It will land on the middle class like every other tax increase does and we will be stuck with a standard of living much closer to those on universal basic income.
The older I get the more I believe that's the intended goal. Create a bifurcated society with the ultra-wealthy running things politically and the poor dependent on the ultra-wealthy for handouts.
My primary goal at the moment is to become financially independent, meaning I have enough money invested that I can live off of my gains.
At that point I most certainly would take time off from work. I wouldn't stop working altogether, but I'd work on things like martial arts, playing musical instruments, automotive work, micro controllers, etc. I definitely wouldn't be putting in a regular 9-5 and meeting deadlines for other people.
I'd go work out in the morning, come back and have lunch and then work on whatever I felt like for the afternoon. I'd probably attend more conferences, give lectures/tutorials and write more software. Basically get back to some of the things I used to do (or wanted to do) as a child when I had all of the time in the world, but no money. Now it's the opposite situation, plenty of money but my time is spent working on other peoples' problems.
Here in Chicago I have read stories about local welfare recipients who have raised entire families on the taxpayer's dime. Subsidized housing, food assistance, power/gas assistance, childcare assistance, subsidized health insurance, subsidized transportation, subsidized Internet, free cellphones. All of life's needs are taken care of so long as you vote Democrat and the Democrats are able to continue borrowing money.
The scary thing is I know people that refuse to believe that some will choose public assistance over working a job. Of course the people I know like that don't live anywhere near areas with high numbers of people on assistance. If your choice is between a minimum wage job for eight hours a day plus travel time or chilling at home all day and collecting a check, some people will take the check.
And they should actually have tests every few months where they do shut down parts of their infrastructure randomly.
A place I used to work at had an outage at their main data center because of a scheduled test of the power system.
The week prior they had an outage because the APC battery-backup system in the server room developed a short. One of the engineers flipped the bypass switch while the APC tech was fixing the problem.
There was a diesel generator next to the building that was used in case the building itself lost its electrical connection and a power-on test was performed every two weeks.
Sure enough, the power-on test was forgotten and it ran while the server room's battery backup was bypassed knocking them out again. The admins didn't practice good configuration management, so people were having to log into individual systems to bring software up after the outages.
Here's one to jam the works. A father is out and about with a young daughter and she needs the bathroom. Should he take her into the women's bathroom, take her into the men's bathroom, hand her over to a woman he has never met before in his life, or tell her to go pee on the potted plant in the corner?
Jam the works? That's a pretty common situation you've outlined. One I had to deal with many times as a child since my Mom was divorced.
What happens is the child goes in the restroom that matches their sex, then their parent calls in asking them if they're okay, the child then becomes embarrassed and possibly responds. If the child is too young to go to the bathroom by themselves they go in whatever bathroom their parent uses.
I would expect that this diagnosis list, as well as a management plan, to be then put in the hands of a human. After a series of tests I would expect the AI to be consulted again if necessary.
Aren't you assuming that the human can understand how the AI reached the conclusion it did? If the machine performs statistically better than a human, then why would anyone ever overrule its decision?
There are other alternatives as well. For example the town I live in uses paper ballots, but counts them with OCR -- which allows for a quick total when the polls close, but still allows a recount if a problem in a miscount is suspected.
My precinct uses those types of ballots which I am really happy I can use.
I tried using an electronic voting machine years ago and I'm pretty sure my vote didn't count. As I was submitting my ballot the machine threw up an error code about the built-in printer being out of paper. I notified a poll worker of the error and they just pulled the memory card that stores the ballot out of the machine and walked away. At that point the error message is replaced with another saying, "card removed too soon", and I see the printed copy of my ballot scroll by with void stamped on it. If you're not supposed to remove the card, then why does the machine allow it?
I was pretty upset, not necessarily about the machine having a problem, but about the workers not being properly trained on how to handle equipment failures. I would have protested, but I knew there was no chance my candidates were going to win.
I didn't come up with that idea and I really wish I could find the source. For all I know I heard it during a segment on NPR.
I did find the following, but I'm sure that's not where I heard of this.
Kesler situates Obama as the latest in a presidential line of liberal progressives, including Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and Lyndon Johnson. For such progressives, Kesler observes, politics is not merely about trying to meet the crises of the moment and ameliorate the problems confronted by the present generation. It is rather about getting the country on the right side of history understood as a progressive force, clearing the way for History’s endless Progress, understood as ever-increasing equality and social solidarity.
This hostility to democratic self-government is built into the demand for progress understood as irreversible improvement in social conditions. Each new step in the march of progress must be embraced as permanent, with the necessary consequence that the people are no longer permitted to deliberate about it.
I can't remember where I first heard this idea, but people panicking over things like this is closely related to their political ideology and worldview.
For Liberals and Progressives, they're always fighting to push forward, to progress. They view human existence as a series of events that push us ever forward as a global society to an eventual Utopia. Things were always worse in the past and will always be better in the future. Any impediment, disagreement or setback to their agenda is thus viewed as "turning back the clock", or "taking us backwards".
For Conservatives, they realize that the pendulum swings both ways. Things change. There is no simple and straight path that takes us all to a glorious future. Sometimes the change is to your advantage and sometimes to your disadvantage. They view any setbacks as temporary in nature, and don't panic about things that they know can be changed.
From a system designed to ensure information flows no matter what... to a system designed to ensure selected information flows at a rate determined by your wallet.
Right, because government regulation is always good?
Can any of the Chicken Littles provide any evidence of their fears actually coming true? I keep hearing about how ISPs will block access to sites, or slow your connection down, but can anyone show this actually happening?
If you want to fight something, fight the government supported cable monopoly.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey Grandpa! We use SSD's these days, even on Linux based systems. Spinning disks are reserved for archiving large amounts of data.
No reason to use spinning disks for the main drive unless you're trying to be cheap.
It's pretty simple really. You can forcibly imprison people, but you can't force them to learn or become productive members of society.
I remember reading that story. Thanks for the link!
Diversity hire. Someone with her background definitely should not have received a Top Secret clearance.
Those 5 friends would still pay those taxes, but they would go towards funding UBI instead of Social Security, Medicaid, etc.
If you want to help the needy you should contribute to charities. The taxpayer should not be expected to subsidize poverty.
It will land on the middle class like every other tax increase does and we will be stuck with a standard of living much closer to those on universal basic income.
The older I get the more I believe that's the intended goal. Create a bifurcated society with the ultra-wealthy running things politically and the poor dependent on the ultra-wealthy for handouts.
I think you're greatly overestimating the number of creative and motivated people. They are the exception.
Many people are intellectually lazy and only want work the minimum that's required to get by.
My primary goal at the moment is to become financially independent, meaning I have enough money invested that I can live off of my gains.
At that point I most certainly would take time off from work. I wouldn't stop working altogether, but I'd work on things like martial arts, playing musical instruments, automotive work, micro controllers, etc. I definitely wouldn't be putting in a regular 9-5 and meeting deadlines for other people.
I'd go work out in the morning, come back and have lunch and then work on whatever I felt like for the afternoon. I'd probably attend more conferences, give lectures/tutorials and write more software. Basically get back to some of the things I used to do (or wanted to do) as a child when I had all of the time in the world, but no money. Now it's the opposite situation, plenty of money but my time is spent working on other peoples' problems.
Here in Chicago I have read stories about local welfare recipients who have raised entire families on the taxpayer's dime. Subsidized housing, food assistance, power/gas assistance, childcare assistance, subsidized health insurance, subsidized transportation, subsidized Internet, free cellphones. All of life's needs are taken care of so long as you vote Democrat and the Democrats are able to continue borrowing money.
The scary thing is I know people that refuse to believe that some will choose public assistance over working a job. Of course the people I know like that don't live anywhere near areas with high numbers of people on assistance. If your choice is between a minimum wage job for eight hours a day plus travel time or chilling at home all day and collecting a check, some people will take the check.
So everyone takes out a five and passes it to the guy on the left?
Where is this UBI money coming from? Taxes? Doesn't that means everyone ends up paying for their own UBI check?
And they should actually have tests every few months where they do shut down parts of their infrastructure randomly.
A place I used to work at had an outage at their main data center because of a scheduled test of the power system.
The week prior they had an outage because the APC battery-backup system in the server room developed a short. One of the engineers flipped the bypass switch while the APC tech was fixing the problem.
There was a diesel generator next to the building that was used in case the building itself lost its electrical connection and a power-on test was performed every two weeks.
Sure enough, the power-on test was forgotten and it ran while the server room's battery backup was bypassed knocking them out again. The admins didn't practice good configuration management, so people were having to log into individual systems to bring software up after the outages.
The reason we have gender separated bathrooms is far more complicated than prevention of sexual assault.
Bathrooms are not separated based on gender, they are separated based on sex!
Aren't those just the single-occupancy/handicap restrooms? I use them whenever I have the chance since there's a lot more room and privacy.
Why are males trying to use female restrooms and why are females trying to use male restrooms?
Bathrooms are separated based on sex, not gender, and being transgender doesn't change your sex.
Here's one to jam the works. A father is out and about with a young daughter and she needs the bathroom. Should he take her into the women's bathroom, take her into the men's bathroom, hand her over to a woman he has never met before in his life, or tell her to go pee on the potted plant in the corner?
Jam the works? That's a pretty common situation you've outlined. One I had to deal with many times as a child since my Mom was divorced.
What happens is the child goes in the restroom that matches their sex, then their parent calls in asking them if they're okay, the child then becomes embarrassed and possibly responds. If the child is too young to go to the bathroom by themselves they go in whatever bathroom their parent uses.
Any student caught cheating should have their name announced/posted in a prominent location so all of their classmates know who the cheaters are.
The rest of the students work too hard to allow cheaters to remain anonymous. They deserve to know who's trying to screw them over.
Theft is theft. It doesn't become okay because the guy you're stealing from has "enough".
I would expect that this diagnosis list, as well as a management plan, to be then put in the hands of a human. After a series of tests I would expect the AI to be consulted again if necessary.
Aren't you assuming that the human can understand how the AI reached the conclusion it did? If the machine performs statistically better than a human, then why would anyone ever overrule its decision?
The only confirmed hacking attempts were performed by DHS against Indiana's and Idaho's election systems.
Indiana joins Idaho in claiming DHS tried to hack their election systems
There are other alternatives as well. For example the town I live in uses paper ballots, but counts them with OCR -- which allows for a quick total when the polls close, but still allows a recount if a problem in a miscount is suspected.
My precinct uses those types of ballots which I am really happy I can use.
I tried using an electronic voting machine years ago and I'm pretty sure my vote didn't count. As I was submitting my ballot the machine threw up an error code about the built-in printer being out of paper. I notified a poll worker of the error and they just pulled the memory card that stores the ballot out of the machine and walked away. At that point the error message is replaced with another saying, "card removed too soon", and I see the printed copy of my ballot scroll by with void stamped on it. If you're not supposed to remove the card, then why does the machine allow it?
I was pretty upset, not necessarily about the machine having a problem, but about the workers not being properly trained on how to handle equipment failures. I would have protested, but I knew there was no chance my candidates were going to win.
I didn't come up with that idea and I really wish I could find the source. For all I know I heard it during a segment on NPR.
I did find the following, but I'm sure that's not where I heard of this.
I can't remember where I first heard this idea, but people panicking over things like this is closely related to their political ideology and worldview.
For Liberals and Progressives, they're always fighting to push forward, to progress. They view human existence as a series of events that push us ever forward as a global society to an eventual Utopia. Things were always worse in the past and will always be better in the future. Any impediment, disagreement or setback to their agenda is thus viewed as "turning back the clock", or "taking us backwards".
For Conservatives, they realize that the pendulum swings both ways. Things change. There is no simple and straight path that takes us all to a glorious future. Sometimes the change is to your advantage and sometimes to your disadvantage. They view any setbacks as temporary in nature, and don't panic about things that they know can be changed.
From a system designed to ensure information flows no matter what... to a system designed to ensure selected information flows at a rate determined by your wallet.
Right, because government regulation is always good?
Can any of the Chicken Littles provide any evidence of their fears actually coming true? I keep hearing about how ISPs will block access to sites, or slow your connection down, but can anyone show this actually happening?
If you want to fight something, fight the government supported cable monopoly.
I thought we wanted policy discussions to be done out in the open in public? Isn't that called transparency?
Or do you have information about classified information being disclosed in public?