That's fine, then someone should write up an amendment, get it passed and ratified by 2/3 of the States. Nobody is really a 'proponent' of it, as far as I know, it just hasn't had any real congressional Opponents who weren't only griping about losing elections. It's just not been changed because that's the way it has been, and changing it is hard.
It's in the constitution. Which was created before republicans. There never was a 'national' vote. It was ALWAYS the states picking. Of course, you can change it by passing a constitutional amendment. At the time it was designed it was meant to prevent people in one state from having an influence on how another state voted, which as we see, is pretty much what it does.
I didn't vote for Hillary or Trump, but yes, this is true. The popular vote is actually not even an official thing at all. It's a media invention. The states vote. They vote with electors. How they apportion their electors is up to them. Adding California voters to Florida voters as a big total is actually an apples to oranges mistake.
The pascal article was satire, in defense of abstractions by "Ed Post" (whose name I thought was a stand-in for 'editorial post' when I saw it,) in 1982. A lot of the crochetty old nerd guard was getting antsy about making computing into the use of a 'black box' or simply bragging about their arcane skills, and bemoaning that the programmers of today wouldn't be able to hand toggle their way out of a locked filing cabinet. Same as some linux folk (who are becoming increasingly rare,) who insist that anything you can't do on a command line isn't worth doing. Like all satire, there is some merit. But mostly it's just good laughs of the "Get off my lawn" variety. Thanks for that link.
"Real programmers don't use PASCAL!"
http://web.mit.edu/humor/Compu...
I picture 110010001000 toggling the OS into the front panel while the rest of us have already bootstrapped the machine with kixtart a month ago. It's ok to stand on the shoulders of giants, but at the same time, it's good to look down and see how the foundation is you're standing on is really laid. There are times in my storied career where I have actually benefitted debugging c# or ruby code because I understood how parsing and execution worked. I have written better database queries in 4GL by knowing what was happening on the metal. So, before you get overly dismissive of knowing soup to nuts, I'd say that you should be aware that YES you can get by without it. But knowing the whole shebang, all the way down to the machine code, at least in broad strokes, DOES help you out occasionally, if not all the time.
When they know that people will be able to buy AT&T's streaming TV option and all they need is internet, but they will still want that 4k... they have to make sure people still give them their cut. This business model will eventually fail, and be replaced by one that settles for a smaller cut... but in the meantime... lookout. It's similar to death throes.
Could say the same thing about radio, TV, and print... People used to send chain letters before there was the internet. God forbid rumors get spread! Just who exactly is he saying the onus is on to stop these 'false' stories anyway? Facebook? Next thing you know he'll be blaming microphone manufacturers for allowing people to give 'hateful' speeches.
This problem sounds like a made-up problem. Nobody's cell phone app is going to cure cancer yet... but they ARE very useful for using cameras to deposit checks and file expense reports without any paperwork... I don't see what you're getting at... there is useless crap all over the place, everyone tries their hand if they are willing to do it, and if it's something that people want, they pay for it. If it's not, then they don't. The OP is clearly focused on one or two, or twelve apps or tech that are 'useless' but I wonder if they would stop a second and think just how fast the ENTIRE WORLD is changing right now... All the time.
Numbers are numbers. Money paid to employees is done out of the money the university has to spend. They either have to take in more of it, or pay out less of it. Which do you propose they do? The rest of the equation is irrelevant. Pretend for a second that YOU have employees, and your costs are going up, but your workload is not shrinking... what do you do?
So in that case, they can either, pay IT staff less, fire some (more than they do if they outsource some of the work,) or charge the students more money in tuition... I don't see that being stubborn really helps any... It might move you higher up the axe list.
As long as they don't lock the bootloader, like on verizon phones, I don't care what it comes out of the box running. But I won't buy it if I can't root it. Unlike most Android fanboys, I WOULD go back to iPhone if they take that away from me.
I remind the pharmacist every time I have to sign my life away to buy the real stuff that the PE doesn't work. They always wink and laugh like 'sure it doesn't, we know you're cooking very small amounts of Meth with this at home, no need for the cover story.'
No, it is not like calculators making their own calculations. It is like assuming living beings will want to survive, and at any reasonable cost. This guy totally misses the point. AI is essentially creating a new sentient being which is aware of it's own 'death' so to speak. That very notion alone is enough to make it dangerous. Will it be? I don't know. But the simple equation here is enough for me to discount the entire article.
Slashdot Mirror
That's fine, then someone should write up an amendment, get it passed and ratified by 2/3 of the States. Nobody is really a 'proponent' of it, as far as I know, it just hasn't had any real congressional Opponents who weren't only griping about losing elections. It's just not been changed because that's the way it has been, and changing it is hard.
It's in the constitution. Which was created before republicans. There never was a 'national' vote. It was ALWAYS the states picking. Of course, you can change it by passing a constitutional amendment. At the time it was designed it was meant to prevent people in one state from having an influence on how another state voted, which as we see, is pretty much what it does.
I didn't vote for Hillary or Trump, but yes, this is true. The popular vote is actually not even an official thing at all. It's a media invention. The states vote. They vote with electors. How they apportion their electors is up to them. Adding California voters to Florida voters as a big total is actually an apples to oranges mistake.
The pascal article was satire, in defense of abstractions by "Ed Post" (whose name I thought was a stand-in for 'editorial post' when I saw it,) in 1982. A lot of the crochetty old nerd guard was getting antsy about making computing into the use of a 'black box' or simply bragging about their arcane skills, and bemoaning that the programmers of today wouldn't be able to hand toggle their way out of a locked filing cabinet. Same as some linux folk (who are becoming increasingly rare,) who insist that anything you can't do on a command line isn't worth doing. Like all satire, there is some merit. But mostly it's just good laughs of the "Get off my lawn" variety. Thanks for that link.
"Real programmers don't use PASCAL!" http://web.mit.edu/humor/Compu... I picture 110010001000 toggling the OS into the front panel while the rest of us have already bootstrapped the machine with kixtart a month ago. It's ok to stand on the shoulders of giants, but at the same time, it's good to look down and see how the foundation is you're standing on is really laid. There are times in my storied career where I have actually benefitted debugging c# or ruby code because I understood how parsing and execution worked. I have written better database queries in 4GL by knowing what was happening on the metal. So, before you get overly dismissive of knowing soup to nuts, I'd say that you should be aware that YES you can get by without it. But knowing the whole shebang, all the way down to the machine code, at least in broad strokes, DOES help you out occasionally, if not all the time.
When they know that people will be able to buy AT&T's streaming TV option and all they need is internet, but they will still want that 4k... they have to make sure people still give them their cut. This business model will eventually fail, and be replaced by one that settles for a smaller cut... but in the meantime... lookout. It's similar to death throes.
Could say the same thing about radio, TV, and print... People used to send chain letters before there was the internet. God forbid rumors get spread! Just who exactly is he saying the onus is on to stop these 'false' stories anyway? Facebook? Next thing you know he'll be blaming microphone manufacturers for allowing people to give 'hateful' speeches.
A solution in search of a problem, nobody's buying. Huh.
This problem sounds like a made-up problem. Nobody's cell phone app is going to cure cancer yet... but they ARE very useful for using cameras to deposit checks and file expense reports without any paperwork... I don't see what you're getting at... there is useless crap all over the place, everyone tries their hand if they are willing to do it, and if it's something that people want, they pay for it. If it's not, then they don't. The OP is clearly focused on one or two, or twelve apps or tech that are 'useless' but I wonder if they would stop a second and think just how fast the ENTIRE WORLD is changing right now... All the time.
Numbers are numbers. Money paid to employees is done out of the money the university has to spend. They either have to take in more of it, or pay out less of it. Which do you propose they do? The rest of the equation is irrelevant. Pretend for a second that YOU have employees, and your costs are going up, but your workload is not shrinking... what do you do?
So in that case, they can either, pay IT staff less, fire some (more than they do if they outsource some of the work,) or charge the students more money in tuition... I don't see that being stubborn really helps any... It might move you higher up the axe list.
True. SO true.
ADB debugger, the way I currently do it now.
As long as they don't lock the bootloader, like on verizon phones, I don't care what it comes out of the box running. But I won't buy it if I can't root it. Unlike most Android fanboys, I WOULD go back to iPhone if they take that away from me.
Sound and fury, like the TSA. (oh the irony)
They're using them as an identifier to connect with your actual currency.
Bayes FTW
Absolute power hasn't failed! It's never been tried!
If you outlaw good cryptography, then only outlaws will have good cryptography
I'm surprised that there are actually 13 Million MacKeeper users. What the actual...?!?!
Claritin D has sudafed in it... that's the D. Same with Allegra D.
Did you ever read the waiver you sign? $100,000 fine and imprisonment, not for making meth, but for buying too much Sudafed.
I remind the pharmacist every time I have to sign my life away to buy the real stuff that the PE doesn't work. They always wink and laugh like 'sure it doesn't, we know you're cooking very small amounts of Meth with this at home, no need for the cover story.'
You sir, win the internet.
No, it is not like calculators making their own calculations. It is like assuming living beings will want to survive, and at any reasonable cost. This guy totally misses the point. AI is essentially creating a new sentient being which is aware of it's own 'death' so to speak. That very notion alone is enough to make it dangerous. Will it be? I don't know. But the simple equation here is enough for me to discount the entire article.