It isn't worth being mentioned because there was A HUMAN IN THE CAR. The human was there for safety and monitoring, but was still there, so people were polite and said "thank you".
If there was no human present, it is unlikely people would express gratitude. How many people "thank" an ATM or a vending machine?
Then the article is wrong. I was at Cisco Live in Vegas in 2016 and attended a workshop in their developers zone where one of the engineers/researchers behind this technology made a presentation.
Or the presenter was wrong.
Or you misunderstood what was said.
They are looking at the encrypted data itself without decrypting it and just finds patterns. I probably still have the presentation somewhere.
That is implausible. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and so far there is none.
Your link about water on Ceres says it's possible it has more fresh water than Earth, not more water than all of our oceans.
Oops. Sorry, I misread the page. But that still includes all the water in the ice sheets of Antarctica and Greenland. That is likely much more water than Mars.
No. It's a lot easier to explore space from Earth, where we already have everything we need.
Indeed. Earth has the advantage of an already existing industrial civilization. Mars has a a rover and a slightly shallower gravity well.
But there are even more shallow gravity wells in the asteroid belt, and plenty of water there as well. A single asteroid may contain more water than all the oceans of earth.
Using Mars as a base for deep space exploration makes no sense at all.
Colonizing Mars doesn't make much sense either. We would be much better off constructing O'Neill Cylinders in solar orbit. We need to get over our fixation on planetary surfaces.
I still don't know about Franken. I wanted to see an investigation
What is there to "investigate"?
He was accused of "forced kissing" and crude sexist gestures, with photographic evidence for the later. Franken said it wasn't as bad as it appeared, but apologized. Then more accusations of groping were made by several women who didn't know each other and had no apparent political motive. Then Franken resigned.
That's it. What could an "investigation" possibly add? In politics, calling for an investigation is just a way to delay, obfusticate, and change the subject.
It's kind of sad to see people getting a pass for having no standards at all, though.
Bill Clinton and Donald Trump were both given a pass because they were well known philanderers before they were elected. It is silly to elect them and then complain that they are what they appeared to be.
Universities will not re-think allowing so many foreign students to take the seats of Americans.
The limiting factor for universities is not the number of chairs in the classroom. It is money. Since foreign students pay full tuition, they are helping to fund all the Americans paying in-state tuition or getting scholarships.
By "exporting" education, America earns billions of dollars and generates jobs for hundreds of thousands of university employees. Portraying this as a "bad thing" is idiotic. We should be working to make it far easier for foreign students to study in America.
For conservatives, it was not the sex that damaged them, but the hypocrisy. They put themselves out there as "family values" champions, yet were chasing nookie on the sly.
The same thing happened to Al Franken. All of his accusers said they came forward because of his posturing and preaching about Roy Moore and others, while he had engaged in groping and other bad behavior himself.
Many seniors engage in evidence-based-reasoning. If data shows SDCs are safe, and they have a lower accident rate than HDCs, then they will trust them.
What about disabled young people like me?:(
Young people tend to just go with the crowd. So if their Facebook friends trust SDCs, so will they.
Most senior citizens don’t have copious amounts of spare cash
They do in The Villages. It is located in Silicon Valley. A townhouse there can cost nearly $1M, and a modest house nearly $2M. It is not for poor people. It is a good choice for a rollout because they can afford the cars, and many of them are techno-geezers.
Disclaimer: I live in San Jose, about 5 miles from The Villages, and I know several people that live there.
Democrats gerrymander too, don't get me wrong. But they haven't abused it to the extend like the Republicans in NC did.
That is because they can't. Gerrymandering works inherently better for Republicans.
Political polarization is NOT symmetrical. If you go to the reddest of the red, say a rural county in Utah, it will still have only about a 70%/30% Republican/Democratic split. But you can easily find urban districts that are 95%/5% Democrat/Republican.
So it is easier to concentrate Democratic voters into a few districts, leaving the Republicans to sweep the rest.
If a county holds a large city or in some other way is unbalanced relative to other counties, then that county is split to equal out the numbers.
Umm... this is exactly what the NC Republicans did. By splitting up the cities, thus dividing the urban vote, and then combining each urban section with rural and suburban voters more likely to vote Republican, they dilute the Democrat votes.
BTW, Gerrymandering has been happening since the beginning of the Republic.
That doesn't mean that we should just continue to accept it as "the way things are".
Several states have placed redistricting in the hands of non-partisan panels of citizens or retired judges. This is more common in western states which have citizens' ballot initiatives, since the politicians have no incentive to reform the process while they are on the "winning" side, and no power to do so when they are in the minority.
Even better would be to get rid of "districts" entirely, and elect representatives by interests rather than geography. So anyone could vote for any representative, and the top 435 get elected. Each rep's voting power would be proportional to how many voters backed him or her. There should also be a website where voters can switch their preference to a different rep at any time, as an "instant recall" to ensure they keep their promises.
It just makes sense to form co-ops so that WE control the means of production
I used to live in Berkeley, which had several co-op grocery stores. Their prices were much higher than Safeway, and about double the prices at Walmart. Eventually, they all went out of business, when even the old gray-haired hippies stopped shopping there.
Funny how that doesn't seem to be happening though, no matter how logical it might be.
You could start a company with a very low paid CEO and then seek investors. You don't even need to worry about what to make, since you could just leave that up to the CEO. Since it is such an obviously good idea, capitalists will beat a path to your door. Good luck.
You'd basically be destroying high investment low margin businesses.
They would just have to change how they do business.
Today a farmer sells wheat to the granary, which sells it to the miller, which sells flour to the baker, who sells bread to the grocery store.
But if they are prohibited from deducting expenses, there are two ways to adapt:
Solution 1: Sell "services" rather than buying products. So the farmer would retain ownership, but pay the granary to store and transport grain, pay the miller to grind it into flour, pay the baker to make it into bread, and then pay the grocery store a consignment to sell it.
Solution 2: Vertical integration. A single company would own the farm, silo, mill, bakery, and grocery store. So each product would only be sold once to the end consumer, and all other transactions would be intra-company and thus untaxed.
Of course either of these solutions is economic insanity, which is why we allow businesses to deduct expenses.
Without food stamps, poor people would face a choice of working longer hours or starving. The bargaining position of desperate people is weaker, not stronger.
Labor is subject to the laws of supply and demand, just like everything else.
Nope. As more people are employed, they earn and spend money, generating demand for even more jobs to satisfy the increased demand for goods and services. Employment begets more employment. Unemployment begets more unemployment. This is the reason for the "business cycle", and is the OPPOSITE of supply and demand.
The belief that there is only a fixed number of jobs to fill is known as the Lump of Labor Fallacy, and is one of the most common misconceptions about how economies work.
If inflation is at an all-time low there's still inflation.
Low inflation is better than no inflation. The sweet spot is about 2%, which is low enough for price stability, but high enough to discourage people from just sitting on cash, rather than spending or investing.
There are over 3 million fast food workers in America. If kiosks replace a third of them, that will be a million people, not 200,000, but the shift will likely occur over 5 or 10 years, and normal job growth can easily absorb that.
Last month the economy added 148,000 jobs. In November, the economy added 252,000 jobs.
Additionally, about 25 million people change jobs in America each year.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, why is it worth being mentioned?
It isn't worth being mentioned because there was A HUMAN IN THE CAR. The human was there for safety and monitoring, but was still there, so people were polite and said "thank you".
If there was no human present, it is unlikely people would express gratitude. How many people "thank" an ATM or a vending machine?
Then the article is wrong. I was at Cisco Live in Vegas in 2016 and attended a workshop in their developers zone where one of the engineers/researchers behind this technology made a presentation.
Or the presenter was wrong.
Or you misunderstood what was said.
They are looking at the encrypted data itself without decrypting it and just finds patterns. I probably still have the presentation somewhere.
That is implausible. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and so far there is none.
Your link about water on Ceres says it's possible it has more fresh water than Earth, not more water than all of our oceans.
Oops. Sorry, I misread the page. But that still includes all the water in the ice sheets of Antarctica and Greenland. That is likely much more water than Mars.
So how?
According to TFA they look for "dodgy destinations" and self-signed certificates.
So no, they aren't looking at the actual contents of the encrypted traffic at all, and they aren't "sniffing" anything.
It's groping not a criminal act in that jurisdiction?
The alleged events occurred over a decade ago. The statute of limitations expired long ago.
No. It's a lot easier to explore space from Earth, where we already have everything we need.
Indeed. Earth has the advantage of an already existing industrial civilization. Mars has a a rover and a slightly shallower gravity well.
But there are even more shallow gravity wells in the asteroid belt, and plenty of water there as well. A single asteroid may contain more water than all the oceans of earth.
Using Mars as a base for deep space exploration makes no sense at all.
Colonizing Mars doesn't make much sense either. We would be much better off constructing O'Neill Cylinders in solar orbit. We need to get over our fixation on planetary surfaces.
I still don't know about Franken. I wanted to see an investigation
What is there to "investigate"?
He was accused of "forced kissing" and crude sexist gestures, with photographic evidence for the later. Franken said it wasn't as bad as it appeared, but apologized. Then more accusations of groping were made by several women who didn't know each other and had no apparent political motive. Then Franken resigned.
That's it. What could an "investigation" possibly add? In politics, calling for an investigation is just a way to delay, obfusticate, and change the subject.
So, if Al Franken had defended Roy Moore, he would still be a senator?
He should not have defended him, but he shouldn't have been so vocal in attacking him either.
The problem with Franken is that, like many offenders, he could recognize bad behavior in others, but honestly didn't see it in himself.
It's kind of sad to see people getting a pass for having no standards at all, though.
Bill Clinton and Donald Trump were both given a pass because they were well known philanderers before they were elected. It is silly to elect them and then complain that they are what they appeared to be.
Universities will not re-think allowing so many foreign students to take the seats of Americans.
The limiting factor for universities is not the number of chairs in the classroom. It is money. Since foreign students pay full tuition, they are helping to fund all the Americans paying in-state tuition or getting scholarships.
By "exporting" education, America earns billions of dollars and generates jobs for hundreds of thousands of university employees. Portraying this as a "bad thing" is idiotic. We should be working to make it far easier for foreign students to study in America.
For conservatives, it was not the sex that damaged them, but the hypocrisy. They put themselves out there as "family values" champions, yet were chasing nookie on the sly.
The same thing happened to Al Franken. All of his accusers said they came forward because of his posturing and preaching about Roy Moore and others, while he had engaged in groping and other bad behavior himself.
Simple heuristic: Practice what you preach.
Will seniors trust them?
Many seniors engage in evidence-based-reasoning. If data shows SDCs are safe, and they have a lower accident rate than HDCs, then they will trust them.
What about disabled young people like me? :(
Young people tend to just go with the crowd. So if their Facebook friends trust SDCs, so will they.
Most senior citizens don’t have copious amounts of spare cash
They do in The Villages. It is located in Silicon Valley. A townhouse there can cost nearly $1M, and a modest house nearly $2M. It is not for poor people. It is a good choice for a rollout because they can afford the cars, and many of them are techno-geezers.
Disclaimer: I live in San Jose, about 5 miles from The Villages, and I know several people that live there.
Democrats gerrymander too, don't get me wrong. But they haven't abused it to the extend like the Republicans in NC did.
That is because they can't. Gerrymandering works inherently better for Republicans.
Political polarization is NOT symmetrical. If you go to the reddest of the red, say a rural county in Utah, it will still have only about a 70%/30% Republican/Democratic split. But you can easily find urban districts that are 95%/5% Democrat/Republican.
So it is easier to concentrate Democratic voters into a few districts, leaving the Republicans to sweep the rest.
If a county holds a large city or in some other way is unbalanced relative to other counties, then that county is split to equal out the numbers.
Umm ... this is exactly what the NC Republicans did. By splitting up the cities, thus dividing the urban vote, and then combining each urban section with rural and suburban voters more likely to vote Republican, they dilute the Democrat votes.
BTW, Gerrymandering has been happening since the beginning of the Republic.
That doesn't mean that we should just continue to accept it as "the way things are".
Several states have placed redistricting in the hands of non-partisan panels of citizens or retired judges. This is more common in western states which have citizens' ballot initiatives, since the politicians have no incentive to reform the process while they are on the "winning" side, and no power to do so when they are in the minority.
Even better would be to get rid of "districts" entirely, and elect representatives by interests rather than geography. So anyone could vote for any representative, and the top 435 get elected. Each rep's voting power would be proportional to how many voters backed him or her. There should also be a website where voters can switch their preference to a different rep at any time, as an "instant recall" to ensure they keep their promises.
It just makes sense to form co-ops so that WE control the means of production
I used to live in Berkeley, which had several co-op grocery stores. Their prices were much higher than Safeway, and about double the prices at Walmart. Eventually, they all went out of business, when even the old gray-haired hippies stopped shopping there.
Funny how that doesn't seem to be happening though, no matter how logical it might be.
You could start a company with a very low paid CEO and then seek investors. You don't even need to worry about what to make, since you could just leave that up to the CEO. Since it is such an obviously good idea, capitalists will beat a path to your door. Good luck.
They will run out of ammunition eventually.
I can buy a 100 round box of 5.56mm ammo for $40. I am sure it is way cheaper in larger volumes.
If they used robotic snipers that could reliably place clean headshots, they would only need one bullet per rioter.
So 7 billion rounds would cost less than $2.8B. For the 1%, that is pocket change.
You'd basically be destroying high investment low margin businesses.
They would just have to change how they do business.
Today a farmer sells wheat to the granary, which sells it to the miller, which sells flour to the baker, who sells bread to the grocery store.
But if they are prohibited from deducting expenses, there are two ways to adapt:
Solution 1: Sell "services" rather than buying products. So the farmer would retain ownership, but pay the granary to store and transport grain, pay the miller to grind it into flour, pay the baker to make it into bread, and then pay the grocery store a consignment to sell it.
Solution 2: Vertical integration. A single company would own the farm, silo, mill, bakery, and grocery store. So each product would only be sold once to the end consumer, and all other transactions would be intra-company and thus untaxed.
Of course either of these solutions is economic insanity, which is why we allow businesses to deduct expenses.
Without food stamps they wouldn't take any jobs
Without food stamps, poor people would face a choice of working longer hours or starving. The bargaining position of desperate people is weaker, not stronger.
Labor is subject to the laws of supply and demand, just like everything else.
Nope. As more people are employed, they earn and spend money, generating demand for even more jobs to satisfy the increased demand for goods and services. Employment begets more employment. Unemployment begets more unemployment. This is the reason for the "business cycle", and is the OPPOSITE of supply and demand.
The belief that there is only a fixed number of jobs to fill is known as the Lump of Labor Fallacy, and is one of the most common misconceptions about how economies work.
How 'bout we tax them for the burden they put on us?
Taxing companies for hiring low wage workers will just discourage them from doing so, and push even more unskilled people out of the labor force.
If inflation is at an all-time low there's still inflation.
Low inflation is better than no inflation. The sweet spot is about 2%, which is low enough for price stability, but high enough to discourage people from just sitting on cash, rather than spending or investing.
There are over 3 million fast food workers in America. If kiosks replace a third of them, that will be a million people, not 200,000, but the shift will likely occur over 5 or 10 years, and normal job growth can easily absorb that.
Last month the economy added 148,000 jobs.
In November, the economy added 252,000 jobs.
Additionally, about 25 million people change jobs in America each year.
We also had much much higher tax rates
No we didn't.
Federal tax receipts in 1955: 15.4% of GDP.
Federal tax receipts in 2015: 17.9% of GDP.
Citation: Federal Receipts as Percent of Gross Domestic Product