Here is the first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Please note that it says "no law". It doesn't say "no law except for unregistered foreigners".
show me somebody more credible than a/. poster who is asking the government to regulate speech on Facebook.
You are moving the goalposts. Why does someone have to be "credible" to favor restrictions on speech? The vote of a non-credible person counts the same as yours.
The government absolutely has a right to raid or detain if probable cause of a crime is shown to a judge.
Speaking is not a crime.
Here is the 1st amendment of the United States Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
considering their caving-in to demands of governments in China, India, various other EMEA nations, etc... each with their differing ideas of what free speech is or is not.
So you are saying that since China, and Saudi Arabia force companies to censor content, then it is okay for America's government to do the same? If not, then what are you trying to say?
Companies are obligated to obey the law. This is not a debate about what companies should do, but about what governments should do. Governments have an extremely poor track record of benignly controlling what people hear and read.
If FaceBook has hate speech on it, then why not raid the offices where the servers are hosted?
Or we could keep the Constitution, and people could, you know, grow some thicker skin.
Your desire to be protected from offense does not trump the right of others to speak.
As a private entity, Facebook has a right to police hate speech as they see fit. The government has no right to force them to do so, by "raiding offices" or otherwise.
I don't think anyone is asking for the government to step in and police hate speech.
Plenty of people are asking for this. In fact, this is exactly what TFA is talking about.
If YouTube or any other private entity wants to set their own standards, or ban people at the request of advertisers, that is their right. But when the government steps in and sets the standards, that is dangerous, and is the direction we are headed.
Full time employees can be fired just as easily as a contractor.
Legally, employees can be fired for almost any reason, or for no reason, at any time. But psychologically it is difficult to sit down with a worker who has a family and a mortgage, and tell them to their face that they are fired. So managers tend to avoid or delay firing people, even when it is against the best interest of the business.
It is much easier to just let a contract expire.
If you want a raise, change jobs.
Indeed. A typical annual raise is about 5%. In tech, the median salary boost from changing jobs is about 20%. To maximize income, you should plan to change employers every 3 to 5 years.
It's a quick and easy way to get H1-B workers for one thing.
The US issues a fixed number of H1-B visas each year. Whether those people work as direct employees or employees of a contractor makes no difference. The number is the same.
It lowers tech wages too
No it doesn't. It increases wages. It lowers non-wage benefits.
you don't have long term employment.
Many of the people discussed in TFA are regular W2 employees working for a contracting company, not individual contractors.
Plus it dodges taxes.
No it doesn't. The taxes net out the same. It just shifts who pays them.
Nobody wants to vote for strong worker protections.
No, not stronger, nor better. Just different. In many ways, 1099 workers get a better deal than W2 workers.
If you want this to change you're going to need help from the government.
We could do the same if worker safety weren't an issue either.
You need to have a balance. If you spend billions on safety measures that only save a handful of lives, then you can afford far less infrastructure, which means stunted economic growth, which leads to worse healthcare, nutrition, and poverty, all of which lower life expectancy. So you end up killing more people than you save.
The tradeoff between safety and cost is going to be different for a developing country like China that it is in a 1st world country like America.
If you really believe in absolute safety and any cost, then the only answer is to never build or do anything.
And why should we expect any of those entities to be truthful in this at all? Apple? Aws?
The companies are subject to serious civil and criminal penalties for lying about material facts that could affect their stock price.
Agencies?
The agencies would get major budget boosts if they can show that the Chinese infiltrated all of these companies. They have a strong vested interest in making China look like a powerful and dangerous boogeyman.
It is OBVIOUSLY a joke. I don't find it particularly funny, but I don't see any harm either. It is clearly ridiculing some of the over-the-top CoCs, and in many cases that ridicule is well deserved.
The people taking this seriously need to eat more fish or, if they are vegan, some omega-3 supplements, to help their brains work better.
The era of specialized hardware will return. We'll have sound cards, video cards, AI accelerators, etc.
I don't think so. Audio, video, and NN-AI are all doing the same thing: lots of low precision fp-ops in parallel. There is no reason to have separate hardware for each.
The secret to the speedup is to place memory and arithmetic units on the same chip.
Wikipedia has a good overview: Computational RAM. I know some of the people who worked on this with Dave Patterson's group at UCB. Very smart people, and a very interesting project.
We are in the post-Moore world. The future is massive parallelism.
single handedly responsible for the destruction of ~80% of the world's corals reefs by parking his various yachts over them and letting the anchors drift around
The world has about 500,000 square miles of coral reefs. I doubt that his boat anchor destroyed 400,000 of them.
you're made at the barely-more-than-min-wage drone that runs the computers.
They make a lot more than minimum wage. Prior to 9/11 the security was run by the airlines. But in the aftermath they were replaced by unionized government employees earning nearly twice as much. Many tests have shown that there was no increase in effectiveness at detecting prohibited items, despite the slower process and newer equipment.
Really. I thought this was done years ago. Every time I have passed through customs they asked me to look in the camera. Starting about two years ago, it is just a kiosk. I insert my passport open to the photo page, look in the camera with my eyes lined up on the dots, and push the button. It prints a paper receipt, which I hand to the nice man with the gun, and then I walk out the door. The system is almost totally automated, and since there are plenty of kiosks, the line moves fast.
At least that is how it works at SJC, SFO, and HNL. Haven't gone through customs anywhere else recently.
Slashdot Mirror
specifically who is asking the US Government to regulate speech on Facebook?
40% of Americans want more government regulation of speech.
But they need to register as foreign agents.
Here is the first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Please note that it says "no law". It doesn't say "no law except for unregistered foreigners".
show me somebody more credible than a /. poster who is asking the government to regulate speech on Facebook.
You are moving the goalposts. Why does someone have to be "credible" to favor restrictions on speech? The vote of a non-credible person counts the same as yours.
Cyc has been working on this for decades (with poor results), and they have received DARPA funding. How is "new" direction any different?
The government absolutely has a right to raid or detain if probable cause of a crime is shown to a judge.
Speaking is not a crime.
Here is the 1st amendment of the United States Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Pay particular attention to the phrase "no law".
considering their caving-in to demands of governments in China, India, various other EMEA nations, etc... each with their differing ideas of what free speech is or is not.
So you are saying that since China, and Saudi Arabia force companies to censor content, then it is okay for America's government to do the same? If not, then what are you trying to say?
Companies are obligated to obey the law. This is not a debate about what companies should do, but about what governments should do. Governments have an extremely poor track record of benignly controlling what people hear and read.
If FaceBook has hate speech on it, then why not raid the offices where the servers are hosted?
Or we could keep the Constitution, and people could, you know, grow some thicker skin.
Your desire to be protected from offense does not trump the right of others to speak.
As a private entity, Facebook has a right to police hate speech as they see fit. The government has no right to force them to do so, by "raiding offices" or otherwise.
I don't think anyone is asking for the government to step in and police hate speech.
Plenty of people are asking for this. In fact, this is exactly what TFA is talking about.
If YouTube or any other private entity wants to set their own standards, or ban people at the request of advertisers, that is their right. But when the government steps in and sets the standards, that is dangerous, and is the direction we are headed.
A $100 Billion Train: The Future of California or a Boondoggle?
That mess will cost a quarter trillion by the end.
I don't think so. California's HSR is on a collision course with fiscal reality. It will likely be cancelled when the next recession comes.
Full time employees can be fired just as easily as a contractor.
Legally, employees can be fired for almost any reason, or for no reason, at any time. But psychologically it is difficult to sit down with a worker who has a family and a mortgage, and tell them to their face that they are fired. So managers tend to avoid or delay firing people, even when it is against the best interest of the business.
It is much easier to just let a contract expire.
If you want a raise, change jobs.
Indeed. A typical annual raise is about 5%. In tech, the median salary boost from changing jobs is about 20%. To maximize income, you should plan to change employers every 3 to 5 years.
It's a quick and easy way to get H1-B workers for one thing.
The US issues a fixed number of H1-B visas each year. Whether those people work as direct employees or employees of a contractor makes no difference. The number is the same.
It lowers tech wages too
No it doesn't. It increases wages. It lowers non-wage benefits.
you don't have long term employment.
Many of the people discussed in TFA are regular W2 employees working for a contracting company, not individual contractors.
Plus it dodges taxes.
No it doesn't. The taxes net out the same. It just shifts who pays them.
Nobody wants to vote for strong worker protections.
No, not stronger, nor better. Just different. In many ways, 1099 workers get a better deal than W2 workers.
If you want this to change you're going to need help from the government.
No thanks.
We could do the same if worker safety weren't an issue either.
You need to have a balance. If you spend billions on safety measures that only save a handful of lives, then you can afford far less infrastructure, which means stunted economic growth, which leads to worse healthcare, nutrition, and poverty, all of which lower life expectancy. So you end up killing more people than you save.
The tradeoff between safety and cost is going to be different for a developing country like China that it is in a 1st world country like America.
If you really believe in absolute safety and any cost, then the only answer is to never build or do anything.
America doesn't build great infrastructure like this anymore. We're broke and getting more in debt every day.
The reason nothing is built in America is dysfunctional politics: Gridlock at the national level, combined with NIMBYism at the local level.
If something on this scale was attempted in America, we would spend $15B just on legal fees.
already on 4nm.
Number of fabs owned by AMD: 0.
The author's sincerity is clear here. It isn't a joke, it is just a mistake.
I don't think he is sincere. This is just a continuation of the joke/troll.
Disclaimer: I am a humor-impaired Aspie, so I could be wrong.
I'm much happier to watch 30 episodes of "Narcos" than two hours of "Hot Tub Time Machine 2."
Indeed. The original content is the only thing that makes Netflix worthwhile. Everything else I can watch for free on Amazon Prime.
And why should we expect any of those entities to be truthful in this at all? Apple? Aws?
The companies are subject to serious civil and criminal penalties for lying about material facts that could affect their stock price.
Agencies?
The agencies would get major budget boosts if they can show that the Chinese infiltrated all of these companies. They have a strong vested interest in making China look like a powerful and dangerous boogeyman.
Every organization involved has a strong, strong motive to deny this, and no motive to admit it.
You have a strong, strong motive to deny you are a child molester, and no motive to admit it.
I agree but oddly JavaScript (no parallelism in the language) and Python (GIL-limited parallelism in the language) are becoming very popular.
JavaScript has WebCL, giving access to massive parallelism, although it is not yet supported by all browsers.
Python is used more than any other language for massively parallel NNs, with TensorFlow, Keras, Caffe, etc.
It is certain I can say TIANIMEN SQUARE here.
You can say it. But can you spell it?
It is: Tian (heaven/sky) An (peace) Men (gate). Tiananmen, the gate of heavenly peace.
The link to the CoC is in the summary, but here it is again: SQLite Code of Conduct.
It is OBVIOUSLY a joke. I don't find it particularly funny, but I don't see any harm either. It is clearly ridiculing some of the over-the-top CoCs, and in many cases that ridicule is well deserved.
The people taking this seriously need to eat more fish or, if they are vegan, some omega-3 supplements, to help their brains work better.
The era of specialized hardware will return. We'll have sound cards, video cards, AI accelerators, etc.
I don't think so. Audio, video, and NN-AI are all doing the same thing: lots of low precision fp-ops in parallel. There is no reason to have separate hardware for each.
The secret to the speedup is to place memory and arithmetic units on the same chip.
Wikipedia has a good overview: Computational RAM. I know some of the people who worked on this with Dave Patterson's group at UCB. Very smart people, and a very interesting project.
We are in the post-Moore world. The future is massive parallelism.
single handedly responsible for the destruction of ~80% of the world's corals reefs by parking his various yachts over them and letting the anchors drift around
The world has about 500,000 square miles of coral reefs. I doubt that his boat anchor destroyed 400,000 of them.
The economic system is not related to to how totalitarian the government is.
Yes it is. If the economic system prohibits the free exchange of goods and services, then you need an oppressive government to enforce the ban.
A Capitalist system can be just as Totalitarian as a Communist one is.
Of course. Franco's Spain and Pinochet's Chile were capitalist and totalitarian.
Also a Communist government could also be a nice place to live and work.
Bullcrap.
you're made at the barely-more-than-min-wage drone that runs the computers.
They make a lot more than minimum wage. Prior to 9/11 the security was run by the airlines. But in the aftermath they were replaced by unionized government employees earning nearly twice as much. Many tests have shown that there was no increase in effectiveness at detecting prohibited items, despite the slower process and newer equipment.
Next...
Really. I thought this was done years ago. Every time I have passed through customs they asked me to look in the camera. Starting about two years ago, it is just a kiosk. I insert my passport open to the photo page, look in the camera with my eyes lined up on the dots, and push the button. It prints a paper receipt, which I hand to the nice man with the gun, and then I walk out the door. The system is almost totally automated, and since there are plenty of kiosks, the line moves fast.
At least that is how it works at SJC, SFO, and HNL. Haven't gone through customs anywhere else recently.