Considering how well my ad blocker works on Slashdot (100%), I would say that this is either not the case, or is highly ineffective.
./ is a bad example. Despite the number of hands its been through in recent years advertising has remained pretty unintrusive.
The sites I hate are the ones that have a popover demanding you disable your adblock so they can bombard you with VIDEO AD AT FULL VOLUME, punch the monkey, malware delivered by advertising, tracking bots, pop ups, pop overs, pop unders, pop reach-arounds, advertising interstitials and one item per page so you have to navigate through 30 pages of ads to get one, maybe two pages of content.
Would the butthurt mod please step forward.
That was pretty quick, however it fails to address the point that its not a progressive attitude to limit housing affordability.
So......there were only elections in 18 countries last year? Is that it?
Seriously, the only reason Trump is president is because he was better at social engineering than Clinton. And I have to hand it to Obama, he pushed that "Hope and Change" meme better than anyone before him ever has. It's all been done before, though.
Strange you should mention that.
There are essentially only two ways to lead, all other ways end up being boiled down into these two very broad categories, you can lead through hope or you can lead through fear.
Obama tried to give the US hope when it was in dire need of it, and he succeeded spectacularly.
Trump tried to give the US fear when it least needed it, he succeeded and now the US is paying for it.
Welcome to the progressive wet dream. Home ownership is for the 1% only (and optional).
You've misspelled conservative.
Progressives want more housing and better housing affordability.
The rest get to live in shared housing, tied to it by monthly rent that is just high enough to ensure they can't accumulate wealth, and just low enough to ensure that anyone can get a 12x12 ft box for themselves.
Basically you're describing Feudalism, which is definitely not progressive. Its quite the opposite. Feudalism is where the lord maintains the ownership of all the lands and the tenants (serfs and freemen) rent off the lord for a portion of their produce. The tenants, well at least the freemen are permitted to work it as they see fit as long as the lords get their tribute. This is very much a conservative wet dream who are still bitter about having to give up any of their rights to the peasantry.
It really is part of the culture. People rely on things to be on time. Now different parts of Europe have different standards. In Switzerland and Germany, if the train schedule says 15:13 departure, it leaves at 15:13 not 15:12 or 15:15. So you have to be on time to catch the train. In Italy, the trains are on time most of the time. That 15:13 train might be 15:14 or so.
Then we have the UK where the 15:12 to London Waterloo is coming at 15:40... maybe... due to a signal failure or leaves on the track... and its still £15 a ticket.
Because of the idiotic First Past the Goal Post voting system which degenerates into a 2 party system.
The solution is to use an Alternative Vote system but the majority of Americans are too fucking stupid to:
a) understand the problem, and
b) do anything to fix the problem.
so they end up with the "best" government money can buy!
Not quite. most countries use Instant Runoff Voting that deal with the issues of FPTP. The problem with the US isn't the FPTP system, its electoral councils and PAC's. What the US needs to do is:
1. Kill the electoral collage and go straight to direct voting. The most votes for congressional candidate John Jackson in the electorate of whatever, Ohio means that Jack Johnson wins it. The most votes for senatorial candidate Jack Johnson in Ohio means he wins and if you want to keep voting directly for your president the most votes for Steve Steveman in the federal election means he's president. This is closer to the French system than the Westminster system we have in the UK and commonwealth mainly because we dont vote directly for the PM/Prez. A federal leader who does not win the popular vote should not be win if you're voting direct for a leader, said leaders power should be limited and balanced by the senate and congress.
2. Kill PACs and limit lobbying. This includes capping party donations for both private individuals and organisations. In fact that should be the first thing done because it'll kill a lot of lobbying in itself.
2.a, limit political advertising and force the organisation who paid for it to be clearly stated at the end.
Sadly people get called racist or white supremacists if they don't tow a certain view point. Its to a point that word has no real meaning since its used to loosely and freely to describe anyone a person with a conflicting view point.
Translation... I want to say something racist but don't want to be called out on it.
Sorry, but there's no global or national conspiracy restricting your viewpoints (sorry, white males are not oppressed). If you find your views are being criticised too much for your liking, simply exercise your right to go somewhere else and expunge them. If you find the only people who share your views are sad old men who sit in dark corners at the pub and use the term "Them" to refer to groups they don't like, maybe your views need re-evaluation.
Unlike you, I find that my views can withstand criticism, in fact robust debate helps me improve and strengthen my views. I like to think this is because my views, in some ways differing from others and from some social norms, are not too extreme that they cannot be debated in a public forum.
Yep, modded down for daring to question the White Male Victim syndrome.
I think that is a massive demonstration of how much faith they have in their own reasoning.
As much as I love In-n-Out burger... I don't really want to see it hispterised. I mean they do great food at reasonable prices (seriously Americans, this is what you do well, can you please export more of this and less war, violence and bad daytime TV). Seriously, the In-N-Out on Sepulveda blvd is a well known stopover for Aussie tourists travelling further afield in the US via LAX.
Oh well, I guess we'll just have to wait in line with our heads hung as people with oiled and manicured beards that raise questions about the menu and complain about the lack of vegan-paleo options.
Sadly people get called racist or white supremacists if they don't tow a certain view point. Its to a point that word has no real meaning since its used to loosely and freely to describe anyone a person with a conflicting view point.
Translation... I want to say something racist but don't want to be called out on it.
Sorry, but there's no global or national conspiracy restricting your viewpoints (sorry, white males are not oppressed). If you find your views are being criticised too much for your liking, simply exercise your right to go somewhere else and expunge them. If you find the only people who share your views are sad old men who sit in dark corners at the pub and use the term "Them" to refer to groups they don't like, maybe your views need re-evaluation.
Unlike you, I find that my views can withstand criticism, in fact robust debate helps me improve and strengthen my views. I like to think this is because my views, in some ways differing from others and from some social norms, are not too extreme that they cannot be debated in a public forum.
Drive through fast food and even liquor stores. Convenience stores where you can get a common grocery item quicker, but at an increased markup.
OK.... Admittedly I usually eat in when travelling through America but are drive through's really more expensive than going inside? In Australia and the UK, Micky D's is usually the same price? In fact with a restaurant, take away is usually cheaper than eat in.
Convenience stores, yep you've got a point but supermarkets run on stupidly thin margins that a local corner shop cant compete with. Usually when I'm accepting that I'm paying a premium for something its because I want it now and not even same day delivery can suffice. Either that or I want to see the product before buying like fresh food although I've never seen a fresh food delivery service cheaper than Tesco or Aldi (but usually shop at Morrisons or Sainsburys for quality).
Antifa certainly doesn't shy from low-level violence like punching and vandalism, and it's something I deeply abhor about them. But if you compare all the low-level violence from both sides I'm honestly not sure who is worse.
But the white supremacists have a literal and extensive body count. Here Antifa isn't even close.
This.
I hate the "but Jimmy hit me as well" excuse. Its childish and completely wrong in any adult situation.
I'm against fascism, but I don't consider Antifa to be any kind of force for good... let alone the white knights that the Facists would think I believe.Trying to get people to forget your organisation is bad because your opponents are bad is simply stupid. However when it comes to a credible threat to my society, way of life and health, its the far right that represents a bigger threat. This is because my nation, like most western nations leans a bit to the right, this I have no problem with. In many respects, agree with but its a centrist position so it doesn't go to far. However it also means we are more accepting of far right positions than far left positions. A proper (Marxist) communist would not stand a chance in an election in any English speaking developed nation, however the UK, US and Australia all have elected far-right politicians.
Personally I'm a 3rd way centrist, left and right ideas can live together, I staunchly agree with universal health care, the Government can manage this better than private organisations but OTOH, I wouldn't want government handling grocery distribution. They can even work together, I.E. internet service, let the govt own and maintain the fibre in the ground and lease it to any private organisation at a fixed cost. The private providers handle retail and compete on equal ground.
White supremacists, ultra-nationalists, fascists and their ilk are bad not because they're right wing, but because they're extremists. Same with Marxists. Never let the fact they have one or two good ideas from seeing how bad their overall goals are.
And other bollocks. Throwing in a bunch of quotes randomly combined with a complete misunderstanding of British history is not a rebuttal. The XKCD was not against free speech, it was pointing out that just because it's not illegal to say does not entitle you to a platform, let alone any platform you like. Also freedom without responsibility is anarchy, the same is true with free speech, free speech has never protected you from criticism.
People trying to defend racism (yes, white supremacists are racists, placing one race as superior to another... let alone all others is the dictionary definition of racism) are the ones who are destroying free speech. They are using this as a thought terminating cliche to silence criticism. White Supremacists are not some hard done by minority group fighting for equal rights or recognition, they are fighting to suppress equal rights for other groups they don't like. Using free speech to defend them from critics is devaluing free speech. Free speech does not mean what you say is right, it just means it is not illegal to say it. Using the free speech excuse to silence critics, especially valid critics, reduces freedom.
I'm a firm believer in playing the devils advocate, but one must always consider the nature of the devil for which one advocates for. Knowing who you are defending is key in defending it successfully. Often using the wrong defence harms you more than not defending them in the first place. Finally, using free speech as a defence is the worst possible argument, falling back on free speech means that the most compelling defence you have for what you said is that it is literally not illegal to say it.
People that are prone to be sensitive and have increased leverage for political correctness reasons are themselves frequently bullies.
What absolute bullshit.
Bullies prey on the weak and vulnerable. Bullies will not act without overwhelming support because they are inherently cowards.
Pointless rant against "teh Pee Cees gone madddddssdzzzss" is pointless. You have no idea what bullying is, especially bullying in the workplace.
Bullying amongst colleagues is easy to define, saying or doing something you've been told not to because it's annoying, upsetting or interfering with a colleague. If you think that the colleague is being irrational that is 6 times the reason to fucking stop. You're an adult, act like it and move on. If you think the workplace is too "Pee Cees" then its likely you are the problem and should move to a more abusive workplace.
Bullying from managers is a bit different, it follows the same basic definition as above but also includes being given tasks that are far beyond your role or capabilities that the manager knows you will fail at.
In fact, from my experience its the people who read the Daily Mail and think "teh Pee Cees gone madddddssdzzzss" are more likely to be bullies due to their tenuous connection to reality. The rest of us not in La-La land know how not to take a joke too far and know that gauging an audience before telling one is paramount instead of expecting everyone to put up with whatever nonsense exudes from your piehole.
Oh, I'm sorry, was that too "Pee Cees" for you, here's a nice cup of Harden The Fuck Up princess.
I've worked in blue collar jobs (it was doing shit kicker work 2 days a week that paid for my education) and management didn't want to hear about bullying. so the bullies who thought they were tough were the ones missing a tooth when someone finally had enough of their bullshit and hit them with a brick, this tended to shut them up pretty quick and they pretty much became social outcasts. Management ignored that also, sometimes I wish I could do this to some of my colleagues in the white collar world (pretty much the only thing I really miss from those days). I'm pretty tolerant of people who have differing views to me, but a few people are just arseholes and have a face missing a fist, Usually the same people that hold extreme Daily Mail type of views.
I'm pretty certain he meant uninformed tight-arses, not a specific race.
Wow, your telepathy is amazing. Tell us how you can read minds like that! Judging by your weird nonstandard spelling, you come from a country without the legacy of Jim Crow, and thus have no idea what you're talking about. Pro TIP: shut the fuck up when you want to say anything about racial issues you have no idea about.
the terms "Black Friday" and "Black Saturday" came to be used by the police in Philadelphia and Rochester to describe the crowds and traffic congestion accompanying the start of the Christmas shopping season.
And yes, I come from a country where institutionalised racism wasn't a thing in living memory. This isn't something I'm particularly ashamed of and maybe you should take your own advice when talking about things you clearly have no knowledge of.
No-one tell him it was just basic comprehension and common sense. Any reading of the GP's post that is indistinguishable from telepathy is insufficiently competent.
When you use the term "dedicated minority", are you referring to African Americans and Hispanic Americans?
I'm pretty certain he meant uninformed tight-arses, not a specific race.
The kind of people who don't realise two things.
1. There is a time cost. Spending 6 hours to save 20% often isn't worth it. Not to mention the cost of fuel.
2. Prices are raised in preparation for the holiday sales, then dropped less than that amount for black Friday.
Savvy people buy this stuff off peak when meaningful discounts are offered to keep stock moving (January or just before the end of the financial year in your nation). Many of us have just given up on stores entirely because we get better prices online. Especially for stuff that goes into stupid prices around Christmas like toys and games, what little of this I had to buy for relatives, I bought months ago.
Fairly certain a savvy black or Latino would have done the same thing. I'm not smart because I'm white, I'm smart because I actually thought about things and planned ahead.
Look up any documented case of feral humans, either in the wild or confinement. If they have a few years first with parents beforehand, they tend to be OK after a period of catching up - but left completely "unprogrammed", they tend to be completely unable to cope.
Humans need interactions on several levels to "become" humans as we recognize them.
The big difference is that a human will learn of its own accord. Of course we guide it to get the kind of human we want in society but that is more a preference than an innate human ability. An AI at our current level of development will not learn or even act on its own accord, it is entirely dependent on a human to give it instructions and more importantly, give it parameters on how to carry out those instructions.
The fact AI do not know how to handle an undefined scenario without human input is why I firmly believe that an autonomous car is decades away from public consumption. However commercial AI lawyers and accountants are a real possibility because for these professions, there are few unknown scenarios and most solutions are easily determined by applying rules to the data.
As long as you live in the fantasy that human brains are magical and computers are not there's no point in having an argument, because you've defined the answer "Humans are intelligent and computers are not, hence anything done by computers is not proof of intelligence." rather than the question: "What is intelligence?" and failed to make any measurable definition or criteria. It's like saying humans have souls and rocks don't and expect the debate to be anything other than theology and philosophy.
The thing is, we've already defined these things, you just haven't looked it up or accepted it.
The kind of AI that wins games is called Applied AI (or Weak AI) this is very good at working within parameters, applying rules that do not change to data. Where it strugles is when rules aren't clearly defined or change. If someone were to cheat at the game the AI was playing, the AI would likely be unable to handle it. This is why games like Chess and Go are good tests for weak AI, the full parameters of the game are known.
Now take something that isn't as straight forward, like Poker, then AI's start to struggle as the rules around the emotional and human elements are not so clear cut. We can make machines that can assemble furniture, but making one that can get a flat packed wardrobe from Ikea and assemble it given only the instructions provided is incredibly hard as the AI needs to interpret vague instructions and then apply them to a dissembled product to make the finished product.
In order to do these things, we need AI that can operate outside set parameters, this is strong AI or AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) which can operate on the same cognitive level as a human this means it must be able to operate outside of set parameters, put simply it must be able to reason, make judgements under uncertainty, represent knowledge (including solving problems with limited information), plan, learn (of its own accord) and most importantly, be capable of combining all of these skills towards a goal. Right now that is what separates the human computer from the silicon one.
The human brain is very much like a computer in the way it can process information, but the fact is we still don't fully understand how that works. That is a realm of science, not theology.
Elon was born in Africa, now he's American. Wouldn't that make him an African-American as well?
Yep, I get this is a joke but African-American has been used to describe American born people who trace their lineage back to Africa, not anyone from Africa or who is black (I.E a black Latino or black Englishman).
However as an Anglo, I've never got the the hang up Americans have over saying things directly. You can speak about race and colour without being racist, its actually quite easy. Here in the UK a black Englishman would describe his skin colour as black and his ethnicity as English. There isn't really a difference between a black Englishman and a white Englishman.
Being racist is about having a negative intent towards a race, not about avoiding certain adjectives.
Also, you'll never hear the term African-English, it would connotate that they are a dual citizen of Africa and England although in that case you'd mention the country in questions, like Kenya and even then they'd describe themselves as Kenyan or English.
Yes but as a white male you're not entitled to anything, not to mention being offended. Being offended "ist verbotten", so to speak.
Ahh, yes, the modern western phenomena of having all the benefits in society but still wanting to play the victim card.
Being a victim is in vogue, so naturally those who think its cool will go to any length to find a way to be a victim.
Personally I'd rather be a person who has accomplished, regardless of any adversity (or lack there of) to someone looking for imaginary adversity to blame for their lack of accomplishments.
SJW is at this point a descriptive shorthand as much as it is an insult.
So it's meaningless, SJW isn't an insult, except to the person who's using it.
SJW has just become a way of telling us we've said something that has butthurt you and you cant form a rational rebuttal to it. Much the same as "PC", "Leftist", "hater" and other meaningless insults thrown about when you cant argue the point.
What is ironic is you have two different definitions for racism.
The first is a person behaving like an asshat based on race. I'm surprised you let that stand since I was applying the basic standard of racism to a black man, which we all "know" can never be a racist.
The second definition of racism you have, which is the more traditional leftist one, is a white person calling out a black person for being a racist.
Nope, you're the one with two definitions of racism. The one where you get to use negative stereotypes of black people with no consequence and the one where you want consequences for a black man using negative stereotypes about whites.
The fact is both are the same form of racism, applying negative generalisation to people based on the colour of their skin. Both are wrong, both are indefensible.
The final nail in the coffin of your argument is the word leftist. This is an immediate indication that you're not clued in about anything.
There are just to many too many streaming platforms out there. Much less a lot of HBO like ones that have shows on them I don't want to have to buy / deal with 4-5 different stores / ui's / apps / offline rules.
HBO
amazon prime
youtube red
CBS All Access
netflix
etc
Predicted this a while back, a service will come along and combine all of these services into one package that you can access through a single device connected to a cable. All that has happened before will happen again... except we'll herald it as NEW and EXCITING because its ON THE INTERWEBS !1!!11!ONE!!1!ELEVEN!!!
Uber is a credit card service. Denounce fraud and you'll get your money back or go to a dispute. Uber gets charged for each refund so it's bad business for them.
Under what Financial Services industry code of conduct do Uber operate? what credit products do they provide? What credit network do they operate (important to know what stores I can use their product in)?
Or maybe a better question is, what were you on when you wrote that?
Uber are not a credit card service, they are an illegal in most jurisdictions (and definitely immoral) taxi company. Your credit card provider is a credit card service. You perform a charge back through them and not Uber. However the burden of evidence is on you to demonstrate that you were fraudulently charged. Uber will of course, not co-operate as they have your money and don't care (I mean what are you going to do, go back to using normal taxis... with the amount your emotionally invested?)
DRM servers have killed the used games market on PCs.
There are lots and lots of games out there that are over a decade old even that you can't buy used because they have been "activated" on an old DRM server and can't be reactivated on another machine.
In several cases, legitimate copies of a game can't be played at all on any PC because the game had demanded to contact a now discontinued DRM server even to start.
Actually sales killed the used game market on the PC, not that it had a huge one to begin with. When I can buy a year old game on Steam for £10 or 2 year old game on Steam or GOG for £5 new, why would I pay £15 for it used?
The reason Consoles have a used game market is that Console owners have less money and fewer sales, 12+ months after release you're still paying near release prices for old games.
As for DRM... there's yet to be one that has remained uncracked. Also I don't reward companies that pull this kind of bollocks, hence EA and Ubisoft has not seen a single one of my currency units (I have cards in multiple countries) since they tried to force me into their own platforms.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering how well my ad blocker works on Slashdot (100%), I would say that this is either not the case, or is highly ineffective.
./ is a bad example. Despite the number of hands its been through in recent years advertising has remained pretty unintrusive.
The sites I hate are the ones that have a popover demanding you disable your adblock so they can bombard you with VIDEO AD AT FULL VOLUME, punch the monkey, malware delivered by advertising, tracking bots, pop ups, pop overs, pop unders, pop reach-arounds, advertising interstitials and one item per page so you have to navigate through 30 pages of ads to get one, maybe two pages of content.
Would the butthurt mod please step forward. That was pretty quick, however it fails to address the point that its not a progressive attitude to limit housing affordability.
So......there were only elections in 18 countries last year? Is that it?
Seriously, the only reason Trump is president is because he was better at social engineering than Clinton. And I have to hand it to Obama, he pushed that "Hope and Change" meme better than anyone before him ever has. It's all been done before, though.
Strange you should mention that.
There are essentially only two ways to lead, all other ways end up being boiled down into these two very broad categories, you can lead through hope or you can lead through fear.
Obama tried to give the US hope when it was in dire need of it, and he succeeded spectacularly.
Trump tried to give the US fear when it least needed it, he succeeded and now the US is paying for it.
Welcome to the progressive wet dream. Home ownership is for the 1% only (and optional).
You've misspelled conservative. Progressives want more housing and better housing affordability.
The rest get to live in shared housing, tied to it by monthly rent that is just high enough to ensure they can't accumulate wealth, and just low enough to ensure that anyone can get a 12x12 ft box for themselves.
Basically you're describing Feudalism, which is definitely not progressive. Its quite the opposite. Feudalism is where the lord maintains the ownership of all the lands and the tenants (serfs and freemen) rent off the lord for a portion of their produce. The tenants, well at least the freemen are permitted to work it as they see fit as long as the lords get their tribute. This is very much a conservative wet dream who are still bitter about having to give up any of their rights to the peasantry.
It really is part of the culture. People rely on things to be on time. Now different parts of Europe have different standards. In Switzerland and Germany, if the train schedule says 15:13 departure, it leaves at 15:13 not 15:12 or 15:15. So you have to be on time to catch the train. In Italy, the trains are on time most of the time. That 15:13 train might be 15:14 or so.
Then we have the UK where the 15:12 to London Waterloo is coming at 15:40... maybe... due to a signal failure or leaves on the track... and its still £15 a ticket.
Because of the idiotic First Past the Goal Post voting system which degenerates into a 2 party system.
The solution is to use an Alternative Vote system but the majority of Americans are too fucking stupid to:
a) understand the problem, and
b) do anything to fix the problem.
so they end up with the "best" government money can buy!
Not quite. most countries use Instant Runoff Voting that deal with the issues of FPTP. The problem with the US isn't the FPTP system, its electoral councils and PAC's. What the US needs to do is: 1. Kill the electoral collage and go straight to direct voting. The most votes for congressional candidate John Jackson in the electorate of whatever, Ohio means that Jack Johnson wins it. The most votes for senatorial candidate Jack Johnson in Ohio means he wins and if you want to keep voting directly for your president the most votes for Steve Steveman in the federal election means he's president. This is closer to the French system than the Westminster system we have in the UK and commonwealth mainly because we dont vote directly for the PM/Prez. A federal leader who does not win the popular vote should not be win if you're voting direct for a leader, said leaders power should be limited and balanced by the senate and congress.
2. Kill PACs and limit lobbying. This includes capping party donations for both private individuals and organisations. In fact that should be the first thing done because it'll kill a lot of lobbying in itself.
2.a, limit political advertising and force the organisation who paid for it to be clearly stated at the end.
3. Implement instant runoff voting.
Sadly people get called racist or white supremacists if they don't tow a certain view point. Its to a point that word has no real meaning since its used to loosely and freely to describe anyone a person with a conflicting view point.
Translation... I want to say something racist but don't want to be called out on it. Sorry, but there's no global or national conspiracy restricting your viewpoints (sorry, white males are not oppressed). If you find your views are being criticised too much for your liking, simply exercise your right to go somewhere else and expunge them. If you find the only people who share your views are sad old men who sit in dark corners at the pub and use the term "Them" to refer to groups they don't like, maybe your views need re-evaluation. Unlike you, I find that my views can withstand criticism, in fact robust debate helps me improve and strengthen my views. I like to think this is because my views, in some ways differing from others and from some social norms, are not too extreme that they cannot be debated in a public forum.
Yep, modded down for daring to question the White Male Victim syndrome.
I think that is a massive demonstration of how much faith they have in their own reasoning.
As much as I love In-n-Out burger... I don't really want to see it hispterised. I mean they do great food at reasonable prices (seriously Americans, this is what you do well, can you please export more of this and less war, violence and bad daytime TV). Seriously, the In-N-Out on Sepulveda blvd is a well known stopover for Aussie tourists travelling further afield in the US via LAX.
Oh well, I guess we'll just have to wait in line with our heads hung as people with oiled and manicured beards that raise questions about the menu and complain about the lack of vegan-paleo options.
Sadly people get called racist or white supremacists if they don't tow a certain view point. Its to a point that word has no real meaning since its used to loosely and freely to describe anyone a person with a conflicting view point.
Translation... I want to say something racist but don't want to be called out on it.
Sorry, but there's no global or national conspiracy restricting your viewpoints (sorry, white males are not oppressed). If you find your views are being criticised too much for your liking, simply exercise your right to go somewhere else and expunge them. If you find the only people who share your views are sad old men who sit in dark corners at the pub and use the term "Them" to refer to groups they don't like, maybe your views need re-evaluation.
Unlike you, I find that my views can withstand criticism, in fact robust debate helps me improve and strengthen my views. I like to think this is because my views, in some ways differing from others and from some social norms, are not too extreme that they cannot be debated in a public forum.
Drive through fast food and even liquor stores. Convenience stores where you can get a common grocery item quicker, but at an increased markup.
OK.... Admittedly I usually eat in when travelling through America but are drive through's really more expensive than going inside? In Australia and the UK, Micky D's is usually the same price? In fact with a restaurant, take away is usually cheaper than eat in.
Convenience stores, yep you've got a point but supermarkets run on stupidly thin margins that a local corner shop cant compete with. Usually when I'm accepting that I'm paying a premium for something its because I want it now and not even same day delivery can suffice. Either that or I want to see the product before buying like fresh food although I've never seen a fresh food delivery service cheaper than Tesco or Aldi (but usually shop at Morrisons or Sainsburys for quality).
Antifa certainly doesn't shy from low-level violence like punching and vandalism, and it's something I deeply abhor about them. But if you compare all the low-level violence from both sides I'm honestly not sure who is worse. But the white supremacists have a literal and extensive body count. Here Antifa isn't even close.
This.
I hate the "but Jimmy hit me as well" excuse. Its childish and completely wrong in any adult situation.
I'm against fascism, but I don't consider Antifa to be any kind of force for good... let alone the white knights that the Facists would think I believe.Trying to get people to forget your organisation is bad because your opponents are bad is simply stupid. However when it comes to a credible threat to my society, way of life and health, its the far right that represents a bigger threat. This is because my nation, like most western nations leans a bit to the right, this I have no problem with. In many respects, agree with but its a centrist position so it doesn't go to far. However it also means we are more accepting of far right positions than far left positions. A proper (Marxist) communist would not stand a chance in an election in any English speaking developed nation, however the UK, US and Australia all have elected far-right politicians.
Personally I'm a 3rd way centrist, left and right ideas can live together, I staunchly agree with universal health care, the Government can manage this better than private organisations but OTOH, I wouldn't want government handling grocery distribution. They can even work together, I.E. internet service, let the govt own and maintain the fibre in the ground and lease it to any private organisation at a fixed cost. The private providers handle retail and compete on equal ground.
White supremacists, ultra-nationalists, fascists and their ilk are bad not because they're right wing, but because they're extremists. Same with Marxists. Never let the fact they have one or two good ideas from seeing how bad their overall goals are.
That always was a shit comic and for good reasons.
And other bollocks. Throwing in a bunch of quotes randomly combined with a complete misunderstanding of British history is not a rebuttal. The XKCD was not against free speech, it was pointing out that just because it's not illegal to say does not entitle you to a platform, let alone any platform you like. Also freedom without responsibility is anarchy, the same is true with free speech, free speech has never protected you from criticism.
People trying to defend racism (yes, white supremacists are racists, placing one race as superior to another... let alone all others is the dictionary definition of racism) are the ones who are destroying free speech. They are using this as a thought terminating cliche to silence criticism. White Supremacists are not some hard done by minority group fighting for equal rights or recognition, they are fighting to suppress equal rights for other groups they don't like. Using free speech to defend them from critics is devaluing free speech. Free speech does not mean what you say is right, it just means it is not illegal to say it. Using the free speech excuse to silence critics, especially valid critics, reduces freedom.
I'm a firm believer in playing the devils advocate, but one must always consider the nature of the devil for which one advocates for. Knowing who you are defending is key in defending it successfully. Often using the wrong defence harms you more than not defending them in the first place. Finally, using free speech as a defence is the worst possible argument, falling back on free speech means that the most compelling defence you have for what you said is that it is literally not illegal to say it.
People that are prone to be sensitive and have increased leverage for political correctness reasons are themselves frequently bullies.
What absolute bullshit.
Bullies prey on the weak and vulnerable. Bullies will not act without overwhelming support because they are inherently cowards.
Pointless rant against "teh Pee Cees gone madddddssdzzzss" is pointless. You have no idea what bullying is, especially bullying in the workplace.
Bullying amongst colleagues is easy to define, saying or doing something you've been told not to because it's annoying, upsetting or interfering with a colleague. If you think that the colleague is being irrational that is 6 times the reason to fucking stop. You're an adult, act like it and move on. If you think the workplace is too "Pee Cees" then its likely you are the problem and should move to a more abusive workplace.
Bullying from managers is a bit different, it follows the same basic definition as above but also includes being given tasks that are far beyond your role or capabilities that the manager knows you will fail at.
In fact, from my experience its the people who read the Daily Mail and think "teh Pee Cees gone madddddssdzzzss" are more likely to be bullies due to their tenuous connection to reality. The rest of us not in La-La land know how not to take a joke too far and know that gauging an audience before telling one is paramount instead of expecting everyone to put up with whatever nonsense exudes from your piehole.
Oh, I'm sorry, was that too "Pee Cees" for you, here's a nice cup of Harden The Fuck Up princess. I've worked in blue collar jobs (it was doing shit kicker work 2 days a week that paid for my education) and management didn't want to hear about bullying. so the bullies who thought they were tough were the ones missing a tooth when someone finally had enough of their bullshit and hit them with a brick, this tended to shut them up pretty quick and they pretty much became social outcasts. Management ignored that also, sometimes I wish I could do this to some of my colleagues in the white collar world (pretty much the only thing I really miss from those days). I'm pretty tolerant of people who have differing views to me, but a few people are just arseholes and have a face missing a fist, Usually the same people that hold extreme Daily Mail type of views.
I'm pretty certain he meant uninformed tight-arses, not a specific race.
Wow, your telepathy is amazing. Tell us how you can read minds like that! Judging by your weird nonstandard spelling, you come from a country without the legacy of Jim Crow, and thus have no idea what you're talking about. Pro TIP: shut the fuck up when you want to say anything about racial issues you have no idea about.
At the risk of unveiling my awesome lexical abilities to the unwary, "black" day is typically associated with a catastrophe, not a race. Looking around it seems it was first used to describe bad traffic conditions in start of the Christmas shopping season.
the terms "Black Friday" and "Black Saturday" came to be used by the police in Philadelphia and Rochester to describe the crowds and traffic congestion accompanying the start of the Christmas shopping season.
And yes, I come from a country where institutionalised racism wasn't a thing in living memory. This isn't something I'm particularly ashamed of and maybe you should take your own advice when talking about things you clearly have no knowledge of.
SHHHHHHH,
No-one tell him it was just basic comprehension and common sense. Any reading of the GP's post that is indistinguishable from telepathy is insufficiently competent.
I'm pretty certain he meant uninformed tight-arses, not a specific race.
The kind of people who don't realise two things.
1. There is a time cost. Spending 6 hours to save 20% often isn't worth it. Not to mention the cost of fuel.
2. Prices are raised in preparation for the holiday sales, then dropped less than that amount for black Friday.
Savvy people buy this stuff off peak when meaningful discounts are offered to keep stock moving (January or just before the end of the financial year in your nation). Many of us have just given up on stores entirely because we get better prices online. Especially for stuff that goes into stupid prices around Christmas like toys and games, what little of this I had to buy for relatives, I bought months ago.
Fairly certain a savvy black or Latino would have done the same thing. I'm not smart because I'm white, I'm smart because I actually thought about things and planned ahead.
Look up any documented case of feral humans, either in the wild or confinement. If they have a few years first with parents beforehand, they tend to be OK after a period of catching up - but left completely "unprogrammed", they tend to be completely unable to cope.
Humans need interactions on several levels to "become" humans as we recognize them.
The big difference is that a human will learn of its own accord. Of course we guide it to get the kind of human we want in society but that is more a preference than an innate human ability. An AI at our current level of development will not learn or even act on its own accord, it is entirely dependent on a human to give it instructions and more importantly, give it parameters on how to carry out those instructions.
The fact AI do not know how to handle an undefined scenario without human input is why I firmly believe that an autonomous car is decades away from public consumption. However commercial AI lawyers and accountants are a real possibility because for these professions, there are few unknown scenarios and most solutions are easily determined by applying rules to the data.
As long as you live in the fantasy that human brains are magical and computers are not there's no point in having an argument, because you've defined the answer "Humans are intelligent and computers are not, hence anything done by computers is not proof of intelligence." rather than the question: "What is intelligence?" and failed to make any measurable definition or criteria. It's like saying humans have souls and rocks don't and expect the debate to be anything other than theology and philosophy.
The thing is, we've already defined these things, you just haven't looked it up or accepted it.
The kind of AI that wins games is called Applied AI (or Weak AI) this is very good at working within parameters, applying rules that do not change to data. Where it strugles is when rules aren't clearly defined or change. If someone were to cheat at the game the AI was playing, the AI would likely be unable to handle it. This is why games like Chess and Go are good tests for weak AI, the full parameters of the game are known.
Now take something that isn't as straight forward, like Poker, then AI's start to struggle as the rules around the emotional and human elements are not so clear cut. We can make machines that can assemble furniture, but making one that can get a flat packed wardrobe from Ikea and assemble it given only the instructions provided is incredibly hard as the AI needs to interpret vague instructions and then apply them to a dissembled product to make the finished product.
In order to do these things, we need AI that can operate outside set parameters, this is strong AI or AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) which can operate on the same cognitive level as a human this means it must be able to operate outside of set parameters, put simply it must be able to reason, make judgements under uncertainty, represent knowledge (including solving problems with limited information), plan, learn (of its own accord) and most importantly, be capable of combining all of these skills towards a goal. Right now that is what separates the human computer from the silicon one.
The human brain is very much like a computer in the way it can process information, but the fact is we still don't fully understand how that works. That is a realm of science, not theology.
Elon was born in Africa, now he's American. Wouldn't that make him an African-American as well?
Yep, I get this is a joke but African-American has been used to describe American born people who trace their lineage back to Africa, not anyone from Africa or who is black (I.E a black Latino or black Englishman).
However as an Anglo, I've never got the the hang up Americans have over saying things directly. You can speak about race and colour without being racist, its actually quite easy. Here in the UK a black Englishman would describe his skin colour as black and his ethnicity as English. There isn't really a difference between a black Englishman and a white Englishman.
Being racist is about having a negative intent towards a race, not about avoiding certain adjectives.
Also, you'll never hear the term African-English, it would connotate that they are a dual citizen of Africa and England although in that case you'd mention the country in questions, like Kenya and even then they'd describe themselves as Kenyan or English.
Yes but as a white male you're not entitled to anything, not to mention being offended. Being offended "ist verbotten", so to speak.
Ahh, yes, the modern western phenomena of having all the benefits in society but still wanting to play the victim card.
Being a victim is in vogue, so naturally those who think its cool will go to any length to find a way to be a victim.
Personally I'd rather be a person who has accomplished, regardless of any adversity (or lack there of) to someone looking for imaginary adversity to blame for their lack of accomplishments.
SJW is at this point a descriptive shorthand as much as it is an insult.
So it's meaningless, SJW isn't an insult, except to the person who's using it.
SJW has just become a way of telling us we've said something that has butthurt you and you cant form a rational rebuttal to it. Much the same as "PC", "Leftist", "hater" and other meaningless insults thrown about when you cant argue the point.
What is ironic is you have two different definitions for racism.
The first is a person behaving like an asshat based on race. I'm surprised you let that stand since I was applying the basic standard of racism to a black man, which we all "know" can never be a racist.
The second definition of racism you have, which is the more traditional leftist one, is a white person calling out a black person for being a racist.
Nope, you're the one with two definitions of racism. The one where you get to use negative stereotypes of black people with no consequence and the one where you want consequences for a black man using negative stereotypes about whites. The fact is both are the same form of racism, applying negative generalisation to people based on the colour of their skin. Both are wrong, both are indefensible.
The final nail in the coffin of your argument is the word leftist. This is an immediate indication that you're not clued in about anything.
There are just to many too many streaming platforms out there. Much less a lot of HBO like ones that have shows on them I don't want to have to buy / deal with 4-5 different stores / ui's / apps / offline rules.
HBO
amazon prime
youtube red
CBS All Access
netflix
etc
Predicted this a while back, a service will come along and combine all of these services into one package that you can access through a single device connected to a cable. All that has happened before will happen again... except we'll herald it as NEW and EXCITING because its ON THE INTERWEBS !1!!11!ONE!!1!ELEVEN!!!
Uber is a credit card service. Denounce fraud and you'll get your money back or go to a dispute. Uber gets charged for each refund so it's bad business for them.
Under what Financial Services industry code of conduct do Uber operate? what credit products do they provide? What credit network do they operate (important to know what stores I can use their product in)?
Or maybe a better question is, what were you on when you wrote that?
Uber are not a credit card service, they are an illegal in most jurisdictions (and definitely immoral) taxi company. Your credit card provider is a credit card service. You perform a charge back through them and not Uber. However the burden of evidence is on you to demonstrate that you were fraudulently charged. Uber will of course, not co-operate as they have your money and don't care (I mean what are you going to do, go back to using normal taxis... with the amount your emotionally invested?)
DRM servers have killed the used games market on PCs.
There are lots and lots of games out there that are over a decade old even that you can't buy used because they have been "activated" on an old DRM server and can't be reactivated on another machine.
In several cases, legitimate copies of a game can't be played at all on any PC because the game had demanded to contact a now discontinued DRM server even to start.
Actually sales killed the used game market on the PC, not that it had a huge one to begin with. When I can buy a year old game on Steam for £10 or 2 year old game on Steam or GOG for £5 new, why would I pay £15 for it used?
The reason Consoles have a used game market is that Console owners have less money and fewer sales, 12+ months after release you're still paying near release prices for old games.
As for DRM... there's yet to be one that has remained uncracked. Also I don't reward companies that pull this kind of bollocks, hence EA and Ubisoft has not seen a single one of my currency units (I have cards in multiple countries) since they tried to force me into their own platforms.