I know for an absolute, indisputable fact that you are not a Russian shill chiming in for no reason other than to thump the nationalistic chest of antiquated Russian technology nobody wants nor cares about.
It is indeed an awesome plane, but you have to admit, that leak-then-refuel thing is pretty lame from an engineering standpoint.
Not awesome, agreed, but at least it was by-design. My understanding is that they fuelled the machine on the ground only sufficient for it to meet its in-flight refuelling tanker to minimise the issue you describe.
Still not ideal, but obviously the result of some significant engineering compromises likely due to the materials technology of the day.
No, no fallacy. Just a mysterious urge to stick one in plural words. It's a curious thing that some people just do, for no reason. And a good example of the sort of randomness that humans bring to working.
Agreed - greengrocer apostrophes are a piece of human warm-fuzziness I could do without.
There's a young man in 2350 who was assured by someone in 2015 that he wouldn't need to worry about everyone jumping to unpaid robolabor. Even so, he's taking no chances, he worries employers will overlook those without approval from the diploma mills. But he'll buy the signature with a paycheck, because our little wiseass knows student loans are a predatory industry, an authorized scam.
He's not disabled, physically or mentally. He's a perfect specimen. He's healthy, he's eager, he's earnest, he'd like one of those abundant human-performed jobs he heard about.
What on earth does any of that mean?
What madness has gripped you so? That has you are making future predictions 335 years hence?
Or, maybe we can just dispense with the "robots will make human lives easier" BS and just go straight to "robots will increase profits for people who already have all the fucking money".
Thanks for posting the unpopular and distasteful truth. Capitalism is by its nature a ponzi; money has something of a 'gravitational pull' and although one can make money without first having money, initial capital makes the whole process so much easier it's understandable people summarise the situation with "you need money to make money."
Automation is a lens by which capitalists focus their productivity. This is a good thing only when considered in isolation. It is likely we'll need to tweak our various implementations of capitalism because - in my opinion - a highly-automated, minimal-labour economy such as the concept we're discussing isn't something capitalism was ever designed to accommodate. (anyone reading please correct me if my macroeconomics isn't up to snuff)
Naturally, I have no suggestions, but I do perceive a bunch of potential problems. A living wage seems like a good idea on the surface but I don't have the economic nous to work through all the possible ramifications of such a policy.
Shit, finger-spasmed Submit instead of Continue Editing, apologies. I'll continue:
Massage: No thanks, I don't want to lie there in full knowledge that the lovely girl massaging me is only doing so because she is paid and wouldn't be within a kilometre of me otherwise
Food Service: No thanks, I don't need or want to interact with a human for something so mundane and easily-abstracted.
Etc etc etc: No thanks - I'm quite happy here. I certainly enjoy interacting with humans via the Internet and spend a lot of time in voice chat with people all over the world. That said I couldn't possibly care less if I ever saw another human being in person.
Nothing personal, I've just got my own things to do that don't require the presence of other people.
My joke about threesome with sex-bots aside, humans will probably always prefer real humans for that work - and also for massages, food service, etc. etc. etc.
Hmm, prefer a human? Let's see:
Sex: No thanks, a robot won't laugh at the pimples on my arse
Having elites is fine and good. Some people are actually better than other people. I know... that isn't politically correct. However, some people are smarter, wiser, more motivated, have better fashion sense, are more artistic, are more creative, are braver, are whatever.
And society works best when those calling the shots have more of a clue.
I agree with you and I'm not one of those people. There are many, many people smarter and wiser than myself, many who are better motivated, artistic, more creative, braver and definitely in possession of more fashion sense.
That's fine with me (and hard cheese if it isn't) and I wouldn't seek to change this for any reason, it is a natural distribution and perfectly normal.
Why has it become such a crime to recognise differences in people's abilities? What do we collectively think we are gaining by this popular movement? Perhaps someone can help me but from where I sit it resembles a race to the bottom (he or she who can tolerate the most obnoxious behaviour wins!)
The issue here isn't "mistruth" but rather "missed truth." The person missing the truth here is you.
Firstly, thank you for engaging me on the topic.
If you were truly an "inquiring mind" you would follow up on the information provided in my posts and see that I'm correct. I suggest you try rereading the thread again (or the similar one at another point in the discussion) and pay attention to the posts quoting Wikipedia and Time magazine. Those substantiate my post.
As to any other posts you wonder about I suggest you do some homework. You probably think I'm wrong because you are unfamiliar with the actual facts and rely upon politicized oral history. That is a common mistake. You may very well find that things are not as you have been told, or as you wish to believe.
All good points and I intend to thoroughly scrutinise your citations rather than skimming.
What is compelling however is the number of well-respected Slashdotters who have their own citations in reply. Without having analysed all cites in depth, are you suggesting that these are all the product of people believing only what they wish to believe? I appreciate this is a bit of an "argument to authority" or "argument to popularity" but I raise the point as I typically find Slashdotters to be less susceptible to that kind of behaviour than a random sampling of the population.
As an aside, I'm not North American and (as far as I am aware) I have no particular bias towards any given version of the story beyond a desire to leave bullshit behind in favour of the truth, whatever that may be.
I don't think Drinkypoo was trolling. Until we account for externalities and essentially build our industries into a self-sustaining loop, we're simply burning through tomorrow. Global consumption continues to grow and as fracking demonstrates, our tools and techniques for plundering the Earth are only getting better.
So yeah, we ignore externalities until the world ends is a pretty accurate summation.
I think the idea of a One World Government is Orwellian and frightening but we do need some sort of global oversight. We can make sure our end of the swimming pool is crystal-clear (and put ourselves at a huge and necessary economic disadvantage in doing so) yet we'll still have China pissing in the pool for all its worth.
You better watch that sort of talk sonny, the world is awash with limitless numbers of social justice warriors ready to pounce on you for "racism". They're not interested in facts or truth and they won't consider citations nor attributed explanations in detail. Reasonable discussion would naturally interfere with them getting their hate on.
If whoever reading this comment finds themselves offended, I'd be prepared to bet that you are one of these people. Do try to remember that you have no right to not be offended.
Perhaps a stupid question but isn't printing money synonymous with QE? Or are you meaning something else like the adding of zeros to currency stored electronically maybe? Sorry, not sure of the correct terms.
Yeah, good luck with that. I'd love to see how your bunker holds up if a large asteroid, a moon, a planet, a star or a black hole hits Earth or just pulls it out of orbit.
How's life? It must be lovely being as blissfully (and clearly wilfully) ignorant as you appear to be.
What exactly are you expecting to happen to disturb an underground bunker should an asteroid hit the surface of the planet it is built into? Anything less than a direct strike is going to affect the subterranean habitat very little, assuming the bunker is up to the same standards you demand (space-based or other-body colony).
What fantasy world do you live in where rogue stars, planets and black holes cruise through other stellar systems? Have you even the faintest idea how BIG space is? More importantly, what's this fabulous plan of yours for getting us to another star system? Because if you've even the dimmest inkling of intelligence you must realise that habitats orbiting Jupiter are going to be just as thoroughly fucked by a rogue star as any underground bunker.
Did you read this APK? Other people here see you for what you are. We don't post to help you - we post in the hope that you'll eventually go away and let the adults enjoy their conversation. Nothing I or anyone else say will affect your behaviour though because you're incapable of critical thought.
Go away, you idiot. You have no value beyond the production of noise and a foul smell. Face it APK, your efforts have amounted to little more than fart gas.
Slashdot Mirror
instead of having a chip on my shoulder.
That kind of bullshit, anti-social and profoundly racist attitude will get you precisely nowhere in today's world.
Die in a fire, SJW arsehole.
I know for an absolute, indisputable fact that you are not a Russian shill chiming in for no reason other than to thump the nationalistic chest of antiquated Russian technology nobody wants nor cares about.
I know this because.
How about flights from Hawaii to Australia, New Zeeland
Aw, come on, not even the original was spelt like that! ;-)
It is indeed an awesome plane, but you have to admit, that leak-then-refuel thing is pretty lame from an engineering standpoint.
Not awesome, agreed, but at least it was by-design. My understanding is that they fuelled the machine on the ground only sufficient for it to meet its in-flight refuelling tanker to minimise the issue you describe.
Still not ideal, but obviously the result of some significant engineering compromises likely due to the materials technology of the day.
WTF? SR-71 pilots were issued stillsuits?!
You believe wrongly.
No, no fallacy. Just a mysterious urge to stick one in plural words. It's a curious thing that some people just do, for no reason. And a good example of the sort of randomness that humans bring to working.
Agreed - greengrocer apostrophes are a piece of human warm-fuzziness I could do without.
There's a young man in 2350 who was assured by someone in 2015 that he wouldn't need to worry about everyone jumping to unpaid robolabor. Even so, he's taking no chances, he worries employers will overlook those without approval from the diploma mills. But he'll buy the signature with a paycheck, because our little wiseass knows student loans are a predatory industry, an authorized scam. He's not disabled, physically or mentally. He's a perfect specimen. He's healthy, he's eager, he's earnest, he'd like one of those abundant human-performed jobs he heard about.
What on earth does any of that mean?
What madness has gripped you so? That has you are making future predictions 335 years hence?
Or, maybe we can just dispense with the "robots will make human lives easier" BS and just go straight to "robots will increase profits for people who already have all the fucking money".
Thanks for posting the unpopular and distasteful truth. Capitalism is by its nature a ponzi; money has something of a 'gravitational pull' and although one can make money without first having money, initial capital makes the whole process so much easier it's understandable people summarise the situation with "you need money to make money."
Automation is a lens by which capitalists focus their productivity. This is a good thing only when considered in isolation. It is likely we'll need to tweak our various implementations of capitalism because - in my opinion - a highly-automated, minimal-labour economy such as the concept we're discussing isn't something capitalism was ever designed to accommodate. (anyone reading please correct me if my macroeconomics isn't up to snuff)
Naturally, I have no suggestions, but I do perceive a bunch of potential problems. A living wage seems like a good idea on the surface but I don't have the economic nous to work through all the possible ramifications of such a policy.
Shit, finger-spasmed Submit instead of Continue Editing, apologies. I'll continue:
Nothing personal, I've just got my own things to do that don't require the presence of other people.
My joke about threesome with sex-bots aside, humans will probably always prefer real humans for that work - and also for massages, food service, etc. etc. etc.
Hmm, prefer a human? Let's see:
Having elites is fine and good. Some people are actually better than other people. I know... that isn't politically correct. However, some people are smarter, wiser, more motivated, have better fashion sense, are more artistic, are more creative, are braver, are whatever.
And society works best when those calling the shots have more of a clue.
I agree with you and I'm not one of those people. There are many, many people smarter and wiser than myself, many who are better motivated, artistic, more creative, braver and definitely in possession of more fashion sense.
That's fine with me (and hard cheese if it isn't) and I wouldn't seek to change this for any reason, it is a natural distribution and perfectly normal.
Why has it become such a crime to recognise differences in people's abilities? What do we collectively think we are gaining by this popular movement? Perhaps someone can help me but from where I sit it resembles a race to the bottom (he or she who can tolerate the most obnoxious behaviour wins!)
The issue here isn't "mistruth" but rather "missed truth." The person missing the truth here is you.
Firstly, thank you for engaging me on the topic.
If you were truly an "inquiring mind" you would follow up on the information provided in my posts and see that I'm correct. I suggest you try rereading the thread again (or the similar one at another point in the discussion) and pay attention to the posts quoting Wikipedia and Time magazine. Those substantiate my post.
As to any other posts you wonder about I suggest you do some homework. You probably think I'm wrong because you are unfamiliar with the actual facts and rely upon politicized oral history. That is a common mistake. You may very well find that things are not as you have been told, or as you wish to believe.
All good points and I intend to thoroughly scrutinise your citations rather than skimming.
What is compelling however is the number of well-respected Slashdotters who have their own citations in reply. Without having analysed all cites in depth, are you suggesting that these are all the product of people believing only what they wish to believe? I appreciate this is a bit of an "argument to authority" or "argument to popularity" but I raise the point as I typically find Slashdotters to be less susceptible to that kind of behaviour than a random sampling of the population.
As an aside, I'm not North American and (as far as I am aware) I have no particular bias towards any given version of the story beyond a desire to leave bullshit behind in favour of the truth, whatever that may be.
For a Slashdot analogy that wasn't based on comparisons to cars, that was a damn good metaphor for the Reddit situation.
I don't think Drinkypoo was trolling. Until we account for externalities and essentially build our industries into a self-sustaining loop, we're simply burning through tomorrow. Global consumption continues to grow and as fracking demonstrates, our tools and techniques for plundering the Earth are only getting better.
So yeah, we ignore externalities until the world ends is a pretty accurate summation.
I think the idea of a One World Government is Orwellian and frightening but we do need some sort of global oversight. We can make sure our end of the swimming pool is crystal-clear (and put ourselves at a huge and necessary economic disadvantage in doing so) yet we'll still have China pissing in the pool for all its worth.
that isn't Greece's fault: it's the economic policies imposed on them.
Arduous and complex policies such as "Please spend less than you make."
Those monsters!
If anyone owes anyone anything, it's you who owe an apology to the ordinary people of Greece.
Let me guess: you'll take that apology in the form of Euro, right?
Accordingly, Europe should give Greece money by way of apology for having previously given Greece money? Where does that leave us exactly?
You better watch that sort of talk sonny, the world is awash with limitless numbers of social justice warriors ready to pounce on you for "racism". They're not interested in facts or truth and they won't consider citations nor attributed explanations in detail. Reasonable discussion would naturally interfere with them getting their hate on.
If whoever reading this comment finds themselves offended, I'd be prepared to bet that you are one of these people. Do try to remember that you have no right to not be offended.
QE, and out-and-out printing money
Perhaps a stupid question but isn't printing money synonymous with QE? Or are you meaning something else like the adding of zeros to currency stored electronically maybe? Sorry, not sure of the correct terms.
The most cogent, concise and persuasive argument on the topic I've seen, thank you sir.
Yeah, good luck with that. I'd love to see how your bunker holds up if a large asteroid, a moon, a planet, a star or a black hole hits Earth or just pulls it out of orbit.
How's life? It must be lovely being as blissfully (and clearly wilfully) ignorant as you appear to be.
What exactly are you expecting to happen to disturb an underground bunker should an asteroid hit the surface of the planet it is built into? Anything less than a direct strike is going to affect the subterranean habitat very little, assuming the bunker is up to the same standards you demand (space-based or other-body colony).
What fantasy world do you live in where rogue stars, planets and black holes cruise through other stellar systems? Have you even the faintest idea how BIG space is? More importantly, what's this fabulous plan of yours for getting us to another star system? Because if you've even the dimmest inkling of intelligence you must realise that habitats orbiting Jupiter are going to be just as thoroughly fucked by a rogue star as any underground bunker.
P.S.=> "Pats self on back"... apk
What a surprise to see this! Well, not really, self-congratulation is one thing we all agree you excel at. Bwahahhaha!
See how stalking people's posts adds to the conversation? See how it makes everything better?
Yeah, that's right - it doesn't. So put a bloody sock in it you antisocial bastard, I'm sick of seeing your childish shit scrawled all over the place.
Did you read this APK? Other people here see you for what you are. We don't post to help you - we post in the hope that you'll eventually go away and let the adults enjoy their conversation. Nothing I or anyone else say will affect your behaviour though because you're incapable of critical thought.
Prove me right by crap-flooding some more!
Go away, you idiot. You have no value beyond the production of noise and a foul smell. Face it APK, your efforts have amounted to little more than fart gas.