As an *old* white texan who voted for Reagan twice, racial bias and injustice bugs the shit out of me. I hate that our country doesn't treat people fairly. It hurts me everytime the police arrest or kill someone because they were driving or walking while black.
The man who mistook his wife for a hat and other clinical tails.
People make mistakes all the time, misidentify objects, mistake cats for dogs, toast burn patterns for faces, random market movement for predictability.
And about 1-2% of humans are *not* amazing at recognizing human facial expressions. They really suck at it in fact.
Basic thing is neural networks are still fairly small. About the size of a miniscule worm's brain.
Strong A.I. will probably be composed of swarms of weak A.I. performing subtasks.
Thing I learned recently: When your move where your eyes are looking- you are momentarily blind- and you don't even realize it.
They do this with musicians. The musician comes in behind a screen. You can only hear their music.
It helps.
To do this for interviewing you would need a voice masker.
It would also help with age discrimination (rampant and currently under lawsuit at some of these companies), lookism (i.e. you are not attractive), sexism (in both directions).
However, extreme measures are needed when the population is 50/50 and a company is at 90/10. or at 88/12 and the company is at 98/2.
It's unfortunately needed to correct for past abuse in the other direction.
Analysis of the facts isn't "uber bashing". That's just an analysis of the facts.
Identifying hidden costs, isn't "uber bashing." That just lets potential uber drivers make an informed decision.
Discussing previous times Uber broke the law, lied, or engaged in terrible behavior isn't "Uber bashing". They earned that by their actions.
Lyft may also have a terrible wage but they haven't been in the news as much for lying, cheating, and doing terrible things (not saying they don't do it- no clue- but they are not in the news for it constantly).
Uber has done wrong repeatedly- the researcher may have identified another area.
From looking at realistic videos on Youtube by several drivers- it looks like it is possible to make about $11 to $19 before taxes and before maintenance/replacement costs (but after insurance costs). But they may be 'best case' compared to the 'average uber driver experience'.
Likewise, I don't see a big difference if you are sitting reading a book at home, or in the car waiting for a fare *if* you are doing this part time for luxury cash. In that case, it's bonus cash.
On the other hand, if you are sitting in the car instead of working at a salary/hourly job, then sitting in the car without a fare counts. If you are sitting waiting for a fare as part of your job, it's part of the job (and closer to a traditional taxi driver).
How can there be a race war when I (an old white man) helps push a hispanic lady who's car stalled out of traffic into a church parking lot with the assistance of a young tattooed black man yesterday.
And we both smiled at each other and fist bumped before heading on our way. And this is in the deep south.
Be excellent to one another. That's all we need to make it.
But you can't cut hair, give a massage, practice law, perform medical procedures, and many other activities which are licensed and regulated like taxi's are.
The regulations were started by the public due to problems with people offering rides.
They may be out-dated. Or they may still be needed.
To some extent taxi companies have captured their regulatory market and charge excessive rates (and their drivers don't do particularly well either unless you define living in your car to make a living wage as doing well).
I'm saying they've lied and been a bad actor multiple times in multiple areas.
They've proven they are untrustworthy. They *earned* my distrust.
So while I want to know the truth (as I said) and I'm open to the facts, Uber starts with a presumption that this time (like all the other times) they are lying again.
I'm going to presume in your real life, that once someone lies to you several time that you finally get wary of them. That's what most people do. For some people, one serious lie is enough.
Once you violate trust, you can't unviolate it. Just like you can't be a virgin again after having intercourse.
You guys keep saying 74% but that's 2010 data. Today it is under 61% white and under 31% white male.
This is why it is becoming an issue. White males no longer have the power to suppress females and minorities.
If you keep living in delusion land, you are going to get hurt.
Is reverse discrimination fair? Not at all.
If you drop the 55% of white man who actively want to avoid discriminating and who don't pick people like themselves, you are probably down to 15% of the total population.
Your position shows you are living in a past that no longer exists.
Share of population White*: 61.3% Hispanic: 17.8% African Americans: 12.7% . Asian: 5.7% Multi-Racial: 2.6% American and Alaskan Native Indian: 1.3% Hawaiian and Pacific Islander:.2%
*(non-Hispanic or Latino population)
As a side note, whites will become a minority between 2044 and 2054 depending on whose estimate you use.
They do this with musicians. The musician comes in behind a screen. You can only hear their music.
It helps.
To do this for interviewing you would need a voice masker.
It would also help with age discrimination (rampant and currently under lawsuit at some of these companies), lookism (i.e. you are not attractive), sexism (in both directions).
However, extreme measures are needed when the population is 50/50 and a company is at 90/10. or at 88/12 and the company is at 98/2.
It's unfortunately needed to correct for past abuse in the other direction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... A year as an uber/lift driver. "It's a great part time job or second source of income but definitely not a good career choice."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... California uber driver. 6 hours a day. Facts to help you make a decision. Upselling you to his "how to become an uber driver" video on his private site.
Keep in mind that the rules are always changing so something profitable may be taken away at any time.
To be honest, at this point I wouldn't give Uber the benefit of the doubt in any discussion.
And I still want to know the truth of the matter. What do uber drivers make?
My impression has been that many are 'very bad at math' and are burning their long term asset (remaining mileage on their car) for dollars.
However-- I have frequent discussions about various things with an uber driver and while he has lots of anecdotes about his rides, he's never complained about his pay (he lives in Utah).
Train wrecks and fuel spills and similar human carelessness are why we can't ship the fuel to be reprocessed.
Pure callousness on the part of the nuclear industry is why we can't ship the fuel to be reprocessed.
The nuclear industry lied their asses off about how safe and inexpensive nuclear power would be but in reality, with actual humans running the show it was not safe and it was not inexpensive.
And after 30 years, even the concrete the reactors are built from becomes tons of radioactive waste making disposal much harder than they used to think.
I agree that in theory we could do it safely. But only in theory. We know from experience now that it's not safe.
In at least one case, my friend's electric bill increased by more than the cost of the bulb each month.
Incandescent not only puts out light- it puts out heat. Not an issue this time of year in the states but come summer- that heat increases the most expensive electricity usage due to variable pricing.
So you pay even more to light and then even more to cool down the heat they introduce.
And the light quality is finally good as of a few years ago.
I have 20-30 in my house. They use the energy of 3 incandescent bulbs.
I haven't had one go bad yet. Tho I have rolled 4 out of use because they were so bad compared to current bulbs (I had a "20" watt that probably put out about 150 lumens. lol)
Aye, they are not economical nor are they safe, nor are they really proven on the scale needed. Plus they produce nuclear fuel so they'll need super high security (maybe put them in the middle of a u.s. military base.
Wow! And Japan had never experienced a nuclear meltdown prior to 2011.
Brilliant logic there man.
You might want to look into "Black Swans".
You may not of heard but California has natural disasters...
You appear to have the same problem as many people. Low risk is not NO risk.
So you have to look at two factors: What's the risk of a nuclear meltdown (say currently about 1% (449 reactors-- 5 of them have had severe problems.) (but keep in mind that there have been 52 smaller accidents at nuclear plants).
And how bad is an accident? Currently 4/5 polluted hundreds of square miles of land for generations and 1/5 (3 mile) were not too bad (close... but didn't turn out bad). 3/5 polluted thousands of square miles of ocean.
It's not NIMBY when something 100 miles away can destroy all your property and put you in temporary housing for years. You just have to ask your self-- do you feel lucky? Will the wind be blowing towards you on that particular day?
---
Your statement about California not having a meltdown seems so bad, I wonder if you are not really anti-nuclear.
---
Couple other points... No place to store nuclear waste. Decomissioning costs are running *hundreds of millions* of dollars higher than estimated (for example $39 original estimate vs 640 million (+8 million a year "forever" to store the waste) for one plant under decomissioning now. And does the unexpected cost come out of corporate and executive pockets? Nope-- all the extra costs are being added to current electric bills. So consumers 30 years ago got cheap electricity, the companies made money, the executives made money-- and today's public gets to pay for it all.
Look up a book written in the 70s called "limits to growth". It's available free in various places. Followups show we are fairly close to the original projections. Also note, limits to elemental consumption are based on estimates of the total material available in the crust- not based on production so if anything they are optimistic.
We have a possibility to approach a limit to fast growth asymptotically but the more likely case right now is that we will over shoot which could (I think is likely) cause a crisis and a sharp decline. I think the crisis will be violent.
See the side conversation with me where he goes from 7000sq foot multi million dollar houses to attacking people in $220k houses (and now $150k houses).
Here's a tip! If have have a roof over your head, you are in the top 1%! and so on.
Yes, some people have 75" TV's. Some people have a new computer every year. And some people have nice cars. (for me it was computers and board games and skiing).
And some people wander into discussions about expensive stuff and just make completely bizarre comments that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.
Televisions were once comparably expensive. So were solar panels. If electric cars drop as much as solar panels have in the last 20 years, they'll cost about $1,500 in inflation adjusted dollars in 20 years.
If you'd take your meds and try some of the perfectly tasty decaffeinated brands on the market, you might realize that we are in agreement on many points.
But you made a statement (7000sq ft houses) and I responded to it.
Between you and me, I think there will be a tremendous overshoot and mass die off in the next 50 years, probably the next 40. The long term carrying capacity of the planet is only about 2-3 billion (and that's with some key inventions replacing the need for chromium, manganese, magnesium, and a half dozen other metals and rare earths). Usage is increasing geometrically and we used more in 2001 than we used from 1999 to 2000 for some of those metals.
It's going to be ugly and hopefully I'll be dead before it hits.
But in the mean time, I mostly ignore that in inane conversations like this.
There is literally nothing you or I can do that will stop it. At this point, it's too late for *anyone* to stop it.
Slashdot Mirror
Now that's interesting lateral thinking.
yea, it was quite funny and it made me smile.
Do they also deny the sheep employment, housing, access to credit?
---
Seriously- they trained A.I. on actual cases and the A.I. gave much harsher sentences for the same crime to blacks.
https://www.propublica.org/art...
Because that's what decades of human judges have been doing.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/1...
As an *old* white texan who voted for Reagan twice, racial bias and injustice bugs the shit out of me. I hate that our country doesn't treat people fairly. It hurts me everytime the police arrest or kill someone because they were driving or walking while black.
We should be better.
We can be better.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00B...
The man who mistook his wife for a hat and other clinical tails.
People make mistakes all the time, misidentify objects, mistake cats for dogs, toast burn patterns for faces, random market movement for predictability.
And about 1-2% of humans are *not* amazing at recognizing human facial expressions. They really suck at it in fact.
Basic thing is neural networks are still fairly small. About the size of a miniscule worm's brain.
Strong A.I. will probably be composed of swarms of weak A.I. performing subtasks.
Thing I learned recently: When your move where your eyes are looking- you are momentarily blind- and you don't even realize it.
You should know that humans have been known to identify their spouses as a hat.
They've also denied that their left arm is their left arm.
These are people who are other wise sane and normal.
They just have one tiny part of the brain which isn't functioning correctly.
And they can't self-check to correct their error.
They do this with musicians. The musician comes in behind a screen. You can only hear their music.
It helps.
To do this for interviewing you would need a voice masker.
It would also help with age discrimination (rampant and currently under lawsuit at some of these companies), lookism (i.e. you are not attractive), sexism (in both directions).
However, extreme measures are needed when the population is 50/50 and a company is at 90/10. or at 88/12 and the company is at 98/2.
It's unfortunately needed to correct for past abuse in the other direction.
Analysis of the facts isn't "uber bashing". That's just an analysis of the facts.
Identifying hidden costs, isn't "uber bashing." That just lets potential uber drivers make an informed decision.
Discussing previous times Uber broke the law, lied, or engaged in terrible behavior isn't "Uber bashing". They earned that by their actions.
Lyft may also have a terrible wage but they haven't been in the news as much for lying, cheating, and doing terrible things (not saying they don't do it- no clue- but they are not in the news for it constantly).
Uber has done wrong repeatedly- the researcher may have identified another area.
From looking at realistic videos on Youtube by several drivers- it looks like it is possible to make about $11 to $19 before taxes and before maintenance/replacement costs (but after insurance costs). But they may be 'best case' compared to the 'average uber driver experience'.
Likewise, I don't see a big difference if you are sitting reading a book at home, or in the car waiting for a fare *if* you are doing this part time for luxury cash. In that case, it's bonus cash.
On the other hand, if you are sitting in the car instead of working at a salary/hourly job, then sitting in the car without a fare counts. If you are sitting waiting for a fare as part of your job, it's part of the job (and closer to a traditional taxi driver).
It is true according to the u.s. government.
How can there be a race war when I (an old white man) helps push a hispanic lady who's car stalled out of traffic into a church parking lot with the assistance of a young tattooed black man yesterday.
And we both smiled at each other and fist bumped before heading on our way. And this is in the deep south.
Be excellent to one another. That's all we need to make it.
That's legal.
But you can't cut hair, give a massage, practice law, perform medical procedures, and many other activities which are licensed and regulated like taxi's are.
The regulations were started by the public due to problems with people offering rides.
They may be out-dated. Or they may still be needed.
To some extent taxi companies have captured their regulatory market and charge excessive rates (and their drivers don't do particularly well either unless you define living in your car to make a living wage as doing well).
Not at all.
I'm saying they've lied and been a bad actor multiple times in multiple areas.
They've proven they are untrustworthy. They *earned* my distrust.
So while I want to know the truth (as I said) and I'm open to the facts, Uber starts with a presumption that this time (like all the other times) they are lying again.
I'm going to presume in your real life, that once someone lies to you several time that you finally get wary of them. That's what most people do. For some people, one serious lie is enough.
Once you violate trust, you can't unviolate it. Just like you can't be a virgin again after having intercourse.
A companies credibility and honesty has bearing on anything they say after they lost their credibility by being caught lying repeatedly.
The same is true for people.
Since they've lied before, it's more likely they are lying now when disputing the method used.
So yea... it's relevant. And it's why you don't want to ruin your reputation.
It still matters to some of us out here.
You guys keep saying 74% but that's 2010 data. Today it is under 61% white and under 31% white male.
This is why it is becoming an issue. White males no longer have the power to suppress females and minorities.
If you keep living in delusion land, you are going to get hurt.
Is reverse discrimination fair? Not at all.
If you drop the 55% of white man who actively want to avoid discriminating and who don't pick people like themselves, you are probably down to 15% of the total population.
Your position shows you are living in a past that no longer exists.
You appear to be referring to 2010 census figures.
Population estimates, July 1, 2016, (V2016)
https://www.census.gov/quickfa...
Share of population .2%
White*: 61.3%
Hispanic: 17.8%
African Americans: 12.7% .
Asian: 5.7%
Multi-Racial: 2.6%
American and Alaskan Native Indian: 1.3%
Hawaiian and Pacific Islander:
*(non-Hispanic or Latino population)
As a side note, whites will become a minority between 2044 and 2054 depending on whose estimate you use.
They do this with musicians. The musician comes in behind a screen. You can only hear their music.
It helps.
To do this for interviewing you would need a voice masker.
It would also help with age discrimination (rampant and currently under lawsuit at some of these companies), lookism (i.e. you are not attractive), sexism (in both directions).
However, extreme measures are needed when the population is 50/50 and a company is at 90/10. or at 88/12 and the company is at 98/2.
It's unfortunately needed to correct for past abuse in the other direction.
Some videos on pay as an uber driver
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
$11 to $19/hour
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
A year as an uber/lift driver. "It's a great part time job or second source of income but definitely not a good career choice."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
California uber driver. 6 hours a day. Facts to help you make a decision. Upselling you to his "how to become an uber driver" video on his private site.
Keep in mind that the rules are always changing so something profitable may be taken away at any time.
To be honest, at this point I wouldn't give Uber the benefit of the doubt in any discussion.
And I still want to know the truth of the matter. What do uber drivers make?
My impression has been that many are 'very bad at math' and are burning their long term asset (remaining mileage on their car) for dollars.
However-- I have frequent discussions about various things with an uber driver and while he has lots of anecdotes about his rides, he's never complained about his pay (he lives in Utah).
I don't think it's always insightful.
Sometimes, it's informative. Othertimes it's underrated. Occasionally it's funny.
No.
Train wrecks and fuel spills and similar human carelessness are why we can't ship the fuel to be reprocessed.
Pure callousness on the part of the nuclear industry is why we can't ship the fuel to be reprocessed.
The nuclear industry lied their asses off about how safe and inexpensive nuclear power would be but in reality, with actual humans running the show it was not safe and it was not inexpensive.
And after 30 years, even the concrete the reactors are built from becomes tons of radioactive waste making disposal much harder than they used to think.
I agree that in theory we could do it safely. But only in theory. We know from experience now that it's not safe.
LED bulbs are down to $2 now in my area.
In at least one case, my friend's electric bill increased by more than the cost of the bulb each month.
Incandescent not only puts out light- it puts out heat. Not an issue this time of year in the states but come summer- that heat increases the most expensive electricity usage due to variable pricing.
So you pay even more to light and then even more to cool down the heat they introduce.
These have been huge for me.
And they are so cheap now.
And the light quality is finally good as of a few years ago.
I have 20-30 in my house. They use the energy of 3 incandescent bulbs.
I haven't had one go bad yet. Tho I have rolled 4 out of use because they were so bad compared to current bulbs (I had a "20" watt that probably put out about 150 lumens. lol)
Aye, they are not economical nor are they safe, nor are they really proven on the scale needed. Plus they produce nuclear fuel so they'll need super high security (maybe put them in the middle of a u.s. military base.
Wow! And Japan had never experienced a nuclear meltdown prior to 2011.
Brilliant logic there man.
You might want to look into "Black Swans".
You may not of heard but California has natural disasters...
You appear to have the same problem as many people. Low risk is not NO risk.
So you have to look at two factors:
What's the risk of a nuclear meltdown (say currently about 1% (449 reactors-- 5 of them have had severe problems.) (but keep in mind that there have been 52 smaller accidents at nuclear plants).
And how bad is an accident? Currently 4/5 polluted hundreds of square miles of land for generations and 1/5 (3 mile) were not too bad (close... but didn't turn out bad). 3/5 polluted thousands of square miles of ocean.
It's not NIMBY when something 100 miles away can destroy all your property and put you in temporary housing for years. You just have to ask your self-- do you feel lucky? Will the wind be blowing towards you on that particular day?
---
Your statement about California not having a meltdown seems so bad, I wonder if you are not really anti-nuclear.
---
Couple other points...
No place to store nuclear waste.
Decomissioning costs are running *hundreds of millions* of dollars higher than estimated (for example $39 original estimate vs 640 million (+8 million a year "forever" to store the waste) for one plant under decomissioning now. And does the unexpected cost come out of corporate and executive pockets? Nope-- all the extra costs are being added to current electric bills. So consumers 30 years ago got cheap electricity, the companies made money, the executives made money-- and today's public gets to pay for it all.
Look up a book written in the 70s called "limits to growth". It's available free in various places. Followups show we are fairly close to the original projections. Also note, limits to elemental consumption are based on estimates of the total material available in the crust- not based on production so if anything they are optimistic.
We have a possibility to approach a limit to fast growth asymptotically but the more likely case right now is that we will over shoot which could (I think is likely) cause a crisis and a sharp decline. I think the crisis will be violent.
See the side conversation with me where he goes from 7000sq foot multi million dollar houses to attacking people in $220k houses (and now $150k houses).
Here's a tip! If have have a roof over your head, you are in the top 1%! and so on.
Yes, some people have 75" TV's. Some people have a new computer every year. And some people have nice cars. (for me it was computers and board games and skiing).
And some people wander into discussions about expensive stuff and just make completely bizarre comments that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.
Lol.
Televisions were once comparably expensive. So were solar panels. If electric cars drop as much as solar panels have in the last 20 years, they'll cost about $1,500 in inflation adjusted dollars in 20 years.
If you'd take your meds and try some of the perfectly tasty decaffeinated brands on the market, you might realize that we are in agreement on many points.
But you made a statement (7000sq ft houses) and I responded to it.
Between you and me, I think there will be a tremendous overshoot and mass die off in the next 50 years, probably the next 40. The long term carrying capacity of the planet is only about 2-3 billion (and that's with some key inventions replacing the need for chromium, manganese, magnesium, and a half dozen other metals and rare earths). Usage is increasing geometrically and we used more in 2001 than we used from 1999 to 2000 for some of those metals.
It's going to be ugly and hopefully I'll be dead before it hits.
But in the mean time, I mostly ignore that in inane conversations like this.
There is literally nothing you or I can do that will stop it. At this point, it's too late for *anyone* to stop it.