First they will come up with computing systems effective enough to do jobs that aren't tightly constrained. That's coming along right now; mostly in the nature of stacking of simple systems to gain stacked competencies.
The training for individual competencies is going on all around us right now. The difficult task of integrating them remains, and there are many more to go. But it is going.
Then, and only then, will the rush to build anthropomorphic chassis commence. Within just a few years (four or five at the most) of that – after all, it's a straight-forward engineering challenge, completely unlike the nature of putting the task competencies together – we'll be deluged by integrated systems that will be able to do just about anything we're able to do, job-wise.
The light at the end of the tunnel is definitely a train.
Our society will have to completely change the nature of what we expect from our citizens, and what we provide for them, and how we provide it. If we don't get that done in time, there's going to be a lot of blood on the tracks.
And you never ship bugs? Ever? Shit happens, get over it.
First of all, when I ship bugs, I fix them if it's within my abilities to do so. Which is usually is. And I will tell you flat out that if I had billions of dollars in the bank, I'd be able to fix every one that was found, because there are people I could hire that are way smarter than me, and I could hire a lot of them without feeling any pain at all.
My problem with Apple isn't that they ship bugs anyway... it's that they leave serious bugs in place even when they know about them.
So I'll get over it when they stop behaving like incompetents, and no sooner.
it's just really, really sad to see megabucks Apple drop the ball like this.
Apple drops the ball constantly. Sometimes they don't pick it back up, either. They leave routinely leave known, reported bugs in versions of the OS that are still in common use (in fact, they force them to be in common use by not letting some perfectly capable machines, even high end, expensive ones, upgrade to a later OS.) Then there are major screwups like "app nap" they stab us with, and the constant churn of "feature in, feature out" (like displays in the menu bar), abandonment of applications they sold (Aperture), the aforementioned OS abandonment of relatively recent (and certainly still very fast and very functional) computers, the constant annoyance of how they "notify" upgrades (you'll either do the upgrade, or go look at it... those are your two choices. There's no simple "no.") Some incredibly basic amenities still haven't found their way into the OS (like audio mixing and EQing, or even a basic bluetooth profile so your phone can send audio to the computer.)
Sometimes I think they're trying to be annoying.
As for High Sierra, it wasn't ready for the public when they shipped it. I really don't get why a company with that much cash in the bank can't manage to field a decent OS test protocol system (not to mention manage to continue to support hardware that is still very shiny.)
But hey, what do I know. I'm just a lowly developer and user. I'm sure I'm just not... courageous... enough.
Well, you can't quite say the same, because going to ASM loses some significant cross-platform capability and in a cross-platform environment, there are indeed things you can't write in ASM.
If you want to be (absurdly) reductionist, you can write pretty much anything in binary. But...
I should mention that I love writing ASM, and have been doing it for many decades.:)
Tons of people here are rightly skeptical of Google, Facebook, at al, but saw nothing suspicious about those companies being the LEADING proponents of net neutrality. Why would these companies, so often duplicitous and manipulative, be coming on so strong for net neutrality?
Google's and Facebook's collection of eyeballs comprise an entirely different issue than ISPs being able to relegate the non-wealthy to low-bandwidth (or no-bandwidth) corners of the web.
Right now, you can choose to be Facebook and/or Google eyeballs, but there are other options of various and sundry nature out there that offer interesting content. Facebook and Google are impotent to stop that; all you have to do is find a link, and there the site will be. That link could be anywhere — while you may indeed find it on Google or Facebook, you can also find it other places.
Allowing bandwidth to be prioritized (or outright taken over) by wealthy interests can silence the other sources of information. That's a new problem, and it's not the same as, or even a version of, the old problem.
Bloomberg is being disingenuous here. Or stupid. You choose.
"Having a degree" proves nothing in specific, but statistically speaking, it may (vaguely) indicate a few things in general. You'd sure as heck better not depend on those vague indications, though.
What requiring a degree (and various other tickmarks unrelated to actual skill and capacity) does, though, is frees businesses to (a) pretend they can't find viable candidates capable of the work, and (b) consequent to a, allows them fish in pools of skill that are much less expensive without alerting the stockholders.
And of course, all of this facilitates and amplifies various other types of discrimination: age, health, arrest and conviction records, social media participation, political leanings, gender, religious outlook, etc.
The current tech job market is truly a hellhole. I'm really glad I no longer outright depend on it, and I feel intensely sympathetic with those skilled and capable candidates who are trying to crack the corporate wall.
The good news, I expect, will be that none of this will mean bupkis within a few decades, because I highly doubt there will be any jobs at all of this type remaining. Pervasive automation looks to be coming, and if/when it does, it's going to eat the need to be employed outright.
There's a the flaw in this plan. If there's a publicly available fiber backbone, I'm not aware of it.
Call me a cynic, but I think there are other flaws as well.
For one thing, it seems fairly obvious to me that moving from a national+state-government-regulated Internet to a local-government-regulated Internet is just creating many opportunities for problems where before we had, nominally, "only" 51.
And that's not to say that the feds, and the states, wouldn't step in and regulate from afar either; after all, how do you think we "got regulation" on the Internet we have? Early on, there were almost no regulations. Now there are loads.
Legislators, to put it kindly, continually meddle. You create a new venue, and particularly so one that has such obvious social and business consequences, they're going to be on that ASAP.
No, I think the thing to do is try to fix the Internet we have, by which I mean punish the regulators for screwing it up and reward them for backing the hell off. Better 51 of these tasks than tens of thousands.
I can report that in a Go project in which a raft of objects had to be moved out of the heap - because the Go garbage collector was constantly looking at them (this was a multi-million element tree) to see if they need to be dumped, some significant performance gains were achieved by getting 'round the GC. The final code eded up with nothing but the root of the tree in the heap, and the rest... not. GC time wasted was culled, overall it was a definite win. The code's in production and running well.
There are constructs I can create with template metaprogramming that even C cannot match the performance of.
That just means you could be better at c. Because there is nothing you can't write in c; c gives you absolute control of everything. The questions are:
o Do you have the time? o Do you have the skill?
Most people aren't willing to say yes to the first, and most people can't honestly say yes to the second (and that's given us a lot of very bad c code. But it's not c that's the problem. It's the raft of so-so and worse programmers that have built things in it.)
I think if people wanted a broadly more powerful language they'd move right to C++, but they don't -- so we need to look at why that is, and maybe we'll have a better idea of what a "new C" could possibly look like.
I think a "new c" might look a lot like Go - without the handicap of garbage collection.
There hasn't been a garbage collector written yet that doesn't constitute an outright insult to performance and predictability.
Governments don't burn oil the general public does.
In the US, government employees — specifically legislators — take money and favors from the oil companies in order to slant fuel production, transport, use and pollution remediation strongly towards them in every way they possibly can.
So yes, it is the government that has been (and continues to go on) driving it here in the USA.
Those days are slowly drawing to a close, though. It's long past time for it to happen. Burning oil is a filthy habit.
The only remaining partially jumped hurdle is clean energy storage.
They're caught between a rock and a hard place and also several other solid mountains of mineral deposits. The ads you and the vast majority of their users hear and hate are too annoying. And they're also evidently not bringing in enough dollars, so they seem to need to make them MORE annoying.
They stream low-quality to high-end systems. You can pay the subscription fee, you still get crap on a high-end receiver or prepro.
They want my money, they have to fix that. And since they were told about it years ago and haven't lifted a finger to fix the quality of the music... to heck with 'em.
The place to spend money is with a service that takes care of its customers, not ignores them. Yeah, high end systems might be a niche market, but we spend money. I guess they don't want it. I'm okay with that, too. And gee, look at what's happening to them. Huh.:)
I live in the southeast part of the San Francisco Bay area. Last summer (a few months ago), it got up to 108 degrees one day. It's never been that hot since I moved here in 1989.
That's why they call them "record temperatures." Records happen in the context of "just normal weather." Consider the context:
Looking at the climate record for San Francisco for last summer, we can see that you had a couple of short-duration extreme outlying temperature events. We can also see from the records shown on the graph that these are not without precedent on other days in years past.
Record breaking days happen; you can see that particular event clearly, but you can also see that it was a significant outlier. It would be absurd to take it as indication of a trend — it's not in line with the temperatures anywhere around it.
None of this screams "climate change"; it's just weather. None of it screams "no climate change", either. Same reason. If you want to consider climate, you must go with large amounts of aggregate data.
Needing for drivers for deliveries is generally seasonal.
And will only last until the robots can do the deliveries. Likewise, security roles, vehicle repair, dispatching, loading, transitions between rail and truck chassis for modular carriers, etc.
There's no reason - at all - to assume that the low level job market going forward will be as rich in employment opportunities. Every time any idea like that has been put forward, it's been full of huge holes in reasoning. No exception this time, either.
It's bullshit, and it's bullshit designed to keep the soon-to-be-unemployed passive just a little while longer. That too will come to an end.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly right.
Here's how it's going to go:
First they will come up with computing systems effective enough to do jobs that aren't tightly constrained. That's coming along right now; mostly in the nature of stacking of simple systems to gain stacked competencies.
The training for individual competencies is going on all around us right now. The difficult task of integrating them remains, and there are many more to go. But it is going.
Then, and only then, will the rush to build anthropomorphic chassis commence. Within just a few years (four or five at the most) of that – after all, it's a straight-forward engineering challenge, completely unlike the nature of putting the task competencies together – we'll be deluged by integrated systems that will be able to do just about anything we're able to do, job-wise.
The light at the end of the tunnel is definitely a train.
Our society will have to completely change the nature of what we expect from our citizens, and what we provide for them, and how we provide it. If we don't get that done in time, there's going to be a lot of blood on the tracks.
First of all, when I ship bugs, I fix them if it's within my abilities to do so. Which is usually is. And I will tell you flat out that if I had billions of dollars in the bank, I'd be able to fix every one that was found, because there are people I could hire that are way smarter than me, and I could hire a lot of them without feeling any pain at all.
My problem with Apple isn't that they ship bugs anyway... it's that they leave serious bugs in place even when they know about them.
So I'll get over it when they stop behaving like incompetents, and no sooner.
Apple drops the ball constantly. Sometimes they don't pick it back up, either. They leave routinely leave known, reported bugs in versions of the OS that are still in common use (in fact, they force them to be in common use by not letting some perfectly capable machines, even high end, expensive ones, upgrade to a later OS.) Then there are major screwups like "app nap" they stab us with, and the constant churn of "feature in, feature out" (like displays in the menu bar), abandonment of applications they sold (Aperture), the aforementioned OS abandonment of relatively recent (and certainly still very fast and very functional) computers, the constant annoyance of how they "notify" upgrades (you'll either do the upgrade, or go look at it... those are your two choices. There's no simple "no.") Some incredibly basic amenities still haven't found their way into the OS (like audio mixing and EQing, or even a basic bluetooth profile so your phone can send audio to the computer.)
Sometimes I think they're trying to be annoying.
As for High Sierra, it wasn't ready for the public when they shipped it. I really don't get why a company with that much cash in the bank can't manage to field a decent OS test protocol system (not to mention manage to continue to support hardware that is still very shiny.)
But hey, what do I know. I'm just a lowly developer and user. I'm sure I'm just not... courageous... enough.
Quite right, corrupt government is a major factor.
Zen offers the solution: "Be the dish."
Well, you can't quite say the same, because going to ASM loses some significant cross-platform capability and in a cross-platform environment, there are indeed things you can't write in ASM.
If you want to be (absurdly) reductionist, you can write pretty much anything in binary. But...
I should mention that I love writing ASM, and have been doing it for many decades. :)
Google's and Facebook's collection of eyeballs comprise an entirely different issue than ISPs being able to relegate the non-wealthy to low-bandwidth (or no-bandwidth) corners of the web.
Right now, you can choose to be Facebook and/or Google eyeballs, but there are other options of various and sundry nature out there that offer interesting content. Facebook and Google are impotent to stop that; all you have to do is find a link, and there the site will be. That link could be anywhere — while you may indeed find it on Google or Facebook, you can also find it other places.
Allowing bandwidth to be prioritized (or outright taken over) by wealthy interests can silence the other sources of information. That's a new problem, and it's not the same as, or even a version of, the old problem.
Bloomberg is being disingenuous here. Or stupid. You choose.
"Having a degree" proves nothing in specific, but statistically speaking, it may (vaguely) indicate a few things in general. You'd sure as heck better not depend on those vague indications, though.
What requiring a degree (and various other tickmarks unrelated to actual skill and capacity) does, though, is frees businesses to (a) pretend they can't find viable candidates capable of the work, and (b) consequent to a, allows them fish in pools of skill that are much less expensive without alerting the stockholders.
And of course, all of this facilitates and amplifies various other types of discrimination: age, health, arrest and conviction records, social media participation, political leanings, gender, religious outlook, etc.
The current tech job market is truly a hellhole. I'm really glad I no longer outright depend on it, and I feel intensely sympathetic with those skilled and capable candidates who are trying to crack the corporate wall.
The good news, I expect, will be that none of this will mean bupkis within a few decades, because I highly doubt there will be any jobs at all of this type remaining. Pervasive automation looks to be coming, and if/when it does, it's going to eat the need to be employed outright.
Well, that they admit to, anyway. Sex robots will be #1 on people's "want lists", count on it. Once they're any good.
Call me a cynic, but I think there are other flaws as well.
For one thing, it seems fairly obvious to me that moving from a national+state-government-regulated Internet to a local-government-regulated Internet is just creating many opportunities for problems where before we had, nominally, "only" 51.
And that's not to say that the feds, and the states, wouldn't step in and regulate from afar either; after all, how do you think we "got regulation" on the Internet we have? Early on, there were almost no regulations. Now there are loads.
Legislators, to put it kindly, continually meddle. You create a new venue, and particularly so one that has such obvious social and business consequences, they're going to be on that ASAP.
No, I think the thing to do is try to fix the Internet we have, by which I mean punish the regulators for screwing it up and reward them for backing the hell off. Better 51 of these tasks than tens of thousands.
That option - last I looked - only worked on the non-receiver / prepro integrated clients.
Nah, c is for me. :) I just think Go has some of the right ideas, particularly WRT concurrency.
I can report that in a Go project in which a raft of objects had to be moved out of the heap - because the Go garbage collector was constantly looking at them (this was a multi-million element tree) to see if they need to be dumped, some significant performance gains were achieved by getting 'round the GC. The final code eded up with nothing but the root of the tree in the heap, and the rest... not. GC time wasted was culled, overall it was a definite win. The code's in production and running well.
Also - this was in June/2017. It was Go 1.8.
That just means you could be better at c. Because there is nothing you can't write in c; c gives you absolute control of everything. The questions are:
o Do you have the time?
o Do you have the skill?
Most people aren't willing to say yes to the first, and most people can't honestly say yes to the second (and that's given us a lot of very bad c code. But it's not c that's the problem. It's the raft of so-so and worse programmers that have built things in it.)
I think a "new c" might look a lot like Go - without the handicap of garbage collection.
There hasn't been a garbage collector written yet that doesn't constitute an outright insult to performance and predictability.
In the US, government employees — specifically legislators — take money and favors from the oil companies in order to slant fuel production, transport, use and pollution remediation strongly towards them in every way they possibly can.
So yes, it is the government that has been (and continues to go on) driving it here in the USA.
Those days are slowly drawing to a close, though. It's long past time for it to happen. Burning oil is a filthy habit.
The only remaining partially jumped hurdle is clean energy storage.
Eunuchs did...
Er, no, wait. Never mind.
Doesn't work. There's this thing called going elsewhere. Which does work.
They stream low-quality to high-end systems. You can pay the subscription fee, you still get crap on a high-end receiver or prepro.
They want my money, they have to fix that. And since they were told about it years ago and haven't lifted a finger to fix the quality of the music... to heck with 'em.
The place to spend money is with a service that takes care of its customers, not ignores them. Yeah, high end systems might be a niche market, but we spend money. I guess they don't want it. I'm okay with that, too. And gee, look at what's happening to them. Huh. :)
No, I'm saying that random peak weather events happen, and they are not where to look to draw broad conclusions.
That's why they call them "record temperatures." Records happen in the context of "just normal weather." Consider the context:
Looking at the climate record for San Francisco for last summer, we can see that you had a couple of short-duration extreme outlying temperature events. We can also see from the records shown on the graph that these are not without precedent on other days in years past.
Record breaking days happen; you can see that particular event clearly, but you can also see that it was a significant outlier. It would be absurd to take it as indication of a trend — it's not in line with the temperatures anywhere around it.
None of this screams "climate change"; it's just weather. None of it screams "no climate change", either. Same reason. If you want to consider climate, you must go with large amounts of aggregate data.
And will only last until the robots can do the deliveries. Likewise, security roles, vehicle repair, dispatching, loading, transitions between rail and truck chassis for modular carriers, etc.
There's no reason - at all - to assume that the low level job market going forward will be as rich in employment opportunities. Every time any idea like that has been put forward, it's been full of huge holes in reasoning. No exception this time, either.
It's bullshit, and it's bullshit designed to keep the soon-to-be-unemployed passive just a little while longer. That too will come to an end.
Labor is not the only motivation to enslave. There is dominance, sexual and otherwise; there are bragging rights, pride, ego. Etc.
For instance, when someone ties their partner to the bedposts, they aren't doing it to get them to work harder.
Q: Lady, would you sleep with me for a million dollars?
A: Yes, I would.
Q: Would you sleep with me for a dollar?
A: What do you think I am?!?!