Hell if I remember correctly half of Japan runs at 60Hz and the other have at 50Hz due to a standards change years ago, and they've never been able to convert even that due to the monumental effort required, and that is AC to AC!
Though I expect the use of things things would be for Cars and Homes, not entire network conversions...
While not endorsing a race to the bottom, there has been a gas leak that is on fire in Russia since the 1970's, apparently a bit of a tourist attraction...
More like likely his model spits out some function of probability of Earth like and life. Even if that value is ridiculously low, and at a glance might seem to be more less zero, the fact is that the Universe is big. Incomprehensibly big. Big enough that any value that isn't absolute zero pretty much guarantees the existence. It may not be very prevalent, and it probably involves distances that pretty much for all intents and purposes makes it a moot academic point, but simply by the sheer scale of it all combined with some value of significance makes it almost a certainty (literately, because we do exist unless you want to get really weird about simulations and philosophy or whatever).
That said, even in the US there are plenty of multi-billion dollar industries all pretty much based on magical unicorns (subverting existing regulation)... Such as online sporting pools, because they aren't "gambling" they are entertainment... online casinos for pretty much the same reason... probably a host of weird financial "vehicles" on Wall Street, because it is gambling, or entertainment, or whatever... All of the above perhaps because enough politicians palms have been greased... Which is pretty much the definition of corruption (essentially paying bribes to avoid having regulations apply to them).
OK, let me give this a try with a very simplistic analogy...
We're standing in a very large pond. Way out in the middle of the pond, we can observe that a pebble was dropped into it. We believe it happened. We expect that that occurrence will create a small ripple. Using maths we calculate when that small ripple will travel from the point of occurrence to where it will eventually touch our leg and we can feel it. However we're not sure our legs are sensitive to notice the difference, so we attach a device to do so. Fast forward, at the expected time, our super sensitive leg device has indeed detected the small ripple to the exact parameters. Doing so means that:
A) a wave was generated, B) the maths used to predict the travel of the wave from the point of pebble impact to leg have been confirmed, and C) having confirmed we can use said maths to accurately measure other such occurrences, perhaps ones that say happened behind us that we can't see, and D) advance the understanding of how the whole pond mechanics work in relation to other forces that we happen to be standing in...
I remember when SA was on, and there were plenty of ways to improve your accuracy, only that back then it wasn't instantaneous and involved post-processing (which we used to do to everything). So ya if you were out in the field walking along with your GPS, it could be out by a lot... However if you stood in one place for a few minutes, collected a few hundred points and then averaged them out statistically after the fact, you could get very accurate results. If you really wanted even better accuracy there used to be a ton of "base stations" which I guess are likely antiquated now, which where in known locations that transmitted their locations, which you could also adjust your values to to achieve even greater accuracy... So there were plenty of ways around SA, just not really at the time of collection. However given today's technology, all that "post-processing" could probably be done on the fly if you really needed to, provided things like base stations still existed, and you didn't need to move around a whole lot at the same time. I used some pretty cheap devices back in the day, that with proper usage could give perfectly acceptable result if you know what you are doing. As I recall, a bigger threat back then was that every device wanted to use it's own proprietary standards, codes, and interface to force you to buy their overpriced (and clunky poorly designed I might add) software to use your own data (Remember Kodak digital cameras? Same Idea.) which was a huge PITA, requiring either to pony up for the software or reverse engineering, or finding tools that other had made (this was before Google)... Of course it there were some pretty collaborative GIS communities at the time .
Also as you say, the US doesn't exactly have a monopoly on the tech anymore, and some devices are capable of receiving a variety of signals.
"The only way my point above works is if you remove those government supports. But we aren't likely to do that."
So at least you have a streak of realism in your argument. I was about to say what you say is true, in a vacuum, which we do not live in, which you more less said yourself.
In the world of post-Apocalypse, where government plays no part in regulating any part of our daily lives, you are right, it would simply self regulate. Don't pay a living wage? Well then you won't find anyone to actually do it, because it would be impossible as they would be dead, not being able to support themselves. Not being able to find anyone, you raise the rate until someone would take it, arguably the "minimum wage" and "living wage" being totally equal in that regard.
In your last example, by your own admission is not a "job" but rather half or some portion of a job. Meaning if it doesn't make sense to hire someone for 15$ an hour, then you don't, they loose a "job", and you all have to answer your own damn phones...
However to extend the capitalist flag a bit, perhaps that might encourage some innovative entrepreneur to create a new business, where they hire that same person for 15$, but perhaps they contract out to multiple businesses to answer and direct phones, where a business might pay 8$ or 10$ for that service and not having to hire someone for what is admittedly only part of a job...
What a lot of people don't get, is that a really low minimum wage is essentially a subsidy for corporations. Those that don't make enough money to live, use government assistance, which *you* the tax payer pay for. Where does that money go? To the profit of the corporation, and typically to the wealthiest people out there. Pay a living wage, not only does that money go direct to the most vulnerable people, but also less government assistance is required, less governmental staff to run the programs, etc...
*YOU* the taxpayer are paying no matter which way to slice it. It all depends if you would rather have your tax dollars going to some billionaire and having to pay to administer a larger governmental social assistance program through taxes or having to pay a bit more for your coffee etc...
Not to mention all the horrible spin-offs that crushing poverty has on society such as crime, lack of education, poor health, etc...
Not to mention the decade long trend of replacing internal IT staff with contractors. That way you have very few IT internal staff that know anything about anything, and those that do have no time to do anything, and many of them are retiring. Because of "big government". When all it really amounts to is a game of legerdemain, you have a smaller "salary" footprint, but you probably spend twice that on consultants anyway, just to look smaller. When all your projects are done by consultants, what few internal staff you have spend all their time trying to make/keep halfassed systems working, with no resources or money, and it doesn't take long before you run out of thumbs to stick in the dyke. Not to mention the lack of accountability of say some consultant rolling out whatever with default everything, if ever called on it, they'll just blame stupid ol' government for not running it properly.
Want to increase security? Increase your IT staff to an appropriate level. Don't overload them. Keep them well trained. Provide training to regular staff. The rest will follow. As anyone with half a brain can tell you that 99.99 percent of hacks are not some super evil genius listening to NIN hammering on a keyboard some arcane code to finesse or brute force your system. Just about everything is A) People being stupid and doing stupid things, B) Not updating or maintaining systems as they should (due to resources, money, or ignorance), C) and lastly though remote, is treat your staff with respect, pay them a decent wage, and don't threaten to lay them off every other day...
Yahoo has been doomed ever since rejecting a MS offer of 44.6 Billion dollars. They were on the slide long before that, mostly because Google is so successful.
AMD is a large company with many divisions. Some are "doing just fine", others not so much. Pointedly in the context of this particular thread, the previous poster is correct, in that AMD had "brief period of success in the early 2000's", however in terms of mid-range to enthusiast retail CPU market. At the low end they do fine, and for the server market they do even better.
You're right, the x64 was created by AMD, during that period of time, and was cutting edge and way before its time. Too far, in that no one really used that instruction set until many years later, after the chips that introduced it have long since obsolesce. Anyway I remember longing for the Athelon 64's back in the day, but in that one market segment, ever since Core 2 Duo they have never managed to catch up. However since then they have also gotten into the video GPU market in addition to those listed above. Anyway I would love to see them challenge Intel again in that segment (though in some very specific applications they do, just in general no so much).
That said, I happened to be watching Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade pretty recently (made before Jurassic Park, but after Aliens), and the scene where the tank falls over the cliff and explodes is pretty cringe worthy...
Looking at a scale depiction of our solar system and possible orbits, if true, it is only really true for very large definitions of "solar system". It apparently ranges from 400AU to 1100AU on a 15,000 year period. To be blunt, even at its closest, it's way fscking out there... It is interesting none the less I suppose.
I'm sure we all remember the hilarious Iran Photoshop of their missile program. Having Iran dependent on Russia for satellite launches means they have one less reason to try to advance their own rocketry science. If all it takes is a token Iranian photo-op on the ISS then that is a pretty cheap win. With oil in the toilet Russia could probably use the currency also, and a stable Russia is probably a good thing.
OK, can we start calling these things Warped Fields, or Warp fields yet?:) Now we just have to start factoring them (I suggest a metric scale of 1 to 10)!
Though I know not really related to this quantum topic, but as far as applied physics, if I remember correctly (and I perhaps don't) that new exotic fusion reactor that the Germans built, used warped magnetic fields to contain plasma... Or it could be they just use magnetic fields to contain plasma and the reactor itself is warped shaped, which I guess would be a bit different... maybe.
I was thinking this myself. Also the idea that IQ is an accurate measurement of intelligence is a bit questionable as well. Indeed the entire study seems like something a pothead might dream up.:)
I think even without a proper study, it is pretty obvious that smoking weed has little effect on intelligence. Motivation on the other hand, probably does take a hit. I'm sure all of us know plenty of smart people who lack motivation regardless of smoking weed.
Then again, there is the question that even in regards to that statement, that weed causes motivational changes. It could be just as likely that those that are prone to abuse smoking weed, are already predisposed to a lack of motivation to begin with...
I think there have been legitimate studies that indicate a negative effect on short term memory, which might give the impression of reduced intelligence, simply because they might have a slightly more difficult time remembering some things useful in testing.
Extrapolate far enough into the future fantastic technologies, which become more and more potentially dangerous and eventually you can say it will blow up X.
If Trump wins, and Hillary wins, it seems like something out of a Simpsons episode.
I mean Trump is a ridiculous human being, and the other candidate is named CLIN-TON. Somehow I can see a debate ending with them taking off their human disguises, and laughing maniacally about the failures of the two party system!
Queue the Alien Overlords with whips forcing Americans to build a giant ray gun, er I mean Apple Smartphones...
I don't disagree, however further to this, three points:
1) It is called a "safety net" not "irresponsibility net". Sure there will be those that take advantage of the system, there always will be. You can be totally responsible, and try to plan for things, but sometimes life doesn't quite cooperate. Anyone could be hit with something that could destroy them, the net is there for that purpose.
2) Not all things are equal. Certain people are going to have better success being responsible and planning for things. I would say that it pretty directly proportional to how well off your family is (and all sorts of related topics such as better education, health, etc...). Essentially if you already have support, it is easier to responsibly support yourself. The rich have an easier time of it, the poor not so much.
3) A safety net allows those in certain situations, such as coming from a poor family, a better opportunity to end the cycle, and with that additional state sponsored support, become more responsible and plan for things, thus eventually (ideally) reducing the amount of folks that actually need such support into the future.
However you will have those situations where folks in a negative environment abuse the system, and then learn how to abuse the system themselves perpetuating the abuse. So it is important to be vigilant and try to reduce this. However addressing this issue is complex.
There was a great video on the topic by John Oliver as to how exactly how clothing companies have been "dealing" with the same issue. Basically it is about plausible deniability. Except in this analogy (Tech VS Clothing), it is another degree of separation. Company A (Clothing/Technology Company) deals with a Company B (Supplier) usually in China/India/Etc... and is told to adhere to code of ethics. Company B subcontracts out to Company C and D (also Suppliers). Company C and D subcontract out to Companies F,H,I, and J (Manufacturers)... It is found that Company I and J use child workers. Company A says they had no idea, and told Company B to act ethically. Companies I and J go out of business (briefly) then start up new companies K and L, and start all over again. In this instance, it is like Companies F,H,I, and J get their materials from Company M (as it produces 50% of the worlds X so is cheaper).
Anyway bottom line, is keeping the whole supply chain straight (pardon pun) is complex and difficult to enforce any adherence to ethical standards upon. Amd that's if you are really intent and interested in doing so, not just giving it lip service for when it pops up in the media every decade or so... Probably made even more difficult when as the article says, the offender supplies most of the worlds cobalt, so sourcing from else where in volume is probably logistically difficult and expensive. Then again, with the commodity cost of cobalt and how much of it is used and given say the markup on these sorts of devices (I'm looking at you Apple), you'd think they could be a bit more discerning without much hit to their bottom line if they cared. Unfortunately, they likely don't.
Also I read some time ago (during a GMO debate) that really no one does this anymore (keeping seeds). Most modern farms where by far the bulk of our food is grown, buy seeds every year. Small hobby farms or family farms might still use this practice, however in the larger picture they are irrelevant.
The Daily Show or John Oliver did an excellent video on debunking the GMO myths a while ago. While there may be other concerns to the GMO big picture, science apparently isn't one of them. In fact GMO's appear to have a lot of positive spin off benefits related to their main features, like having to use less pesticides, less fertilizer, less water, etc... Really the only big concern that comes to mind, is that they work too well, and make a lot of competing crops obsolete, meaning they may be used far less and eventually disappear which may still have useful traits in the future. However this has been going on (abet not as fast) through selection and cross breading anyway for centuries. At least now we have things like seed banks and the like to try and preserve some of the species for later use.
First off does anyone use synthetic benchmarks anymore? I mean they were proven to be cheating like a decade ago. Anyway I'd agree with AMD that it isn't a good measure of performance.
Having said that, there are different types of performance for different things. However there are limits. So while generally speaking, saving some money on a CPU, and spending it elsewhere may make sense for gaming, there are limitations. I think generally speaking, you're wrong about AMD being a "better value" for gaming. Then again, it depends on your definition of "gaming" a bit also. The only chips AMD has had in years that are a "value" for money spent, are the *very* low end, none of which are suitable for gaming (other than of the very light variety). No you do not need an i7, but a mid-range i5 for example is better bang for buck than AMD offering. As to what you spend it on, I would agree you will see immediate gains with a SSD, however that "performance" is limited to load times, which is also governed by your CPU to a degree, so that does make sense. However a SSD will not do anything for quality, or speed. For that, the GPU is the big gun, however even it can be limited by your CPU. So buying a low end AMD, and tacking a med to high end GPU to it, may not be the best solution either. As for the memory, it likely isn't needed. Additional memory is really only used either for very specific applications, or if you need to run a large number of applications all at the same time, or if trying to future proof you system against possible increases in demand (which really hasn't manifested in recent years).
To me she sounds like one of those people that try to let on they know/understand more than they actually do. They try and wink and nod their way through any discussion. However as you say, any amount of detailed discussion will have "cringe worthy" responses. I've never been a big fan of hers.
Personally I think the only decent leader in the US would be Sanders, however it is too bad he is so old, as I imagine that may be something voters consider. To put it bluntly, can he live through a term in office? If he does, a second term is likely difficult at best as what will his health be like into his 80's?
I have a bet going with a friend that Trump is the next president. He thinks it is insane and impossible. I point out that George W Bush was elected twice. I'll admit Trump does have one refreshing trait (which comedians love), is that he doesn't appear to have a political filter (or less of one anyway), even if many of his ideas are a bit bonkers. I've heard speculation that it is all a sham, and that he is only pandering to the far right for the party win, and likely once running for president will become more centrist.
Anyway this is from an outsider looking into the US political scrum.
Actually if recent examples prove anything the conversation goes more like this:
Gov: "Give us a backdoor, or we'll just destroy you in court." CEO: "Okdokie!"
Interestingly, in Canada the conversation went the other way. I hope this has been fixed, but probably it has not, as it had to do with many requests didn't have warrants. Anyway, the amount of requests made were so many (in the millions of requests in a year), that the companies had a hard time dealing with them. So not only did the companies *want* to build a backdoor so that they didn't have to handle the volume of requests anymore, they wanted the government to actually *pay* to build it! This eventually went political, and I think went away, although I am not sure if the amount of requests has been addressed.
Slashdot Mirror
Hell if I remember correctly half of Japan runs at 60Hz and the other have at 50Hz due to a standards change years ago, and they've never been able to convert even that due to the monumental effort required, and that is AC to AC!
Though I expect the use of things things would be for Cars and Homes, not entire network conversions...
While not endorsing a race to the bottom, there has been a gas leak that is on fire in Russia since the 1970's, apparently a bit of a tourist attraction...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
More like likely his model spits out some function of probability of Earth like and life. Even if that value is ridiculously low, and at a glance might seem to be more less zero, the fact is that the Universe is big. Incomprehensibly big. Big enough that any value that isn't absolute zero pretty much guarantees the existence. It may not be very prevalent, and it probably involves distances that pretty much for all intents and purposes makes it a moot academic point, but simply by the sheer scale of it all combined with some value of significance makes it almost a certainty (literately, because we do exist unless you want to get really weird about simulations and philosophy or whatever).
That said, even in the US there are plenty of multi-billion dollar industries all pretty much based on magical unicorns (subverting existing regulation)... Such as online sporting pools, because they aren't "gambling" they are entertainment... online casinos for pretty much the same reason... probably a host of weird financial "vehicles" on Wall Street, because it is gambling, or entertainment, or whatever... All of the above perhaps because enough politicians palms have been greased... Which is pretty much the definition of corruption (essentially paying bribes to avoid having regulations apply to them).
OK, let me give this a try with a very simplistic analogy...
We're standing in a very large pond. Way out in the middle of the pond, we can observe that a pebble was dropped into it. We believe it happened. We expect that that occurrence will create a small ripple. Using maths we calculate when that small ripple will travel from the point of occurrence to where it will eventually touch our leg and we can feel it. However we're not sure our legs are sensitive to notice the difference, so we attach a device to do so. Fast forward, at the expected time, our super sensitive leg device has indeed detected the small ripple to the exact parameters. Doing so means that:
A) a wave was generated,
B) the maths used to predict the travel of the wave from the point of pebble impact to leg have been confirmed, and
C) having confirmed we can use said maths to accurately measure other such occurrences, perhaps ones that say happened behind us that we can't see, and
D) advance the understanding of how the whole pond mechanics work in relation to other forces that we happen to be standing in...
Am I very far off?
I remember when SA was on, and there were plenty of ways to improve your accuracy, only that back then it wasn't instantaneous and involved post-processing (which we used to do to everything). So ya if you were out in the field walking along with your GPS, it could be out by a lot... However if you stood in one place for a few minutes, collected a few hundred points and then averaged them out statistically after the fact, you could get very accurate results. If you really wanted even better accuracy there used to be a ton of "base stations" which I guess are likely antiquated now, which where in known locations that transmitted their locations, which you could also adjust your values to to achieve even greater accuracy... So there were plenty of ways around SA, just not really at the time of collection. However given today's technology, all that "post-processing" could probably be done on the fly if you really needed to, provided things like base stations still existed, and you didn't need to move around a whole lot at the same time. I used some pretty cheap devices back in the day, that with proper usage could give perfectly acceptable result if you know what you are doing. As I recall, a bigger threat back then was that every device wanted to use it's own proprietary standards, codes, and interface to force you to buy their overpriced (and clunky poorly designed I might add) software to use your own data (Remember Kodak digital cameras? Same Idea.) which was a huge PITA, requiring either to pony up for the software or reverse engineering, or finding tools that other had made (this was before Google)... Of course it there were some pretty collaborative GIS communities at the time .
Also as you say, the US doesn't exactly have a monopoly on the tech anymore, and some devices are capable of receiving a variety of signals.
"The only way my point above works is if you remove those government supports. But we aren't likely to do that."
So at least you have a streak of realism in your argument. I was about to say what you say is true, in a vacuum, which we do not live in, which you more less said yourself.
In the world of post-Apocalypse, where government plays no part in regulating any part of our daily lives, you are right, it would simply self regulate. Don't pay a living wage? Well then you won't find anyone to actually do it, because it would be impossible as they would be dead, not being able to support themselves. Not being able to find anyone, you raise the rate until someone would take it, arguably the "minimum wage" and "living wage" being totally equal in that regard.
In your last example, by your own admission is not a "job" but rather half or some portion of a job. Meaning if it doesn't make sense to hire someone for 15$ an hour, then you don't, they loose a "job", and you all have to answer your own damn phones...
However to extend the capitalist flag a bit, perhaps that might encourage some innovative entrepreneur to create a new business, where they hire that same person for 15$, but perhaps they contract out to multiple businesses to answer and direct phones, where a business might pay 8$ or 10$ for that service and not having to hire someone for what is admittedly only part of a job...
What a lot of people don't get, is that a really low minimum wage is essentially a subsidy for corporations. Those that don't make enough money to live, use government assistance, which *you* the tax payer pay for. Where does that money go? To the profit of the corporation, and typically to the wealthiest people out there. Pay a living wage, not only does that money go direct to the most vulnerable people, but also less government assistance is required, less governmental staff to run the programs, etc...
*YOU* the taxpayer are paying no matter which way to slice it. It all depends if you would rather have your tax dollars going to some billionaire and having to pay to administer a larger governmental social assistance program through taxes or having to pay a bit more for your coffee etc...
Not to mention all the horrible spin-offs that crushing poverty has on society such as crime, lack of education, poor health, etc...
Not to mention the decade long trend of replacing internal IT staff with contractors. That way you have very few IT internal staff that know anything about anything, and those that do have no time to do anything, and many of them are retiring. Because of "big government". When all it really amounts to is a game of legerdemain, you have a smaller "salary" footprint, but you probably spend twice that on consultants anyway, just to look smaller. When all your projects are done by consultants, what few internal staff you have spend all their time trying to make/keep halfassed systems working, with no resources or money, and it doesn't take long before you run out of thumbs to stick in the dyke. Not to mention the lack of accountability of say some consultant rolling out whatever with default everything, if ever called on it, they'll just blame stupid ol' government for not running it properly.
Want to increase security? Increase your IT staff to an appropriate level. Don't overload them. Keep them well trained. Provide training to regular staff. The rest will follow. As anyone with half a brain can tell you that 99.99 percent of hacks are not some super evil genius listening to NIN hammering on a keyboard some arcane code to finesse or brute force your system. Just about everything is A) People being stupid and doing stupid things, B) Not updating or maintaining systems as they should (due to resources, money, or ignorance), C) and lastly though remote, is treat your staff with respect, pay them a decent wage, and don't threaten to lay them off every other day...
Yahoo has been doomed ever since rejecting a MS offer of 44.6 Billion dollars. They were on the slide long before that, mostly because Google is so successful.
http://financesonline.com/top-...
Ironically, even in the attached URL Yahoo is broken!
AMD is a large company with many divisions. Some are "doing just fine", others not so much. Pointedly in the context of this particular thread, the previous poster is correct, in that AMD had "brief period of success in the early 2000's", however in terms of mid-range to enthusiast retail CPU market. At the low end they do fine, and for the server market they do even better.
You're right, the x64 was created by AMD, during that period of time, and was cutting edge and way before its time. Too far, in that no one really used that instruction set until many years later, after the chips that introduced it have long since obsolesce. Anyway I remember longing for the Athelon 64's back in the day, but in that one market segment, ever since Core 2 Duo they have never managed to catch up. However since then they have also gotten into the video GPU market in addition to those listed above. Anyway I would love to see them challenge Intel again in that segment (though in some very specific applications they do, just in general no so much).
That said, I happened to be watching Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade pretty recently (made before Jurassic Park, but after Aliens), and the scene where the tank falls over the cliff and explodes is pretty cringe worthy...
Looking at a scale depiction of our solar system and possible orbits, if true, it is only really true for very large definitions of "solar system". It apparently ranges from 400AU to 1100AU on a 15,000 year period. To be blunt, even at its closest, it's way fscking out there... It is interesting none the less I suppose.
I'm sure we all remember the hilarious Iran Photoshop of their missile program. Having Iran dependent on Russia for satellite launches means they have one less reason to try to advance their own rocketry science. If all it takes is a token Iranian photo-op on the ISS then that is a pretty cheap win. With oil in the toilet Russia could probably use the currency also, and a stable Russia is probably a good thing.
OK, can we start calling these things Warped Fields, or Warp fields yet? :) Now we just have to start factoring them (I suggest a metric scale of 1 to 10)!
Though I know not really related to this quantum topic, but as far as applied physics, if I remember correctly (and I perhaps don't) that new exotic fusion reactor that the Germans built, used warped magnetic fields to contain plasma... Or it could be they just use magnetic fields to contain plasma and the reactor itself is warped shaped, which I guess would be a bit different... maybe.
I was thinking this myself. Also the idea that IQ is an accurate measurement of intelligence is a bit questionable as well. Indeed the entire study seems like something a pothead might dream up. :)
I think even without a proper study, it is pretty obvious that smoking weed has little effect on intelligence. Motivation on the other hand, probably does take a hit. I'm sure all of us know plenty of smart people who lack motivation regardless of smoking weed.
Then again, there is the question that even in regards to that statement, that weed causes motivational changes. It could be just as likely that those that are prone to abuse smoking weed, are already predisposed to a lack of motivation to begin with...
I think there have been legitimate studies that indicate a negative effect on short term memory, which might give the impression of reduced intelligence, simply because they might have a slightly more difficult time remembering some things useful in testing.
Extrapolate far enough into the future fantastic technologies, which become more and more potentially dangerous and eventually you can say it will blow up X.
House/Village/City/Country/World/Solar System/Galaxy/Universe/etc...
If Trump wins, and Hillary wins, it seems like something out of a Simpsons episode.
I mean Trump is a ridiculous human being, and the other candidate is named CLIN-TON.
Somehow I can see a debate ending with them taking off their human disguises, and laughing maniacally about the failures of the two party system!
Queue the Alien Overlords with whips forcing Americans to build a giant ray gun, er I mean Apple Smartphones...
I don't disagree, however further to this, three points:
1) It is called a "safety net" not "irresponsibility net". Sure there will be those that take advantage of the system, there always will be. You can be totally responsible, and try to plan for things, but sometimes life doesn't quite cooperate. Anyone could be hit with something that could destroy them, the net is there for that purpose.
2) Not all things are equal. Certain people are going to have better success being responsible and planning for things. I would say that it pretty directly proportional to how well off your family is (and all sorts of related topics such as better education, health, etc...). Essentially if you already have support, it is easier to responsibly support yourself. The rich have an easier time of it, the poor not so much.
3) A safety net allows those in certain situations, such as coming from a poor family, a better opportunity to end the cycle, and with that additional state sponsored support, become more responsible and plan for things, thus eventually (ideally) reducing the amount of folks that actually need such support into the future.
However you will have those situations where folks in a negative environment abuse the system, and then learn how to abuse the system themselves perpetuating the abuse. So it is important to be vigilant and try to reduce this. However addressing this issue is complex.
There was a great video on the topic by John Oliver as to how exactly how clothing companies have been "dealing" with the same issue. Basically it is about plausible deniability. Except in this analogy (Tech VS Clothing), it is another degree of separation. Company A (Clothing/Technology Company) deals with a Company B (Supplier) usually in China/India/Etc... and is told to adhere to code of ethics. Company B subcontracts out to Company C and D (also Suppliers). Company C and D subcontract out to Companies F,H,I, and J (Manufacturers)... It is found that Company I and J use child workers. Company A says they had no idea, and told Company B to act ethically. Companies I and J go out of business (briefly) then start up new companies K and L, and start all over again. In this instance, it is like Companies F,H,I, and J get their materials from Company M (as it produces 50% of the worlds X so is cheaper).
Anyway bottom line, is keeping the whole supply chain straight (pardon pun) is complex and difficult to enforce any adherence to ethical standards upon. Amd that's if you are really intent and interested in doing so, not just giving it lip service for when it pops up in the media every decade or so... Probably made even more difficult when as the article says, the offender supplies most of the worlds cobalt, so sourcing from else where in volume is probably logistically difficult and expensive. Then again, with the commodity cost of cobalt and how much of it is used and given say the markup on these sorts of devices (I'm looking at you Apple), you'd think they could be a bit more discerning without much hit to their bottom line if they cared. Unfortunately, they likely don't.
Also I read some time ago (during a GMO debate) that really no one does this anymore (keeping seeds). Most modern farms where by far the bulk of our food is grown, buy seeds every year. Small hobby farms or family farms might still use this practice, however in the larger picture they are irrelevant.
The Daily Show or John Oliver did an excellent video on debunking the GMO myths a while ago. While there may be other concerns to the GMO big picture, science apparently isn't one of them. In fact GMO's appear to have a lot of positive spin off benefits related to their main features, like having to use less pesticides, less fertilizer, less water, etc... Really the only big concern that comes to mind, is that they work too well, and make a lot of competing crops obsolete, meaning they may be used far less and eventually disappear which may still have useful traits in the future. However this has been going on (abet not as fast) through selection and cross breading anyway for centuries. At least now we have things like seed banks and the like to try and preserve some of the species for later use.
First off does anyone use synthetic benchmarks anymore? I mean they were proven to be cheating like a decade ago. Anyway I'd agree with AMD that it isn't a good measure of performance.
Having said that, there are different types of performance for different things. However there are limits. So while generally speaking, saving some money on a CPU, and spending it elsewhere may make sense for gaming, there are limitations. I think generally speaking, you're wrong about AMD being a "better value" for gaming. Then again, it depends on your definition of "gaming" a bit also. The only chips AMD has had in years that are a "value" for money spent, are the *very* low end, none of which are suitable for gaming (other than of the very light variety). No you do not need an i7, but a mid-range i5 for example is better bang for buck than AMD offering. As to what you spend it on, I would agree you will see immediate gains with a SSD, however that "performance" is limited to load times, which is also governed by your CPU to a degree, so that does make sense. However a SSD will not do anything for quality, or speed. For that, the GPU is the big gun, however even it can be limited by your CPU. So buying a low end AMD, and tacking a med to high end GPU to it, may not be the best solution either. As for the memory, it likely isn't needed. Additional memory is really only used either for very specific applications, or if you need to run a large number of applications all at the same time, or if trying to future proof you system against possible increases in demand (which really hasn't manifested in recent years).
Or commenting from direct experience from how many groups have back door access to her email server... :)
To me she sounds like one of those people that try to let on they know/understand more than they actually do. They try and wink and nod their way through any discussion. However as you say, any amount of detailed discussion will have "cringe worthy" responses. I've never been a big fan of hers.
Personally I think the only decent leader in the US would be Sanders, however it is too bad he is so old, as I imagine that may be something voters consider. To put it bluntly, can he live through a term in office? If he does, a second term is likely difficult at best as what will his health be like into his 80's?
I have a bet going with a friend that Trump is the next president. He thinks it is insane and impossible. I point out that George W Bush was elected twice. I'll admit Trump does have one refreshing trait (which comedians love), is that he doesn't appear to have a political filter (or less of one anyway), even if many of his ideas are a bit bonkers. I've heard speculation that it is all a sham, and that he is only pandering to the far right for the party win, and likely once running for president will become more centrist.
Anyway this is from an outsider looking into the US political scrum.
Actually if recent examples prove anything the conversation goes more like this:
Gov: "Give us a backdoor, or we'll just destroy you in court."
CEO: "Okdokie!"
Interestingly, in Canada the conversation went the other way. I hope this has been fixed, but probably it has not, as it had to do with many requests didn't have warrants. Anyway, the amount of requests made were so many (in the millions of requests in a year), that the companies had a hard time dealing with them. So not only did the companies *want* to build a backdoor so that they didn't have to handle the volume of requests anymore, they wanted the government to actually *pay* to build it! This eventually went political, and I think went away, although I am not sure if the amount of requests has been addressed.