What restarted the economy was the WAR, not the economic stimulus.
War is an economic stimulus, just the least efficient form of it possible. Building all those bombs occupied a lot of people.
More importantly the giant shot of confidence after winning the WW2 that made people think they could do anything.
Do you accept confidence as payment? No matter how wonderful your product is or how good a salesman you are, if people have no money you have no customers.
Why shovel shit for the sake of shoveling shit when we can transition to designing and programming better machines to shovel the shit for us.
Some can, some can't. What are those shovel experts who can't program or design nor have enough talent for them to ever learn going to do - eat cake?
It's not the Jobs are going away, they are just transitioning.
Our modern concept of a job was created for the needs of industrial capitalism, and is an abstraction of the old serf-lord relationship of feudalism, having the advantage - and disadvantage, for the weaker party - of greater flexibility over it. If employees are replaced by machines, why keep this last vestige of serfdom around?
Administrators control the network between Microsoft's servers and end user workstations. This will simply turn into another example of "They think they're going to dictate what, again?" where Microsoft's store app on the PC finds itself unable to talk to anything back at the mother ship due to firewall or URL restrictions.
You underestimate the power of the Dark Side. If Win10 can't contact the App store, it can't verify you have the licenses to run it and "your" programs, and must therefore block all usage to protect Microsoft's and third parties copyrights.
How does this impact me or most other people in any significant way? I don't think it does.
Reusable rockets is one of the key technologies to bring down the cost of space travel. Once it comes beneath a certain treshold, you get a positive feedback loop in the form of space-based industries. The end result is hopefully having it cheap enough for colonization.
So, potentially, it's the beginning of industrial-scale space travel, which would be just as much of a change Industrial Revolution has proved to be. But even at absolute worst, it means cheaper satellites.
I'll get modded down because this is an unpopular question to ask. But it needs to be asked. Shouldn't we put our resources to better use, like stopping global warming? Can anyone give me a good answer? I'm doubting it.
One of our worst problems is that our resource management system is still based on the feudal model, with money taking the place of land, and our nobility is just as corrupt, selfish and inept - and nowadays just as hereditary - as the preceding bunch. If one of them actually does his job - invests the resources under his control into advancing humanity - should he be attacked for it just because you'd rather see him take on some other cause?
You got modded down because you got handed a bar of silver and are whining it's not gold.
It's more criminally negligent to utilize general-purpose stuff for specialized medical operations.
This is why we have application-specific hardware.
We don't currently have the capacity to manufacture application-specific hardware in sufficient quantities to use it for medical devices. You'll have to wait until assembly lines can be reconfigured without slowing down, or 3D printers catch up to them on speed and product quality.
I use the web to _publish_ stuff, and to read what others _publish_. When I buy a newspaper at my local newsstand, I don't want it encrypted, and I don't care that the owner knows what papers I read.
Anonymity is like a seatbelt: you don't need it most of the time, but when you do, you either have it or die.
As for Trump, his biggest challenge will be raising funds.
Will it? After all this scaremongering about Trump, not reporting his every move and comment is letting good headlines go to waste. Also, people who hate Trump will continue dissing him, which simply increases a protest candidate's popularity.
But it really comes down to the fact that we don't want to see poor people. Because they can be scary because there isn't much for them to lose.
The poor, for the most part, have internalized the power structures of the surrounding society, just like everyone else. And that's the real reason we don't want to see the poor: that anyone is poor in a post-industrial society proves that that society is rotten to the core, and because we've internalized that society's values, it follows that we - or at least a part of us - are rotten to the core.
Mr. Woodward is simply responding as he's been conditioned to: blame the victim, so you don't start wondering about the implications of there being victims. Every system with hierarchies and inequalities requires that kind of trained self-deception from its members to stay stable because, in the end, most people aren't psychopaths. But of course, as Mr. Woodward demonstrates, lies are fragile things, which is why society has progressed somewhat over the years.
The poor aren't scary because there isn't much for them to lose, the poor are scary because, deep down, we all know there's going to be Hell to pay, quite possibly literally.
Except the likely end game for any advanced civilization is a matrix like existence where everything is great and there's no evil AI. Why would any civilization stay existing in the real world if they could plug everyone's brain into a paradise?
Except that's not the endgame, just the end of the opening moves. Once everyone is plugged in - or preferably uploaded - there's no reason why they can't simply use remote control to interface with the real world.
Also, we could make most people's lives a lot better if we wanted to, yet choose to keep them destitute to make those who control the resources a little bit richer. Why would an alien species build paradises rather than Hells on Earth either?
poor planning on their part does not a catastrophe for me make. Those cities have probably contributed a great deal more even on a per capita bases to the global CO2 levels than the folks on the hill tops have.
Nature is amoral, its a complex system of rules and feedback.
Nature is a complex feedback system, yet you think a large change in its operational parameters won't affect you. Nature is amoral, yet you think a disaster unleashed by other people's poor planning will only strike city folk who "deserve" it (that is, not you).
You're a sociopath and an idiot. Congratulations.
Oh, and you're also wrong: cities are more efficient - use less resources per capita - at taking care of their residents than countryside is. It's efficiencies of scale at work.
with 400+ large scale NPPs in operation around the world. Their inventory of stored fission byproducts dwarfs any release if we detonated all the worlds nuclear weapons by 100 fold. I would say we are closer than ever to an extinction event.
Nuclear winter isn't caused by radioactivity, it's caused by all the dust kicked up by the explosions blocking the Sun. Radioactivity is simply the icing on cake.
All it takes to start the extinction event, is the workers operating each plant don't show up for work.
And believing this you are, of course, campaigning for the planned long-term storage facilities - such as the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository - to be opened?
What's going to kill us all might be a nuclear war or a meteor strike we fail to deflect, but the reason it could ever get within striking distance was that people kept lying for their pet causes, thus crippling our collective intelligence.
Phase 6: Everyone pays Rupert Mudoch's ransom for the only good TV left.
Phase 7: more people simply abandon TV because with BBC gone, it's even less competitive against the Internet.
Commercial TV isn't competing against the BBC or other national broadcasters, it's competing against Facebook and a billion funny cat videos. And it's going to lose because it's inferior in both technology and content, as well as led by people so used to captive audiences that they think they're entitled to them.
Look at what happened with the Catholic church, the covered up pedophilia for so long that they ended up with a disproportionate amount of pedophiles in their ranks because those people knew they could get away with their actions because someone else would hush it up or make excuses for the behavior.
No, that's not what happened with the Catholic Church. What happened with the Catholic Church is that they covered up child molesters to protect their reputation at the expense of past and future victims. They are not accused of attracting terrible people, they're accused of being terrible people. And that they keep on playing the victim simply proves they've not changed, and don't intend to.
making assumptions that you're just as bad as the awful people you've been defending.
Not an assumption but a deduction. Approving of awful things makes you an awful person. This seems to be a persistant tumbling block in the way of every single movement that dreams of a better world, and is what separates people who might actually build one from psychopaths who simply want a fancy excuse for their atrocities.
In that respect, a Bernie presidency might actually be a GOOD thing as all of the naieve young kids that like him will get disappointed with his socialist agenda due to his inability to force Congress to do his bidding.
How could anyone be disappointed with Bernie's agenda if the Congress blocks said agenda from being implemented? Are you often disappointed with the quality of meals you didn't get to actually eat?
If anything, the Congress, being a notoriously corrupt organization, blocking an agenda gives that agenda more credibility.
The definition of the word "produce" is important. If the evidence already exists (as encrypted data on the hard drive), then the court can compel someone to produce (deliver) it to the investigators.
The alleged evidence has been delivered. What the investigators want is the suspect's help in interpreting it by providing the missing piece of information: the password. Which, frankly, seems dangerously close to being forced to testify against yourself.
Defending encryption doesn't mean having to defend every disgusting pervert or criminal that uses it.
Yes, it does: if I don't defend a criminal's fundamental rights, I weaken mine. After all, I have accepted them being merely conditional, rather than truly fundamental, and signaled this acceptance through my lack of action. Cultural consensus has shifted, eroding said rights ever so slightly.
And, quite frankly, the end result of this is the same, a pervert sits behind bars.
Some accused of being a pervert sits behind bars. This is used by authoritarians to cause an emotional response, which can then be used against you later. Don't go into the trap.
Each kid from China grew up with 1000 peers competing for every spot they ever applied for, going all the way back to grade school.
Yeah. But the thing is, I care more for those 999 kids who lost the competition and thus failed to get even grade school education. In fact, since I, not your company, am paying the taxes to fix or manage the consequences, I care far more about them than whatever value your shareholders receive from the lucky 0.1%.
Your company will have to compete on its own merits, not by forcing your externalities on me or innocent kids.
Slashdot Mirror
War is an economic stimulus, just the least efficient form of it possible. Building all those bombs occupied a lot of people.
Do you accept confidence as payment? No matter how wonderful your product is or how good a salesman you are, if people have no money you have no customers.
Some can, some can't. What are those shovel experts who can't program or design nor have enough talent for them to ever learn going to do - eat cake?
Our modern concept of a job was created for the needs of industrial capitalism, and is an abstraction of the old serf-lord relationship of feudalism, having the advantage - and disadvantage, for the weaker party - of greater flexibility over it. If employees are replaced by machines, why keep this last vestige of serfdom around?
You underestimate the power of the Dark Side. If Win10 can't contact the App store, it can't verify you have the licenses to run it and "your" programs, and must therefore block all usage to protect Microsoft's and third parties copyrights.
Windows 7 recognizes my USB mouse, but randomly fails to register clicks. That's some quality programming for a mouse-driven OS.
Reusable rockets is one of the key technologies to bring down the cost of space travel. Once it comes beneath a certain treshold, you get a positive feedback loop in the form of space-based industries. The end result is hopefully having it cheap enough for colonization.
So, potentially, it's the beginning of industrial-scale space travel, which would be just as much of a change Industrial Revolution has proved to be. But even at absolute worst, it means cheaper satellites.
One of our worst problems is that our resource management system is still based on the feudal model, with money taking the place of land, and our nobility is just as corrupt, selfish and inept - and nowadays just as hereditary - as the preceding bunch. If one of them actually does his job - invests the resources under his control into advancing humanity - should he be attacked for it just because you'd rather see him take on some other cause?
You got modded down because you got handed a bar of silver and are whining it's not gold.
We don't currently have the capacity to manufacture application-specific hardware in sufficient quantities to use it for medical devices. You'll have to wait until assembly lines can be reconfigured without slowing down, or 3D printers catch up to them on speed and product quality.
Our technology just isn't quite there yet.
I use the web to _publish_ stuff, and to read what others _publish_. When I buy a newspaper at my local newsstand, I don't want it encrypted, and I don't care that the owner knows what papers I read.
Anonymity is like a seatbelt: you don't need it most of the time, but when you do, you either have it or die.
Because it was built by the same military contractors who made the Death Stars?
Trump already has visibility, so what does he need a campaign for? How much do you think he paid Slashdot to get us to talk about him?
Dozens of cases per year, in a country of 300 million? These must be the end times.
Will it? After all this scaremongering about Trump, not reporting his every move and comment is letting good headlines go to waste. Also, people who hate Trump will continue dissing him, which simply increases a protest candidate's popularity.
The poor, for the most part, have internalized the power structures of the surrounding society, just like everyone else. And that's the real reason we don't want to see the poor: that anyone is poor in a post-industrial society proves that that society is rotten to the core, and because we've internalized that society's values, it follows that we - or at least a part of us - are rotten to the core.
Mr. Woodward is simply responding as he's been conditioned to: blame the victim, so you don't start wondering about the implications of there being victims. Every system with hierarchies and inequalities requires that kind of trained self-deception from its members to stay stable because, in the end, most people aren't psychopaths. But of course, as Mr. Woodward demonstrates, lies are fragile things, which is why society has progressed somewhat over the years.
The poor aren't scary because there isn't much for them to lose, the poor are scary because, deep down, we all know there's going to be Hell to pay, quite possibly literally.
Except that's not the endgame, just the end of the opening moves. Once everyone is plugged in - or preferably uploaded - there's no reason why they can't simply use remote control to interface with the real world.
Also, we could make most people's lives a lot better if we wanted to, yet choose to keep them destitute to make those who control the resources a little bit richer. Why would an alien species build paradises rather than Hells on Earth either?
Nature is a complex feedback system, yet you think a large change in its operational parameters won't affect you. Nature is amoral, yet you think a disaster unleashed by other people's poor planning will only strike city folk who "deserve" it (that is, not you).
You're a sociopath and an idiot. Congratulations.
Oh, and you're also wrong: cities are more efficient - use less resources per capita - at taking care of their residents than countryside is. It's efficiencies of scale at work.
Nuclear winter isn't caused by radioactivity, it's caused by all the dust kicked up by the explosions blocking the Sun. Radioactivity is simply the icing on cake.
And believing this you are, of course, campaigning for the planned long-term storage facilities - such as the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository - to be opened?
What's going to kill us all might be a nuclear war or a meteor strike we fail to deflect, but the reason it could ever get within striking distance was that people kept lying for their pet causes, thus crippling our collective intelligence.
Phase 7: more people simply abandon TV because with BBC gone, it's even less competitive against the Internet.
Commercial TV isn't competing against the BBC or other national broadcasters, it's competing against Facebook and a billion funny cat videos. And it's going to lose because it's inferior in both technology and content, as well as led by people so used to captive audiences that they think they're entitled to them.
If we're still talking about that town of 20,000, 200 is exactly 1%, or all who matter. The rest of us looters can drink our bootstraps.
No, that's not what happened with the Catholic Church. What happened with the Catholic Church is that they covered up child molesters to protect their reputation at the expense of past and future victims. They are not accused of attracting terrible people, they're accused of being terrible people. And that they keep on playing the victim simply proves they've not changed, and don't intend to.
Not an assumption but a deduction. Approving of awful things makes you an awful person. This seems to be a persistant tumbling block in the way of every single movement that dreams of a better world, and is what separates people who might actually build one from psychopaths who simply want a fancy excuse for their atrocities.
How could anyone be disappointed with Bernie's agenda if the Congress blocks said agenda from being implemented? Are you often disappointed with the quality of meals you didn't get to actually eat?
If anything, the Congress, being a notoriously corrupt organization, blocking an agenda gives that agenda more credibility.
That is something to keep in mind whenever someone starts ranting about "welfare queens" or defending our aristocracy.
The alleged evidence has been delivered. What the investigators want is the suspect's help in interpreting it by providing the missing piece of information: the password. Which, frankly, seems dangerously close to being forced to testify against yourself.
Yes, it does: if I don't defend a criminal's fundamental rights, I weaken mine. After all, I have accepted them being merely conditional, rather than truly fundamental, and signaled this acceptance through my lack of action. Cultural consensus has shifted, eroding said rights ever so slightly.
Some accused of being a pervert sits behind bars. This is used by authoritarians to cause an emotional response, which can then be used against you later. Don't go into the trap.
Isn't that the whole premise behind SWATting?
Are you seriously arguing against democracy?
Yeah. But the thing is, I care more for those 999 kids who lost the competition and thus failed to get even grade school education. In fact, since I, not your company, am paying the taxes to fix or manage the consequences, I care far more about them than whatever value your shareholders receive from the lucky 0.1%.
Your company will have to compete on its own merits, not by forcing your externalities on me or innocent kids.