The problems arise if the boring job isn't replaced by an interesting job. Because then you not getting the boring job means you not getting a job at all.
No. Initially, you have 100% of workers working 5*8 hours each. Now you reduce their workload to 4*8 hours each. That is, they work 100% times 8 hours less. Then they make up the lack by adding 20% more workers. If those workers worn n*8 hours each, you'll compensate for 20%*n*8 hours. Since you have to compensate for 100%*8 hours, you have to choose your n so that 20%*n = 100%.
Which shows that not only you were wrong, I was, too: Because those 20% more workers actually need to work 5*8 hours to make up the lost hours. If the additional workers are supposed to work only 4*8 hours a week, you'd need 25% more workers, exactly as the OP said.
A very easy way to see how wrong your claim was is to note that if each single worker works 8 hours less, and you make that up with people working 8 hours each, then for each worker working 8 hours less you need one person which works those 8 hours. One new worker per old worker means an increase of 100%.
The 20% of additional workers now working an eight hour week to make up the day you've cut won't be much help - they'll be unable to pay for even the basics.
Your math is a bit off here. Either it's 100% more workers, with the additional workers doing an 8 hour week, or 20% more workers, with the additional workers doing a 32 hour week just like the original workers now.
But the idea that just because "not enough work is available", we should institute some sort of basic income for all? Doesn't that basically define Communism the way the old Soviet Union handled things?
No. In Soviet style communism, any private business was suppressed. With a basic income, you'd still be able to increase your income by working. It's just that you wouldn't be forced to work in order to live.
Now that doesn't mean that it would actually work. But it means that the economic situation in the Soviet Union gives absolute no hint about whether it would work, because it was completely different.
I don't think it's very likely that you have in your current a directory named "http:" which in addition has a subdirectory named "www.google.com" which in addition contains a file with the name "search" followed by an arbitrary letter, followed by "q=apple". And even in that case, it won't be a problem if there's only a single file matching and that single character between "search" and "q=apple" happens to be a question mark for that file.
I didn't have forensics in mind, but normal everyday use. If your drive misinterprets live data as abandoned data, it means you'll face a data loss. It can be assumed that they tested it well with current NTFS, and hopefully also with other widely deployed file systems to make sure it doesn't lose data there. However they probably didn't test it on less-frequently used file systems, and they definitively didn't test it on future file systems which don't even exist yet, including but not limited to future versions of NTFS. Also they probably assume that the file system structures are intact; in the real world, file systems sometimes go corrupt; you don't want to lose even more data due to the drive doing its own thing (and yes, you should have backups, but such a data loss might remain unnoticed until your last backup with valid data was deleted).
IMHO the drive should never try to second-guess the operating system.
Is there any evidence to support this hypothesis whatsoever? Or is this purely based on random scifi-based wishful thinking? The article seems to say "if you accept that A (which really has nothing to support it at all) is true, then B can also be true." Uhh, yeah.
Worse: It's "If you accept A (which not only has nothing to support it at all, but actually has strong theoretical reasons to assume to be false) is true, then it cannot be completely excluded that B could also be true."
Actually every desktop/laptop computer does come with a completely configurable interface. Mind you, it's not easily configurable, but you can configure it any way you want by just writing the necessary code.;-) OK, if you are unlucky, your computer may break before you finished writing the code.:-)
I do want my icons to be covered when opening a window. If I'm working with a program, I don't want my space to be wasted with icons I don't actually need at that point. OTOH in situations where I do use those icons, they aren't covered anyway. Things I would like to use on a non-empty desktop don't go to the icons, but to the panel.
Simple: Say someone with whom you are sharing your connection does something bad on that connection. Now you cannot defend that it wasn't you, because if you do then you've still violated the EULA. Basically it means you are responsible for everything which happens on your connection because if someone else is responsible, you are still responsible for letting him do it against the EULA. Of course, depending on what that other person did on the connection, you admitting to have shared your connection may still be the lesser evil (say, he used the line to share child porn). But then, you better have damn good proof that it wasn't you, because the EULA means you are the first suspect.
So basically the EULA is "enforced" by the fact that you'll get in trouble whenever anyone does something bad over your connection. Therefore connection sharing comes with an associated risk, especially if you share with people you don't know. If you were officially allowed sharing the connection, then you could not be held responsible for anything others do on your connection.
It will make things harder for the botnet operators as well because, unlike now, the infection will only remain undetected until you receive your next bill from your de-mail provider. And after that, people will try to remove that bot ASAP. So as soon as you use a bot to send de-mail, that node will soon be lost for the botnet.
But then, normal mail won't go away anyway. So spam will continue to exist on normal mail, but de-mail will likely be mostly spam-free (mostly, because after all some companies happily pay for "snail spam" to be delivered to your physical mail box).
To me this is why I'll never get an account. It's mandatory by law you check your account regularly because delivery by the provider equals reception by you. Sick in a hospital? On vacation? Good news! Once you'll return you're life will be fucked because you missed a few legal messages to which you had to respond yesterday.
How is this different from legal messages arriving in your physical mailbox when you are away (in hospital/on vacation)?
Taxi: Welcome to the free automatic Google Taxi. Where do you want to go? Passenger: To the train station. Taxi: OK. By the way, there's a Starbucks on the way. They currently have a special offer, two coffees for the price of one. Maybe you want to go to there first? Passenger: No, I just want to go to the train station. Taxi: If you are interested in train stations, maybe the railway museum would interest you. It's only five minutes from here. Passenger: I'm not interested in the train station, I just want to get my train. Taxi: Maybe you are interested in Morton's model railway shop? They have great models, and I can get you there in only ten minutes. Passenger: I don't want a model train, I want to use the real train! Taxi: Did you know that just this week, the Railway Academy opened? In the first year they give discount for their locomotive driver courses. I can send you the application form to your phone. Passenger: I don't want to drive the train, I just want to take the train. And if you don't drive me there soon, I'll miss it. Taxi: Did you know that you can buy train tickets with 5% discount at train-ticket.com? Passenger: I already have the train ticket. I just want to get to the fucking train. Taxi: Oh, you are interested in fucking? There's a whorehouse not far from here...
Even if that were the case, the subject would be meaningful. All ants are small. However, you certainly can ask which is the largest ant. Indeed, it makes even sense to speak about large ants, because while being small at human scale, they are large compared to the average ant.
Of course, Linux is important even in an absolute sense. You probably even have it at home, in your home router.
Actually you are not so far off, we got a coplaint last year by a customer who was seriously complaining that a site was freaking out on his ie 5.5. I first thought this was a joke, but the guy was dead serious!
Well, he probably heard that IE6 is bad, and thus decided not to upgrade...
That doesn't help if the browser calculates the available space from the total disk space instead of quota. If you have 500MB quota on a half-full 1TB disk and the browser figures that it can 1% of the free space as cache (1% is nothing, right?) then it will eventually eat up all your quota. It won't help you if the disk is less full, of course.
Slashdot Mirror
The problems arise if the boring job isn't replaced by an interesting job. Because then you not getting the boring job means you not getting a job at all.
No. Initially, you have 100% of workers working 5*8 hours each.
Now you reduce their workload to 4*8 hours each. That is, they work 100% times 8 hours less.
Then they make up the lack by adding 20% more workers. If those workers worn n*8 hours each, you'll compensate for 20%*n*8 hours.
Since you have to compensate for 100%*8 hours, you have to choose your n so that 20%*n = 100%.
Which shows that not only you were wrong, I was, too: Because those 20% more workers actually need to work 5*8 hours to make up the lost hours. If the additional workers are supposed to work only 4*8 hours a week, you'd need 25% more workers, exactly as the OP said.
A very easy way to see how wrong your claim was is to note that if each single worker works 8 hours less, and you make that up with people working 8 hours each, then for each worker working 8 hours less you need one person which works those 8 hours. One new worker per old worker means an increase of 100%.
Your math is a bit off here. Either it's 100% more workers, with the additional workers doing an 8 hour week, or 20% more workers, with the additional workers doing a 32 hour week just like the original workers now.
No. In Soviet style communism, any private business was suppressed. With a basic income, you'd still be able to increase your income by working. It's just that you wouldn't be forced to work in order to live.
Now that doesn't mean that it would actually work. But it means that the economic situation in the Soviet Union gives absolute no hint about whether it would work, because it was completely different.
One of capitalism's many problems...
Why is it that people that rail against capitalism are steadfastly resistant to giving up all of their own capital?
Probably because giving up your capital doesn't get you out of capitalism. It only makes your position inside capitalism worse.
I'm more concerned about the trolling that will result. How long before we see this cited in claims that there are no more than 3500 KDE users? ;)
Well, that's what you get for using a TrollTech product. :-)
Use git. Then everyone can maintain his own version of the constitution. :-)
Will Apple then revoke the constitution if it doesn't fit Apple guidelines? :-)
I don't think it's very likely that you have in your current a directory named "http:" which in addition has a subdirectory named "www.google.com" which in addition contains a file with the name "search" followed by an arbitrary letter, followed by "q=apple". And even in that case, it won't be a problem if there's only a single file matching and that single character between "search" and "q=apple" happens to be a question mark for that file.
I didn't have forensics in mind, but normal everyday use. If your drive misinterprets live data as abandoned data, it means you'll face a data loss. It can be assumed that they tested it well with current NTFS, and hopefully also with other widely deployed file systems to make sure it doesn't lose data there. However they probably didn't test it on less-frequently used file systems, and they definitively didn't test it on future file systems which don't even exist yet, including but not limited to future versions of NTFS. Also they probably assume that the file system structures are intact; in the real world, file systems sometimes go corrupt; you don't want to lose even more data due to the drive doing its own thing (and yes, you should have backups, but such a data loss might remain unnoticed until your last backup with valid data was deleted).
IMHO the drive should never try to second-guess the operating system.
Is there any evidence to support this hypothesis whatsoever? Or is this purely based on random scifi-based wishful thinking? The article seems to say "if you accept that A (which really has nothing to support it at all) is true, then B can also be true." Uhh, yeah.
Worse: It's "If you accept A (which not only has nothing to support it at all, but actually has strong theoretical reasons to assume to be false) is true, then it cannot be completely excluded that B could also be true."
Actually every desktop/laptop computer does come with a completely configurable interface. Mind you, it's not easily configurable, but you can configure it any way you want by just writing the necessary code. ;-) :-)
OK, if you are unlucky, your computer may break before you finished writing the code.
I do want my icons to be covered when opening a window. If I'm working with a program, I don't want my space to be wasted with icons I don't actually need at that point. OTOH in situations where I do use those icons, they aren't covered anyway. Things I would like to use on a non-empty desktop don't go to the icons, but to the panel.
Above our heads.
However only one is close enough to harvest its energy.
I definitely own an apple product. And I'm going to eat it.
No, Apple just adopted Eco's description as catholic. They now arrived in the middle ages where only church-approved stuff may be published.
Any why should that not work with de-mail?
Simple: Say someone with whom you are sharing your connection does something bad on that connection. Now you cannot defend that it wasn't you, because if you do then you've still violated the EULA. Basically it means you are responsible for everything which happens on your connection because if someone else is responsible, you are still responsible for letting him do it against the EULA. Of course, depending on what that other person did on the connection, you admitting to have shared your connection may still be the lesser evil (say, he used the line to share child porn). But then, you better have damn good proof that it wasn't you, because the EULA means you are the first suspect.
So basically the EULA is "enforced" by the fact that you'll get in trouble whenever anyone does something bad over your connection. Therefore connection sharing comes with an associated risk, especially if you share with people you don't know. If you were officially allowed sharing the connection, then you could not be held responsible for anything others do on your connection.
It will make things harder for the botnet operators as well because, unlike now, the infection will only remain undetected until you receive your next bill from your de-mail provider. And after that, people will try to remove that bot ASAP. So as soon as you use a bot to send de-mail, that node will soon be lost for the botnet.
But then, normal mail won't go away anyway. So spam will continue to exist on normal mail, but de-mail will likely be mostly spam-free (mostly, because after all some companies happily pay for "snail spam" to be delivered to your physical mail box).
How is this different from legal messages arriving in your physical mailbox when you are away (in hospital/on vacation)?
Taxi: Welcome to the free automatic Google Taxi. Where do you want to go? ...
Passenger: To the train station.
Taxi: OK. By the way, there's a Starbucks on the way. They currently have a special offer, two coffees for the price of one. Maybe you want to go to there first?
Passenger: No, I just want to go to the train station.
Taxi: If you are interested in train stations, maybe the railway museum would interest you. It's only five minutes from here.
Passenger: I'm not interested in the train station, I just want to get my train.
Taxi: Maybe you are interested in Morton's model railway shop? They have great models, and I can get you there in only ten minutes.
Passenger: I don't want a model train, I want to use the real train!
Taxi: Did you know that just this week, the Railway Academy opened? In the first year they give discount for their locomotive driver courses. I can send you the application form to your phone.
Passenger: I don't want to drive the train, I just want to take the train. And if you don't drive me there soon, I'll miss it.
Taxi: Did you know that you can buy train tickets with 5% discount at train-ticket.com?
Passenger: I already have the train ticket. I just want to get to the fucking train.
Taxi: Oh, you are interested in fucking? There's a whorehouse not far from here
Even if that were the case, the subject would be meaningful. All ants are small. However, you certainly can ask which is the largest ant. Indeed, it makes even sense to speak about large ants, because while being small at human scale, they are large compared to the average ant.
Of course, Linux is important even in an absolute sense. You probably even have it at home, in your home router.
Is this so? If Debian ceased to exist, would Ubuntu remain?
Of course, if Ubuntu ceased to exist, Debian would remain.
Actually you are not so far off, we got a coplaint last year by a customer who was seriously complaining that a site was freaking out on his ie 5.5.
I first thought this was a joke, but the guy was dead serious!
Well, he probably heard that IE6 is bad, and thus decided not to upgrade ...
That doesn't help if the browser calculates the available space from the total disk space instead of quota. If you have 500MB quota on a half-full 1TB disk and the browser figures that it can 1% of the free space as cache (1% is nothing, right?) then it will eventually eat up all your quota. It won't help you if the disk is less full, of course.