Costs still unknown, but the taxpayer is picking up the bill.
Taxpayer is also picking up the bill for all other forms of energy production, such as lung cancer, global warming, oil spills and enviromental destruction from mining enough materials for billions of solar panels and batteries. Nuclear industry simply happens to be the only industry which must represent an actual bill for its externalities, rather than let them stay implicit.
What matters is the content of the message, not who says it.
However, it's impossible to judge the worth of that content before investing time and effort to read it. That means it's very easy to shut down anonymous discussion simply by drowning relevant messages under a flood of spam. Pseudonymity mitigates that problem, as well as facilitating more complex discussions.
Anyone that says otherwise has an agenda to kill anonymity.
No, but people who ascribe malevolent intent on anyone who disagrees with them are making every would-be tyrant's life easier by normalizing such behavior.
The only real answer to this problem is for the investors, in particular the institutional investors (including the mutual funds that hold almost all stock) to hire or appoint board members that actually look after stockholders interests including long term growth and profit.
The problem with that is that in a high liquid market - such as the stock market - long term growth and profit are almost completely irrelevant, because shareholders can easily get rid of their shares after pocketing short-term windfalls. It's a classic Tragedy of the Commons: everyone can profit by defecting because the costs of doing so are shared by everyone, consequently everyone does so, and so everyone is worse off.
Then there's outright parasites like patent trolls, high-frequency traders, etc. taking on the role of opportunistic infections in a dying system.
Until that happens the US will continue to decline.
US will continue to decline until it falls. There's too much power invested in screwing over others for profit - and too many delusions about the consequences - for any non-crisis change to be possible. The only real question is whether it loses superpower status, first world status or existence.
I'm quite certain that most programmers worth their salt of re-invented some wheel that outperformed a popular wheel in every way.
Perhaps. But that took time they could had used to invent a hyperdrive instead. So does the super-wheel outperform the popular wheel even when the opportunity cost of the time and effort that went into inventing it in a world where the popular wheel already existed is taken into account?
the argument was under the assumption that you as a sell *wanted* to make the transaction. with credit cards it doesn't matter if seller and buyer are in accord: you *still* have to have the blessing of a transaction company etc.
It seems I had a brain fart. You are, of course, correct.
The less sanguine note that that's pretty much exactly what team Behavioral Econ says is the recipe to maximize impulse spending and consumer debt accumulation.
If you don't want to pay people enough for them to create the demand to keep the economy going, your options are to either have it crash or give them infinite credit.
What cash is, is something that can not be refused because it is your cash
I can absolutely refuse to do business with you even if you'd be paying in cash, for example because my face-reg security camera is warning me you're a notorious Slashdot poster.
The whole cashless society in capitalism thing is one huge scam, to basically enslave the majority.
How's that any different from any other kind of capitalism?
Every civilization that has insufficiently resisted Islam has fallen to Islam.
And every civilization that has insufficiently resisted bug-eyed aliens from Venus have fallen to bug-eyed aliens from Venus. Since the bug-eyed aliens from Venus don't actually exist, this is an empty set and sufficient level of resistance is zero, but the tautology remains true nonetheless. This says, much less proves, absolutely nothing about bug-eyed aliens from Venus.
Rational and efficient...where have I heard that before...oh, right as a justification for fascism.
Weird. I have heard "rational" and "efficient" as adjectives referring to capitalism, people, and organizations. It's uncanny. It's almost like rationality and efficiency were good and desirable qualities.
Which, I guess, is why you went straight for Hitler.
If this system is so great, why can't it be democratically enacted. Because the people won't agree, amirite?
Functioning democracy is a requirement for joining the EU. On top of being controlled by democratically elected governments, the EU itself holds its own elections. And of course the decision to seek EU membership in the first place is itself typically subject to public referendum.
Since you can't possibly believe your own bullshit, mind telling us what your real beef with the EU is?
If you apply the "capitalism filter", they are further from success than ever.
The problem with applying "capitalism filter" to energy production is that keeping industrial civilization going is a good enough cause to pay taxes for subsidizing. Also, our eventual starships are going to need power sources capable of working in interstellar space, and in practice that likely means either fission or fusion reactors, at least in early gens.
things you assume like piling stuff up and moving it with conveyor belts require gravity
Use bags for piling and drones for moving - in the absence of gravity, a quadcopter spends zero energy just for hovering. You can further help them by creating "trade winds" with fans, perhaps on demand.
They already made the first big mistake - not writing the entire thing in ASM for utter speed.
Would a kernel written in a higher level language actually be faster, since kernel code takes a tiny fraction of processor time and a higher level language would make it easier to implement fancy algorithms?
This type of microaggressive behavior SHOULD NOT be tolerated in the Rust community.
Lots of small pieces of feces create just as much stink as one giant turd, and it's about time people stopped pretending otherwise. Just admit you had a wet fart and change your pants already.
Plenty of IT work is done exactly to that spec, almost like Larry the Cable Guy was the project lead, "Geterdone!"
It's not just IT but all industry of any kind. A company - or anyone doing business - isn't going to spend more than they have to, and if they do, they'll be undercut by the competition. That's why regulation exists - to set the minimum bar no one is allowed to go below - and why IT is going to get its share as it keeps getting more and more important for the functioning of the society.
The bad thing about hiring quotas by any determinate like race or gender or any pool with a smaller population, is that ALLOF THE COMPANIES are trying to generally do the same thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Taxpayer is also picking up the bill for all other forms of energy production, such as lung cancer, global warming, oil spills and enviromental destruction from mining enough materials for billions of solar panels and batteries. Nuclear industry simply happens to be the only industry which must represent an actual bill for its externalities, rather than let them stay implicit.
However, it's impossible to judge the worth of that content before investing time and effort to read it. That means it's very easy to shut down anonymous discussion simply by drowning relevant messages under a flood of spam. Pseudonymity mitigates that problem, as well as facilitating more complex discussions.
No, but people who ascribe malevolent intent on anyone who disagrees with them are making every would-be tyrant's life easier by normalizing such behavior.
Every forum isn't 4chan, nor should they be.
Mayer had to abolish a company policy because the employees were actually following it?
The problem with that is that in a high liquid market - such as the stock market - long term growth and profit are almost completely irrelevant, because shareholders can easily get rid of their shares after pocketing short-term windfalls. It's a classic Tragedy of the Commons: everyone can profit by defecting because the costs of doing so are shared by everyone, consequently everyone does so, and so everyone is worse off.
Then there's outright parasites like patent trolls, high-frequency traders, etc. taking on the role of opportunistic infections in a dying system.
US will continue to decline until it falls. There's too much power invested in screwing over others for profit - and too many delusions about the consequences - for any non-crisis change to be possible. The only real question is whether it loses superpower status, first world status or existence.
Wasn't that his point ?-)
And if the have nots don't like it, they can eat cake.
Perhaps. But that took time they could had used to invent a hyperdrive instead. So does the super-wheel outperform the popular wheel even when the opportunity cost of the time and effort that went into inventing it in a world where the popular wheel already existed is taken into account?
Which implies this future islamic UK is going to be just as democratic as the current UK, so... what's the problem?
Or did you just get confused by your own doublethink?
Doesn't matter. Your tautology is true of anything, even nonexistent things. That's kinda the point.
It seems I had a brain fart. You are, of course, correct.
If you don't want to pay people enough for them to create the demand to keep the economy going, your options are to either have it crash or give them infinite credit.
I can absolutely refuse to do business with you even if you'd be paying in cash, for example because my face-reg security camera is warning me you're a notorious Slashdot poster.
How's that any different from any other kind of capitalism?
And every civilization that has insufficiently resisted bug-eyed aliens from Venus have fallen to bug-eyed aliens from Venus. Since the bug-eyed aliens from Venus don't actually exist, this is an empty set and sufficient level of resistance is zero, but the tautology remains true nonetheless. This says, much less proves, absolutely nothing about bug-eyed aliens from Venus.
Now grow a pair and stop spreading panic.
Weird. I have heard "rational" and "efficient" as adjectives referring to capitalism, people, and organizations. It's uncanny. It's almost like rationality and efficiency were good and desirable qualities.
Which, I guess, is why you went straight for Hitler.
Functioning democracy is a requirement for joining the EU. On top of being controlled by democratically elected governments, the EU itself holds its own elections. And of course the decision to seek EU membership in the first place is itself typically subject to public referendum.
Since you can't possibly believe your own bullshit, mind telling us what your real beef with the EU is?
The Shadow of the Vulture is fiction.
Tragedy of the commons makes voluntary taxes unviable.
Then... what's the point?
The problem with applying "capitalism filter" to energy production is that keeping industrial civilization going is a good enough cause to pay taxes for subsidizing. Also, our eventual starships are going to need power sources capable of working in interstellar space, and in practice that likely means either fission or fusion reactors, at least in early gens.
Or torch enemy capital. Or just kill their crops with drought. Or spark forest fires.
You're talking about a weapon of mass destruction.
Use bags for piling and drones for moving - in the absence of gravity, a quadcopter spends zero energy just for hovering. You can further help them by creating "trade winds" with fans, perhaps on demand.
I just think it's sad that a nation that aspired so high has fallen so low.
Any excuse will serve a tyrant.
Would a kernel written in a higher level language actually be faster, since kernel code takes a tiny fraction of processor time and a higher level language would make it easier to implement fancy algorithms?
Lots of small pieces of feces create just as much stink as one giant turd, and it's about time people stopped pretending otherwise. Just admit you had a wet fart and change your pants already.
It's not just IT but all industry of any kind. A company - or anyone doing business - isn't going to spend more than they have to, and if they do, they'll be undercut by the competition. That's why regulation exists - to set the minimum bar no one is allowed to go below - and why IT is going to get its share as it keeps getting more and more important for the functioning of the society.
Half of human species is women, you know.