A few innocent lives may be lost, but that's a small price to pay for my peace of mind.
This is, quite literally, the rationale for every form of law (and law enforcement) which has ever existed or will ever exist. Even in the UK, where "police don't carry guns", a few innocent die and many innocents end up rotting in jail. We as a society accept that cost because we understand that no system is perfect but almost any system is better than none. We can try to reduce the number of innocents killed or otherwise injured in the pursuit of justice, but we will never get that number down to zero. So yes, a few innocent lives may be lost, but that's a small price to pay for our piece of mind.
The problem is he's conflating the two facts of who commits more crime and why.
He didn't even talk about why, so how can he be conflating it with anything?
Black people commit more crimes in western nations because of a variety of reasons, the primary being socioeconomic status. Control for that factor across black populations and all of a sudden blackness isn't the thing to look for when predicting criminal behavior.
That's wonderful; even if you had incontrovertible evidence for this and could convince every single person on the earth that "socioeconomic status" was the one and only reason for the difference it would still have absolutely nothing to do with what he was talking about.
However, if you really want to go off topic, consider the fact that your explanation says nothing about why there's such a big difference in the "economic status". You haven't actually explained anything, you've just pointed out a correlation without demonstrating a root cause. It's like saying "the reason country X has more car accidents is because people drive worse". Well thank you Dr. Science.
It's always been confusing. Your BIOS is stored in ROM, so it's a type of non voletlie memory which is really storage. CDs were more fully referred to as "CD-ROM" which implies that they're memory, even though they're storage. EPROM is also a type of storage; the basis of present day "flash memory", which is also storage.
There's never been a clear-cut differentiation in how we use the terms "memory" and "storage", which is why we keep having these silly discussions. It all depends on the context. From a purely technical perspective there's nothing wrong with referring to storage as "memory" (after all, it remembers stuff) whereas it would be incorrect to refer to volatile memory (ie. RAM) as storage since it doesn't typically store data for any appreciable length of time (and not at all when it's powered off).
We probably need better words to describe these things but, unfortunately, we're pretty much stuck with what we have.
Your wife's shop doesn't provide the ability for users to create an account? It doesn't store order details and financial records? It doesn't send confirmation emails?
What's she running, a static HTML page on GeoCities saying "come pay cash at our physical store"?
It's an arbitrary difference so Slashdot (ie. people better informed that you) doesn't care. SSDs are commonly refered to as "flash memory". They evolved from EEPROM technology. You know what ROM stands for, right?
When talking about "memory" and "storage" the context is more important than the words themselves.
If you are highly educated though, good luck, f**k you, go work elsewhere, shut up and pay your obscenely high taxes so we can pay some idiot to tighten a bolt.
That's supply and demand baby. We spent decades pushing every Joe, Dick, and Harry to get a university degree, and steering them away from the trades. So they went out and got them. Turns out we don't actually need 5 million software engineers and 10 million "communications" technicians, so now only the best of those who got a degree can actually get a decent job. Meanwhile we do actually still need plumbers, mechanics, and general labourers, and since we've successfully depleted the pool of people working in those jobs their value has gone up significantly.
I tried to explain this to my contemporaries while I was still in highschool but, apparently, "supply and demand" was a difficult concept for the college-bound crowd to grasp.
Our murder rate in Ottawa, the capital, with ~1m people is 15-20/yr. There is probably no area of town where I wouldn't walk at night. Canada is the kinder gentler America.
If, when deciding whether to live in Canada or the USA, "murder rate" makes it anywhere into your top ten list of deciding factors, you are a very silly person.
Yes, but robbing Peter to pay Peter comes a lot closer, both to the truth, and to sustainability.
"A lot closer" to sustainability still isn't sustainable.
Of course you're not robbing Peter to pay Peter, otherwise there would be no point. You're robbing Peter so that you can pay John, Paul, and Ringo, and then you're give a bit of money back to Peter so that you can pretend you didn't rob him.
Canada has better overall health outcomes than the US. That's just a fact. Also, studies show the US would save $17 Trillion (with a 'T') dollars switching to single payer.
Given that total spending is only 3.3 trillion, that would be quite the trick! Maybe you're planning on getting Mexico to pay you for it?
Oh, and to elaborate on why the Soviets had better luck with Venus than Mars... people focus (of course) on the heat and pressure due to the dense atmosphere. And it's of course a real issue, although one that even Soviet tech developed in the 1960s could deal with.
Their longest-surviving probe lasted about 2 hours, which is a pretty funny definition of "deal with". Sure, maybe we could stretch that to 4 hours or, if we are really really clever, even a whole day, but you're never going to get a Venus Rover booting around the planet for years at a time like we can on Mars.
Personally I think Mercury would be a much more worthwhile target. While it's closer to the sun it's actually not as hot as Venus, meaning probes could last longer. More importantly, the poles seem to have ice, meaning water should be easily available for possible manned missions, and it's proximity to the sun means that solar panels would be far more effective than on earth, and orders of magnitude more effective than on Mars.
Also we've NEVER landed a probe on Mercury, so if you take want to break new grounds it's definitely a better destination than Venus.
For example, you can buy a $1,000 drone and strap maybe a one or two pounds of explosives to it (a hand grenade worth maybe) and maybe kill a few people
Two things:
1. You can build an equally capable drone for far less than $1,000. You don't need a fancy 4k camera and you don't need a lot of the hardware and software intended to make them appealing for home users, plus you don't need to make them look pretty. You could build your "hand-grande drone" for $250 easy; less if you're making a bunch of them.
2. While people tend to think of quadrocopters when discussing drones, fixed-winged models can carry a lot more payload. If you're looking to build a suicide-drone, that's your best option. You can order an RC plane kit for under $200 which would be capable of carrying 10+ lbs of explosives. Slap a camera, a controller, and a 3g modem on it and you've got a cheap heavy lift drone capable of attacking targets many miles away.
Also, reguardles of the method used, don't forget the advantage provided by air-burst capability. 2 pounds of explosives and shrapnel at ground level in a crowd might blow off some legs and kill one or two people; the same load detonated above the heads of a large crowd could kill dozens.
Interesting that you left out that key modifier though, did you just not realize how that adjective renders the claim faulty?
It's a useless adjective; there's no such thing as perfection. I was being charitable and assuming you had included it by accident. If you're actually concerned with perfection then you are a far sillier man than I had thought.
Of course this is a fairy tale. Supposed "white hat hackers" are in it for the money (or fame leading to money) and if they happen to find a vulnerability in a "big name" company (for sufficiently large values of "big") I have no doubt they'll exploit that knowledge for their better outcome not the target.
You have no doubt of it because you're the kind of cunt who would do that. You shouldn't project your own values onto other people, though.
I haven't "hacked" anything in well over a decade, but back when I was interested in that stuff I would regularly run scans for common volnurabilities and then send anonymized email to the administrators of vulnerable hosts letting them know what I found. Did I sniff around their networks a bit first? Sure. Did I ever blackmail anyone or use their resources to get "fame" for myself? Fuck no. Not all of us are fame and money hungry twats like you. I certainly could have used the cash back then, but I considered my morals to be rather more important.
Back then I also had a fun time hajacking botnets and using them to DDOS the original owner for a bit of well earned schadenfreude. After which I would set them free. There's this little thing called "empathy" which normal people have; it leads us to identify with the poor bastards whose computers have been exploited so that we want to help them rather than taking advantage of them. I'm sure that's a difficult thing for you to understand, but it exists nonetheless.
Number of people in prison is the best indicator of the likelihood of being imprisoned.
I could see why someone with a child-like understanding of reality would believe that. I've already explained why it's wrong though, so repeating yourself is pointless.
Slashdot Mirror
Total attendance was just over 60,000 so that gives you some basis for running your numbers.
He seems to think that investigating is illegal. I'm not sure why.
A few innocent lives may be lost, but that's a small price to pay for my peace of mind.
This is, quite literally, the rationale for every form of law (and law enforcement) which has ever existed or will ever exist. Even in the UK, where "police don't carry guns", a few innocent die and many innocents end up rotting in jail. We as a society accept that cost because we understand that no system is perfect but almost any system is better than none. We can try to reduce the number of innocents killed or otherwise injured in the pursuit of justice, but we will never get that number down to zero. So yes, a few innocent lives may be lost, but that's a small price to pay for our piece of mind.
Everyone knows that OJ is just a victim of early facial recognition technology.
The problem is he's conflating the two facts of who commits more crime and why.
He didn't even talk about why, so how can he be conflating it with anything?
Black people commit more crimes in western nations because of a variety of reasons, the primary being socioeconomic status. Control for that factor across black populations and all of a sudden blackness isn't the thing to look for when predicting criminal behavior.
That's wonderful; even if you had incontrovertible evidence for this and could convince every single person on the earth that "socioeconomic status" was the one and only reason for the difference it would still have absolutely nothing to do with what he was talking about.
However, if you really want to go off topic, consider the fact that your explanation says nothing about why there's such a big difference in the "economic status". You haven't actually explained anything, you've just pointed out a correlation without demonstrating a root cause. It's like saying "the reason country X has more car accidents is because people drive worse". Well thank you Dr. Science.
It's always been confusing. Your BIOS is stored in ROM, so it's a type of non voletlie memory which is really storage. CDs were more fully referred to as "CD-ROM" which implies that they're memory, even though they're storage. EPROM is also a type of storage; the basis of present day "flash memory", which is also storage.
There's never been a clear-cut differentiation in how we use the terms "memory" and "storage", which is why we keep having these silly discussions. It all depends on the context. From a purely technical perspective there's nothing wrong with referring to storage as "memory" (after all, it remembers stuff) whereas it would be incorrect to refer to volatile memory (ie. RAM) as storage since it doesn't typically store data for any appreciable length of time (and not at all when it's powered off).
We probably need better words to describe these things but, unfortunately, we're pretty much stuck with what we have.
How does your appeal to gerontocracy wave away the fact that "memory" has always been used for certain types of storage?
Your wife's shop doesn't provide the ability for users to create an account? It doesn't store order details and financial records? It doesn't send confirmation emails?
What's she running, a static HTML page on GeoCities saying "come pay cash at our physical store"?
It's an arbitrary difference so Slashdot (ie. people better informed that you) doesn't care. SSDs are commonly refered to as "flash memory". They evolved from EEPROM technology. You know what ROM stands for, right?
When talking about "memory" and "storage" the context is more important than the words themselves.
That would be a very valuable job, if they could find anyone to actually do it ...
If you are highly educated though, good luck, f**k you, go work elsewhere, shut up and pay your obscenely high taxes so we can pay some idiot to tighten a bolt.
That's supply and demand baby. We spent decades pushing every Joe, Dick, and Harry to get a university degree, and steering them away from the trades. So they went out and got them. Turns out we don't actually need 5 million software engineers and 10 million "communications" technicians, so now only the best of those who got a degree can actually get a decent job. Meanwhile we do actually still need plumbers, mechanics, and general labourers, and since we've successfully depleted the pool of people working in those jobs their value has gone up significantly.
I tried to explain this to my contemporaries while I was still in highschool but, apparently, "supply and demand" was a difficult concept for the college-bound crowd to grasp.
Our murder rate in Ottawa, the capital, with ~1m people is 15-20/yr. There is probably no area of town where I wouldn't walk at night. Canada is the kinder gentler America.
If, when deciding whether to live in Canada or the USA, "murder rate" makes it anywhere into your top ten list of deciding factors, you are a very silly person.
Yes, but robbing Peter to pay Peter comes a lot closer, both to the truth, and to sustainability.
"A lot closer" to sustainability still isn't sustainable.
Of course you're not robbing Peter to pay Peter, otherwise there would be no point. You're robbing Peter so that you can pay John, Paul, and Ringo, and then you're give a bit of money back to Peter so that you can pretend you didn't rob him.
Canada has better overall health outcomes than the US. That's just a fact. Also, studies show the US would save $17 Trillion (with a 'T') dollars switching to single payer.
Given that total spending is only 3.3 trillion, that would be quite the trick! Maybe you're planning on getting Mexico to pay you for it?
Why haven't you titanium armored your roof?
Because titanium is crap for armour. Guess you don't learn much about materials science when you're working on a liberal arts degree ...
Are you advocating we pool all our resources so a few people can go die in a more creative way on Mars while you let people here die?
No, that's clearly not what he's advocating, but I can understand why someone with a shoddy education might see it that way.
Oh, and to elaborate on why the Soviets had better luck with Venus than Mars... people focus (of course) on the heat and pressure due to the dense atmosphere. And it's of course a real issue, although one that even Soviet tech developed in the 1960s could deal with.
Their longest-surviving probe lasted about 2 hours, which is a pretty funny definition of "deal with". Sure, maybe we could stretch that to 4 hours or, if we are really really clever, even a whole day, but you're never going to get a Venus Rover booting around the planet for years at a time like we can on Mars.
Personally I think Mercury would be a much more worthwhile target. While it's closer to the sun it's actually not as hot as Venus, meaning probes could last longer. More importantly, the poles seem to have ice, meaning water should be easily available for possible manned missions, and it's proximity to the sun means that solar panels would be far more effective than on earth, and orders of magnitude more effective than on Mars.
Also we've NEVER landed a probe on Mercury, so if you take want to break new grounds it's definitely a better destination than Venus.
For example, you can buy a $1,000 drone and strap maybe a one or two pounds of explosives to it (a hand grenade worth maybe) and maybe kill a few people
Two things:
1. You can build an equally capable drone for far less than $1,000. You don't need a fancy 4k camera and you don't need a lot of the hardware and software intended to make them appealing for home users, plus you don't need to make them look pretty. You could build your "hand-grande drone" for $250 easy; less if you're making a bunch of them.
2. While people tend to think of quadrocopters when discussing drones, fixed-winged models can carry a lot more payload. If you're looking to build a suicide-drone, that's your best option. You can order an RC plane kit for under $200 which would be capable of carrying 10+ lbs of explosives. Slap a camera, a controller, and a 3g modem on it and you've got a cheap heavy lift drone capable of attacking targets many miles away.
Also, reguardles of the method used, don't forget the advantage provided by air-burst capability. 2 pounds of explosives and shrapnel at ground level in a crowd might blow off some legs and kill one or two people; the same load detonated above the heads of a large crowd could kill dozens.
Interesting that you left out that key modifier though, did you just not realize how that adjective renders the claim faulty?
It's a useless adjective; there's no such thing as perfection. I was being charitable and assuming you had included it by accident. If you're actually concerned with perfection then you are a far sillier man than I had thought.
Of course this is a fairy tale. Supposed "white hat hackers" are in it for the money (or fame leading to money) and if they happen to find a vulnerability in a "big name" company (for sufficiently large values of "big") I have no doubt they'll exploit that knowledge for their better outcome not the target.
You have no doubt of it because you're the kind of cunt who would do that. You shouldn't project your own values onto other people, though.
I haven't "hacked" anything in well over a decade, but back when I was interested in that stuff I would regularly run scans for common volnurabilities and then send anonymized email to the administrators of vulnerable hosts letting them know what I found. Did I sniff around their networks a bit first? Sure. Did I ever blackmail anyone or use their resources to get "fame" for myself? Fuck no. Not all of us are fame and money hungry twats like you. I certainly could have used the cash back then, but I considered my morals to be rather more important.
Back then I also had a fun time hajacking botnets and using them to DDOS the original owner for a bit of well earned schadenfreude. After which I would set them free. There's this little thing called "empathy" which normal people have; it leads us to identify with the poor bastards whose computers have been exploited so that we want to help them rather than taking advantage of them. I'm sure that's a difficult thing for you to understand, but it exists nonetheless.
Actually, if it were "perfectly" sensible, then there wouldn't be a non-zero number of innocents killed in self-defense incidents
Retarded argument is retarded.
"Hurrr durrr if fighting back against Nazis in WW2 were sensible them there wouldn't have been a non-zero number of innocent civilians killed"
How's that zero rounds per second machine gun working out for you?
If your electric car is making sparks, there's probably a problem. Now spark plugs in an ICE vehicle, on the other hand ...
Tesla is getting Zero MPG.
The fact that you think zero MPG is better than 80 MPG tells me all I need to know about how seriously to take your opinion.
China's economy is the world's biggest by PPP, which is the most sensible measurement of national production.
This is also nowhere near right. The US is 11th on the list, China is 79th.
Number of people in prison is the best indicator of the likelihood of being imprisoned.
I could see why someone with a child-like understanding of reality would believe that. I've already explained why it's wrong though, so repeating yourself is pointless.