Mob psychology and all the flaws of humans in numbers... it was amplified by the internet already but now with walled garden monopolies centralizing the internet it's turbocharged to nearly as far as is humanly possible.
The only solution is to go back to decentralized smaller more chaotic market of smaller mobs concentrating human flaws. Yes that means that the useful benefits will be weaker as well so the few useful movements will have to settle on a few services.
You NEVER have to provide solutions or alternatives when presenting negative facts or saying something is bad and should be replaced or banned.
The errors come in when you are pressed into another topic you don't have facts, research, or must time invested in just because people have a psychological problem dealing with LOSS of anything... like a infant needs a new shiny to distract from the one you took away.
It's not that people are wrong it's that they are human and 100% their point may be correct, it's the addendum where they can be 0% correct. Do not discount an expert for being wrong at guessing the lottery numbers, or being fool enough to buy a ticket.
I would purposely have hacked email servers, especially for the state dept. I'd use obscure things for serious work but a lot of the stuff you know the big government spy agencies know already would be just fine on there. Just so long as they do not know you know they are listening. Nobody ever seems to even remotely suggest that it may have been intentional (it's just normal email after all, WTF? who'd trust normal email??!) and naturally a fuss has to be made about your ignorance while dirty politicians will milk the situation knowing you can not admit your true motives/policies.
Who really thinks that nobody has briefed officials about how bad email is? for decades now?
On some level they know better. nobody in their right mind is moving nuclear launch codes around with secured email servers.
I remember when the state dept's email server was hacked as well... like that is so safe.... Oh and remember other officials used private email servers too and likely still do. That dull movie "dick" did remind people that the bush people were using private email servers on purpose only touching on it; but it was far worse back then and they also knew better. It also was quite useful in hiding actual crimes back then as well.
Some people's purpose in life is to serve as an example to others.
The suffering sick person in the family may be the best argument to get the rest vaccinated. Happens all the time; somebody gets cancer, friends and family or fans of the celebrity go get themselves screened. Maybe you could offset their medical bills slightly for doing such things... but I don't see any reason why preventable illnesses shouldn't COST you more because you made yourself more of a burden... The argument is used to get smokers in all kinds of ways (most often illegitimate but popular because it's viewed by the majority as a lower class minority group/tribe.)
you're making the claim. you prove it. I'm saying they don't endanger anymore than tons of other random sources-- in otherwords I'm saying you prove it's actually worse.
We all know that the rare case of somebody purposely trying to infect others is negligible. Careless people you could make a reasonable guess about but there are immune people spreading things carelessly as well as animals etc.
The burden is on you to make a strong case that it is so much worse than nothing that we must pass a law to save people from plastic bag suffocation (is it any worse than that? and if in the ball park why not outlaw those? is it even fair to compare banning a product vs forced injections?) Your claiming your position is so great and works so well, so you've got to prove it.
The data is on immunization not on exposure. This is an academic argument; but you're prescribing by law to everybody and a mob reaction isn't good enough. people are more endangered by other things; this can't grow into epidemic levels because the vaccination rates are too high for that to be possible so to react like this is probably more overblown than the fake immigration crisis being cooked up at the border (and real investigation shows far bigger problems.)
It's easy for you to attack the OTHER tribe who is anti old established science and punish them and force them to your tribal beliefs. I'm with the vaccination works position but I'm not a good standing member of any tribe.
If you want more vaccinations you need more education and let the really stupid people get sick and die. Yes, some stupid people harm others on their way out of the gene pool. unavoidable. If people are so stupid or ignorant to NOT take reasonable measures you have a GREATER PROBLEM that will cause more harm than a tiny number of sick or dead people. For an obvious example, the anti-science tribe helping make global warming worse and before that delaying the common understanding smoking is bad for you by decades-- adding millions more dead people around the world... Do you think force is going to make these people change? It undermines your moral and compelling high ground if you fail and must prescribe it by force. (obviously, even saying the world is round is going to fail for some tiny tiny group of morons who think it is flat; they are a rounding error, ignore them.)
So you don't wash your hands etc or avoid visiting an infant when sick???
It's my right to do what you think is selfish. Voting Republican does more harm to others and that is still a right; some might say the other brand name/tribe is worse...
Children die. that sucks and that is natural. for all of human existence and it's also what evolved humanity. bad luck happens. Children are humans too, with equal rights and equal luck.
Think of the children is often a poor excuse always abused and so many are completely hypocrites about it too.
not sorry for trolling you. You also just assume that vaccinated people can't spread illness, pets, etc. They can. Also, vaccinations do not cover all versions of a virus but they do make people more careless. I've had chicken pox 2 times and the docs thought it was a error in paperwork (not believing me either) until a decade later when they learned there were 3 versions of it. The 2nd time I was careless because I thought I was immune.
If you care about children, take more precautions and maybe back up words with action on other topics instead of righteously patting yourself on the back just to feel good. Not likely actually doing something; righteousness is just emotional masturbation. like a lot of social media too.
Alternative: you pay more $ if you catch what you weren't vaccinated for. simple. no police state required.
So because they statistically raise healthcare costs, you want to force things into their bodies? Criminalize sugar? Make Smoking illegal? Alcohol surely kills more than vaccinated people...
YES, a lot of people stay home when SICK or take precautions spreading it to other people. Maybe they end up in the hospital, maybe not. I had measles as a kid before I could get the shot (which I still got later.) I was lucky; costs to the system was negligible too. You do realize germs spread anyway right? immune people still spread germs. You could be immune and be fighting the thing off for weeks without knowing it.
DO you stay home or wear a mask or wash your hands when you get the flu? the flu is a top killer of old people and those shots suck (they only predict a few each year to protect against) so you do more by preventative measures than the shot does. Do you do any of that? How would you like a ticket for failing to wear a mask or wash your hands?
Not getting vaccinated is your own fault and giving to other people who do not get vaccinated is their fault (shared blame if they are careless or intentional)
contradictions are not always the case if you dig deeper. I wasn't being specific enough but also was trying to be more provocative to get people going. so troll isn't an unfair mod.
You can't get great data on exposure rates because you measure sick people who are not immune who obviously greatly reduce in numbers because vaccinations are extremely effective. Theory says there is less exposure. Try proving that. The data is on how effective the vaccination is; not exposure.
You are not responsible for spreading it unless you purposely or carelessly spread germs. Immune or not. The people who do not get vaccinated are to blame only for themselves. Being 1 of many natural exposure vectors doesn't prove anything unless do some action with 100% effective transfer rate. Yes, intent matters... and washing your hands is a big deal... I bet you proper hygiene does far more good than mandatory vaccinations. (good luck legislating that; even if you can enforce it people would revolt.)
Technically yes, and I wouldn't force you to prove some rounding error just to make the point that it does some good. The tiny % that suffer from shots etc. they are the price the government accepts when they set the threshold of legally approving of new medicine... who sets the threshold and what should it be? pro/con of tiny % are what this is all about. Should we make expanding gov power decisions over such tiny numbers of people (especially when tons more people die of things we don't touch politically... some which we need to.)
The PROBLEM here is that local politicians are deciding both those things and FORCING something in your body without your consent. Forced circumcision? similar political situation, less severe results but already has been a big issue for a long time. It's an example of where these things have actually gone.
FYI, I get vaccinated; no sympathy for those who do not. The rest are unlucky. that is life; not fair. Doesn't mean they get sick and die either--- humans survived without tech just fine... actually, those who didn't survive to reproduction is why we are here today overpopulating the planet. (yes, i did just troll there...)
You do not endanger people who ARE vaccinated. You put yourself at risk.
Other people who ALSO put themselves at risk are just as likely to catch germs from anybody including people who are vaccinated. You are no more to blame for their infection than they are THEMSELVES for not being vaccinated. It's their own dam fault if they get sick (generally speaking.) Not yours... unless you get sick and purposely go around coughing on everybody.
No, you are not endangering others by spreading something that gets around ANYWAY, immune people spread it around while their body is killing it; besides all the other vectors. It's a reduction of numbers game which is tough to verify given how you only get stats from sick people who were not immune; exposure rates I bet are unsubstantiated... you won't have much data on exposure. Not washing your hands and simple measures do far more good (there are viruses we don't have shots for.)
Actually, governments do round off tiny % exceptions on things and so do I. People die of unfortunate stuff; that is life. You can't save everybody no matter how extreme dystopia you create. That is reality.
NOTE: Some people can't get a vaccination. they are unlucky... like everybody was before whatever new discovery. Also, some people are harmed by some vaccinations for various reasons and governments knowingly approve with acceptable complication rates. Also unlucky people. Obviously you have to balance the actual pro/cons but you are allowing politicians make this decision for everybody with a poor track record and again, this is always going to be a tiny % who are screwed either way. But one is natural causes and the other has potential for abuse which could amount to more harmed people in the end. What you PUT IN YOUR BODY should be your gamble.
So all boys who are uncircumcised should be criminals too? You can find some bad looking stats on health issues for that... sway a local politician...
I know somebody who had a really bad reaction to a common immunization shot; far worse than if he simply caught the illness. unlucky. fortunately for him he asked specifically NOT to get it and his lawyer got him a nice retirement for the malpractice. HIS gamble and now he suffers (he'd trade the $ without hesitation.) Yes, like I said a tiny % is unlucky. The difference between either position is going to be a tiny % too... what and who decides the thresholds?
If you would like more then read the many BOOKS which I'm told are actually not horribly simplistic and pretty good plus they all must tie together... and Lucas didn't write them, just set the bar higher than he could ever reach for those writers.
You know they will mess it up and Lucas already messed it up and to wrongs together will not make a right. Get over it and enjoy the past movies; even a decent job wouldn't replace your memory and age when you saw them. Enjoy the past memory and don't expect all these reboots, soft reboots and sequels to compare to the 1st, it's better to see the old thing again unless you like being disappointed or upset... or are so simple that mere branding is enough to excite you.
One could imagine a ton of situations before and after a good open ended story; that is, if you have an imagination.
YOU DO NOT ENDANGER OTHERS IF YOU ARE NOT VACCINATED. You endanger yourself; it's to train your immune system. Yes, you could carry and spread it to other people WHO ARE NOT VACCINATED.
So people who refuse get sick and die because of their own decisions. That is the way it should be. Furthermore, remove the idiot warning labels on plastic bags etc.
Get away with this and you open up the door for future corrupt politicians to force things into your body against your will. Colon cancer is a real problem in the USA, why don't they force cameras up our colons while they are at it? (yes obviously you volunteer for that under the right conditions because who wants to die of that? but it's your choice and not a 1 size fits all policy which easily can be done 10x as much just to give more money to a lobby group.)
Not too interested in death counts so I didn't look for that statistic. Many possible outcomes are worse than death.
FYI: I do not drink. Measures taken to combat the drunks haven't worked out and an expensive car add on to go wrong isn't going to fix that. Motivated people will get around it as easily as driving while revoked. Chinese hack devices from ebay will be out within a year... court-ordered add-on devices are really expensive and monitored but to mass produce a cheap alternative that is not monitored is not going to work.
It does not need to phone home. Do you realize you have a black box in your car already which can be used against you after a crash? Do you realize your cell info tracks you already which can be used against you... it is already SOLD by your cell company, and some keep your whole history years back. Do you realize the DEA has been gathering plate scans from police nationwide and building tracking data for any car they pick up on a participating scanner?
This is just an idea similar to the chip credit cards and RFIDs already in wide use set with a standard so any car could use them. Public key encryption would allow government to sign the ID and anybody to decode it to verify it's a real ID. The car could verify this; and a unique ID would be the key; which the driver Ids all have already printed upon them. This isn't tracking people; even so, it wouldn't be any more than your credit cards do... certainly less than the other methods already widespread.
Given how at least 40,000 die in the USA yearly and how we flip out over tragedies that amount to a rounding error... you'd think something would be done if any rationality was involved
1) Drunk Driving is not the #1 cause. It's DISTRACTED driving. so now lets try to solve #4 rather than address the big elephant in the room?
Require bluetooth linking that disables nearly all the phone's features. A century of cars without smart phones prove it's not necessary to use both. The brats can learn to sit in the car without it too (unfortunately the brats grew up into the largest voting block... and don't really care if a city worth of people die each year.) More punishment will not improve things so post-accident cell data won't help anymore than DWI testing has.
2) Why can't the license BE the car key?? We already have phones paired as keys. Chip the licenses. Most the car key systems seem to get hacked anyway; may as well have 1 solid standard... you can't drive without a key and you are not supposed to drive without your ID on you! Cut down on pocket clutter. Your ID is the key; maybe even put your ID as a digital ID on your phone too. How often do you hear on the news the drunk was already suspended?
3) Invest all that $$$ into helping self driving take off... better mass transit as well... car growth is out pacing road expansion. The 10 years a highway expansion plan takes to complete is undone by the 10 year growth during that period!
4) mitigation. ROUNDABOUTS! save $, reduce fatalities, and can somewhat catch drunks.. deep grooves in the road edges that tend to rip off your wheels. more side ditches and tough plants (less grass.) How about proper city design going forward? no, politics are broken in the USA. unsustainable urban sprawl continues with zero thought allowed.
More likely pot smokers are fooling with their phones or car electronics more carelessly and that is causing the accidents. Pot certainly is not making them into aggressive drivers; less stressed and worried by risks.
It will get better; yes it's never going to be that intelligent... it only masters it's domain that we can make it learn and not much bigger... well, as you expand the domain the problem space becomes crazy huge and past patterns do not work the same way; adapting the past to a bigger space in a way a human does is something that doesn't work yet.
Some stuff humans are good at. Just not as much as we thought:
If you think beyond it replacing a human but instead think of performing a specific JOB then they can compete. For odd situations, there is nothing saying that you can't employ hybrids. Like having kids play video games that help with folding proteins. A bunch of twits on their phones with idiotic freemium games could be solving the difficult situations for the AI - when you have non-expert assistance augmenting the AI with some abstraction you'll see some really clever solutions a lot sooner.
The decisions and main work could be AI with humans (or animals) acting as subsystems.
Seriously, AI is all hype; but what it proves is that tasks we thought involved a lot of human skill actually are overrated because AI beats us; plenty of things are difficult for it. Slow humans...out smarting them is possible.
1) Inflation. don't forget and remember that they no longer have to report exactly what it is.
2) Lower income for everybody but the top. Wages have gone down for half a century now; people didn't notice as women's freedom was hyped at the same time the quality of life with 1 adult working was becoming unsustainable.
3) Cheap commodity items like food, junk food, clothing, technology made TV cheaper etc. This gives the illusion of increased prosperity relative to more wealthy past generations who could only afford 1 TV etc. REAL costs that can't be artificially changed will appear to rise. Just look at the % of income spent on food now vs past.
4) Union protections of wages at most universities have kept salaries rising with inflation (I think it is less than inflation) but I would guess rising higher than everybody else who has been losing income which makes the cost of school rise relative to people's incomes. BENEFITS like healthcare remain while the anarchy we call a healthcare system continues to infect costs of everything made locally.
5) Administration costs seem to rise as it gets more top heavy despite increased clerical automation.
6) SPORTS and other money pits which are essentially marketing that claim to pay for themselves (even so, it's entertainment and teaching teamwork is pure BS.) Sadly, my state college funding in general rises when the state football team does well. So the problems are wider and deeper.
7) Government subsidies have dropped resulting in higher prices in the public sector. My state 40 years ago payed 80%. now it's in the 30s.
8) LOANS. the financial sector and it's corrupting influence of government have setup a huge mess on top of everything else.
9) Growth. More people have to get degrees and trade skill training as automation and outsourcing expands; this has been going on for decades already. Expansion costs and adds overhead; look at your local colleges etc. How many new building projects have you seen? I bet you've noticed. Those buildings last a century but must be built in advance.
10) Only a guess: Private schools have to compete more due to online courses, increased advertising... about 1/3 is MARKETING to get you to sign up, scholarships (aka coupon "discounts") , referral deals (kids,) and to make you feel great about your purchase. Private schools waste a ton of money they have no accountability for this; higher prices make it more elite and can be spent appearing more elite.
Aside: Corporations do not train anybody; rates are extremely low. They want everybody else to pay for training and this is in a time with INCREASED specialization. In the tech field the specialization is at insanity levels that it's not only a joke but not uncommon to have impossible job requirements. They want schools to teach their specific niche fads years before the buzzwords have been coined. As good MBAs, they shift all responsibility elsewhere.
Slavery is a stark example of the BIAS in the system design at the time and why you can't just accept it as a flawless document without a need for revision. Every amendment after the 1st immediate batch is bug fix. Not the same as being bug free and beyond criticism.
NOT all the founders wanted perpetual equal opportunity; especially to the lesser humans. Wealth capping schemes came about later when it became more apparent that a ruling dynasties were becoming a real threat. You can't have separation of powers if you ignore some types of power. The 4th branch failed to be clearly defined but until Lincoln, it was heavily funded (aka press.)
The inbred yokels have unequal political power; just not as much as the Royalty of the past (who had inbreeding problems; but they get respect and the yokels do not... neither deserve birth right benefits outside of the extra healthcare their genetics create.)
The 3 official branches of government are elected to power by different means; they need not be the same; probably shouldn't be given how any system will have specific flaws.
State governments should have more federal input; however, populations change while state borders are static which creates a serious problem of unequal representation. As Puerto Rico points out in the extreme (not being even being a state but out numbering nearly half the states.)
It is only going to get worse as the progression to cities continues with empty states commanding more disproportionate power. In the EU you have real history and culture drawing borders; the USA isn't remotely similar but it will over time (but likely retain a common language.) Redrawing state lines would make sense but be difficult to sell people... when humanity loves to war over their borders.
Ultimately, no perfect system could function perfectly when operated by humans. You 1st have to curtail ALL unequal sources of power. That means wealth caps, corporate limitations unseen since the civil war (and surpassed,) diversified press, and with the internet probably no means to limit online mobs led by influencers. You can't make citizens responsible let alone mindful...
Human driven cars NEED more limitations; too many stupid people (who should only be allowed to remove themselves from the gene pool.)
Self-driving cars #1 problem is the humans. By 2050 they'll probably be discussing more limitations if not passing future bans on human drivers. Limit humans to half the speed and double the robots speed because they can handle it...
If you obsess over perfecting the rounding error at the end to get 100% you'll be fine; it's that last bit that always ends up creating problems.
Geography does not matter more than people do. They already play around swing states to game the system; at least population targets PEOPLE!
You can not have equal voting rights if you weight voting power by additional factors: Slaves are 3/5 of a human vote (in the constitution) which is an indirect method of geographic and wealth weighting.
If it were not for the lack influence back in Europe's long established dynasties monopolizing power based upon perpetual land ownership...the USA would have been different, or not have existed.
Some inbred rural yolkel gets more power than 100s... at least they are not Royalty anymore...
Oh, and the senate algorithm is deeply flawed too! At least it's not as heavily rooted in racism. It needs a major rewrite; nobody's kernel would be so pathetic.
Puerto Rico gets no representation and they have more Americans than 21 states!
Slashdot Mirror
Mob psychology and all the flaws of humans in numbers... it was amplified by the internet already but now with walled garden monopolies centralizing the internet it's turbocharged to nearly as far as is humanly possible.
The only solution is to go back to decentralized smaller more chaotic market of smaller mobs concentrating human flaws. Yes that means that the useful benefits will be weaker as well so the few useful movements will have to settle on a few services.
You NEVER have to provide solutions or alternatives when presenting negative facts or saying something is bad and should be replaced or banned.
The errors come in when you are pressed into another topic you don't have facts, research, or must time invested in just because people have a psychological problem dealing with LOSS of anything... like a infant needs a new shiny to distract from the one you took away.
It's not that people are wrong it's that they are human and 100% their point may be correct, it's the addendum where they can be 0% correct. Do not discount an expert for being wrong at guessing the lottery numbers, or being fool enough to buy a ticket.
I would purposely have hacked email servers, especially for the state dept. I'd use obscure things for serious work but a lot of the stuff you know the big government spy agencies know already would be just fine on there. Just so long as they do not know you know they are listening. Nobody ever seems to even remotely suggest that it may have been intentional (it's just normal email after all, WTF? who'd trust normal email??!) and naturally a fuss has to be made about your ignorance while dirty politicians will milk the situation knowing you can not admit your true motives/policies.
Who really thinks that nobody has briefed officials about how bad email is? for decades now?
On some level they know better. nobody in their right mind is moving nuclear launch codes around with secured email servers.
I remember when the state dept's email server was hacked as well... like that is so safe.... Oh and remember other officials used private email servers too and likely still do. That dull movie "dick" did remind people that the bush people were using private email servers on purpose only touching on it; but it was far worse back then and they also knew better. It also was quite useful in hiding actual crimes back then as well.
Some people's purpose in life is to serve as an example to others.
The suffering sick person in the family may be the best argument to get the rest vaccinated. Happens all the time; somebody gets cancer, friends and family or fans of the celebrity go get themselves screened. Maybe you could offset their medical bills slightly for doing such things... but I don't see any reason why preventable illnesses shouldn't COST you more because you made yourself more of a burden... The argument is used to get smokers in all kinds of ways (most often illegitimate but popular because it's viewed by the majority as a lower class minority group/tribe.)
you're making the claim. you prove it. I'm saying they don't endanger anymore than tons of other random sources-- in otherwords I'm saying you prove it's actually worse.
We all know that the rare case of somebody purposely trying to infect others is negligible. Careless people you could make a reasonable guess about but there are immune people spreading things carelessly as well as animals etc.
The burden is on you to make a strong case that it is so much worse than nothing that we must pass a law to save people from plastic bag suffocation (is it any worse than that? and if in the ball park why not outlaw those? is it even fair to compare banning a product vs forced injections?) Your claiming your position is so great and works so well, so you've got to prove it.
The data is on immunization not on exposure. This is an academic argument; but you're prescribing by law to everybody and a mob reaction isn't good enough. people are more endangered by other things; this can't grow into epidemic levels because the vaccination rates are too high for that to be possible so to react like this is probably more overblown than the fake immigration crisis being cooked up at the border (and real investigation shows far bigger problems.)
It's easy for you to attack the OTHER tribe who is anti old established science and punish them and force them to your tribal beliefs. I'm with the vaccination works position but I'm not a good standing member of any tribe.
If you want more vaccinations you need more education and let the really stupid people get sick and die. Yes, some stupid people harm others on their way out of the gene pool. unavoidable. If people are so stupid or ignorant to NOT take reasonable measures you have a GREATER PROBLEM that will cause more harm than a tiny number of sick or dead people. For an obvious example, the anti-science tribe helping make global warming worse and before that delaying the common understanding smoking is bad for you by decades-- adding millions more dead people around the world... Do you think force is going to make these people change? It undermines your moral and compelling high ground if you fail and must prescribe it by force. (obviously, even saying the world is round is going to fail for some tiny tiny group of morons who think it is flat; they are a rounding error, ignore them.)
So you don't wash your hands etc or avoid visiting an infant when sick???
It's my right to do what you think is selfish. Voting Republican does more harm to others and that is still a right; some might say the other brand name/tribe is worse...
Children die. that sucks and that is natural. for all of human existence and it's also what evolved humanity. bad luck happens. Children are humans too, with equal rights and equal luck.
Think of the children is often a poor excuse always abused and so many are completely hypocrites about it too.
not sorry for trolling you. You also just assume that vaccinated people can't spread illness, pets, etc. They can. Also, vaccinations do not cover all versions of a virus but they do make people more careless. I've had chicken pox 2 times and the docs thought it was a error in paperwork (not believing me either) until a decade later when they learned there were 3 versions of it. The 2nd time I was careless because I thought I was immune.
If you care about children, take more precautions and maybe back up words with action on other topics instead of righteously patting yourself on the back just to feel good. Not likely actually doing something; righteousness is just emotional masturbation. like a lot of social media too.
Alternative: you pay more $ if you catch what you weren't vaccinated for. simple. no police state required.
So because they statistically raise healthcare costs, you want to force things into their bodies?
Criminalize sugar? Make Smoking illegal? Alcohol surely kills more than vaccinated people...
YES, a lot of people stay home when SICK or take precautions spreading it to other people. Maybe they end up in the hospital, maybe not. I had measles as a kid before I could get the shot (which I still got later.) I was lucky; costs to the system was negligible too. You do realize germs spread anyway right? immune people still spread germs. You could be immune and be fighting the thing off for weeks without knowing it.
DO you stay home or wear a mask or wash your hands when you get the flu? the flu is a top killer of old people and those shots suck (they only predict a few each year to protect against) so you do more by preventative measures than the shot does. Do you do any of that? How would you like a ticket for failing to wear a mask or wash your hands?
Not getting vaccinated is your own fault and giving to other people who do not get vaccinated is their fault (shared blame if they are careless or intentional)
contradictions are not always the case if you dig deeper. I wasn't being specific enough but also was trying to be more provocative to get people going. so troll isn't an unfair mod.
You can't get great data on exposure rates because you measure sick people who are not immune who obviously greatly reduce in numbers because vaccinations are extremely effective. Theory says there is less exposure. Try proving that. The data is on how effective the vaccination is; not exposure.
You are not responsible for spreading it unless you purposely or carelessly spread germs. Immune or not. The people who do not get vaccinated are to blame only for themselves. Being 1 of many natural exposure vectors doesn't prove anything unless do some action with 100% effective transfer rate. Yes, intent matters... and washing your hands is a big deal... I bet you proper hygiene does far more good than mandatory vaccinations. (good luck legislating that; even if you can enforce it people would revolt.)
Technically yes, and I wouldn't force you to prove some rounding error just to make the point that it does some good. The tiny % that suffer from shots etc. they are the price the government accepts when they set the threshold of legally approving of new medicine... who sets the threshold and what should it be? pro/con of tiny % are what this is all about. Should we make expanding gov power decisions over such tiny numbers of people (especially when tons more people die of things we don't touch politically... some which we need to.)
The PROBLEM here is that local politicians are deciding both those things and FORCING something in your body without your consent. Forced circumcision? similar political situation, less severe results but already has been a big issue for a long time. It's an example of where these things have actually gone.
FYI, I get vaccinated; no sympathy for those who do not. The rest are unlucky. that is life; not fair. Doesn't mean they get sick and die either--- humans survived without tech just fine... actually, those who didn't survive to reproduction is why we are here today overpopulating the planet. (yes, i did just troll there...)
You do not endanger people who ARE vaccinated. You put yourself at risk.
Other people who ALSO put themselves at risk are just as likely to catch germs from anybody including people who are vaccinated. You are no more to blame for their infection than they are THEMSELVES for not being vaccinated. It's their own dam fault if they get sick (generally speaking.) Not yours... unless you get sick and purposely go around coughing on everybody.
No, you are not endangering others by spreading something that gets around ANYWAY, immune people spread it around while their body is killing it; besides all the other vectors. It's a reduction of numbers game which is tough to verify given how you only get stats from sick people who were not immune; exposure rates I bet are unsubstantiated... you won't have much data on exposure. Not washing your hands and simple measures do far more good (there are viruses we don't have shots for.)
Actually, governments do round off tiny % exceptions on things and so do I. People die of unfortunate stuff; that is life. You can't save everybody no matter how extreme dystopia you create. That is reality.
NOTE: Some people can't get a vaccination. they are unlucky... like everybody was before whatever new discovery. Also, some people are harmed by some vaccinations for various reasons and governments knowingly approve with acceptable complication rates. Also unlucky people. Obviously you have to balance the actual pro/cons but you are allowing politicians make this decision for everybody with a poor track record and again, this is always going to be a tiny % who are screwed either way. But one is natural causes and the other has potential for abuse which could amount to more harmed people in the end. What you PUT IN YOUR BODY should be your gamble.
So all boys who are uncircumcised should be criminals too? You can find some bad looking stats on health issues for that... sway a local politician...
I know somebody who had a really bad reaction to a common immunization shot; far worse than if he simply caught the illness. unlucky. fortunately for him he asked specifically NOT to get it and his lawyer got him a nice retirement for the malpractice. HIS gamble and now he suffers (he'd trade the $ without hesitation.) Yes, like I said a tiny % is unlucky. The difference between either position is going to be a tiny % too... what and who decides the thresholds?
If you would like more then read the many BOOKS which I'm told are actually not horribly simplistic and pretty good plus they all must tie together... and Lucas didn't write them, just set the bar higher than he could ever reach for those writers.
You know they will mess it up and Lucas already messed it up and to wrongs together will not make a right. Get over it and enjoy the past movies; even a decent job wouldn't replace your memory and age when you saw them. Enjoy the past memory and don't expect all these reboots, soft reboots and sequels to compare to the 1st, it's better to see the old thing again unless you like being disappointed or upset... or are so simple that mere branding is enough to excite you.
One could imagine a ton of situations before and after a good open ended story; that is, if you have an imagination.
YOU DO NOT ENDANGER OTHERS IF YOU ARE NOT VACCINATED. You endanger yourself; it's to train your immune system. Yes, you could carry and spread it to other people WHO ARE NOT VACCINATED.
So people who refuse get sick and die because of their own decisions. That is the way it should be. Furthermore, remove the idiot warning labels on plastic bags etc.
Get away with this and you open up the door for future corrupt politicians to force things into your body against your will. Colon cancer is a real problem in the USA, why don't they force cameras up our colons while they are at it? (yes obviously you volunteer for that under the right conditions because who wants to die of that? but it's your choice and not a 1 size fits all policy which easily can be done 10x as much just to give more money to a lobby group.)
Depends on how you measure the stats:
https://seriousaccidents.com/l...
Not too interested in death counts so I didn't look for that statistic. Many possible outcomes are worse than death.
FYI: I do not drink. Measures taken to combat the drunks haven't worked out and an expensive car add on to go wrong isn't going to fix that. Motivated people will get around it as easily as driving while revoked. Chinese hack devices from ebay will be out within a year... court-ordered add-on devices are really expensive and monitored but to mass produce a cheap alternative that is not monitored is not going to work.
It does not need to phone home. Do you realize you have a black box in your car already which can be used against you after a crash?
Do you realize your cell info tracks you already which can be used against you... it is already SOLD by your cell company, and some keep your whole history years back.
Do you realize the DEA has been gathering plate scans from police nationwide and building tracking data for any car they pick up on a participating scanner?
This is just an idea similar to the chip credit cards and RFIDs already in wide use set with a standard so any car could use them. Public key encryption would allow government to sign the ID and anybody to decode it to verify it's a real ID. The car could verify this; and a unique ID would be the key; which the driver Ids all have already printed upon them. This isn't tracking people; even so, it wouldn't be any more than your credit cards do... certainly less than the other methods already widespread.
Given how at least 40,000 die in the USA yearly and how we flip out over tragedies that amount to a rounding error... you'd think something would be done if any rationality was involved
1) Drunk Driving is not the #1 cause. It's DISTRACTED driving. so now lets try to solve #4 rather than address the big elephant in the room?
Require bluetooth linking that disables nearly all the phone's features. A century of cars without smart phones prove it's not necessary to use both. The brats can learn to sit in the car without it too (unfortunately the brats grew up into the largest voting block... and don't really care if a city worth of people die each year.) More punishment will not improve things so post-accident cell data won't help anymore than DWI testing has.
2) Why can't the license BE the car key?? We already have phones paired as keys. Chip the licenses. Most the car key systems seem to get hacked anyway; may as well have 1 solid standard... you can't drive without a key and you are not supposed to drive without your ID on you! Cut down on pocket clutter. Your ID is the key; maybe even put your ID as a digital ID on your phone too. How often do you hear on the news the drunk was already suspended?
3) Invest all that $$$ into helping self driving take off... better mass transit as well... car growth is out pacing road expansion. The 10 years a highway expansion plan takes to complete is undone by the 10 year growth during that period!
4) mitigation. ROUNDABOUTS! save $, reduce fatalities, and can somewhat catch drunks.. deep grooves in the road edges that tend to rip off your wheels. more side ditches and tough plants (less grass.) How about proper city design going forward? no, politics are broken in the USA. unsustainable urban sprawl continues with zero thought allowed.
More likely pot smokers are fooling with their phones or car electronics more carelessly and that is causing the accidents. Pot certainly is not making them into aggressive drivers; less stressed and worried by risks.
Disclaimer: I've never tried the stuff.
It will get better; yes it's never going to be that intelligent... it only masters it's domain that we can make it learn and not much bigger... well, as you expand the domain the problem space becomes crazy huge and past patterns do not work the same way; adapting the past to a bigger space in a way a human does is something that doesn't work yet.
Some stuff humans are good at. Just not as much as we thought:
If you think beyond it replacing a human but instead think of performing a specific JOB then they can compete. For odd situations, there is nothing saying that you can't employ hybrids. Like having kids play video games that help with folding proteins. A bunch of twits on their phones with idiotic freemium games could be solving the difficult situations for the AI - when you have non-expert assistance augmenting the AI with some abstraction you'll see some really clever solutions a lot sooner.
The decisions and main work could be AI with humans (or animals) acting as subsystems.
Seriously, AI is all hype; but what it proves is that tasks we thought involved a lot of human skill actually are overrated because AI beats us; plenty of things are difficult for it.
Slow humans...out smarting them is possible.
not in order just off the top of my head:
1) Inflation. don't forget and remember that they no longer have to report exactly what it is.
2) Lower income for everybody but the top. Wages have gone down for half a century now; people didn't notice as women's freedom was hyped at the same time the quality of life with 1 adult working was becoming unsustainable.
3) Cheap commodity items like food, junk food, clothing, technology made TV cheaper etc. This gives the illusion of increased prosperity relative to more wealthy past generations who could only afford 1 TV etc. REAL costs that can't be artificially changed will appear to rise. Just look at the % of income spent on food now vs past.
4) Union protections of wages at most universities have kept salaries rising with inflation (I think it is less than inflation) but I would guess rising higher than everybody else who has been losing income which makes the cost of school rise relative to people's incomes. BENEFITS like healthcare remain while the anarchy we call a healthcare system continues to infect costs of everything made locally.
5) Administration costs seem to rise as it gets more top heavy despite increased clerical automation.
6) SPORTS and other money pits which are essentially marketing that claim to pay for themselves (even so, it's entertainment and teaching teamwork is pure BS.) Sadly, my state college funding in general rises when the state football team does well. So the problems are wider and deeper.
7) Government subsidies have dropped resulting in higher prices in the public sector. My state 40 years ago payed 80%. now it's in the 30s.
8) LOANS. the financial sector and it's corrupting influence of government have setup a huge mess on top of everything else.
9) Growth. More people have to get degrees and trade skill training as automation and outsourcing expands; this has been going on for decades already. Expansion costs and adds overhead; look at your local colleges etc. How many new building projects have you seen? I bet you've noticed. Those buildings last a century but must be built in advance.
10) Only a guess: Private schools have to compete more due to online courses, increased advertising... about 1/3 is MARKETING to get you to sign up, scholarships (aka coupon "discounts") , referral deals (kids,) and to make you feel great about your purchase. Private schools waste a ton of money they have no accountability for this; higher prices make it more elite and can be spent appearing more elite.
Aside: Corporations do not train anybody; rates are extremely low. They want everybody else to pay for training and this is in a time with INCREASED specialization. In the tech field the specialization is at insanity levels that it's not only a joke but not uncommon to have impossible job requirements. They want schools to teach their specific niche fads years before the buzzwords have been coined. As good MBAs, they shift all responsibility elsewhere.
ActiveX for Chrome?
Microsoft OFFICE integration?
Clippy?
Slavery is a stark example of the BIAS in the system design at the time and why you can't just accept it as a flawless document without a need for revision. Every amendment after the 1st immediate batch is bug fix. Not the same as being bug free and beyond criticism.
NOT all the founders wanted perpetual equal opportunity; especially to the lesser humans. Wealth capping schemes came about later when it became more apparent that a ruling dynasties were becoming a real threat. You can't have separation of powers if you ignore some types of power. The 4th branch failed to be clearly defined but until Lincoln, it was heavily funded (aka press.)
The inbred yokels have unequal political power; just not as much as the Royalty of the past (who had inbreeding problems; but they get respect and the yokels do not... neither deserve birth right benefits outside of the extra healthcare their genetics create.)
The 3 official branches of government are elected to power by different means; they need not be the same; probably shouldn't be given how any system will have specific flaws.
State governments should have more federal input; however, populations change while state borders are static which creates a serious problem of unequal representation. As Puerto Rico points out in the extreme (not being even being a state but out numbering nearly half the states.)
It is only going to get worse as the progression to cities continues with empty states commanding more disproportionate power. In the EU you have real history and culture drawing borders; the USA isn't remotely similar but it will over time (but likely retain a common language.) Redrawing state lines would make sense but be difficult to sell people... when humanity loves to war over their borders.
Ultimately, no perfect system could function perfectly when operated by humans. You 1st have to curtail ALL unequal sources of power. That means wealth caps, corporate limitations unseen since the civil war (and surpassed,) diversified press, and with the internet probably no means to limit online mobs led by influencers. You can't make citizens responsible let alone mindful...
Human driven cars NEED more limitations; too many stupid people (who should only be allowed to remove themselves from the gene pool.)
Self-driving cars #1 problem is the humans. By 2050 they'll probably be discussing more limitations if not passing future bans on human drivers. Limit humans to half the speed and double the robots speed because they can handle it...
If you obsess over perfecting the rounding error at the end to get 100% you'll be fine; it's that last bit that always ends up creating problems.
Geography does not matter more than people do. They already play around swing states to game the system; at least population targets PEOPLE!
You can not have equal voting rights if you weight voting power by additional factors:
Slaves are 3/5 of a human vote (in the constitution) which is an indirect method of geographic and wealth weighting.
If it were not for the lack influence back in Europe's long established dynasties monopolizing power based upon perpetual land ownership...the USA would have been different, or not have existed.
Some inbred rural yolkel gets more power than 100s... at least they are not Royalty anymore...
Oh, and the senate algorithm is deeply flawed too! At least it's not as heavily rooted in racism. It needs a major rewrite; nobody's kernel would be so pathetic.
Puerto Rico gets no representation and they have more Americans than 21 states!
she is still not white enough for you.
Some people would take the discount?
Or just put it in the legal agreement text... it's not like people bothered to pay attention to facebook etc.
MOD Parent up