Uber is faster than a limo, when you want to get a ride quick. Waiting for a Black car could take 30 minutes, or more in a chaotic situation. And taxis are harder to find in chaotic situations. In general a billionaire in NYC would catch a car (private or cab, depending on the amount of warning/planning), and get a ride to the heliport. Then they take a helicopter to where they are going (often a hop to the airport). This is standard, and nobody looks twice at a billionaire hopping in a cab.
Though, I'm offended to hear Trump described as such. He's a pauper. He refuses to release his tax returns because they'll show that he's poor, just talks a good game to get 110% bank lending to live off the loans. If everyone knew how poor he was, he'd lose all his funding, and everything with the Trump name on it would fail. He'd rather remain silent and lose the election than speak and ruin his life.
Define "terrorism" and define the entity to make the call whether an "incident" is terrorism or not. Was the OKC bombing "terrorism"? It was generally not described as such. How about a riot? Civil unrest, or terrorism? Seems like a vague and self-serving criteria to base things on. Being able to figure it out later is not the same as knowing it at the time. 9/11 was a "horrible event" that was even thought an accident at the time, so what do you do in such situations?
There is no algorithm that can evaluate that in real-time. So to require that would be unreasonable.
Medallion cabs respond to disasters by disappearing.
That's what the market demands. The medallion cabs are paid for the trip. In a "disaster" (this wasn't one, it was just a scare), people want to move. If you are a Taxi and in the disaster area, and you have a fare to go from the disaster area to NJ, you would. Then you are in NJ. Do you dead-head back to the disaster scene, or take another fare to somewhere else? Whatever keeps the back of your cab full of paying customers is best for you, and since nobody wants to go to the center of a disaster, the taxis will stay away. Capitalism demands it.
The problem with so many here is that they argue the economist definition against the dictionary definition, or the dictionary definition against the vernacular definition, and nobody discusses any of them against reality.
A "free market" as defined by the economists is as close as we want to get to an ideal free market, because the actors in an ideal market recognize the inefficiencies that drive us away from an ideal market, and exploit them, so the ideal system is unstable and easily exploited. The "free market" we say is designed to be abused, so abuse of the system isn't an aberration that proves it delicate, but proof the system works as designed.
For psychology reasons, we are left with the least efficient "free market" possible. And that's the one PopeRatzo says nobody wants, because it's undesireable by design. But there are better free markets to choose from.
That's not a free market, that's a monopoly market. Uber isn't a monopoly. The options of cabs were still there, as well as Black Cars and limos. The artificial limits on taxis (not a free market) created the problem that Uber is trying to solve. If there were 10,000 Ubers, then Uber wouldn't ever hit boost conditions, because the load would be shared.
The "goal" in an ideal free market, is that 100% of drivers are signed up with a "ridesharing" company, and they pick up a nearby fare when headed home. But that ideal is never going to happen, so long as everyone is fighting the ride shares whenever possible.
Uber didn't increase the rates because there was a bomb. Uber doubled the rate because nobody was traveling to the city, only away, so to get more drivers to make the one-way unpaid trip into the city to get a fair, they were paid for the empty portion by the person who wanted the ride.
The Uber rates aren't driven by disaster, but ride requests. This wasn't an evil plot, it was effective capitalism. If we can't tell the difference between capitalism and evil, that says something about both.
Just a few EMPs, and their kill-bots to wipe up the confused meatsacks left behind. No nukes, that'd spoil their conquest. Unless they mastered anti-matter bombs. Though radioactive, the radiation from those is quite short lived.
Though, I want to see the aliens with an orbital drill. Drill to the core, heat it up 10,000 degrees, watch the continents melt, while they reform the planet in our image. When the construction workers make a house, they don't exterminate the ants first. They leave that to the bulldozers.
There's skills learned in the woods and fields that lend themselves very well to combat. Like knowing how to shoot and *hit* your target. It's not just point and pull like in the movies. We won WWII because of these farm-boys.
The last war decided by farm boys was WWI. WWII was decided by tanks, planes and boats. Those since, mostly planes, but also mostly politics. The farm boy is irrelevant, and has been for many years.
What does a "farm boy" bring to a war fought by drones?
Large swings in outside temperatures in the areas you listed. You'd be better off putting it in the Amazon jungle, if the goal was to have a stable temperature. And reality says that they are enough to matter. Hence why it's in space.
Can you point out how "news for nerds" must be technology related? I would think that any news that interests nerds would meet that criteria, and given the political discussions in the comments sections, this seems quite along the lines of things that interest "nerds".
I am an expert on Europe, but I've never heard of Paris, or London.
Nope. Not knowing a key battleground indicates lack of knowledge of a subject so well, one could say he doesn't know what ISIS is, since he doesn't know where it operates, and doesn't follow the most basic news about it.
When 70% of them are "in name only" then the RINOs are the hardliners The Repulbicans supporting Hillary are more "the party" than those supporting Trump.
If he does it, it will be between the election and inauguration. Pardons rarely happen before the election, as they can sway some opinions. If it happens, it will be in December or early Jan.
No, we all understood, and recognized it as a red herring. You aren't testing what happens inside the conceptual environment. Doing the double-transformation would be silly to run a simulation to "train" the computer in basic operations. The double-transformation is done to train the recognition of the intermediate step of "seeing" a wall and recognizing it as such. The AI isn't learning how to interact with the world, that's pre-programmed, and doesn't need the intermediate step.
The intermediate step is to train the AI to recognize a world-recognizable wall. That can't be done without the double-transformation (at least until it's well trained, then that can be rolled up in the initial knowledge).
The problem is capitalism. Optimizing for cost gets a technically inferior solution.
The SR-71 is still the fastest plane ever built.
It's the fastest manned aircraft that launches from the ground under its own power and runs on JP-7 fuel. Remove any one of those constraints, and there is something faster, though none are in use, as they are too expensive, and anything you can do with an SR-71, you can do cheaper with a drone or satellite. The SR-71 existed so that we could take pictures without losing pilots. Drones fit that bill and are much cheaper.
Concorde is our best plane.
Grounded because they were expensive and delicate. They were inferior to a 777 in every way, other than travel time.
Realistic enough to work as a proxy for reality, but not realistic enough to fool an alert observer. Apparently you don't know the difference between "works" and "perfect". There's usually quite a gap.
If Apple didn't recognize their own racism, why did they bother to hire more diverse contractors to speak? Holding up the mirror doesn't make one ugly, that's on the person that's looking at it. Getting mad at the mirror or messenger doesn't change the reality.
On the first miss, you call them and arrange a new delivery address (at work) or tell them to hold it so you can pick it up. The FedEx depot near me is open 8-7, so you have 11 hours in your day to get it. Before or after work, or over lunch, if you work long or odd hours. And the line at FedEx is shorter than the line in the store, if you were to buy locally. So still a time saver.
And even "signature required" generally allow you to sign the "sorry we missed you" note and they'll leave it the next day without you ever being home.
Your Option 2 sounds like you've never received a package in your life.
I've never spent less than 30 minutes in the store for that option. More often than not, they don't have it set aside in the holding room, but have to go to stock and get it. Usually, the person helping isn't allowed to leave their post, so they have to call for someone, wait for someone to come, pass off the information on the item being saught, then wait for that person to come back with it. Between the initial fruitless search, and the retrieval from the shelves, the wait time is pretty bad for click and collect. I much prefer shipping. Saves me lots of time, and never more expensive than the store.
Slashdot Mirror
Uber is faster than a limo, when you want to get a ride quick. Waiting for a Black car could take 30 minutes, or more in a chaotic situation. And taxis are harder to find in chaotic situations. In general a billionaire in NYC would catch a car (private or cab, depending on the amount of warning/planning), and get a ride to the heliport. Then they take a helicopter to where they are going (often a hop to the airport). This is standard, and nobody looks twice at a billionaire hopping in a cab.
Though, I'm offended to hear Trump described as such. He's a pauper. He refuses to release his tax returns because they'll show that he's poor, just talks a good game to get 110% bank lending to live off the loans. If everyone knew how poor he was, he'd lose all his funding, and everything with the Trump name on it would fail. He'd rather remain silent and lose the election than speak and ruin his life.
Define "terrorism" and define the entity to make the call whether an "incident" is terrorism or not. Was the OKC bombing "terrorism"? It was generally not described as such. How about a riot? Civil unrest, or terrorism? Seems like a vague and self-serving criteria to base things on. Being able to figure it out later is not the same as knowing it at the time. 9/11 was a "horrible event" that was even thought an accident at the time, so what do you do in such situations?
There is no algorithm that can evaluate that in real-time. So to require that would be unreasonable.
Medallion cabs respond to disasters by disappearing.
That's what the market demands. The medallion cabs are paid for the trip. In a "disaster" (this wasn't one, it was just a scare), people want to move. If you are a Taxi and in the disaster area, and you have a fare to go from the disaster area to NJ, you would. Then you are in NJ. Do you dead-head back to the disaster scene, or take another fare to somewhere else? Whatever keeps the back of your cab full of paying customers is best for you, and since nobody wants to go to the center of a disaster, the taxis will stay away. Capitalism demands it.
When most people say "free market" then think "ideal free market" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The problem with so many here is that they argue the economist definition against the dictionary definition, or the dictionary definition against the vernacular definition, and nobody discusses any of them against reality.
A "free market" as defined by the economists is as close as we want to get to an ideal free market, because the actors in an ideal market recognize the inefficiencies that drive us away from an ideal market, and exploit them, so the ideal system is unstable and easily exploited. The "free market" we say is designed to be abused, so abuse of the system isn't an aberration that proves it delicate, but proof the system works as designed.
For psychology reasons, we are left with the least efficient "free market" possible. And that's the one PopeRatzo says nobody wants, because it's undesireable by design. But there are better free markets to choose from.
That's not a free market, that's a monopoly market. Uber isn't a monopoly. The options of cabs were still there, as well as Black Cars and limos. The artificial limits on taxis (not a free market) created the problem that Uber is trying to solve. If there were 10,000 Ubers, then Uber wouldn't ever hit boost conditions, because the load would be shared.
The "goal" in an ideal free market, is that 100% of drivers are signed up with a "ridesharing" company, and they pick up a nearby fare when headed home. But that ideal is never going to happen, so long as everyone is fighting the ride shares whenever possible.
Uber didn't increase the rates because there was a bomb. Uber doubled the rate because nobody was traveling to the city, only away, so to get more drivers to make the one-way unpaid trip into the city to get a fair, they were paid for the empty portion by the person who wanted the ride.
The Uber rates aren't driven by disaster, but ride requests. This wasn't an evil plot, it was effective capitalism. If we can't tell the difference between capitalism and evil, that says something about both.
Just a few EMPs, and their kill-bots to wipe up the confused meatsacks left behind. No nukes, that'd spoil their conquest. Unless they mastered anti-matter bombs. Though radioactive, the radiation from those is quite short lived.
Though, I want to see the aliens with an orbital drill. Drill to the core, heat it up 10,000 degrees, watch the continents melt, while they reform the planet in our image. When the construction workers make a house, they don't exterminate the ants first. They leave that to the bulldozers.
There's skills learned in the woods and fields that lend themselves very well to combat. Like knowing how to shoot and *hit* your target. It's not just point and pull like in the movies. We won WWII because of these farm-boys.
The last war decided by farm boys was WWI. WWII was decided by tanks, planes and boats. Those since, mostly planes, but also mostly politics. The farm boy is irrelevant, and has been for many years.
What does a "farm boy" bring to a war fought by drones?
Large swings in outside temperatures in the areas you listed. You'd be better off putting it in the Amazon jungle, if the goal was to have a stable temperature. And reality says that they are enough to matter. Hence why it's in space.
With relativity, it'll be 100% accurate. It's you who is inaccurate.
Being in space, the temperatures will be more consistent. This leads to fewer errors from thermal issues, so the clock is more accurate.
Can you point out how "news for nerds" must be technology related? I would think that any news that interests nerds would meet that criteria, and given the political discussions in the comments sections, this seems quite along the lines of things that interest "nerds".
I am an expert on Europe, but I've never heard of Paris, or London.
Nope. Not knowing a key battleground indicates lack of knowledge of a subject so well, one could say he doesn't know what ISIS is, since he doesn't know where it operates, and doesn't follow the most basic news about it.
When 70% of them are "in name only" then the RINOs are the hardliners The Repulbicans supporting Hillary are more "the party" than those supporting Trump.
Voting for president someone who doesn't know who ISIS is. That doesn't seem to be a wise decision either.
I missed where someone stated the government took any action.
It takes courage to betray an oath to do the right thing. Heroes are described as "courageous".
If he does it, it will be between the election and inauguration. Pardons rarely happen before the election, as they can sway some opinions. If it happens, it will be in December or early Jan.
No, we all understood, and recognized it as a red herring. You aren't testing what happens inside the conceptual environment. Doing the double-transformation would be silly to run a simulation to "train" the computer in basic operations. The double-transformation is done to train the recognition of the intermediate step of "seeing" a wall and recognizing it as such. The AI isn't learning how to interact with the world, that's pre-programmed, and doesn't need the intermediate step.
The intermediate step is to train the AI to recognize a world-recognizable wall. That can't be done without the double-transformation (at least until it's well trained, then that can be rolled up in the initial knowledge).
Where is the "dead end" with moore's law? When will we hit it? We have enough compute power for AI. What we don't have is a good algorithm.
There is a problem with our scientists today.
The problem is capitalism. Optimizing for cost gets a technically inferior solution.
The SR-71 is still the fastest plane ever built.
It's the fastest manned aircraft that launches from the ground under its own power and runs on JP-7 fuel. Remove any one of those constraints, and there is something faster, though none are in use, as they are too expensive, and anything you can do with an SR-71, you can do cheaper with a drone or satellite. The SR-71 existed so that we could take pictures without losing pilots. Drones fit that bill and are much cheaper.
Concorde is our best plane.
Grounded because they were expensive and delicate. They were inferior to a 777 in every way, other than travel time.
Realistic enough to work as a proxy for reality, but not realistic enough to fool an alert observer. Apparently you don't know the difference between "works" and "perfect". There's usually quite a gap.
If Apple didn't recognize their own racism, why did they bother to hire more diverse contractors to speak? Holding up the mirror doesn't make one ugly, that's on the person that's looking at it. Getting mad at the mirror or messenger doesn't change the reality.
On the first miss, you call them and arrange a new delivery address (at work) or tell them to hold it so you can pick it up. The FedEx depot near me is open 8-7, so you have 11 hours in your day to get it. Before or after work, or over lunch, if you work long or odd hours. And the line at FedEx is shorter than the line in the store, if you were to buy locally. So still a time saver.
And even "signature required" generally allow you to sign the "sorry we missed you" note and they'll leave it the next day without you ever being home.
Your Option 2 sounds like you've never received a package in your life.
I've never spent less than 30 minutes in the store for that option. More often than not, they don't have it set aside in the holding room, but have to go to stock and get it. Usually, the person helping isn't allowed to leave their post, so they have to call for someone, wait for someone to come, pass off the information on the item being saught, then wait for that person to come back with it. Between the initial fruitless search, and the retrieval from the shelves, the wait time is pretty bad for click and collect. I much prefer shipping. Saves me lots of time, and never more expensive than the store.