It seems that a significant portion of Sanders supporters are not willing to vote for Clinton no matter what.
That's very abusive wording. Independents won't vote for Hillary - the second most hated major party candidate, or Drumpf - the first most hated major party candidate.
That means that "Sanders supporters" are more likely independents or unenthusiastic party members. They aren't spiteful, but uninterested in a choice between two evils Who's the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil. That makes you evil, even if you are trying to avoid a worse evil.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Navstar redirects to GPS. Navstar is the more public name of DNSS. If you want to be correct, Navstar should likely never be used. The original name is DNSS. The common name is GPS. Navstar is an obsolete common name, so it is neither the most accurate, nor the most common.
Personally I'd like to see more people use Navstar instead of GPS when referring to the US GNSS since it not only is it's proper name but it also reduces confusion since GPS is also used generally to refer to other GNSS. It seems to be a lost cause because even the US federal government is failing to call their own GNSS by its proper name.
GPS means one or more GPS (GNSS, as you like to call them, though they are technically unrelated to navigation - you could just as easily call them a global time system, and be no less accurate). US GPS is how I refer to DNSS, as it is unique, and obvious. The only people "confused" are deliberately confused in protest. Nobody knows DNSS or Navstar, and, as you note, nobody uses either, even the government that created it.
So you can not really cut off one region without harming all surrounding regions.
Obviously. Who said you wouldn't be harming the surrounding areas? If it's easy to turn them off and on individually, it should be trivial to black out a single location. Yes, the accuracy of the block is not very granular, and it will affect surrounding areas. Nobody said otherwise.
Why jam US GPS, when you have the power to turn it off? That is the question. Perhaps the system doesn't allow settings to "black out" a small area of the globe. Perhaps it's not just GPS, but also WAAS (or perhaps only GPS enhancements, like WAAS). With no information we can only speculate. But if you can turn off GPS, jamming it doesn't seem to have a great benefit. Perhaps they are testing anti-jamming. If someone were to jam it, how well can target that jammer?
And why notify the FAA, who explicitly uses US GPS and only US GPS that they are jamming US GPS, when they are only jamming other GPS systems? Are they not sure if their jammers will be too broad spectrum? Or are they doing something else?
Would you suggest then that if 100 Million immigrants were to enter the US in a given year that there would suddenly be 20 million vacant jobs?
You've added "suddenly" to a question without the time constraints. Yes, 100M immigrants would lead to 120M jobs. But it would take a while for the jobs to be created in response to the new consumers. The free market is too slow to react.
It is illegal to use private property as a public throughway,
Nope. It's actually quite legal to do that. Cutting through a "private" parking lot is 100% legal, unless otherwise prohibited. If it weren't already legal, why would they need an explicit law to prohibit it? http://www.statutes.legis.stat... Sec. 545.423 But don't worry, we won't let reality interfere with your unsubstantiated opinion.
That driver can then sue the manufacturer for the faulty equipment, but it does not shift the legal responsibility for the accident itself.
So a 3rd party can't sue directly? Oh, they can. And do. Care to try your false assertion again? If Ford's defective brakes harm Bob. It doesn't matter if Alice was driving. Bob can sue Ford, Alice, and God for the problem, though would likely only win from Ford and Alice, and Alice doesn't have as much money. Bob could sue Alice only, and expect Alice to sue Ford so Bob can get $100,000,000, but because Alice is not as likely to pursue the case as diligently as Bob will, Bob usually cuts out the middle man and sues Alice and Ford at the same time. Alice pays her insurance max, and Ford pays out whatever they lose for.
That you don't want reality to work that way doesn't change it.
Oh, right, shitty assholes go as far as making their neighborhood less desirable instead of working to make their roads better able to handle the new traffic.
You think it's the job of people living on unlined and uncontrolled side-streets to improve their road to compensate for roadworks in the area? That's an insane assertion.
That "most places have some rules around preventing cut-throughs". First, no.
Reality not agreeing with your opinion doesn't change reality. No matter how much you want your opinion to be true.
This is no different than ISP which throttle all streaming websites de facto without even considering if there's enough bandwidth to handle the traffic nor considering building out to handle increased traffic.
The main road is unthorttled. Has been, will be. It's temporarily ill from construction. A permanent improvement to make the side streets more main street on the off chance main street is congested is silly.
Yet most places have some rules around preventing cut-throughs. Almost everywhere has some rules that prevent cutting through private property to avoid a traffic control device. Some (but much fewer) have rules preventing cutting through public streets. Yes, they are paid for, but they are also not sized or safe for being used as mass through-ways.
Other people have taken up the flying car, but Moller has been 5 years away from the flying car for as long or longer. I remember reading about him as a kid, and it being "5 years away". Though what it's 5 years away from has changed slightly over the years.
Deep neural nets are not dB lookups. They mimic the way the brain stores and recalls patterns and responses to patterns.
It's not a dB lookup, it's a dB lookup that's stored like a brain. Still sounds like a dB lookup to me. The way they are used is to lookup things. That the lookup table isn't defined is the only "smart" thing about them. What's the number of people that will buy bottled water tomorrow in Florida? That's a neural net (dB) lookup. That you don't fully define that it's based on weather patterns (water purchases increase under threat of hurricane), or day of week, or month of year, or nearby holidays, or all that is the only thing "intelligent" about it. It's nothing that couldn't be defined if there was a team of 100 working on defining the parameters of the lookup in a plain old SQL database.
If that is what you want to call dB lookup, then well the brain just works through dB lookups too.
Sure. The brain works through dB lookup. Seems everyone working on AI wants to make it sound like it's more important. It's more sexy than a dB lookup, but it's a dB lookup.
A tax on the corporation isn't a tax on the corporation. Great logic.
Turn that around and suggest a national 2% sales tax, it would be largely the same thing and likely easier to collect.
Completely different. I'll leave it to you to think about. Since you don't understand, you probably wouldn't listen to someone trying to help you understand. I can explain it for you, but not understand it for you. And your comments make it sound like you'd play obtuse (or devil's advocate, or whatever you like to call it).
Well, since YOU say it won't, I guess it is all roses and peaches...
And we should hold you to a lower standard. If you say it, it's true, until someone else gives proof, but if someone else disagrees, it's their responsibility to present proof to prove you wrong. Why a worthless hypocrite you are.
You might consider thinking and learning for a change, you might discover that what you think you know is wrong.
You might consider taking your own advice. The truth doesn't change to match your opinion, no matter how much you want it to.
if you're giving money to unemployed people with the assumption that they'll use it on food and housing, what do you do about people who squander their money on drugs or gambling? What about the people who can't manage money, and get evicted because they spend money immediately and can't save up for rent? Other people will have their money taken from them by parasitic 'friends' and family members who hound them for money, or outright stolen due to fraud/burglary etc.
The only solution to that is slavery. Don't let them have money, and provide for them the way a plantation owner provided for them. Of course, to make sure nobody fell through the cracks you'd have to make it a crime to abandon your plantation, I mean government housing.
The superior solution is foodstamps combined with nationalized housing.
Ah, I see, you did think of that solution, but didn't think through the responses by those who *want* to fall through the cracks.
Therefore, the govt. owning and distributing land
So pick and choose the worst of communism? It's getting worse all the time.
I'm not going to earn $200K a year only to give 70% of it to the state. I just won't bother.
Why is it that people would rather make $100k and give 40% of it away than make $200k and give 70% of it away? In either case, they would be keeping $60k, and (at least theoretically) in the case of making $200k, they'd live in a place with much better social services.
Raise the income from corporations, not the tax rate. Nobody pays the tax rate anyway. They do, on adjusted income, so adjusted that the tax rate is closer to 0%. A corporation could make billions in profit and never pay a penny in tax. That's easy. So don't increase the tax rate nobody is paying anyway, and instead change how it's calculated. 2% of gross income would be a better tax. Not some calculated "profit" number that hides everything where the movie companies sell profit to subsidiaries at a loss, and hide that income off-shore havens.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems that a significant portion of Sanders supporters are not willing to vote for Clinton no matter what.
That's very abusive wording. Independents won't vote for Hillary - the second most hated major party candidate, or Drumpf - the first most hated major party candidate.
That means that "Sanders supporters" are more likely independents or unenthusiastic party members. They aren't spiteful, but uninterested in a choice between two evils Who's the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil. That makes you evil, even if you are trying to avoid a worse evil.
"Xbox, go to setings." Settings opened. What's the problem with the UI? Oh, you aren't using Kinect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... nm is not a nautical mile. nm is unambiguously a nanometer (even in the US).
You tie a grenade to a quad-copter drone, and use GPS to deliver it to your ex's house. That's the "military" use that they want to prevent.
Personally I'd like to see more people use Navstar instead of GPS when referring to the US GNSS since it not only is it's proper name but it also reduces confusion since GPS is also used generally to refer to other GNSS. It seems to be a lost cause because even the US federal government is failing to call their own GNSS by its proper name.
GPS means one or more GPS (GNSS, as you like to call them, though they are technically unrelated to navigation - you could just as easily call them a global time system, and be no less accurate). US GPS is how I refer to DNSS, as it is unique, and obvious. The only people "confused" are deliberately confused in protest. Nobody knows DNSS or Navstar, and, as you note, nobody uses either, even the government that created it.
They question every mosquito at their agricultural checkpoints.
So you can not really cut off one region without harming all surrounding regions.
Obviously. Who said you wouldn't be harming the surrounding areas? If it's easy to turn them off and on individually, it should be trivial to black out a single location. Yes, the accuracy of the block is not very granular, and it will affect surrounding areas. Nobody said otherwise.
Why jam US GPS, when you have the power to turn it off? That is the question. Perhaps the system doesn't allow settings to "black out" a small area of the globe. Perhaps it's not just GPS, but also WAAS (or perhaps only GPS enhancements, like WAAS). With no information we can only speculate. But if you can turn off GPS, jamming it doesn't seem to have a great benefit. Perhaps they are testing anti-jamming. If someone were to jam it, how well can target that jammer?
And why notify the FAA, who explicitly uses US GPS and only US GPS that they are jamming US GPS, when they are only jamming other GPS systems? Are they not sure if their jammers will be too broad spectrum? Or are they doing something else?
Hi Republican Troll.
Would you suggest then that if 100 Million immigrants were to enter the US in a given year that there would suddenly be 20 million vacant jobs?
You've added "suddenly" to a question without the time constraints. Yes, 100M immigrants would lead to 120M jobs. But it would take a while for the jobs to be created in response to the new consumers. The free market is too slow to react.
It is illegal to use private property as a public throughway,
Nope. It's actually quite legal to do that. Cutting through a "private" parking lot is 100% legal, unless otherwise prohibited. If it weren't already legal, why would they need an explicit law to prohibit it? http://www.statutes.legis.stat... Sec. 545.423 But don't worry, we won't let reality interfere with your unsubstantiated opinion.
That driver can then sue the manufacturer for the faulty equipment, but it does not shift the legal responsibility for the accident itself.
So a 3rd party can't sue directly? Oh, they can. And do. Care to try your false assertion again? If Ford's defective brakes harm Bob. It doesn't matter if Alice was driving. Bob can sue Ford, Alice, and God for the problem, though would likely only win from Ford and Alice, and Alice doesn't have as much money. Bob could sue Alice only, and expect Alice to sue Ford so Bob can get $100,000,000, but because Alice is not as likely to pursue the case as diligently as Bob will, Bob usually cuts out the middle man and sues Alice and Ford at the same time. Alice pays her insurance max, and Ford pays out whatever they lose for.
That you don't want reality to work that way doesn't change it.
Oh, right, shitty assholes go as far as making their neighborhood less desirable instead of working to make their roads better able to handle the new traffic.
You think it's the job of people living on unlined and uncontrolled side-streets to improve their road to compensate for roadworks in the area? That's an insane assertion.
That "most places have some rules around preventing cut-throughs". First, no.
Reality not agreeing with your opinion doesn't change reality. No matter how much you want your opinion to be true.
This is no different than ISP which throttle all streaming websites de facto without even considering if there's enough bandwidth to handle the traffic nor considering building out to handle increased traffic.
The main road is unthorttled. Has been, will be. It's temporarily ill from construction. A permanent improvement to make the side streets more main street on the off chance main street is congested is silly.
Yet most places have some rules around preventing cut-throughs. Almost everywhere has some rules that prevent cutting through private property to avoid a traffic control device. Some (but much fewer) have rules preventing cutting through public streets. Yes, they are paid for, but they are also not sized or safe for being used as mass through-ways.
Other people have taken up the flying car, but Moller has been 5 years away from the flying car for as long or longer. I remember reading about him as a kid, and it being "5 years away". Though what it's 5 years away from has changed slightly over the years.
Deep neural nets are not dB lookups. They mimic the way the brain stores and recalls patterns and responses to patterns.
It's not a dB lookup, it's a dB lookup that's stored like a brain. Still sounds like a dB lookup to me. The way they are used is to lookup things. That the lookup table isn't defined is the only "smart" thing about them. What's the number of people that will buy bottled water tomorrow in Florida? That's a neural net (dB) lookup. That you don't fully define that it's based on weather patterns (water purchases increase under threat of hurricane), or day of week, or month of year, or nearby holidays, or all that is the only thing "intelligent" about it. It's nothing that couldn't be defined if there was a team of 100 working on defining the parameters of the lookup in a plain old SQL database.
If that is what you want to call dB lookup, then well the brain just works through dB lookups too.
Sure. The brain works through dB lookup. Seems everyone working on AI wants to make it sound like it's more important. It's more sexy than a dB lookup, but it's a dB lookup.
But would it be a crime to sleep on the street when you have a house provided for you? Many people now want homelessness to be a crime.
There was no reason in your long-winded reply. You repeated logic-less sound bites.
Turn that around and suggest a national 2% sales tax, it would be largely the same thing and likely easier to collect.
Completely different. I'll leave it to you to think about. Since you don't understand, you probably wouldn't listen to someone trying to help you understand. I can explain it for you, but not understand it for you. And your comments make it sound like you'd play obtuse (or devil's advocate, or whatever you like to call it).
For all you claim, I have as much or more, yet you give nobody else any respect, and demand more from everyone else. It just makes you a hypocrite.
Well, since YOU say it won't, I guess it is all roses and peaches...
And we should hold you to a lower standard. If you say it, it's true, until someone else gives proof, but if someone else disagrees, it's their responsibility to present proof to prove you wrong. Why a worthless hypocrite you are.
You might consider thinking and learning for a change, you might discover that what you think you know is wrong.
You might consider taking your own advice. The truth doesn't change to match your opinion, no matter how much you want it to.
if you're giving money to unemployed people with the assumption that they'll use it on food and housing, what do you do about people who squander their money on drugs or gambling? What about the people who can't manage money, and get evicted because they spend money immediately and can't save up for rent? Other people will have their money taken from them by parasitic 'friends' and family members who hound them for money, or outright stolen due to fraud/burglary etc.
The only solution to that is slavery. Don't let them have money, and provide for them the way a plantation owner provided for them. Of course, to make sure nobody fell through the cracks you'd have to make it a crime to abandon your plantation, I mean government housing.
The superior solution is foodstamps combined with nationalized housing.
Ah, I see, you did think of that solution, but didn't think through the responses by those who *want* to fall through the cracks.
Therefore, the govt. owning and distributing land
So pick and choose the worst of communism? It's getting worse all the time.
I'm not going to earn $200K a year only to give 70% of it to the state. I just won't bother.
Why is it that people would rather make $100k and give 40% of it away than make $200k and give 70% of it away? In either case, they would be keeping $60k, and (at least theoretically) in the case of making $200k, they'd live in a place with much better social services.
Raise the income from corporations, not the tax rate. Nobody pays the tax rate anyway. They do, on adjusted income, so adjusted that the tax rate is closer to 0%. A corporation could make billions in profit and never pay a penny in tax. That's easy. So don't increase the tax rate nobody is paying anyway, and instead change how it's calculated. 2% of gross income would be a better tax. Not some calculated "profit" number that hides everything where the movie companies sell profit to subsidiaries at a loss, and hide that income off-shore havens.