Reality is not a democracy. A bunch of people believing in something is not sufficient to declare its existence. Large numbers of people have believed all manner of absolute fucking garbage.
And to me, Pascal's Wager has to be the worst kind of cynicism. Beyond that, why should you be anything but a decent human being even if you think that when you die, that's the end of the road?
Except that in the 1990s Redmond had the clout to stand on competitors throats and choke the life out of them. In and Android-iOS universe, what the fuck does Cortana even matter?
Except, so far as search goes, they no longer have that dominance. When it comes to surfing these days, the world is overwhelmingly Android.
This might have meant something even five years ago. Now it's just a has-been monopolist who still can't figure out that they're dying on the consumer side.
I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but I confess this is one I have a hard time completely dismissing. He's literally pulling the party to pieces, and with his own real competitor (and not even much of that anymore) being a vile sociopathic hard right troll named Ted Cruz, if this wasn't a secret plot to completely fuck over the Republicans, then Hillary Clinton may very well be the luckiest Presidential candidate in modern times.
The US is a lot more adaptable than even many of its citizens give it credit for. When it was founded, the Industrial Revolution had barely begun, and large swathes of its population were still involved in agrarian or home manufacturing, much as their ancestors had been for thousands of years. By the middle of the 19th century, even in the midst of a brutal civil war, the US was competing with the Old World powers in innovation (the Civil War proved, as wars so often do, to be a boon for technological innovation). By WWII, the US was the pre-eminent world power, and despite all the claims of its waning, the US still remains one of the great economic power houses.
In reality, it has ever been thus. Every generation has its struggles, not just with itself, but with the previous generation, and the transition always leads to moments of revolution. The Baby Boomers may be trying to hang on to their power, and the wealth they accrued, but sooner or later they're going to walk off into the sunset. The Millennials have different priorities, just as the Baby Boomers did in their time.
So the only way you can think of to keep people "alert" is to make the pick up garbage or talk to old people? What about people painting, playing games, pursuing goals without an expectation of monetary award?
We simply do not know what people will do because we've always expected, indeed required, that people scrabble for every nickel, whether they end up with only a few nickels or bank vaults full of them.
Providing this newly liberated populace isn't becoming a menace, I'm of a mind that the actual requirements of what they do be fairly modest at best.
I don't think a basic living wage can be stopped in the long run. In the short term it will be blocked, but sooner or later it will have to happen. It's unavoidable. We started down this road with the invention of the spinning frame in 1760, and I suspect, even then, the more farseeing individuals knew that spinners were just at the forefront of those whose occupations would be relegated to the dustbin of history.
There's no going back. It's been 250 years of increasing mechanization, and it's an unstoppable train.
Even big ticket items are becoming increasingly modular, so repair often amounts to "pull module out of slot C and replace with new module". I look at the extremes I had to go to in the late 1980s to replace a RAM module as compared to now.
There is a very notable phenomena in wealthier societies; and that is that the wealthier a society gets, the less children are produced. I remember reading a book on demographics in the Early Modern Era (ie. the Elizabethan age and later), where the first glimmers of a middle class started to appear in England, and this group had notably lower birth rates than either the lower classes or the nobility. For both the lower classes and the nobility, economics dictated the need for lots of babies due to infant mortality rates and the need for lots of heirs (the lower classes to inherit their parents' crappy jobs and the nobility to assure that estates were passed on). This trend started slow, but as the Middle Class grew as a demographic, and continues to grow the in the Industrialized world, you're seeing overall population levels fall; precipitously in some places. Most industrialized countries have negative population growth, but some, like Japan and Spain, are in serious trouble.
It will repeat itself in the developing world. As living standards in places like Africa, China and India begin to rise, populations will stabilize, and as more people enter their society's middle class, it will slow, and in the long run probably begin a decline. There isn't going to be some sort of infinite growth in population.
And as automation increases, even the ten guys that polish the gears will ultimately be replaced. One can well imagine in a century or two that factories may be entirely automated.
Well, with most Libertarians being grumpy aging men, I'd say the time for a basic living wage is likely to become a reality. I know they'll talk about the theft of "their" money (as if, somehow, they don't have some debt to the societies in which they live), and they'll continue to ruin conservative parties the world over for a few more years, but there's just simply no way to jive increased mechanization with supporting the populace that doesn't involve making sure the necessities are covered to allow people to pursue their fortunes in other ways.
Who knows, maybe Roddenberry's view of the future isn't as farfetched as even I thought a few years ago.
No, you begin looking at a living wage. After all, whether it's machines building the goods or people, the manufacturer, distributor and retailer are all being taxed, and those taxes should still go to support the society at large.
But it is terrible shit. That a tech company with as much money as Apple has can continue to make this steamy pile of shit even more steamy and shitty is a testament to the contempt the company has for its customers. I haven't bought anything on iTunes since 2013. When I'm out and out buying music, I just go to the Google Play store. A lot less hassle and a lot more light weight.
Then it's up to his lawyer to demonstrate the warrant was overbroad, or didn't cover his computer.
But of course the warrant would have covered the computer, so it's hard to see how it's a flimsy reason at all.
Defending encryption doesn't mean having to defend every disgusting pervert or criminal that uses it. And, quite frankly, the end result of this is the same, a pervert sits behind bars.
The judge believes (and there's no reason not to agree with the reasoning that I can see) that the accused is quite capable of decrypting the data, and the man is thus defying a court order, and is in contempt. That's how the system is supposed to work. Are you saying courts shouldn't have the power to compel the production of evidence?
Slashdot Mirror
I have no problem with marketers gaining my smart device exercise data. I merely charge $50,000 per bit.
Because nothing bad happens when nuclear reactors go wrong.
Jesus fucking Christ. Answers in Genesis? Really?
Reality is not a democracy. A bunch of people believing in something is not sufficient to declare its existence. Large numbers of people have believed all manner of absolute fucking garbage.
And to me, Pascal's Wager has to be the worst kind of cynicism. Beyond that, why should you be anything but a decent human being even if you think that when you die, that's the end of the road?
Edge just plain sucks. We've all but disabled on the Win 10 installs at work because it's so broken.
Are you talking to yourself, marketing filth astroturfer?
Except that in the 1990s Redmond had the clout to stand on competitors throats and choke the life out of them. In and Android-iOS universe, what the fuck does Cortana even matter?
Except, so far as search goes, they no longer have that dominance. When it comes to surfing these days, the world is overwhelmingly Android.
This might have meant something even five years ago. Now it's just a has-been monopolist who still can't figure out that they're dying on the consumer side.
I cannot fathom a reason I'd use Bing. It's a second rate search engine.
I will, however, shut down Cortana and save a few cycles.
Look asshole, we know you're a fucking shill. You can quite with the "I'm a former Linux user". You're a lying astroturfing sack of shit.
And yes, you soulless piece of marketing filth, you are getting paid. Now just fuck off.
Translation: You belong to us, bitches! Now bend over so we can serve you some search results!
I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but I confess this is one I have a hard time completely dismissing. He's literally pulling the party to pieces, and with his own real competitor (and not even much of that anymore) being a vile sociopathic hard right troll named Ted Cruz, if this wasn't a secret plot to completely fuck over the Republicans, then Hillary Clinton may very well be the luckiest Presidential candidate in modern times.
Exactly.
Now get off my Second Life lawn!
The US is a lot more adaptable than even many of its citizens give it credit for. When it was founded, the Industrial Revolution had barely begun, and large swathes of its population were still involved in agrarian or home manufacturing, much as their ancestors had been for thousands of years. By the middle of the 19th century, even in the midst of a brutal civil war, the US was competing with the Old World powers in innovation (the Civil War proved, as wars so often do, to be a boon for technological innovation). By WWII, the US was the pre-eminent world power, and despite all the claims of its waning, the US still remains one of the great economic power houses.
In reality, it has ever been thus. Every generation has its struggles, not just with itself, but with the previous generation, and the transition always leads to moments of revolution. The Baby Boomers may be trying to hang on to their power, and the wealth they accrued, but sooner or later they're going to walk off into the sunset. The Millennials have different priorities, just as the Baby Boomers did in their time.
So the only way you can think of to keep people "alert" is to make the pick up garbage or talk to old people? What about people painting, playing games, pursuing goals without an expectation of monetary award?
We simply do not know what people will do because we've always expected, indeed required, that people scrabble for every nickel, whether they end up with only a few nickels or bank vaults full of them.
Providing this newly liberated populace isn't becoming a menace, I'm of a mind that the actual requirements of what they do be fairly modest at best.
I don't think a basic living wage can be stopped in the long run. In the short term it will be blocked, but sooner or later it will have to happen. It's unavoidable. We started down this road with the invention of the spinning frame in 1760, and I suspect, even then, the more farseeing individuals knew that spinners were just at the forefront of those whose occupations would be relegated to the dustbin of history.
There's no going back. It's been 250 years of increasing mechanization, and it's an unstoppable train.
Even big ticket items are becoming increasingly modular, so repair often amounts to "pull module out of slot C and replace with new module". I look at the extremes I had to go to in the late 1980s to replace a RAM module as compared to now.
There is a very notable phenomena in wealthier societies; and that is that the wealthier a society gets, the less children are produced. I remember reading a book on demographics in the Early Modern Era (ie. the Elizabethan age and later), where the first glimmers of a middle class started to appear in England, and this group had notably lower birth rates than either the lower classes or the nobility. For both the lower classes and the nobility, economics dictated the need for lots of babies due to infant mortality rates and the need for lots of heirs (the lower classes to inherit their parents' crappy jobs and the nobility to assure that estates were passed on). This trend started slow, but as the Middle Class grew as a demographic, and continues to grow the in the Industrialized world, you're seeing overall population levels fall; precipitously in some places. Most industrialized countries have negative population growth, but some, like Japan and Spain, are in serious trouble.
It will repeat itself in the developing world. As living standards in places like Africa, China and India begin to rise, populations will stabilize, and as more people enter their society's middle class, it will slow, and in the long run probably begin a decline. There isn't going to be some sort of infinite growth in population.
And as automation increases, even the ten guys that polish the gears will ultimately be replaced. One can well imagine in a century or two that factories may be entirely automated.
Well, with most Libertarians being grumpy aging men, I'd say the time for a basic living wage is likely to become a reality. I know they'll talk about the theft of "their" money (as if, somehow, they don't have some debt to the societies in which they live), and they'll continue to ruin conservative parties the world over for a few more years, but there's just simply no way to jive increased mechanization with supporting the populace that doesn't involve making sure the necessities are covered to allow people to pursue their fortunes in other ways.
Who knows, maybe Roddenberry's view of the future isn't as farfetched as even I thought a few years ago.
No, you begin looking at a living wage. After all, whether it's machines building the goods or people, the manufacturer, distributor and retailer are all being taxed, and those taxes should still go to support the society at large.
Just to let you know, the Apple fanbois have mod points and are modding anyone down who dares question the objection of their religious fervor.
But it is terrible shit. That a tech company with as much money as Apple has can continue to make this steamy pile of shit even more steamy and shitty is a testament to the contempt the company has for its customers. I haven't bought anything on iTunes since 2013. When I'm out and out buying music, I just go to the Google Play store. A lot less hassle and a lot more light weight.
Then it's up to his lawyer to demonstrate the warrant was overbroad, or didn't cover his computer.
But of course the warrant would have covered the computer, so it's hard to see how it's a flimsy reason at all.
Defending encryption doesn't mean having to defend every disgusting pervert or criminal that uses it. And, quite frankly, the end result of this is the same, a pervert sits behind bars.
The judge believes (and there's no reason not to agree with the reasoning that I can see) that the accused is quite capable of decrypting the data, and the man is thus defying a court order, and is in contempt. That's how the system is supposed to work. Are you saying courts shouldn't have the power to compel the production of evidence?