I agree it could be one of multiple factors. The bank bubble of the 1920's could have temporarily masked the brewing problem. When the crash happened, the problem became naked.
Societal transformations caused by technological change don't always progress smoothly. If you've been farming all your life, moving to the city to put widgets into gadgets on an assembly line may be too big a life change later in life such that you choose to battle it out with the remaining farmers instead, giving you and the other farmers less income, depressing the economy, or at least tilting it in destabilizing ways.
Even if [driving bots were] ready... No business is going to throw out a perfectly functional truck to buy an expensive self driving truck just because one became available.
If a truck lasts about 20 years, then about 5% will be replaced every year anyhow.
Our family once had an iPhone where the OS upgrade froze it, requiring a rebaseline, essentially. We lost all the data. Apple recommended we install iTunes to do a full data back-up next time, but iTunes made the Window PC go funky. Apple recommended we buy an iMac instead of a PC.
Re: "Please elaborate." - Oh, please. Do you really have no imagination?
That's about snooping. Diff issue, and probably orthogonal to who "owns" the wires.
Soviet Estonia vs. Finland; Eastern Germany vs. Western North Korea vs. South
Oh please! Those are non-democracies. Lack of democracy will screw up ANY system: capitalism, socialism, gerbilism, etc.
The best systems appear to mixed systems. Too much capitalism or too much socialism shows the worse results. Capitalism can fly higher, but then often crashes down via bubbles and excess cronyism buildup. Politicians just can't resist the Yuuuuge money of the fat cats. Canada avoided most of the mortgage bubble by having sufficient mortgage regulations in place.
It appears the penalty for Apple/Google/Et-al's anti-poaching deal a few years ago was not strong enough to send a message to other companies thinking of the same.
I'm thinking the browser/viewer could encrypt the cache somehow and give you up to a few hours of delay (or whatever the content author allows). But with hacking cat/mouse games, sometimes that's easier said than done.
That's only if Action A depends on Action B. But exposing X typically won't also involve having to expose Y. Although, you are welcome to present such a scenario.
The court ruling there is merely that it's not illegal for Yelp to be biased in itself. Nor did the article identify any specific bias.
However, if they advertised that they were unbiased, and it were discovered and provable they were, then someone could successfully sue them for false advertising if it can be argued it hurts their business.
For example, Restaurant B suspects that Restaurant A bribed Yelp for a better rating, Restaurant B could then also bribe Yelp, document that its ratings went up without corresponding review changes, and then sue Yelp in court for false advertising to recover losses to A (if Yelp claims to be unbiased).
But Yelp may decide it's better to pay B the difference rather than change their general practices. (I don't know if punitive damages would also be in order.)
For a short while we had 3, but then one bought #3 out and we were back to 2. I was just about to mail the contract also, singing to myself, "Sayonara you stinkin duopolies!". Then heard about the merger on the news on the way to work. Doh! I wish the regulators stopped that merger.
It's possible half of what he did was "good" and half was "bad". In the legal system, doing good doesn't usually counter-act the bad.
Let's say you rescued a child from a burning building, and then an hour later you kicked a dog and broke its leg. Rescuing the child doesn't cancel the kicking act in most courts.
Some of the stuff Ed released may turn out to be legitimate to release, but other stuff perhaps not.
It's important to stress that all of these things have already had a great deal of work on them...
I'm skeptical. That "great deal of work" is mostly with simplistic models: spherical-cow kind of stuff. If it's new technology it generally ends up costing far more than originally expected when actually implemented. And there's a good chance of failure on the first try.
I would suggest starting simple: send two sample-return probes to two diverse locations on Venus. Forget about the re-use angle.
(Another problem with sample return is quarantine. Any sample return will have to pass through Venus' atmosphere, which could harbor microbes in the mid altitudes. Let's not risk a planetary Darwin Award.)
You also seem to be confusing "socialism" with "crony capitalism". A good many competition-killing laws are bribed into place by established companies trying to keep out new competition.
You seem to be implying that all bad laws in place are from socialists or those with socialist ideals, which is often not the case.
I agree that crony capitalism laws are usually bad. However, nobody has found a side-effect-free way to fix that problem, especially on the local level. I'm all ears...
That's mostly based on anecdotes, and we don't know how many counter-anecdotes were excluded from that article just by reading it.
with government policing the Internet traffic
Please elaborate.
Today I can switch from FiOS to Comcast in a matter of days should I decide to.
And what if they BOTH suck? That's the situation our family finds ourselves in. We've tried both ISP's available in our area, and are highly dissatisfied with both, but there are no viable alternatives in our area, despite being relatively heavily populated. Friends and co-workers report the same crap.
I'd welcome more experiments in various states and counties to see what works best rather than just argue theory and dogma, but every scenario that I "mentally simulate" over the longer run shows the last-mile-problem causing tons of wasted resources, duplication, property damage, and/or higher prices.
Indeed that's the point: an easy choice. If your bandwidth is currently hosed by Evil ISP, then it would be nice to switch to caching instead of streaming without closing your browser/viewer and going to a different utility.
Oligopolies suffer from similar problems as "big gov't": not enough competition to give them incentive and to give consumers real choices. They historically almost always take advantage of insufficient competition to screw customers: Railroads, oil, cars, computers (IBM, MS), CPU's, telecoms, etc. have shown mass dickery under oligopolies or monopolies.
If there were say 7 or more realistic ISP choices per typical customer, THEN competition could work its magic, Adam-Smith-style.
The biggest road-block to more competition in my opinion is the "last mile problem". It's not realistic nor efficient for every competitor to run wires to every potential customer. It's the main reason Google is dropping out in many areas.
If a gov't utility could set up "last mile" wiring, then multiple ISP's would only have to hook up to centralized routing nodes, not to each house. It's then just a switch. This could invite the competition needed to end most ISP BS such that regulators wouldn't have to get involved nearly as much.
The right conditions have to be in place for capitalism to work right.
And also the ability to delay or offload content in cache. For example, if your bandwidth is currently funky (as is typical with oligopoly ISP's), then set the play to notify you when the download is complete or the buffer reaches a certain percent complete. A fuller menu would look something like:
Bandwidth and Delay Options: Quality (higher quality may slow download):
[x] Automatic
[_] High-Definition [rate value here]
[_] Medium [rate value here]
[_] Low [rate value here]
[_] Etc. Delayed Playback:
[x] Don't play until buffer has ____ seconds of video [with a default but editable number]
[_] Don't play until entire video is cached on your computer, Auto-Play
[_] Don't play until entire video is cached on your computer, Pop-Up-Notification
[_] Don't play until entire video is cached on your computer, No notification (click video window to play when "Ready" indicated)
But companies can argue these kind of options are too confusing to most consumers. Maybe a good UI designer could make them friendlier...
We could have sent a blimp to spend months in the skies of Venus with a multiuse phase-change/bellow balloon lander to sample all across the surface for that price.
The surface of Venus is 800 degrees Fahrenheit. A balloon would have its electronics fried. You'd need something akin to a rocket with A/C to get down and back up fast to sample the surface in a re-usable way. That ain't gonna be cheap.
That being said, I generally agree with you. A Titan boat-bot would be cool both scientifically and conceptually.
Mars gets attention because allegedly there's going to be a manned mission there such that we have to survey it first. But I hate to see general planetary science get steam-rolled by a manned focus.
The bot-vs-man battle of space-flight politics and funding is a tricky fight. Bots just don't have the political "glory factor" that astronauts do. We can try to sell bots until the mechanical cows come home, but it will likely fail yet again.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree it could be one of multiple factors. The bank bubble of the 1920's could have temporarily masked the brewing problem. When the crash happened, the problem became naked.
Societal transformations caused by technological change don't always progress smoothly. If you've been farming all your life, moving to the city to put widgets into gadgets on an assembly line may be too big a life change later in life such that you choose to battle it out with the remaining farmers instead, giving you and the other farmers less income, depressing the economy, or at least tilting it in destabilizing ways.
If a truck lasts about 20 years, then about 5% will be replaced every year anyhow.
Sorry, "Windows". Typo.
iTunes has long been known to be buggy on Windows. It caused networking problems in our case.
Thus, to backup an iPhone properly, we'd have to buy a Mac. A file copy is incomplete, or at least not readily restore-able.
While true, I think you missed the main point.
Our family once had an iPhone where the OS upgrade froze it, requiring a rebaseline, essentially. We lost all the data. Apple recommended we install iTunes to do a full data back-up next time, but iTunes made the Window PC go funky. Apple recommended we buy an iMac instead of a PC.
Trump: "I'll blow the damned moon out of the water! The moon doesn't respect USA, it keeps mooning Obama."
The Galaxy Note 7 tried anti-matter, but that didn't work out so well.
Early Android phones did this. The bottom row of the screen had a bar with a "back" button, a "home" button, and a "settings" button.
That's about snooping. Diff issue, and probably orthogonal to who "owns" the wires.
Oh please! Those are non-democracies. Lack of democracy will screw up ANY system: capitalism, socialism, gerbilism, etc.
The best systems appear to mixed systems. Too much capitalism or too much socialism shows the worse results. Capitalism can fly higher, but then often crashes down via bubbles and excess cronyism buildup. Politicians just can't resist the Yuuuuge money of the fat cats. Canada avoided most of the mortgage bubble by having sufficient mortgage regulations in place.
Goldilockism.
It appears the penalty for Apple/Google/Et-al's anti-poaching deal a few years ago was not strong enough to send a message to other companies thinking of the same.
http://fortune.com/2015/09/03/...
Win some, lose some
I'm thinking the browser/viewer could encrypt the cache somehow and give you up to a few hours of delay (or whatever the content author allows). But with hacking cat/mouse games, sometimes that's easier said than done.
That's only if Action A depends on Action B. But exposing X typically won't also involve having to expose Y. Although, you are welcome to present such a scenario.
The court ruling there is merely that it's not illegal for Yelp to be biased in itself. Nor did the article identify any specific bias.
However, if they advertised that they were unbiased, and it were discovered and provable they were, then someone could successfully sue them for false advertising if it can be argued it hurts their business.
For example, Restaurant B suspects that Restaurant A bribed Yelp for a better rating, Restaurant B could then also bribe Yelp, document that its ratings went up without corresponding review changes, and then sue Yelp in court for false advertising to recover losses to A (if Yelp claims to be unbiased).
But Yelp may decide it's better to pay B the difference rather than change their general practices. (I don't know if punitive damages would also be in order.)
Unfortunately, sometimes it's cheaper to sue than make your service better.
For a short while we had 3, but then one bought #3 out and we were back to 2. I was just about to mail the contract also, singing to myself, "Sayonara you stinkin duopolies!". Then heard about the merger on the news on the way to work. Doh! I wish the regulators stopped that merger.
It's possible half of what he did was "good" and half was "bad". In the legal system, doing good doesn't usually counter-act the bad.
Let's say you rescued a child from a burning building, and then an hour later you kicked a dog and broke its leg. Rescuing the child doesn't cancel the kicking act in most courts.
Some of the stuff Ed released may turn out to be legitimate to release, but other stuff perhaps not.
I'm skeptical. That "great deal of work" is mostly with simplistic models: spherical-cow kind of stuff. If it's new technology it generally ends up costing far more than originally expected when actually implemented. And there's a good chance of failure on the first try.
I would suggest starting simple: send two sample-return probes to two diverse locations on Venus. Forget about the re-use angle.
(Another problem with sample return is quarantine. Any sample return will have to pass through Venus' atmosphere, which could harbor microbes in the mid altitudes. Let's not risk a planetary Darwin Award.)
Addendum
You also seem to be confusing "socialism" with "crony capitalism". A good many competition-killing laws are bribed into place by established companies trying to keep out new competition.
You seem to be implying that all bad laws in place are from socialists or those with socialist ideals, which is often not the case.
I agree that crony capitalism laws are usually bad. However, nobody has found a side-effect-free way to fix that problem, especially on the local level. I'm all ears...
That's mostly based on anecdotes, and we don't know how many counter-anecdotes were excluded from that article just by reading it.
Please elaborate.
And what if they BOTH suck? That's the situation our family finds ourselves in. We've tried both ISP's available in our area, and are highly dissatisfied with both, but there are no viable alternatives in our area, despite being relatively heavily populated. Friends and co-workers report the same crap.
I'd welcome more experiments in various states and counties to see what works best rather than just argue theory and dogma, but every scenario that I "mentally simulate" over the longer run shows the last-mile-problem causing tons of wasted resources, duplication, property damage, and/or higher prices.
Indeed that's the point: an easy choice. If your bandwidth is currently hosed by Evil ISP, then it would be nice to switch to caching instead of streaming without closing your browser/viewer and going to a different utility.
Oligopolies suffer from similar problems as "big gov't": not enough competition to give them incentive and to give consumers real choices. They historically almost always take advantage of insufficient competition to screw customers: Railroads, oil, cars, computers (IBM, MS), CPU's, telecoms, etc. have shown mass dickery under oligopolies or monopolies.
If there were say 7 or more realistic ISP choices per typical customer, THEN competition could work its magic, Adam-Smith-style.
The biggest road-block to more competition in my opinion is the "last mile problem". It's not realistic nor efficient for every competitor to run wires to every potential customer. It's the main reason Google is dropping out in many areas.
If a gov't utility could set up "last mile" wiring, then multiple ISP's would only have to hook up to centralized routing nodes, not to each house. It's then just a switch. This could invite the competition needed to end most ISP BS such that regulators wouldn't have to get involved nearly as much.
The right conditions have to be in place for capitalism to work right.
"Pixellated indistinct blobs, gotta catch em all!"
And also the ability to delay or offload content in cache. For example, if your bandwidth is currently funky (as is typical with oligopoly ISP's), then set the play to notify you when the download is complete or the buffer reaches a certain percent complete. A fuller menu would look something like:
Bandwidth and Delay Options:
Quality (higher quality may slow download):
[x] Automatic
[_] High-Definition [rate value here]
[_] Medium [rate value here]
[_] Low [rate value here]
[_] Etc.
Delayed Playback:
[x] Don't play until buffer has ____ seconds of video [with a default but editable number]
[_] Don't play until entire video is cached on your computer, Auto-Play
[_] Don't play until entire video is cached on your computer, Pop-Up-Notification
[_] Don't play until entire video is cached on your computer, No notification (click video window to play when "Ready" indicated)
But companies can argue these kind of options are too confusing to most consumers. Maybe a good UI designer could make them friendlier...
The surface of Venus is 800 degrees Fahrenheit. A balloon would have its electronics fried. You'd need something akin to a rocket with A/C to get down and back up fast to sample the surface in a re-usable way. That ain't gonna be cheap.
That being said, I generally agree with you. A Titan boat-bot would be cool both scientifically and conceptually.
Mars gets attention because allegedly there's going to be a manned mission there such that we have to survey it first. But I hate to see general planetary science get steam-rolled by a manned focus.
The bot-vs-man battle of space-flight politics and funding is a tricky fight. Bots just don't have the political "glory factor" that astronauts do. We can try to sell bots until the mechanical cows come home, but it will likely fail yet again.