We need to change our economy and our basic value systems to adapt to a world were not everyone needs to work. However, I expect what will happen first is the workers will be pitted against the unemployed while the rich run off with all the money.
It used to be employment would go up when productivity went up around the year 2000 that trend was broken. Now the economy recovers but doesn't create jobs. So it is different now. People are employed as web developers as an alternative to hiring more people to do other jobs.
Increases in productivity have reached the point were the cycle has been broken and there are no new jobs to replace the old ones.
When Moore's law ends, there will be mostly multi-processor computers. The code will all be concurrent. You won't really want to go down ASM and code multi-threaded programs. You will use languages like Scala that have good abstractions like Actors.
The ID thieves ruin your credit, so instead of applying for one credit card you apply to five since you keep getting rejected. Finally you wonder what's going on and you pay Experian for your credit report.
But the people who make profits don't want us to have free energy, they want to make profits. They certainly don't want to selflessly work toward that goal of free energy.
But the suit I outlined would be legitimate and would win. Your first link is an opinion piece by a well intentioned lady who wishes corporations didn't have to maximize shareholder value, not a piece of law that states that they don't.
Your second link confirms what I have said. A corporation has to act in good faith to... maximize shareholder wealth.
If they don't focus on making money, their shareholders can sue them. Companies are there to make money, they can't be twisted into innovation factories. If they could we'd probably have free energy and plentiful drinking water by now.
Capitalism is complex and artificial system developed by man in the last thousand years. Money is artificial and doesn't exist without a government. The corporations that own most of the property are artificial and don't exist without the government. The whole system is artificial.
Maybe they should use their own methods. Maybe they should do studies on how to get teachers to learn what does and doesn't work. It seems like an awfully ironic problem for them to have.
You seem to think that because there is an upside, we don't need to be aware of all the consequences of greater automation. This is a broad article that engages in a nuanced discussion of the effects of automation. It seems clear that one of the effects is the elimination of certain types of jobs and that this will be painful for many. Few say we should eliminate technology for the sake of jobs, but anyone with any sense realizes there are effects that must be reckoned with.
We need an livable environment provided for us with almost exact specifications. We don't have the nearly technology to adjust the CO2 in our atmosphere or to maintain our environment when key species go extinct, let alone to create an entirely synthetic environment to live in.
Yeah. And the one guy behind a lot of it, Charles Graner, probably is a sociopath. But the book kind of doesn't really go that way. It's theme is really that anyone could be do the wrong things. It really blames circumstances more than genetics for what a person does.
If you find ways to quell the demand for STEM workers, then fewer people will study it in college. The number of CS grads has always closely tracked the demand for them.
Robert Hare http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_D._Hare is an expert in psychopaths. He said that was asked to work on therapies for psychopaths to get them to rehabilitate. He said he wanted to develop a program that appeals to their self-interest to not engage in criminal or bad behavior. If they do have an "empathy switch" that would be a good thing. You would have to convince the psychopath that it is in their best interest to leave it on.
It isn't nearly as popular (and I don't know why), but Netbeans kicks Eclipses ass. True, they are both memory hogs. But Netbeans doesn't drag and freeze as much. Its commands and interface are a lot more intuitive. Netbeans is also a much better IDE for the web. It handles JavaScript way better than Eclipse and even allows you to debug your JavaScript through a Chrome extension.
Are people's illnesses also going to be delayed until January 1, 2015 if their employer has fewer than 50 employees? The mandate that people have to buy insurance is the bad part of the law. Having employers provide insurance was the upside.
The Democrats are shooting themselves in the foot with this illegal delay in implementation of this part of the law.
Slashdot Mirror
People can be killed by cheaply made robots, so the US can "win the robotics race."
Why don't we instead have companies here develop the technology for the safest robots so they eventually become the ones most used around the world.
We need to change our economy and our basic value systems to adapt to a world were not everyone needs to work. However, I expect what will happen first is the workers will be pitted against the unemployed while the rich run off with all the money.
It used to be employment would go up when productivity went up around the year 2000 that trend was broken. Now the economy recovers but doesn't create jobs. So it is different now. People are employed as web developers as an alternative to hiring more people to do other jobs.
Increases in productivity have reached the point were the cycle has been broken and there are no new jobs to replace the old ones.
If an article title contains the word "could" then you should append on the end "but it isn't", and this will render a true statement.
When Moore's law ends, there will be mostly multi-processor computers. The code will all be concurrent. You won't really want to go down ASM and code multi-threaded programs. You will use languages like Scala that have good abstractions like Actors.
You have the wrong cell phone company. Just go to one without caps.
What happens when Magnus plays the strongest computers? Can he win? What computers can he beat?
The ID thieves ruin your credit, so instead of applying for one credit card you apply to five since you keep getting rejected. Finally you wonder what's going on and you pay Experian for your credit report.
But the people who make profits don't want us to have free energy, they want to make profits. They certainly don't want to selflessly work toward that goal of free energy.
A not-for-profit corporation is an obvious exception. Google is for-profit. Google can only give away money if that ultimately helps profits.
But the suit I outlined would be legitimate and would win. Your first link is an opinion piece by a well intentioned lady who wishes corporations didn't have to maximize shareholder value, not a piece of law that states that they don't.
Your second link confirms what I have said. A corporation has to act in good faith to... maximize shareholder wealth.
If they don't focus on making money, their shareholders can sue them. Companies are there to make money, they can't be twisted into innovation factories. If they could we'd probably have free energy and plentiful drinking water by now.
Mod parent up!
Our system needs government-backed currency. It couldn't work without it.
Capitalism is complex and artificial system developed by man in the last thousand years. Money is artificial and doesn't exist without a government. The corporations that own most of the property are artificial and don't exist without the government. The whole system is artificial.
Maybe they should use their own methods. Maybe they should do studies on how to get teachers to learn what does and doesn't work. It seems like an awfully ironic problem for them to have.
You seem to think that because there is an upside, we don't need to be aware of all the consequences of greater automation. This is a broad article that engages in a nuanced discussion of the effects of automation. It seems clear that one of the effects is the elimination of certain types of jobs and that this will be painful for many. Few say we should eliminate technology for the sake of jobs, but anyone with any sense realizes there are effects that must be reckoned with.
But what about fat people who exercise and don't eat fast food. There's plenty of them.
WHOOOOOOSH!!!!!
Most notably, confirming that BSD is dead. I think you might be onto something with "just another bad internet meme."
We need an livable environment provided for us with almost exact specifications. We don't have the nearly technology to adjust the CO2 in our atmosphere or to maintain our environment when key species go extinct, let alone to create an entirely synthetic environment to live in.
Yeah. And the one guy behind a lot of it, Charles Graner, probably is a sociopath. But the book kind of doesn't really go that way. It's theme is really that anyone could be do the wrong things. It really blames circumstances more than genetics for what a person does.
If you find ways to quell the demand for STEM workers, then fewer people will study it in college. The number of CS grads has always closely tracked the demand for them.
Robert Hare http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_D._Hare is an expert in psychopaths. He said that was asked to work on therapies for psychopaths to get them to rehabilitate. He said he wanted to develop a program that appeals to their self-interest to not engage in criminal or bad behavior. If they do have an "empathy switch" that would be a good thing. You would have to convince the psychopath that it is in their best interest to leave it on.
It isn't nearly as popular (and I don't know why), but Netbeans kicks Eclipses ass. True, they are both memory hogs. But Netbeans doesn't drag and freeze as much. Its commands and interface are a lot more intuitive. Netbeans is also a much better IDE for the web. It handles JavaScript way better than Eclipse and even allows you to debug your JavaScript through a Chrome extension.
Are people's illnesses also going to be delayed until January 1, 2015 if their employer has fewer than 50 employees? The mandate that people have to buy insurance is the bad part of the law. Having employers provide insurance was the upside.
The Democrats are shooting themselves in the foot with this illegal delay in implementation of this part of the law.