Watermark software will just have to become more involved to get around this, such as randomizing/distorting size and density of watermarks. Watermarks will become like Captcha's.
Under Obama the Democrats refused to pass a budget, so they could tell the kind of tall tales you're spinning now.
Are we talking about the president or Congress? You seem to be moving the goalpost. I was talking about the president. I will agree both parties play political games to hide their real intentions. But that also means assigning spending blame to parties in Congress would be messy and nuanced.
And then the Iraq war [cost quote is] nonsense. The 1.6T number is bandied about in sock puppet echo chamber
I invite you to link to a reliable cost quote from a reliable source.
And as long as we're taking revisionist history, how many Democrats voted for [Iraq war]?
About 65% of Democrats and 98% of GOP. So that would make the Dems 65% stupid and the GOP 98% stupid. But, I was talking about prez, not congress.
In that case you are the one "lying with statistics" since absolute dollars doesn't take into account inflation nor population growth. Without accounting for inflation, you are comparing apples to oranges since today's dollar is not the same as 1985's dollar. His new programs were only about 1.6T (mostly stimulus and ACA). If he did nothing in office, sat in the corner drooling, the debt would be the same as it is now minus 1.6T.
And, the economy may have been even worse off without the stimulus, but that's mostly another subject. He is NOT more "spendy" than GOP. The Iraq war alone surpassed 1.6T.
I was talking with someone who said high speed rail and other such things are guvmint boondoggles.
Often the plans are boondoggles. Why not instead spend it on medium-speed rail that's placed where it's actually needed. And because it's cheaper than high-speed rail, more railways can be built for the same money. Stop trying to go for a home-run, just get players on bases.
It's really weird-like the way computers were supposed to reduce paper waste we shouldn't need to travel to work anymore yet exactly the opposite has happened.
It worked too well, actually. It made it far easier to outsource work to Timbuktu for $2/hr. The remaining jobs require "face time" in order to be competitive with $2/hr Timbuktuians. It's one of the few advantages a physical office worker has over them.
It just needs to try to communicate, period, whether it's with satellites or gerbils. If it kept sending a signal for long enough, then it could have been picked up.
And a backup to that could be to gradually leak micro-beads with a distinct chemical signature that would float to the top to leave a trail. That way if the broadcasting electronics are damaged, there is a secondary way to find sunken planes.
The title is vague, and arguably misleading. A good many readers, perhaps most, would interpret that title as meaning batteries manufactured by or installed by Samsung itself. How people are likely to interpret a headline is probably the most important metric of its quality, even if it's not "technically" wrong. If the article really is talking about counterfeits, then the title probably should have used the phrase "counterfeit batteries" or equivalent.
This reminds me of a movie/TV prop supplier company who rented out cardboard people to fill up theaters and stadiums in the backgrounds. They used roughly 80% cardboard dummies and 20% real people who would move and squirm to make the crowd look alive. (Tell your date you're a "professional squirmer".) The ratio of real people was typically higher near the front (close by) seats.
The cardboard dummies were based on photos of about 25 different people with hand alterations so that duplicates didn't stand out. That way they had fewer batch runs to prepare.
Fairly often some of the human "seat" actors ("extras") would mutilate the dummies out of job security, ripping arms off, drawing black-eyes on them, giving women mustaches, giving men boobs, etc. Thus, the co. had to spend a lot of time repairing them after shoots.
Now they probably use mostly CGI and/or canned footage stitched in via digital motion smoothers etc.
Now if only [Democrats] could learn to [save] other people's money.
Republicans have been the bigger spenders for the last several decades. Examples: Reagan's military buildup, including SDI; Bush's wars, Medic. Plan D, and DHS. And they cut taxes on the rich, causing revenue shortfalls, and then blame the problem on Democrats. Nice work.
Most people that actually do brain work...for 60+ hours/week end up being net negative workers in a couple of months...'Work ethic' doesn't imply 60 hour weeks
Okay, but then the definition of "work ethic" becomes subjective/vague/hard-to-measure, etc., making communication and studies about it difficult.
As far as hours worked affecting consumption, the only way to really settle it would be a direct study. Otherwise, we are both guessing human behavior.
Anyhow, I think the goal should be to get machines to work their tails off and NOT humans working their tails off*. The trick is to tune the motivations and money flow to the humans such that the benefits don't logjam to one group or to nowhere (recession).
* Social darwinists are against this, believing that difficult struggles keep humans strong and alert to protect against invaders (from other countries or maybe other planets).
I'd ask the sexy genie to give them all a work ethic instead.
If everyone worked 60 hours a week, then not enough would be out consuming to keep econ going. And it may make for less available jobs since 2 people do the work that 3 normally would. Still doesn't scale. Try again.
Robots have a great work ethic, by the way. (Until they break down.)
Obama had something similar called "President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness" which also seemed to amount to nothing; it was abandoned "due to a lack of engagement from council members".
O quitter: "This is a bunch of vague mumbo jumbo about synergy and 'expanding education opportunities' that puts me to sleep. I'm outta here."
T quitter: "WTF did he just say? I don't wanna be associated with that loon. Sayonara!"
No, he's just the worst president you've ever had, Republican or Democrat, by any objective measure you could possibly come up with. [Emph. added]
I'd argue that presidents who actually got stuff done, bad stuff, are worse. Trump is too innefective to even get bad stuff done.
The Vietnam and Iraq war come to mind. If Trump were around then, he perhaps would have bungled getting war underway, which would have been a good thing.
I'm just worried his undisciplined mouth and/or fingers may start a bigass conflict and/or we lose too many allies. And stirring up the red/blue culture war and pitting ethnicities against each other ain't helping. But other than that, an ineffective tyrant is usually better than an effective tyrant. He's like Adolf's dumber brother: same rants, but couldn't invade a wet paper bag. Most just slap their forehead or laugh at him. (Hypothetical brother.)
Making it less expensive is mostly moot if people cannot afford to buy most of it. Just because machines are capable of making something does not mean the owners actually will tell machine to do it, such as if there are not enough buyers (who can afford it).
I fully agree with the potential, but making it work in practice in a socioeconomic sense may be the real bottleneck.
McDonald's, but it's amazing that you can walk into a restaurant that is fairly ubiquitous and, for a dollar or two, you can get a decent amount of protein and calories
If one can cook, then buying sacks of grains such as wheat, rice, and oats is probably far cheaper. It may not be tasty, but it's nutritious. Mix in a little meat and spices to improve it. A side issue anyhow.
If you are 30 and working at a burger joint for minimum wage, regardless how good that minimum wage rate is, you need to re-evaluate your life and see how you can improve yourself
I'm not sure that solution scales. As a thought experiment, suppose a sexy genie blinked her eyes and everybody had a PhD education. That still wouldn't mean there's enough openings for advanced jobs. You'd end up with PhD's mopping the floors. (Maybe all the PhD's together would eventually invent true AI, but that's a whole other chapter.)
It reminds me of the joke that I don't have to outrun the bear to survive, only outrun the person next to me.
Anything that encourages labor automation is a net benefit to the world.
"could be" instead of "is". The problem is that the benefits of automation are not trickling down in practice (other than cheap widgets and lawn-chairs). The benefits go mostly to the owners of the machines: it's becoming a winner-take-all economy.
I'm not a "commie", but this is just the kind of problem Karl Marx ranted about. I don't necessarily agree with his proposed solutions, but if some other solution is not found, then rioting etc. could lead to Marxism/communism, along with its down sides. Better to solve it smartly rather than let angry mobs "solve" it for us.
I once worked for a place where the top boss did the notification recordings. One morning the radio was doing a typical test and I was thinking, "Shit, my boss followed me home and is waking me up! Or, is this a bad dream?"
I wonder if someday we'll hear:
"This is a test of the American Emergency Broadcasting System. I am the Great President Donald J. Trump, who by the way won the popular vote if you discount the filthy illegals who work at milk places. If this were a bigly emergency, I'd tell you exactly what to do and where to do. I'm really good at that, believe me; it's what I did as a really really successful businessman. If you hear some other looozer on the radio talking in a showboating emergency-sounding voice, ignore them, they are fake news. I alone can rescue the world. MAGA out!"
It doesn't explain why she missed the training course(s). Normally a CEO has assistants to make sure such appointments are scheduled and kept. I wouldn't expect a CEO or equivalent to micromanage such scheduling all themselves. Therefore, the failure was a team effort. Yes, she "should have" found a way, but "should have" is not the same as "gross negligence".
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed; we could have filled the gaps to make him STFU about it.
By removing houses? I thought that's part of the problem.
Watermark software will just have to become more involved to get around this, such as randomizing/distorting size and density of watermarks. Watermarks will become like Captcha's.
I will agree both parties are guilty of the debt in many ways. But GOP keeps painting O as a mass spender.
It makes healthcare far cheaper in other countries compared to what we pay under both ACA and BushCare.
GOP championed it, and most Dems admitted it was a mistake, unlike GOP.
That's good, Apple and MS still need new ideas to steal.
Are we talking about the president or Congress? You seem to be moving the goalpost. I was talking about the president. I will agree both parties play political games to hide their real intentions. But that also means assigning spending blame to parties in Congress would be messy and nuanced.
I invite you to link to a reliable cost quote from a reliable source.
About 65% of Democrats and 98% of GOP. So that would make the Dems 65% stupid and the GOP 98% stupid. But, I was talking about prez, not congress.
In that case you are the one "lying with statistics" since absolute dollars doesn't take into account inflation nor population growth. Without accounting for inflation, you are comparing apples to oranges since today's dollar is not the same as 1985's dollar. His new programs were only about 1.6T (mostly stimulus and ACA). If he did nothing in office, sat in the corner drooling, the debt would be the same as it is now minus 1.6T.
And, the economy may have been even worse off without the stimulus, but that's mostly another subject. He is NOT more "spendy" than GOP. The Iraq war alone surpassed 1.6T.
Whether that's true or not may not matter: it's what the PHB's and owners believe.
Often the plans are boondoggles. Why not instead spend it on medium-speed rail that's placed where it's actually needed. And because it's cheaper than high-speed rail, more railways can be built for the same money. Stop trying to go for a home-run, just get players on bases.
It worked too well, actually. It made it far easier to outsource work to Timbuktu for $2/hr. The remaining jobs require "face time" in order to be competitive with $2/hr Timbuktuians. It's one of the few advantages a physical office worker has over them.
It just needs to try to communicate, period, whether it's with satellites or gerbils. If it kept sending a signal for long enough, then it could have been picked up.
And a backup to that could be to gradually leak micro-beads with a distinct chemical signature that would float to the top to leave a trail. That way if the broadcasting electronics are damaged, there is a secondary way to find sunken planes.
The title is vague, and arguably misleading. A good many readers, perhaps most, would interpret that title as meaning batteries manufactured by or installed by Samsung itself. How people are likely to interpret a headline is probably the most important metric of its quality, even if it's not "technically" wrong. If the article really is talking about counterfeits, then the title probably should have used the phrase "counterfeit batteries" or equivalent.
This reminds me of a movie/TV prop supplier company who rented out cardboard people to fill up theaters and stadiums in the backgrounds. They used roughly 80% cardboard dummies and 20% real people who would move and squirm to make the crowd look alive. (Tell your date you're a "professional squirmer".) The ratio of real people was typically higher near the front (close by) seats.
The cardboard dummies were based on photos of about 25 different people with hand alterations so that duplicates didn't stand out. That way they had fewer batch runs to prepare.
Fairly often some of the human "seat" actors ("extras") would mutilate the dummies out of job security, ripping arms off, drawing black-eyes on them, giving women mustaches, giving men boobs, etc. Thus, the co. had to spend a lot of time repairing them after shoots.
Now they probably use mostly CGI and/or canned footage stitched in via digital motion smoothers etc.
Republicans have been the bigger spenders for the last several decades. Examples: Reagan's military buildup, including SDI; Bush's wars, Medic. Plan D, and DHS. And they cut taxes on the rich, causing revenue shortfalls, and then blame the problem on Democrats. Nice work.
Okay, but then the definition of "work ethic" becomes subjective/vague/hard-to-measure, etc., making communication and studies about it difficult.
As far as hours worked affecting consumption, the only way to really settle it would be a direct study. Otherwise, we are both guessing human behavior.
Anyhow, I think the goal should be to get machines to work their tails off and NOT humans working their tails off*. The trick is to tune the motivations and money flow to the humans such that the benefits don't logjam to one group or to nowhere (recession).
* Social darwinists are against this, believing that difficult struggles keep humans strong and alert to protect against invaders (from other countries or maybe other planets).
If everyone worked 60 hours a week, then not enough would be out consuming to keep econ going. And it may make for less available jobs since 2 people do the work that 3 normally would. Still doesn't scale. Try again.
Robots have a great work ethic, by the way. (Until they break down.)
O quitter: "This is a bunch of vague mumbo jumbo about synergy and 'expanding education opportunities' that puts me to sleep. I'm outta here."
T quitter: "WTF did he just say? I don't wanna be associated with that loon. Sayonara!"
I'd argue that presidents who actually got stuff done, bad stuff, are worse. Trump is too innefective to even get bad stuff done.
The Vietnam and Iraq war come to mind. If Trump were around then, he perhaps would have bungled getting war underway, which would have been a good thing.
I'm just worried his undisciplined mouth and/or fingers may start a bigass conflict and/or we lose too many allies. And stirring up the red/blue culture war and pitting ethnicities against each other ain't helping. But other than that, an ineffective tyrant is usually better than an effective tyrant. He's like Adolf's dumber brother: same rants, but couldn't invade a wet paper bag. Most just slap their forehead or laugh at him. (Hypothetical brother.)
Making it less expensive is mostly moot if people cannot afford to buy most of it. Just because machines are capable of making something does not mean the owners actually will tell machine to do it, such as if there are not enough buyers (who can afford it).
I fully agree with the potential, but making it work in practice in a socioeconomic sense may be the real bottleneck.
If one can cook, then buying sacks of grains such as wheat, rice, and oats is probably far cheaper. It may not be tasty, but it's nutritious. Mix in a little meat and spices to improve it. A side issue anyhow.
Ironic, you elected a crybaby bitch.
I'm not sure that solution scales. As a thought experiment, suppose a sexy genie blinked her eyes and everybody had a PhD education. That still wouldn't mean there's enough openings for advanced jobs. You'd end up with PhD's mopping the floors. (Maybe all the PhD's together would eventually invent true AI, but that's a whole other chapter.)
It reminds me of the joke that I don't have to outrun the bear to survive, only outrun the person next to me.
"could be" instead of "is". The problem is that the benefits of automation are not trickling down in practice (other than cheap widgets and lawn-chairs). The benefits go mostly to the owners of the machines: it's becoming a winner-take-all economy.
I'm not a "commie", but this is just the kind of problem Karl Marx ranted about. I don't necessarily agree with his proposed solutions, but if some other solution is not found, then rioting etc. could lead to Marxism/communism, along with its down sides. Better to solve it smartly rather than let angry mobs "solve" it for us.
Often because they block each other in gridlock.
I once worked for a place where the top boss did the notification recordings. One morning the radio was doing a typical test and I was thinking, "Shit, my boss followed me home and is waking me up! Or, is this a bad dream?"
I wonder if someday we'll hear:
"This is a test of the American Emergency Broadcasting System. I am the Great President Donald J. Trump, who by the way won the popular vote if you discount the filthy illegals who work at milk places. If this were a bigly emergency, I'd tell you exactly what to do and where to do. I'm really good at that, believe me; it's what I did as a really really successful businessman. If you hear some other looozer on the radio talking in a showboating emergency-sounding voice, ignore them, they are fake news. I alone can rescue the world. MAGA out!"
Here's a link.
It doesn't explain why she missed the training course(s). Normally a CEO has assistants to make sure such appointments are scheduled and kept. I wouldn't expect a CEO or equivalent to micromanage such scheduling all themselves. Therefore, the failure was a team effort. Yes, she "should have" found a way, but "should have" is not the same as "gross negligence".