Not all social goods that are not private necessities should be priced at what the market can bear
Take that! Mr. Capitalism uber alles.
Now demonstrate to me how I am wrong. I don't go in for the concept of proof, but I do accept by the preponderance of evidence.
of everything we do... says just about everyone in technology. Nothing to see here. BTW, an interview was conducted over the phone with my mom today and the voice was so even and the interviewer had trouble understanding my mom's, yes response several times on the same question. I thought it was likely an AI, but my mom felt certain it was a real person. I loaded up a few of the Watson commercials and you could hear the difference, but it's likely better since then and who's to say they didn't degrade it to keep people from noticing in real life?
It may or may not be more safe, but when are we going to get to the point where clients can make decisions about their health using information from their doctor online. I have doctors from the same company and they struggle to share information on their network. Forget about me.
No! Really! There's this macOS thing and everything! Or is that just for the desktop. My magic 8-ball remains murky. It's OS X only it's not! it's the really old MacOS only we're spelling it with a lowercase m so now it's new and trendy and something, something... There really is nothing new under the sun, but how you get from there to "Serve God" the ecclesiastician doesn't really reveal.
This exploit puts software on Android systems in such a way that the usual install path doesn't see it. It's as if were the system capable of asking, "Are you new here?" the malware would say. "No, I've been here all along." and the system would be like, "Okay, then... carry on."
Oddly enough, everytime someone complains I'm reminded of the time where the robot is on another planet with some humans (Mercury, I think) and they think that the situation warrants the robot preserving itself over the human's instructions, so they give it an instruction to get some ore that is a life or death situation, but they forget to tell it that it is a life or death situation and to top it off, it encounters some robot-damaging radiation and apparently its rerouting programming isn't too good, or maybe it's been told to go straight there so it gets close to the more intense radiation (and maybe gets a little bit damaged) backs off, the instruction kicks in again, approaches, backs off, etc. and one of the humans has to get in a suit putting the human's life in further jeopardy, to tell the robot, that no, this is really a life or death situation.
Then there's the one where two robots are built with the concept of humans that are more important than others and decide that they ARE humans and furthermore the most important ones.
No, it can hurt you... it just can't be held responsible, and that's what the earlier posts were going for. It also can't be a violation of Asimov's laws as the robot was never taught them or given a system with them baked in.
Actually mental illness plays a pretty big role in human events, and the reason people try to downplay it is... actually pretty complicated, now that I stop to think of it... I started typing "because of the stigma associated with mental illness, but go ahead and keep playing this stupid game of"... but belligerence is another problem. Mental illness includes things that aren't belligerence, but belligerent behavior is considered especially heinous. When people think in terms of belligerence mental illness gets lumped in and people are so afraid of people with a mental illness who isn't belligerent getting hurt they are quick to say that a person who is belligerent isn't mentally ill. Arguably the people who want to harm any mentally ill person once the connection between mentally ill and belligerent is established in their mind are mentally ill... told you it was complicated. Anyways, it's long past time we all had a big sit-down about going the belligerent route as quick as we do, be it soldiers overseas or police here at home, and the quickness of Muslims to go the belligerent route, and the belligerence thing isn't limited to the West and Muslims. I'll stop pointing out groups at this point, but lets shine a huge spotlight on belligerence in general.
I have a condition along the Autism spectrum. While I may or may not be typical, in my experience the people along the Autism spectrum would most likely not get riled up on this matter. If your point in posting this was to trigger a response from a person or persons on the Autism spectrum, well done.
It was my understanding that one attempt to legitimize criminalization was that it was considered almost a given that in order to support the habit people committed "real crimes", such as robbery and further along the slippery slope even prostitution was a "corime" identified. Drug addiction was among the earliest forms of "precrime".
Drug addict: You mean if I come forward as a drug addict and try to get clean, they're going to arrest me and charge me with a crime? Forget that... I'll just put up with the addiction and try to keep it as quiet as possible.
Yeah, ""talent". Just another word for "magic". Can't say for certain, but I suspect that most people have what it takes for the military's "advanced training" to get them the rest of the way, but then who trains the trainers?
I could see how the AC's post could be interpreted as now you are safe from being executed by the government, but the government could still pass laws that ruin you financially. Sure, the first amendment isn't meant to protect you from civil/tort suits, but the AC failed to mention specifically what he was going for.
Whenever someone trots out the "informed" pony, I think along the lines of, in cases like this: To be really informed is to know enough to be able to perform the operation yourself AND insure a positive outcome. I don't care how the best outcome is obtained as long as it is the best outcome available. Even the judgement of someone who aced statistical analysis might be preferable.
Begging the question. You have said nothing to indicate that it won't quickly progress to one injection and you're done. not saying that's what's going to happen or I'd be begging the question just as much as you are, just illustrating the situation by stating the opposite in the same terms. So I'm just pretending to beg the question.
Do you really want to fly on a plane programmed by someone who skipped college because it was too time consuming?
I don't really care. Can his code be proven to be algorithmically complete? Can he convince people who did sit through college that his design is the best. Is this even a person? I hear that AI's are finally hitting their stride.
The issues people really need to be looking at, and not blind adherence to the way a simpleton would think things get done.
Really, because I totally went the other way on this one where his life is miserable and he thinks that everyone like him who spends most of their time with computers is miserable like he is and that he thinks the grass is greener on the other side of the fence.
I have Asperger's, but very early on I was a very sociable baby. Looking back on my life, I've found that there are plenty of people of all walks that will do all they can to make their own lives and the lives of those around them miserable. There are others who go along the lines of the opposite, but those people are less germane to this thread. Then there's Mother Theresa, who apparently was a bit more of a sadist than people let on.... Sadist, now there's a word along with the concept of sadomasochism, both those who actually derive pleasure from physical pain and the expanded meaning that is much like the concept I expresssed in the beginning of this post.
Slashdot Mirror
Gee, maybe investigations should be driven by public outcry?
Not all social goods that are not private necessities should be priced at what the market can bear
Take that! Mr. Capitalism uber alles.
Now demonstrate to me how I am wrong. I don't go in for the concept of proof, but I do accept by the preponderance of evidence.
Or they could just apply contract law.
of everything we do... says just about everyone in technology. Nothing to see here. BTW, an interview was conducted over the phone with my mom today and the voice was so even and the interviewer had trouble understanding my mom's, yes response several times on the same question. I thought it was likely an AI, but my mom felt certain it was a real person. I loaded up a few of the Watson commercials and you could hear the difference, but it's likely better since then and who's to say they didn't degrade it to keep people from noticing in real life?
People live by what ifs all the time, what if I eat this or that for lunch, what if I go with this service or goods provider or that one?
It may or may not be more safe, but when are we going to get to the point where clients can make decisions about their health using information from their doctor online. I have doctors from the same company and they struggle to share information on their network. Forget about me.
The problem has always been when the person loses the lawsuit and doesn't have money to pay. That's why we insurance mainly exists.
No! Really! There's this macOS thing and everything! Or is that just for the desktop. My magic 8-ball remains murky. It's OS X only it's not! it's the really old MacOS only we're spelling it with a lowercase m so now it's new and trendy and something, something... There really is nothing new under the sun, but how you get from there to "Serve God" the ecclesiastician doesn't really reveal.
Right so no conversions to pesky electricity then? What about the video then... Wait, starts as light, ends as light.... Perfect!
Yes, I am being intentionally dense much like the facts around this story. But mine's for humor purposes. Honest!
This exploit puts software on Android systems in such a way that the usual install path doesn't see it. It's as if were the system capable of asking, "Are you new here?" the malware would say. "No, I've been here all along." and the system would be like, "Okay, then... carry on."
Oddly enough, everytime someone complains I'm reminded of the time where the robot is on another planet with some humans (Mercury, I think) and they think that the situation warrants the robot preserving itself over the human's instructions, so they give it an instruction to get some ore that is a life or death situation, but they forget to tell it that it is a life or death situation and to top it off, it encounters some robot-damaging radiation and apparently its rerouting programming isn't too good, or maybe it's been told to go straight there so it gets close to the more intense radiation (and maybe gets a little bit damaged) backs off, the instruction kicks in again, approaches, backs off, etc. and one of the humans has to get in a suit putting the human's life in further jeopardy, to tell the robot, that no, this is really a life or death situation.
Then there's the one where two robots are built with the concept of humans that are more important than others and decide that they ARE humans and furthermore the most important ones.
No, it can hurt you... it just can't be held responsible, and that's what the earlier posts were going for. It also can't be a violation of Asimov's laws as the robot was never taught them or given a system with them baked in.
Actually mental illness plays a pretty big role in human events, and the reason people try to downplay it is... actually pretty complicated, now that I stop to think of it... I started typing "because of the stigma associated with mental illness, but go ahead and keep playing this stupid game of"... but belligerence is another problem. Mental illness includes things that aren't belligerence, but belligerent behavior is considered especially heinous. When people think in terms of belligerence mental illness gets lumped in and people are so afraid of people with a mental illness who isn't belligerent getting hurt they are quick to say that a person who is belligerent isn't mentally ill. Arguably the people who want to harm any mentally ill person once the connection between mentally ill and belligerent is established in their mind are mentally ill... told you it was complicated. Anyways, it's long past time we all had a big sit-down about going the belligerent route as quick as we do, be it soldiers overseas or police here at home, and the quickness of Muslims to go the belligerent route, and the belligerence thing isn't limited to the West and Muslims. I'll stop pointing out groups at this point, but lets shine a huge spotlight on belligerence in general.
I have a condition along the Autism spectrum. While I may or may not be typical, in my experience the people along the Autism spectrum would most likely not get riled up on this matter. If your point in posting this was to trigger a response from a person or persons on the Autism spectrum, well done.
ISIS is outside the country, clearly the job ofor the Creeps In Action... or so they got called in "Greatest American Hero".
It was my understanding that one attempt to legitimize criminalization was that it was considered almost a given that in order to support the habit people committed "real crimes", such as robbery and further along the slippery slope even prostitution was a "corime" identified. Drug addiction was among the earliest forms of "precrime".
Drug addict: You mean if I come forward as a drug addict and try to get clean, they're going to arrest me and charge me with a crime? Forget that... I'll just put up with the addiction and try to keep it as quiet as possible.
Yeah, ""talent". Just another word for "magic". Can't say for certain, but I suspect that most people have what it takes for the military's "advanced training" to get them the rest of the way, but then who trains the trainers?
I could see how the AC's post could be interpreted as now you are safe from being executed by the government, but the government could still pass laws that ruin you financially. Sure, the first amendment isn't meant to protect you from civil/tort suits, but the AC failed to mention specifically what he was going for.
This appears to be misinterpreting a sarcastic remark, and it gets modded +2 insightful? Anonymous coward posts start at 0 don't they?
Whenever someone trots out the "informed" pony, I think along the lines of, in cases like this: To be really informed is to know enough to be able to perform the operation yourself AND insure a positive outcome. I don't care how the best outcome is obtained as long as it is the best outcome available. Even the judgement of someone who aced statistical analysis might be preferable.
Begging the question. You have said nothing to indicate that it won't quickly progress to one injection and you're done. not saying that's what's going to happen or I'd be begging the question just as much as you are, just illustrating the situation by stating the opposite in the same terms. So I'm just pretending to beg the question.
Do you really want to fly on a plane programmed by someone who skipped college because it was too time consuming?
I don't really care. Can his code be proven to be algorithmically complete? Can he convince people who did sit through college that his design is the best. Is this even a person? I hear that AI's are finally hitting their stride.
The issues people really need to be looking at, and not blind adherence to the way a simpleton would think things get done.
Really, because I totally went the other way on this one where his life is miserable and he thinks that everyone like him who spends most of their time with computers is miserable like he is and that he thinks the grass is greener on the other side of the fence.
I have Asperger's, but very early on I was a very sociable baby. Looking back on my life, I've found that there are plenty of people of all walks that will do all they can to make their own lives and the lives of those around them miserable. There are others who go along the lines of the opposite, but those people are less germane to this thread. Then there's Mother Theresa, who apparently was a bit more of a sadist than people let on.... Sadist, now there's a word along with the concept of sadomasochism, both those who actually derive pleasure from physical pain and the expanded meaning that is much like the concept I expresssed in the beginning of this post.