This is really just "Watson as a Service" rather than actually adding the capabilities of Watson to devices. I'm sure it'll be just as free and privacy minded as other "cloud" services.
I'm a big fan of automation but wireless automation, especially the IoT blight is a horrible idea. If your primary defense is obscurity then accepting a broadcast from anywhere is a recipe for disaster. Wired automation is intrinsically safer because it requires physical access though I do not believe that should be it's only defense.
If CBC doesn't want people to access their content indirectly, they can configure their servers to prohibit such activity. The fact that they haven't means they aren't serious or they are idiots. In both cases, their words lack credibility.
No, you wouldn't, otherwise you would have already left. The truth is that you have built-up a fantasy of what life in New Delhi is like and actually living there would shatter that fantasy with cold buckets of reality.
I'd sooner spend a long weekend in New Delhi than the SF Bay or LA
Ha! A single weekend is misrepresentative, go live there.
I've hear the Galaxy S8 is going to be so great it's going to explode on the scene. You'll be the envy of everyone who will want to call and talk about it so your phone certain to be blowing up. Sorry, I can't help myself, I'm on fire.;)
Chome's dominance is not surprising. The number one way to lose users is to complacently enjoy the lead you have over your competitors and ignore user feedback. Microsoft and Mozilla are both experts are ignoring user feedback and both enjoyed large leads while they diverted resources. Chrome can also be defeated by a competitor that offers something better that they don't want to or refuse to provide. Frankly, I would like to see a fork of Chromium that focuses on privacy, ad blocking and script blocking (I don't like random scripts running on my machine). These are things Google wouldn't want to provide, so this could be how Chrome slips back to a 5% user share.
is there any way to browse totally anonymous to the sites you are visiting?
there is actually a very simple way to do this, don't visit the site! however, to see the content of the site without visiting it, just plug the address into archive.org and you can see a snapshot of the page at certain dates. to ensure that a sneaky javascript isn't phoning home, use "noscript" or just use a browser without javascript execution capabilities.
Did I compare the amount I paid in tax to the total cost of cancer medication? No. I compared the tax I paid to the total cost of cancer medicine minus the total cost of the extra years of life I would gain, mostly drawing pension payments.
The problem is that this isn't about you but rather about smokers in general.
This is not including my biggest monthly bill which believe it or not isn't cigarette taxes but income and employment taxes.
And those taxes are allocated to many different things.
Tax on cigarettes is additional tax I pay.
Absolutely and that tax is not going to cover the cost of the medical bills when/if it gives you cancer.
I'm very good at watching the pea under the thimble, so don't try that one on me again.
The only thing I'm trying is to point out that smokers are a costly bunch of people to take care of when they get sick from smoking and that the cigarette tax isn't enough to make up for the amount you are taking out of the medical system. If everyone was a smoker and the resulting ill people were treated for cancer, it would bankrupt the medical system.
[T]he raw sewage is placed in a reactor that's basically a tube pressurized to 3,000 pounds per square inch and heated to 660 degrees Fahrenheit,
A) Where are you going to get all that energy to pressurized and heat the tube? B) Is the overall energy loss greater or less than existing battery systems? C) Why not use that energy directly instead of making crude oil that has to be refined?
They don't pay the crazy sums for health care that we do (single payer's a _lot_ less costly). Their gov't doesn't allow their drug companies to gouge their population.
What our healthcare system in the US is being eaten up with is fake foods and obese people.
Well, this issue is specifically fructose and addictive foods. A big issue is that corn is subsidized which means that stuff like HFCS is subsidized. The result is that processed foods is less expensive than many of crops. However, taxing sugars themselves is not the answer because you can have a healthy food with lots of sugar: e.g. apples. If you are going to tax something directly, we should be taxing based on glycemic load and fructose content. However, this brings up complicated issues like how much the tax should be, how it should adjust with time, how much it should cover, etcetera. The alternative is to tax indirectly which would be tracking what people buy and taxing companies based on their medical expenses based on correlations found. This is a massive feedback loop mechanism which is not limited by the date of the purchase and follows people throughout their lives. It's big, complicated and scary but it would force companies to think of what their product does to people versus how to make a quick buck. I also think we need to reform how companies/executives are held responsible for their actions but that's another discussion.
$2 per pack? Are you kidding me? It's £9.50 in the UK.
Well that's almost £70K (assuming the tax never changed) if you smoke a full pack a day for 20 years. However, that is more of a more recent development and probably why you quit smoking, because you literally couldn't afford to continue. You've probably paid £35K in total taxes, assuming you smoked a full pack a day. That said, the price of the cancer medicine is the same but in the UK, your health care system is eating the cost. This means that overall you are costing society more than you are paying back.
Speaking as someone with around 3,000 new mutations (I quit a few months ago), I can tell you I've paid in tax on cigarettes about 2 x the cost of any treatment I'll get for the problems it'll cause and of course I'll take out a lot less in pension assuming I make it to 68, which is quite unlikely. So you know, these "massive" costs are actually net benefits if you're going to start accounting.
O RLY? Have you done the math? In the USA, it's taxed federally and locally but that turns out to currently be about $2 per pack (used to be much lower). If you smoke one pack a day for 20 years, that's $14,600 in tax.
I looked up the cost and the typical cost to be an inpatient at a hospital is $1,600 per day. If you are in the hospital, you have eight days to die before you start taking up resources. Now, let's just say you start smoking at age 20 and get cancer after 15 years, so at age 35, you will begin your cancer treatment. You will likely survive a couple years and then die. The cost of the medication to fight cancer is $100,000 per year alone. Your two month decline to dying is going to rack up $96,000. You will expended more than $300,000 after paying $10,950 in cigarette excise tax.
The only ways to go around the store are even more expensive: A. buy a Mac for each of your iOS users so that they can install the application from source code using Xcode, or B. the iOS Developer Enterprise Program, which requires employing all your users.
Slashdot Mirror
This is really just "Watson as a Service" rather than actually adding the capabilities of Watson to devices. I'm sure it'll be just as free and privacy minded as other "cloud" services.
He's not Hitler. He's not going to eat your babies.
What?! That bastard said he was and he would! It's the reason I voted for him!
The solution to the problem for countries where it is a problem, is to increase excise on cigarettes until income approximately matches expense.
i don't dispute this, i do dispute that it's already been adequately implemented.
I'm a big fan of automation but wireless automation, especially the IoT blight is a horrible idea. If your primary defense is obscurity then accepting a broadcast from anywhere is a recipe for disaster. Wired automation is intrinsically safer because it requires physical access though I do not believe that should be it's only defense.
Smoking costs the NHS approximately £2 billion a year to treat. The tax raised on cigarettes is approximately £12.3 billion.
Ha! It's cute that you think this problem is limited to your country and that you act like it's always been like this.
If CBC doesn't want people to access their content indirectly, they can configure their servers to prohibit such activity. The fact that they haven't means they aren't serious or they are idiots. In both cases, their words lack credibility.
Your question is as absurd as asking if the Golden Gate Bridge should be made of actual gold.
<Overlord> N7.
<Samsung_> aww shit. hit. R3.
<Overlord> miss! umm... J5?
<Samsung_> FUCK! another hit. Q9.
<Overlord> miss, ha! S-
<Samsung_> NO! NOT S! ANYTHING BUT S!
Why do people keep buying these unsafe cars from a manufacturer who can't be trusted?
it might have something to do with... i dunno, facts: Tesla’s Model S Sedan Named Safest Car In The History Of Cars
Would I go back to New Delhi?
In a heart beat.
No, you wouldn't, otherwise you would have already left. The truth is that you have built-up a fantasy of what life in New Delhi is like and actually living there would shatter that fantasy with cold buckets of reality.
I'd sooner spend a long weekend in New Delhi than the SF Bay or LA
Ha! A single weekend is misrepresentative, go live there.
I've hear the Galaxy S8 is going to be so great it's going to explode on the scene. You'll be the envy of everyone who will want to call and talk about it so your phone certain to be blowing up. Sorry, I can't help myself, I'm on fire. ;)
Chome's dominance is not surprising. The number one way to lose users is to complacently enjoy the lead you have over your competitors and ignore user feedback. Microsoft and Mozilla are both experts are ignoring user feedback and both enjoyed large leads while they diverted resources. Chrome can also be defeated by a competitor that offers something better that they don't want to or refuse to provide. Frankly, I would like to see a fork of Chromium that focuses on privacy, ad blocking and script blocking (I don't like random scripts running on my machine). These are things Google wouldn't want to provide, so this could be how Chrome slips back to a 5% user share.
The people that continue to support Microsoft's grip on gaming are finally getting what they are supporting: quarantine.
is there any way to browse totally anonymous to the sites you are visiting?
there is actually a very simple way to do this, don't visit the site! however, to see the content of the site without visiting it, just plug the address into archive.org and you can see a snapshot of the page at certain dates. to ensure that a sneaky javascript isn't phoning home, use "noscript" or just use a browser without javascript execution capabilities.
Did I compare the amount I paid in tax to the total cost of cancer medication? No. I compared the tax I paid to the total cost of cancer medicine minus the total cost of the extra years of life I would gain, mostly drawing pension payments.
The problem is that this isn't about you but rather about smokers in general.
This is not including my biggest monthly bill which believe it or not isn't cigarette taxes but income and employment taxes.
And those taxes are allocated to many different things.
Tax on cigarettes is additional tax I pay.
Absolutely and that tax is not going to cover the cost of the medical bills when/if it gives you cancer.
I'm very good at watching the pea under the thimble, so don't try that one on me again.
The only thing I'm trying is to point out that smokers are a costly bunch of people to take care of when they get sick from smoking and that the cigarette tax isn't enough to make up for the amount you are taking out of the medical system. If everyone was a smoker and the resulting ill people were treated for cancer, it would bankrupt the medical system.
[T]he raw sewage is placed in a reactor that's basically a tube pressurized to 3,000 pounds per square inch and heated to 660 degrees Fahrenheit,
A) Where are you going to get all that energy to pressurized and heat the tube?
B) Is the overall energy loss greater or less than existing battery systems?
C) Why not use that energy directly instead of making crude oil that has to be refined?
They don't pay the crazy sums for health care that we do (single payer's a _lot_ less costly). Their gov't doesn't allow their drug companies to gouge their population.
indeed, this means their healthcare system is paying the cost for him and that money comes from taxes.
What our healthcare system in the US is being eaten up with is fake foods and obese people.
Well, this issue is specifically fructose and addictive foods. A big issue is that corn is subsidized which means that stuff like HFCS is subsidized. The result is that processed foods is less expensive than many of crops. However, taxing sugars themselves is not the answer because you can have a healthy food with lots of sugar: e.g. apples. If you are going to tax something directly, we should be taxing based on glycemic load and fructose content. However, this brings up complicated issues like how much the tax should be, how it should adjust with time, how much it should cover, etcetera. The alternative is to tax indirectly which would be tracking what people buy and taxing companies based on their medical expenses based on correlations found. This is a massive feedback loop mechanism which is not limited by the date of the purchase and follows people throughout their lives. It's big, complicated and scary but it would force companies to think of what their product does to people versus how to make a quick buck. I also think we need to reform how companies/executives are held responsible for their actions but that's another discussion.
$2 per pack? Are you kidding me? It's £9.50 in the UK.
Well that's almost £70K (assuming the tax never changed) if you smoke a full pack a day for 20 years. However, that is more of a more recent development and probably why you quit smoking, because you literally couldn't afford to continue. You've probably paid £35K in total taxes, assuming you smoked a full pack a day. That said, the price of the cancer medicine is the same but in the UK, your health care system is eating the cost. This means that overall you are costing society more than you are paying back.
Speaking as someone with around 3,000 new mutations (I quit a few months ago), I can tell you I've paid in tax on cigarettes about 2 x the cost of any treatment I'll get for the problems it'll cause and of course I'll take out a lot less in pension assuming I make it to 68, which is quite unlikely. So you know, these "massive" costs are actually net benefits if you're going to start accounting.
O RLY? Have you done the math? In the USA, it's taxed federally and locally but that turns out to currently be about $2 per pack (used to be much lower). If you smoke one pack a day for 20 years, that's $14,600 in tax.
I looked up the cost and the typical cost to be an inpatient at a hospital is $1,600 per day. If you are in the hospital, you have eight days to die before you start taking up resources. Now, let's just say you start smoking at age 20 and get cancer after 15 years, so at age 35, you will begin your cancer treatment. You will likely survive a couple years and then die. The cost of the medication to fight cancer is $100,000 per year alone. Your two month decline to dying is going to rack up $96,000. You will expended more than $300,000 after paying $10,950 in cigarette excise tax.
Besides, it's not like anyone is making a video wall out of phones.
good sir, you should search before making such bold claims! BEHOLD! The video wall of windows phones!
The market is saturated. Do or do not, there is no try.
That's the smell of iRome burning.
so which is it, free application that brings in no money or business a application that somehow can't afford testing on multiple platforms?
The only ways to go around the store are even more expensive: A. buy a Mac for each of your iOS users so that they can install the application from source code using Xcode, or B. the iOS Developer Enterprise Program, which requires employing all your users.
LOL! oh man, you're helpless.