. Commuting is for people who didn't think ahead, and they pay a price and even may die because of it.
Or can't afford to buy, or think buying is a bad investment, that property which is close to where they work. In my case, the homes which would require no traffic are in the $1-$2M range. I work just outside of a "cheap" city. I cannot imagine what people in Si Valley deal with.
Who voted probably needs to be public information, with all the finger pointing and insinuations out there about fraud. This can be abused by people with deep pockets and agenda, but it is probably not a huge problem right now.
Shaming your friends into voting can only backfire.
"Screen time" has done nothing but good in terms of my children's early development, in terms of every academic assessment (and I don't give a shit about the fluffy stuff). Don't browbeat me with anecdotal complaints, anecdotes in this case are all that matter to me. Sample size=2, it is fine and I have only two samples to worry about.
Social networks? Absolutely I forbid them for at least a hundred reasons, but I won't be able to forever and I am not sure I should try.
It's very hard for new companies to enter the market with China out there ready to copy product and erase profit margins. That the iPhone was successful at all is purely because it was lightyears ahead of its competition, and they bet their entire company on it. If they had biffed that, there would be no Apple right now. If you think about it, people who are in the position of having significant financial resources, but also have really good reason to take huge risks are pretty rare. By the same token, if the iPhone clones had become good enough, fast enough, Apple would also probably have failed.
It would be better if companies could sort of succeed in this market, without being immediately run down. In a way, China has become the new Microsoft, and many are afraid to innovate. That money would be better spent on other investments which may have lower upside, but also lower downside.
It's politeness designed to help you warm up your lies. Then you return with the same question, helping them warm up their lies. Once both parties are fully booted, you can commence having a conversation about more serious topics, during which you can both deceive each other more fluidly.
They will never stop believing that they lost their crown years ago, and that it was their own fault. It turns out MBA executive types aren't actually that good at much of anything except destroying anything they get their hands on, all in the name of shareholder value.
The biggest advantage of electric cars is not the 3x efficiency, it's not the incredible acceleration, and it's only partly the lack of post-purchase carbon emissions. It's that everything is much more fungible. I do not delude myself that my electric car is not polluting, I get my power from the texas power grid, which is 34% natural gas and 30% coal . The 3x efficiency combined with getting 28% from less polluting sources is a big step forward, but ultimately just part of the solution.
The main advantage is that it is easier to pressure ERCOT to change their ways than it is to cause millions of texans to change their ways (and buy new vehicles, which itself is pretty nasty for the environment). If the major source of carbon emissions for electric cars is the manufacturers, we can get after them. These entities are capable of working with their governments to come up with a timeline, and a way of managing the expenses to make change happen. Joe Sixpack in his 1967 pickup is unreachable, possibly couldn't afford to fix it if he wanted to, and might not comply if he didn't.
As long as people are driving around with combustion engines, we can pass laws and scream and yell and nothing will change.
Video games used to be fun alternatives to the sportsball my peers were up to in school. Hours, maybe days were invested in things like Ultima, Monkey Island, Space/King's Quest, etc.
Now you have 30 million FPSs, each one sucks. RPGs are FPSs with experience bars, and RTSs move at the speed of light. I want the old days back, days that were less about competition and more about fun.
Then let them fight you in court claiming that your repair service damaged their hardware via careless static discharge. To figure this out requires some expensive equipment, which is going to increase the cost of the case. In my experience that equipment is going to justify their claim, whether it is true or not. It's pretty easy for ESD to damage modern silicon, and chances are there is latent damage already. They're not building these things to last anymore, it's all chinesium to one degree or another.
Even if they put 3 trillion miles on their system, if they confine it to just a few geographical areas, I don't trust it very much. I'd like to see them driving in NYC, Boston, Chicago, New Jersey (even humans can't figure this one out), etc. Places where public investment in the roadways has either been compromised (i.e. stolen by politician for other bullshit), minimal, or there simply wasn't enough space to put proper roads in, so they did something else instead...
I don't know to what degree "China" (it's government, it's people, or it's corporations, state owned or otherwise) are spying, but I do know it's not 0, not even close to 0. I have been close to accusations and convictions, they are absolutely spying using any available means. That's not surprising. If it made any sense to do it, adding stray hardware/software to a PC is definitely a viable approach to compromising it.
The real issue is technical. How do we create a secure compute environment? Apple has taken the route on its phones of building a very effective and secure trust chain. It is pretty hard for an unauthorized user to slip in stray firmware on their phones, I don't want to say impossible because there are some known and pretty exotic exploits. But very hard. Their design is such that even their MFGs cannot sneak in stray code to spy on you. The weakest point is still the single authorized user, and their ability to protect their passwords and biometrics. Apple's route also makes you, the owner, a perpetual customer rather than an owner. If they choose to lock you out, there's nothing you can do about it, your $1k phone is a paperweight.
PCs (I'm including desktops, servers and laptops) on the other hand are pretty much a free for all. The MFG can sneak on just about anything in their BIOS/EFI implementation, and anyone up and down the chain can do so without much oversight. It's a pretty open and competitive market, with many small players of little to no account, all trying to make the sale. Each of them provides their own hardware, and some EFI implementation they probably bought and then tailored to their implementation. Someone could also have added backdoors. That in turn hands off to my choice of OSes, which themselves could easily be compromised and I wouldn't know better until something happened. I am unquestionably the owner of this system, and can do anything I would like, but I also cannot rely on anything up and down the system. I'm the owner of a very leaky boat.
What we need is a system that can both be trustworthy and robust to middle-man attackers who may, at times, have direct hardware access, but still allows me to be the absolute owner of my hardware. I may make bad choices, those bad choices may compromise my system, but I need a foolproof way of knowing when I'm making a bad choice. It's not that easy of a problem in the current ecosystem, and we're waiting for someone to get caught doing something bad that forces our hand.
No, you paid what you could. The hospital expects people like me to pay the rest, my insurance covered most of the "cost". They either can't, or won't, stay in business with offers like yours. The best reason for you to believe me, is that they could have made more money with your loan by just putting it in a checking account than they made from your transaction. Hospitals all over the US run on this model, and it's fine but could be much better.
There are also people who pay nothing and walk out the door. Others who default on the loan and it gets sent to collections, but collections takes a piece if they are paid, or they're not paid. You were probably not paying for them, but I am. All of it is part of the hospital's balance sheet.
It might also be a personal responsibility problem, that's definitely real, I've seen it with my own eyes in my own family. It's not about education, one doctor and one army colonel can't seem to figure out what they can really afford. They know math, they understand banks and financing. But they seem to lack self control. I'm not sure that can be taught.
The other side of the coin is that things are very expensive in the US due to investment and general security of those investments. I blame most of it on housing and real-estate. Given that most of the US is very sparsely populated and we have tons of available land, there's no particular reason why real-estate should even be a good investment. But various arbitrary forces and heavy investment ensures that it is. We had hoped maybe that the rise of the internet would let people leave city centers, but it seems like the opposite is happening and it's very, very expensive.
If real-estate is expensive, it blows everything up. It blows your own personal rent/mortgage up, it makes the goods you buy cost more, it makes your employer want to pay less. All so that we can support a real-estate investment factor that's probably unnecessary and unhelpful. It might require someone bursting our bubble to reset us to a point where we can enjoy our relative wealth.
what you may not understand, is that actually someone is paying your interest, uncovered expenses and (for some hospitals) profit for you when they show up to the hospital with either a) money or b) insurance. You are benefiting from a form of socialized health care wherein any sucker who can afford to pay has to pay on your behalf assuming they live in your hospital's general area.
It's not awful, it keeps people from terrible situations. Obviously it won't cover cancer, but it's letting certain people who live in very exclusive areas avoid paying anything at all, while others that have enough money, but not a lot have to foot the bill. To give you an idea, 10 years ago my son's birth was billed at $15,000. This was a traditional vaginal delivery, no anesthesia (which would have been like $5k more, because it requires a spinal). To pay that in 8 years would have been $150/month (assuming no interest). The difference is that I have insurance and was charged the rate of someone who has insurance. In fact I paid very little out of my pocket directly, and the dollar value I was charged is mostly irrelevant (the premiums that come out of my paycheck are quite relevant). I'm guessing you were charged something more like cost. So I paid for you and one other person to have a baby. (Twice, since I have two kids).
The answer is still to socialize health care but over the entire population rather than use fees, and make everyone pay proportional to their ability to pay, independently of where they live or their current need to use a hospital. Babies are perhaps a bad discussion since people should not be having babies unless they can afford them, but heart attacks, broken bones and cancer are delivered unrequested.
Why are you associating these two things? One is a personality type, the other is a mental disorder. Most people in the latter category are incapable of STEM careers.
STEM careers are more introverted than say, teaching elementary school. But they are not the life of isolation that I would prefer to have. I'd probably try to take up writing or something.
(Why would Samsung do this when they have their own chip fab? Think about it)
Chip fabs are factories. Developing an SoC requires a large and fairly expensive design team, a larger validation team, and then someone has to write a lot of software. Not that I don't believe Samsung could put this together, in fact I believe they have one here in Austin. But when you deal in commodities, you tend to take the cheapest route from a->b and don't look too far down the road.
And as most of the world has socialized healthcare of some kind, it is an expensive form of population control. Other conspiracy theories float the rise in cancer and cheap high-saturated fat foods as methods of killing off the old who have outlived their usefulness, but when you look at the cost of cancer treatments and survived heart attacks, it doesn't look so good. Even the US has medicare for the elderly, it's not really helping anyone to kill them off in any of these ways.
It's probably just people making bad decisions, evidenced most by the relatively high number of young people affected.
You note that he said the Chinese internet versus the American internet, which is arguable but probably effectively true. That's two (big) countries that comprise about 25% of the world's population. The rest of the world has to decide what to do.
China is obvious: don't insult pooh bear, don't contradict the government, don't stir up dissent, don't rock the boat, be good happy citizen in harmonious society. America lets you say anything you want: but don't fuck with corporate interests particularly with IP, you will be thrown in jail just as quickly.
So the question is what does the the remaining 75% of the world use? They will probably pick and choose. They will probably get their entertainment and software from the Chinese internet. They will probably get their social, and their porn from the "American" internet. The question is where will they get their drugs and mutually agreed upon contraband...
It's the reason we're, not running around, but walking around at all. If we spent every waking moment working hard, getting more food than we needed, building more shelter than we needed, creating more weapons than we needed, as fast as we possibly could do it, we'd have completed exhausted the resources of any place we lived and would have literally killed ourselves.
We do only what we feel we have to do to survive, sometimes a bit more. You can't do less, you don't survive. If anything, modern society is forcing us to work much harder than we ordinarily would have, and probably more than is good for us. We've replaced threat of death with artificial competition (although in America, losing that competition can mean death!), and we burn much harder than we strictly need to.
Slashdot Mirror
. Commuting is for people who didn't think ahead, and they pay a price and even may die because of it.
Or can't afford to buy, or think buying is a bad investment, that property which is close to where they work. In my case, the homes which would require no traffic are in the $1-$2M range. I work just outside of a "cheap" city. I cannot imagine what people in Si Valley deal with.
Who voted probably needs to be public information, with all the finger pointing and insinuations out there about fraud. This can be abused by people with deep pockets and agenda, but it is probably not a huge problem right now.
Shaming your friends into voting can only backfire.
You could almost believe msmash might have an agenda.
"Screen time" has done nothing but good in terms of my children's early development, in terms of every academic assessment (and I don't give a shit about the fluffy stuff). Don't browbeat me with anecdotal complaints, anecdotes in this case are all that matter to me. Sample size=2, it is fine and I have only two samples to worry about.
Social networks? Absolutely I forbid them for at least a hundred reasons, but I won't be able to forever and I am not sure I should try.
It's very hard for new companies to enter the market with China out there ready to copy product and erase profit margins. That the iPhone was successful at all is purely because it was lightyears ahead of its competition, and they bet their entire company on it. If they had biffed that, there would be no Apple right now. If you think about it, people who are in the position of having significant financial resources, but also have really good reason to take huge risks are pretty rare. By the same token, if the iPhone clones had become good enough, fast enough, Apple would also probably have failed.
It would be better if companies could sort of succeed in this market, without being immediately run down. In a way, China has become the new Microsoft, and many are afraid to innovate. That money would be better spent on other investments which may have lower upside, but also lower downside.
I mean Spock would use Vi, the guy goes around flashing V's with his hand for christ's sake.
It's politeness designed to help you warm up your lies. Then you return with the same question, helping them warm up their lies. Once both parties are fully booted, you can commence having a conversation about more serious topics, during which you can both deceive each other more fluidly.
It's kind of like priming a pump before using it.
They will never stop believing that they lost their crown years ago, and that it was their own fault. It turns out MBA executive types aren't actually that good at much of anything except destroying anything they get their hands on, all in the name of shareholder value.
The biggest advantage of electric cars is not the 3x efficiency, it's not the incredible acceleration, and it's only partly the lack of post-purchase carbon emissions. It's that everything is much more fungible. I do not delude myself that my electric car is not polluting, I get my power from the texas power grid, which is 34% natural gas and 30% coal . The 3x efficiency combined with getting 28% from less polluting sources is a big step forward, but ultimately just part of the solution.
The main advantage is that it is easier to pressure ERCOT to change their ways than it is to cause millions of texans to change their ways (and buy new vehicles, which itself is pretty nasty for the environment). If the major source of carbon emissions for electric cars is the manufacturers, we can get after them. These entities are capable of working with their governments to come up with a timeline, and a way of managing the expenses to make change happen. Joe Sixpack in his 1967 pickup is unreachable, possibly couldn't afford to fix it if he wanted to, and might not comply if he didn't.
As long as people are driving around with combustion engines, we can pass laws and scream and yell and nothing will change.
Video games used to be fun alternatives to the sportsball my peers were up to in school. Hours, maybe days were invested in things like Ultima, Monkey Island, Space/King's Quest, etc.
Now you have 30 million FPSs, each one sucks. RPGs are FPSs with experience bars, and RTSs move at the speed of light. I want the old days back, days that were less about competition and more about fun.
Then let them fight you in court claiming that your repair service damaged their hardware via careless static discharge. To figure this out requires some expensive equipment, which is going to increase the cost of the case. In my experience that equipment is going to justify their claim, whether it is true or not. It's pretty easy for ESD to damage modern silicon, and chances are there is latent damage already. They're not building these things to last anymore, it's all chinesium to one degree or another.
Even if they put 3 trillion miles on their system, if they confine it to just a few geographical areas, I don't trust it very much. I'd like to see them driving in NYC, Boston, Chicago, New Jersey (even humans can't figure this one out), etc. Places where public investment in the roadways has either been compromised (i.e. stolen by politician for other bullshit), minimal, or there simply wasn't enough space to put proper roads in, so they did something else instead...
I'm not saying we shouldn't let them burn. I'm saying there's nothing stopping their next competitor from doing exactly the same thing, better.
I don't know to what degree "China" (it's government, it's people, or it's corporations, state owned or otherwise) are spying, but I do know it's not 0, not even close to 0. I have been close to accusations and convictions, they are absolutely spying using any available means. That's not surprising. If it made any sense to do it, adding stray hardware/software to a PC is definitely a viable approach to compromising it.
The real issue is technical. How do we create a secure compute environment? Apple has taken the route on its phones of building a very effective and secure trust chain. It is pretty hard for an unauthorized user to slip in stray firmware on their phones, I don't want to say impossible because there are some known and pretty exotic exploits. But very hard. Their design is such that even their MFGs cannot sneak in stray code to spy on you. The weakest point is still the single authorized user, and their ability to protect their passwords and biometrics. Apple's route also makes you, the owner, a perpetual customer rather than an owner. If they choose to lock you out, there's nothing you can do about it, your $1k phone is a paperweight.
PCs (I'm including desktops, servers and laptops) on the other hand are pretty much a free for all. The MFG can sneak on just about anything in their BIOS/EFI implementation, and anyone up and down the chain can do so without much oversight. It's a pretty open and competitive market, with many small players of little to no account, all trying to make the sale. Each of them provides their own hardware, and some EFI implementation they probably bought and then tailored to their implementation. Someone could also have added backdoors. That in turn hands off to my choice of OSes, which themselves could easily be compromised and I wouldn't know better until something happened. I am unquestionably the owner of this system, and can do anything I would like, but I also cannot rely on anything up and down the system. I'm the owner of a very leaky boat.
What we need is a system that can both be trustworthy and robust to middle-man attackers who may, at times, have direct hardware access, but still allows me to be the absolute owner of my hardware. I may make bad choices, those bad choices may compromise my system, but I need a foolproof way of knowing when I'm making a bad choice. It's not that easy of a problem in the current ecosystem, and we're waiting for someone to get caught doing something bad that forces our hand.
Hmm I think Apple would love to find evidence that the PC ecosystem is compromised and fundamentally flawed.
No, you paid what you could. The hospital expects people like me to pay the rest, my insurance covered most of the "cost". They either can't, or won't, stay in business with offers like yours. The best reason for you to believe me, is that they could have made more money with your loan by just putting it in a checking account than they made from your transaction. Hospitals all over the US run on this model, and it's fine but could be much better.
There are also people who pay nothing and walk out the door. Others who default on the loan and it gets sent to collections, but collections takes a piece if they are paid, or they're not paid. You were probably not paying for them, but I am. All of it is part of the hospital's balance sheet.
It might also be a personal responsibility problem, that's definitely real, I've seen it with my own eyes in my own family. It's not about education, one doctor and one army colonel can't seem to figure out what they can really afford. They know math, they understand banks and financing. But they seem to lack self control. I'm not sure that can be taught.
The other side of the coin is that things are very expensive in the US due to investment and general security of those investments. I blame most of it on housing and real-estate. Given that most of the US is very sparsely populated and we have tons of available land, there's no particular reason why real-estate should even be a good investment. But various arbitrary forces and heavy investment ensures that it is. We had hoped maybe that the rise of the internet would let people leave city centers, but it seems like the opposite is happening and it's very, very expensive.
If real-estate is expensive, it blows everything up. It blows your own personal rent/mortgage up, it makes the goods you buy cost more, it makes your employer want to pay less. All so that we can support a real-estate investment factor that's probably unnecessary and unhelpful. It might require someone bursting our bubble to reset us to a point where we can enjoy our relative wealth.
what you may not understand, is that actually someone is paying your interest, uncovered expenses and (for some hospitals) profit for you when they show up to the hospital with either a) money or b) insurance. You are benefiting from a form of socialized health care wherein any sucker who can afford to pay has to pay on your behalf assuming they live in your hospital's general area.
It's not awful, it keeps people from terrible situations. Obviously it won't cover cancer, but it's letting certain people who live in very exclusive areas avoid paying anything at all, while others that have enough money, but not a lot have to foot the bill. To give you an idea, 10 years ago my son's birth was billed at $15,000. This was a traditional vaginal delivery, no anesthesia (which would have been like $5k more, because it requires a spinal). To pay that in 8 years would have been $150/month (assuming no interest). The difference is that I have insurance and was charged the rate of someone who has insurance. In fact I paid very little out of my pocket directly, and the dollar value I was charged is mostly irrelevant (the premiums that come out of my paycheck are quite relevant). I'm guessing you were charged something more like cost. So I paid for you and one other person to have a baby. (Twice, since I have two kids).
The answer is still to socialize health care but over the entire population rather than use fees, and make everyone pay proportional to their ability to pay, independently of where they live or their current need to use a hospital. Babies are perhaps a bad discussion since people should not be having babies unless they can afford them, but heart attacks, broken bones and cancer are delivered unrequested.
introverted autistic
Why are you associating these two things? One is a personality type, the other is a mental disorder. Most people in the latter category are incapable of STEM careers.
STEM careers are more introverted than say, teaching elementary school. But they are not the life of isolation that I would prefer to have. I'd probably try to take up writing or something.
(Why would Samsung do this when they have their own chip fab? Think about it)
Chip fabs are factories. Developing an SoC requires a large and fairly expensive design team, a larger validation team, and then someone has to write a lot of software. Not that I don't believe Samsung could put this together, in fact I believe they have one here in Austin. But when you deal in commodities, you tend to take the cheapest route from a->b and don't look too far down the road.
They had to get the obligatory Apple slam in there and put the 'M$' in msmash
And as most of the world has socialized healthcare of some kind, it is an expensive form of population control. Other conspiracy theories float the rise in cancer and cheap high-saturated fat foods as methods of killing off the old who have outlived their usefulness, but when you look at the cost of cancer treatments and survived heart attacks, it doesn't look so good. Even the US has medicare for the elderly, it's not really helping anyone to kill them off in any of these ways.
It's probably just people making bad decisions, evidenced most by the relatively high number of young people affected.
You note that he said the Chinese internet versus the American internet, which is arguable but probably effectively true. That's two (big) countries that comprise about 25% of the world's population. The rest of the world has to decide what to do.
China is obvious: don't insult pooh bear, don't contradict the government, don't stir up dissent, don't rock the boat, be good happy citizen in harmonious society. America lets you say anything you want: but don't fuck with corporate interests particularly with IP, you will be thrown in jail just as quickly.
So the question is what does the the remaining 75% of the world use? They will probably pick and choose. They will probably get their entertainment and software from the Chinese internet. They will probably get their social, and their porn from the "American" internet. The question is where will they get their drugs and mutually agreed upon contraband...
If you are dense.
Technology and civilization have allowed us to exceed the capacity of pre-historic man. In our drive to do less, we created more.
It's the reason we're, not running around, but walking around at all. If we spent every waking moment working hard, getting more food than we needed, building more shelter than we needed, creating more weapons than we needed, as fast as we possibly could do it, we'd have completed exhausted the resources of any place we lived and would have literally killed ourselves.
We do only what we feel we have to do to survive, sometimes a bit more. You can't do less, you don't survive. If anything, modern society is forcing us to work much harder than we ordinarily would have, and probably more than is good for us. We've replaced threat of death with artificial competition (although in America, losing that competition can mean death!), and we burn much harder than we strictly need to.