Intel has over twice the market cap that Qualcomm has
Total market cap is irrelevant. Qualcomm dominates the market for cellular chips. Intel dominates the market for desktop/laptop/server CPUs. Neither can illegally exploit their dominance to lock out competitors or expand their monopolyish power to other markets.
Intel has been spanked by the courts for abusing the dominance several times. They have paid fines, and agreed to a consent decree to modify their behavior.
Because all they had to do was simply give a lower price instead of getting paid, then giving money back.
Nonsense. If they had just offered Apple a lower price, that would have been legal. But they gave those lower prices with an explicit agreement that Apple would buy only from them. That is also NOT illegal in general, but it is illegal for a company that dominates its market.
When you have a monopoly, or near monopoly, then different rules apply.
This is just normal business that we all engage in
No it isn't. It is NOT illegal to dominate a market. Exclusive agreements are also not illegal. It is the combination of the two that can be illegal.
Qualcomm was allegedly leveraging their dominant position to completely shut out competitors. This is not something that "we all engage in" because very very few of us dominate an industry.
TFA is just a stupid strawman argument. Sure, if we implement geoengineering in the stupidest possible way, and then suddenly stop again, then that would be stupid.
That says nothing about whether geoengineering is good or bad in general, or even whether sulfur aerosols are good or bad. In fact, TFA seems to say that sulfur aerosols work pretty well, and it is only stopping them that is bad.
Tomorrow morning, I am going to dump my bitcoins and invest in sulfur futures.
Communists must always use the technologies developed by capitalists.
The Internet was created by the government, so it was the other way around in this case.
Instead of just using labels like "communist" and "capitalist", you should learn about evidence based reasoning. Look at the actual results. For most things, capitalism works better. For some things, such as healthcare, where transparency is absent, government run systems tend to work better and cost less.
For Internet service, people tend to be happier with municipal systems rather than private monopolies. So maybe that is a better way to go. What is important is the results.
It isn't clear if it is safe or not. This guy claimed Autopilot was engaged, but I am skeptical. In other Autopilot failures there were explanations, like projections above the cameras' field of view, or a lorry exactly the color of the sky. But in this case it just plowed into a firetruck for no apparent reason. That is a pretty big bug to have gone unnoticed until now.
About once a week for the last 3 years I've been around a group that plays Dungeons and Dragons.
So your evidence that video games are harmful is an anecdote about a group of dysfunctional guys that are playing something that is NOT a video game?
My impression from talking with them is that they have all had difficult childhoods.
That may be true, but that is not evidence that any particular activity caused that problem.
But playing D&D does not give them any help in understanding how to recover from insufficient care.
So what? Nobody is claiming that D&D is helpful. We are just reserving judgement about whether video games, role playing games, or whatever, are harmful, until some actual evidence is presented. None so far.
Um, it is a robot car park that uses AI to stack cars. How is it not relevant to tech???
Because the technology is not being discussed. I would be very interested in the tech, and even more interested in why it failed. But who owned 8 abandoned car? Who cares?
I have seen automatic parking in Japan, and it seems to work well there. Maybe the difference is in the demand for parking. Japan has very little "street parking", since they believe streets are for driving, not parking. Before you can buy a car in Japan, you have to provide proof that you own or are leasing a parking space. Also, Edinburgh is way less dense than Tokyo.
Has there ever been a corporate or citizen's welfare program that has not been dropped as soon as the political tides turn in the US
Absolutely. Oil subsidies and tax breaks have persisted for decades through Democratic and Republican administrations. Same for tobacco subsidies, sugar subsidies, corn ethanol subsidies, etc. The mohair subsidy persisted for more than 70 years after it became completely pointless in 1945. The carried interest tax break for investment bankers famously just survived in Trump's big tax reform, despite his repeated promises during the campaign to eliminate it.
I could go on, and on, and on.
It is much harder to find the opposite: An example of corporate welfare that was actually ended.
those who spend huge amounts of time playing video games avoid personal growth and avoid connecting with the world.
Do you have any actual evidence for this? Or are you just spouting off the same "conventional wisdom" that is debunked by this study?
Sure, introverts may be socially isolated and play a lot of video games. But that doesn't imply that the games caused the isolation, nor does it imply that the isolation is actually harmful, to the introverts or to the rest of society.
When I was a kid, there were no video games (other than "Pong"), yet we still had socially isolated people, watching Star Trek on TV, reading SciFi, and playing D&D. So are interactive video games "worse" in some way compared to likely alternative activities? I have seen zero evidence for that.
Subsidies? Tarrifs aren't distributed to domestic manufacturers, they are taxes, added to the federal budget.
Wrong. These are protective tariffs. They are being put in place to make imports prohibitively expensive, so few if any will be imported. So no "tax" will be collected. This allows domestic manufacturers to raise prices beyond the market price.
So the net effect is: 1. People are required by law to pay more for solar panels. 2. This extra money goes to corporations that did nothing to earn it.
This is corporate welfare, pure and simple. Corporate welfare is stupid when it is used for something like ethanol subsidies, which at least in principle are an improvement over burning fossil fuels. But this is EVEN STUPIDER since it will DISCOURAGE solar installations, and result in more FFs being burned.
I can't believe anyone with a brain thinks this is a good idea. In the short run we spend more on fossil fuels. In the long run, we make our solar industry even more uncompetitive.
So how does that view fit in with the fact that the tariffs will reduce to elimination over the next 4 years?
Because once corporate welfare is in place, it becomes politically impossible to remove it. The companies receiving the subsidies will have more money for lobbying, while the (far more numerous) companies hurt by the tariffs will have less to spend or will go out of business.
Sounds to me that it's an opportunity for american manufacturing to get their feet before competition resumes, and nothing else.
This is the classical justification for protectionism: That it is only "temporary" while we "learn to compete". But that never works because companies don't become stronger by being coddled.
This ensures that American solar panel manufacturers will be shielded from competition, face no pressure to innovate, and fall even further behind in the world market.
Just more corporate welfare, at the expense of American families, and one more field where America has given up even trying to lead. So much for MAGA.
In most instances, the answer is "nothing". Gene therapy on a dying patient past reproductive age is going to affect no one but the patient.
Part of the problem is, the things that go wrong are often not things we even suspected might go wrong.
You can use this same argument to ban anyone from doing anything.
Some reasonable regulations would be acceptable, but America has WAY too much of a bias toward "doing nothing". We are letting the future slip away from us in so many ways.
My daughter is a biotechnology major at the University of California. She applied for an internship for the coming summer. Many of her classmates had every application rejected, but she was offered well paid internships by four companies. Why? She speaks fluent Mandarin Chinese.
According to TFA, 1.4 million workers will be displaced, which is less than 1% of the American labor force of 160M, and it will be spread out over ten years, so less than 0.1% per year. About 20% of workers, or 200 times this amount, change jobs every year.
like... librarian. Then reasonable Web searches come along, and the demand for reference assistance dries up overnight.
Except that according to the BLS jobs for librarians haven't fallen, and are expected to grow by 10% over the next decade, faster than the general labor market.
No, but accepting money to air foreign propaganda secretly is.
No, it is not treason. Treason is explicitly defined in the Constitution, and publishing foreign viewpoints in peacetime is not even close to qualifying.
The point of TFA is that this is the way it should be. Basic human freedoms, such as freedom of expression, are expendable if they don't help to "guarantee" that elections are won by the "correct" candidate.
If governments regulate the exchanges so much that they close, then the value will pretty much drop to zero.
I don't think so. That sort of authoritarianism is exactly what Bitcoin was designed to circumvent. When governments start turning the screws on their own citizens, the demand and value of cryptocurrencies will soar.
Slashdot Mirror
you can find 8 different companies all selling service in the same area
Where?
They already tried; it was discovered that the bodies need to really live for the organs to be healthy.
The spare body wouldn't just sit in a vat. You could give it enough of a brain stem to run on a treadmill for an hour per day.
Or you could use it as a "blood boy" for periodic transfusions of youthful blood. That seems to be working for Peter Thiel.
Some of the other poster here seem to deliberate try engage in dominating the "dumbass industy"
That is a very competitive market, with plenty of participants, and very few barriers to entry.
AT&T opposes net neutrality... Slashdot whines incessantly.
AT&T supports net neutrality... Slashdot whines incessantly.
AT&T opposed net neutrality when it mattered.
AT&T "supports" net neutrality now that their support is irrelevant.
Let's see if they continue to support NN when the Republicans lose their congressional majority, and Trump is out of office.
It's about Slashdot looking for an excuse to whine about anything and everything.
Well, there's that too.
Intel has over twice the market cap that Qualcomm has
Total market cap is irrelevant. Qualcomm dominates the market for cellular chips. Intel dominates the market for desktop/laptop/server CPUs. Neither can illegally exploit their dominance to lock out competitors or expand their monopolyish power to other markets.
Intel has been spanked by the courts for abusing the dominance several times. They have paid fines, and agreed to a consent decree to modify their behavior.
Because all they had to do was simply give a lower price instead of getting paid, then giving money back.
Nonsense. If they had just offered Apple a lower price, that would have been legal. But they gave those lower prices with an explicit agreement that Apple would buy only from them. That is also NOT illegal in general, but it is illegal for a company that dominates its market.
When you have a monopoly, or near monopoly, then different rules apply.
This is just normal business that we all engage in
No it isn't. It is NOT illegal to dominate a market. Exclusive agreements are also not illegal. It is the combination of the two that can be illegal.
Qualcomm was allegedly leveraging their dominant position to completely shut out competitors. This is not something that "we all engage in" because very very few of us dominate an industry.
Where the the volume needed for terms to kick in are defines as 100% of a customer's business.
That would be illegal. A few twisted words do not make illegal actions acceptable.
The correct way to do this is to have no written agreement, just a wink and a handshake.
TFA is just a stupid strawman argument. Sure, if we implement geoengineering in the stupidest possible way, and then suddenly stop again, then that would be stupid.
That says nothing about whether geoengineering is good or bad in general, or even whether sulfur aerosols are good or bad. In fact, TFA seems to say that sulfur aerosols work pretty well, and it is only stopping them that is bad.
Tomorrow morning, I am going to dump my bitcoins and invest in sulfur futures.
Communists must always use the technologies developed by capitalists.
The Internet was created by the government, so it was the other way around in this case.
Instead of just using labels like "communist" and "capitalist", you should learn about evidence based reasoning. Look at the actual results. For most things, capitalism works better. For some things, such as healthcare, where transparency is absent, government run systems tend to work better and cost less.
For Internet service, people tend to be happier with municipal systems rather than private monopolies. So maybe that is a better way to go. What is important is the results.
So this excuses it from being safe?
It isn't clear if it is safe or not. This guy claimed Autopilot was engaged, but I am skeptical. In other Autopilot failures there were explanations, like projections above the cameras' field of view, or a lorry exactly the color of the sky. But in this case it just plowed into a firetruck for no apparent reason. That is a pretty big bug to have gone unnoticed until now.
About once a week for the last 3 years I've been around a group that plays Dungeons and Dragons.
So your evidence that video games are harmful is an anecdote about a group of dysfunctional guys that are playing something that is NOT a video game?
My impression from talking with them is that they have all had difficult childhoods.
That may be true, but that is not evidence that any particular activity caused that problem.
But playing D&D does not give them any help in understanding how to recover from insufficient care.
So what? Nobody is claiming that D&D is helpful. We are just reserving judgement about whether video games, role playing games, or whatever, are harmful, until some actual evidence is presented. None so far.
Um, it is a robot car park that uses AI to stack cars. How is it not relevant to tech???
Because the technology is not being discussed. I would be very interested in the tech, and even more interested in why it failed. But who owned 8 abandoned car? Who cares?
I have seen automatic parking in Japan, and it seems to work well there. Maybe the difference is in the demand for parking. Japan has very little "street parking", since they believe streets are for driving, not parking. Before you can buy a car in Japan, you have to provide proof that you own or are leasing a parking space. Also, Edinburgh is way less dense than Tokyo.
Has there ever been a corporate or citizen's welfare program that has not been dropped as soon as the political tides turn in the US
Absolutely. Oil subsidies and tax breaks have persisted for decades through Democratic and Republican administrations. Same for tobacco subsidies, sugar subsidies, corn ethanol subsidies, etc. The mohair subsidy persisted for more than 70 years after it became completely pointless in 1945. The carried interest tax break for investment bankers famously just survived in Trump's big tax reform, despite his repeated promises during the campaign to eliminate it.
I could go on, and on, and on.
It is much harder to find the opposite: An example of corporate welfare that was actually ended.
those who spend huge amounts of time playing video games avoid personal growth and avoid connecting with the world.
Do you have any actual evidence for this? Or are you just spouting off the same "conventional wisdom" that is debunked by this study?
Sure, introverts may be socially isolated and play a lot of video games. But that doesn't imply that the games caused the isolation, nor does it imply that the isolation is actually harmful, to the introverts or to the rest of society.
When I was a kid, there were no video games (other than "Pong"), yet we still had socially isolated people, watching Star Trek on TV, reading SciFi, and playing D&D. So are interactive video games "worse" in some way compared to likely alternative activities? I have seen zero evidence for that.
Subsidies? Tarrifs aren't distributed to domestic manufacturers, they are taxes, added to the federal budget.
Wrong. These are protective tariffs. They are being put in place to make imports prohibitively expensive, so few if any will be imported. So no "tax" will be collected. This allows domestic manufacturers to raise prices beyond the market price.
So the net effect is:
1. People are required by law to pay more for solar panels.
2. This extra money goes to corporations that did nothing to earn it.
This is corporate welfare, pure and simple. Corporate welfare is stupid when it is used for something like ethanol subsidies, which at least in principle are an improvement over burning fossil fuels. But this is EVEN STUPIDER since it will DISCOURAGE solar installations, and result in more FFs being burned.
I can't believe anyone with a brain thinks this is a good idea. In the short run we spend more on fossil fuels. In the long run, we make our solar industry even more uncompetitive.
So how does that view fit in with the fact that the tariffs will reduce to elimination over the next 4 years?
Because once corporate welfare is in place, it becomes politically impossible to remove it. The companies receiving the subsidies will have more money for lobbying, while the (far more numerous) companies hurt by the tariffs will have less to spend or will go out of business.
Sounds to me that it's an opportunity for american manufacturing to get their feet before competition resumes, and nothing else.
This is the classical justification for protectionism: That it is only "temporary" while we "learn to compete". But that never works because companies don't become stronger by being coddled.
What about American solar panel manufacturers?
This ensures that American solar panel manufacturers will be shielded from competition, face no pressure to innovate, and fall even further behind in the world market.
Just more corporate welfare, at the expense of American families, and one more field where America has given up even trying to lead. So much for MAGA.
people ask, "What could possibly go wrong?"
In most instances, the answer is "nothing". Gene therapy on a dying patient past reproductive age is going to affect no one but the patient.
Part of the problem is, the things that go wrong are often not things we even suspected might go wrong.
You can use this same argument to ban anyone from doing anything.
Some reasonable regulations would be acceptable, but America has WAY too much of a bias toward "doing nothing". We are letting the future slip away from us in so many ways.
My daughter is a biotechnology major at the University of California. She applied for an internship for the coming summer. Many of her classmates had every application rejected, but she was offered well paid internships by four companies. Why? She speaks fluent Mandarin Chinese.
According to TFA, 1.4 million workers will be displaced, which is less than 1% of the American labor force of 160M, and it will be spread out over ten years, so less than 0.1% per year. About 20% of workers, or 200 times this amount, change jobs every year.
like ... librarian. Then reasonable Web searches come along, and the demand for reference assistance dries up overnight.
Except that according to the BLS jobs for librarians haven't fallen, and are expected to grow by 10% over the next decade, faster than the general labor market.
Why is there a deadline at all, anyway?
To make it more dramatic and newsworthy. If there was no deadline, there would be no story about it each time a deadline is extended or expired.
No, but accepting money to air foreign propaganda secretly is.
No, it is not treason. Treason is explicitly defined in the Constitution, and publishing foreign viewpoints in peacetime is not even close to qualifying.
The point of TFA is that this is the way it should be. Basic human freedoms, such as freedom of expression, are expendable if they don't help to "guarantee" that elections are won by the "correct" candidate.
If governments regulate the exchanges so much that they close, then the value will pretty much drop to zero.
I don't think so. That sort of authoritarianism is exactly what Bitcoin was designed to circumvent. When governments start turning the screws on their own citizens, the demand and value of cryptocurrencies will soar.