They could make a good-faith effort to find the owner, or they could auction it and pad yearly revenue. The choice is obvious.
This is a big reason why police organizations often oppose drug legalization. Drug crimes are the biggest source of forfeitures, so it is profitable for police to focus on them, and devote minimal resources to unprofitable crimes like, say, sexual assault.
The daycare simply miscalculated their price. They should be charging whatever their normal hourly rate is plus say 50% for overtime pay.
Actually, they should be charging what the market will bear, maximizing their profit without charging enough to discourage parents from staying after work for an important meeting. If they are really smart, they could even segment the market by quoting a price based on how nice of a car the parent drives when picking up the kid. But many people that lack business sense view customer needs as nails that need to be hammered, rather than opportunities that can be screwed.
It shouldn't mean they can own something that was originally stolen.
It may have been stolen, but it wasn't stolen from NASA. NASA gave it away. It was later stolen from a museum, then recovered by the police. It wasn't claimed within the statutory limit, so the police (actually the US Marshals) sold it at auction. NASA was suing the winner of that auction. Legally, NASA has no standing. Morally, they have no right.
the bittorrent protocol is specifically designed to upload while it downloads, and uploading infringes copyright.
Unless you can point to an actual court case, I doubt if this is true. Despite perception to the contrary, courts tend to apply common sense to situations like this. Just because something is true in a pedantic technical sense, doesn't mean it is valid in court. For instance, if you look at a picture, that picture is copied onto your retina. No court would consider that copyright infringement.
The social unrest is already boiling just below the surface and their economic bubble is about to burst.
A lot of Chinese are seething, and it is not just about the slowing overall economy. Many are angry about the Hokou System of hereditary castes that dispossess hundreds of millions of people, and deny them access to education, health-care, housing, etc. They also have tens of millions of young men with no hope of finding a wife and starting a family.
This is why they're sabre rattling and egging on a conflict. It's a classic move from their playbook.
They tried that in 1966. More than 2 million people died, and their economy was set back by a decade.
They know a hot war is unlikely.
It is easy to generate national outrage by blaming outsiders. It is harder to control it. For instance, a face-off with America might be seen in Taiwan as an opportunity to declare independence, which China would see as a major escalation. Activists in Tibet and Xinjiang may also see it as a chance to stir up trouble.
If you want something really private, why use a 3rd party hosting service?
Most companies don't need "really" private. They just need "normal" private. I don't wan't to just open all my code to the world, but it isn't something I lose sleep over.
I once consulted for a company that was considering open sourcing their main product. Some people were opposed, and thought they would be giving away their "crown jewels", but they decided to go ahead. A year later, we checked, and the OSS repo had been downloaded this many times: 0.
The hard truth is that nobody cares about your crappy code, and even if you give it away, you will often need to work hard to get people to use it.
Ah, turn a great decentralized info storage system into a centralized system controlled by one company.
You make that sound like a bad thing. My company uses Github, and a reliable centralized system with a standard interface works great. Of course, we have our own local clones, so we are not "controlled" by github.
Anyway, I can't imagine why they would need 600 employees. I always assumed that they were three guys working out of a loft in SF.
Anyone can become a truck driver if they are willing to do what it takes to get their commercial license
No commercial license is needed if you drive a two-axle bobtail, and don't cross state lines. You can do a lot of around-town deliveries and short-hauls that big-rig drivers don't want to bother with.
... and follow the existing regulations for drivers (log books, vehicle inspections every day, rest breaks, etc).
Do customers and drivers really want to directly communicate with each other about arrival times, dock bays, etc.
Absolutely! I would much rather send this information directly to the driver through an app, than give it over the phone to the dispatcher where it is screwed up 80% of the time. I would also love to be able to see reviews of the drivers, and see a GPS plot of the driver's location. Trucking is definitely an industry that needs to be Uberified. It would be an improvement in every way.
Physics was not one of your best subjects in high school, was it?
Melanin make skin dark, and does indeed cause more light to be absorbed, but the light is absorbed before it generates vitamin D. People with darker skin living in northern climates are more likely to be vitamin D deficient.
Presumably peoples who live at the extreme latitudes near the poles, who would get a lot less sunlight in winter, would have a seasonally higher incidence of autism?
People who live near the poles tend to each a lot of oily fish that have a plenty of vitamin D.
No, you look after them for the rest of their lives, just like any responsible society does for those not able to look after themselves.
Many of them can look after themselves, especially if they get some help to get started. In America, 80% of autistic people are not employed. But with coaching, and targeted help, most autistic people are employable. Some countries do a far better job of this than others. The Economist recently had an article about the effectiveness of education and employment policies for autistic people.
Tesla Autopilot will exceed the speed limit if the driver requests it to. I don't see why this would be any different. Tesla Autopilot will limit the speed to 5mph over the limit on residential streets, but I don't think there is any specific limit for highway driving. I usually go about 10mph over for highway driving. Any slower than that, and I get flipped off too much.
When the Uber SDC ran the red light, it was under human control and the SDC capability was not active. So the human driver was at fault. No one was ticketed, because the violation was recorded by a bystander, not the police.
what is being called for is for the company to prove to the public, via its regulatory agencies, that they've done all they can to make it as safe as they can, before proceeding to public road testing.
that's what this permit does.
No, that is NOT what the permit does. The permit tests the ability to jump through bureaucratic hoops, and patiently wait for months with the application sits in some inbox.
ignoring this regulation and potentially endangering people does not put them on the side of morality.
Every day that progress is impeded, another 100 families lose a father, mother, son, daughter in a needless traffic accident... and that is just in America. There is a thousand more elsewhere. These are real deaths not "potential endangerment".
So, your argument is that because nobody who is willing to risk safety would worry about getting a permit, we should just get rid of the permits?
I am saying that the current permit process is pointless and isn't preventing any accidents. A sensible permit process, focused on public safety, would be fine, but that is not what we have now.
it certainly reduces the RISK of something bad happening.
There is nothing "certain" about this. You can use a Raspberry Pi to control your brakes or steering, as long as it is not fully self driving, and anyone willing to take risks like that is unlikely to worry about the risk of not having the permit. There is little reason to believe these rules have saved even one life, and plenty of reason to believe they are costing thousands of lives by impeding progress. It is not even clear that Uber is actually breaking any law, but they are certainly on the side of morality. I, for one, applaud them for their stance on this.
Crime and violence are at all-time lows, so by that measure we are getting more moral.
This likely has more to do with the aging of the overall population than with anything else.
Nope. The decline has occurred in many countries, and in some other countries it has NOT occurred. It has occurred everywhere, and only, in locations that have banned leaded gasoline, with a lag of 15-20 years (the time for exposed infants to reach peak criminal age).
Aging populations likely helped, but reduction in environmental lead exposure was the primary factor. There are many crime "hot-spots" in places like Flint, Michigan, and East St Louis. The children in the hotspots nearly always have elevated blood lead levels. $1 spent on reducing lead exposure saves $100 on the costs of crime, including the construction of prisons. Yet no politician has won an election by promising to spend less on prisons and more on clean water.
As you point out, these rules exist for a reason. They make the roads safer. The rules against SDCs, even when there is a human in the driver's seat, do not make the roads safer in any demonstrable way. They exist only because of bureaucratic inertia. 38,300 people died in traffic accidents in America last year. So if by pushing back against petty rules, Uber brings forward the widespread adoption of SDCs by even one day, they will have saved 100 lives.
So when was this golden age when people were more moral than they are today? Can you point to any actual evidence that morality is in decline? Crime and violence are at all-time lows, so by that measure we are getting more moral.
The problem is that there are a ton of freeloaders in India that aren't paying their taxes. This is a clear-cut way to track down that money.
It isn't working out that way. If you have over about $10,000 in rupees you need to have an explanation of where they came from. But plenty of services have popped up that, for a small cut, will spread your cash out over many smaller transactions, each under the threshold. Competition has driven the price of these laundering services down so far, that many people with legitimate cash are using them just to avoid standing in line at the bank for hours.
Sure. But as long as we are discussing totally unworkable fantasies, I would also like to point out that if no one had unprotected sex, we could eliminate STDs, and if all the armies in the world disbanded, we would have world peace.
Slashdot Mirror
They could make a good-faith effort to find the owner, or they could auction it and pad yearly revenue. The choice is obvious.
This is a big reason why police organizations often oppose drug legalization. Drug crimes are the biggest source of forfeitures, so it is profitable for police to focus on them, and devote minimal resources to unprofitable crimes like, say, sexual assault.
The daycare simply miscalculated their price. They should be charging whatever their normal hourly rate is plus say 50% for overtime pay.
Actually, they should be charging what the market will bear, maximizing their profit without charging enough to discourage parents from staying after work for an important meeting. If they are really smart, they could even segment the market by quoting a price based on how nice of a car the parent drives when picking up the kid. But many people that lack business sense view customer needs as nails that need to be hammered, rather than opportunities that can be screwed.
It shouldn't mean they can own something that was originally stolen.
It may have been stolen, but it wasn't stolen from NASA. NASA gave it away. It was later stolen from a museum, then recovered by the police. It wasn't claimed within the statutory limit, so the police (actually the US Marshals) sold it at auction. NASA was suing the winner of that auction. Legally, NASA has no standing. Morally, they have no right.
They do when you copy it into memory to execute a program though!
Hogwash. No one has been successfully sued or prosecuted for copyright infringement based on copying from disk to RAM.
the bittorrent protocol is specifically designed to upload while it downloads, and uploading infringes copyright.
Unless you can point to an actual court case, I doubt if this is true. Despite perception to the contrary, courts tend to apply common sense to situations like this. Just because something is true in a pedantic technical sense, doesn't mean it is valid in court. For instance, if you look at a picture, that picture is copied onto your retina. No court would consider that copyright infringement.
The social unrest is already boiling just below the surface and their economic bubble is about to burst.
A lot of Chinese are seething, and it is not just about the slowing overall economy. Many are angry about the Hokou System of hereditary castes that dispossess hundreds of millions of people, and deny them access to education, health-care, housing, etc. They also have tens of millions of young men with no hope of finding a wife and starting a family.
This is why they're sabre rattling and egging on a conflict. It's a classic move from their playbook.
They tried that in 1966. More than 2 million people died, and their economy was set back by a decade.
They know a hot war is unlikely.
It is easy to generate national outrage by blaming outsiders. It is harder to control it. For instance, a face-off with America might be seen in Taiwan as an opportunity to declare independence, which China would see as a major escalation. Activists in Tibet and Xinjiang may also see it as a chance to stir up trouble.
If you want something really private, why use a 3rd party hosting service?
Most companies don't need "really" private. They just need "normal" private. I don't wan't to just open all my code to the world, but it isn't something I lose sleep over.
I once consulted for a company that was considering open sourcing their main product. Some people were opposed, and thought they would be giving away their "crown jewels", but they decided to go ahead. A year later, we checked, and the OSS repo had been downloaded this many times: 0.
The hard truth is that nobody cares about your crappy code, and even if you give it away, you will often need to work hard to get people to use it.
Ah, turn a great decentralized info storage system into a centralized system controlled by one company.
You make that sound like a bad thing. My company uses Github, and a reliable centralized system with a standard interface works great. Of course, we have our own local clones, so we are not "controlled" by github.
Anyway, I can't imagine why they would need 600 employees. I always assumed that they were three guys working out of a loft in SF.
Anyone can become a truck driver if they are willing to do what it takes to get their commercial license
No commercial license is needed if you drive a two-axle bobtail, and don't cross state lines. You can do a lot of around-town deliveries and short-hauls that big-rig drivers don't want to bother with.
... and follow the existing regulations for drivers (log books, vehicle inspections every day, rest breaks, etc).
You don't have to do any of that either.
Do customers and drivers really want to directly communicate with each other about arrival times, dock bays, etc.
Absolutely! I would much rather send this information directly to the driver through an app, than give it over the phone to the dispatcher where it is screwed up 80% of the time. I would also love to be able to see reviews of the drivers, and see a GPS plot of the driver's location. Trucking is definitely an industry that needs to be Uberified. It would be an improvement in every way.
Physics was not one of your best subjects in high school, was it?
Melanin make skin dark, and does indeed cause more light to be absorbed, but the light is absorbed before it generates vitamin D. People with darker skin living in northern climates are more likely to be vitamin D deficient.
Presumably peoples who live at the extreme latitudes near the poles, who would get a lot less sunlight in winter, would have a seasonally higher incidence of autism?
People who live near the poles tend to each a lot of oily fish that have a plenty of vitamin D.
No, you look after them for the rest of their lives, just like any responsible society does for those not able to look after themselves.
Many of them can look after themselves, especially if they get some help to get started. In America, 80% of autistic people are not employed. But with coaching, and targeted help, most autistic people are employable. Some countries do a far better job of this than others. The Economist recently had an article about the effectiveness of education and employment policies for autistic people.
As we all know, the oldest profession in the (western) world, is breewing beer.
Prostitution preceded brewing by millions of years: Prostitution among animals.
can it do more then the speed limit?
Tesla Autopilot will exceed the speed limit if the driver requests it to. I don't see why this would be any different. Tesla Autopilot will limit the speed to 5mph over the limit on residential streets, but I don't think there is any specific limit for highway driving. I usually go about 10mph over for highway driving. Any slower than that, and I get flipped off too much.
I wonder who got the ticket for that?
When the Uber SDC ran the red light, it was under human control and the SDC capability was not active. So the human driver was at fault. No one was ticketed, because the violation was recorded by a bystander, not the police.
what is being called for is for the company to prove to the public, via its regulatory agencies, that they've done all they can to make it as safe as they can, before proceeding to public road testing.
that's what this permit does.
No, that is NOT what the permit does. The permit tests the ability to jump through bureaucratic hoops, and patiently wait for months with the application sits in some inbox.
ignoring this regulation and potentially endangering people does not put them on the side of morality.
Every day that progress is impeded, another 100 families lose a father, mother, son, daughter in a needless traffic accident ... and that is just in America. There is a thousand more elsewhere. These are real deaths not "potential endangerment".
So, your argument is that because nobody who is willing to risk safety would worry about getting a permit, we should just get rid of the permits?
I am saying that the current permit process is pointless and isn't preventing any accidents. A sensible permit process, focused on public safety, would be fine, but that is not what we have now.
it certainly reduces the RISK of something bad happening.
There is nothing "certain" about this. You can use a Raspberry Pi to control your brakes or steering, as long as it is not fully self driving, and anyone willing to take risks like that is unlikely to worry about the risk of not having the permit. There is little reason to believe these rules have saved even one life, and plenty of reason to believe they are costing thousands of lives by impeding progress. It is not even clear that Uber is actually breaking any law, but they are certainly on the side of morality. I, for one, applaud them for their stance on this.
Crime and violence are at all-time lows, so by that measure we are getting more moral.
This likely has more to do with the aging of the overall population than with anything else.
Nope. The decline has occurred in many countries, and in some other countries it has NOT occurred. It has occurred everywhere, and only, in locations that have banned leaded gasoline, with a lag of 15-20 years (the time for exposed infants to reach peak criminal age).
Aging populations likely helped, but reduction in environmental lead exposure was the primary factor. There are many crime "hot-spots" in places like Flint, Michigan, and East St Louis. The children in the hotspots nearly always have elevated blood lead levels. $1 spent on reducing lead exposure saves $100 on the costs of crime, including the construction of prisons. Yet no politician has won an election by promising to spend less on prisons and more on clean water.
As you point out, these rules exist for a reason. They make the roads safer. The rules against SDCs, even when there is a human in the driver's seat, do not make the roads safer in any demonstrable way. They exist only because of bureaucratic inertia. 38,300 people died in traffic accidents in America last year. So if by pushing back against petty rules, Uber brings forward the widespread adoption of SDCs by even one day, they will have saved 100 lives.
Morality and monogamy are both in decline.
So when was this golden age when people were more moral than they are today? Can you point to any actual evidence that morality is in decline? Crime and violence are at all-time lows, so by that measure we are getting more moral.
Just wait to see what happens after Texit.
Too late. Texit already happened.
The problem is that there are a ton of freeloaders in India that aren't paying their taxes. This is a clear-cut way to track down that money.
It isn't working out that way. If you have over about $10,000 in rupees you need to have an explanation of where they came from. But plenty of services have popped up that, for a small cut, will spread your cash out over many smaller transactions, each under the threshold. Competition has driven the price of these laundering services down so far, that many people with legitimate cash are using them just to avoid standing in line at the bank for hours.
If nobody paid, the problem would solve itself.
Sure. But as long as we are discussing totally unworkable fantasies, I would also like to point out that if no one had unprotected sex, we could eliminate STDs, and if all the armies in the world disbanded, we would have world peace.
In the meantime, wear a condom, do backups.