I am going to get hard flamed for this, but I would still make the argument that the vast vast majority of people have no need or even practical use for more than the 50Mbps symmetric speeds VDSL can "practically" deliver.
I telecommute, I would LOVE something better than LTE, because the caps are an issue, the speed around 6Mbps really isn't the problem. That said if I had the choice between VDSL and gigabit fiber at a price difference of $30 a month, I would not pay fiber.
We don't need fiber the premises most places, even decent copper based broad band to our less densely populated regions would be a huge win for a lot of people. Hell real unlimited data plans would be a huge win.
Verizon's plan is a f'ing joke. The throttle 'mobile host spots down to 600Kbps" after 10 gigs, they have the never to classify the fixed LTE solution they sell, which bolts to the side of your home or business as a mobile hotspot! Now if they would at least treat it as well as a handset and give you 22 gigs it would be an entertain-able choice. As it is me and the neighbors remain stuck on un-advertised but capped large plans.
What state are you in? I live in Virginia and I know a couple single people that have been allowed to adopt. I know more that have been foster parents.
use the metasploit framework. Its already got code to test this exploit, and the many eyeballs on it probably make it the safest bet among hackers tools for not having anything in it that should not be there.
with participants receiving up to $17,000 annually if single, and $24,000 for families.
Discourage people from actually getting married by essentially paying them not to! Can't have those pesky independent families, with their ability to depend on each other rather than the state can we. Can't have people loyal to each other rather than our glorious government.
It is a first class object. I passed an argument to it but there are all the usual methods on that method object. You absolutely can do something like:
mymethods[:foo].name
its valid and you'd get back its original name in this case. You could even define new methods on the object! It is a first class object in every way but how you happen to access it syntactically.
Right this is what the UBI folks don't see to get. I plays out in one of two ways.
1) You still end up with a large group of disaffected people who are unhappy with their lot in life because they have nothing to do but watch TV all day and see fancy people doing fancy thing they don't get income to support and have no path to get there. Hard work won't help them, there are no jobs left suitable for their talents. They get their check and their soviet style block apartment and that is their life and all their is to it. Humans even those who are not in on the leading portion of out intellectual bell curve won't be satisfied living that way. People *need* goals, they have to have some hope of improvement, and for most people that is improvement with respect to their peers, not "I feel good about myself because I sat and read all the classics" and not "I made this art for me, and I don't care if everyone else just sees it as garbage." some people are like that but the vast majority are not so self actualized.
2) We literally destroy the planet! Robotic workforce with unlimited cheap labor or not other resources remain limited. You will have the people on basic income asking why they should not get a bigger house, a faster car, travel to the other-side the world at super sonic speeds. After determining that there exists no path to earning these things, they will declare them to be entitlements. "Its not fair I was not born a winner of the genetic lottery, who can still find work in an automated world" and to some extent, I might be inclined to agree if man made economics as you say severs to cut them off from the things others have rather than provide any path to getting them. Earth can't sustain 9Billion people each living the life style of the say top 30% of what is considered middle class in the United States enjoy. There isn't probably enough land to build that many suburban houses and while a lot of people like and will choose cities enough will want their own little private patch of ground to lay out in the sun shine on. It just won't work.
Technology has always and will always allow more of us to have more, but physics will never allow all of us to have everything. No economic policy can change human nature. Either the population rebels against it, or if you look at say Chinese or Soviet communism human nature is corrosive of it until it starts to look like sadder, capricious, lawless forms of capitalism or fascism.
If that was adhered to there would have been no progress in the last two thousand years!
Humans can clear and plant fields by hand! If we still did the bulk of our agriculture that way most of us would be over worked and badly nourished; and as far as art, culture, and entertainment go most of us would be lucky to see an EVERYMAN play on Sunday afternoon, having worked every other waking hour of the week.
You can do this just fine in Ruby, using the method method, ie to get foo you'd do method:foo. You could do something like
myhash[f:oo] = method:foo myhash[:foo].call arg1
so you can build the same structure you are describing in Ruby without much difficultly, although admittedly this might be one of the few places where Python might actually be syntactically superior.
On nation war criminal is anthers hero. Its always been that way. There are few lines Westerns have generally agreed should not be crossed but usually it comes down to intent. Yes its wrong to target civilians, its not always wrong to target assets even when that means civilians will die.
Dropping incendiaries on wheat fields and automotive plants because you can is wrong clearly. Doing it because you *need* to disrupt the enemies supply chain so as to save the lives of your own service men, does not seem so unethical to me. I would echo Harris' comments on the bombing of Dresden:
Attacks on cities like any other act of war are intolerable unless they are strategically justified. But they are strategically justified in so far as they tend to shorten the war and preserve the lives of Allied soldiers. To my mind we have absolutely no right to give them up unless it is certain that they will not have this effect. I do not personally regard the whole of the remaining cities of Germany as worth the bones of one British Grenadier.
Sucks to you, I am not even an American citizen, your laws don't apply to me. Now book be a plane back to China.
Which as I understand it does happen from time to time. Usually as some kind of exchange to get one of our own assets back or for some other kind of political agreement.
When my last employer decided to fire the American citizens (forcing them to train their "offshore" replacements in order to receive any severance) that built the products and systems that made the company a success, those of us that remained discovered that we had to rewrite everything they produced (with a much smaller staff, of course).
But somehow you managed. Which suggests to me that you did not have to re-write EVERYTHING. I am sure there was a lot of bug fixes and re-work but the off shore folks mush have produced some useful code, at least "framed up" the application successfully enough that your reduced team could fix it. Which suggests to me that under the old model there were lots of people in your group doing work that was far below their talent level / pay grade. It sounds like management has made the right call here, they got cheaper less skilled folks to do rough-in / boiler plate and they have you and your co-workers as highly trained specialists doing the finish work.
You don't employ a cabinet maker / master carpenter to frame your house. You get one to supervise the work of others. You only need guys with basic skills to nail 2x4s together every 14". Similarly you have the more expensive talented guys do the finish work because you want the miters on your moldings to match up perfectly, your doors plumb so that don't fall open or closed or stick, your drawers to slide easily, etc.
I was wondering about that too but the more I think about:
1) on "ordinary fabrics" heat + tumble dry is not exactly gentle. Certainly the heat causes expansion and contraction, which probably puts much more stress on cotton and natural fibers than vibration would.
2) heat on synthetics often results in fatal failure modes! I have lots of outdoor/backcountry stuff that is entirely synthetic and I have ruined that stuff by failing to set the thing to "noheat"
I don't know that this ultra sonic stuff might not introduce premature wear to some of those fabrics but I doubt it would destroy them.
In some absolutist systems perhaps but most of us live in a little more grey world. Its not as simple question of minimizing the absolute violence in the world. There are other considerations. When is it our fight, only when we are threatened? when who we consider to be the victims are unable to defend themselves? When our 'allies' are threatened?
Does it matter that we have a volunteer armed services, that our people had a choice to be put in harms way. What if we have a draft again in the future does that raise the bar for the entering a war?
That is interesting and it confirms neurologically what psychologists have suspected for a long time. Certain religions attract the "healthy minded." Which sounds nice but really isn't a value judgement. You could call it a certain tolerance for injustice if you will. The healthy minded individual says, "I am not responsible if I am not personally involved and things are not necessarily in my power to improve". Catholicism mostly falls into this line of thinking. Other people see an unjust situation and think, "I might not have anything to do with it directly and I might not be able to fix it; but I have a responsibility to try." This is more consistent with people attracted to mainline Protestantism. I don't know where your typical atheist might fall on the spectrum but I can see how elements of secular humanism philosophically might be attractive to that type of individual as a mainline Protestant myself, I don't find the day to day conduct of your typical secular humanist in conflict with our/my own view of what Christ like behavior would be.
I know you were being tong in cheek, but you are not wrong. It is awesome, that we can eliminate an enemy position without risking the lives our our service personnel!
I did not mean my post to suggest the right/moral course was to send ground troops into that mess of caves. I would have used the bomb too, honestly if the president ordered me to take out that position. I simply was observing that there is a moral hazard to push button war of any sort. It makes it an easier call to kill people when you know its none of your people that will be doing any of the dying.
There is always the potential for civilian casualties, especially with large impact remote weapons systems. The next question is what is a legitimate target. I don't think if you are fighting a war for example all civilians are really off limits in terms of targets. What about the guy working in the tire factory, or the oil field. You know his effort supports the war effort and he knows it too but is still working there, is he fair target? What about the farmer tending his wheat field? I would say yes! If taking out that facility means either sweeping it with ground forces and loosing American lives or bombing / sending in terminator unit and killing some 'enemy' non-combatants, better them than us, would be my call.
What more worries me is does all this stuff make it to easy to decide to go to war in the first place? I still think there is a fundamental question this nation has wrestled with since before our entry in WWI, should be fighting wars that don't relate to our immediate interests? or should we keep the blood off our hands, even when that means sitting by and allowing injustice and even atrocities to occur?
Wait until that shit happens and insurance companies make it financially impossible to afford to own a car or let a "dangerous" human drive one."
People keep saying this but there is the reality of rural America (most of America geographically speaking). If you live in the city or burbs this seams reasonable. Where I live we have mostly farmers driving their 15 year old pickups around. These often have farm use plates (important point here). Normal registrations, plates, and full rate insurance would already be to much for this market. So the state and insurers have already carved out exceptions. More carve outs will be made.
I expect what we will see is something like you can drive whatever you want in the country, like how in the county roads are 55mph unless otherwise marked and inside city limits they are 35 unless otherwise marked but cities will require either special insurance or automated driving. From a purely technical standpoint this makes sense. Its way easier to automate city driving. Roads have lines, there are signals, its all relatively slow speed, its small area if you have deploy additional network or communications infrastructure, roads are all paved so stopping distances with a otherwise maintained vehicle are somewhat uniform, you don't have excessively steep grades etc, you don't have to pass the tractor on a double line sometimes because...reasons.
Driving around the county on the other hand is easy for humans (at least in daylight) there is little traffic, humans are good at dealing with the slightly out of the ordinary. We are super good at pattern recognition, I tell the difference between a dirt road and an ATV trail, because I just can.
My guess is uber and similar services will fill a niche. We will see things like Park-n-Rides at the edge of town. So I can cruise into town with my manually operated vehicle park it, and jump in a "public" self driver for my errands around the city that day. Already Cities like Waynesboro and Stanton have carpool lots, at the edges of town were folks can meet up and park and share a vehicle for longer trips around the valley. There isn't any public transportation attached to these currently its just a place for people to aggregate nothing more. It easy to imagine a hand full of self driving ubers at these places waiting to be used for trips inside the city.
The ethical issue however is mostly the same. It push button warfare. One side can kill the other without facing death themselves. Machines still do the killing (whether a gun toting robot or shell on the end of a guided missile with an altitude trigger) at a remote site where there isn't a human been to look the other guy in the eyes and possible change its mind.
Consider the MOAB. We killed 36 ISIS 'fighters' were they all fighters or were two of them just guys ISIS grabbed and said "you'll be cooking our meals or we kill your family" those two hypothetical individuals are men who might have surrendered to ground troops when the position was eventually over run. Those are lives that might have been spared, instead they got incinerated like everyone else! Again this just my imagination it is probably more likely everyone of the guys hold up in those caves were committed Islamists determined to kill anyone standing in the way of their caliphate.
Maybe one day our or Russian 'terminators' will have capacity to capture or kill, hopefully by the time these are deployed in the field they will have enough visual recognition to see if someone is carrying what appears to be a firearm and shoot them and maybe not kill the the little girl carrying a bucket of water. That kind of target recognition is far from simple however. Maybe that isn't a bucket of water, maybe is a bucket of acid? Humans are somewhat good and figuring that stuff out, machines have a ways to go yet.
Slashdot Mirror
I am going to get hard flamed for this, but I would still make the argument that the vast vast majority of people have no need or even practical use for more than the 50Mbps symmetric speeds VDSL can "practically" deliver.
I telecommute, I would LOVE something better than LTE, because the caps are an issue, the speed around 6Mbps really isn't the problem. That said if I had the choice between VDSL and gigabit fiber at a price difference of $30 a month, I would not pay fiber.
We don't need fiber the premises most places, even decent copper based broad band to our less densely populated regions would be a huge win for a lot of people. Hell real unlimited data plans would be a huge win.
Verizon's plan is a f'ing joke. The throttle 'mobile host spots down to 600Kbps" after 10 gigs, they have the never to classify the fixed LTE solution they sell, which bolts to the side of your home or business as a mobile hotspot! Now if they would at least treat it as well as a handset and give you 22 gigs it would be an entertain-able choice. As it is me and the neighbors remain stuck on un-advertised but capped large plans.
What state are you in? I live in Virginia and I know a couple single people that have been allowed to adopt. I know more that have been foster parents.
if I have 51% of the money in the US that doesn't allow me to automatically elect the president because I'm the majority.
If you controlled 51% of the US money supply I expect you could secure whatever outcome in a POTUS election you would like.
use the metasploit framework. Its already got code to test this exploit, and the many eyeballs on it probably make it the safest bet among hackers tools for not having anything in it that should not be there.
with participants receiving up to $17,000 annually if single, and $24,000 for families.
Discourage people from actually getting married by essentially paying them not to! Can't have those pesky independent families, with their ability to depend on each other rather than the state can we. Can't have people loyal to each other rather than our glorious government.
This is a seriously distressing policy.
Right but other than capturing the reference to the method in the first place, even the syntax is the same.
Your only real complaint here (and I agree its valid) seems to be the return value of a "def" block is nil rather than the method object.
It is a first class object. I passed an argument to it but there are all the usual methods on that method object. You absolutely can do something like:
mymethods[:foo].name
its valid and you'd get back its original name in this case. You could even define new methods on the object! It is a first class object in every way but how you happen to access it syntactically.
Right this is what the UBI folks don't see to get. I plays out in one of two ways.
1) You still end up with a large group of disaffected people who are unhappy with their lot in life because they have nothing to do but watch TV all day and see fancy people doing fancy thing they don't get income to support and have no path to get there. Hard work won't help them, there are no jobs left suitable for their talents. They get their check and their soviet style block apartment and that is their life and all their is to it. Humans even those who are not in on the leading portion of out intellectual bell curve won't be satisfied living that way. People *need* goals, they have to have some hope of improvement, and for most people that is improvement with respect to their peers, not "I feel good about myself because I sat and read all the classics" and not "I made this art for me, and I don't care if everyone else just sees it as garbage." some people are like that but the vast majority are not so self actualized.
2) We literally destroy the planet! Robotic workforce with unlimited cheap labor or not other resources remain limited. You will have the people on basic income asking why they should not get a bigger house, a faster car, travel to the other-side the world at super sonic speeds. After determining that there exists no path to earning these things, they will declare them to be entitlements. "Its not fair I was not born a winner of the genetic lottery, who can still find work in an automated world" and to some extent, I might be inclined to agree if man made economics as you say severs to cut them off from the things others have rather than provide any path to getting them. Earth can't sustain 9Billion people each living the life style of the say top 30% of what is considered middle class in the United States enjoy. There isn't probably enough land to build that many suburban houses and while a lot of people like and will choose cities enough will want their own little private patch of ground to lay out in the sun shine on. It just won't work.
Technology has always and will always allow more of us to have more, but physics will never allow all of us to have everything. No economic policy can change human nature. Either the population rebels against it, or if you look at say Chinese or Soviet communism human nature is corrosive of it until it starts to look like sadder, capricious, lawless forms of capitalism or fascism.
But machines shouldn't replace what humans can do
If that was adhered to there would have been no progress in the last two thousand years!
Humans can clear and plant fields by hand! If we still did the bulk of our agriculture that way most of us would be over worked and badly nourished; and as far as art, culture, and entertainment go most of us would be lucky to see an EVERYMAN play on Sunday afternoon, having worked every other waking hour of the week.
You can do this just fine in Ruby, using the method method, ie to get foo you'd do method :foo. You could do something like
myhash[f:oo] = method :foo
myhash[:foo].call arg1
so you can build the same structure you are describing in Ruby without much difficultly, although admittedly this might be one of the few places where Python might actually be syntactically superior.
I was able to connect to the 800+ recruiters I've talked to over the last 20+ years.
That is most unusual definition of awesome I have ever read.
On nation war criminal is anthers hero. Its always been that way. There are few lines Westerns have generally agreed should not be crossed but usually it comes down to intent. Yes its wrong to target civilians, its not always wrong to target assets even when that means civilians will die.
Dropping incendiaries on wheat fields and automotive plants because you can is wrong clearly. Doing it because you *need* to disrupt the enemies supply chain so as to save the lives of your own service men, does not seem so unethical to me. I would echo Harris' comments on the bombing of Dresden:
Attacks on cities like any other act of war are intolerable unless they are strategically justified. But they are strategically justified in so far as they tend to shorten the war and preserve the lives of Allied soldiers. To my mind we have absolutely no right to give them up unless it is certain that they will not have this effect. I do not personally regard the whole of the remaining cities of Germany as worth the bones of one British Grenadier.
The problem is proving he 'induced' manning. Unless you can get manning to testify against him its going to be hard to pin anything on him.
You helped manning steal classified documents
No he just gave them to me. ...
Sucks to you, I am not even an American citizen, your laws don't apply to me. Now book be a plane back to China.
Which as I understand it does happen from time to time. Usually as some kind of exchange to get one of our own assets back or for some other kind of political agreement.
Well PF Changs did it recently after they were hacked! I can see that situation being relatively common going forward.
FB has already proven they can get millions of people to type stuff without using their brains.
When my last employer decided to fire the American citizens (forcing them to train their "offshore" replacements in order to receive any severance) that built the products and systems that made the company a success, those of us that remained discovered that we had to rewrite everything they produced (with a much smaller staff, of course).
But somehow you managed. Which suggests to me that you did not have to re-write EVERYTHING. I am sure there was a lot of bug fixes and re-work but the off shore folks mush have produced some useful code, at least "framed up" the application successfully enough that your reduced team could fix it. Which suggests to me that under the old model there were lots of people in your group doing work that was far below their talent level / pay grade. It sounds like management has made the right call here, they got cheaper less skilled folks to do rough-in / boiler plate and they have you and your co-workers as highly trained specialists doing the finish work.
You don't employ a cabinet maker / master carpenter to frame your house. You get one to supervise the work of others. You only need guys with basic skills to nail 2x4s together every 14". Similarly you have the more expensive talented guys do the finish work because you want the miters on your moldings to match up perfectly, your doors plumb so that don't fall open or closed or stick, your drawers to slide easily, etc.
THIS ^
while true; Thread.new { 1 + 1 }; end;
Will create aclot of CPU activity but that does not mean its in any way useful.
I was wondering about that too but the more I think about:
1) on "ordinary fabrics" heat + tumble dry is not exactly gentle. Certainly the heat causes expansion and contraction, which probably puts much more stress on cotton and natural fibers than vibration would.
2) heat on synthetics often results in fatal failure modes! I have lots of outdoor/backcountry stuff that is entirely synthetic and I have ruined that stuff by failing to set the thing to "noheat"
I don't know that this ultra sonic stuff might not introduce premature wear to some of those fabrics but I doubt it would destroy them.
the technology used makes no difference
In some absolutist systems perhaps but most of us live in a little more grey world. Its not as simple question of minimizing the absolute violence in the world. There are other considerations. When is it our fight, only when we are threatened? when who we consider to be the victims are unable to defend themselves? When our 'allies' are threatened?
Does it matter that we have a volunteer armed services, that our people had a choice to be put in harms way. What if we have a draft again in the future does that raise the bar for the entering a war?
That is interesting and it confirms neurologically what psychologists have suspected for a long time. Certain religions attract the "healthy minded." Which sounds nice but really isn't a value judgement. You could call it a certain tolerance for injustice if you will. The healthy minded individual says, "I am not responsible if I am not personally involved and things are not necessarily in my power to improve". Catholicism mostly falls into this line of thinking. Other people see an unjust situation and think, "I might not have anything to do with it directly and I might not be able to fix it; but I have a responsibility to try." This is more consistent with people attracted to mainline Protestantism. I don't know where your typical atheist might fall on the spectrum but I can see how elements of secular humanism philosophically might be attractive to that type of individual as a mainline Protestant myself, I don't find the day to day conduct of your typical secular humanist in conflict with our/my own view of what Christ like behavior would be.
To be fair, the MOAB is totally awesome.
I know you were being tong in cheek, but you are not wrong. It is awesome, that we can eliminate an enemy position without risking the lives our our service personnel!
I did not mean my post to suggest the right/moral course was to send ground troops into that mess of caves. I would have used the bomb too, honestly if the president ordered me to take out that position. I simply was observing that there is a moral hazard to push button war of any sort. It makes it an easier call to kill people when you know its none of your people that will be doing any of the dying.
There is always the potential for civilian casualties, especially with large impact remote weapons systems. The next question is what is a legitimate target. I don't think if you are fighting a war for example all civilians are really off limits in terms of targets. What about the guy working in the tire factory, or the oil field. You know his effort supports the war effort and he knows it too but is still working there, is he fair target? What about the farmer tending his wheat field? I would say yes! If taking out that facility means either sweeping it with ground forces and loosing American lives or bombing / sending in terminator unit and killing some 'enemy' non-combatants, better them than us, would be my call.
What more worries me is does all this stuff make it to easy to decide to go to war in the first place? I still think there is a fundamental question this nation has wrestled with since before our entry in WWI, should be fighting wars that don't relate to our immediate interests? or should we keep the blood off our hands, even when that means sitting by and allowing injustice and even atrocities to occur?
Wait until that shit happens and insurance companies make it financially impossible to afford to own a car or let a "dangerous" human drive one."
People keep saying this but there is the reality of rural America (most of America geographically speaking). If you live in the city or burbs this seams reasonable. Where I live we have mostly farmers driving their 15 year old pickups around. These often have farm use plates (important point here). Normal registrations, plates, and full rate insurance would already be to much for this market. So the state and insurers have already carved out exceptions. More carve outs will be made.
I expect what we will see is something like you can drive whatever you want in the country, like how in the county roads are 55mph unless otherwise marked and inside city limits they are 35 unless otherwise marked but cities will require either special insurance or automated driving. From a purely technical standpoint this makes sense. Its way easier to automate city driving. Roads have lines, there are signals, its all relatively slow speed, its small area if you have deploy additional network or communications infrastructure, roads are all paved so stopping distances with a otherwise maintained vehicle are somewhat uniform, you don't have excessively steep grades etc, you don't have to pass the tractor on a double line sometimes because...reasons.
Driving around the county on the other hand is easy for humans (at least in daylight) there is little traffic, humans are good at dealing with the slightly out of the ordinary. We are super good at pattern recognition, I tell the difference between a dirt road and an ATV trail, because I just can.
My guess is uber and similar services will fill a niche. We will see things like Park-n-Rides at the edge of town. So I can cruise into town with my manually operated vehicle park it, and jump in a "public" self driver for my errands around the city that day. Already Cities like Waynesboro and Stanton have carpool lots, at the edges of town were folks can meet up and park and share a vehicle for longer trips around the valley. There isn't any public transportation attached to these currently its just a place for people to aggregate nothing more. It easy to imagine a hand full of self driving ubers at these places waiting to be used for trips inside the city.
The ethical issue however is mostly the same. It push button warfare. One side can kill the other without facing death themselves. Machines still do the killing (whether a gun toting robot or shell on the end of a guided missile with an altitude trigger) at a remote site where there isn't a human been to look the other guy in the eyes and possible change its mind.
Consider the MOAB. We killed 36 ISIS 'fighters' were they all fighters or were two of them just guys ISIS grabbed and said "you'll be cooking our meals or we kill your family" those two hypothetical individuals are men who might have surrendered to ground troops when the position was eventually over run. Those are lives that might have been spared, instead they got incinerated like everyone else! Again this just my imagination it is probably more likely everyone of the guys hold up in those caves were committed Islamists determined to kill anyone standing in the way of their caliphate.
Maybe one day our or Russian 'terminators' will have capacity to capture or kill, hopefully by the time these are deployed in the field they will have enough visual recognition to see if someone is carrying what appears to be a firearm and shoot them and maybe not kill the the little girl carrying a bucket of water. That kind of target recognition is far from simple however. Maybe that isn't a bucket of water, maybe is a bucket of acid? Humans are somewhat good and figuring that stuff out, machines have a ways to go yet.
Could it be that much worse than the current ruling class?