This is stupid, I have been on the internet since i was a kid. I cant tell you how many times I said i was 13 when I was under.. And even more saying I was 18 when I was nowhere close. I am by no means advocating for having to give ID and prove someone is a certain age, I however this these kinds of laws are bullshit and everyone knows what really happens.
Like any age gate, enforcing the age restriction isn't important, it's about making an effort to say "we put in an age gate, we've complied with the law". Likewise, the law requiring an age gate is arse covering for the politicians so they can say "we've made all these sites put in an age gate... we're doing Something(TM), re-elect Shonkey McShonkface for governor" and the "think of the Children" crowd get a warm fuzzy feeling about all the children they're protecting.
Boss: HARRISON... I bloody well told you to stop watching Porn at the office. /furious clicking Serf: Erm... I wasn't watching porn. Boss: Then what the Sam hell were you doing. Serf: Uhhh.... Researching... Yes, researching an article (mumbles) that's the ticket. Boss: What about? Serf: Errr... ah! you know that fake deep stuff, the celebrity heads on pornstars bodies? Boss: Go on. Serf: Well apparently they're still doing it. Boss: Hmmm.... I smell a Buzzfeed worthy story here, make a top 10 list of things you can believe and many clicks will be generated. Good work Harrison. /serf wipes sweat from brow, goes back to PornHub.
Remember, someone at Buzzfeed has just been paid to surf porn.
Please, explain to me the benefit for the average computer user of a display that is "taller than it is wide" - don't forget, many 'average users' do a lot of work in spreadsheets, an application that lends itself to a "wider than it is tall" display.
There isn't one.
Author doesn't understand how normal people use laptops. They have their own unique usage case and simply cant get that other people can be different.
Someone above mentioned that some people turn their 16:9 monitors sideways to make them taller, these are usually people dealing with a lot of scrolling text (writers, developers). These people rarely work from their laptop alone and almost always have dedicated monitors. People who work primarily from their laptops tend to be presenters or technicians. When I was on site installing something, the orientation of my laptop was the least of my concern.
However the majority of laptop users are home users. Professionals tend to have monitors some or all of the time, its the casual laptop user who uses them without a monitor most of the time and what are they doing? Farmbook, Twatter, watching movies. This is why a 16:9 panel is perfect for them, it allows them to watch movies with the entire screen.
I'm currently using a 16:9 screen with the Windows taskbar underneath, at the top the window title bar, the Firefox menu bar, a tab bar and the address bar. It does not seem tight at all.
Back in the olden times when the default laptop screen had a resolution of 1366x768 screen real estate was at a premium... But I can now get a 1920x1080 15" screen for $500 or less that isn't the case.
Laptops are 16:9 because that's the cheapest panels produced. They're also better than 4:3 because you can fit a larger keyboard without making the laptop too tall. I've got a 15" 1920x1080 Asus with a full keyboard incl. numpad and it's brilliant. Should I require more screen I can hook it up to the 25" 4K monitor that I use for my gaming PC.
Also all recent games, movies and most TV shows released are in 16:9. Sure, 10 years ago when I was regularly fiddling about trying to get my games to work in 16:9 you might have been able to argue a case for a 4:3 laptop... but now that's practically a dead format as almost all TVs are now 16:9.
They may be well-meaning; but they seem to be even more Regulation-Happy than the U.S. Congress, and that's saying something!
So now, nobody can have an online service that might POSSIBLY inadvertently gather data that might POSSIBLY be also gathered by a "Competitor"?
I don't know how Shazam works; but do you have to tell it what Streaming Music Service you might (or might not) belong to to use it? If not, then this is a horseshit suggestion.
It is an investigation into possible negative outcomes of the merger.. So you are opposed to anyone ever doing anything to preemptively prevent market problems before they occur?
No it's just that the EU is doing it and they want to have an Anti-EU rant.
Google would never allow end-to-end encryption of data that they'd like to mine. Why would anyone be surprised?
Except that they do.
You need to stop thinking like an iSheep. Not enabling by default does not mean it is strictly verboten on Android.
If you're worried about Google reading your inane and vapid messages, don't use the default message app. This isn't like the Iphone where you've got no choice. I'm sure there's an app that can easily replace Google's yet to be released "Chat". Also SMS isn't a secure protocol to begin with, basically you need to use a different protocol completely for end to end encryption.
Android was designed from the ground up to be user customisable.
It is actually better for the individual in the UK court vs an American court. The bar for libel and slander is lower in the UK. The degree in which the UK values individual reputation and the protection of such is higher in the UK than in the US. I wish the guy luck, and a special place in hell for those who continue to use his name without his permission. After warning Facebook, and having ads pulled, they should be on the look out for more fraud but as usual they will disavow and responsibility or any wrong doing.
Beyond that... The loser pays the winners court costs. This prevents the Big Guy(TM) from threatening the Little Guys(TM) into submission by using high priced lawyers... because if you've got a solid case a high priced lawyer will do it on a no win/no fee basis. There are quite a few Barristers and Queens Councils (a very highly paid lawyers in the UK) who love doing cases like this, they make a killing and look good in the process.
Could the mod show me on this doll where the comment butthurt you?
Modding that down only demonstrates that you don't know what an "SJW" is and the only one trying to enforce Political Correctness... are the ones complaining about Political Correctness gone mad.
I'll probably be modded down into oblivion for having a contrary opinion but I wish the USA would just get it over and annex Canada and Mexico already. Once people get over the knee-jerk reaction and actually think about what this would mean
Unless you get their permission first (and you can't), what it would mean is war on at least two fronts, and probably more. Even assuming the USA can beat both countries militarily (and then occupy them successfully, despite a complete lack of moral legitimacy), it's unlikely the rest of the world would stand for the USA going full-Lebensraum on its neighbors and allies.
This, you invade Canada, you're asking for war with the entire Commonwealth. This means millions of pissed off Scots and Australians, which should be enough on its own but not to mention the South Africans (who all have claimed to have killed at least one person in self defence), India, New Zealanders (they'll bring the sandwiches), England, Northern Ireland, Wales and a host of other nations.
The UK being involved, you can guarantee that we'll drag the French and Germans into it (they both still owe us for the war). Along with them will be the Spanish and Italians (they may not do much, but will look good whilst doing it). Meanwhile, where will the US turn to for allies, China? Russia? I don't think they'll be rushing to help.
Where would they go, the US is the most right wing capitalist country in the world
Singapore is a low-tax authoritarian country which spends little on social programs, spends robustly on their military, executes drug dealers, and they even spank petty criminals.
They also tax alcohol and tobacco heavily, chewing gum is banned and prostitution is legal... Not really paradise for the ultra-right wing religious redneck.
I work in a credit union. 90% of our jobs are customer facing for people who want to talk with a human instead of using the website or an ATM. There is very little back office. You have loan underwriters, title clerk's, IT, mail, and accounting. All small departments. Big stuff are call centers, tellers, FSRs, etc...
You're thinking of "banking" as just the front end stuff. Those jobs aren't under threat from AI.
Perhaps if we used the technical term "Financial Services" that you'll realise the customer facing part is actually a very small number of jobs, call centres included. The majority of jobs are underwriters, assessors, clerks, so on and so forth and its these jobs that will be replaced by AI because these jobs are what AI is good at, taking large sets of data and applying rules to them which is basically what a human already does when you make a claim or apply for a loan.
I honestly cant see why not in the future. The main reasons we stick with metals is that they're harder to forge (as in both metallurgy and fraud) and tradition (we've always had metal coins). However introducing a wireless induction induction loop with a chip could be a better anti-fraud system. We'd probably still coat them in a metallic coating for aesthetics.
cash you need to pay people to count it, pick it up, do the bookkeeping, account for theft and pay the bank to accept your deposit
Which costs a lot less than 5%.
Also, when you've got a business account, deposits are free unless you live in a shonky third world country with no banking regulations. If you're willing to pay for it, you can get it picked up from your business. I owned a business back in the early 00's, cash was simple. I'd count it, I'd stick it in an envelope with the deposit slip and drop it through the deposit box on my way home (back in those days, banks shut at 16:45 on the dot or earlier). It would appear in my account within 24 hours... which was 24-36 hours sooner than credit transactions. This is why maintaining a OPEX reserve is important.
A large food court near me decided to do this cashless thing. They've lost about 20% of their business since then and it's still declining. Meanwhile, restaurants around them charging in whole pounds (Sterling, you know, Doctor Who money) have been experiencing an uptick in sales.
You must not eat in the same restaurant twice. I can only imagine what's happened to your food...
I live in a civilised country where we pay service staff a liveable wage. I'm polite and friendly to service staff so I cant see a problem. This semi-enforced tipping thing seems like a poor way to disguise a price increase and to be frank, rather arse about (short for "arse about face" meaning "one's posterior is pointing in the direction one should expect one's face to be pointing" or put simply, backwards).
Most low-skill immigrants work physically demanding jobs that natives won't take like meat processing and agriculture.
This is a logical fallacy repeated everywhere around the world, no doubt helped by those with money and power: physically demanding jobs would be gladly taken by "natives" if the pay were attractive. The main reason the pay hasn't been attractive, though, is because of low-skilled immigrant workers accepting lower pay for those jobs.
It isn't a logical fallacy.
Immigrants tend to take jobs that otherwise wouldn't exist. Tories in the UK love to complain about Johnny Foreigner coming over here to take jobs and strangle the NHS but dont ever think twice about paying the Polish lady to clean their house for them, the Romanian to wash their car and the Bulgarian who does mows their lawn far less than a Briton would accept. What many of these slightly upper middle class complainers fail to realise as they talk out one side of their mouths about the evil immigrunts, is that were all the Romanians, Poles and Bulgarians were to suddenly up sticks and go home because they cant work here any more, they'll have to start cleaning their own homes, washing their own cars and mowing their own lawns.
I'm an Australian who lives in the UK. In Australia we're free of these evil foreigners who are willing to work for less than an Australian would. So I used to wash my own car because an Australian asked A$50 p/h, vacuum my own floors because an Australian charged A$30 p/h and mercifully, the housemate did the gardens (claims he enjoyed it). Now I live in the UK, a housekeeper once a week is included in the rent, I can pay a paltry £7 to get my car washed and gardening is someone else's problem too (the landlords). Point in short, British people wont start doing these jobs, the jobs will simply disappear because most people cant afford to pay what a British person will ask.
Liberal arts degrees are a waste of money, like psychology or music degrees.
Psychology degrees open doors into teaching and therapy jobs to name just two.
Music degrees open doors into all manner of production jobs like audio editing, sound recordist, post production, score writing, so on and so forth and this is beyond actually playing for a living (think less American Idle and more a paying gig in a philharmonic orchestra).
But I bet you're one of those knuckle dragging, mouth breathing, Fox News/Daily Mail subscribers that think these people just fall out of trees. I've worked for universities that provide both of these courses. A huge amount of usable research came out of psychology such as treatments for mental disorders, teaching methods for autistic people not to mention the less ethical routes of marketing, journalism and politics (a lot of those massaging the data from the likes of Cambridge Analytica will have physiology degrees). Music degrees, students were taught how to produce music from writing to mastering and release, so they were taught all manner of skills that can land a decent job.
Liberal arts... maybe, I've never researched one of those (and neither have you) but comparing them to degrees that produce actual jobs, you've got no clue.
Translation: The sick freaks of the left are concerned that AI's will not be front-loaded with the politically-correct amount of anti-white bias, as defined by shrieking fascist moron SJW's.
TRANSLATION: I'm angry at an imaginary enemy, have not idea what happens in the real world (because I mainly watch Fox News) and because I use pointless but scary sounding acronyms like "SJW" that I don't even know the meaning of, I'm a complete twat.
Erm... after reading that I think it's clear that you don't know what left wing is.
Nowhere in that page has he asked for collective ownership or limitations on personal property. You know, actual very left wing ideas. If anything, he's centre right.
First fix the flaw in the system that allows any scammer to spoof any number they want, which is the only explanation for why I keep getting robocalls from numbers that match the first 6 digits of my own number.
It's not a flaw, it's a feature. It permits employees of legitimate businesses to show a different callback number (e.g. customer service) rather than their personal extensions.
No, thats a flaw. Number masking should be handled by the PABX system, the telco is not even involved in masking private extensions.
The "feature" is that the scammer pays the phone company money to do this. This is why it was banned by lawmakers in other countries.
so how exactly are there "veterans" of the workplace there?
are people that lazy to find another job?
If you haven't been given an education or your IQ prevents you from getting an adequate education then these people are usually stuck with this sort of work.
This
Those who believe this "oh, just go find another job" malarky have never worked a real job in their lives. They were probably given a cushy job in a large firm straight out of university (which they barely studied at) by one of daddy's contacts.
As someone who didn't have a rich daddy and worked shit jobs when they were young, there are no better jobs if you don't have a good education. You can quit your warehouse job for another job in another warehouse that is just as shit as the one you came from.
A big container ship will have a crew of about 25. Of these, only 3 or 4 are directly involved in steering the ship: The captain, and a couple of deck officers, all of whom have other duties as well. And, as you said, they aren't paid much. So I don't see how this could possibly generate "ridiculous amounts of revenue" as claimed by TFA.
Crew costs are minimal compared to fuel. The main drive of transport automation, be it air, land or sea is to safe fuel.
IKEA is cheaper because the customer does the assembly at home.
Actually, IKEA is cheaper because they take advantage of economies of scale. A Vandenfloog is the same no matter if it's sold in Australia, Germany or Canada. Secondly its cheaper because they design to a price. Literally. IKEA designers are given £75 and told to make a desk.
Not much is saved in the construction, the benefit of flat packed furniture means I can get a chest of drawers home in my coupe instead of having to rent a van.
Slashdot Mirror
This is stupid, I have been on the internet since i was a kid. I cant tell you how many times I said i was 13 when I was under.. And even more saying I was 18 when I was nowhere close. I am by no means advocating for having to give ID and prove someone is a certain age, I however this these kinds of laws are bullshit and everyone knows what really happens.
Like any age gate, enforcing the age restriction isn't important, it's about making an effort to say "we put in an age gate, we've complied with the law". Likewise, the law requiring an age gate is arse covering for the politicians so they can say "we've made all these sites put in an age gate... we're doing Something(TM), re-elect Shonkey McShonkface for governor" and the "think of the Children" crowd get a warm fuzzy feeling about all the children they're protecting.
At a Buzzfeed office.
/furious clicking
/serf wipes sweat from brow, goes back to PornHub.
Boss: HARRISON... I bloody well told you to stop watching Porn at the office.
Serf: Erm... I wasn't watching porn.
Boss: Then what the Sam hell were you doing.
Serf: Uhhh.... Researching... Yes, researching an article (mumbles) that's the ticket.
Boss: What about?
Serf: Errr... ah! you know that fake deep stuff, the celebrity heads on pornstars bodies?
Boss: Go on.
Serf: Well apparently they're still doing it.
Boss: Hmmm.... I smell a Buzzfeed worthy story here, make a top 10 list of things you can believe and many clicks will be generated. Good work Harrison.
Remember, someone at Buzzfeed has just been paid to surf porn.
Please, explain to me the benefit for the average computer user of a display that is "taller than it is wide" - don't forget, many 'average users' do a lot of work in spreadsheets, an application that lends itself to a "wider than it is tall" display.
There isn't one.
Author doesn't understand how normal people use laptops. They have their own unique usage case and simply cant get that other people can be different.
Someone above mentioned that some people turn their 16:9 monitors sideways to make them taller, these are usually people dealing with a lot of scrolling text (writers, developers). These people rarely work from their laptop alone and almost always have dedicated monitors. People who work primarily from their laptops tend to be presenters or technicians. When I was on site installing something, the orientation of my laptop was the least of my concern.
However the majority of laptop users are home users. Professionals tend to have monitors some or all of the time, its the casual laptop user who uses them without a monitor most of the time and what are they doing? Farmbook, Twatter, watching movies. This is why a 16:9 panel is perfect for them, it allows them to watch movies with the entire screen.
I'm currently using a 16:9 screen with the Windows taskbar underneath, at the top the window title bar, the Firefox menu bar, a tab bar and the address bar. It does not seem tight at all.
Back in the olden times when the default laptop screen had a resolution of 1366x768 screen real estate was at a premium... But I can now get a 1920x1080 15" screen for $500 or less that isn't the case.
Laptops are 16:9 because that's the cheapest panels produced. They're also better than 4:3 because you can fit a larger keyboard without making the laptop too tall. I've got a 15" 1920x1080 Asus with a full keyboard incl. numpad and it's brilliant. Should I require more screen I can hook it up to the 25" 4K monitor that I use for my gaming PC.
Also all recent games, movies and most TV shows released are in 16:9. Sure, 10 years ago when I was regularly fiddling about trying to get my games to work in 16:9 you might have been able to argue a case for a 4:3 laptop... but now that's practically a dead format as almost all TVs are now 16:9.
They may be well-meaning; but they seem to be even more Regulation-Happy than the U.S. Congress, and that's saying something!
So now, nobody can have an online service that might POSSIBLY inadvertently gather data that might POSSIBLY be also gathered by a "Competitor"?
I don't know how Shazam works; but do you have to tell it what Streaming Music Service you might (or might not) belong to to use it? If not, then this is a horseshit suggestion.
It is an investigation into possible negative outcomes of the merger.. So you are opposed to anyone ever doing anything to preemptively prevent market problems before they occur?
No it's just that the EU is doing it and they want to have an Anti-EU rant.
Google would never allow end-to-end encryption of data that they'd like to mine. Why would anyone be surprised?
Except that they do.
You need to stop thinking like an iSheep. Not enabling by default does not mean it is strictly verboten on Android.
If you're worried about Google reading your inane and vapid messages, don't use the default message app. This isn't like the Iphone where you've got no choice. I'm sure there's an app that can easily replace Google's yet to be released "Chat". Also SMS isn't a secure protocol to begin with, basically you need to use a different protocol completely for end to end encryption.
Android was designed from the ground up to be user customisable.
It is actually better for the individual in the UK court vs an American court. The bar for libel and slander is lower in the UK. The degree in which the UK values individual reputation and the protection of such is higher in the UK than in the US. I wish the guy luck, and a special place in hell for those who continue to use his name without his permission. After warning Facebook, and having ads pulled, they should be on the look out for more fraud but as usual they will disavow and responsibility or any wrong doing.
Beyond that... The loser pays the winners court costs. This prevents the Big Guy(TM) from threatening the Little Guys(TM) into submission by using high priced lawyers... because if you've got a solid case a high priced lawyer will do it on a no win/no fee basis. There are quite a few Barristers and Queens Councils (a very highly paid lawyers in the UK) who love doing cases like this, they make a killing and look good in the process.
Could the mod show me on this doll where the comment butthurt you?
Modding that down only demonstrates that you don't know what an "SJW" is and the only one trying to enforce Political Correctness... are the ones complaining about Political Correctness gone mad.
I'll probably be modded down into oblivion for having a contrary opinion but I wish the USA would just get it over and annex Canada and Mexico already. Once people get over the knee-jerk reaction and actually think about what this would mean
Unless you get their permission first (and you can't), what it would mean is war on at least two fronts, and probably more. Even assuming the USA can beat both countries militarily (and then occupy them successfully, despite a complete lack of moral legitimacy), it's unlikely the rest of the world would stand for the USA going full-Lebensraum on its neighbors and allies.
This, you invade Canada, you're asking for war with the entire Commonwealth. This means millions of pissed off Scots and Australians, which should be enough on its own but not to mention the South Africans (who all have claimed to have killed at least one person in self defence), India, New Zealanders (they'll bring the sandwiches), England, Northern Ireland, Wales and a host of other nations.
The UK being involved, you can guarantee that we'll drag the French and Germans into it (they both still owe us for the war). Along with them will be the Spanish and Italians (they may not do much, but will look good whilst doing it). Meanwhile, where will the US turn to for allies, China? Russia? I don't think they'll be rushing to help.
Where would they go, the US is the most right wing capitalist country in the world
Singapore is a low-tax authoritarian country which spends little on social programs, spends robustly on their military, executes drug dealers, and they even spank petty criminals.
They also tax alcohol and tobacco heavily, chewing gum is banned and prostitution is legal... Not really paradise for the ultra-right wing religious redneck.
I work in a credit union. 90% of our jobs are customer facing for people who want to talk with a human instead of using the website or an ATM. There is very little back office. You have loan underwriters, title clerk's, IT, mail, and accounting. All small departments. Big stuff are call centers, tellers, FSRs, etc...
You're thinking of "banking" as just the front end stuff. Those jobs aren't under threat from AI.
Perhaps if we used the technical term "Financial Services" that you'll realise the customer facing part is actually a very small number of jobs, call centres included. The majority of jobs are underwriters, assessors, clerks, so on and so forth and its these jobs that will be replaced by AI because these jobs are what AI is good at, taking large sets of data and applying rules to them which is basically what a human already does when you make a claim or apply for a loan.
Except it's not the free market, because this only happens due to a government granted monopoly on the drug formulation (i.e. the patents).
Yes, it's not the free market, it's capitalism.
Getting the govt to eliminate your competition is the holy grail of capitalism.
Your Loonies and Toonies, too, eh?
I honestly cant see why not in the future. The main reasons we stick with metals is that they're harder to forge (as in both metallurgy and fraud) and tradition (we've always had metal coins). However introducing a wireless induction induction loop with a chip could be a better anti-fraud system. We'd probably still coat them in a metallic coating for aesthetics.
cards take less than 5%
cash you need to pay people to count it, pick it up, do the bookkeeping, account for theft and pay the bank to accept your deposit
Which costs a lot less than 5%.
Also, when you've got a business account, deposits are free unless you live in a shonky third world country with no banking regulations. If you're willing to pay for it, you can get it picked up from your business. I owned a business back in the early 00's, cash was simple. I'd count it, I'd stick it in an envelope with the deposit slip and drop it through the deposit box on my way home (back in those days, banks shut at 16:45 on the dot or earlier). It would appear in my account within 24 hours... which was 24-36 hours sooner than credit transactions. This is why maintaining a OPEX reserve is important.
A large food court near me decided to do this cashless thing. They've lost about 20% of their business since then and it's still declining. Meanwhile, restaurants around them charging in whole pounds (Sterling, you know, Doctor Who money) have been experiencing an uptick in sales.
You must not eat in the same restaurant twice. I can only imagine what's happened to your food...
I live in a civilised country where we pay service staff a liveable wage. I'm polite and friendly to service staff so I cant see a problem. This semi-enforced tipping thing seems like a poor way to disguise a price increase and to be frank, rather arse about (short for "arse about face" meaning "one's posterior is pointing in the direction one should expect one's face to be pointing" or put simply, backwards).
Most low-skill immigrants work physically demanding jobs that natives won't take like meat processing and agriculture.
This is a logical fallacy repeated everywhere around the world, no doubt helped by those with money and power: physically demanding jobs would be gladly taken by "natives" if the pay were attractive. The main reason the pay hasn't been attractive, though, is because of low-skilled immigrant workers accepting lower pay for those jobs.
It isn't a logical fallacy.
Immigrants tend to take jobs that otherwise wouldn't exist. Tories in the UK love to complain about Johnny Foreigner coming over here to take jobs and strangle the NHS but dont ever think twice about paying the Polish lady to clean their house for them, the Romanian to wash their car and the Bulgarian who does mows their lawn far less than a Briton would accept. What many of these slightly upper middle class complainers fail to realise as they talk out one side of their mouths about the evil immigrunts, is that were all the Romanians, Poles and Bulgarians were to suddenly up sticks and go home because they cant work here any more, they'll have to start cleaning their own homes, washing their own cars and mowing their own lawns.
I'm an Australian who lives in the UK. In Australia we're free of these evil foreigners who are willing to work for less than an Australian would. So I used to wash my own car because an Australian asked A$50 p/h, vacuum my own floors because an Australian charged A$30 p/h and mercifully, the housemate did the gardens (claims he enjoyed it). Now I live in the UK, a housekeeper once a week is included in the rent, I can pay a paltry £7 to get my car washed and gardening is someone else's problem too (the landlords). Point in short, British people wont start doing these jobs, the jobs will simply disappear because most people cant afford to pay what a British person will ask.
Liberal arts degrees are a waste of money, like psychology or music degrees.
Psychology degrees open doors into teaching and therapy jobs to name just two.
Music degrees open doors into all manner of production jobs like audio editing, sound recordist, post production, score writing, so on and so forth and this is beyond actually playing for a living (think less American Idle and more a paying gig in a philharmonic orchestra).
But I bet you're one of those knuckle dragging, mouth breathing, Fox News/Daily Mail subscribers that think these people just fall out of trees. I've worked for universities that provide both of these courses. A huge amount of usable research came out of psychology such as treatments for mental disorders, teaching methods for autistic people not to mention the less ethical routes of marketing, journalism and politics (a lot of those massaging the data from the likes of Cambridge Analytica will have physiology degrees). Music degrees, students were taught how to produce music from writing to mastering and release, so they were taught all manner of skills that can land a decent job.
Liberal arts... maybe, I've never researched one of those (and neither have you) but comparing them to degrees that produce actual jobs, you've got no clue.
Translation: The sick freaks of the left are concerned that AI's will not be front-loaded with the politically-correct amount of anti-white bias, as defined by shrieking fascist moron SJW's.
TRANSLATION: I'm angry at an imaginary enemy, have not idea what happens in the real world (because I mainly watch Fox News) and because I use pointless but scary sounding acronyms like "SJW" that I don't even know the meaning of, I'm a complete twat.
No, he was sentenced in the UK (at the Leicester crown court) and tried as a minor, sent to a juvenile prison.
And given a maximum of 2 years. I think he'll be out before then.
For the record, Stallman is very left wing.
Erm... after reading that I think it's clear that you don't know what left wing is.
Nowhere in that page has he asked for collective ownership or limitations on personal property. You know, actual very left wing ideas. If anything, he's centre right.
It's not a flaw, it's a feature. It permits employees of legitimate businesses to show a different callback number (e.g. customer service) rather than their personal extensions.
No, thats a flaw. Number masking should be handled by the PABX system, the telco is not even involved in masking private extensions.
The "feature" is that the scammer pays the phone company money to do this. This is why it was banned by lawmakers in other countries.
so how exactly are there "veterans" of the workplace there?
are people that lazy to find another job?
If you haven't been given an education or your IQ prevents you from getting an adequate education then these people are usually stuck with this sort of work.
This
Those who believe this "oh, just go find another job" malarky have never worked a real job in their lives. They were probably given a cushy job in a large firm straight out of university (which they barely studied at) by one of daddy's contacts.
As someone who didn't have a rich daddy and worked shit jobs when they were young, there are no better jobs if you don't have a good education. You can quit your warehouse job for another job in another warehouse that is just as shit as the one you came from.
After Brexit the UK may be applying for admission to the Third World community.
Look, there's no way things in the UK are going to improve that much after Brexit.
A big container ship will have a crew of about 25. Of these, only 3 or 4 are directly involved in steering the ship: The captain, and a couple of deck officers, all of whom have other duties as well. And, as you said, they aren't paid much. So I don't see how this could possibly generate "ridiculous amounts of revenue" as claimed by TFA.
Crew costs are minimal compared to fuel. The main drive of transport automation, be it air, land or sea is to safe fuel.
IKEA is cheaper because the customer does the assembly at home.
Actually, IKEA is cheaper because they take advantage of economies of scale. A Vandenfloog is the same no matter if it's sold in Australia, Germany or Canada. Secondly its cheaper because they design to a price. Literally. IKEA designers are given £75 and told to make a desk.
Not much is saved in the construction, the benefit of flat packed furniture means I can get a chest of drawers home in my coupe instead of having to rent a van.