You're right, that is pedantic, and completely tangential to the conversation. If you only call it "war" when it is declared by men in 19th century outfits with a written declaration, then go right ahead.
You don't seem like a troll or an idiot - why are you still insisting that that laptop has a 7-year-old chip? It is thoroughly state-of-the-art, for a laptop. Even desktops only got a bump in January.
I don't know if your thesis is right, because I'm betting that a substantial number of people who took the survey don't even know that Snowden is in Russia. That is my problem with surveys like this. I would love to know why informed people support or don't support him - I'm not so interested in what ignorant people think.
I was referring to this study. The largest source of news for Millennials is Facebook. That might seem like "the news" to someone without epic stupidity flowing through their veins, but some of us are so full of epic stupidity that we still think of Facebook as a place to get biased, self-reinforcing information from your little circle of "friends".
Honestly, I think it is because Millennials don't know who he is. They really don't, as a cohort, pay much attention to the news. I'd love it if these surveys also tested knowledge about basic facts on an issue, and not just opinions.
I think you underestimate the strength of those tunnels, but that is kind of a tangent.
I agree that it would be easy to disrupt the economics that underpin society. Look at all of those unguarded electrical poles. Most highways could be completely clogged with just 3 or 4 coordinated drivers simply parking and walking away. The fact that we have so few people actively engaged in such behavior tells you just how rare the motivation to carry out such things is - or how ineffective it is to simply piss people off rather than to terrorize them.
I've never put my mind to it (nor do I intend to), but it seems like some well-timed damage to a rail on a curve would cause some problems for even the best-designed train.
I can't even imagine how much explosive you would need to damage the tunnels from INSIDE a train. Maybe if you could get some incendiary device on a diesel train, but diesels don't run into NYC. Actually that isn't quite true - NJ Transit runs some dual-mode trains now. Still seems like a long shot.
Right, so one of those was an on-board bombing which killed a whopping 2 people. That is exactly my point: you could kill 2 people without smuggling something on board. You brought the TGV into the discussion, and I'm not very familiar with the system. I'm sure a determined terrorist could find a way to kill more than 2 people, but I could just be ignorant. Certainly it would not be hard in the US with typical commuter rail, Amtrak, or subways.
Trains don't have security because it would be trivial to attack them without being on them. Short of acquiring a fighter jet or missile, this is not the case with aircraft. Why bother blowing yourself up on a train when you can do whatever you want to it from anywhere along it's permanent track? Dumbasses demonstrate this tactic all the time by stopping on grade crossings.
As for the NYC airports, only Laguardia is isolated from rail. JFK is linked to Jamaica, which is served by both subway and LIRR. Newark is served by Amtrak and NJ Transit along the NE Corridor line.
But the backhoe operator is paid a lot more than the shovel operator. Because automation boosted his productivity by 50-100x.
Yes, and he displaced x number of workers in the process. On the other hand, his increased productivity allows projects which previously were cost prohibitive, so he creates some more good jobs at the expense of those very low-end jobs.
I don't think drones can boost package delivery productivity enough to even pay for the drone itself -- unless the people delivering the packages are artificially overpaid by 5-10x already.
I think you are probably right with today's technology, but this area has been progressing very quickly. Package delivery is not something that really requires a human, so it is ripe for automation. When we get to the point where regular people are being chauffeured around by self-driving cars, it is a bit insane to imagine a man hand-delivering letters to fixed locations every day.
The thing is that automation reduces the value of their skills. You could pay someone to dig a ditch, or you can use a backhoe. One only has to look around to see that the backhoe is a lot more cost effective.
A self-driving van with delivery drone or drones may be cost effective compared to human postal worker driving, parking, and walking from door to door. That doesn't sound completely absurd to me.
Yes, at best it could be a market like the electrical market where you have suppliers and distributors. The suppliers could certainly compete, I guess.
I think what they are really suggesting is that rationing should be implemented via price increasing with demand or inversely with supply. This would definitely work, but I'm not sure they have thought through all of the repercussions and it would be very tricky to get right.
I don't know enough information to do an economic feasibility study - I was just addressing the concerns of Stormcrow309 that it would not work. It obviously would work, but as you point out it might not be worth the cost.
Slashdot Mirror
You're right, that is pedantic, and completely tangential to the conversation. If you only call it "war" when it is declared by men in 19th century outfits with a written declaration, then go right ahead.
You don't seem like a troll or an idiot - why are you still insisting that that laptop has a 7-year-old chip? It is thoroughly state-of-the-art, for a laptop. Even desktops only got a bump in January.
Yeah, lots of guys sitting in jail for friendly fire, you sure have done your research.
Don't forget our big one: The Confederate States of America.
Where have you been?
Please read the AUMF.
I assume you are being deliberately obtuse, because there is a pretty big war in Afghanistan going on. Most of NATO was there, sorry you missed it.
Is this amateur hour?
Yeah, he'll get in line behind the thousands of others who kill during war.
I don't know if your thesis is right, because I'm betting that a substantial number of people who took the survey don't even know that Snowden is in Russia. That is my problem with surveys like this. I would love to know why informed people support or don't support him - I'm not so interested in what ignorant people think.
I was referring to this study. The largest source of news for Millennials is Facebook. That might seem like "the news" to someone without epic stupidity flowing through their veins, but some of us are so full of epic stupidity that we still think of Facebook as a place to get biased, self-reinforcing information from your little circle of "friends".
Honestly, I think it is because Millennials don't know who he is. They really don't, as a cohort, pay much attention to the news. I'd love it if these surveys also tested knowledge about basic facts on an issue, and not just opinions.
10%
I think you underestimate the strength of those tunnels, but that is kind of a tangent.
I agree that it would be easy to disrupt the economics that underpin society. Look at all of those unguarded electrical poles. Most highways could be completely clogged with just 3 or 4 coordinated drivers simply parking and walking away. The fact that we have so few people actively engaged in such behavior tells you just how rare the motivation to carry out such things is - or how ineffective it is to simply piss people off rather than to terrorize them.
I think Carlos the Jackal was pretty determined.
Yes, and he killed more than 2 people :)
I've never put my mind to it (nor do I intend to), but it seems like some well-timed damage to a rail on a curve would cause some problems for even the best-designed train.
I can't even imagine how much explosive you would need to damage the tunnels from INSIDE a train. Maybe if you could get some incendiary device on a diesel train, but diesels don't run into NYC. Actually that isn't quite true - NJ Transit runs some dual-mode trains now. Still seems like a long shot.
Right, so one of those was an on-board bombing which killed a whopping 2 people. That is exactly my point: you could kill 2 people without smuggling something on board. You brought the TGV into the discussion, and I'm not very familiar with the system. I'm sure a determined terrorist could find a way to kill more than 2 people, but I could just be ignorant. Certainly it would not be hard in the US with typical commuter rail, Amtrak, or subways.
Trains don't have security because it would be trivial to attack them without being on them. Short of acquiring a fighter jet or missile, this is not the case with aircraft. Why bother blowing yourself up on a train when you can do whatever you want to it from anywhere along it's permanent track? Dumbasses demonstrate this tactic all the time by stopping on grade crossings.
As for the NYC airports, only Laguardia is isolated from rail. JFK is linked to Jamaica, which is served by both subway and LIRR. Newark is served by Amtrak and NJ Transit along the NE Corridor line.
But the backhoe operator is paid a lot more than the shovel operator. Because automation boosted his productivity by 50-100x.
Yes, and he displaced x number of workers in the process. On the other hand, his increased productivity allows projects which previously were cost prohibitive, so he creates some more good jobs at the expense of those very low-end jobs.
I don't think drones can boost package delivery productivity enough to even pay for the drone itself -- unless the people delivering the packages are artificially overpaid by 5-10x already.
I think you are probably right with today's technology, but this area has been progressing very quickly. Package delivery is not something that really requires a human, so it is ripe for automation. When we get to the point where regular people are being chauffeured around by self-driving cars, it is a bit insane to imagine a man hand-delivering letters to fixed locations every day.
The thing is that automation reduces the value of their skills. You could pay someone to dig a ditch, or you can use a backhoe. One only has to look around to see that the backhoe is a lot more cost effective.
The drone doesn't waste time chatting with co-workers.
... or posting on Slashdot :)
Don't turn this into a competition to Google for deaths by postal truck!
A self-driving van with delivery drone or drones may be cost effective compared to human postal worker driving, parking, and walking from door to door. That doesn't sound completely absurd to me.
Yes, at best it could be a market like the electrical market where you have suppliers and distributors. The suppliers could certainly compete, I guess.
I think what they are really suggesting is that rationing should be implemented via price increasing with demand or inversely with supply. This would definitely work, but I'm not sure they have thought through all of the repercussions and it would be very tricky to get right.
I don't know enough information to do an economic feasibility study - I was just addressing the concerns of Stormcrow309 that it would not work. It obviously would work, but as you point out it might not be worth the cost.