A full time job is 40 hours a week. That leaves 128 hours a week for people "to enjoy their lives outside work." We've already passed the point of diminishing returns; many people are willing to work a few additional hours in order to gain the advantages that more money brings.
For people who don't have to tend to their children every day, larger blocks of free time are useful. A work week of four 10-hour days or three 13-1/3 hour days wastes less time in commuting and provides larger blocks of time for major activities.
First, how is this law going to be enforced? A robot can be scaled to do any portion of a human's job, or the jobs of multiple people. See that thing that looks like a washing machine with paper slots - that's our engineering department. That thing that looks like a pizza oven is our production line. Government inspectors will be unable to determine how many people a robot replaces, or even if a particular machine is even a robot. If the government decides just to count the change in the number of warm bodies, the company will shut down and form 2 new companies. The first will be just the CEO. The other will be just robots, located in a place that doesn't tax robots and with all maintenance and ancillary functions outsourced.
Second, what's a robot? Machines will be designed to skirt any legal definition of a robot.
Third, the economics changes. Robots will cut costs, and if a manufacturer doesn't cut selling prices to match then competition will pop up to undercut that manufacturer. There won't be new profits to tax.
In his glee at having found a new way to oppress people, Gates hasn't thought through the obvious flaws in his nefarious scheme.
Fermat's last theorem was a great idea, and attracted many people to number theory. Yet by itself, it has no practical application. Wyle's proof is also a great accomplishment.
The idea was great by itself, with or without execution.
... the current buffoon in the white house has already destroyed any foreign policy cred he may have had. Russia and China know that the US is now just a paper tiger, and that sort of weakness will embolden them to the point where the only response will have to be a nuclear one.
The previous administration was a paper tampon, weakening the country, attempting to make friends with those who would kill us, and alienating our best allies such as Israel and Great Britain. Trump is taking steps to re-bond to our allies, strengthen our military, and identify and oppose our enemies.
Because sled dogs aren't good for heavy loads. Because environmentalists don't want you hunting polar bears.
More seriously, a wide ranging ability to edit genes is one of the most powerful advances for humanity, ever. Although it ranks below the level of language, it is on the level of fuel-powered engines.
This sort of experimentation on humans would be widely decried. To safely make major genetic changes to a human, first requires the sort of experiments that make a wooly mammoth.
My memory is hazy on this point, but IIRC it's the niacinamide form of B3 that is a risk for liver damage (in large doses, over time.) Niacin causes skin flushing (feels like a sunburn) in large doses, which tends to discourage overuse - but flushing varies a lot by individual. The RDA is below 20 mg / day, and most adults can easily take 10 times more.
Hundreds and hundreds of words, and they can't even name the partner company. Are these people formerly employed by Blackberry still employed by the partner company? If the partner company quickly went belly up or fired them, they've got a legitimate beef. If they're still employed but looking for a lump sum payment because they were forced to change companies, then they're trying to get unearned cash.
"Structurally Deficient" has legal and engineering meaning (which may vary by state) and does not necessarily mean a bridge is unsafe. Quite often, it means that the bridge must have a sign in front of it stating a maximum gross vehicle weight.
Also, what qualifies as a bridge subject to government attention? Do you have a 20 foot concrete culvert passing under the road? That's a bridge, and the government (correctly) pays attention to it. But it isn't necessarily a big deal.
Gasoline powered electrical generators of the sort a consumer might buy for his house are neither fixed load nor particularly efficient. Even run under optimum conditions they are considerably more expensive per kWh than power from power utility, and that high price implies low efficiency.
Jerry Pournelle's A Step Farther Out ( ca. 1984 ) proposed orbital solar satellites transmitting power via microwave. It mat not be economically feasible, but it's not silly and it's not a new idea.
The primary material outputs of petroleum burning engines are water and CO2, both of which are 100% recyclable. They don't even have to be transported to a recycling center.
Norway is 15 people per square mile. The United States is 84 people per square mile. 6% of US electricity is from hydropower; if the US were 15 people per square mile that figure would be 34%, and if every brook and trickle were dammed it still couldn't be doubled. Environmentalists in the US tend to oppose new hydropower because the supply lakes tend to silt up. Other people oppose hydropower because they don't want to lose their homes.
So, if you want the US to be 100% hydropower we'll have to shut down aluminum production and almost all other industry, stop heating houses and generally speaking fall into poverty. You're damned right I'm a naysayer.
The freedom culture of the United States of America is the best in the world for human beings. Let in too many uninformed (and sometimes vicious) immigrants and that culture will be corrupted and destroyed. Don't think it can't happen here; other nations have been corrupted and destroyed from within.
Fewer than 10% of households in the US don't have a car, and the numbers in Europe are comparable. Given that many people in dense cities don't really need a car, the portion of people who can't afford to own a car is even lower. Granted, car ownership isn't the same as being able to afford to run a car, but still...
Running a car is not necessarily the greatest expense in car ownership. If you've purchased an old used car and seldom drive it, the greatest expense is combined government fees (license, registration) and government regulations (mandatory inspection, mandatory insurance).
Slashdot Mirror
What part of "liberty" do you not understand?
A full time job is 40 hours a week. That leaves 128 hours a week for people "to enjoy their lives outside work." We've already passed the point of diminishing returns; many people are willing to work a few additional hours in order to gain the advantages that more money brings.
For people who don't have to tend to their children every day, larger blocks of free time are useful. A work week of four 10-hour days or three 13-1/3 hour days wastes less time in commuting and provides larger blocks of time for major activities.
You sure have the clueless part right.
First, how is this law going to be enforced? A robot can be scaled to do any portion of a human's job, or the jobs of multiple people. See that thing that looks like a washing machine with paper slots - that's our engineering department. That thing that looks like a pizza oven is our production line. Government inspectors will be unable to determine how many people a robot replaces, or even if a particular machine is even a robot. If the government decides just to count the change in the number of warm bodies, the company will shut down and form 2 new companies. The first will be just the CEO. The other will be just robots, located in a place that doesn't tax robots and with all maintenance and ancillary functions outsourced.
Second, what's a robot? Machines will be designed to skirt any legal definition of a robot.
Third, the economics changes. Robots will cut costs, and if a manufacturer doesn't cut selling prices to match then competition will pop up to undercut that manufacturer. There won't be new profits to tax.
In his glee at having found a new way to oppress people, Gates hasn't thought through the obvious flaws in his nefarious scheme.
You don't need a doctor. You need a logician and a cunning linguist.
Dolts.
Fermat's last theorem was a great idea, and attracted many people to number theory. Yet by itself, it has no practical application. Wyle's proof is also a great accomplishment.
The idea was great by itself, with or without execution.
1945 WWII ends.
1949 USSR explodes its first atomic bomb.
1953 Stalin dies.
The previous administration was a paper tampon, weakening the country, attempting to make friends with those who would kill us, and alienating our best allies such as Israel and Great Britain. Trump is taking steps to re-bond to our allies, strengthen our military, and identify and oppose our enemies.
Because sled dogs aren't good for heavy loads. Because environmentalists don't want you hunting polar bears.
More seriously, a wide ranging ability to edit genes is one of the most powerful advances for humanity, ever. Although it ranks below the level of language, it is on the level of fuel-powered engines.
This sort of experimentation on humans would be widely decried. To safely make major genetic changes to a human, first requires the sort of experiments that make a wooly mammoth.
My memory is hazy on this point, but IIRC it's the niacinamide form of B3 that is a risk for liver damage (in large doses, over time.) Niacin causes skin flushing (feels like a sunburn) in large doses, which tends to discourage overuse - but flushing varies a lot by individual. The RDA is below 20 mg / day, and most adults can easily take 10 times more.
Hundreds and hundreds of words, and they can't even name the partner company. Are these people formerly employed by Blackberry still employed by the partner company? If the partner company quickly went belly up or fired them, they've got a legitimate beef. If they're still employed but looking for a lump sum payment because they were forced to change companies, then they're trying to get unearned cash.
"Structurally Deficient" has legal and engineering meaning (which may vary by state) and does not necessarily mean a bridge is unsafe. Quite often, it means that the bridge must have a sign in front of it stating a maximum gross vehicle weight.
Also, what qualifies as a bridge subject to government attention? Do you have a 20 foot concrete culvert passing under the road? That's a bridge, and the government (correctly) pays attention to it. But it isn't necessarily a big deal.
Gasoline powered electrical generators of the sort a consumer might buy for his house are neither fixed load nor particularly efficient. Even run under optimum conditions they are considerably more expensive per kWh than power from power utility, and that high price implies low efficiency.
Selling busses happens at county fairs and houses of prostitution. Selling buses is different.
In Leyden jars.
Jerry Pournelle's A Step Farther Out ( ca. 1984 ) proposed orbital solar satellites transmitting power via microwave. It mat not be economically feasible, but it's not silly and it's not a new idea.
Toronto: ...... city 2,731,571; .Urban 5,132,794; .Metro: 5,928,040
Los Angeles: city 3,971,883; Urban 12,150,996; Metro: 13,131,431
You must be using Common Core math.
The primary material outputs of petroleum burning engines are water and CO2, both of which are 100% recyclable. They don't even have to be transported to a recycling center.
Norway is 15 people per square mile. The United States is 84 people per square mile. 6% of US electricity is from hydropower; if the US were 15 people per square mile that figure would be 34%, and if every brook and trickle were dammed it still couldn't be doubled. Environmentalists in the US tend to oppose new hydropower because the supply lakes tend to silt up. Other people oppose hydropower because they don't want to lose their homes.
So, if you want the US to be 100% hydropower we'll have to shut down aluminum production and almost all other industry, stop heating houses and generally speaking fall into poverty. You're damned right I'm a naysayer.
Claims of significant human-caused global warming are fraudulent.
And one world government, also. Hard to find a rallying cry that's resulted in more bloodshed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AZjwLhS6jc
The freedom culture of the United States of America is the best in the world for human beings. Let in too many uninformed (and sometimes vicious) immigrants and that culture will be corrupted and destroyed. Don't think it can't happen here; other nations have been corrupted and destroyed from within.
Fewer than 10% of households in the US don't have a car, and the numbers in Europe are comparable. Given that many people in dense cities don't really need a car, the portion of people who can't afford to own a car is even lower. Granted, car ownership isn't the same as being able to afford to run a car, but still...
Running a car is not necessarily the greatest expense in car ownership. If you've purchased an old used car and seldom drive it, the greatest expense is combined government fees (license, registration) and government regulations (mandatory inspection, mandatory insurance).
It's no longer 1946. Modern fear of nuclear fission is due to media sensationalism.
You first.
How sad. I've just read what it's like to be dead.