I have read somewhere that the average age was so low because child death was so high. Average was actually around 50 when you deduct the kids dying after the first year.
So there where elders and it was an average, so older ones where there as well.
Not sure where I got the info from or what period it spoke of.
Did they also forbid to change anything when better ideas come up, because all I hear is how people who have died 200 years ago had a good idea. I hear it in such a way that it sounds as if since then no smart people where born.
To me it looks as if they tried, but failed. Otherwise the US would not be in that situation. Change e.g. the "Winner takes all/first past the post". There are better ways to do it.
It might mean that you need to change a LOT. But if that is what it takes, why not? Those smart people 200 years ago did it.
It might make it seem easier if everything is detailed, but you still need to have enough algorithm to know if things are there that should not be or if things or not there if they should be.
You can't have a car stop, just because some person places a box too close to the road for trash pickup and the AI is not smart enough.
And what should it do if the tree is gone? Did it not see the tree, or is it really gone or is there something else going on? What about a street light? That can be gone, because of an accident and then replaced 3 months later.
So having a detailed map will not exclude a very good AI, but a very good AI can do with a very basic map. Have you seen paper maps? We where able to get where we needed to get, regardless. A better map made it easier, not impossible. I have traveled half over Europe with a car and no map. And I killed nobody by accident that I know of.
I have a Huawei phone. If I need another one, I most likely will buy one again if it has a phone jack. If not, I will buy one that has. And I even do not listen that often to Music and if I do, I do it wireless 99% of the time, but for that 1% I will want the jack.
To be fair, you still see a lot of cables in the air, but not in cities or villages where there is already a lot of groundwork happening, just to get waste-water out.
So if the city is build on rock, to will the rest be on rock.
If a person has Dissociative Identity Disorder (Multiple Personality Disorder) we still see him as one person. Cutting a brain in half does not make a difference. There have been people where they lost half their brain. They do not become half a person. They are just the same person with, in some cases, a complete different mentality.
So: leave it in the body, two people. Put it in two bodies: one person.
If they are born with two brains and one body, it will be seen as two persons. These are pretty clear situations that already exist.
I feel as if the person is looking for a solution to a problem that does not exist.
Yes, that is what the saying used to be. That is no longer valid.
It used to be that quality costs money and sometimes you still get what you pay for, but it becomes less and less the case. Cheap becomes better in quality and expensive becomes less.
I have bought Armani shirts where the buttons fell out and I have bought cheapo-no-name shirts where this was not the case. 25 times the price? Sure, cheapo lasted three years instead of 10, so 7 times the price.
Bought a DVD player for 400 that broke within a year, replaced it with one for 40 that still works 10 years later.
Sure,you can buy the phone with the most gadgets, but if you only use it to update Facebook, you do not NEED the best. It is a waste of money. And 1000USD for a device is just as much as 1000USD for a device you touch 10 times pers day.
Practicality and price have nothing to do with it. It is the perceived need that has been important since the emperors new clothes.
I am somewhere in between. I do not need a return on investment for everything. I also do not buy a new phone every year. But I do spend sometimes things that could be had a LOT cheaper. I go eating out at least once a moth where I pay 150EUR or so per person for dinner. I could eat at home for much less. Once or twice a week I spend at least 50EUR for a dinner. OTOH I do not like spending money on a fancy hotel, because I sleep when I a, there and I sleep just as well in a much cheaper hotel. If it is clean and reasonable quiet, it is good enough.
I feel sorry for those that live so frugal that they become cheapskates. Is there really nothing you like more than counting money? I just hope there will be nothing left when I die.
"Massive". I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Sure these things will be available and people will still buy them. The arguments you make is like saying "the car did not kill the horse industry. There are stil horses around and people use them in traffic.
Sure, it doubled perhaps from last year, but it is nowhere close as to what it was.
When was the last time that you hosted on a server that could not handle the load of that? When it happened, it was things hosted by some small shared hosting provider. Even if the amount of people on/. would be times 10, there would not be a real issue.for sites, unless they host it at home.
The only two reasons I am still here is because of habit and the way the threads are done. It is closest to how I would like to have online discussions. (The Usenet way is even better, but that was killed)
In almost all other online media the comments are a mess. Reddit is a bit better, but is blocked where I work and to find something interesting takes a while.
At this moment these are just rounding numbers. It is easier to say everybody was hacked. Then look at who was not.
What I still find appalling is that the people that where hacked are "just" a few million people, but the real stink is how they dropped stock. It is like that douchebag with the inhalers. Screwing over a few million people for money is not an issue, but take some money from the rich and you are dead.
I am not saying that they should not be prosecuted for that but the company should be offline till the investigations end at least. The only thing that should be available online is a static webpage telling that they are offline. Just as a precaution, the same should be done to their competitors till they show they are secure. But that would mean they can't make money and we can't have peoples lives interfere with that, now can we?
I am sure that European countries are as secure as American ones. The difference is the data that they are willing to keep and what they do with that data. First and foremost: It is illegal to sell customer data.That means that the data I have has no added value, besides what I have. Not being allowed to trade data makes it more secure. Secondly: If there is a dispute between a company and a person, the company will start with a disadvantage and will have to prove their innocence, so they will see to it that this is less the case. That makes it more secure of and by itself. e.g. Even if you get my National Number that identifies me, you won't get a credit and IF you do, it will be the company who gave it that will be responsible, not me. So the company wil be more careful in giving it, because it is them who pay the piper.
You are also only allowed to keep data that you actually need, although that can be a pretty grey area.
Yes, I have worked with peoples data and if you do not need to share data with others, it is much easier to make it secure. It is like having no hole in a boat vs people wanting a hole with glass on the bottom, so they can see through it. The first is easier, even if the second can be made just as secure.
And all this makes them less of a target as you can do less with the information.
You could do identity theft. You would need my ID and my national number. The second is easy if you have the first as it is on my ID and readers are cheap and it is open source. You need to be fast, because I can just call a number and that would block my ID for being used and if a company that needs your ID (e.g. a bank by opening an account) does not do a check at https://www.checkdoc.be/ they will be held responsible. That site is travaille for everybody for free.
So yes, as a whole, Europe is more secure than the US concerning identity theft. Is it perfect? Absolutely not. As everywhere, the biggest issue is the people.
In Belgium: Credit data is held by the National Bank and is ONLY accessible to credit companies and banks. The data is only valid in combination of an obligatory ID card. A check can be done if that card is stolen on https://www.checkdoc.be/ If it is stolen you call a free number and it will be blocked immediately. Every person in Belgium has a national number. Even if you are not Belgian. It is your date of birth in reverse, three numbers for the person born or added on that day. and two control digits. Dutch info The ID has the data on it and is readable by any OS as it is open source to read.
This does not mean that ID theft is not possible, it just means that it won't take over your life for always. Fraude will still happen. e.g. you ex has your details and does an online request in your name. As the address has most likely not yet been updated, the contracts will be send there, Ex signes the papers. Police will be involved. Ex needs to pay back and you get a new ID card. Not nice, but not that bad. If you where in the process of getting a credit to buy your house, it might delay that process for a month, if that. Yes, I have seen the worst case scenario. Those are where the son or daughter does it and dad/mom don't want to go to the police. Worse if they are elderly and unable or afraid.
All this does not mean I am just going to make it available for all, because it still can be used for Social Engineering and get info I do not want to be out in the open.
Slashdot Mirror
I have read somewhere that the average age was so low because child death was so high. Average was actually around 50 when you deduct the kids dying after the first year.
So there where elders and it was an average, so older ones where there as well.
Not sure where I got the info from or what period it spoke of.
Perhaps she went to the Vulcan version of an Online University.
Did they also forbid to change anything when better ideas come up, because all I hear is how people who have died 200 years ago had a good idea. I hear it in such a way that it sounds as if since then no smart people where born.
To me it looks as if they tried, but failed. Otherwise the US would not be in that situation. Change e.g. the "Winner takes all/first past the post". There are better ways to do it.
It might mean that you need to change a LOT. But if that is what it takes, why not? Those smart people 200 years ago did it.
Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail. Monorail.
Lameness filter encountered.
Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition.
It's an arts student, so obviously overpaid yet relaxed due to the change in the law about possession of herbal substances.
In Argentina they used Admin/Admin as user/password. Must be the same person.
It might make it seem easier if everything is detailed, but you still need to have enough algorithm to know if things are there that should not be or if things or not there if they should be.
You can't have a car stop, just because some person places a box too close to the road for trash pickup and the AI is not smart enough.
And what should it do if the tree is gone? Did it not see the tree, or is it really gone or is there something else going on? What about a street light? That can be gone, because of an accident and then replaced 3 months later.
So having a detailed map will not exclude a very good AI, but a very good AI can do with a very basic map. Have you seen paper maps? We where able to get where we needed to get, regardless. A better map made it easier, not impossible.
I have traveled half over Europe with a car and no map. And I killed nobody by accident that I know of.
The real reason it will go fast is money. People cost money and if you do not have to deal with the money for people, it will be the way it will go.
The cost of people is two-fold
1) People to drive the car
2) People in accidents
So even if they where the same; the companies would start wanting them, because they are cheaper.
If you have a job where you drive, that will be gone in 10 years or so. Not sure what job won't be in danger.
I have a Huawei phone. If I need another one, I most likely will buy one again if it has a phone jack. If not, I will buy one that has. And I even do not listen that often to Music and if I do, I do it wireless 99% of the time, but for that 1% I will want the jack.
In The Netherlands? Pretty deep on average.
To be fair, you still see a lot of cables in the air, but not in cities or villages where there is already a lot of groundwork happening, just to get waste-water out.
So if the city is build on rock, to will the rest be on rock.
If a person has Dissociative Identity Disorder (Multiple Personality Disorder) we still see him as one person. Cutting a brain in half does not make a difference.
There have been people where they lost half their brain. They do not become half a person. They are just the same person with, in some cases, a complete different mentality.
So: leave it in the body, two people. Put it in two bodies: one person.
If they are born with two brains and one body, it will be seen as two persons.
These are pretty clear situations that already exist.
I feel as if the person is looking for a solution to a problem that does not exist.
They don'have more place in their showroom.
Yes, that is what the saying used to be. That is no longer valid.
It used to be that quality costs money and sometimes you still get what you pay for, but it becomes less and less the case. Cheap becomes better in quality and expensive becomes less.
I have bought Armani shirts where the buttons fell out and I have bought cheapo-no-name shirts where this was not the case. 25 times the price? Sure, cheapo lasted three years instead of 10, so 7 times the price.
Bought a DVD player for 400 that broke within a year, replaced it with one for 40 that still works 10 years later.
Sure,you can buy the phone with the most gadgets, but if you only use it to update Facebook, you do not NEED the best. It is a waste of money. And 1000USD for a device is just as much as 1000USD for a device you touch 10 times pers day.
Practicality and price have nothing to do with it. It is the perceived need that has been important since the emperors new clothes.
I am somewhere in between. I do not need a return on investment for everything. I also do not buy a new phone every year. But I do spend sometimes things that could be had a LOT cheaper. I go eating out at least once a moth where I pay 150EUR or so per person for dinner. I could eat at home for much less. Once or twice a week I spend at least 50EUR for a dinner.
OTOH I do not like spending money on a fancy hotel, because I sleep when I a, there and I sleep just as well in a much cheaper hotel. If it is clean and reasonable quiet, it is good enough.
I feel sorry for those that live so frugal that they become cheapskates. Is there really nothing you like more than counting money? I just hope there will be nothing left when I die.
"Massive". I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Sure these things will be available and people will still buy them. The arguments you make is like saying "the car did not kill the horse industry. There are stil horses around and people use them in traffic.
Sure, it doubled perhaps from last year, but it is nowhere close as to what it was.
When was the last time that you hosted on a server that could not handle the load of that? When it happened, it was things hosted by some small shared hosting provider. Even if the amount of people on /. would be times 10, there would not be a real issue.for sites, unless they host it at home.
The only two reasons I am still here is because of habit and the way the threads are done. It is closest to how I would like to have online discussions. (The Usenet way is even better, but that was killed)
In almost all other online media the comments are a mess. Reddit is a bit better, but is blocked where I work and to find something interesting takes a while.
At this moment these are just rounding numbers. It is easier to say everybody was hacked. Then look at who was not.
What I still find appalling is that the people that where hacked are "just" a few million people, but the real stink is how they dropped stock. It is like that douchebag with the inhalers. Screwing over a few million people for money is not an issue, but take some money from the rich and you are dead.
I am not saying that they should not be prosecuted for that but the company should be offline till the investigations end at least. The only thing that should be available online is a static webpage telling that they are offline.
Just as a precaution, the same should be done to their competitors till they show they are secure.
But that would mean they can't make money and we can't have peoples lives interfere with that, now can we?
One does not exclude the other.
I am sure that European countries are as secure as American ones. The difference is the data that they are willing to keep and what they do with that data.
First and foremost: It is illegal to sell customer data.That means that the data I have has no added value, besides what I have.
Not being allowed to trade data makes it more secure.
Secondly: If there is a dispute between a company and a person, the company will start with a disadvantage and will have to prove their innocence, so they will see to it that this is less the case. That makes it more secure of and by itself.
e.g. Even if you get my National Number that identifies me, you won't get a credit and IF you do, it will be the company who gave it that will be responsible, not me. So the company wil be more careful in giving it, because it is them who pay the piper.
You are also only allowed to keep data that you actually need, although that can be a pretty grey area.
Yes, I have worked with peoples data and if you do not need to share data with others, it is much easier to make it secure. It is like having no hole in a boat vs people wanting a hole with glass on the bottom, so they can see through it. The first is easier, even if the second can be made just as secure.
And all this makes them less of a target as you can do less with the information.
You could do identity theft. You would need my ID and my national number. The second is easy if you have the first as it is on my ID and readers are cheap and it is open source. You need to be fast, because I can just call a number and that would block my ID for being used and if a company that needs your ID (e.g. a bank by opening an account) does not do a check at https://www.checkdoc.be/ they will be held responsible.
That site is travaille for everybody for free.
So yes, as a whole, Europe is more secure than the US concerning identity theft. Is it perfect? Absolutely not. As everywhere, the biggest issue is the people.
In Belgium:
Credit data is held by the National Bank and is ONLY accessible to credit companies and banks.
The data is only valid in combination of an obligatory ID card. A check can be done if that card is stolen on https://www.checkdoc.be/
If it is stolen you call a free number and it will be blocked immediately.
Every person in Belgium has a national number. Even if you are not Belgian. It is your date of birth in reverse, three numbers for the person born or added on that day. and two control digits. Dutch info
The ID has the data on it and is readable by any OS as it is open source to read.
This does not mean that ID theft is not possible, it just means that it won't take over your life for always. Fraude will still happen. e.g. you ex has your details and does an online request in your name. As the address has most likely not yet been updated, the contracts will be send there, Ex signes the papers. Police will be involved. Ex needs to pay back and you get a new ID card. Not nice, but not that bad. If you where in the process of getting a credit to buy your house, it might delay that process for a month, if that.
Yes, I have seen the worst case scenario. Those are where the son or daughter does it and dad/mom don't want to go to the police. Worse if they are elderly and unable or afraid.
All this does not mean I am just going to make it available for all, because it still can be used for Social Engineering and get info I do not want to be out in the open.
Well, it didn't, because you can only receive GPS. Unless you are a satellite, you are not on GPS, so you can not vanish from it.
So is this called Terrorism? Will people of the same skin color now be targeted? Because that would be bad.
And they where better paid than workers now. (OK, not that difficult to do)
Retirement? Guy probably already has a new job that pays even more.