To be precise, you borrow shares, and then you sell them.
Legal, sure, but fraudulent nonetheless
That makes no sense. Fraud is illegal. You can't have legal fraud, and you can't just redefine well established worse.
And there's no problem with short selling. It provides liquidity, and it can be very helpful in a panic sell, because short sellers may be the only ones buying at such at time, and they can stabilize the stock prize.
True, the line between shorting and fraud is the spreading of false rumors about the underlying company and that's almost never prosecuted. And this drives most folks crazy. If this was enforced and prosecuted more often (its already illegal), there would probably be a lot less complaints about shorting.
It does get a bit hinky when a broker loans you one of his client's shares without their knowledge in order to set up your short position.
It cuts as close to fraud as you can get without actually breaking the law.
Its a common practice which everyone expects. Also, if you want to prevent your shares from being loaned out to shorts, just place a LMT order at a huge profit and they can't be loaned out to shorts when those LMT orders are open. This does require you to replace the order every 6 months but that can be automated.
Market makers assume risk, but they choose to assume risk, they can cover as easily as anyone.
Out of the money put options. Limited risk, unlimited upside. Market knowledge can be extracted from the option premiums (the price paid upfront) if thickly traded.
That's true but also you need to pay a much higher premium to keep the position open. When shorting, you pay a small amount of interest to keep the position open. When buying PUT options, you must rebuy the PUT options the next period to keep the "bet" open which is far more expensive than the interest on the short. So short vs PUT is about the time horizon on the "bet" you are placing and options are NOT automatically better.
Nope. I would never short TSLA. People are too irrational. Most people who own TSLA don't even know who the largest EV manufacturers are.
And most of the people short on TSLA don't even know who the largest battery manufacturers are (for the types of batteries in EVs and large storage its Tesla). Oh, and the world's largest EV manufacturer is Tesla followed by GM and BMW (plus a couple of Chinese companies). But thanks for playing.
Bzzzt. Wrong. That would be India. Thanks for playing.
Also Brazil has fewer people than the US so its not even the second biggest democracy. Of course, technically the US isn't even the second biggest democracy, that would be Russia but if they count as a democracy is a matter of opinion.
The idea is the computer system knows the numbers and that gets reported nearly instantly when the election is over and then scrutineers check the paper ballots to verify it matches the info that the computer sent out. That sort of system would be very handy for preferential voting.
I expect a secure electronic voting system is impossible but I would love to see it because like most automation, it could eliminate an entire class of useless middlemen - namely politicians.
Scantron paper ballots have done this for a long, long time. Then poll workers call in the results (but this could be done via an app I guess). e-voting has no benefits over paper ballot other than the ability to hack an entire election at once with no audit trail. If these voting systems were highly secure and added something to the election somehow then I would support them, but the simple fact is, they don't.
The exact quote is: "Despite our production difficulties, all parts of the Model 3 production system have demonstrated a 500 car per day capability, or, a 3500 car per week capability, and we just did a big set of upgrades and are spooling up the production lines again. I think it's quite likely that we will achieve a 5000 cars a week by the end of the month."
This was with 2 GA lines (the biggest bottleneck). They just built a third.
I don't think there's any malice in the Bloomberg tracker. I think it's just hindered by too long of an averaging period on their algorithm. It averages in planned line downtimes in with line production rates, which you don't want.
Its also hindered by the fact its only counting US deliveries. For reasons having to do with preserving the tax credits for more customers, Tesla has only been delivering cars to Canada and foreign markets (left side steering only) lately. This has basically hidden the real model 3 production numbers for the last couple of weeks and those numbers won't become accurate again till sometime in mid-July. Until then, we are all just guessing.
Take salt shakers of restaurant tables;
Limit soft drink sizes;
And push for anti-gun laws.
You're right, Bloomberg is a raging conservative.
Its a greed thing. Tesla is the most shorted stock in history. $12 billion is bet against Tesla. Most of those positions were initiated a few weeks/months ago when TSLA was trading in a range between $280-305. Recently the price rose to $325 (closed at ~318 today I think) and many short positions were stopped out and a brief short squeeze happened but many traders re-entered new shorts at higher entry prices and defended against a total rout (for now). If the price pops again (because Elon tweets that 5000 model 3s were produced that week), those shorts are fucked and several billion dollars will be lost by hedge funds (and gained by those, like me, long on Tesla). This is the battle being carried out right now. Its mostly retail investors in CA taking on the hedge funds in Conn and NY and the retail side is winning big right now (which rarely happens). If too much more good news comes out about Tesla, it will be all over and those shorts will be squeezed entirely out of the stock (by their risk managers). This might be an effect of our current political divisions, but its entirely outside of politics and an interesting case of the market deciding something against some very big moneyed interests. Its the rare case where the "masses" have more money than a few billionaires and are bullying them around. Its also the rare case where engineering knowledge is far more valuable than accounting knowledge in the pricing of a stock.
Amazon stands on top of its market, regardless if EV and self driving cars take off Tesla will only have a small part of the pie... Amazon's money was better spent.
Keep telling yourself that. Where are all those batteries for those other car companies EVs coming from again? You can't just put a bunch of laptop batteries into an EV and sell them for a profit (anymore). You need to use a type of battery cell with a cost below a certain price point (about $150 per Kwh I believe) and nobody else currently is doing that. Hell, there aren't even plans to make a non-Tesla factory to build such batteries. Telsa will have at least a 5 year head start on the rest of the car companies and by that time, it will already be over. GM loses money on every Volt and Bolt sold and that won't change unless they start making their own batteries at scale. GM makes a small number of EV batteries at very high cost currently and GM has no current plans to scale up to the point where they can make those cars economically.
Also, you are betting that people want to buy cars from car dealerships (really, never bought a new car have you).
Finally, you are betting that car companies will entirely change their basic culture and start making EVs. Go to any car company's HQ and talk to the employees and the real problem will come into view. These folks simply don't want to change. And by the time they figure out how completely fucked they are, it will be entirely too late. It happened with every other type of business when a new business model becomes viable. The old guard gets crushed. It happened with Walmart vs Amazon. It happened with MS vs Google. It happened dozens of times before that in many industries including many industrial businesses. It will happen again, its one of the few patterns in life that happens with such high certainty.
You really think the US govt is going to pass military savings back to the public? I doubt the oligarchy would allow that.
That's true, if by that you mean direct payment from conquered countries as tribute to American citizens. But in the modern world in which we live, its 100% false.
That gas you buy is 1/4 the price it would be in the EU. Why? Because of the Petrodollar. That same fact also makes sure that foreign currencies are usually depreciating against the dollar which allows you to buy from foreign companies very cheaply (while depressing their ability to buy foreign goods themselves). This allows the US to run huge deficits without any real consequences and allows more Americans to live with a much higher and more consistent standard of living. This fact also allows cheap transportation of goods to your town (even if you are in a remote place). Also, it keeps the dollar stable which probably isn't a big deal to you but ask someone from Venezuela if they want a stable currency or not.
Really, its just that Americans (me too) just don't realize all the benefits we get from our military dominance mainly because most of us have never known anything else. But live abroad and your eyes will open quickly as to what those advantages are and how much they really matter to politics and financial markets.
Every company handling personal data about EU citizens that is in reach of EU law enforcement has to comply.
Yea, but banking is increasingly an international industry and such provisions are enforced by putting the onus on the banks to ensure their customers comply or risk access to EU markets. So I'm sure that unless every bank with which you do business is entirely inside the US and the EU doesn't somehow force the US-only banks to comply, your company's money can be claimed/fined by an EU court. Which is the problem. The US uses the same mechanism to enforce sanctions on Iran and N. Korea. The EU is going to try to use this mechanism to enforce GDPR and we'll see if it works (I'm betting it does, bankers don't stand up for principles).
It doesn't have to make sense. Erdogan is a despot who at this point can pretty much do what he wants. And he is a populist pur sang... banning a disruptive foreign company fits exceedingly well in his playbook, whatever the actual rights and wrongs of the matter are.
Sort of, but Turkey is a large country and still subject to the international markets. And when he says things about being against interest rates and taking control of the central bank, there are consequences. Turkey's currency is crashing (similar to what Obama did to Russia in 2014 but self inflicted) and this will cause significant issues with their ability to finance large projects and importing foreign goods becomes much more expensive. And considering food is one of the things Turkey imports in large amounts, this is a big problem. Its just that Erdogan doesn't seem to know this so he's just gone power mad and started just making proclamations that seem like they will have consequences in the near future for him and Turkey.
I hear politicians talk about how "military grade" weapons should remain only on the battlefield. Well, then let's do that. That means the police should not carry AR-15 rifles, semi-automatic shotguns, or "sniper" rifles. I took a computer security class from a gentleman that was a Marine scout/sniper prior to his semi-retirement as a security consultant. After class one day we chatted for a bit and I asked what kind of weapon he used as a sniper. He said a Remington Model 700. The Remington Model 700 is a bolt action rifle available at most any sporting goods store for less than a kilobuck, and that includes the scope. If "military grade" weapons belong on the battlefield then we should not be arming our police with "military grade" weapons like a bolt action rifle. The police should not have battlefield weapons like the Beretta M9, a semi-automatic pistol chambered in the 9mm (a caliber developed in 1902).
If "military grade" means a GMC 3500 with green paint and aftermarket shocks, a cheap bolt action rifle, and a pistol that was "high tech" a century ago, then what is left? Can I get a pump action shotgun? Nope, that's the M870. Even a $300 shotgun is off limits if we can't have "military grade" anything.
In fairness, there is something called mil spec. That comes from the DOD and is a set of specifications that products must meet to be sold to the military. Its public and consumer products can meet those specs which should mean "military grade" but how well that's enforced in the market, I couldn't say. I wouldn't be surprised if very few products with the "military grade" label actually pass mil spec. But some do and unless there is a law preventing a specific technology from being sold to the public (in the past, dual receiver GPS comes to mind) you can buy something that meets the same specs as the military gear. Might not actually be the same stuff or even as good but that's what the term is supposed to mean.
And the ones in their 70s care about accumulating power, giving jobs to their kids and playing golf.
I can't say I know a lot of 70 year olds in that group. Many I've seen can barely afford a "pot to piss in" and are abandoned in nursing homes or poor living conditions with neglected healthcare because they're not considered useful anymore. Some are doing OK. Many are responsible for the wealth inequality gap that we continue to accept as a society which we can change during a single election period but fail to do so because were sparse and disorganized as a group
The OP was describing Trump...and now that I've explained the joke, its no longer funny.
Is the game mocking mass shootings, or glorifying them, or something in between?
Whatever it's doing, it sure looks clumsy and tasteless from here.
I suspect it's the product of some naive, young, male programmers, who have spent too much time alone, dealing with other people only as vague online constructs, and thus never developed much empathy or understanding regarding how their words and actions can affect other people. When everything and everyone is nothing more than pixels on a screen, nothing matters, so why not make a game about mass shootings?
Either that, or they are masters of the Streisand effect.
The politically driven process is inherently more expensive. Simply because the most efficient and cheapest way to conduct business is usually not the chosen path.
Where are all the lefty slashdotters who should be jumping in to point out that government is inherently more efficient than private enterprise because it doesn't have to add a profit margin to its costs?
They are in a health care thread where that's actually true. Its also true that without the space race (a government/political event), private industry would likely be nowhere with space tech. But industries mature and require different amounts of regulation and guidelines at different points. Its almost as if being ideological about such points ensures that you are wrong part of the time, but that can't be it...
The 1st Amendment says NOTHING about "citizenship". [...] Where in the phrase "no law" does it say that laws abridging the freedom of speech of non-citizens are permitted?
As with most contracts, it comes back to how you define your terms. The Constitution starts with "We the People of the United States", which some have argued implicitly defines "people" as "citizens of the United States". Following that train of thought, all succeeding clauses and amendments would then be interpreted through that same lens, suggesting that the First Amendment's protections may not apply to non-citizens.
Mind you, I don't agree with that line of reasoning, but you asked, so there it is.
The courts would say that the constitution protects non-citizens in many cases and there is quite a bit of precedent going back 130 years that this is the case. Tends to be much more hit and miss than for citizens but still not a principle of US law. For example: https://www.oyez.org/cases/185...
non citizenry would also grant non citizens to form armed militias within the US under the 2nd amendment.
My bunkmate in Marine bootcamp was a citizen of the Philippines. Citizenship has never been a precondition to serving in the armed forces, nor to own a gun.
My GFs father joined the US Army while he was a citizen of the Philippines and only many years later became a US citizen.
To give a simple example, a child runs out from between parked cars and is hit by a car. In most cases, the driver of the car will not be held legally responsible. He may feel PERSONALLY responsible however, and a normal human will wish to avoid those feelings, and certainly any normal human wishes to avoid injuring another. So how does a human driver avoid such incidents? Subconsciously, by using his experience: did a ball just roll into the road - a child may be following. Is there someone in the yard frantically waving their arms and maybe yelling? Is there a child on the side of the road beckoning for someone to cross?
You are making this entirely too metaphysical. I'm pretty sure every time there is an accident, the data is released. I'm also sure that the data from those accidents is shared so to be included as negative examples in the training set for AVs. ML algos are trained the same way as people, with experience. But in this case we can include (and amplify) the data from accidents into every AV's training data.
Your example about the ball rolling into the road can be handled and in fact has a funny side-effect. People have figured out that if they run at and wave their hands to a Google AV, it will stop for the exact reason you sited. Its expecting a child to run into the road and it doesn't want to hit it. But in this case its a false alarm which is super annoying for the developers as including these "incidents" in the training set could be dangerous but if they don't the AV will stop every time someone runs at the car and waves their handles as if they are chasing a child chasing a ball.
Hint: Google has been working on their self-driving-car tech since 2009.
Hint: the research upon which Google built their car was started in the late 80s at CMU. It successfully drove across the country (USA) in '94. What is your point? Its AI (really ML) which by definition will have an error rate, but so do humans. The real question is how do those rates compare for each system to some human level error rate (probably for a professional driver). And that's what we don't know (but probably the teams working on these systems do).
You "understand" the Tesla accidents because you are a fanboy of Tesla. There is no excuse for Teslas accidents either, except for the fact that is is mis-marketed as "Autopilot" and is still a developing technology. It should be called "driver assist" or something similar, which is what other manufacturers do.
And you only say that because you hate Tesla. Actually, calling it Autopilot was 100% accurate as in its the same features and abilities as an older plane's autopilot feature. Its just that the general public wouldn't make the distinction between that (Level 2) and a self-driving (Level 5) car. Tesla kinda probably should have known that but since it causes people to talk about their car more they let it go. Even better if they can create some sort of Streisand effect to get even more publicity especially since I'm sure the AP feature contains a big legal disclaimer about it being Level 2 and experimental. But since you probably have never even seen a Tesla you couldn't know that which just feeds the cycle of Trolling.
Slashdot Mirror
you're selling something you do not own,
To be precise, you borrow shares, and then you sell them.
Legal, sure, but fraudulent nonetheless
That makes no sense. Fraud is illegal. You can't have legal fraud, and you can't just redefine well established worse.
And there's no problem with short selling. It provides liquidity, and it can be very helpful in a panic sell, because short sellers may be the only ones buying at such at time, and they can stabilize the stock prize.
True, the line between shorting and fraud is the spreading of false rumors about the underlying company and that's almost never prosecuted. And this drives most folks crazy. If this was enforced and prosecuted more often (its already illegal), there would probably be a lot less complaints about shorting.
It does get a bit hinky when a broker loans you one of his client's shares without their knowledge in order to set up your short position.
It cuts as close to fraud as you can get without actually breaking the law.
Its a common practice which everyone expects. Also, if you want to prevent your shares from being loaned out to shorts, just place a LMT order at a huge profit and they can't be loaned out to shorts when those LMT orders are open. This does require you to replace the order every 6 months but that can be automated.
Nice theory, now look up 'naked short'.
Market makers assume risk, but they choose to assume risk, they can cover as easily as anyone.
Out of the money put options. Limited risk, unlimited upside. Market knowledge can be extracted from the option premiums (the price paid upfront) if thickly traded.
That's true but also you need to pay a much higher premium to keep the position open. When shorting, you pay a small amount of interest to keep the position open. When buying PUT options, you must rebuy the PUT options the next period to keep the "bet" open which is far more expensive than the interest on the short. So short vs PUT is about the time horizon on the "bet" you are placing and options are NOT automatically better.
Nope. I would never short TSLA. People are too irrational. Most people who own TSLA don't even know who the largest EV manufacturers are.
And most of the people short on TSLA don't even know who the largest battery manufacturers are (for the types of batteries in EVs and large storage its Tesla). Oh, and the world's largest EV manufacturer is Tesla followed by GM and BMW (plus a couple of Chinese companies). But thanks for playing.
I leave it as an exercise to decide whether the knave or the fool ascended to the WH in 2016.
It was the fool. Now what do I win?
Brazil is the biggest democracy in the world
Bzzzt. Wrong. That would be India. Thanks for playing.
Also Brazil has fewer people than the US so its not even the second biggest democracy. Of course, technically the US isn't even the second biggest democracy, that would be Russia but if they count as a democracy is a matter of opinion.
The idea is the computer system knows the numbers and that gets reported nearly instantly when the election is over and then scrutineers check the paper ballots to verify it matches the info that the computer sent out. That sort of system would be very handy for preferential voting.
I expect a secure electronic voting system is impossible but I would love to see it because like most automation, it could eliminate an entire class of useless middlemen - namely politicians.
Scantron paper ballots have done this for a long, long time. Then poll workers call in the results (but this could be done via an app I guess). e-voting has no benefits over paper ballot other than the ability to hack an entire election at once with no audit trail. If these voting systems were highly secure and added something to the election somehow then I would support them, but the simple fact is, they don't.
The exact quote is: "Despite our production difficulties, all parts of the Model 3 production system have demonstrated a 500 car per day capability, or, a 3500 car per week capability, and we just did a big set of upgrades and are spooling up the production lines again. I think it's quite likely that we will achieve a 5000 cars a week by the end of the month."
This was with 2 GA lines (the biggest bottleneck). They just built a third.
I don't think there's any malice in the Bloomberg tracker. I think it's just hindered by too long of an averaging period on their algorithm. It averages in planned line downtimes in with line production rates, which you don't want.
Its also hindered by the fact its only counting US deliveries. For reasons having to do with preserving the tax credits for more customers, Tesla has only been delivering cars to Canada and foreign markets (left side steering only) lately. This has basically hidden the real model 3 production numbers for the last couple of weeks and those numbers won't become accurate again till sometime in mid-July. Until then, we are all just guessing.
Right, it's a republican thing to:
Take salt shakers of restaurant tables; Limit soft drink sizes; And push for anti-gun laws.
You're right, Bloomberg is a raging conservative.
Its a greed thing. Tesla is the most shorted stock in history. $12 billion is bet against Tesla. Most of those positions were initiated a few weeks/months ago when TSLA was trading in a range between $280-305. Recently the price rose to $325 (closed at ~318 today I think) and many short positions were stopped out and a brief short squeeze happened but many traders re-entered new shorts at higher entry prices and defended against a total rout (for now). If the price pops again (because Elon tweets that 5000 model 3s were produced that week), those shorts are fucked and several billion dollars will be lost by hedge funds (and gained by those, like me, long on Tesla). This is the battle being carried out right now. Its mostly retail investors in CA taking on the hedge funds in Conn and NY and the retail side is winning big right now (which rarely happens). If too much more good news comes out about Tesla, it will be all over and those shorts will be squeezed entirely out of the stock (by their risk managers). This might be an effect of our current political divisions, but its entirely outside of politics and an interesting case of the market deciding something against some very big moneyed interests. Its the rare case where the "masses" have more money than a few billionaires and are bullying them around. Its also the rare case where engineering knowledge is far more valuable than accounting knowledge in the pricing of a stock.
Amazon stands on top of its market, regardless if EV and self driving cars take off Tesla will only have a small part of the pie ... Amazon's money was better spent.
Keep telling yourself that. Where are all those batteries for those other car companies EVs coming from again? You can't just put a bunch of laptop batteries into an EV and sell them for a profit (anymore). You need to use a type of battery cell with a cost below a certain price point (about $150 per Kwh I believe) and nobody else currently is doing that. Hell, there aren't even plans to make a non-Tesla factory to build such batteries. Telsa will have at least a 5 year head start on the rest of the car companies and by that time, it will already be over. GM loses money on every Volt and Bolt sold and that won't change unless they start making their own batteries at scale. GM makes a small number of EV batteries at very high cost currently and GM has no current plans to scale up to the point where they can make those cars economically.
Also, you are betting that people want to buy cars from car dealerships (really, never bought a new car have you).
Finally, you are betting that car companies will entirely change their basic culture and start making EVs. Go to any car company's HQ and talk to the employees and the real problem will come into view. These folks simply don't want to change. And by the time they figure out how completely fucked they are, it will be entirely too late. It happened with every other type of business when a new business model becomes viable. The old guard gets crushed. It happened with Walmart vs Amazon. It happened with MS vs Google. It happened dozens of times before that in many industries including many industrial businesses. It will happen again, its one of the few patterns in life that happens with such high certainty.
You really think the US govt is going to pass military savings back to the public? I doubt the oligarchy would allow that.
That's true, if by that you mean direct payment from conquered countries as tribute to American citizens. But in the modern world in which we live, its 100% false.
That gas you buy is 1/4 the price it would be in the EU. Why? Because of the Petrodollar. That same fact also makes sure that foreign currencies are usually depreciating against the dollar which allows you to buy from foreign companies very cheaply (while depressing their ability to buy foreign goods themselves). This allows the US to run huge deficits without any real consequences and allows more Americans to live with a much higher and more consistent standard of living. This fact also allows cheap transportation of goods to your town (even if you are in a remote place). Also, it keeps the dollar stable which probably isn't a big deal to you but ask someone from Venezuela if they want a stable currency or not.
Really, its just that Americans (me too) just don't realize all the benefits we get from our military dominance mainly because most of us have never known anything else. But live abroad and your eyes will open quickly as to what those advantages are and how much they really matter to politics and financial markets.
You missing an important part.
Every company handling personal data about EU citizens that is in reach of EU law enforcement has to comply.
Yea, but banking is increasingly an international industry and such provisions are enforced by putting the onus on the banks to ensure their customers comply or risk access to EU markets. So I'm sure that unless every bank with which you do business is entirely inside the US and the EU doesn't somehow force the US-only banks to comply, your company's money can be claimed/fined by an EU court. Which is the problem. The US uses the same mechanism to enforce sanctions on Iran and N. Korea. The EU is going to try to use this mechanism to enforce GDPR and we'll see if it works (I'm betting it does, bankers don't stand up for principles).
It doesn't have to make sense. Erdogan is a despot who at this point can pretty much do what he wants. And he is a populist pur sang... banning a disruptive foreign company fits exceedingly well in his playbook, whatever the actual rights and wrongs of the matter are.
Sort of, but Turkey is a large country and still subject to the international markets. And when he says things about being against interest rates and taking control of the central bank, there are consequences. Turkey's currency is crashing (similar to what Obama did to Russia in 2014 but self inflicted) and this will cause significant issues with their ability to finance large projects and importing foreign goods becomes much more expensive. And considering food is one of the things Turkey imports in large amounts, this is a big problem. Its just that Erdogan doesn't seem to know this so he's just gone power mad and started just making proclamations that seem like they will have consequences in the near future for him and Turkey.
But not for long. We might be able to get him in for reelection in 2020. But most of us are still banking on Hillary.
The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
I hear politicians talk about how "military grade" weapons should remain only on the battlefield. Well, then let's do that. That means the police should not carry AR-15 rifles, semi-automatic shotguns, or "sniper" rifles. I took a computer security class from a gentleman that was a Marine scout/sniper prior to his semi-retirement as a security consultant. After class one day we chatted for a bit and I asked what kind of weapon he used as a sniper. He said a Remington Model 700. The Remington Model 700 is a bolt action rifle available at most any sporting goods store for less than a kilobuck, and that includes the scope. If "military grade" weapons belong on the battlefield then we should not be arming our police with "military grade" weapons like a bolt action rifle. The police should not have battlefield weapons like the Beretta M9, a semi-automatic pistol chambered in the 9mm (a caliber developed in 1902).
If "military grade" means a GMC 3500 with green paint and aftermarket shocks, a cheap bolt action rifle, and a pistol that was "high tech" a century ago, then what is left? Can I get a pump action shotgun? Nope, that's the M870. Even a $300 shotgun is off limits if we can't have "military grade" anything.
In fairness, there is something called mil spec. That comes from the DOD and is a set of specifications that products must meet to be sold to the military. Its public and consumer products can meet those specs which should mean "military grade" but how well that's enforced in the market, I couldn't say. I wouldn't be surprised if very few products with the "military grade" label actually pass mil spec. But some do and unless there is a law preventing a specific technology from being sold to the public (in the past, dual receiver GPS comes to mind) you can buy something that meets the same specs as the military gear. Might not actually be the same stuff or even as good but that's what the term is supposed to mean.
*looks at Microsoft*
Their stock is way up, and that is all they care about. Nothing else matters to them. Hope you saved some money.
That's only because GCP is failing as a platform so MS somehow fell into the #2 spot in the cloud (which is like being #2 in search).
And the ones in their 70s care about accumulating power, giving jobs to their kids and playing golf.
I can't say I know a lot of 70 year olds in that group. Many I've seen can barely afford a "pot to piss in" and are abandoned in nursing homes or poor living conditions with neglected healthcare because they're not considered useful anymore. Some are doing OK. Many are responsible for the wealth inequality gap that we continue to accept as a society which we can change during a single election period but fail to do so because were sparse and disorganized as a group
The OP was describing Trump...and now that I've explained the joke, its no longer funny.
Well written and funny, but I hope you're not proposing that the metaphor holds up.
Everyone knows that all /. metaphors have to do with cars or libraries of congress.
Is the game mocking mass shootings, or glorifying them, or something in between?
Whatever it's doing, it sure looks clumsy and tasteless from here.
I suspect it's the product of some naive, young, male programmers, who have spent too much time alone, dealing with other people only as vague online constructs, and thus never developed much empathy or understanding regarding how their words and actions can affect other people. When everything and everyone is nothing more than pixels on a screen, nothing matters, so why not make a game about mass shootings?
Either that, or they are masters of the Streisand effect.
The politically driven process is inherently more expensive. Simply because the most efficient and cheapest way to conduct business is usually not the chosen path.
Where are all the lefty slashdotters who should be jumping in to point out that government is inherently more efficient than private enterprise because it doesn't have to add a profit margin to its costs?
They are in a health care thread where that's actually true. Its also true that without the space race (a government/political event), private industry would likely be nowhere with space tech. But industries mature and require different amounts of regulation and guidelines at different points. Its almost as if being ideological about such points ensures that you are wrong part of the time, but that can't be it...
The 1st Amendment says NOTHING about "citizenship". [...] Where in the phrase "no law" does it say that laws abridging the freedom of speech of non-citizens are permitted?
As with most contracts, it comes back to how you define your terms. The Constitution starts with "We the People of the United States", which some have argued implicitly defines "people" as "citizens of the United States". Following that train of thought, all succeeding clauses and amendments would then be interpreted through that same lens, suggesting that the First Amendment's protections may not apply to non-citizens.
Mind you, I don't agree with that line of reasoning, but you asked, so there it is.
The courts would say that the constitution protects non-citizens in many cases and there is quite a bit of precedent going back 130 years that this is the case. Tends to be much more hit and miss than for citizens but still not a principle of US law. For example: https://www.oyez.org/cases/185...
non citizenry would also grant non citizens to form armed militias within the US under the 2nd amendment.
My bunkmate in Marine bootcamp was a citizen of the Philippines. Citizenship has never been a precondition to serving in the armed forces, nor to own a gun.
My GFs father joined the US Army while he was a citizen of the Philippines and only many years later became a US citizen.
To give a simple example, a child runs out from between parked cars and is hit by a car. In most cases, the driver of the car will not be held legally responsible. He may feel PERSONALLY responsible however, and a normal human will wish to avoid those feelings, and certainly any normal human wishes to avoid injuring another. So how does a human driver avoid such incidents? Subconsciously, by using his experience: did a ball just roll into the road - a child may be following. Is there someone in the yard frantically waving their arms and maybe yelling? Is there a child on the side of the road beckoning for someone to cross?
You are making this entirely too metaphysical. I'm pretty sure every time there is an accident, the data is released. I'm also sure that the data from those accidents is shared so to be included as negative examples in the training set for AVs. ML algos are trained the same way as people, with experience. But in this case we can include (and amplify) the data from accidents into every AV's training data.
Your example about the ball rolling into the road can be handled and in fact has a funny side-effect. People have figured out that if they run at and wave their hands to a Google AV, it will stop for the exact reason you sited. Its expecting a child to run into the road and it doesn't want to hit it. But in this case its a false alarm which is super annoying for the developers as including these "incidents" in the training set could be dangerous but if they don't the AV will stop every time someone runs at the car and waves their handles as if they are chasing a child chasing a ball.
Hint: Google has been working on their self-driving-car tech since 2009.
Hint: the research upon which Google built their car was started in the late 80s at CMU. It successfully drove across the country (USA) in '94. What is your point? Its AI (really ML) which by definition will have an error rate, but so do humans. The real question is how do those rates compare for each system to some human level error rate (probably for a professional driver). And that's what we don't know (but probably the teams working on these systems do).
You "understand" the Tesla accidents because you are a fanboy of Tesla. There is no excuse for Teslas accidents either, except for the fact that is is mis-marketed as "Autopilot" and is still a developing technology. It should be called "driver assist" or something similar, which is what other manufacturers do.
And you only say that because you hate Tesla. Actually, calling it Autopilot was 100% accurate as in its the same features and abilities as an older plane's autopilot feature. Its just that the general public wouldn't make the distinction between that (Level 2) and a self-driving (Level 5) car. Tesla kinda probably should have known that but since it causes people to talk about their car more they let it go. Even better if they can create some sort of Streisand effect to get even more publicity especially since I'm sure the AP feature contains a big legal disclaimer about it being Level 2 and experimental. But since you probably have never even seen a Tesla you couldn't know that which just feeds the cycle of Trolling.