This sentry combines the grace and agility of a robot with the reflexes and continuous attention of a human! Something like this could never be tricked into carrying a bomb back to base.
But this is a major party nominee calling for another country to commit cybercrime and violate our national security for his own political gain. That's kind of big news.
You mean, a politician calling for exposure of a criminal's crimes and illegally destroyed evidence, even though said criminal is a rich and well-connected elite. That's kind of big news, indeed.
No doubt they will want to start off with some innocuous, nearly inconspicuous ads, and then work their way up to several minutes of unskippable ads, with ads resetting any time you skip too far ahead or leave it paused for too long. At least that seems to be what other companies are doing. Then they can sell the flaming wreckage before buyers realize that sort of thing pisses off their customers like nothing else. Although there is a chance the CEO will fend off the idiots who want to do this.
In the meantime, Netflix will have to put more and more effort into original shows, both to distinguish themselves from the competition and because the media companies want to kill off Netfix by refusing to renew licensing agreements. At least the DVD-by-mail system is safe from those shenanigans.
Every single doctor's office in the country requires you sign a HIPAA waiver in order to obtain services, and unless life-threatening, it is perfectly legal for them to deny you service if you refuse to sign.
And so when someone does show up with a life-threatening condition and doesn't sign a HIPAA waiver, do they have to replace all their Windows 10 machines with ones that don't spy?
What we really need rather than a smartphone is a computer that can fit in a 4"X6"X1/2" case with a touchscreen.
While you may think I'm being facetious, phones have a history of belonging to the carrier, while computers have a history of belonging to the owner, and the software involved has a similar history. Cellphones belong to carriers, computers belong to owners. That's unlikely to change (Windows 10 not withstanding).
I'd like to add that while it does sometimes block ads, it only blocks ads that aren't really owned by any legitimate businesses. For example, none of the businesses whose ads get blocked actually take responsibility for their ads should their ad be a scam ("Your computer has a virus, click here for your grandmother to install one for you while you aren't here to warn her its a virus") or directly contain malware with a Flash exploit.
I don't use an adblocker, I use a scam/malware remover, bandwidth saver, page quality enhancer, and internet speed enhancer. But by a strange coincidence, it is called AdBlock.
Not all fMRI studies were affected. Although this is a pretty good reason as to why we might not want mysterious closed source algorithms involved in our science.
In this case I imagine "hard" refers to "storing data atom by atom at 77 Kelvin (-321 F) in a vacuum". Be sure to keep backups in case it heats up to arctic temperatures.
They don't have these burdens compared to the previous:
They don't have to pay for long distance calls. They can email, text, tweet, or communicate with people all over the world. They can share your opinion instantly with many people at the same time. You have access for FREE to everything you need to master any subject, including all the coursework to get degrees for top universities like MIT and Stanford. Just about any fact can be looked up instantly.
... which allows many more jobs to be shipped to foreign countries, and also means employers are no longer limited to locals for in-country labor.
THe Nintendo of 1985 sucked compared to the current Xbox One. You can rent or watch nearly any movie at home you like instantly online (don't have to rent a VHS tape).
... but at least we have something to do while foreigners work our former jobs.
I suspect the proper response to those sorts of people would be, "Oh, you're an idiot. I'm sorry -- I'll make the necessary arrangements. OK, now all your bills are deducted directly from your UBI, and you get the remainder on a daily basis. And here's a can of beans, come back if you get hungry again."
If I take $10,000 from someone and then give them $10,000, you can say all you want that I spent $10,000 or that I took that much from the guy, but in reality it is effectively the same as not doing anything. Like any other government service UBI would be funded by taxpayers. Some people will pay more in taxes than they receive in UBI; for those people giving them UBI is not a real cost but only an accounting trick. (Of course, they still have UBI and can feel secure that should they lose their source of income they will never be destitute.)
Um, this assumes that one side can always maintain an advantage, amiright? Otherwise it just sounds like a really fast game of cat and mouse.
Correct, and they are right about it. Hacking is not combat; if there is no vulnerability in the code then it doesn't matter how much of a genius one is, you can't find what isn't there. If done right, security AI could eliminate all software vulnerabilities and leave only physical access or social engineering as attack vectors. And this sort of task would be ideal for AI, as it does not need any creativity beyond analyzing the logic of a program for the presence of certain well-defined traits.
Are we spending 3 trillion a year on these social programs?
My point is, the 3 trillion supposed cost is a fabrication. The basic income level would be set to cost approximately the amount spent on the social programs it would replace. Despite being universal, it would only cost what goes to the poor -- those beyond a certain income level would pay it back in taxes (if basic income is more efficient than means-tested programs this could be done so that every single American is better off).
As for the amount spent on social programs, that amount might be higher than you think. For example, did you know you occasionally spend over $1000 to give a single poor person three crappy hospital meals? Some people will report in to the emergency room with "chest pains aka you need to keep me in for observation in case it really is my heart" when they get hungry. If they need a ride to near the hospital, they can call a really expensive "cab" with flashing lights to get them there really quickly. And if it gets too cold, they can get some longer-term accommodations by committing a minor crime. These people would prefer cheaper food and accommodations, but they take what they can get. Minimum wage is also a social welfare program, with difficult to measure cost or efficiency, which won't be needed if people have a basic income.
When poor people are given money, they will spend it, which would boost the economy. A lot of people would start new businesses if they had the ability to do so without fear of failing and going hungry, which would create jobs and improve the economy. Both these would increase tax revenue, meaning it would be as if the program cost that much less.
I'm not saying that I know basic income is a good idea. My main fear is the same as that of many others -- that too many people would simply choose not to work. This one problem could be the doom of the whole idea. But their 3 trillion dollar cost is totally bogus.
What the hell are all of these accountants still doing?
I think they're busy deciding which country to set as their headquarters for tax reasons and what internal costs to invent so that the income is made where it should be to minimize costs. For example, having the headquarters in Ireland and paying them all their income to use their brand name elsewhere so they make no profit where it would be taxed.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, you gotta quit drinking.
Ads are supposed to hack brains, not computers. This is an outrage!
The roof will be covered in solar panels, with the goal of producing enough electricity to power the entire thing.
Solar panels are nice, but how will they store the power for when the sun don't shine?
Because the sort of person who would quit working after they got enough money, wouldn't continue past even one million.
This sentry combines the grace and agility of a robot with the reflexes and continuous attention of a human! Something like this could never be tricked into carrying a bomb back to base.
I wonder if they found those missing emails?
But this is a major party nominee calling for another country to commit cybercrime and violate our national security for his own political gain. That's kind of big news.
You mean, a politician calling for exposure of a criminal's crimes and illegally destroyed evidence, even though said criminal is a rich and well-connected elite. That's kind of big news, indeed.
I was under the impression that a lot of things on Windows 10 would get progressively worse, especially after the end of the free upgrade period.
No doubt they will want to start off with some innocuous, nearly inconspicuous ads, and then work their way up to several minutes of unskippable ads, with ads resetting any time you skip too far ahead or leave it paused for too long. At least that seems to be what other companies are doing. Then they can sell the flaming wreckage before buyers realize that sort of thing pisses off their customers like nothing else. Although there is a chance the CEO will fend off the idiots who want to do this.
In the meantime, Netflix will have to put more and more effort into original shows, both to distinguish themselves from the competition and because the media companies want to kill off Netfix by refusing to renew licensing agreements. At least the DVD-by-mail system is safe from those shenanigans.
Yet more hardware you can buy but not own. Won't be long before a drone filming a protest gets geofenced away even though there's no aircraft excuse.
"our anti-spam systems briefly flagged links to these documents as unsafe."
The truth has a long tradition of being considered dangerous.
Every single doctor's office in the country requires you sign a HIPAA waiver in order to obtain services, and unless life-threatening, it is perfectly legal for them to deny you service if you refuse to sign.
And so when someone does show up with a life-threatening condition and doesn't sign a HIPAA waiver, do they have to replace all their Windows 10 machines with ones that don't spy?
What we really need rather than a smartphone is a computer that can fit in a 4"X6"X1/2" case with a touchscreen.
While you may think I'm being facetious, phones have a history of belonging to the carrier, while computers have a history of belonging to the owner, and the software involved has a similar history. Cellphones belong to carriers, computers belong to owners. That's unlikely to change (Windows 10 not withstanding).
I'd like to add that while it does sometimes block ads, it only blocks ads that aren't really owned by any legitimate businesses. For example, none of the businesses whose ads get blocked actually take responsibility for their ads should their ad be a scam ("Your computer has a virus, click here for your grandmother to install one for you while you aren't here to warn her its a virus") or directly contain malware with a Flash exploit.
I don't use an adblocker, I use a scam/malware remover, bandwidth saver, page quality enhancer, and internet speed enhancer. But by a strange coincidence, it is called AdBlock.
So what do you call artificial creations that demonstrate (limited) intelligence? No one is claiming this thing passes the Turing test.
Not all fMRI studies were affected. Although this is a pretty good reason as to why we might not want mysterious closed source algorithms involved in our science.
In this case I imagine "hard" refers to "storing data atom by atom at 77 Kelvin (-321 F) in a vacuum". Be sure to keep backups in case it heats up to arctic temperatures.
How are the minnelials worse off?
They don't have these burdens compared to the previous:
They don't have to pay for long distance calls.
They can email, text, tweet, or communicate with people all over the world. They can share your opinion instantly with many people at the same time.
You have access for FREE to everything you need to master any subject, including all the coursework to get degrees for top universities like MIT and Stanford.
Just about any fact can be looked up instantly.
... which allows many more jobs to be shipped to foreign countries, and also means employers are no longer limited to locals for in-country labor.
THe Nintendo of 1985 sucked compared to the current Xbox One.
You can rent or watch nearly any movie at home you like instantly online (don't have to rent a VHS tape).
... but at least we have something to do while foreigners work our former jobs.
And you can also whitelist/refund numbers from approved callers.
I suspect the proper response to those sorts of people would be,
"Oh, you're an idiot. I'm sorry -- I'll make the necessary arrangements. OK, now all your bills are deducted directly from your UBI, and you get the remainder on a daily basis. And here's a can of beans, come back if you get hungry again."
If I take $10,000 from someone and then give them $10,000, you can say all you want that I spent $10,000 or that I took that much from the guy, but in reality it is effectively the same as not doing anything. Like any other government service UBI would be funded by taxpayers. Some people will pay more in taxes than they receive in UBI; for those people giving them UBI is not a real cost but only an accounting trick. (Of course, they still have UBI and can feel secure that should they lose their source of income they will never be destitute.)
Um, this assumes that one side can always maintain an advantage, amiright? Otherwise it just sounds like a really fast game of cat and mouse.
Correct, and they are right about it. Hacking is not combat; if there is no vulnerability in the code then it doesn't matter how much of a genius one is, you can't find what isn't there. If done right, security AI could eliminate all software vulnerabilities and leave only physical access or social engineering as attack vectors. And this sort of task would be ideal for AI, as it does not need any creativity beyond analyzing the logic of a program for the presence of certain well-defined traits.
Are we spending 3 trillion a year on these social programs?
My point is, the 3 trillion supposed cost is a fabrication. The basic income level would be set to cost approximately the amount spent on the social programs it would replace. Despite being universal, it would only cost what goes to the poor -- those beyond a certain income level would pay it back in taxes (if basic income is more efficient than means-tested programs this could be done so that every single American is better off).
As for the amount spent on social programs, that amount might be higher than you think. For example, did you know you occasionally spend over $1000 to give a single poor person three crappy hospital meals? Some people will report in to the emergency room with "chest pains aka you need to keep me in for observation in case it really is my heart" when they get hungry. If they need a ride to near the hospital, they can call a really expensive "cab" with flashing lights to get them there really quickly. And if it gets too cold, they can get some longer-term accommodations by committing a minor crime. These people would prefer cheaper food and accommodations, but they take what they can get. Minimum wage is also a social welfare program, with difficult to measure cost or efficiency, which won't be needed if people have a basic income.
When poor people are given money, they will spend it, which would boost the economy. A lot of people would start new businesses if they had the ability to do so without fear of failing and going hungry, which would create jobs and improve the economy. Both these would increase tax revenue, meaning it would be as if the program cost that much less.
I'm not saying that I know basic income is a good idea. My main fear is the same as that of many others -- that too many people would simply choose not to work. This one problem could be the doom of the whole idea. But their 3 trillion dollar cost is totally bogus.
What the hell are all of these accountants still doing?
I think they're busy deciding which country to set as their headquarters for tax reasons and what internal costs to invent so that the income is made where it should be to minimize costs. For example, having the headquarters in Ireland and paying them all their income to use their brand name elsewhere so they make no profit where it would be taxed.