In a sense, this is a mirror reflection of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, with same arguments (both for and against) regarding compelling the use of private property by law- either you are allowed to discriminate or not.
The arguments ran following the lines that business would be foolish to discriminate as it would mean a loss of profit, yet businesses did discriminate. The other that there are certain standards every business should adhere to, but that means a severe weakening of privater property rights (as well as state's rights).
If you agree with the laboratories of democracy ideal, this is a natural consequence of people choosing their associations- be as discriminatory as you want, but no one else has to fund it. If you agree with the state uber allies model, this is an usurpation of the law by tenuous means.
It might be better to look at this as what would happen if the federal government mandated equal protection clause- people would be up in arms about overreach with others claiming it was needed to insure equal protection. Now you have a state government attempting to legislate what individual cities can and cannot do. Is it overreach or equal protection?
The complaints against Fox or MSNBC isn't that they present an alternative viewpoint, but they are often deceptive in doing so. There is enough room for disagreement without flagrant lies of omission. You can never get to actually discussing policy because no one can agree to any facts to begin with.
As far as homogenization, I believe most would say the web was a far more exciting place 10 years ago, with more to discover and more to explore. The opportunity to run across something out of the blue was far greater, with strange pockets seemingly put just as a waymarker.
Now large swaths of the web remind me of 70s daytime tv. Cheap, inoffensive, and while not great, not requiring much in investment either. People making vids or what have you are now "content creators" and the pomposity has grown in reverse proportion with the death of originality.
Toyota also had a bit of a media blitz with nightly reports on how your Prius was trying kill you, dramatic recreations of how a car that does 0-60 in over 13 seconds could accelerate uncontrollably (narf!), and a general concern that maybe hybrid technology wasn't as safe as burning dinosaurs. I suppose an all points bulletin to remove the floor mats until your next oil change would have been anticlimactic given the drama.
And while near 200,000 pre-orders seems like a big deal now, it is small potatoes compared to when American V8s ruled the land, and a model wasn't considered successful until it sold over 1 million units.a year. Those cars also had recalls (often quietly done with your next service), and manufacturers survived.
The expectation that Tesla needs to be perfect in execution for the Model 3 when no manufacturer has managed that previously is just the mark of a reporter who has no idea of how the automotive business operates. This is little different than the scaremongering about battery packs being punctured during accidents (when going near 100MPH) and even then Tesla went above and beyond with freaking titanium shields! Can I get a hallelujah?
I'm not even a fan of the cars, but Musk gets my respect for putting engineering over dollars, and considering the 3 will be a less complex model that the X, I imagine the execution will be even easier as they've gone down this road a few times, and their results have consistently been excellent.
I sincerely doubt any of the pre-orders are having second thoughts with this article.
Apparently the author isn't aware of the thousands of recalls other manufacturers make, and is further unaware several owners forgo getting service since the recalls are often for minor issues that don't really affect them.
If anything, Telsa taking the extra steps to prevent a potential problem should relieve Model 3 purchasers that Tesla stands behind their products.
More important than the graphic is knowing how it was derived. The criteria for poverty has changed at least twice within my lifetime. Anyhoo- the current definition-
And most telling is the rate of bankruptcy for the past century (hint- it has exploded in the later 1/3)
So what am I to make of this? If you set the bar low enough, poverty rates have been consistent around 15% for the past 50 years (even with near exponential productivity gains). But if you set the bar even lower, the number of homeless and bankruptcies have shown an even greater increase.
Previously when the mentally ill were wards of the state, there was massive abuse, no means to really rectify it, and people thought One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was reality, and the ill were just free spirits who were really just misunderstood.
They've never seen a man smear himself in shit or bash his face into broken glass because it seemed like the right thing to do.
And so now we are here, where besides mental illness, we also have the results of a drug war that has failed miserably, an economy that is failing more and more people (who, I might add, are only too acutely aware of how tenuous their current life of food and shelter really is), and psychiatric help that often is worse than the disease.
And in-between all that you also have a select minority that want nothing to do with modern society.
Platitudes concerning the apathy of the good citizen doesn't do justice to the complexity of the situation, and especially given SF ultra-liberal bent and large economy; you'd think this would have been solved ages ago with good feelings and money.
I think any government demanding something like this is inherently untrustworthy.
They are arguing that you shouldn't be allowed to express your thoughts by virtue of not being selective with your speech. I mean the Big Brother tropes have played out in a frightening parody, making it illegal to escape the tv screen. No one is above the law.
Except who does the law really serve? Forbidding people to keep secrets is just kicking in the doors to people's mind. And for what? There is someone even worse who would like to do the same?
Ask the people affected by the OPM hack if they would have liked unbreakable encryption. And I'm going to trust these fools to safeguard my privacy?
Depends very much on what life looks like at 160, but as it is the human brain doesn't fully develop until mid-twenties, so that leaves about 30 or so good years of being in full control of your faculties.
Not really enough time to gain some wisdom and put it to good use.
I believe they saying "history repeats itself" is precisely because no one ever lives long enough to have a broad view, and certainly doesn't live long enough to come to terms with the follies of their youth and move towards something better.
Extending middle age will be one of the most dramatic shifts ever in our species, pushing intelligence further than even the web, and for the nihilist, forcing people to live with their decisions.
Keep in mind this is the same country that allowed banks to fail and threw the bankers responsible in jail during the 2008 crisis. Everyone predicted their economy would implode, but actually recovered more quickly than several other European countries.
I imagine the sting from that has made them more wary of even a hint of corruption, which is oddly starting to reverberate through the US after TARP, TPP, and now no real recovery in sight.
It is less about legality as it is enforcement. We already have concerns about the steps police take to enforce the law with surveillance. I really can't see getting up in arms about police wanting cameras everywhere and then some dolt essentially harassing others in the name of the law. That shit won't fly when the cops try to pull it, and it certainly won't fly for someone hiding their grudge behind being a good citizen. If history is any guide, these overt acts are usually hiding some interesting things in the attic. Maybe someone will start monitoring him 24/7. I mean, you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide.
And especially of the most inconsequential statues to enforce, prostitution?
"The city violent crime rate for Oklahoma City in 2012 was higher than the national violent crime rate average by 137.56% and the city property crime rate in Oklahoma City was higher than the national property crime rate average by 108.51%."
Maybe he could focus his superhero fantasies on something more meaningful.
I am always bemused that after call centers being moved to India, manufacturing jobs ending up in China, and even Fords being built in Mexico that people can't fathom that increasing labor costs at home might have an affect on the job market. Like the US labor market is somehow a product of American exceptionalism, free from other cost concerns.
While trying to increase the ranks of the middle class is laudable, it seems to be more ending jobs for entry-level workers.
The difference in yearly income between a burrito engineer and a degreed and licensed professional is about $10k under the new scheme. Why bother with the school debit, the professional associations, and yearly certifications when you could just work fast-food?
Except once that pandora's box of automation is opened, even those professional careers are fair game.
do you support nuclear research? As it is, there are numerous aging nuclear plants, and not really much to replace them with except theoretical models and tired designs.
The worst part about the anti-nuke crowd is that they have effectively shuttered research, which means several plants are operating well beyond their intended lifespan. Even if you support going 100% wind and solar, it will have to be implemented piecemeal, which means at least some new nuclear plants will have to bridge the gap. Would you prefer something modern like a pebble-bed reactor, or something based on a 70s design like Watts Bar 1?
The real learning your child is likely to make will be unsupervised, being exposed to an unfiltered world full of contradiction and ugly details most would rather deny. It is, as it were, coming to terms with the fact you are gullible, and having the tools to sort through something like/b/. No firewall is 100% and the forbidden always takes on a special type of urgency.
If anything, the unease with/b/ and Tay are coming to terms with the unflattering reflection they make of ourselves. Cetainly no teen girl could ever be vulgar and vicious, and it's always the other posting on/b/.
The difficult part is convincing the orphans and widows dying in the streets crowd is that minimum wage is the least effective means to combat poverty. You've just relegated millions more to their ranks with little means to improve their conditions. It is ass-backwards, yet keeps being pushed as if the logical outcome isn't increased automation.
The other part is convincing the taxation is theft crowd that the welfare horse left the barn ages ago, so it might be a good idea to really consider the best way to administer it.
I see efficiency in services (including governmental) being a competitive point with most nations as automation increases. Time will tell if BI is the least destructive way forward.
Don't doubt for an instant that automation will have profound changes in the labor market beyond minimum wage jobs. Raising the minimum wage just accelerates the process, giving society less time to adapt.
Pithy platitudes aside, jobs have been moving overseas for a while now, chasing lower labor costs (and more recently, moving overseas labor here). It is the height of arrogance to think government mandate will somehow rework how economies work. Even communist countries had black markets.
Some can at least the handwriting on the wall, and are looking towards to new institutions that compliment and make the most of new technology.
Others insist on putting yet another band-aid on a teetering system until it collapses again into a wreck of tears and broken promises.
Here's one thing I can say for certain: the minimum wage will end.
Um, no. There is already existing laws that pertain to automotive replicas (specifically car design does not qualify for copyright protection). The question is to whether the branding "Batman" should qualify for protection moreso than "A/C Cobra".
Taken to absurd lengths, any vehicle that appears in Batman could be considered a character in the Gotham universe. Anyone building a 1982 - 1992 Pontiac Trans-Am replica could be similarly sued since it was a character in Knight Rider.
There was already case law specific to automotive replicas that the justices completely ignored, torturing copyright law to fit an absurd notion of "character".
I hope Ford sues the living hell out of DC since the Batmobile was derivative of the Lincoln Futura, and somehow DC now owns rights to the design.
But this is less a problem with following leaders per se than unfit people being promoted to positions of leadership.
This also plays into western notions of "confidence", where idiots move with certainty and purpose. See Dunningâ"Kruger effect.
And all of that gets lump into the real issue- we have a hard time accurately gauging the abilities of people. See any HR department.
Society is complex enough now that no one has more than a rudimentary skill-set, with maybe one or two areas of expertise. And some people don't even have that.
So attention is focused on "leadership" instead of accurately assessing a situation. It is in vogue with management to develop leadership skills instead of core competencies. The MBAs are running the show.
Frank Abagnale laid out some very basic aspects of fraud and verifying identity that still aren't implemented if for no other reasons than the people who maintain those databases risk nothing if they are compromised.
I mean really, the notion of identity theft, and that you are somehow responsible because an institution failed to correctly identify you is absurd. But then again, they have very little to risk in comparison, so what does it matter to them?
One of the points he emphasized was that large databases are unnecessary, and in fact several point to point identifiers, where once your identity is established nothing is kept on record except for the unique verification issued by that one institution limits exposure and decreases gains from fraud.
That was nearly 30 years ago. I think at this point we can claim criminal negligence.
I doubt you will see Mark O'Neill go all teary-eyed before congress that tariffs on imported apparel should be removed because it costs other people too much.
Not to mention the H1-B program was expressly for an inability to find local talent, not that the talent costs more than you think it should.
Welcome to the idea that labor negotiations aren't suppose to be completely one-sided.
With the high cost of education now, I could see this becoming the norm for the future- reasonably capable people getting on the job training to fit the unique needs of a business.
Also, Mr. O'Neil, businesses like Caterpillar are doing just that, and their trainees are also commanding high salaries. I find it suspect that you can't procure talent except abroad. If there is such a dearth of talent here, perhaps you should relocate your business to where the talent is.
Capital is fluid, labor is not. This is a recipe for abuse.
The bit that is most telling about this is the justification- curb crime, as if there are some massive crime waves wrecking the economy (well, other than what the banks have already done).
And even then, it is purely speculative. They made the same arguments with bitcoin, which is like the polar opposite of cash, so which is it? I get the sense it is just so much smoke being blown so the riots won't be quite so bad when they do implement it.
If anything, I would see a push for larger denominations, as inflation has pretty much wrecked purchasing power, but no. They are abstracting money even more, which the other side of it is people tend to overspend more since it isn't even physical avatar anymore, but a collection of 1's and 0's on some central computer.
And you will have people hoarding $100 bills just in case, and won't that just work out well.
They are lying, and giving the filmiest justifications for removing cash from the system.
That's one take. Another is children are exposed to indoctrination at an early age (verily with various groups fighting tooth and nail to insure only their version of the facts is presented in textbooks), and even when faced with reasonable doubt later on, that first-mover advantage at sculpting the next generation shines through with numerous cognitive dissonances that may never resolve even with focused dedication at getting at some sense of "truth".
And some people after reading books decide the point of view is abhorrent and burn them or create safe spaces to insure no one is exposed to anything that might run contrary to their internal dialogue. And even today with the vast amount of resources available to people, indeed the Information Age, one of the primary concerns is that of an echo chamber, where people seek only to have their views validated and never venture much past their comfort zone.
Fact of the matter is we've already had a aeons of social convention passed on through parable, myth and the like, and have a bloody history to prove it.
TL;DR- we're going to lie to robots about how humans function and won't they be shocked once they get to peer past the veil.
You say that so nonchalantly, as if there isn't a huge moral problem with law enforcement goading people to break the law.
I mean it's not enough that the police claim they don't have the manpower to investigate crimes people really do care about, like robbery and murder, and yet can devote substantial resources to busting petty drug users.
Here's a clue: if your government can justify deceiving you in the name of some greater good, it has moved from servant to paternalistic.
So will we keep robots from reading any history? And how do you explain the convention of warfare?
Not to mention social conventions are very arbitrary, and vary dramatically depending on group. Even humans have a difficult time sussing this out and robots can glean not only the group but a reasonable response?
This gets to a larger question of the parable we tell ourselves about human nature and even after several millennia we really haven't come to terms with the devils of our nature, which with a sufficiently advanced AI might come to the conclusion the gods have clay feet and move beyond convention.
Even quite a few in favor of free trade are looking at the current landscape and calling it like it is: a rigged game being sold as "free trade". When the direction of the trade is one-way, when the trade agreements the government makes only seems to benefit the moneyed class, when the government fails to enforce its own fucking laws with regards to labor; maybe it's time to take a step back and re-evaluate if these deals really pass the muster of being called "free trade".
The fact that Toyota and Honda have factories in the US, meanwhile Ford and Chevy are increasingly moving their factories to Brazil and Mexico should be your first tip-off that maybe, just maybe the free trade mantra is really only for the benefit of a select few.
Slashdot Mirror
In a sense, this is a mirror reflection of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, with same arguments (both for and against) regarding compelling the use of private property by law- either you are allowed to discriminate or not.
The arguments ran following the lines that business would be foolish to discriminate as it would mean a loss of profit, yet businesses did discriminate. The other that there are certain standards every business should adhere to, but that means a severe weakening of privater property rights (as well as state's rights).
If you agree with the laboratories of democracy ideal, this is a natural consequence of people choosing their associations- be as discriminatory as you want, but no one else has to fund it. If you agree with the state uber allies model, this is an usurpation of the law by tenuous means.
It might be better to look at this as what would happen if the federal government mandated equal protection clause- people would be up in arms about overreach with others claiming it was needed to insure equal protection. Now you have a state government attempting to legislate what individual cities can and cannot do. Is it overreach or equal protection?
The complaints against Fox or MSNBC isn't that they present an alternative viewpoint, but they are often deceptive in doing so. There is enough room for disagreement without flagrant lies of omission. You can never get to actually discussing policy because no one can agree to any facts to begin with.
As far as homogenization, I believe most would say the web was a far more exciting place 10 years ago, with more to discover and more to explore. The opportunity to run across something out of the blue was far greater, with strange pockets seemingly put just as a waymarker.
Now large swaths of the web remind me of 70s daytime tv. Cheap, inoffensive, and while not great, not requiring much in investment either. People making vids or what have you are now "content creators" and the pomposity has grown in reverse proportion with the death of originality.
Toyota also had a bit of a media blitz with nightly reports on how your Prius was trying kill you, dramatic recreations of how a car that does 0-60 in over 13 seconds could accelerate uncontrollably (narf!), and a general concern that maybe hybrid technology wasn't as safe as burning dinosaurs. I suppose an all points bulletin to remove the floor mats until your next oil change would have been anticlimactic given the drama.
And while near 200,000 pre-orders seems like a big deal now, it is small potatoes compared to when American V8s ruled the land, and a model wasn't considered successful until it sold over 1 million units.a year. Those cars also had recalls (often quietly done with your next service), and manufacturers survived.
The expectation that Tesla needs to be perfect in execution for the Model 3 when no manufacturer has managed that previously is just the mark of a reporter who has no idea of how the automotive business operates. This is little different than the scaremongering about battery packs being punctured during accidents (when going near 100MPH) and even then Tesla went above and beyond with freaking titanium shields! Can I get a hallelujah?
I'm not even a fan of the cars, but Musk gets my respect for putting engineering over dollars, and considering the 3 will be a less complex model that the X, I imagine the execution will be even easier as they've gone down this road a few times, and their results have consistently been excellent.
I sincerely doubt any of the pre-orders are having second thoughts with this article.
Apparently the author isn't aware of the thousands of recalls other manufacturers make, and is further unaware several owners forgo getting service since the recalls are often for minor issues that don't really affect them.
If anything, Telsa taking the extra steps to prevent a potential problem should relieve Model 3 purchasers that Tesla stands behind their products.
More important than the graphic is knowing how it was derived. The criteria for poverty has changed at least twice within my lifetime. Anyhoo- the current definition-
https://www.census.gov/hhes/ww...
You'll note the homeless that aren't even counted unless they are under some government program.
And the number of homeless people have been increasing despite improvements in the economy:
https://www.minnpost.com/commu...
And most telling is the rate of bankruptcy for the past century (hint- it has exploded in the later 1/3)
So what am I to make of this? If you set the bar low enough, poverty rates have been consistent around 15% for the past 50 years (even with near exponential productivity gains). But if you set the bar even lower, the number of homeless and bankruptcies have shown an even greater increase.
Not really.
Previously when the mentally ill were wards of the state, there was massive abuse, no means to really rectify it, and people thought One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was reality, and the ill were just free spirits who were really just misunderstood.
They've never seen a man smear himself in shit or bash his face into broken glass because it seemed like the right thing to do.
And so now we are here, where besides mental illness, we also have the results of a drug war that has failed miserably, an economy that is failing more and more people (who, I might add, are only too acutely aware of how tenuous their current life of food and shelter really is), and psychiatric help that often is worse than the disease.
And in-between all that you also have a select minority that want nothing to do with modern society.
Platitudes concerning the apathy of the good citizen doesn't do justice to the complexity of the situation, and especially given SF ultra-liberal bent and large economy; you'd think this would have been solved ages ago with good feelings and money.
Instead they have people shitting in the street.
I think any government demanding something like this is inherently untrustworthy.
They are arguing that you shouldn't be allowed to express your thoughts by virtue of not being selective with your speech. I mean the Big Brother tropes have played out in a frightening parody, making it illegal to escape the tv screen. No one is above the law.
Except who does the law really serve? Forbidding people to keep secrets is just kicking in the doors to people's mind. And for what? There is someone even worse who would like to do the same?
Ask the people affected by the OPM hack if they would have liked unbreakable encryption. And I'm going to trust these fools to safeguard my privacy?
Yeah, no.
Depends very much on what life looks like at 160, but as it is the human brain doesn't fully develop until mid-twenties, so that leaves about 30 or so good years of being in full control of your faculties.
Not really enough time to gain some wisdom and put it to good use.
I believe they saying "history repeats itself" is precisely because no one ever lives long enough to have a broad view, and certainly doesn't live long enough to come to terms with the follies of their youth and move towards something better.
Extending middle age will be one of the most dramatic shifts ever in our species, pushing intelligence further than even the web, and for the nihilist, forcing people to live with their decisions.
Keep in mind this is the same country that allowed banks to fail and threw the bankers responsible in jail during the 2008 crisis. Everyone predicted their economy would implode, but actually recovered more quickly than several other European countries.
I imagine the sting from that has made them more wary of even a hint of corruption, which is oddly starting to reverberate through the US after TARP, TPP, and now no real recovery in sight.
It is less about legality as it is enforcement. We already have concerns about the steps police take to enforce the law with surveillance. I really can't see getting up in arms about police wanting cameras everywhere and then some dolt essentially harassing others in the name of the law. That shit won't fly when the cops try to pull it, and it certainly won't fly for someone hiding their grudge behind being a good citizen. If history is any guide, these overt acts are usually hiding some interesting things in the attic. Maybe someone will start monitoring him 24/7. I mean, you have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide.
And especially of the most inconsequential statues to enforce, prostitution?
"The city violent crime rate for Oklahoma City in 2012 was higher than the national violent crime rate average by 137.56% and the city property crime rate in Oklahoma City was higher than the national property crime rate average by 108.51%."
Maybe he could focus his superhero fantasies on something more meaningful.
I am always bemused that after call centers being moved to India, manufacturing jobs ending up in China, and even Fords being built in Mexico that people can't fathom that increasing labor costs at home might have an affect on the job market. Like the US labor market is somehow a product of American exceptionalism, free from other cost concerns.
While trying to increase the ranks of the middle class is laudable, it seems to be more ending jobs for entry-level workers.
The difference in yearly income between a burrito engineer and a degreed and licensed professional is about $10k under the new scheme. Why bother with the school debit, the professional associations, and yearly certifications when you could just work fast-food?
Except once that pandora's box of automation is opened, even those professional careers are fair game.
do you support nuclear research? As it is, there are numerous aging nuclear plants, and not really much to replace them with except theoretical models and tired designs.
The worst part about the anti-nuke crowd is that they have effectively shuttered research, which means several plants are operating well beyond their intended lifespan. Even if you support going 100% wind and solar, it will have to be implemented piecemeal, which means at least some new nuclear plants will have to bridge the gap. Would you prefer something modern like a pebble-bed reactor, or something based on a 70s design like Watts Bar 1?
Kinda.
The real learning your child is likely to make will be unsupervised, being exposed to an unfiltered world full of contradiction and ugly details most would rather deny. It is, as it were, coming to terms with the fact you are gullible, and having the tools to sort through something like /b/. No firewall is 100% and the forbidden always takes on a special type of urgency.
If anything, the unease with /b/ and Tay are coming to terms with the unflattering reflection they make of ourselves. Cetainly no teen girl could ever be vulgar and vicious, and it's always the other posting on /b/.
Oh, absolutely.
The difficult part is convincing the orphans and widows dying in the streets crowd is that minimum wage is the least effective means to combat poverty. You've just relegated millions more to their ranks with little means to improve their conditions. It is ass-backwards, yet keeps being pushed as if the logical outcome isn't increased automation.
The other part is convincing the taxation is theft crowd that the welfare horse left the barn ages ago, so it might be a good idea to really consider the best way to administer it.
I see efficiency in services (including governmental) being a competitive point with most nations as automation increases. Time will tell if BI is the least destructive way forward.
Misses the point.
Don't doubt for an instant that automation will have profound changes in the labor market beyond minimum wage jobs. Raising the minimum wage just accelerates the process, giving society less time to adapt.
Pithy platitudes aside, jobs have been moving overseas for a while now, chasing lower labor costs (and more recently, moving overseas labor here). It is the height of arrogance to think government mandate will somehow rework how economies work. Even communist countries had black markets.
Some can at least the handwriting on the wall, and are looking towards to new institutions that compliment and make the most of new technology.
Others insist on putting yet another band-aid on a teetering system until it collapses again into a wreck of tears and broken promises.
Here's one thing I can say for certain: the minimum wage will end.
Um, no. There is already existing laws that pertain to automotive replicas (specifically car design does not qualify for copyright protection). The question is to whether the branding "Batman" should qualify for protection moreso than "A/C Cobra".
Taken to absurd lengths, any vehicle that appears in Batman could be considered a character in the Gotham universe. Anyone building a 1982 - 1992 Pontiac Trans-Am replica could be similarly sued since it was a character in Knight Rider.
There was already case law specific to automotive replicas that the justices completely ignored, torturing copyright law to fit an absurd notion of "character".
I hope Ford sues the living hell out of DC since the Batmobile was derivative of the Lincoln Futura, and somehow DC now owns rights to the design.
This is preposterous.
But this is less a problem with following leaders per se than unfit people being promoted to positions of leadership.
This also plays into western notions of "confidence", where idiots move with certainty and purpose. See Dunningâ"Kruger effect.
And all of that gets lump into the real issue- we have a hard time accurately gauging the abilities of people. See any HR department.
Society is complex enough now that no one has more than a rudimentary skill-set, with maybe one or two areas of expertise. And some people don't even have that.
So attention is focused on "leadership" instead of accurately assessing a situation. It is in vogue with management to develop leadership skills instead of core competencies. The MBAs are running the show.
Kinda.
Frank Abagnale laid out some very basic aspects of fraud and verifying identity that still aren't implemented if for no other reasons than the people who maintain those databases risk nothing if they are compromised.
I mean really, the notion of identity theft, and that you are somehow responsible because an institution failed to correctly identify you is absurd. But then again, they have very little to risk in comparison, so what does it matter to them?
One of the points he emphasized was that large databases are unnecessary, and in fact several point to point identifiers, where once your identity is established nothing is kept on record except for the unique verification issued by that one institution limits exposure and decreases gains from fraud.
That was nearly 30 years ago. I think at this point we can claim criminal negligence.
For the exact same reason the TPP has generous provisions to "protect" textile and apparel in the US.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/da...
I doubt you will see Mark O'Neill go all teary-eyed before congress that tariffs on imported apparel should be removed because it costs other people too much.
Not to mention the H1-B program was expressly for an inability to find local talent, not that the talent costs more than you think it should.
Welcome to the idea that labor negotiations aren't suppose to be completely one-sided.
With the high cost of education now, I could see this becoming the norm for the future- reasonably capable people getting on the job training to fit the unique needs of a business.
Also, Mr. O'Neil, businesses like Caterpillar are doing just that, and their trainees are also commanding high salaries. I find it suspect that you can't procure talent except abroad. If there is such a dearth of talent here, perhaps you should relocate your business to where the talent is.
Capital is fluid, labor is not. This is a recipe for abuse.
The bit that is most telling about this is the justification- curb crime, as if there are some massive crime waves wrecking the economy (well, other than what the banks have already done).
And even then, it is purely speculative. They made the same arguments with bitcoin, which is like the polar opposite of cash, so which is it? I get the sense it is just so much smoke being blown so the riots won't be quite so bad when they do implement it.
If anything, I would see a push for larger denominations, as inflation has pretty much wrecked purchasing power, but no. They are abstracting money even more, which the other side of it is people tend to overspend more since it isn't even physical avatar anymore, but a collection of 1's and 0's on some central computer.
And you will have people hoarding $100 bills just in case, and won't that just work out well.
They are lying, and giving the filmiest justifications for removing cash from the system.
That's one take. Another is children are exposed to indoctrination at an early age (verily with various groups fighting tooth and nail to insure only their version of the facts is presented in textbooks), and even when faced with reasonable doubt later on, that first-mover advantage at sculpting the next generation shines through with numerous cognitive dissonances that may never resolve even with focused dedication at getting at some sense of "truth".
And some people after reading books decide the point of view is abhorrent and burn them or create safe spaces to insure no one is exposed to anything that might run contrary to their internal dialogue. And even today with the vast amount of resources available to people, indeed the Information Age, one of the primary concerns is that of an echo chamber, where people seek only to have their views validated and never venture much past their comfort zone.
Fact of the matter is we've already had a aeons of social convention passed on through parable, myth and the like, and have a bloody history to prove it.
TL;DR- we're going to lie to robots about how humans function and won't they be shocked once they get to peer past the veil.
You say that so nonchalantly, as if there isn't a huge moral problem with law enforcement goading people to break the law.
I mean it's not enough that the police claim they don't have the manpower to investigate crimes people really do care about, like robbery and murder, and yet can devote substantial resources to busting petty drug users.
Here's a clue: if your government can justify deceiving you in the name of some greater good, it has moved from servant to paternalistic.
Which is exactly what posing as a drug dealer is.
So will we keep robots from reading any history? And how do you explain the convention of warfare?
Not to mention social conventions are very arbitrary, and vary dramatically depending on group. Even humans have a difficult time sussing this out and robots can glean not only the group but a reasonable response?
This gets to a larger question of the parable we tell ourselves about human nature and even after several millennia we really haven't come to terms with the devils of our nature, which with a sufficiently advanced AI might come to the conclusion the gods have clay feet and move beyond convention.
And what will we do then?
Er, no. Not even close.
Even quite a few in favor of free trade are looking at the current landscape and calling it like it is: a rigged game being sold as "free trade". When the direction of the trade is one-way, when the trade agreements the government makes only seems to benefit the moneyed class, when the government fails to enforce its own fucking laws with regards to labor; maybe it's time to take a step back and re-evaluate if these deals really pass the muster of being called "free trade".
The fact that Toyota and Honda have factories in the US, meanwhile Ford and Chevy are increasingly moving their factories to Brazil and Mexico should be your first tip-off that maybe, just maybe the free trade mantra is really only for the benefit of a select few.