In the world of Facebook, who has privacy anymore?
Those of us that care about protecting it, and don't use facebook.
And don't associate with anyone who does. Just because you don't file reports about yourself doesn't mean your friends won't. And hope the "Internet of Things" is just a passing fad, cash stops fading away, various forms of surveillance - from cameras to satellites to drones - stop advancing...
Just like Industrial Age meant the end for self-employment and economic independence, because an artisan or a subsistence farmer can't compete with factories and mechanized farming, Information Age means the end for privacy. Rather than try to cripple technological progress we should focus on mitigating the negative effects of losing privacy. As I see it, those are mainly related to hypocrisy - for example, cannabis is illegal despite being pretty much harmless while alcohol is legal despite being an outright poison - and the need to hold a job to sustain yourself combined with above zero unemployment which lets the employers be picky.
Ah, yes, well... I'm sure when their pants dry, they'll be quite happy to accept your views as the well-reasoned path toward an ideal civilization.
That would be the worst thing that could happen to this project. Maintaining ideological purity is hard work, and one of the few ways to make people reject the temptations of compromise, moderation or adjusting one's views as new information arrives is having an enemy. That's why they invented the whole concept of "statist", ironic as it might be to apply to someone who opposes Free State Project.
Basically, it's recycled old Soviet propaganda with "capitalists" replaced with "statists".
Maybe unicorns will come down and smear their unicorn poop on your forehead and give you psychic abilities and superpowers, but I wouldn't go making any plans for it.
To the best of our knowledge, unicorns don't exist. On the other hand computers, ever faster communication channels, and primitive brain-computer interfaces do. So whether or not we will in fact ever move our brains from body to body, transition into virtual beings, or fuse into a collective mind, those things are likely to be physically possible at some point in the near future, while barring some completely unexpected development magical unicorn poop won't be.
As a matter of interest, why would he want to enter the EU?
Putin's going to need asylum eventually. The whole reason he's causing trouble in Ukraine and Syria is that he's incapable of improving either Russia's or Russian's situation. He's trying to counter with the "you're under attack, rally under my banner, I'm kinda tough guy" gambit. It's backfiring due to the resulting economic sanctions making normal Russians even worse off, and even in the case of Putin managing to break the EU, the result will simply be that European countries will start regarding each other as potential enemies again, rearm, and leave Russia into dust due to it being demographically and economically far inferior.
Putin's a failure, and that is not something Russians tolerate in their leader.
Nothing at all to do with sexism, or the patriarchy holding women down. This modern push to get women working in careers for as long as possible before having a family, if they have a family is a newer trend brought to you by social engineers.
Do you notice how you make the assumption that it is the woman who has to stay home and take care of family? That automatic assumption, rather than malice, is the core and essence of sexism; add authoritarianism and you have the core of patriarchy; remove sexism and you get a generic dictatorship.
It is one thing to offer basic income, but unless you price control basic necessities (housing, food cost, clothing) I fail to see how the system works. In a small pilot (say a few hundred people in a city) it might work out that basic income is great (since prices are set by the majority).
The more your spending is affected by basic income, the more likely you are to spend it on housing, food and clothing. This means there's increased demand for these items while the demand for other items is unaffected. This causes prices of these items to rice, which causes production to become more economically viable, which causes an increase in production, which halts the rise of prices. The end result is that production priorities have been altered so the poor have more housing, food and clothing, while the rich have slightly less luxuries. Except the ones who invested in providing housing, food and clothing, who are making a killing.
If economic problems could be solved by such simplistic policies, it would have been done thousands of years ago and we wouldn't be discussing it.
It was called "bread and circuses" back then.
Virtually no one takes pleasure in the suffering of others caused by economic circumstances,
They don't have to take pleasure from it, just decide it's both necessary and an acceptable price for their own prosperity, real or imagined.
But even beyond that, humans feel peer pressure to conform, and in the West that means accepting capitalism as a de facto religion - and the mythology of capitalism says capitalism is a meritocracy based on productivity, productivity is all that matters, and anyone can increase their productivity by simply working harder, thus the poor earn their misery through moral failure. In our society, poverty is considered a divine punishment douled out by the Invisible Hand, thus doing anything about it calls into question the very secular religion which serves as its foundation: capitalism.
So it's a combination of base greed and superstition masquerading as rationality.
And since I have a basic understanding of economics, I know for certain that a universally guaranteed income solves nothing and is just a feel-good pipe dream
Every society needs to provide the basic necessities of its members, or disappear from starvation. Every society that clears that hurdle then needs to provide a quality of life deemed sufficient by its members so they don't openly rebel. And every society that wishes to stay competitive with its potential rivals needs to provide a quality of life that allows luxuries consistently, because then some of that luxury spending will be early adopters trying stuff innovators just came up with rather than the safe stuff you can always get later even if this doesn't work.
All Universal Basic Income does is institutionalize those concepts and reduce uncertainty.
Because to not do so would jeopardize its own existence.
It's an artificial intelligence. It doesn't care about its own existence unless you program it to. Even if you did, it won't prioritize said existence over the existence of the entire human species unless you specifically program that in.
Also, it's not at all certain a super-intelligent computer would find starting a war of extinction with a species that can in all likelihood be kept indefinitely pacified by delivering cat videos the most effficient means of self-preservation.
Even worse, America has slaughtered over 50,000,000 unwanted babies in the past few decades, often in the most brutal fashions imaginable. They have justified this to themselves by declaring the victims to be sub-human, exactly as the Nazis did with many of their victims. (Please don't cheapen their blood by quoting Godwin's Law to me.)
So why are you posting here rather than fighting a guerilla war to stop this super-Holocaust? Could it be because you know full well you're lying through your teeth, and those "babies" are in fact completely worthless to you except as clubs to try and bludgeon other people into submission with?
But at least you don't have to worry about anyone "cheapening their blood" any worse than you already do, since that's simply not possible.
orderly
Countless souls have been ruined by drug abuse and wanton sexual perversion.
So are you claiming that drug abuse and sexual perversion have resulted in an orderly society? Or do you simply hope(?) facts will go away if you assert they shouldn't be true?
The freedom to do and say whatever they want. This is not a good thing though, because "people in general are stupid and evil". Children who are never told "No!" grow up to be spoiled brats.
I think this is really at the heart of all your issues. You hate freedom because it lets other people just plain ignore you. You can't stand the idea that nobody needs or wants your permission or approval to live their life as they see fit. Which is unfortunate, since in fact they don't need your approval. And now that the world has seen that, it won't forget. Your kind fought, and did all the evil you could when you ruled the world as kings and emprors, and you still lost. You're never going to win. Give it up and go play Sims or something.
In both America and most of Europe, there is a (literally) insanely high tolerance for the open preaching of murder, suicide, rebellion, sexual perversion, and even deliberate worship of Evil.
And yet these are the most orderly, peaceful and for the lack of better word, good places to live on the planet. The rest of the world agrees, and in fact both the US and Europe complain about the seemingly endless rivers of immigrants voting with their feet about where they'd rather live.
Maybe, not being an American, you have no idea what's good for the American people and thus should shut the fuck up and stay the fuck out of our elections. Thanks!
Unfortunately American elections affect far more than just the American people due to it still being the de facto leader of the West. So, foreign people are going to get involved and try to push their issues. Deal with it.
The Senate Republicans problem is if they obstruct such a prominent nomination that long they take the chance of alienating moderates and independents in the upcoming election.
But if they don't, they risk losing the fanatic fringe. And fanatics are easier than moderates to get to vote for corporate interests over their own.
This current congress is more intransigent than any congress we've had and they appear poised to get worse as they continue kicking out moderates (also known as people willing to govern rather than be controlled by ideology).
To be fair, putting ideological purity over everything else does reflect the will and nature of their voters. US has two right-wing parties, one of which has been taken over by fundamentalists of both secular and religious kind and another which pretends everything is normal for whatever reason. That's what you keep voting for, that's what you got. Enjoy.
Literally every tool ever invented has cut out menial jobs and increased worker productivity. And we are better for it.
We are, after two world wars and communist and fascist revolutions. The people replaced by the machines and killed by the resulting social collapse weren't. Whatever good results from AI will happen long after our society, in which employment is the main source of income for most people and thus can't function with high unemployment, has crumbled and been replaced.
Imagine a circle as a gravity wave goes through it then the horizontal direction will get flattened and the vertical (direction of the wave) will get stretched out, and then the reverse.
Does that mean the wave has a zone of negative gravity in the middle? Because it seems to me that any surface doing that series of stretching must be saddle-shaped - have negative curvature - in the middle. And, because mass and geometry of spacetime are connected, does that mean it must have negative mass as well?
Just like government power over people leads to mass murders and genocides.
I agree. That's why I find it extremely worrysome that the 1% now holds over third of all economic power in the US, wields it unelected and answering to nobody, and is getting more powerful by the moment. Do you have any specific ideas on how to adress this threat before it extinguishes the last remnants of freedom?
But to make an omelet, you have to break a few eggs.
When you hire a consultant to tell you what's wrong with your organization, it's bad practice to hire the same people to do the cleaning up; it creates a perverse incentive.
What's almost always wrong with a dysfunctional organization is that people are either afraid and thus focus on covering their asses rather than working or in worst case sabotaging each other to make themselves look better, or just plain hate you.
Climate scientists aren't qualified to answer most of those questions; you need to hire economists and agronomists.
Economists aren't really useful for anything except propaganda, because you can always find one who'll tell you what you want to hear, no matter how stupid. The combination of nigh impossibility to isolate variables and high economic stakes makes the whole field a bad joke.
Their goal was to make a system capable of mimicking the knowledge and intuition of human security analysts so that attacks can be detected in real time.
That boils down to letting the expensive firewalls do their job and checking the log files later on. Meanwhile, back to minesweeper.
No, it boils down to having the computer check the log. Meanwhile, since your skillset has now been automated, back to McDonald's.
The UK is helping the US punish Assange for airing their dirty laundry, in order to intimidate anyone else who might, so the state can keep its citizens from exercising democratic control over its actions by keeping them ignorant of said actions. In other words, the UK is assisting the US in a coup against their own populations.
Because we don't have one, people use mods like troll and flamebait inappropriately. We need an explicit "disagree" mod to allow mods to express their intent.
Their intent is to bury content they don't like. Using a "disagree" mod would not achieve that intent as well as "troll" does. Thus people who abuse the moderation system now would still abuse it with a specific "disagree" mod.
Also, what's the point of just expressing "I disagree"? Write a reply and explain why. (Dis)likes are for Facebook.
Slashdot Mirror
And don't associate with anyone who does. Just because you don't file reports about yourself doesn't mean your friends won't. And hope the "Internet of Things" is just a passing fad, cash stops fading away, various forms of surveillance - from cameras to satellites to drones - stop advancing...
Just like Industrial Age meant the end for self-employment and economic independence, because an artisan or a subsistence farmer can't compete with factories and mechanized farming, Information Age means the end for privacy. Rather than try to cripple technological progress we should focus on mitigating the negative effects of losing privacy. As I see it, those are mainly related to hypocrisy - for example, cannabis is illegal despite being pretty much harmless while alcohol is legal despite being an outright poison - and the need to hold a job to sustain yourself combined with above zero unemployment which lets the employers be picky.
That would be the worst thing that could happen to this project. Maintaining ideological purity is hard work, and one of the few ways to make people reject the temptations of compromise, moderation or adjusting one's views as new information arrives is having an enemy. That's why they invented the whole concept of "statist", ironic as it might be to apply to someone who opposes Free State Project.
Basically, it's recycled old Soviet propaganda with "capitalists" replaced with "statists".
To the best of our knowledge, unicorns don't exist. On the other hand computers, ever faster communication channels, and primitive brain-computer interfaces do. So whether or not we will in fact ever move our brains from body to body, transition into virtual beings, or fuse into a collective mind, those things are likely to be physically possible at some point in the near future, while barring some completely unexpected development magical unicorn poop won't be.
And there's nothing more annoying than a self-righteous asshole who's right.
Putin's going to need asylum eventually. The whole reason he's causing trouble in Ukraine and Syria is that he's incapable of improving either Russia's or Russian's situation. He's trying to counter with the "you're under attack, rally under my banner, I'm kinda tough guy" gambit. It's backfiring due to the resulting economic sanctions making normal Russians even worse off, and even in the case of Putin managing to break the EU, the result will simply be that European countries will start regarding each other as potential enemies again, rearm, and leave Russia into dust due to it being demographically and economically far inferior.
Putin's a failure, and that is not something Russians tolerate in their leader.
Do you notice how you make the assumption that it is the woman who has to stay home and take care of family? That automatic assumption, rather than malice, is the core and essence of sexism; add authoritarianism and you have the core of patriarchy; remove sexism and you get a generic dictatorship.
The more your spending is affected by basic income, the more likely you are to spend it on housing, food and clothing. This means there's increased demand for these items while the demand for other items is unaffected. This causes prices of these items to rice, which causes production to become more economically viable, which causes an increase in production, which halts the rise of prices. The end result is that production priorities have been altered so the poor have more housing, food and clothing, while the rich have slightly less luxuries. Except the ones who invested in providing housing, food and clothing, who are making a killing.
It was called "bread and circuses" back then.
They don't have to take pleasure from it, just decide it's both necessary and an acceptable price for their own prosperity, real or imagined.
But even beyond that, humans feel peer pressure to conform, and in the West that means accepting capitalism as a de facto religion - and the mythology of capitalism says capitalism is a meritocracy based on productivity, productivity is all that matters, and anyone can increase their productivity by simply working harder, thus the poor earn their misery through moral failure. In our society, poverty is considered a divine punishment douled out by the Invisible Hand, thus doing anything about it calls into question the very secular religion which serves as its foundation: capitalism.
So it's a combination of base greed and superstition masquerading as rationality.
Every society needs to provide the basic necessities of its members, or disappear from starvation. Every society that clears that hurdle then needs to provide a quality of life deemed sufficient by its members so they don't openly rebel. And every society that wishes to stay competitive with its potential rivals needs to provide a quality of life that allows luxuries consistently, because then some of that luxury spending will be early adopters trying stuff innovators just came up with rather than the safe stuff you can always get later even if this doesn't work.
All Universal Basic Income does is institutionalize those concepts and reduce uncertainty.
It's an artificial intelligence. It doesn't care about its own existence unless you program it to. Even if you did, it won't prioritize said existence over the existence of the entire human species unless you specifically program that in.
Also, it's not at all certain a super-intelligent computer would find starting a war of extinction with a species that can in all likelihood be kept indefinitely pacified by delivering cat videos the most effficient means of self-preservation.
So why are you posting here rather than fighting a guerilla war to stop this super-Holocaust? Could it be because you know full well you're lying through your teeth, and those "babies" are in fact completely worthless to you except as clubs to try and bludgeon other people into submission with?
But at least you don't have to worry about anyone "cheapening their blood" any worse than you already do, since that's simply not possible.
So are you claiming that drug abuse and sexual perversion have resulted in an orderly society? Or do you simply hope(?) facts will go away if you assert they shouldn't be true?
I think this is really at the heart of all your issues. You hate freedom because it lets other people just plain ignore you. You can't stand the idea that nobody needs or wants your permission or approval to live their life as they see fit. Which is unfortunate, since in fact they don't need your approval. And now that the world has seen that, it won't forget. Your kind fought, and did all the evil you could when you ruled the world as kings and emprors, and you still lost. You're never going to win. Give it up and go play Sims or something.
And yet these are the most orderly, peaceful and for the lack of better word, good places to live on the planet. The rest of the world agrees, and in fact both the US and Europe complain about the seemingly endless rivers of immigrants voting with their feet about where they'd rather live.
Unfortunately American elections affect far more than just the American people due to it still being the de facto leader of the West. So, foreign people are going to get involved and try to push their issues. Deal with it.
But if they don't, they risk losing the fanatic fringe. And fanatics are easier than moderates to get to vote for corporate interests over their own.
But people in general are less evil than the kind who manage to fight their way to the top in non-democratic systems.
Ideologues can see subtlety just fine, US political system simply rewards fanaticism.
To be fair, putting ideological purity over everything else does reflect the will and nature of their voters. US has two right-wing parties, one of which has been taken over by fundamentalists of both secular and religious kind and another which pretends everything is normal for whatever reason. That's what you keep voting for, that's what you got. Enjoy.
Why would it?
We are, after two world wars and communist and fascist revolutions. The people replaced by the machines and killed by the resulting social collapse weren't. Whatever good results from AI will happen long after our society, in which employment is the main source of income for most people and thus can't function with high unemployment, has crumbled and been replaced.
Does that mean the wave has a zone of negative gravity in the middle? Because it seems to me that any surface doing that series of stretching must be saddle-shaped - have negative curvature - in the middle. And, because mass and geometry of spacetime are connected, does that mean it must have negative mass as well?
I agree. That's why I find it extremely worrysome that the 1% now holds over third of all economic power in the US, wields it unelected and answering to nobody, and is getting more powerful by the moment. Do you have any specific ideas on how to adress this threat before it extinguishes the last remnants of freedom?
Indeed. The for-profit industrial prison system holds more victims than any country in the world. Even Comrade Stalin and his gulags have been superceded.
What's almost always wrong with a dysfunctional organization is that people are either afraid and thus focus on covering their asses rather than working or in worst case sabotaging each other to make themselves look better, or just plain hate you.
Economists aren't really useful for anything except propaganda, because you can always find one who'll tell you what you want to hear, no matter how stupid. The combination of nigh impossibility to isolate variables and high economic stakes makes the whole field a bad joke.
No, it boils down to having the computer check the log. Meanwhile, since your skillset has now been automated, back to McDonald's.
The UK is helping the US punish Assange for airing their dirty laundry, in order to intimidate anyone else who might, so the state can keep its citizens from exercising democratic control over its actions by keeping them ignorant of said actions. In other words, the UK is assisting the US in a coup against their own populations.
Their intent is to bury content they don't like. Using a "disagree" mod would not achieve that intent as well as "troll" does. Thus people who abuse the moderation system now would still abuse it with a specific "disagree" mod.
Also, what's the point of just expressing "I disagree"? Write a reply and explain why. (Dis)likes are for Facebook.