirement.
Silly and arrogant oversimplification gets modded up sky-high. . . . Ah, Slashdot. . . the OTHER bitter, brown substance I put inside myself every morning. . .
He explicitly addresses this, saying that US employers are significantly more likely to award reserved stock or stock options to employees than Japanese employers (where it is almost unheard of). Accordingly, if Japan did not have special laws to protect individual inventors, the impact would be completely different in Japan than the U.S. (a point complete lost on PM Abe, whose only strategies are to devalue the yen and copy the U.S. wherever possible, even when it makes no sense. ..)
pieces of crap that break constantly due to horribly cheap parts
That is just as meaningless a statement about Chromebooks as it is about Android phones. . . What specific company hardware are you talking about (e.g. I have had a very good experience with Samsung and HP Chromebooks)?
Regarding your "featureless" statement, have you heard of Crouton? Also, were you aware that an increasing number of Android apps are coming to Chromebooks? Your post seems to represent the segment of/. that has not bothered to really look into chromebooks before hating them. . .
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, and a new Slashdot meme is born!
./er grumbles: "but,but,but. . . NUCLEAR!"
*Some positive energy/global warming related article is posted that does not explicitly attribute nuclear power*
Some grumpy
Well, they would need to know they exist, first. . . If such a law ever passed, it would be trivial to make detecting such cameras near impossible. . .
Correct. However, Orwell did not anticipate that the general public would be the ones to have the majority of networked cameras that they could use to keep tabs on the government. I have cameras installed at my home, but I am not just going to share with anyone unconditionally. A string of events would have to occur first before I would even consider sharing specific footage with the local police. I believe anyone else (including in the UK) shelling out their own money would be inclined to do the same (else risk their own footage being used against themselves).
So, in short, yes, everything will be recorded just like Orwell's predicted. However, the economic tendency is for everyone to have a piece of the footage pie and be able to choose when and with whom they share it with.
That data mining required you to wade through shit, but this is ridiculous. . .
You get the awesomeness of dataframes in an awesome language with an awesome community (that's 3 awesomes!). Use the Python Notebook tutorials and go do awesome things . . .
I could use a new head.
At least, when it comes to Tokyo.
Let's invade the moon!
OK, now I think you are just being stubborn. . . You are doing yourself a disservice. Think about this for a while:
1) We were keeping all other factors constant and only changing mortgage period.
2) In this scenario, mortgage period only impacts monthly payments of principle.
3) Prepayments are payments of principle above and beyond what is determined by the mortgage period.
4) Accordingly, you want your required principle payments as low as possible because you can also prepay to turn your mortgage period into any mortgage period shorter than your originally contracted period. For instance, I could get a 60 year mortgage and pay it off in 30 years by prepaying every month (it would look identical to a 30 year mortgage)
I hope human life is extended just so that you live long enough to understand this concept.
Here is a more simple explanation. You have two choices:
A. You are forced to pay monthly principle payments of $1000
B. You are forced to pay monthly principle payments of $500 but can also prepay another $500, if you want (depending on alternative investment opportunities).
Option B. allows me to choose between both options, every month. If I choose option A, I am stuck with option A every month. Consequently, a rational person would choose the longest mortgage period possible because they could artificially create ANY shorter mortgage period option through prepayments.
There are big trade-offs to be made between using water and having a more efficient (less polluting) plant.
Sure, until you start considering technologies like NGCC, NGCT, PV, and wind. Might be related to why, in the U.S., that is where the major investment in power is going. . .
assuming some level of rational financial decisions
Assuming income is the same in both situations, if I am not earning higher than 3% on my investments, then why am I not paying off my mortgage with my surplus monthly net cashflow (which is higher in the second scenario)? If I am earning higher than 3% on my investments then I am earning a spread and making easy money, like a bank (I am earning a higher interest rate than I am being charged).
Twice the mortgage period length gives me twice as long an opportunity to take advantage of advantageous investments when they are above 3% (earn a spread), so, all else equal, I am better off financially.
Repeat after me: Evaporation and boiling are not the same thing
Yeah, that was my thought: desert, very hot water (at least 2/3 of overall energy output is lost to heat), and cooling pounds. . . Me thinks that evaporation would need to be significant to get the water cool enough to run back through the plant.
Is this better than letting the water run downstream and be utilized for other purposes? Is this really "water conservation" or "water cost minimization?"
. . . or how some people will try anything including poking a sleeping bear with a stick just to get 15 min of fame . . .
Yes. . . you do remember that thing they call the "Internet." Technology is just making the real world more like that. . . You can wish people were different all you want, but, for better or worse, it is what it is. You cannot change human nature. . . best to accept and move on.
NK already kills people all the time for just being human. I think that is a problem with the NK regime, not human nature.
What could possibly be done to prevent this? You really do not need to announce something like this to the world (like through Kickstarter). Technology to do something like this exists now and is just getting cheaper and cheaper. People have been sending balloons over for years. . . just a matter of time until they start sending drones. . .
It is simply the new reality we are living in. If NK starts killing people over it, it is only a testament to how out of touch with reality their regime is. . .
I agree that I am not understanding your point. However, I can't help but think that our disagreement stems from your seeing this as a zero sum game. Robert Wright has very compelling arguments that human civilization is moving towards nonzero sum games, and this is improving the lives of everyone. I recommend you test your views against the arguments he makes to support this claim.
Computational technological advances have greatly increased our ability to generate wealth. Your point seems to be about wealth distribution. However, it is far easier for a society to redistribute wealth than it is to generate wealth (this is easiest to see in developing nations). The harder problem is already being addressed by technology. Technology's propensity to decentralize concentrations of power will eventually solve the easier problem.
Overall, it is hard for me to accept your point that longer, healthier lives will not make people more wealthy. Most mortgages are ~30years. If you double the time period people can work without having to worry about a mortgage, you definitely have improved their financial situation (assuming some level of rational financial decisions).
The longer people live, the higher probability they will be directly impacted by short sighted decisions, like not increasing the retirement age. Longer life will result in more long term thinking.
People are going to retire at 65, and then collect benefits for the next 55 years.
If aging can be postponed, then so can retirement. Also, perhaps work will become more pleasant without the pressure of having to rush and save up for retirement.
Silly and arrogant oversimplification gets modded up sky-high. . . . Ah, Slashdot. . . the OTHER bitter, brown substance I put inside myself every morning. . .
That's aIoT.
He explicitly addresses this, saying that US employers are significantly more likely to award reserved stock or stock options to employees than Japanese employers (where it is almost unheard of). Accordingly, if Japan did not have special laws to protect individual inventors, the impact would be completely different in Japan than the U.S. (a point complete lost on PM Abe, whose only strategies are to devalue the yen and copy the U.S. wherever possible, even when it makes no sense. . .)
There isn't an app for telling you what there isn't an app for. . .
pieces of crap that break constantly due to horribly cheap parts
That is just as meaningless a statement about Chromebooks as it is about Android phones. . . What specific company hardware are you talking about (e.g. I have had a very good experience with Samsung and HP Chromebooks)?
/. that has not bothered to really look into chromebooks before hating them. . .
Regarding your "featureless" statement, have you heard of Crouton? Also, were you aware that an increasing number of Android apps are coming to Chromebooks? Your post seems to represent the segment of