1) When they make a statement, for example that parts of a birth certificate were clearly modified, they back it up with specifics, ideally a copy of the evidence and another, comparison copy to show the difference between modified and not-modified.
The shmucks that don't provide this proof are either a) Morons, or b) paid to lie
2) They spend more time establishing their own trustworthiness, rather than simply claiming that other sources - such at 'the media' are not trustworthy. When they not only refuse to do this, but insist on their anonymity, then they are either: a) Totally paranoid or b) paid to lie. In either case, they are not trustworthy.
3) Being a citizen is fairly easy for most people to prove. It happens all the time in courts of law. Able to run for President is not supposed to be a harder to prove, it should be easier (otherwise the Constitution would have discussed it further). Genetic tests, established records, even newspaper announcements etc. are all considered proof. People reject them only if they are a) Morons b) being paid to lie.
Given these simple fact, there is the possibility that you are being paid to lie. But I don't think so. Frankly you did such a poor job of it, I can't think of anyone so desperate as to pay you to lie. If they did, they should get their money back.
That kind of leaves only one explanation for your post. Most states offer guaranteed employment for people like you, though usually they don't pay minimum wage.
Its mostly the other way around. A warlike culture has to either accept polygamy or accept lesbian marriage - children require a huge amount of attention and require multiple parents.
It is true that this kind of culture is slightly self-reinforcing, encouraging men to go to war to both maintain the shortage of men and collect the resources necessary to support the children.
But it is mostly the other way around.
Real polygamy takes too much work on the part of the man to be worth it for anyone not in the top 1% wealth wise. As such, while it is viewed as high status, it's actual presence does NOT lead to more war, but instead creates a desire for peace. And fishing. Lots of fishing. Anything to get away from the constant nagging.
The poor still don't have free cards. They either have to pay for a credit card, usually via super high interest rates, or have to pay for a bank account.
This is in addition to the issue of privacy, though their are apps like privacy.com (basically unlimited burner visa cards that pay for themselves by taking the 1% that credit cards usually offer as cashback) that offer enhanced privacy for cashless transactions.
1) Have it BE the smartphone. No linking needed, it's just a smart phone designed to be worn, with a small screen and better voice recognition.
2) Have it do essential body measurements. Make one that accurately measures blood sugar and all the diabetics will come to you. Same for any other medical information that people check at least 1/day. If it can detect calorie consumption, that would be a huge dieting aid - my watch says to stop eating now.
Happy Holidays exists not because people got visibly offended by the constant slights to non-Christians. And they do exist.
Instead what happened was that the majority of the world is not christian and enough non-Christians owned companies and these non-Christians started saying Happy Holiday because they are not christian, so why would they wish some one to have a Merry Christmas. It was simply what people that are not christian did.
But Christians also started saying it. Do you want to know why?
Because those Christians that were NOT religious bigots realized that unless it is ACTUALLY Christmas and you know you are talking to a Christian, then it obviously makes more sense to say Happy Holiday. It's inclusive, not exclusive. Like saying "Welcome Ladies and Gentleman" rather than just saying "Welcome Gentleman".
But then something else happened. A bunch of religious bigots came along and objected to wishing anyone a happy holiday. The idea of including the Jews and the Muslims, and the rest of the world made them physically ill. They couldn't stand the idea of being polite to a Jew or a Muslim.
But the little Nazi bigots didn't dare actually say they refused to wish the Jews a Happy Holidays. They knew what would happen if they dared admit their dirty little secret.
So instead they whined about not being allowed to say Merry Christmas. The truly religious are fine saying Happy Holiday. It's only the tiny, cowardly neo-nazies that object.
Lets say your company is doing well, but has a slight pullback, losing 10% of your market share and you are now the #2 player, then a startup comes out of nowhere to take over the entire industry.
People don't talk about how the startup beat the guy that USED to be #1 and is now #2. Instead they talk about the startup beating the guy that just made it to #1 spot after 10 years of hard work.
In fact it's almost physically impossible for someone to create a disruptive technology without taking out the #1 player - it's just not disruptive if your tech only makes you #2. And if you are #1, then OF COURSE you are at your peak. Unless the economy is in a downward spiral, the #1 guy has to be at his peak.
That's like saying the wow, the best scorer in the league is having a good year. He would not be the best scorer if he wasn't having a good year.
I would love to be greeted by a oral sex from every single 20 year old woman that weighs less than 150 lbs. But that is not the issue. What is the issue is how the people that do NOT want to do that feel.
On Dec 24 and Dec 25th, I enjoy being wished a Merry Christmas. It's a great sentiment and I reply the same. So on Dec 24 and on Dec 25th, I wish everyone a Merry Christmas.
But I do not do that on Thanksgiving. Nor do I do it on New Year's Eve. Doing that would be obnoxious. I wish everyone a Happy Thanksgiving or a Happy New Year on those days.
Similarly, on Hanuka I wish everyone a Happy Hanuka. It's kind of a dick move to wish someone a Merry Christmas on Dec 13th, the first day of Hannuka.
The rule should be: If you know someone is christian, or today actually IS Christmas or Christmas Eve, again, wish them a Merry Christmas.
But for all other situations, wish them Happy Holidays, so you don't do force your religion on them.
19th century was the one we developed new alloys. 20th century we found new elements. 21th century looks to be the age of the layered metamaterials - computer chips, radar reflecting, hydrophobic sprays, that kind of thing.
I would expect aliens tech to be composed of elements we understand in peculiar manners.
If you are in a large corporation the answer is two weeks before you do it. Even if your boss is honorable, his boss might not be.
If you are in a small-medium company and know both your boss and his boss are honorable and loyal, then I would consider giving them six months notice.
But only if the culture is loyal.
If you do decide to talk to them, make it a bigger discussion than just when.
Talk about training your replacement, what kind of person would be a good fit. In particular talk about hiring from within - that would give you a full year to slowly train someone to take over your job.
It is always easier to fill a lower position than higher levels.
It's within walking distance of my place, costs $0.13 cents a page to print black and white. A printer would be more than $100, so that's about 700 pages before it ceases to be cost effective. I print less than 100 pages a year. If I bought a printer it would take 7 years to recoup my investment. Not including paper and ink costs.
If I ever have to print more than 100 pages at one time, then I would buy a printer. But as long as I am printing on average 20 pages a month, I use staples.
This is wrong in Manhattan. Yes is is true in most of the world. But in areas of high value, speculation on future profits have driven purchase prices sky high. People are renting out just to cover/reduce the costs, not to make a profit, trusting that as the market goes up their profit will come from the sale, not the rental income.
Two years ago I owned my own home with over 75% equity in the home. Now I rent. Mainly because I live in NYC and when you live in NYC, the mortgage + taxes + maintenance often exceed the cost to rent.
In other words, rent is cheap compared to buying (although it is very high as compared to most of the rest of the country).
When you buy real estate in most of the US, you are both saving money and doing a reasonably safe, reasonably profitable investment.
But in NYC, particularly Manhattan, you are most likely to be spending MORE money every month to buy rather than less, and investing in a riskier, high profit investment. I decided that it was too high risk for more and I did not have the extra cash to do it.
It does not create weapons grade radioactive materials. If you have a thorium based nuclear reactor you end up with low amounts of radioactive waste and can not build nuclear bombs. If you use the more traditional nuclear power plants, you get all this fun stuff that can be used to build a nuclear bomb.
The USA wanted nuclear bombs, so we ignored this technology.
Look, there is a lot of very good reasons to regulate drones. Their cameras are both an invasion of privacy and also allow people to control them from very far away.
But there is no reason at all to include model aircraft that do NOT have cameras on them. The lack of a camera means you can only use them within visible range.
I have no problem with people doing this, as long a:
1) They tell the owner of the PC what is going on.
2) They do not double dip (i.e. also showing advertising and tracking the customers).
It should be an either/or situation, they either earn money by selling your attention OR they earn money by selling your computer cycles. Not both, and only with notification.
Incorrect. You are ignoring two factors mentioned in the SUMMARY, let alone the article.
Lowered costs and higher demand are both key factors that business people take into account when they decide whether or not to open a store.
I won't open a store at the corner of Busy St and Office Avenue unless costs are less than the estimated profits. If automation allows me to hire fewer people in that particular store, and also allows me to offer people coffee on the way to work WITHOUT a 10 minute wait, then I will do it. Without the automation reducing head count per store and allowing online pre-purchase, that store would never be profitable.
You have made a poor criticism that does not stand up to reason.
You do not understand logic. It is not a video game where activities directly reduce your lifespan.
Instead it is a percent chance to die very early. As such, the existence of atheistical outliers like you mention does not in any way affect my logic.
The Alocholism reduces life expectancy by over 7 years. Smoking by ten years. The fact that one guy lives to 90 does not change the fact that some guys die at 20 from those activities.
1) It is not true that human life spans, height, and athleticism naturally improve. They assumed this by looking at an unusual period of time, the last century. There was NO natural, gradual improvement.
2) What is true is that in the past hundred years we made three different discoveries, each of which INSTANTLY raised lie expectancy, height, and athleticism to their current values. But it took a long time for that knowledge to spread. There are still people out there smoking cigarettes, drinking to excess, etc. Those three issues were healthy lifestyles (life span), nutrition (height), exercise (athleticism).
3) There are several discoveries that are not advances in healthy lifestyle, nutrition, or exercise that are very promising new ways to improve all three of those statistics. Genetic engineering and cyber-replacements could each individually increase any or all of those three things.
Technically, we can already increase anyone's height that has lost both legs. (https://www.quora.com/When-someone-is-getting-two-artificial-legs-can-they-pick-their-new-height)
The basic question they asked shows their assumptions are silly.
Nope, he is DEFINITELY liable. Of course, I meant that the son was underage (Your neighbor is not liable if the son was 40 years old).
The only question is how much he is liable. Consider a case where two ten year old boys steal one of their father's cars and crash it. If the one who was driving was not the son of the owner, I assure you the insurance company will go after the father that did not own the car. Even if the other boy stole the keys, the one that was driving will have to pay. (or rather his father will).
1) We have been ignoring the fire risk for a long time. Specifically we have stopped all small fires before they get anywhere, which means there are a lot fuel wood stocked up. The smarter thing to do is to let small fires become controlled medium sized fires during the WET season, rather than the dry season when they become huge.
2) We have been putting houses in stupid locations and not requiring appropriate fire prevention measures. There is nothing wrong with building a house in the middle of fire zones. But make it a bunker out of concrete. Yes, it won't look the same as a normal house, so freaking what? A good architect can make a concrete, fire-proof home still look good. Yes it costs more. But less than double, which is what most people will pay.
3) Oh yeah, and stop counting fire smoke from intentionally set preventative fires as 'pollution' while saying that smoke from natural forest fires doesn't count because it isn't man made.
LOLWUT stupidity: Why do you think the people that invented bitcoin allow anyone to mine? Because in addition to mining coins, the exact same mining software verifies that when someone gives you a piece of software that claims to be a bit coin, it actually is a bitcoin, rather than an encrypted copy of their fan-fic story about Spock seducing Captain Kirk.
As for costs of dollar transactions, it isn't what you think. The article made the mistake of looking at the actual cost of energy per visa transaction, vs the TOTAL cost of bitcoin mining divided by the number of bitcoins transactions. Technically the actual bitcoin cost of energy per bitcoin transaction is 0, as the energy is spent on mining. You need to make a fair compairson.
To make a fair comparison you have to look at the total cost of visa transactions vs the bitcoin total, then divide each by transactions.
Total cost of VISA transactions is not just energy run by their computer but also includes every single bit of profit VISA reports, plus every single employee wage, etc. etc. etc.
To be truly fair, you should also look into economies of scale and see if VISA or bitcoin get any advantage because of their relative sizes, but that's another point entirely,
Slashdot Mirror
How to tell if someone is trustworthy:
1) When they make a statement, for example that parts of a birth certificate were clearly modified, they back it up with specifics, ideally a copy of the evidence and another, comparison copy to show the difference between modified and not-modified.
The shmucks that don't provide this proof are either a) Morons, or b) paid to lie
2) They spend more time establishing their own trustworthiness, rather than simply claiming that other sources - such at 'the media' are not trustworthy. When they not only refuse to do this, but insist on their anonymity, then they are either: a) Totally paranoid or b) paid to lie. In either case, they are not trustworthy.
3) Being a citizen is fairly easy for most people to prove. It happens all the time in courts of law. Able to run for President is not supposed to be a harder to prove, it should be easier (otherwise the Constitution would have discussed it further). Genetic tests, established records, even newspaper announcements etc. are all considered proof. People reject them only if they are a) Morons b) being paid to lie.
Given these simple fact, there is the possibility that you are being paid to lie. But I don't think so. Frankly you did such a poor job of it, I can't think of anyone so desperate as to pay you to lie. If they did, they should get their money back.
That kind of leaves only one explanation for your post. Most states offer guaranteed employment for people like you, though usually they don't pay minimum wage.
Bees are just as good as dogs at sniffing things, including drugs and explosives.
You train the hive ONCE, and they train each other after that.
Unlike dogs, they have much longer working rules. They don't need as much rest or reward.
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/...
http://mentalfloss.com/article...
Its mostly the other way around. A warlike culture has to either accept polygamy or accept lesbian marriage - children require a huge amount of attention and require multiple parents.
It is true that this kind of culture is slightly self-reinforcing, encouraging men to go to war to both maintain the shortage of men and collect the resources necessary to support the children.
But it is mostly the other way around.
Real polygamy takes too much work on the part of the man to be worth it for anyone not in the top 1% wealth wise. As such, while it is viewed as high status, it's actual presence does NOT lead to more war, but instead creates a desire for peace. And fishing. Lots of fishing. Anything to get away from the constant nagging.
Doesn't need FDA approval to have the medical functions, it only needs FDA approval to declare it a medical device.
Similarly, watches don't need to be COSC certified to be a swiss watch.
The poor still don't have free cards. They either have to pay for a credit card, usually via super high interest rates, or have to pay for a bank account.
This is in addition to the issue of privacy, though their are apps like privacy.com (basically unlimited burner visa cards that pay for themselves by taking the 1% that credit cards usually offer as cashback) that offer enhanced privacy for cashless transactions.
1) Have it BE the smartphone. No linking needed, it's just a smart phone designed to be worn, with a small screen and better voice recognition.
2) Have it do essential body measurements. Make one that accurately measures blood sugar and all the diabetics will come to you. Same for any other medical information that people check at least 1/day. If it can detect calorie consumption, that would be a huge dieting aid - my watch says to stop eating now.
Happy Holidays exists not because people got visibly offended by the constant slights to non-Christians. And they do exist.
Instead what happened was that the majority of the world is not christian and enough non-Christians owned companies and these non-Christians started saying Happy Holiday because they are not christian, so why would they wish some one to have a Merry Christmas. It was simply what people that are not christian did.
But Christians also started saying it. Do you want to know why?
Because those Christians that were NOT religious bigots realized that unless it is ACTUALLY Christmas and you know you are talking to a Christian, then it obviously makes more sense to say Happy Holiday. It's inclusive, not exclusive. Like saying "Welcome Ladies and Gentleman" rather than just saying "Welcome Gentleman".
But then something else happened. A bunch of religious bigots came along and objected to wishing anyone a happy holiday. The idea of including the Jews and the Muslims, and the rest of the world made them physically ill. They couldn't stand the idea of being polite to a Jew or a Muslim.
But the little Nazi bigots didn't dare actually say they refused to wish the Jews a Happy Holidays. They knew what would happen if they dared admit their dirty little secret.
So instead they whined about not being allowed to say Merry Christmas. The truly religious are fine saying Happy Holiday. It's only the tiny, cowardly neo-nazies that object.
Lets say your company is doing well, but has a slight pullback, losing 10% of your market share and you are now the #2 player, then a startup comes out of nowhere to take over the entire industry.
People don't talk about how the startup beat the guy that USED to be #1 and is now #2. Instead they talk about the startup beating the guy that just made it to #1 spot after 10 years of hard work.
In fact it's almost physically impossible for someone to create a disruptive technology without taking out the #1 player - it's just not disruptive if your tech only makes you #2. And if you are #1, then OF COURSE you are at your peak. Unless the economy is in a downward spiral, the #1 guy has to be at his peak.
That's like saying the wow, the best scorer in the league is having a good year. He would not be the best scorer if he wasn't having a good year.
I would love to be greeted by a oral sex from every single 20 year old woman that weighs less than 150 lbs. But that is not the issue. What is the issue is how the people that do NOT want to do that feel.
On Dec 24 and Dec 25th, I enjoy being wished a Merry Christmas. It's a great sentiment and I reply the same. So on Dec 24 and on Dec 25th, I wish everyone a Merry Christmas.
But I do not do that on Thanksgiving. Nor do I do it on New Year's Eve. Doing that would be obnoxious. I wish everyone a Happy Thanksgiving or a Happy New Year on those days.
Similarly, on Hanuka I wish everyone a Happy Hanuka. It's kind of a dick move to wish someone a Merry Christmas on Dec 13th, the first day of Hannuka.
The rule should be:
If you know someone is christian, or today actually IS Christmas or Christmas Eve, again, wish them a Merry Christmas.
But for all other situations, wish them Happy Holidays, so you don't do force your religion on them.
19th century was the one we developed new alloys.
20th century we found new elements.
21th century looks to be the age of the layered metamaterials - computer chips, radar reflecting, hydrophobic sprays, that kind of thing.
I would expect aliens tech to be composed of elements we understand in peculiar manners.
If you are in a large corporation the answer is two weeks before you do it. Even if your boss is honorable, his boss might not be.
If you are in a small-medium company and know both your boss and his boss are honorable and loyal, then I would consider giving them six months notice.
But only if the culture is loyal.
If you do decide to talk to them, make it a bigger discussion than just when.
Talk about training your replacement, what kind of person would be a good fit. In particular talk about hiring from within - that would give you a full year to slowly train someone to take over your job.
It is always easier to fill a lower position than higher levels.
It's within walking distance of my place, costs $0.13 cents a page to print black and white. A printer would be more than $100, so that's about 700 pages before it ceases to be cost effective. I print less than 100 pages a year. If I bought a printer it would take 7 years to recoup my investment. Not including paper and ink costs.
If I ever have to print more than 100 pages at one time, then I would buy a printer. But as long as I am printing on average 20 pages a month, I use staples.
This is wrong in Manhattan. Yes is is true in most of the world. But in areas of high value, speculation on future profits have driven purchase prices sky high. People are renting out just to cover/reduce the costs, not to make a profit, trusting that as the market goes up their profit will come from the sale, not the rental income.
Here: is a real world example from Manhattan:
https://www.trulia.com/propert...
For sale at $649k. Estimated Mortgage = $3,760 per month (apparently includes maintenance, insurance and taxes).
Total square feet = 498.
From this website:
https://www.zillow.com/homes/f...
It says a condo 2 floors above, with the same 498 sq ft, rents for $2450/month.
So assuming you get the same rent, that means you pay $3760/month to own, get $2450/month for rent.
That is the reality of owning in Manhattan.
People make money by buying and holding. Over time, the value of the apartment goes up and eventually you can choose to rent it out at a profit.
But that assumes the real estate market goes up. It's ripe for a bubble bursting that could wipe out people's life savings.
Two years ago I owned my own home with over 75% equity in the home. Now I rent. Mainly because I live in NYC and when you live in NYC, the mortgage + taxes + maintenance often exceed the cost to rent.
In other words, rent is cheap compared to buying (although it is very high as compared to most of the rest of the country).
When you buy real estate in most of the US, you are both saving money and doing a reasonably safe, reasonably profitable investment.
But in NYC, particularly Manhattan, you are most likely to be spending MORE money every month to buy rather than less, and investing in a riskier, high profit investment. I decided that it was too high risk for more and I did not have the extra cash to do it.
It does not create weapons grade radioactive materials. If you have a thorium based nuclear reactor you end up with low amounts of radioactive waste and can not build nuclear bombs. If you use the more traditional nuclear power plants, you get all this fun stuff that can be used to build a nuclear bomb.
The USA wanted nuclear bombs, so we ignored this technology.
Look, there is a lot of very good reasons to regulate drones. Their cameras are both an invasion of privacy and also allow people to control them from very far away.
But there is no reason at all to include model aircraft that do NOT have cameras on them. The lack of a camera means you can only use them within visible range.
I have no problem with people doing this, as long a:
1) They tell the owner of the PC what is going on.
2) They do not double dip (i.e. also showing advertising and tracking the customers).
It should be an either/or situation, they either earn money by selling your attention OR they earn money by selling your computer cycles. Not both, and only with notification.
Incorrect. You are ignoring two factors mentioned in the SUMMARY, let alone the article.
Lowered costs and higher demand are both key factors that business people take into account when they decide whether or not to open a store.
I won't open a store at the corner of Busy St and Office Avenue unless costs are less than the estimated profits. If automation allows me to hire fewer people in that particular store, and also allows me to offer people coffee on the way to work WITHOUT a 10 minute wait, then I will do it. Without the automation reducing head count per store and allowing online pre-purchase, that store would never be profitable.
You have made a poor criticism that does not stand up to reason.
You do not understand logic. It is not a video game where activities directly reduce your lifespan.
Instead it is a percent chance to die very early. As such, the existence of atheistical outliers like you mention does not in any way affect my logic.
The Alocholism reduces life expectancy by over 7 years. Smoking by ten years. The fact that one guy lives to 90 does not change the fact that some guys die at 20 from those activities.
Anecdotal outliers do not disprove statistical facts.
1) It is not true that human life spans, height, and athleticism naturally improve. They assumed this by looking at an unusual period of time, the last century. There was NO natural, gradual improvement.
2) What is true is that in the past hundred years we made three different discoveries, each of which INSTANTLY raised lie expectancy, height, and athleticism to their current values. But it took a long time for that knowledge to spread. There are still people out there smoking cigarettes, drinking to excess, etc. Those three issues were healthy lifestyles (life span), nutrition (height), exercise (athleticism).
3) There are several discoveries that are not advances in healthy lifestyle, nutrition, or exercise that are very promising new ways to improve all three of those statistics. Genetic engineering and cyber-replacements could each individually increase any or all of those three things.
Technically, we can already increase anyone's height that has lost both legs. (https://www.quora.com/When-someone-is-getting-two-artificial-legs-can-they-pick-their-new-height)
The basic question they asked shows their assumptions are silly.
Nope, he is DEFINITELY liable. Of course, I meant that the son was underage (Your neighbor is not liable if the son was 40 years old).
The only question is how much he is liable. Consider a case where two ten year old boys steal one of their father's cars and crash it. If the one who was driving was not the son of the owner, I assure you the insurance company will go after the father that did not own the car. Even if the other boy stole the keys, the one that was driving will have to pay. (or rather his father will).
If someone at the Philippines bank facilitated a theft from the Bangladesh bank, then the Bangladesh people can and SHOULD sue the Philippine bank.
Even if some people at the Bangladesh bank also facilitated the theft.
If your neighbor's son helps your son steal from you, damn right you would want your neighbor to at least partially reimburse you for the damage.
Even if you are talking 10%, that's a lot of money.
1) We have been ignoring the fire risk for a long time. Specifically we have stopped all small fires before they get anywhere, which means there are a lot fuel wood stocked up. The smarter thing to do is to let small fires become controlled medium sized fires during the WET season, rather than the dry season when they become huge.
2) We have been putting houses in stupid locations and not requiring appropriate fire prevention measures. There is nothing wrong with building a house in the middle of fire zones. But make it a bunker out of concrete. Yes, it won't look the same as a normal house, so freaking what? A good architect can make a concrete, fire-proof home still look good. Yes it costs more. But less than double, which is what most people will pay.
3) Oh yeah, and stop counting fire smoke from intentionally set preventative fires as 'pollution' while saying that smoke from natural forest fires doesn't count because it isn't man made.
Answers.
LOLWUT stupidity: Why do you think the people that invented bitcoin allow anyone to mine? Because in addition to mining coins, the exact same mining software verifies that when someone gives you a piece of software that claims to be a bit coin, it actually is a bitcoin, rather than an encrypted copy of their fan-fic story about Spock seducing Captain Kirk.
As for costs of dollar transactions, it isn't what you think. The article made the mistake of looking at the actual cost of energy per visa transaction, vs the TOTAL cost of bitcoin mining divided by the number of bitcoins transactions. Technically the actual bitcoin cost of energy per bitcoin transaction is 0, as the energy is spent on mining. You need to make a fair compairson.
To make a fair comparison you have to look at the total cost of visa transactions vs the bitcoin total, then divide each by transactions.
Total cost of VISA transactions is not just energy run by their computer but also includes every single bit of profit VISA reports, plus every single employee wage, etc. etc. etc.
To be truly fair, you should also look into economies of scale and see if VISA or bitcoin get any advantage because of their relative sizes, but that's another point entirely,