My problem with the entire AGW issue is that people don't seem to look at it from the economic perspective. The costs of cutting emissions enough to make even a little difference is huge, and not enough to save us. Even without the thawing methane issue many of the models say we are on course for a 4+ degree rise, and doing enough to slow that by 2 degrees could consume almost our entire GDP! Meanwhile the models also indicate the geo-polictical situation as we know it won't tolerate more than 2 degrees. Finally add in feedback issues like this one and the evidence we might have already crossed the tipping point where even if we became carbon neutral today we are still doomed!
So it seems to me curbing emissions is a waste of resources that should be either going into savings (private and public) so we can afford to implement an actual solution when one becomes apparent or to R&D of said solution.
Maybe that is carbon scrubber large enough and cheap enough to lower the carbon content in the atmosphere. Once we have something like that we would know the unit cost of removing carbon, and could target emissions goals based on cut emissions until the costs of reduction per unit exceeds operating the scrubber.
Perhaps its some other geo-engineering solution; there are benefits to higher atmospheric carbon for agriculture, perhaps if we can control temperatures another way the CO2 might not even be such a problem (yes I am aware there are acidity issues with the ocean etc that complicate things as well).
As it stands right now the situation looks like this to me:
Guy goes to the doctor
Doctor: Well your heart is failing and you have two years to live Guy: Is there anything we can do? Doctor: I could amputate your legs, it will lower you body mass and make things easier for your heart. Guy: That sounds awful; but it will save me right? Doctor (chuckles): Oh my no, your heart is already way to damaged, it will be incredibly painful come with its own complications and probably only extend your life a couple weeks. Shall I get my hack saw? Guy:....
I am not sure shoveling out barns is the best career move if you are looking to avoid bullshit. I don't have tons of experience in agriculture but I suspect quite a lot bullshit is produced in barns. Perhaps not as much as out in grazing fields but a substantial amount.
So we can't burn our coal, we can't store our nuclear waste in an affordable way, and if the EPA gets its way we won't be able to continue our growth in cheap natural gas either. All without care for the fact that we still have no-effective base load green energy solution.
Even the pretty darn irrational like Iran and DPRK leadership are rational enough to understand MAD. Anyone in charge of an installed government is in a pretty good spot, and won't want to screw it up. Saddam Husein being a note worthy exception; he could have saved himself easily even after 911 by just throwing open the doors and letting Weapons inspectors do whatever they like, it would have let the air out of the US position.
Most likely its the case Ahmadinejad likes being President and the Iatola (sp?) likes being the supreme leader; they know they'd never be allowed to keep such a position if they actually used a nuke. So they won't even if they believe their rhetoric about us being the infidel they won't do it. The entire rest of the world be line up against them; or they'd be killed in a counter strike.
Trouble is the Arab uprisings have shown us even thought to be stable governments like Syria and Egypt can be here one day gone the next. Any new government will have all the same things to lose if they thought to use a nuke, so no matter who ends up in power the deal will be cushy enough they'd never nuke anyone. The question is what happens if the weapons go missing during the anarchic period between governments? They could conceivably find their way to hands of some loony with nothing to lose, who might actually use one.
Do we really need a study to show that repeated hits to the head result in confusion, depression and dementia?
Yes and No! Plenty of anecdotal evidence existed out there, enough for most of us to conclude participating in an activity where repeated blows to the head are common would increase our risk of those things. I think most of us *supposed* as much. What studies do is enable us to *know* things, they take it out of the realm of sure seems like it to, and move it into hard facts.
Now I hear many people, say things like "measure don't guess". That is correct position when the answer will be actionable or would effect the action you will take. For me and I would guess for you, no study is needed. I have plenty of other good reasons to try and minimize the number of times I get hit in the head; I really don't like it being a big one. So I can't use the information.
Someone who really values football and or enjoys playing it might be able to, though. Speculation might not have been reason enough to give up something they enjoy; but if you can say "yes this is certainly damaging your mental faculties" it changes the math for them.
I ripped + encoded + tagged my entire collection with some shell scripts, just using cdda2wav to get the data. It was all auto pilot after some initial testing. IE every time the disk tray ejected I just dropped the next disk off the stack in. Sometimes I was in front of the computer doing other things, other times the display was off I was just walking past it.
I have since been listing to my collection for years on a variety of devices and never once heard an audible error I can reasonably attribute to the initial ripping/encoding. I used shorten at the time ( like I said years ago ), but have since converted to flac.
Knowing what I know about the technology I am certain the rips were not error free, most errors should have been fixed, but the unrecoverable errors must therefore be preserved. My point is it really does not impact my ability to enjoy the material though. Even if someone did have golden ears, would a few bad frames spread across several moments for audio really distract? Seems hard to believe.
I think the article poster should consider he might be solving the wrong problem. Rather than trying to get perfect rips done fast, maybe he should try to get very good rips done fast.
I never said what the big carriers are doing is illegal, I said was dishonest. If they don't have the intention of terminating calls anywhere the rates are higher than the norm I think dishonest be marking "unlimited flat rate LD to anywhere", even if they have legally covered themselves with some fine print. Unlimited flat rate LD is what presented in the audible component of the television spots and the readable type face on the shiny mailers.
They should either drop the anyway or the flat rate part, of the pitch if they really want to be what I would call forthright. I am not naive though I don't really expect anyone's advertising to be exactly forthright; and I do think we should keep our standard of business buyer beware, if someone fails to read the fine print its their own damn fault.
I still disagree with you on the economics of who should pay for what. I don't have a dog in this fight but I used to live in place that had a rural bell operator. If you put the added costs on the loop side, than heavy users get subsidized by light users. I did not receive all that many LD ( it was expensive for everyone back then ) calls from friends or family, but it was sure nice to be able to do so. Had loop costs been higher I'd probably have done without a line (pay phones still existed then so I could have made the occasional call from Main St). Local calls were of little use either, frankly you went downtown for one reason or another pretty much every day and when its sub 10min walk from one end of town to the other, you don't need to "let your fingers do the walking", want to know if a shop or business can take care of something for you? might as well walk in and ask.
Frankly I think its much fairer and more sensible to draw as much of the required revenue from tariffs on inter-exchange calls. That way it stays cheap for everyone to have a loop. If loop costs get to high people would drop service; pretty soon you'd have no end points to terminate calls at. Charging more for loop makes no sense for a local bell, as it actually degrades the usefulness of the system.
Finally I don't think this is a case of city folk subsiding rural bell users, its more a case of they (they are placing the call after all) want to communicate by phone with someone in the middle of know where are being asked to pay real costs of doing so, part of which is to maintain a perhaps little used stretch of copper across the last 15miles making it possible. Unfortunately rather than using a little intelligence and computerization to jump in an say something to the effect of "This is a hard case call termination, there will be an additional 3c/min surcharge do you wish to continue) the call just gets dropped. Seems like a problem as much with the oligopoly of a few big national carriers, as with the monopoly that the local bell operator might be.
The do if they want to connect calls for their customers to those loops. If they can't offer unlimited flat rate long distance, they should not do so. I don't see why you feel the local telco operators should be forced to structure their revenue in any particular way.
Just like makers of safety razors sell the bodies cheap because they know they can get the revenue from the blades, all these local carriers are doing is selling loop cheap because they know they can charge enough to cover their costs for call termination.
The bigger carriers are just being dishonest by dropping the calls. They either need to tell their customers we can't give you flat rate because our own cost structure is not flat. When you want to call Nowhereville population 64, its going to be a few bucks more an hour because thats what the telephone operator there charges. Otherwise they need to eat the cost or tell their own customers they won't terminate the calls as why. They could encourage them to write and suggest they encourage their local carrier to revisit their pricing structure.
You seem to think the person paying for the destination loop is the customer where LD is concerned and its not true.
Why is more reasonable to charge loop customers more but not carriers? Seriously if Verizon and AT&T want to offer sell unlimited nation wide LD they should either build out the last mile infrastructure themselves or pay the MARKET rate for call termination in that area.
Right in this case its not the rural customer that is being subsided here. They are paying for their service, and their operator is providing termination to other carriers. Its these other carriers who don't like the rates. The problem is they want to offer unlimited nation wide long distance dirt cheap. Well then they either need to charge more or eat some margin when customers make high cost calls to rural telephone operators.
The problem is not the folks in BFE, it Jr. in NYC is not willing to pay the costs to make a call there, or is carrier isn't.
telephone service can be the difference between life and death in emergencies.
So can living an hour closer to a hospital. What's point? There are risks, costs, and many benefits to living in any place. Weigh them and take your choice.
Should we have to build a ER in every small town? Do we need a fire station within 5min of ever country house along some road? Where do you draw the line? I have relatives that would probably be alive today if they had access to better emergency services and communications. I don't fault society though, they chose to live where they lived and loved living there.
Easy, get rid of the earned income tax credit and make failure to file and or pay a capital crime for persons over 18. We have just have them all lined up an shot on April 16th. It will even broaden the base!
Seriously though it is a real problem and there is a total leadership vacuum around the issue. The whole "winning the future" thing misses the point. We can invest all we want in education but there is still going to be an ever growing segment of the population who simply lack the innate talent to be more productive than our machines. It won't matter how many years we send trying to cram their wetware full of facts and condition it to use certain problem solving strategies.
Honestly I think this is real problem society faces and its manifesting it self in ways that we are treating like problems today; which are really only symptoms. Its like the myth of pay gap. Its not that CEO has become more greedy in fact if you look at total cost of compensation, including perks and expense, CEO pay vs other employees has actually gone DOWN over 25 years. Its just that the average wage has spread. Why because machines replaced the bottom rung of white collar workers first.
Those workers made more than blue collar folks because you did have to have some training to do basic accounting work. Now the ERP system and handful of accountants does the work a whole department once did on paper. The robots have actually been the harder part of automation.
Doing what carbon paper and an adding machine did with automation was easy, replicating the human hand much harder, but that domino is falling. When people are not needed to stock shelves or fry burgers we are in real trouble. Really I anticipate cleaning the last thing to be automated.
No, because then you'd be angry at them for killing jobs. Everyone knows that big companies will be vilified no matter what they do. So it really only makes sense for them to do whatever is most economical.
If the general public actually had the intellect to rival our poo flinging primate cousins; than maybe there would be hope for corporate responsibility but as it stands companies like Amazon and lately even Google can't be win in the court of public opinion no matter what they do so they may as well just "be evil".
Packet radio is plenty common and widely used (well for Amateur Radio definitions of widely). Usually you do SLIP not ethernet, as that would be lots of extra overhead pushing ether frames back and forth for no good reason.
The problem: while smartphones go in an out of vogue every few years, modern cars have lifespans of a decade or more.
Auto Industry perspective: The problem: while smartphones go in and out of vogue every few years, our cars have lifespans of a decade or more.
Nothing would make them happier than if they could get away with obsoleting a car in 3 years in the market place. Right now the public wont stand for it (thank God) but the automakers would love it. The other thing is the automakers don't really see used market buyers as their customers. As far as passenger cars go they make their money off the folks that either lease or flip their car every three years or less. So they don't care if a second hard owner can get any use of the in dash system or not.
Did it help them make the first sale is all that matters. The re certified used segment might even get a new revenue stream offering to upgrade that stuff.
Its partly true they can certainly make a law (A) that says they can't make laws but there is nothing to stop them from creating a law (B) that explicitly says it invalidates (A) and also does "some stuff".
So its really an exercises in making a statement and not much more.
Perhaps but I think the content industry needs to get real about the value of their products. Quite honestly the difference between a 2003 title on Gog for $2-10 vs a 2012 title for $40-60 is in my opinion frequently nil in fun factor.
Now its true that many of these titles could not be sold profitably at release for $2-10 if you assume their sales figures hold constant. I doubt they would though. As you say copyright infringement is rampant, so these things get installed on allot more systems than copies were sold for, perhaps they'd sell more copies if the price was lower. My guess is they would.
There problem is the market places is crowded, the prices are higher than is justified given that context or two many games are being produced likely both. Those freetards would not buy the product for $60 if that was the only way to get it; they'd do with out. The industry needs find a more reasonable price point and cut down the release schedule to something supportable at that price point.
What GOG really proves is that if you lower the price infringement drops, at a faster rate. I don't see what the value is in pretending that you have a product worth $60 that sells 300K copies and gets install on 1000K machines, when you could sell 900K copies at $20 and still get installed on about 1000K machines.
I think everyone understands that. They big thing the economy needs is to know what to expect. So you don't cut the budget 50% in year one, but what you do is plan 50% cuts and say in year X buget A will be...
That way everyone knows where they need to make adjustments.
The ignorance of what happened less than a decade ago is astounding. We keep hearing about a two state solution, Gaza was the two state solution. Squabbling at the UN aside, even Israel officially recognized the Gaza boarder as an international one at least at one point, I think they still do.
About 8 years ago the Israeli's pulled out and left the region to the Palestinian authority to manage. Those idiots attacked with rockets almost as soon as the last Israeli left. At the time it was not an "open-air prison" that happened later after the Palestinians proved that if allowed access to any resources they'd weaponize them and attack Israel.
What exactly would you do if after in the interest of peace you gave someone some land and then they used it as a platform to try and attack you from? I know what I would do; and it looks allot like what Israel has done to Gaza in recent years.
I would advocate not using HTTPs unless you have something to secure. That might be as simple as login if you have forum or something but if its all just non-interactive public information send it in the clear.
Do some googling there are some public CAs that will issue minimally verified certificates for personal sites free for at least the first year, so that might be an option. Otherwise if the user community is small enough you can use a self signed certificate. You'll need to contact them out of band transmit you certificate out of band and get them to install it. I know one person who managed to score a couple thousand 8Mb usb sticks for like $25 watch ebay. He has a local business that delivers paper products and janitorial supplies. His customers that want to re-order over the web are given one with the cert on it, they install it on their machine and it all works.
This is actually more secure than Verisign and the like but obviously it only works when you have an exisiting relationship and won't scale. Those are really your only options.
Because this lets the browser know and it remembers. So when I come along and spoof the MAC address of your gateway, and route the traffic to my own web server. I also need to run HTTPS or you will get a warning.
Additionally I am also going to need a certificate that your system will see as trusted and valid for the name you requested; which fortuitously remains at least a little hard in the typical case.
Without this I could pretty much count on you just typing amazon.com, rather than https://amazon.com/ your browser would most likely do http first and if you are really lucky try https first but still fall back to http when I don't answer on 443. So anyone who could manipulate your DNS or upstream routing could make you a victim of site cloning, or man-in-the-middle pretty easily. With this the hole is at least partly closed, in that if you have been to the site before your browser knows if its not https something is wrong.
Well if the Muslim world had not cut off the route from Europe to the holy land the crusades probably never would have happened. Remember early Islam was spread by the sword. Its a modern fiction that the Europeans started the conflict that lead to the Crusades.
If the performance numbers are really this good and you can run it off a reasonably sized solar cell, seems this would be great for hiking. Its no fun having to carry a large quantity of water, even relatively wet climates like the eastern US sometimes good water sources are farther apart than you'd like. That was my experience when I did the AT anyway.
I generally found I needed to carry 3 liters of water to not be thirsty between convenient opportunities to acquire more on hotter days. These were usually humid days when this thing would perform better too, as the water loss was from perspiration which you did more of because its less effective cooling the more humid it gets.
Slashdot Mirror
Why I am wasting time replying to your profane post whe you can use google all by yourself I don't know but.... World Bank just last week.
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://climatechange.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/Turn_Down_the_heat_Why_a_4_degree_centrigrade_warmer_world_must_be_avoided.pdf&sa=U&ei=w8DDUO2tDMnJ0QH07ICwAw&ved=0CBsQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNEWQfQA-XNnDdeVCH3dMvQCW8wgyw
My problem with the entire AGW issue is that people don't seem to look at it from the economic perspective. The costs of cutting emissions enough to make even a little difference is huge, and not enough to save us. Even without the thawing methane issue many of the models say we are on course for a 4+ degree rise, and doing enough to slow that by 2 degrees could consume almost our entire GDP! Meanwhile the models also indicate the geo-polictical situation as we know it won't tolerate more than 2 degrees. Finally add in feedback issues like this one and the evidence we might have already crossed the tipping point where even if we became carbon neutral today we are still doomed!
So it seems to me curbing emissions is a waste of resources that should be either going into savings (private and public) so we can afford to implement an actual solution when one becomes apparent or to R&D of said solution.
Maybe that is carbon scrubber large enough and cheap enough to lower the carbon content in the atmosphere. Once we have something like that we would know the unit cost of removing carbon, and could target emissions goals based on cut emissions until the costs of reduction per unit exceeds operating the scrubber.
Perhaps its some other geo-engineering solution; there are benefits to higher atmospheric carbon for agriculture, perhaps if we can control temperatures another way the CO2 might not even be such a problem (yes I am aware there are acidity issues with the ocean etc that complicate things as well).
As it stands right now the situation looks like this to me:
Guy goes to the doctor
Doctor: Well your heart is failing and you have two years to live ....
Guy: Is there anything we can do?
Doctor: I could amputate your legs, it will lower you body mass and make things easier for your heart.
Guy: That sounds awful; but it will save me right?
Doctor (chuckles): Oh my no, your heart is already way to damaged, it will be incredibly painful come with its own complications and probably only extend your life a couple weeks. Shall I get my hack saw?
Guy:
I am not sure shoveling out barns is the best career move if you are looking to avoid bullshit. I don't have tons of experience in agriculture but I suspect quite a lot bullshit is produced in barns. Perhaps not as much as out in grazing fields but a substantial amount.
So we can't burn our coal, we can't store our nuclear waste in an affordable way, and if the EPA gets its way we won't be able to continue our growth in cheap natural gas either. All without care for the fact that we still have no-effective base load green energy solution.
I don't think the risk is a state.
Even the pretty darn irrational like Iran and DPRK leadership are rational enough to understand MAD. Anyone in charge of an installed government is in a pretty good spot, and won't want to screw it up. Saddam Husein being a note worthy exception; he could have saved himself easily even after 911 by just throwing open the doors and letting Weapons inspectors do whatever they like, it would have let the air out of the US position.
Most likely its the case Ahmadinejad likes being President and the Iatola (sp?) likes being the supreme leader; they know they'd never be allowed to keep such a position if they actually used a nuke. So they won't even if they believe their rhetoric about us being the infidel they won't do it. The entire rest of the world be line up against them; or they'd be killed in a counter strike.
Trouble is the Arab uprisings have shown us even thought to be stable governments like Syria and Egypt can be here one day gone the next. Any new government will have all the same things to lose if they thought to use a nuke, so no matter who ends up in power the deal will be cushy enough they'd never nuke anyone. The question is what happens if the weapons go missing during the anarchic period between governments? They could conceivably find their way to hands of some loony with nothing to lose, who might actually use one.
Do we really need a study to show that repeated hits to the head result in confusion, depression and dementia?
Yes and No! Plenty of anecdotal evidence existed out there, enough for most of us to conclude participating in an activity where repeated blows to the head are common would increase our risk of those things. I think most of us *supposed* as much. What studies do is enable us to *know* things, they take it out of the realm of sure seems like it to, and move it into hard facts.
Now I hear many people, say things like "measure don't guess". That is correct position when the answer will be actionable or would effect the action you will take. For me and I would guess for you, no study is needed. I have plenty of other good reasons to try and minimize the number of times I get hit in the head; I really don't like it being a big one. So I can't use the information.
Someone who really values football and or enjoys playing it might be able to, though. Speculation might not have been reason enough to give up something they enjoy; but if you can say "yes this is certainly damaging your mental faculties" it changes the math for them.
I ripped + encoded + tagged my entire collection with some shell scripts, just using cdda2wav to get the data. It was all auto pilot after some initial testing. IE every time the disk tray ejected I just dropped the next disk off the stack in. Sometimes I was in front of the computer doing other things, other times the display was off I was just walking past it.
I have since been listing to my collection for years on a variety of devices and never once heard an audible error I can reasonably attribute to the initial ripping/encoding. I used shorten at the time ( like I said years ago ), but have since converted to flac.
Knowing what I know about the technology I am certain the rips were not error free, most errors should have been fixed, but the unrecoverable errors must therefore be preserved. My point is it really does not impact my ability to enjoy the material though. Even if someone did have golden ears, would a few bad frames spread across several moments for audio really distract? Seems hard to believe.
I think the article poster should consider he might be solving the wrong problem. Rather than trying to get perfect rips done fast, maybe he should try to get very good rips done fast.
I never said what the big carriers are doing is illegal, I said was dishonest. If they don't have the intention of terminating calls anywhere the rates are higher than the norm I think dishonest be marking "unlimited flat rate LD to anywhere", even if they have legally covered themselves with some fine print. Unlimited flat rate LD is what presented in the audible component of the television spots and the readable type face on the shiny mailers.
They should either drop the anyway or the flat rate part, of the pitch if they really want to be what I would call forthright. I am not naive though I don't really expect anyone's advertising to be exactly forthright; and I do think we should keep our standard of business buyer beware, if someone fails to read the fine print its their own damn fault.
I still disagree with you on the economics of who should pay for what. I don't have a dog in this fight but I used to live in place that had a rural bell operator. If you put the added costs on the loop side, than heavy users get subsidized by light users. I did not receive all that many LD ( it was expensive for everyone back then ) calls from friends or family, but it was sure nice to be able to do so. Had loop costs been higher I'd probably have done without a line (pay phones still existed then so I could have made the occasional call from Main St). Local calls were of little use either, frankly you went downtown for one reason or another pretty much every day and when its sub 10min walk from one end of town to the other, you don't need to "let your fingers do the walking", want to know if a shop or business can take care of something for you? might as well walk in and ask.
Frankly I think its much fairer and more sensible to draw as much of the required revenue from tariffs on inter-exchange calls. That way it stays cheap for everyone to have a loop. If loop costs get to high people would drop service; pretty soon you'd have no end points to terminate calls at. Charging more for loop makes no sense for a local bell, as it actually degrades the usefulness of the system.
Finally I don't think this is a case of city folk subsiding rural bell users, its more a case of they (they are placing the call after all) want to communicate by phone with someone in the middle of know where are being asked to pay real costs of doing so, part of which is to maintain a perhaps little used stretch of copper across the last 15miles making it possible. Unfortunately rather than using a little intelligence and computerization to jump in an say something to the effect of "This is a hard case call termination, there will be an additional 3c/min surcharge do you wish to continue) the call just gets dropped. Seems like a problem as much with the oligopoly of a few big national carriers, as with the monopoly that the local bell operator might be.
The do if they want to connect calls for their customers to those loops. If they can't offer unlimited flat rate long distance, they should not do so. I don't see why you feel the local telco operators should be forced to structure their revenue in any particular way.
Just like makers of safety razors sell the bodies cheap because they know they can get the revenue from the blades, all these local carriers are doing is selling loop cheap because they know they can charge enough to cover their costs for call termination.
The bigger carriers are just being dishonest by dropping the calls. They either need to tell their customers we can't give you flat rate because our own cost structure is not flat. When you want to call Nowhereville population 64, its going to be a few bucks more an hour because thats what the telephone operator there charges. Otherwise they need to eat the cost or tell their own customers they won't terminate the calls as why. They could encourage them to write and suggest they encourage their local carrier to revisit their pricing structure.
You seem to think the person paying for the destination loop is the customer where LD is concerned and its not true.
Why is more reasonable to charge loop customers more but not carriers? Seriously if Verizon and AT&T want to offer sell unlimited nation wide LD they should either build out the last mile infrastructure themselves or pay the MARKET rate for call termination in that area.
Right in this case its not the rural customer that is being subsided here. They are paying for their service, and their operator is providing termination to other carriers. Its these other carriers who don't like the rates. The problem is they want to offer unlimited nation wide long distance dirt cheap. Well then they either need to charge more or eat some margin when customers make high cost calls to rural telephone operators.
The problem is not the folks in BFE, it Jr. in NYC is not willing to pay the costs to make a call there, or is carrier isn't.
telephone service can be the difference between life and death in emergencies.
So can living an hour closer to a hospital. What's point? There are risks, costs, and many benefits to living in any place. Weigh them and take your choice.
Should we have to build a ER in every small town? Do we need a fire station within 5min of ever country house along some road? Where do you draw the line? I have relatives that would probably be alive today if they had access to better emergency services and communications. I don't fault society though, they chose to live where they lived and loved living there.
This kind of storage scheme means that the human workers are simply meat waldos serving the computer software that runs the place.
Before that they simply served the warehouse manager with his ledger. I think you over stating impact this has on the job role of they typical picker.
Easy, get rid of the earned income tax credit and make failure to file and or pay a capital crime for persons over 18. We have just have them all lined up an shot on April 16th. It will even broaden the base!
Seriously though it is a real problem and there is a total leadership vacuum around the issue. The whole "winning the future" thing misses the point. We can invest all we want in education but there is still going to be an ever growing segment of the population who simply lack the innate talent to be more productive than our machines. It won't matter how many years we send trying to cram their wetware full of facts and condition it to use certain problem solving strategies.
Honestly I think this is real problem society faces and its manifesting it self in ways that we are treating like problems today; which are really only symptoms. Its like the myth of pay gap. Its not that CEO has become more greedy in fact if you look at total cost of compensation, including perks and expense, CEO pay vs other employees has actually gone DOWN over 25 years. Its just that the average wage has spread. Why because machines replaced the bottom rung of white collar workers first.
Those workers made more than blue collar folks because you did have to have some training to do basic accounting work. Now the ERP system and handful of accountants does the work a whole department once did on paper. The robots have actually been the harder part of automation.
Doing what carbon paper and an adding machine did with automation was easy, replicating the human hand much harder, but that domino is falling. When people are not needed to stock shelves or fry burgers we are in real trouble. Really I anticipate cleaning the last thing to be automated.
No, because then you'd be angry at them for killing jobs. Everyone knows that big companies will be vilified no matter what they do. So it really only makes sense for them to do whatever is most economical.
If the general public actually had the intellect to rival our poo flinging primate cousins; than maybe there would be hope for corporate responsibility but as it stands companies like Amazon and lately even Google can't be win in the court of public opinion no matter what they do so they may as well just "be evil".
Packet radio is plenty common and widely used (well for Amateur Radio definitions of widely). Usually you do SLIP not ethernet, as that would be lots of extra overhead pushing ether frames back and forth for no good reason.
The problem: while smartphones go in an out of vogue every few years, modern cars have lifespans of a decade or more.
Auto Industry perspective:
The problem: while smartphones go in and out of vogue every few years, our cars have lifespans of a decade or more.
Nothing would make them happier than if they could get away with obsoleting a car in 3 years in the market place. Right now the public wont stand for it (thank God) but the automakers would love it. The other thing is the automakers don't really see used market buyers as their customers. As far as passenger cars go they make their money off the folks that either lease or flip their car every three years or less. So they don't care if a second hard owner can get any use of the in dash system or not.
Did it help them make the first sale is all that matters. The re certified used segment might even get a new revenue stream offering to upgrade that stuff.
Its partly true they can certainly make a law (A) that says they can't make laws but there is nothing to stop them from creating a law (B) that explicitly says it invalidates (A) and also does "some stuff".
So its really an exercises in making a statement and not much more.
Perhaps but I think the content industry needs to get real about the value of their products. Quite honestly the difference between a 2003 title on Gog for $2-10 vs a 2012 title for $40-60 is in my opinion frequently nil in fun factor.
Now its true that many of these titles could not be sold profitably at release for $2-10 if you assume their sales figures hold constant. I doubt they would though. As you say copyright infringement is rampant, so these things get installed on allot more systems than copies were sold for, perhaps they'd sell more copies if the price was lower. My guess is they would.
There problem is the market places is crowded, the prices are higher than is justified given that context or two many games are being produced likely both. Those freetards would not buy the product for $60 if that was the only way to get it; they'd do with out. The industry needs find a more reasonable price point and cut down the release schedule to something supportable at that price point.
What GOG really proves is that if you lower the price infringement drops, at a faster rate. I don't see what the value is in pretending that you have a product worth $60 that sells 300K copies and gets install on 1000K machines, when you could sell 900K copies at $20 and still get installed on about 1000K machines.
I think everyone understands that. They big thing the economy needs is to know what to expect. So you don't cut the budget 50% in year one, but what you do is plan 50% cuts and say in year X buget A will be...
That way everyone knows where they need to make adjustments.
The ignorance of what happened less than a decade ago is astounding. We keep hearing about a two state solution, Gaza was the two state solution. Squabbling at the UN aside, even Israel officially recognized the Gaza boarder as an international one at least at one point, I think they still do.
About 8 years ago the Israeli's pulled out and left the region to the Palestinian authority to manage. Those idiots attacked with rockets almost as soon as the last Israeli left. At the time it was not an "open-air prison" that happened later after the Palestinians proved that if allowed access to any resources they'd weaponize them and attack Israel.
What exactly would you do if after in the interest of peace you gave someone some land and then they used it as a platform to try and attack you from? I know what I would do; and it looks allot like what Israel has done to Gaza in recent years.
I would advocate not using HTTPs unless you have something to secure. That might be as simple as login if you have forum or something but if its all just non-interactive public information send it in the clear.
Do some googling there are some public CAs that will issue minimally verified certificates for personal sites free for at least the first year, so that might be an option. Otherwise if the user community is small enough you can use a self signed certificate. You'll need to contact them out of band transmit you certificate out of band and get them to install it. I know one person who managed to score a couple thousand 8Mb usb sticks for like $25 watch ebay. He has a local business that delivers paper products and janitorial supplies. His customers that want to re-order over the web are given one with the cert on it, they install it on their machine and it all works.
This is actually more secure than Verisign and the like but obviously it only works when you have an exisiting relationship and won't scale. Those are really your only options.
Because this lets the browser know and it remembers. So when I come along and spoof the MAC address of your gateway, and route the traffic to my own web server. I also need to run HTTPS or you will get a warning.
Additionally I am also going to need a certificate that your system will see as trusted and valid for the name you requested; which fortuitously remains at least a little hard in the typical case.
Without this I could pretty much count on you just typing amazon.com, rather than https://amazon.com/ your browser would most likely do http first and if you are really lucky try https first but still fall back to http when I don't answer on 443. So anyone who could manipulate your DNS or upstream routing could make you a victim of site cloning, or man-in-the-middle pretty easily. With this the hole is at least partly closed, in that if you have been to the site before your browser knows if its not https something is wrong.
Well if the Muslim world had not cut off the route from Europe to the holy land the crusades probably never would have happened. Remember early Islam was spread by the sword. Its a modern fiction that the Europeans started the conflict that lead to the Crusades.
If the performance numbers are really this good and you can run it off a reasonably sized solar cell, seems this would be great for hiking. Its no fun having to carry a large quantity of water, even relatively wet climates like the eastern US sometimes good water sources are farther apart than you'd like. That was my experience when I did the AT anyway.
I generally found I needed to carry 3 liters of water to not be thirsty between convenient opportunities to acquire more on hotter days. These were usually humid days when this thing would perform better too, as the water loss was from perspiration which you did more of because its less effective cooling the more humid it gets.