They need to get things done. Chinese workers have low work ethics, but they beat the average African worker by a large margin. And no, this is not racist. This is what African refugees have told me as their analysis of the problem.
Indeed. And a lot of places in Africa are also politically unstable, at war or run by cleptocrats, racists and religious crusaders. While some people there see that this cannot go on, most are simply far too selfish and want to just get rich quick. And, of course, the smartest ones leave and only very few come back.
Unfortunately, it looks that way. Incidentally, when you want somebody to say really, really bad things about Africans, ask an African refugee that has been in Europe for a while and is trying hard to make a new living (not all do, but many work really hard). The families back there expect them to send enough money to keep the whole (large) family afloat, pay for education, bicycles, etc, since they are now rich and, of course, nobody else in the family has to work anymore or even take good care of their things! And when they tell their family that living is expensive or you have to show up on time for work or that it is really cold in the winter and you simply cannot sleep outside, they are not believed.
You clearly have not actually understood anything of the upcoming problems. An UBI is critically necessary, but it alone, even if generous, will not be enough to prevent countries from burning. People not only need bread and games, they also need meaning in their lives and feel useful. And that will be a much larger problem.The UBI will prevent food riots. But what will prevent the riots of the terminally bored?
Unless that amounts to suicide. Then you have to be willing to kill yourself and admit you have failed at existing. That takes more stones than any US president will ever have. What will actually happen is that the US will default at some time. The rest of the world will recover from that after a decade or two, but the US will not.
Self-checkouts are not automating a job. They are merely shifting the job from the cashier (a professional) to the customer (an amateur). It is not surprising they take longer. No, the thing is self-checkout is for is data gathering on customer behavior and that makes it worthwhile.
So, no. Almost all applications of automation to remove jobs are not like this at all.
Another factor, yes. And there will be others. Fact is that robots and other automation create a tiny number of highly qualified jobs, but nothing else. They do remove a lot of jobs formerly done by humans though. It really is very, very obvious what is going on.
Indeed. Or the use the increased capacity to kill a competitor. Or the jobs are lost in retail, due to more online shopping. As this is extremely obvious to anybody with half a clue that almost all jobs lost to automation are not coming back, everybody tries very hard to give the impression to not be involved in this, even when they clearly are. As people are generally stupid and have short memories (see elections), obfuscating the issue this way will most likely work, at least until the effects become extremely obvious.
"May be"? It is so bloody obviously bogus it is staggering. The issue also is not that automation does not create new jobs (what an utterly demented level to argue on), the issue is that automation kills a lot of jobs and creates a tiny number of replacements.
People are stupid and like to put their heads into the sand. Also, this means increased capacity there, which in turn means either a competitor will sack people or the job destruction is in retail because sales move online.
Indeed. End you find the people that have lost their jobs simply in retail. Of course, that is too complex a situation to understand for many people, so the demented claims that "robots do not kill jobs, new ones are created!" will continue.
Of course, they either do this to fire people (not here) or to increase capacity which will mean people fired somewhere else, possibly in a different company.
SHA1 is not broken for this use. If the password is weak, you could brute-force it, sure. But then the user already has a problem. If the password is strong, then this is perfectly secure. Of course, using Argon 2 would be better, bit if the password is really weak, that can only do so much to make it more secure.
Streaming over TCP requires abundant spare bandwidth to work. A good rule of thumb is reliably (including peaks) less than 50% utilization in both directions for it to work fine. This situation is rarely given, so basically no streaming uses plain TCP. It may use some other protocol masking as TCP to get through firewalls and other things, but that is it.
The problem is that these "Ecomodernist" are lying about what their "solutions" can achieve. They are basically a false-flag operation. I am pointing that out. You , on the other hand, are regurgitating propaganda.
Slashdot Mirror
They need to get things done. Chinese workers have low work ethics, but they beat the average African worker by a large margin. And no, this is not racist. This is what African refugees have told me as their analysis of the problem.
Indeed. And a lot of places in Africa are also politically unstable, at war or run by cleptocrats, racists and religious crusaders. While some people there see that this cannot go on, most are simply far too selfish and want to just get rich quick. And, of course, the smartest ones leave and only very few come back.
Obvious troll is obvious.
Unfortunately, it looks that way. Incidentally, when you want somebody to say really, really bad things about Africans, ask an African refugee that has been in Europe for a while and is trying hard to make a new living (not all do, but many work really hard). The families back there expect them to send enough money to keep the whole (large) family afloat, pay for education, bicycles, etc, since they are now rich and, of course, nobody else in the family has to work anymore or even take good care of their things! And when they tell their family that living is expensive or you have to show up on time for work or that it is really cold in the winter and you simply cannot sleep outside, they are not believed.
Well, maybe. We will see. It would be good to get this problem solved, a burning planet is not what I want to retire to...
Lead-based paint? OMG....
Unfortunately, what you say makes sense.
All the time? I don't think so.
Have you nor heard? Facebook is in decline...
So-called Universal Basic Income WILL NOT WORK for 300,000,000 people, plain and simple, why can't you all see that!?
Because you are a clueless moron that cannot do numbers?
You clearly have not actually understood anything of the upcoming problems. An UBI is critically necessary, but it alone, even if generous, will not be enough to prevent countries from burning. People not only need bread and games, they also need meaning in their lives and feel useful. And that will be a much larger problem.The UBI will prevent food riots. But what will prevent the riots of the terminally bored?
Unless that amounts to suicide. Then you have to be willing to kill yourself and admit you have failed at existing. That takes more stones than any US president will ever have. What will actually happen is that the US will default at some time. The rest of the world will recover from that after a decade or two, but the US will not.
You have something to say or you just want to scream around unsubstantiated opinions like a cave-man?
Somebody smart that actually cares about people for president? No chance. The current crook will just be followed by another crook.
Self-checkouts are not automating a job. They are merely shifting the job from the cashier (a professional) to the customer (an amateur). It is not surprising they take longer. No, the thing is self-checkout is for is data gathering on customer behavior and that makes it worthwhile.
So, no. Almost all applications of automation to remove jobs are not like this at all.
Another factor, yes. And there will be others. Fact is that robots and other automation create a tiny number of highly qualified jobs, but nothing else. They do remove a lot of jobs formerly done by humans though. It really is very, very obvious what is going on.
Indeed. Or the use the increased capacity to kill a competitor. Or the jobs are lost in retail, due to more online shopping. As this is extremely obvious to anybody with half a clue that almost all jobs lost to automation are not coming back, everybody tries very hard to give the impression to not be involved in this, even when they clearly are. As people are generally stupid and have short memories (see elections), obfuscating the issue this way will most likely work, at least until the effects become extremely obvious.
"May be"? It is so bloody obviously bogus it is staggering. The issue also is not that automation does not create new jobs (what an utterly demented level to argue on), the issue is that automation kills a lot of jobs and creates a tiny number of replacements.
People are stupid and like to put their heads into the sand. Also, this means increased capacity there, which in turn means either a competitor will sack people or the job destruction is in retail because sales move online.
Indeed. End you find the people that have lost their jobs simply in retail. Of course, that is too complex a situation to understand for many people, so the demented claims that "robots do not kill jobs, new ones are created!" will continue.
Of course, they either do this to fire people (not here) or to increase capacity which will mean people fired somewhere else, possibly in a different company.
SHA1 is not broken for this use. If the password is weak, you could brute-force it, sure. But then the user already has a problem. If the password is strong, then this is perfectly secure. Of course, using Argon 2 would be better, bit if the password is really weak, that can only do so much to make it more secure.
So true!
The use of superlatives was a pretty clear indicator before that. Somebody trying to get rich on feel-good cheerleading.
Streaming over TCP requires abundant spare bandwidth to work. A good rule of thumb is reliably (including peaks) less than 50% utilization in both directions for it to work fine. This situation is rarely given, so basically no streaming uses plain TCP. It may use some other protocol masking as TCP to get through firewalls and other things, but that is it.
The problem is that these "Ecomodernist" are lying about what their "solutions" can achieve. They are basically a false-flag operation. I am pointing that out. You , on the other hand, are regurgitating propaganda.