In other words the taxpayers just had half a billion stolen from them and given to some idiot Californicators to waste on building overpriced cars that will only sell if they are subsidized with yet more taxpayer dollars.
Seriously, if these cars were such a great moneymaking venture I don't think California is lacking in venture capitalists even in a recession. You only go to the government with hat in hand if you know it is a losing idea but can be made politically appealing anyway. These days you just have to say "green!" to crack open the piggy bank.
I know. Just like those silly Interstate highways, the US Marine Corps, the US Postal Service that'll deliver a package of paper to any door in the US within a day or two for an affordable flat fee, and those terribly inefficient and socialized Firefighters and that neo-communist socialized Police Department. Government. Pah! Who needs it?
Reminds me of early attempts to cloak planes to the naked eye by putting a row of lights around the edges. It was reasonably effective on a bright overcast day.
Apple is pretty good in the sense that they don't appear to criticise the competition (or if they do it doesn't make the news). They get on with what they do best.
Never seen the "I'm a Mac - I'm a PC" advertising campaign?
I really don't see what's the big deal about driving in SF. Apart from listening to the impatient honking of the scum-of-the-earth taxi drivers who I hate with a passion, it's really easy to drive in.
I live and work in San Francisco and quite frankly I love it. I've never experienced any of the issues the article claims plague our city (I'm not sure what iJacking is, but my eye sockets are just fine).
I agree. And did TFA say that the traffic is bad in SF? Apart from the Bay Bridge toll plaza backup, the traffic in SF flows just fine. I don't know what that author is smoking.
I've often thought that if it's economically viable to go to the trouble of all that engineering for offshore oil exploration, extraction and processing, surely it's viable to build vast offshore wind farms where there's plenty of room, plenty of wind, and no neighbours to object.
I've figured a solution to that problem. Put to Joe Bag on while you're going down on her. Doesn't interrupt the flow at all. Once she realizes you're wearing it she asks "when did you put that on?!" You tell her, and she's amazed at your talent, horning her up all the more. Ta daaa!
Seriously though, I don't know about guys who don't have foreskins, but condoms are deadly uncomfortable for a non-circumcised dick. More times than enough I've had to pull out before I've finished the job because it feels like my tip is being pinched. I think they need more lubrication on the inside. Plus they don't stretch very easily, you'd need to apply considerable pressure to get them to expand, and the average guy's blood flow is not going to do that. I suppose it's one of the trade-offs of reliability.
In one letter that The Post published after its article ran online, a reader wrote: "Newspapers are going broke in part because news can be read, free of charge, on the Internet. As a nearly lifelong reader of The Post, I could not read this article in the paper I pay for and subscribe to; instead I came on it accidentally while scrolling online for business reasons."
A story about three polyamorous men living together and you found it while surfing the net for "business reasons?" Yeah, right!
Say what you will about vinyl, but there is a huge difference in the experience of reading on a computer screen that sits a foot in front of you and a paper you can hold in your lap while kicking back on the couch.
I hold my computer on my lap as a kick back on the couch - they call them laptops.
I know, but there's something about the feel of a physical paper that's so much more pleasant than a bloody screen. I hate not being able to see the whole page in one view without having to scroll. It's like when I worked in a drawing office as a CAD draughtsman. Sure we'd long ago dispensed with the drawing boards and all the design work was done on screen, but when it came to reviewing drawings and looking for potential problems, checking calculations etc. it was time to run a plot and pore over the thing flat out on the desk. There'll always be a role for paper.
See also, from The Atlantic (which I happen to buy in print form) on why The Economist newspaper is doing so well. The Economist uses long form reporting, doesn't charge for online content (except for the archives) and is still growing strongly.
What is not illegal/immoral today may well be tomorrow.
You cannot be prosecuted today for something you did previously when it was legal.
It can be matched with other recordings to give an account of the travels of everyone who passed by that evening. With enough cameras in an area, 1 or 2 observers can 'follow' everyone, all night long, all around town.
So could independent eyewitness accounts. 'Corroboration' I believe is the word used to describe this.
Start small, expand as needed. Today, just in the trouble spots. Tomorrow, down the quiet leafy suburban street.
'As needed' is the key phrase. It's not generally needed on a suburban street if it's a residential area with people present.
Do you really want to live in a world where you are on camera all of the time? I don't.
I was in a chip shop in Manchester England late one night when some young thugs tried to start a fight because a fella objected to them jumping the line. They said quite openly that the only reason they didn't beat the head off him was because there was a camera pointing at them. This was in the same year that some poor night clubber was beaten to death in an early morning disturbance over a bag of chips (French fries). Manchester has a vibrant nightlife, but it is heavily policed and I was always grateful for that. Do not underestimate the power of drunken people in large groups. Without some innovative approaches to law and order, it would be impossible to have late night bus services and the thriving club scene.
It's all well and good living in leafy suburbs where crime is almost unheard of and declaring that survailance is an unnecessary restriction on freedoms, but some people live in areas where this kind of thing is needed.
In her seminal book, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Jane Jacobs described how the design of city streets can influence crime levels. The presence of other people on a street, or the perceived presence of people who might be looking out from their windows, is enough to keep crime at lower levels in residential areas. Deserted areas such as back alleys, sprawling parking lagoons, or empty retail or office parks late at night, are all much more dangerous. The design of many American cities in recent decades has seen some short-sighted car-centric planning methods that has led to an increase in the number of these dangerously barren areas. In an ideal world, these single-use zoned areas would be retrofitted into mixed-use zones where there is a permanent human presence. In the real world, cameras are the next best thing.
Older cities like San Francisco have much of their area populated at all hours of the day and night because they were built before the days of single-use zoning. Is the presence of people on the street a curtailment of civil liberties? What's the difference between a camera recording an incident and an eyewitness who can later give testimony? The only difference that I can see is that the camera can't be intimidated and doesn't need to be put into a witness protection program.
Er, you said yourself that the incident took place in a suburb of LA, which kinda proves the point that suburbs are not necessarily inherently safer than higher density urban cores.
Yeah, I'm sure they'll thank you for moving them downtown to get harassed by bums, shot at by gangbangers, and attend a school where the teachers wear body armor. I can see them giving you the "World's Greatest Dad" cup now.
Ah. The old "urban areas are crime infested ghettos and suburbs are all sweetness and light" fallacy.
Ever heard of a city called LA? It's a sprawl addict's dream. A 100 mile wide city that has crime in abundance. It has nice areas too though.
Ever heard of a city called San Francisco? It's a compact city enthusiast's dream. Things are so close together that you can (are you ready for this) WALK most places! Sure it has its crime-intensive areas, but they're the exception. The majority of the city is pleasant and safe enough that it attracts tourists by the million, and doesn't have the bums, gangbangers, and teachers in shining armour of which you speak. (OK, homelessness is a problem, but that's more to do with the city's temperate climate than anything else, and you'll find bums in other bay area cities including the low density ones.)
The point I'm making here is that there are good and bad high density cities, and good and bad low density cities. However, low density cities have an inherent problem that high density cities do not - namely heavy reliance on automobiles to meet daily needs, extra expense of delivering utilities and services, along with the pollution and social isolation that comes from single-use zoning. This scheme in TFA looks like a good way to bring out the best in American cities and finally walk away from this unsustainable and wasteful settlement pattern that forces people to make car trips just to buy a bottle of milk or a postage stamp. What's the point in living in a city if you can't walk anywhere? You might as well live away out in the wilds.
I was a victim of being thrown in at the deep end and didn't last long in my phone support role - thankfully. If the economy is weak and you have a bit of money to tide you over for a year, by all means go into full time education, but to be honest it might be better to stick at this job and teach yourself what you can in your own time. I'm a self taught man. I have no formal training in web development, but I'm a web developer now. My degree was in Manufacturing Engineering, and that has always been an asset when it comes to interviews because it helps me to stand out from all the Computer Science degree holders. The fact that I taught myself is also an asset, since in this dynamic world an insightful employer will be more impressed by your ability to pick up new skills rather than the specific skills you have now, as long as you know enough to get the job done to some extent at first you'll be fine. Where to get experience? The beauty of web dev is that you can work as a freelancer, doing pro-bono work for non profit organisations to begin with just to get yourself up to speed and build up a portfolio.
There's nothing as soul destroying as sitting at the bottom of the IT ladder knowing that there are people only one rung above you that have a much better life. But you can haul yourself up there.
I never did understand why the American "football" rarely involves a foot. I know it is descended from football, but so is rugby, and no-one calls that football.
But in all seriousness, a "rugby" game would be British I would think.
As we say here "Football is a gentleman's game played by ruffians and rugby is a ruffian's game played by gentlemen". Rugby players and fans typically celebrate with each other after a game (hence another saying, "my drinking team has a rugby problem"), where football fans have to be kept apart by the police...
Rugby doesn't involve much kicking of the ball either, and contrary to your assertion it is actually called rugby football in officialdom and is administered by the Rugby 'Football' Union (except for Rugby League, of course). It has a little bit more kicking than American Football, but still not much. American football is a derivative of rugby, rugby is not a derivative of soccer - the kicking game was codified first by the FA, the carrying game was later codified by the RFU. The Irish kicking and carrying style of game was codified as Gaelic Football by the GAA, and that had an influence on the early development of Australian Rules Football.
There are many codes of football in the world, but only soccer predominantly uses the foot to deliver the ball. The reason it's called 'football' has nothing to do with the kicking action. In days of yore, games were played by the nobles on horseback. Games were played by the peasants on foot. Hence, 'foot' ball.
Those games would have been similar to the Cornish custom of hurling the silver ball, mad chaotic events involving huge crowds similar to continental festivals like the running of the bulls in Pamplona. The object of the game would have varied from region to region, but would have usually involved trying to get the ball into the neigbouring village or past some agreed landmark. More here.
"but by manipulating extra dimensions with astronomical amounts of energy dot dot dot"
Well, if we could manipulate astronomical amounts of energy, instead of sailing off to Alpha Centauri or Wolf 359, we could:
Have rolling roads (a la heinlein and Asimov) and eliminate the need for flying cars or rolling cars
Desalinate seawater to irrigate the arid lands
Control global climate change, or run a computer cluster model that can disprove it. Pick one.
But we can't. I know this is a fun dream. But before you try to replicate the Federation, take a look at the world that they were based upon. The Earth of Roddenberry is VERY different than this one. Let us strive to achieve THAT before we strive for the fastest way off of here.
Imagine charities researching the causes you mention. Now imagine everyone giving a dollar to those causes every time someone repeats the "let's solve all the problems on Earth before we start exploring space" mantra. Those causes would then have enough money to fix all those problems, we'd have our utopia on Earth, and then we'd be free to go on exploring space.
Personally, between 6 billion of us, I think we should be capable of working on more than one project at once.
I can't see this venture returning capital on anything that remotely resembles "short term". As such, I envision only government entities or wealthy individuals uninterested in ROI funding a project such as this.
Honestly, what kind of question could there be about investors in this type of technology? I didn't see anything remotely relevant to a business plan in any of the links.
I didn't either, but I do see a catastrophic sense of humor failure in your post.
Slashdot Mirror
In other words the taxpayers just had half a billion stolen from them and given to some idiot Californicators to waste on building overpriced cars that will only sell if they are subsidized with yet more taxpayer dollars.
Seriously, if these cars were such a great moneymaking venture I don't think California is lacking in venture capitalists even in a recession. You only go to the government with hat in hand if you know it is a losing idea but can be made politically appealing anyway. These days you just have to say "green!" to crack open the piggy bank.
Who built the Interstates?
More bullshit courtesy of the U.S. Gubmint!
I know. Just like those silly Interstate highways, the US Marine Corps, the US Postal Service that'll deliver a package of paper to any door in the US within a day or two for an affordable flat fee, and those terribly inefficient and socialized Firefighters and that neo-communist socialized Police Department. Government. Pah! Who needs it?
Reminds me of early attempts to cloak planes to the naked eye by putting a row of lights around the edges. It was reasonably effective on a bright overcast day.
Apple is pretty good in the sense that they don't appear to criticise the competition (or if they do it doesn't make the news). They get on with what they do best.
Never seen the "I'm a Mac - I'm a PC" advertising campaign?
I really don't see what's the big deal about driving in SF. Apart from listening to the impatient honking of the scum-of-the-earth taxi drivers who I hate with a passion, it's really easy to drive in.
I live and work in San Francisco and quite frankly I love it. I've never experienced any of the issues the article claims plague our city (I'm not sure what iJacking is, but my eye sockets are just fine).
I agree. And did TFA say that the traffic is bad in SF? Apart from the Bay Bridge toll plaza backup, the traffic in SF flows just fine. I don't know what that author is smoking.
Better demolish all our buildings then.
I've often thought that if it's economically viable to go to the trouble of all that engineering for offshore oil exploration, extraction and processing, surely it's viable to build vast offshore wind farms where there's plenty of room, plenty of wind, and no neighbours to object.
I've figured a solution to that problem. Put to Joe Bag on while you're going down on her. Doesn't interrupt the flow at all. Once she realizes you're wearing it she asks "when did you put that on?!" You tell her, and she's amazed at your talent, horning her up all the more. Ta daaa!
Seriously though, I don't know about guys who don't have foreskins, but condoms are deadly uncomfortable for a non-circumcised dick. More times than enough I've had to pull out before I've finished the job because it feels like my tip is being pinched. I think they need more lubrication on the inside. Plus they don't stretch very easily, you'd need to apply considerable pressure to get them to expand, and the average guy's blood flow is not going to do that. I suppose it's one of the trade-offs of reliability.
Quoth TFA:
In one letter that The Post published after its article ran online, a reader wrote: "Newspapers are going broke in part because news can be read, free of charge, on the Internet. As a nearly lifelong reader of The Post, I could not read this article in the paper I pay for and subscribe to; instead I came on it accidentally while scrolling online for business reasons."
A story about three polyamorous men living together and you found it while surfing the net for "business reasons?" Yeah, right!
I hold my computer on my lap as a kick back on the couch - they call them laptops.
I know, but there's something about the feel of a physical paper that's so much more pleasant than a bloody screen. I hate not being able to see the whole page in one view without having to scroll. It's like when I worked in a drawing office as a CAD draughtsman. Sure we'd long ago dispensed with the drawing boards and all the design work was done on screen, but when it came to reviewing drawings and looking for potential problems, checking calculations etc. it was time to run a plot and pore over the thing flat out on the desk. There'll always be a role for paper.
See also, from The Atlantic (which I happen to buy in print form) on why The Economist newspaper is doing so well. The Economist uses long form reporting, doesn't charge for online content (except for the archives) and is still growing strongly.
That recording is (potentially) forever.
Only relevant if witnesses led short lives.
What is not illegal/immoral today may well be tomorrow.
You cannot be prosecuted today for something you did previously when it was legal.
It can be matched with other recordings to give an account of the travels of everyone who passed by that evening. With enough cameras in an area, 1 or 2 observers can 'follow' everyone, all night long, all around town.
So could independent eyewitness accounts. 'Corroboration' I believe is the word used to describe this.
Start small, expand as needed. Today, just in the trouble spots. Tomorrow, down the quiet leafy suburban street.
'As needed' is the key phrase. It's not generally needed on a suburban street if it's a residential area with people present.
Do you really want to live in a world where you are on camera all of the time? I don't.
No. And that's not what anyone is talking about.
I was in a chip shop in Manchester England late one night when some young thugs tried to start a fight because a fella objected to them jumping the line. They said quite openly that the only reason they didn't beat the head off him was because there was a camera pointing at them. This was in the same year that some poor night clubber was beaten to death in an early morning disturbance over a bag of chips (French fries). Manchester has a vibrant nightlife, but it is heavily policed and I was always grateful for that. Do not underestimate the power of drunken people in large groups. Without some innovative approaches to law and order, it would be impossible to have late night bus services and the thriving club scene.
It's all well and good living in leafy suburbs where crime is almost unheard of and declaring that survailance is an unnecessary restriction on freedoms, but some people live in areas where this kind of thing is needed.
In her seminal book, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Jane Jacobs described how the design of city streets can influence crime levels. The presence of other people on a street, or the perceived presence of people who might be looking out from their windows, is enough to keep crime at lower levels in residential areas. Deserted areas such as back alleys, sprawling parking lagoons, or empty retail or office parks late at night, are all much more dangerous. The design of many American cities in recent decades has seen some short-sighted car-centric planning methods that has led to an increase in the number of these dangerously barren areas. In an ideal world, these single-use zoned areas would be retrofitted into mixed-use zones where there is a permanent human presence. In the real world, cameras are the next best thing.
Older cities like San Francisco have much of their area populated at all hours of the day and night because they were built before the days of single-use zoning. Is the presence of people on the street a curtailment of civil liberties? What's the difference between a camera recording an incident and an eyewitness who can later give testimony? The only difference that I can see is that the camera can't be intimidated and doesn't need to be put into a witness protection program.
'the innocent have nothing to fear'.... What the hell is that crap? When did that become the rally flag for the loss of freedoms?
Next they will tell us that if they don't get these cameras, the terrorist win....
Oh wait!
Would you abolish the police then?
You've never been to England, then.
The Game - Penetrating the secret society of pickup artists, by Neil Strauss
The Mystery Method - How to get beautiful women into bed, by Mystery
Great reading. Helps with all aspects of socialising, not just picking up girls.
Er, you said yourself that the incident took place in a suburb of LA, which kinda proves the point that suburbs are not necessarily inherently safer than higher density urban cores.
Thank you.
Yeah, I'm sure they'll thank you for moving them downtown to get harassed by bums, shot at by gangbangers, and attend a school where the teachers wear body armor. I can see them giving you the "World's Greatest Dad" cup now.
Ah. The old "urban areas are crime infested ghettos and suburbs are all sweetness and light" fallacy.
Ever heard of a city called LA? It's a sprawl addict's dream. A 100 mile wide city that has crime in abundance. It has nice areas too though.
Ever heard of a city called San Francisco? It's a compact city enthusiast's dream. Things are so close together that you can (are you ready for this) WALK most places! Sure it has its crime-intensive areas, but they're the exception. The majority of the city is pleasant and safe enough that it attracts tourists by the million, and doesn't have the bums, gangbangers, and teachers in shining armour of which you speak. (OK, homelessness is a problem, but that's more to do with the city's temperate climate than anything else, and you'll find bums in other bay area cities including the low density ones.)
The point I'm making here is that there are good and bad high density cities, and good and bad low density cities. However, low density cities have an inherent problem that high density cities do not - namely heavy reliance on automobiles to meet daily needs, extra expense of delivering utilities and services, along with the pollution and social isolation that comes from single-use zoning. This scheme in TFA looks like a good way to bring out the best in American cities and finally walk away from this unsustainable and wasteful settlement pattern that forces people to make car trips just to buy a bottle of milk or a postage stamp. What's the point in living in a city if you can't walk anywhere? You might as well live away out in the wilds.
And FYI, high density mixed-use zoning is proving to be in high demand.
Excuse me, I wrote the linked article.
I was a victim of being thrown in at the deep end and didn't last long in my phone support role - thankfully. If the economy is weak and you have a bit of money to tide you over for a year, by all means go into full time education, but to be honest it might be better to stick at this job and teach yourself what you can in your own time. I'm a self taught man. I have no formal training in web development, but I'm a web developer now. My degree was in Manufacturing Engineering, and that has always been an asset when it comes to interviews because it helps me to stand out from all the Computer Science degree holders. The fact that I taught myself is also an asset, since in this dynamic world an insightful employer will be more impressed by your ability to pick up new skills rather than the specific skills you have now, as long as you know enough to get the job done to some extent at first you'll be fine. Where to get experience? The beauty of web dev is that you can work as a freelancer, doing pro-bono work for non profit organisations to begin with just to get yourself up to speed and build up a portfolio.
There's nothing as soul destroying as sitting at the bottom of the IT ladder knowing that there are people only one rung above you that have a much better life. But you can haul yourself up there.
Good luck!
I never did understand why the American "football" rarely involves a foot. I know it is descended from football, but so is rugby, and no-one calls that football.
But in all seriousness, a "rugby" game would be British I would think.
As we say here "Football is a gentleman's game played by ruffians and rugby is a ruffian's game played by gentlemen". Rugby players and fans typically celebrate with each other after a game (hence another saying, "my drinking team has a rugby problem"), where football fans have to be kept apart by the police...
Rugby doesn't involve much kicking of the ball either, and contrary to your assertion it is actually called rugby football in officialdom and is administered by the Rugby 'Football' Union (except for Rugby League, of course). It has a little bit more kicking than American Football, but still not much. American football is a derivative of rugby, rugby is not a derivative of soccer - the kicking game was codified first by the FA, the carrying game was later codified by the RFU. The Irish kicking and carrying style of game was codified as Gaelic Football by the GAA, and that had an influence on the early development of Australian Rules Football.
There are many codes of football in the world, but only soccer predominantly uses the foot to deliver the ball. The reason it's called 'football' has nothing to do with the kicking action. In days of yore, games were played by the nobles on horseback. Games were played by the peasants on foot. Hence, 'foot' ball.
Those games would have been similar to the Cornish custom of hurling the silver ball, mad chaotic events involving huge crowds similar to continental festivals like the running of the bulls in Pamplona. The object of the game would have varied from region to region, but would have usually involved trying to get the ball into the neigbouring village or past some agreed landmark. More here.
Nice. I took the "call this number again and I'll F***ing kill you!" approach.
From TFA #2:
"but by manipulating extra dimensions with astronomical amounts of energy dot dot dot"
Well, if we could manipulate astronomical amounts of energy, instead of sailing off to Alpha Centauri or Wolf 359, we could:
But we can't. I know this is a fun dream. But before you try to replicate the Federation, take a look at the world that they were based upon. The Earth of Roddenberry is VERY different than this one. Let us strive to achieve THAT before we strive for the fastest way off of here.
Imagine charities researching the causes you mention. Now imagine everyone giving a dollar to those causes every time someone repeats the "let's solve all the problems on Earth before we start exploring space" mantra. Those causes would then have enough money to fix all those problems, we'd have our utopia on Earth, and then we'd be free to go on exploring space.
Personally, between 6 billion of us, I think we should be capable of working on more than one project at once.
I can't see this venture returning capital on anything that remotely resembles "short term". As such, I envision only government entities or wealthy individuals uninterested in ROI funding a project such as this.
Honestly, what kind of question could there be about investors in this type of technology? I didn't see anything remotely relevant to a business plan in any of the links.
I didn't either, but I do see a catastrophic sense of humor failure in your post.