I don't follow the crytocurrency scene very much, but I was under the impression that Ethereum was specifically designed in such a way as to make it difficult or perhaps impossible to use an ASIC.
There'd probably be some benefit to a mining only card. The lack of ports for connecting to displays would make the cards less expensive and companies could bin chips that have defects only in the parts of the chip that would make them useless for gaming but don't affect their ability to mine. Also, I don't believe that the used market is that valuable as it's likely to get flooded as miners try to upgrade at the same time and many consumers are leery about buying cards used for mining to begin with.
Even if he had them, Twitter wouldn't get rid of him anyway. He's probably responsible for at least a double digit percentage of their traffic. They couldn't quit each other if they wanted to.
I'm curious as to how Google plans to prevent trolling on the part of people like 4chan that just love to abuse AI systems. I can easily see someone uploading photos of dicks in response to every photo request or adding racist translations among other mischief.
The C level executives don't have anything to do with whatever half-cocked legal argument their team of lawyers decides to bring before the court. They only care about minimizing their exposure to the risk of a class action lawsuit. They don't really care how the lawyers do it so long as it works and aren't fit to judge for themselves the legal merit of their legal counsel.
Also, good luck actually pinning any of these activities on anyone at the C level. I agree that someone should be punished for this, but there's no guarantee the malfeasance was at the direct behest of an executive. It's just as likely that someone in the middle found a creative way to improve their numbers and climb the ladder as a result. The big bosses need not call for that kind of activity. It's sufficient to create an environment where that kind of behavior is encouraged and eventually someone lower and the ladder will do it out of their own self-interest which gets the bosses what they want without dirtying their hands directly.
Murder is inherently evil, but killing isn't. Otherwise you could extend the same logic to conclude the jailing people indefinitely is inherently evil as well. There are some terrible people in the world intent on terrible actions. Killing them (or imprisoning them for the remainder of their days) results in a net reduction in the amount of suffering and evil in the world.
Right now the tools that we have at our disposal not only kill the intended target, but typically a few other people who may not need killing or are perhaps completely innocent such that no one could claim that they deserve any rebuke, let alone death. Unfortunately that collateral damage doesn't do enough to outweight the benefit from killing those who need to be killed. Improving our tools would allow us to spare those innocents from an unfortunate fate. One could just as well argue that refusing to make a better tool that would reduce collateral damage is morally evil.
Perhaps in the future we'll have even better tools and it won't be necessary to kill anyone at all, but that does us little good in the here and now, and we're unlikely to make an immediate leap to that point without the same kind of gradual and incremental improvement that drives humanity forward.
Thankfully, that's a practice that has been more or less abandoned as stores these days try to make it easier for you to find things so you have a positive experience and come back.
No, today the big stores track purchases and do all kinds of analytics to find out that if you put the Doritoes next to the toothpaste, sales increase by 2.7%. Any experience you have is one carefully crafted to wring as much money out of you as possible. It's not much different than in the past, merely just more refined and scientific instead of haphazard.
How do they think it detects the "bad" messages? Spidey sense?
I suppose they could always implement an evil bit for their messages. Much more efficient than scanning and trying to match against a bad word list or other approaches that are commonly used.
Sorry, I don't see the huge advantage, could anyone clue me in?
Getting to make hand gestures to dismiss a phone call while doing Obi-Wan impressions seems like something I obviously need in my life. I'm sure there's probably other stuff you could do as well, but who cares about any of that?
Why would you want a cashless society? Having the ability to pay in cash doesn't require you to do so yourself. I can't wrap my head around the fact that there are some people who actively want fewer choices even when the alternative options require nothing from them in terms of action or cost. Even from a business owner's perspective, there's nothing that says your business has to accept cash payments, unless there's some obscure Swedish laws of which I'm unaware.
I'm not going to try to lump this person into any particular group or ideology, but after reading some of the quotes from her manifesto, she doesn't come off as a mentally stable individual.
I don't know if her channels have been deleted or if people have made copies of her videos, but one thing that may be fascinating about this particular case is that the suspect has likely created an extensive number of videos over the past several years that will probably give investigators a pretty accurate view into her thought process. Hopefully that will prove helpful in identifying other individuals who appear to be expressing at risk behavior and that we'll be able to figure out what can be done to treat whatever it is that's wrong with them.
That wouldn't surprise me as there are plenty of times where one agency has stumbled into another and neither are quite aware of it.
I don't think the government should be too alarmed or surprised. They've been actively trying to surveil every single American. Someone should have informed those dipshits that category includes them as well.
False flag nonsense is exactly that. Nonsense. How you were modded up is beyond me.
I'll buy the possibility of someone angry at YouTube over recent policy who decided to go shoot up the place, but they'd have to get past security to even get at people. It's far more likely that it's a disgruntled employee.
It's just like casinos. If everyone was winning money in them, they wouldn't be able to afford to keep the lights on. If you're using something a company provides to you without paying for it, then it's really you who's the product.
ARM is pretty flexible and will license the instruction set just as well as their reference implementation. Companies like Apple, Qualcomm, and Nvidia already make their own customized ARM cores and even the Chinese manufacturers are starting to build their own customized implementations.
I think this does just boil down to costs. As companies have discovered throughout history, being beholden to a single supplier is just asking for them to bleed you dry. Even if this never gets used, it's always going to serve as a check on how much ARM Holdings can charge.
If we reached the point where we're easily capable of creating lifeforms from some arbitrary DNA, we probably also have enough knowledge of how to create permutations of that DNA and even if we don't, once you create a few and find the bottlenecks that arise from inbreeding, you know what to alter.
I also suspect that we'd keep anything created this way in a lab for decades before even attempting to reintroduce it to the wild.
It's been a while since I played the game, but the character seemed to be a generalization of several different actresses who were relatively successful or well known before getting heavily into drugs or alcohol and tanking their careers. It seems like every five years or so there's a new starlet that goes down the exact same path.
You're free to pay for the basic living expenses of as many of them as you care to help.
And even if you could be as virtuous as you'd like with everyone else's money, it wouldn't ultimately matter anyway. There are going to be enough men that want sex who are willing to pay for it that some women will engage in prostitution not out of necessity or for their survival, but because it allows them to earn extra money. This may surprise you, but some women like sex as much as most men, especially if they can be discerning in who they're hopping into bed with. If they can get paid for doing what they enjoy, who the hell are you to tell them what they're allowed to do with their bodies?
Legalizing prostitution will do a lot of prevent the kinds of horrible conditions and abuse that many women find themselves in just as repealing prohibition meant that no one had to get shot or poisoned over bootleg liquor.
I don't necessarily buy into all of this myself, but why do people tend to treat the government and its operatives as infallible masterminds? If they were so capable in these regards, why is so much else a complete cluster fuck?
Even if you want to argue that the intelligence organizations are not staffed by your typical rank and file idiots, highly skilled, very intelligent people are still capable of making mistakes. Even though the odds of those are quite small by themselves, doing something enough times makes it likely to have slipped up somewhere.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't follow the crytocurrency scene very much, but I was under the impression that Ethereum was specifically designed in such a way as to make it difficult or perhaps impossible to use an ASIC.
There'd probably be some benefit to a mining only card. The lack of ports for connecting to displays would make the cards less expensive and companies could bin chips that have defects only in the parts of the chip that would make them useless for gaming but don't affect their ability to mine. Also, I don't believe that the used market is that valuable as it's likely to get flooded as miners try to upgrade at the same time and many consumers are leery about buying cards used for mining to begin with.
Even if he had them, Twitter wouldn't get rid of him anyway. He's probably responsible for at least a double digit percentage of their traffic. They couldn't quit each other if they wanted to.
Well the really old currencies typically had to be mined out of thick hard rock.
Thin air seems rather convenient by comparison. Perhaps too convenient.
I'm curious as to how Google plans to prevent trolling on the part of people like 4chan that just love to abuse AI systems. I can easily see someone uploading photos of dicks in response to every photo request or adding racist translations among other mischief.
The C level executives don't have anything to do with whatever half-cocked legal argument their team of lawyers decides to bring before the court. They only care about minimizing their exposure to the risk of a class action lawsuit. They don't really care how the lawyers do it so long as it works and aren't fit to judge for themselves the legal merit of their legal counsel.
Also, good luck actually pinning any of these activities on anyone at the C level. I agree that someone should be punished for this, but there's no guarantee the malfeasance was at the direct behest of an executive. It's just as likely that someone in the middle found a creative way to improve their numbers and climb the ladder as a result. The big bosses need not call for that kind of activity. It's sufficient to create an environment where that kind of behavior is encouraged and eventually someone lower and the ladder will do it out of their own self-interest which gets the bosses what they want without dirtying their hands directly.
Murder is inherently evil, but killing isn't. Otherwise you could extend the same logic to conclude the jailing people indefinitely is inherently evil as well. There are some terrible people in the world intent on terrible actions. Killing them (or imprisoning them for the remainder of their days) results in a net reduction in the amount of suffering and evil in the world.
Right now the tools that we have at our disposal not only kill the intended target, but typically a few other people who may not need killing or are perhaps completely innocent such that no one could claim that they deserve any rebuke, let alone death. Unfortunately that collateral damage doesn't do enough to outweight the benefit from killing those who need to be killed. Improving our tools would allow us to spare those innocents from an unfortunate fate. One could just as well argue that refusing to make a better tool that would reduce collateral damage is morally evil.
Perhaps in the future we'll have even better tools and it won't be necessary to kill anyone at all, but that does us little good in the here and now, and we're unlikely to make an immediate leap to that point without the same kind of gradual and incremental improvement that drives humanity forward.
Thankfully, that's a practice that has been more or less abandoned as stores these days try to make it easier for you to find things so you have a positive experience and come back.
No, today the big stores track purchases and do all kinds of analytics to find out that if you put the Doritoes next to the toothpaste, sales increase by 2.7%. Any experience you have is one carefully crafted to wring as much money out of you as possible. It's not much different than in the past, merely just more refined and scientific instead of haphazard.
How do they think it detects the "bad" messages? Spidey sense?
I suppose they could always implement an evil bit for their messages. Much more efficient than scanning and trying to match against a bad word list or other approaches that are commonly used.
Sorry, I don't see the huge advantage, could anyone clue me in?
Getting to make hand gestures to dismiss a phone call while doing Obi-Wan impressions seems like something I obviously need in my life. I'm sure there's probably other stuff you could do as well, but who cares about any of that?
Why would you want a cashless society? Having the ability to pay in cash doesn't require you to do so yourself. I can't wrap my head around the fact that there are some people who actively want fewer choices even when the alternative options require nothing from them in terms of action or cost. Even from a business owner's perspective, there's nothing that says your business has to accept cash payments, unless there's some obscure Swedish laws of which I'm unaware.
I'm not going to try to lump this person into any particular group or ideology, but after reading some of the quotes from her manifesto, she doesn't come off as a mentally stable individual.
I don't know if her channels have been deleted or if people have made copies of her videos, but one thing that may be fascinating about this particular case is that the suspect has likely created an extensive number of videos over the past several years that will probably give investigators a pretty accurate view into her thought process. Hopefully that will prove helpful in identifying other individuals who appear to be expressing at risk behavior and that we'll be able to figure out what can be done to treat whatever it is that's wrong with them.
That wouldn't surprise me as there are plenty of times where one agency has stumbled into another and neither are quite aware of it.
I don't think the government should be too alarmed or surprised. They've been actively trying to surveil every single American. Someone should have informed those dipshits that category includes them as well.
No, but they do need to have a label indicating that they've been found to cause cancer in the state of California.
False flag nonsense is exactly that. Nonsense. How you were modded up is beyond me.
I'll buy the possibility of someone angry at YouTube over recent policy who decided to go shoot up the place, but they'd have to get past security to even get at people. It's far more likely that it's a disgruntled employee.
It's just like casinos. If everyone was winning money in them, they wouldn't be able to afford to keep the lights on. If you're using something a company provides to you without paying for it, then it's really you who's the product.
ARM is pretty flexible and will license the instruction set just as well as their reference implementation. Companies like Apple, Qualcomm, and Nvidia already make their own customized ARM cores and even the Chinese manufacturers are starting to build their own customized implementations.
I think this does just boil down to costs. As companies have discovered throughout history, being beholden to a single supplier is just asking for them to bleed you dry. Even if this never gets used, it's always going to serve as a check on how much ARM Holdings can charge.
If we reached the point where we're easily capable of creating lifeforms from some arbitrary DNA, we probably also have enough knowledge of how to create permutations of that DNA and even if we don't, once you create a few and find the bottlenecks that arise from inbreeding, you know what to alter.
I also suspect that we'd keep anything created this way in a lab for decades before even attempting to reintroduce it to the wild.
It's not necessary to be a politician, merely just a well known public figure.
It's been a while since I played the game, but the character seemed to be a generalization of several different actresses who were relatively successful or well known before getting heavily into drugs or alcohol and tanking their careers. It seems like every five years or so there's a new starlet that goes down the exact same path.
Nonsense. According to Wikipedia, AARP The Magazine is the largest organ.
I'm guessing that the watch was in development or that plans were made about it while Jobs was still alive. I suppose the wireless earbuds could count, but I think HomePod is a better example, even if it isn't terribly novel in itself as it does represent Apple getting serious about speaker technology and by several counts they did a good job there.
You're free to pay for the basic living expenses of as many of them as you care to help.
And even if you could be as virtuous as you'd like with everyone else's money, it wouldn't ultimately matter anyway. There are going to be enough men that want sex who are willing to pay for it that some women will engage in prostitution not out of necessity or for their survival, but because it allows them to earn extra money. This may surprise you, but some women like sex as much as most men, especially if they can be discerning in who they're hopping into bed with. If they can get paid for doing what they enjoy, who the hell are you to tell them what they're allowed to do with their bodies?
Legalizing prostitution will do a lot of prevent the kinds of horrible conditions and abuse that many women find themselves in just as repealing prohibition meant that no one had to get shot or poisoned over bootleg liquor.
Just live in a shitty apartment building with thin walls like the rest of us and you'll have front row seats every evening.
I don't necessarily buy into all of this myself, but why do people tend to treat the government and its operatives as infallible masterminds? If they were so capable in these regards, why is so much else a complete cluster fuck?
Even if you want to argue that the intelligence organizations are not staffed by your typical rank and file idiots, highly skilled, very intelligent people are still capable of making mistakes. Even though the odds of those are quite small by themselves, doing something enough times makes it likely to have slipped up somewhere.