This is the Lump of Labor Fallacy. Immigrants increase the supply of labor, but they also increase the demand for goods and services, and generally do so disproportionately thus reducing unemployment. This is not just economic theory. When Poland joined the EU, nearly every country threw up barriers to Polish laborers. The exceptions were Britain and Sweden. Can you guess which two countries had the greatest reduction in unemployment over the next few years?
If you walk down a street in San Francisco, you will see more brown faces than white, and hear chatter in several languages. It has one of the highest immigrant populations of any major city in America, and one of the lowest unemployment rates.
The notion that immigration causes unemployment is one of those things that is "simple, obvious, and wrong". It is a real shame that the Democrats didn't stand up to Trump on this issue (and many others) and speak the truth. Instead, they just tried to go "stupid-lite" and lost, because you can't out-stupid the Donald.
So you are fine with only being informed about the capabilities of a product with a price tag of a car... AFTER you buy the product?
I didn't buy the car, my wife did. We both fully understood that she was not buying a full SDC for the following reasons: 1. We can read. 2. We can see. 3. We can listen. 4. We can think. People that can do none of these things are going to have a lot of problems in life beyond believing that their car can drive by itself, and it is unlikely many of them are going to be buying a Tesla.
They just are trying to protect their coal industry so that it doesn't wind up the West Virginia of the western US.
That is short sighted. Wyoming has a lot of wind resources, and they could build UHVDC lines to export the power. Oklahoma and Texas are doing well with wind.
Also, the newer, larger turbines kill far fewer birds.
The big reason for this is that they are higher off the ground, where winds are stronger and more reliable. Most local birds fly low, and most migrating birds fly even higher than than the big turbines.
The "bird" objection to wind turbines has always been stupid and disingenuous (the people making it don't really give a crap about the birds), but it has become even stupider as turbines improve.
No. The take-away is that birds evolved before there were large obstacles moving at 70 mph, and large transparent areas on cliff faces. They rarely run into parked cars, or windowless buildings.
Since these "uninformed" people don't actually own a Tesla, it doesn't matter one iota what they think about the system. If you actually own a Tesla, the capabilities and limitations of the system are very very clear.
Also, an autopilot on an aircraft doesn't completely fly the plane all by itself either. Pilots understand that. Do you think they should rename it so the passenger in seat 22C also understands?
The voice keeps talking, and I am left w/ no choice but to hang up.
Do NOT hang up. Instead press "1" so that you waste the time of an actual human, and then put the phone on hold. If everyone did that, their business model would not work. If you enjoy annoying people that deserve it, then stay on the line and pretend to be interested, and give them bogus CC numbers until they start swearing at you. But please don't just hang up.
We only spent a couple months at a time making holes in the ocean.
SSBNs stay submerged for 6 months at a time. I don't think the difference between 6 and 8 is enough to matter.
Plus we had a lot more possible social interactions (100+ in a boat, as opposed to six in the dome).
Many subs have had smaller crews, and nearly all of your interactions are with a few people at your work station.
But there is another huge psychological consideration that makes a sub much more like a space flight: You can't quit. No matter what, you are in for the duration. The people in this dome can quit and walk out anytime they want. They likely won't, but the ability to do so makes an enormous difference in the stress level. The absolute worst case scenario if something goes wrong, is that you open the door and walk out.
I'm truly impressed by how far some Americans are willing to go to escape a Trump presidency.;)
I am also impressed at far some Americans are willing to go to do pointless redundant research instead of just looking at how sailors deal with life on a submarine.
So, question.......would you really build a death star out of steel?
Yes. Steel is strong, and easy to work with. The only drawback over something like titanium or carbon fiber is that it is HEAVY, but that isn't a big problem in space. The big advantage of steel is that it is cheap and plentiful, and when you need a quadrillion tonnes for just one Death Star, those costs add up.
Of course, heaviness means inertia, but travelling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, and inertia doesn't seem to be an impediment in any of the movies.
The asteroid belt is 3 AU from the sun, so the sunlight would be 1/9th as bright as the light that reaches earth. You would need a big mirror, but in the vacuum of space, the only heat loss would be radiant.
"Potentially as large as Mars"? According to Wikipedia: Psyche16: 200km in diameter. Mars: 6800km in diameter
That was mangled in the summary, but TFA says that it may be the remaining core of a planet destroyed in a collision, that was potentially as large as Mars.
The $10 Quadrillion figure is total baloney. You can't just take the current value and extrapolate, because the price would fall as the supply rises. A one carat diamond may be worth $10,000, but if there were suddenly a trillion of them, they would be worth next to nothing, and people would use them as gravel in their driveways.
"If we can't even properly reverse engineer an extremely simple deterministic computer chip using fault modeling, it's extremely unlikely that we can infer the mechanisms of an extremely complex non-deterministic processor like the brain."
But that logic only makes sense if microprocessors and brains were similar enough that comparable methods could be used to attempt to understand them. But that isn't true. That is like saying you can't understand how to plow a field with a horse if you don't understand how a tractor engine works. Although horses and tractors have some similarities, understanding how one works doesn't really help you with the other.
They'll stop reacting to what he says because it is just noise.
That is not how the stock market works. Traders will react because they think other traders will react, and they want a first-mover advantage. Other than tweeting, it doesn't matter what Trump does or doesn't do. He just needs to trigger the feedback loop.
1. As a senator, Hillary voted for the Iraq war. 2. As secretary of state, she supported the intervention in Libya. 3. She advocated for deeper American involvement in Syria. All of these have been unmitigated disasters for America, so her judgement doesn't appear to be so good.
I expect Trump to be a terrible president, but his preference for non-interventionism in foreign affairs is one of his few good points. Another good point about his presidency is the entertainment value. Popcorn sales should go way up. Hillary would have been dull.
high schools with large numbers of low-income students tend to have under-staffed guidance offices
That was my situation last year when my daughter was applying to college. So I spent several thousand on an outside consultant who coached her on SAT techniques, helped her apply, and even co-authored her essays. She got into a very good university that was the best that we could have realistically hoped for. It was money well spent, but not many low income families could afford that.
Using my money to basically buy her way into a good school felt wrong, but when it is your own kid, you do what you gotta do.
you don't get to try to patent it and lock others out.
It is unlikely that is their goal. Most likely they are collecting SDC related patents to help them negotiate a patent pool with other SDC developers (Google, Uber, etc.).
SDCs will almost certainly lower delivery costs, and will be a huge benefit to Amazon, so it would be silly for them to impede progress by hoarding patents.
won't pan out for at least a decade due to regulations and liabilities.
So far the regulations are keeping up with technology. Tesla Autopilot and other driver assistance and self-steering and self-braking is legal in all states. Many states have streamlined approval for SDC testing. By the time SDCs are available to the public, they will be legal in most places.
The liability situation doesn't change much. Before SDCs: The insurance company pays. After SDCs: The insurance company pays. The big difference will be that, instead of the driver buying insurance, the cost of insurance will be built into the price of the car.
Paying the way for 'one of the good ones' doesn't mean there is not still a huge classism problem in these schools.
Of course. But the problem is NOT that they are qualified but can't afford it. The problem is that they are not qualified. So the solution is not "more aid" or "more loans" but maybe fixing inequality in K-12.
Smart parents --> high earnings Smart parents --> smart kids (doesn't matter if you believe that's due to nature or nurture, both are at play)
This is a consequence of feminism. Two generations ago, lawyers were men and they married their secretaries. Doctors were men and they married nurses. Today, lawyers marry other lawyers, and doctors marry other doctors. Smart/rich people pair up, and dumb/poor people pair up. This is causing economic inequality, since it is not individual, but household income that is measured.
Overly complicated explanation. Poor people can't afford top colleges.
Not true. Top schools have huge endowments, and way more alumni donations, so they can offer more aid for poor students. Most do not consider ability to pay during the admissions process. If you are talented but poor, a top school is likely more affordable than a second tier school because of the more generous financial aid offered.
Slashdot Mirror
stop immigration which is stealing our jobs.
This is the Lump of Labor Fallacy. Immigrants increase the supply of labor, but they also increase the demand for goods and services, and generally do so disproportionately thus reducing unemployment. This is not just economic theory. When Poland joined the EU, nearly every country threw up barriers to Polish laborers. The exceptions were Britain and Sweden. Can you guess which two countries had the greatest reduction in unemployment over the next few years?
If you walk down a street in San Francisco, you will see more brown faces than white, and hear chatter in several languages. It has one of the highest immigrant populations of any major city in America, and one of the lowest unemployment rates.
The notion that immigration causes unemployment is one of those things that is "simple, obvious, and wrong". It is a real shame that the Democrats didn't stand up to Trump on this issue (and many others) and speak the truth. Instead, they just tried to go "stupid-lite" and lost, because you can't out-stupid the Donald.
So you are fine with only being informed about the capabilities of a product with a price tag of a car ... AFTER you buy the product?
I didn't buy the car, my wife did. We both fully understood that she was not buying a full SDC for the following reasons:
1. We can read.
2. We can see.
3. We can listen.
4. We can think.
People that can do none of these things are going to have a lot of problems in life beyond believing that their car can drive by itself, and it is unlikely many of them are going to be buying a Tesla.
They just are trying to protect their coal industry so that it doesn't wind up the West Virginia of the western US.
That is short sighted. Wyoming has a lot of wind resources, and they could build UHVDC lines to export the power. Oklahoma and Texas are doing well with wind.
Also, the newer, larger turbines kill far fewer birds.
The big reason for this is that they are higher off the ground, where winds are stronger and more reliable. Most local birds fly low, and most migrating birds fly even higher than than the big turbines.
The "bird" objection to wind turbines has always been stupid and disingenuous (the people making it don't really give a crap about the birds), but it has become even stupider as turbines improve.
So, the take-away is that birds are mostly blind?
No. The take-away is that birds evolved before there were large obstacles moving at 70 mph, and large transparent areas on cliff faces. They rarely run into parked cars, or windowless buildings.
To someone who is uninformed ...
Since these "uninformed" people don't actually own a Tesla, it doesn't matter one iota what they think about the system. If you actually own a Tesla, the capabilities and limitations of the system are very very clear.
Also, an autopilot on an aircraft doesn't completely fly the plane all by itself either. Pilots understand that. Do you think they should rename it so the passenger in seat 22C also understands?
The voice keeps talking, and I am left w/ no choice but to hang up.
Do NOT hang up. Instead press "1" so that you waste the time of an actual human, and then put the phone on hold. If everyone did that, their business model would not work. If you enjoy annoying people that deserve it, then stay on the line and pretend to be interested, and give them bogus CC numbers until they start swearing at you. But please don't just hang up.
We only spent a couple months at a time making holes in the ocean.
SSBNs stay submerged for 6 months at a time. I don't think the difference between 6 and 8 is enough to matter.
Plus we had a lot more possible social interactions (100+ in a boat, as opposed to six in the dome).
Many subs have had smaller crews, and nearly all of your interactions are with a few people at your work station.
But there is another huge psychological consideration that makes a sub much more like a space flight: You can't quit. No matter what, you are in for the duration. The people in this dome can quit and walk out anytime they want. They likely won't, but the ability to do so makes an enormous difference in the stress level. The absolute worst case scenario if something goes wrong, is that you open the door and walk out.
I'm truly impressed by how far some Americans are willing to go to escape a Trump presidency. ;)
I am also impressed at far some Americans are willing to go to do pointless redundant research instead of just looking at how sailors deal with life on a submarine.
FWIW, there are diamonds in asteroids too.
Cool. Instead of buying my GF an engagement ring, I can just buy her the naming rights to a small carbonaceous asteroid.
So, question.......would you really build a death star out of steel?
Yes. Steel is strong, and easy to work with. The only drawback over something like titanium or carbon fiber is that it is HEAVY, but that isn't a big problem in space. The big advantage of steel is that it is cheap and plentiful, and when you need a quadrillion tonnes for just one Death Star, those costs add up.
Of course, heaviness means inertia, but travelling through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, and inertia doesn't seem to be an impediment in any of the movies.
You smelt using mirrors and the sun.
The asteroid belt is 3 AU from the sun, so the sunlight would be 1/9th as bright as the light that reaches earth. You would need a big mirror, but in the vacuum of space, the only heat loss would be radiant.
"Potentially as large as Mars"? According to Wikipedia: Psyche16: 200km in diameter. Mars: 6800km in diameter
That was mangled in the summary, but TFA says that it may be the remaining core of a planet destroyed in a collision, that was potentially as large as Mars.
The $10 Quadrillion figure is total baloney. You can't just take the current value and extrapolate, because the price would fall as the supply rises. A one carat diamond may be worth $10,000, but if there were suddenly a trillion of them, they would be worth next to nothing, and people would use them as gravel in their driveways.
Companies can move out of silly valley.
If you force companies to move out of SV, a lot them will move to Mumbai instead of Omaha.
"If we can't even properly reverse engineer an extremely simple deterministic computer chip using fault modeling, it's extremely unlikely that we can infer the mechanisms of an extremely complex non-deterministic processor like the brain."
But that logic only makes sense if microprocessors and brains were similar enough that comparable methods could be used to attempt to understand them. But that isn't true. That is like saying you can't understand how to plow a field with a horse if you don't understand how a tractor engine works. Although horses and tractors have some similarities, understanding how one works doesn't really help you with the other.
They'll stop reacting to what he says because it is just noise.
That is not how the stock market works. Traders will react because they think other traders will react, and they want a first-mover advantage. Other than tweeting, it doesn't matter what Trump does or doesn't do. He just needs to trigger the feedback loop.
1. As a senator, Hillary voted for the Iraq war.
2. As secretary of state, she supported the intervention in Libya.
3. She advocated for deeper American involvement in Syria.
All of these have been unmitigated disasters for America, so her judgement doesn't appear to be so good.
I expect Trump to be a terrible president, but his preference for non-interventionism in foreign affairs is one of his few good points. Another good point about his presidency is the entertainment value. Popcorn sales should go way up. Hillary would have been dull.
While making a copy in RAM, which has only been deemed legal when required for playback of legal content.
So then it should be okay if I don't do any buffering, right?
high schools with large numbers of low-income students tend to have under-staffed guidance offices
That was my situation last year when my daughter was applying to college. So I spent several thousand on an outside consultant who coached her on SAT techniques, helped her apply, and even co-authored her essays. She got into a very good university that was the best that we could have realistically hoped for. It was money well spent, but not many low income families could afford that.
Using my money to basically buy her way into a good school felt wrong, but when it is your own kid, you do what you gotta do.
you don't get to try to patent it and lock others out.
It is unlikely that is their goal. Most likely they are collecting SDC related patents to help them negotiate a patent pool with other SDC developers (Google, Uber, etc.).
SDCs will almost certainly lower delivery costs, and will be a huge benefit to Amazon, so it would be silly for them to impede progress by hoarding patents.
won't pan out for at least a decade due to regulations and liabilities.
So far the regulations are keeping up with technology. Tesla Autopilot and other driver assistance and self-steering and self-braking is legal in all states. Many states have streamlined approval for SDC testing. By the time SDCs are available to the public, they will be legal in most places.
The liability situation doesn't change much.
Before SDCs: The insurance company pays.
After SDCs: The insurance company pays.
The big difference will be that, instead of the driver buying insurance, the cost of insurance will be built into the price of the car.
Paying the way for 'one of the good ones' doesn't mean there is not still a huge classism problem in these schools.
Of course. But the problem is NOT that they are qualified but can't afford it. The problem is that they are not qualified. So the solution is not "more aid" or "more loans" but maybe fixing inequality in K-12.
Smart parents --> high earnings
Smart parents --> smart kids (doesn't matter if you believe that's due to nature or nurture, both are at play)
This is a consequence of feminism. Two generations ago, lawyers were men and they married their secretaries. Doctors were men and they married nurses. Today, lawyers marry other lawyers, and doctors marry other doctors. Smart/rich people pair up, and dumb/poor people pair up. This is causing economic inequality, since it is not individual, but household income that is measured.
Overly complicated explanation. Poor people can't afford top colleges.
Not true. Top schools have huge endowments, and way more alumni donations, so they can offer more aid for poor students. Most do not consider ability to pay during the admissions process. If you are talented but poor, a top school is likely more affordable than a second tier school because of the more generous financial aid offered.