3. explain to taxpayers that solar energy is only available during the day and sunny days are more productive than cloudy ones. I realize most children innately understand this already, but politically brainwashed adults have lost their reasoning skills.
Oh believe me, I understand it perfectly well. I've considered his statement and rejected it because I don't want to live in a mud hut commune like he does. Profit gives motivation to expend effort beyond subsistence levels. It also allows specialization so that we don't ALL have to spend 90% of our time grubbing for food. The internet, in fact, most of the technology stack going back to the days of early electricity, medical knowledge, transportation, and farming techniques were all motivated by people who wanted to profit so that they could live well. This applies from the VCs/banks/governments who fund its development to the technicians who install and maintain it.
or maybe western countries should get over their infantile fear of speech. Ever since the fall of the USSR, it's been a race among western powers to recreate its worst aspects.
um what? In programming, we favor strongly typed languages for a reason: so that expressed data remains consistent as it is communicated to different objects. This applies to spoken/written languages for the same reason: so that expressed meaning remains consistent as it is communicated to different people. Does this always work out? No, mainly because human communication is a lot more organic, but it's still a lot better than allowing arbitrary word redefinitions in the dictionary to soothe those with specific political sensitivities (which is the obvious intent given in the summary).
In programming, the compiler handles syntax errors for us, and forces us to conform to it so that it has a chance of interpreting our logic correctly. If we don't, we can't run our programs. With spoken language, mishandling syntax can do anything from creating humorous double entendres to starting wars. Some grammar (and spelling!) 'nazism' during the formative years ensures that kids have some chance at communicating clearly as adults.
If it's immoral to use race as a discriminator, then it's immoral regardless of the targeted race. If the racetype is used to determine the morality of the discrimination under the guise of fighting such discrimination, then the philosophy is illogical and self defeating.
You need a society where there is systematic abuse of white men before they could possibly be the victim of hate speech.
No. The individual situation matters, not some generalized assumption. You just need one person or institution in a position of power to discriminate for/against someone based on race for it to be an example of racism. The best thing for society is to provide a way for grievances to be heard in as unbiased a way as possible, equally, for ALL citizens. Your position (which is the popular GoodThink atm) demonizes specific groups (white/straight/male) by uniting everyone else against them (I'll let you draw the obvious historical parallels). By assuming it's just not possible for them to be discriminated against, you place them on second tier status, dehumanizing them.
A very conservative collection of programs (one could only hope) that will operate on a mesh network of millions of devices.. a fat target for terrorists and bored teenagers. Considering that half these companies pushing autonomous cars still can't secure their existing infrastructure (eg google, apple) made from much simpler devices..
In this Radiant Future where every car is 'autonomous', all it will take is one bored (or radicalized) 16 yo with a bunch of sploits on a laptop to turn 10000 of these cars into deathtraps.
So what happens when someone takes part in a resistance movement against an oppressive political or social establishment ends up breaking the law in the process? Terrorist or freedom fighter?
They should be. In the highly unlikely scenario where someone truly intends to do me harm, I'd rather know about it than have it sprung as a surprise later. In the highly likely scenario of idle threats and foolish blustering, there's no point in worrying about it.
The ideological lensing in your comment is off the scale. Plate scanners do not filter by race. Unequal outcome is not proof of unethical discrimination.
Hurt feelings are an actionable offense, comrade. Blasphem..err I mean 'hate speech' shall not be tolerated, and don't forget to pray away your original si...err I mean check your privilege!
Slashdot Mirror
& desktop.
This is laughable at best. node desktop applications may in fact be worse than java desktop applications.
nodejs is the new standard for speed?
No wonder today's software reflects the obesity epidemic.
Unless you're the kind of idiot who runs his browser in super-secure-no-cache-no-cookies-no-tracking-etc
You mean the mode made essentially mandatory with all the abuse from malware and advertisers?
3. explain to taxpayers that solar energy is only available during the day and sunny days are more productive than cloudy ones. I realize most children innately understand this already, but politically brainwashed adults have lost their reasoning skills.
It's not waste if it's a closed system.
All productivity comes from labor, and labor very rarely shares in profits.
So most people work for free then?
It's stock price goes up.
Yeah.. not for long, certainly once stockholders find out the company doesn't have anyone producing anything.
No they aren't. Profits motivate productivity. What happens to a company's profits if it quits paying its workers?
Oh believe me, I understand it perfectly well. I've considered his statement and rejected it because I don't want to live in a mud hut commune like he does. Profit gives motivation to expend effort beyond subsistence levels. It also allows specialization so that we don't ALL have to spend 90% of our time grubbing for food. The internet, in fact, most of the technology stack going back to the days of early electricity, medical knowledge, transportation, and farming techniques were all motivated by people who wanted to profit so that they could live well. This applies from the VCs/banks/governments who fund its development to the technicians who install and maintain it.
The skepticism you refer to exists mainly because feminists have created a credibility problem for women in these matters.
It sorta reads like a battleplan for implementing 1984?
or maybe western countries should get over their infantile fear of speech. Ever since the fall of the USSR, it's been a race among western powers to recreate its worst aspects.
um what? In programming, we favor strongly typed languages for a reason: so that expressed data remains consistent as it is communicated to different objects. This applies to spoken/written languages for the same reason: so that expressed meaning remains consistent as it is communicated to different people. Does this always work out? No, mainly because human communication is a lot more organic, but it's still a lot better than allowing arbitrary word redefinitions in the dictionary to soothe those with specific political sensitivities (which is the obvious intent given in the summary).
In programming, the compiler handles syntax errors for us, and forces us to conform to it so that it has a chance of interpreting our logic correctly. If we don't, we can't run our programs. With spoken language, mishandling syntax can do anything from creating humorous double entendres to starting wars. Some grammar (and spelling!) 'nazism' during the formative years ensures that kids have some chance at communicating clearly as adults.
I'm not sure regulation would solve anything. It would just move the influence from the boardroom to darker/danker parts of government.
kbye. I hope the company dies. It's entire reason to be is to 'compromise' its users.
If it's immoral to use race as a discriminator, then it's immoral regardless of the targeted race. If the racetype is used to determine the morality of the discrimination under the guise of fighting such discrimination, then the philosophy is illogical and self defeating.
You need a society where there is systematic abuse of white men before they could possibly be the victim of hate speech.
No. The individual situation matters, not some generalized assumption. You just need one person or institution in a position of power to discriminate for/against someone based on race for it to be an example of racism. The best thing for society is to provide a way for grievances to be heard in as unbiased a way as possible, equally, for ALL citizens. Your position (which is the popular GoodThink atm) demonizes specific groups (white/straight/male) by uniting everyone else against them (I'll let you draw the obvious historical parallels). By assuming it's just not possible for them to be discriminated against, you place them on second tier status, dehumanizing them.
..and how do you know that for sure?
A very conservative collection of programs (one could only hope) that will operate on a mesh network of millions of devices.. a fat target for terrorists and bored teenagers. Considering that half these companies pushing autonomous cars still can't secure their existing infrastructure (eg google, apple) made from much simpler devices..
In this Radiant Future where every car is 'autonomous', all it will take is one bored (or radicalized) 16 yo with a bunch of sploits on a laptop to turn 10000 of these cars into deathtraps.
So what happens when someone takes part in a resistance movement against an oppressive political or social establishment ends up breaking the law in the process? Terrorist or freedom fighter?
Speech did not lead to WW2.
Moving forward towards what exactly?
Threats aren't protected speech.
They should be. In the highly unlikely scenario where someone truly intends to do me harm, I'd rather know about it than have it sprung as a surprise later. In the highly likely scenario of idle threats and foolish blustering, there's no point in worrying about it.
The ideological lensing in your comment is off the scale. Plate scanners do not filter by race. Unequal outcome is not proof of unethical discrimination.
There's a difference between understanding language and associating sounds with activities.
Hurt feelings are an actionable offense, comrade. Blasphem..err I mean 'hate speech' shall not be tolerated, and don't forget to pray away your original si...err I mean check your privilege!