As far as translating English into local languages, I agree. I doubt many local languages will ever provide large enough data sets for translation from those languages to be any good.
It was in `98 I tried to speak to a Chinese student on the bus and she smiled and bowed a couple times speaking Chinese and then pulled out a phone-sized computer and started speaking into it, and the computer explained that she didn't speak English but had a translator device. It worked pretty well. We have lots of students that don't speak English. But only from China. Nobody else has advanced enough language support to get away with it, even now.
"business license" isn't a thing as you imagine it, and it certainly isn't a bludgeon that would be legal to use instead of enforcing other laws. Give me a freakin' break, go read a book for once in your life.
"Business license" is something that exists in some places and not others, and where it exists it is merely a registration of the name of the company and who owns it and who the formal contacts are. And there is some fee or tax associated with that listing. You would have to already be banned from doing business for some other reason for it to be denied to anybody.
This investigation seems instead designed to go after a bunch of executives and engineers rather than the corporation itself.
There are lots of things that are official company actions that violate laws that they could be investigating, but they're investigating part that people were keeping secret but using anyways. That means that this is going to implicate individuals criminally, and most of the corporate liability will be civil negligence.
1) They didn't refuse service, they continued providing app data to those users. It was just intentionally false data.
2) "We Reserve The Right to Refuse Service" is a dog-whistle sign that is intended to be understood in a certain way by certain people. If you don't know who that is, you won't know anything is wrong. Luckily though, the owner of the shop is generally not able to communicate that to employees, and so it doesn't get "enforced."
3) There is no right to refuse service, nor any right to be served. All the rights have to do with other things.
The National Enquirer is one of the few news magazines still doing traditional investigative reporting.
They've been legit ever since Bat Boy left for the Weekly World News in 1982!
Who ended Gary Hart's political career? The National Enquirer. They also took down John Edwards. Who attempted to out Bill Cosby as a serial abuser in 2005? The National Enquirer. Who paid for the tip that solved the murder of Bill Cosby's son, Ennis in 1997? The National Enquirer. They even spent 18 months investigating Charlie Sheen's health before outing his as HIV-positive. They even reported Steve Jobs having cancer long before anybody else.
Isn't this all important news?!?!? What about Rush Limbaugh's drug addiction, was that real news? Mel Gibson's divorce? Tiger Woods' wife didn't know he was cheating until The National Enquirer reported it. Ouch.
No, they're not actually going to use sloppy, overly-broad, incorrect phrasing chosen by The Independent as a legal document. They'll use stuff written by lawyers and politicians, perhaps even the text of the statute.
When your currency devalues, stuff you import isn't any cheaper. Instead, prices go up. Services provided by foreign companies are likely to be priced based on the exchange rate.
When your currency devalues, imports become more expensive and exports earn more.
If people there are going to subscribe because they're a more-captive audience than before, they might even end up paying extra even beyond the exchange rate difference.
Watching Game of Thrones from a dodgy website does not warrant a ten year jail sentence.
Considering the difference in both quality and efficiency between streaming and torrenting, I would support at least a 5 year sentence to an reeducation camp.
The situation with John Deere is exactly what the DMCA was supposed to do.
Just because you only paid attention to the part about filesharing doesn't mean anything.
Protecting proprietary commercial services from trespass was exactly the point of the parts of it that John Deere makes use of.
IMO it is a good thing because it prevents them from mixing their proprietary crap with the open stuff that I use. They stay on their side, I stay on my side. No embracing, no extending, no problems. If the customer does even a tiny bit of research they'll learn that they can't use a regular mechanic if they buy that brand, and they'll either be happy about that, or not. And they'll buy it, or not.
To be a business language people have to be able to learn it as adults, and be able to identify documents using just a phrase book.
The written form has to be based on the Latin alphabet. The reason is simple; lots of languages already use it. So there is broad familiarity with the concept of having a phonetic encoding system using approximately these same letters. No other writing system has that.
Russian is not viable in a post-Soviet world. It is laughable.
Chinese or Arabic-speaking people can look up phrases in a Latin alphabet using a phrase book. And nobody else is going to easily use theirs. So it is not even viable. It is not even 1% chance. Plus, other reasons.
Chinese is too difficult for non-native speakers to ever become a glue language that business people would want to learn to speak to other non-native Chinese speakers. Also, almost all Chinese people speak a second language. Younger people English, older people Russian.
Spanish or German are the only really viable alternatives to English for that use case in most of the world. And what business uses as a glue language is the one that parents will want children to learn in school.
Chinese is a useful language to learn, and it is increasingly useful in the world we live in, but that is only for the use case of talking to people in China.
Even people so stupid they can't tell the difference between "is not decreasing in use" and "is the only important thing" realize they better learn a few words of it, eh?
He probably doesn't realize that all the French voter rolls are processed and the data input by Bulgarians who don't speak French.
Without using English, they wouldn't even be able to have their ballots printed.
All their government documents have to be translated into all the dozens of EU languages... by the same people. And those people only speak Bulgarian, English, and German. Very few people in the world want to learn French, and that includes people who translate French documents all day! It also includes French people, who often write the originals in English.
Considering French labor laws, there is no way that France would be able to afford to hire French people to do that sort of work.
It is true that if you visit France and appear to be a native English speaker, lots of people will pretend they don't speak it. Just practice asking, "Do you speak Russian?" first and then they'll answer you in English.
Without English, the EU wouldn't even work. If the French really think English is on the decline, they should be studying German because that would be the next choice for a "glue language" in Europe.
No, you have to eliminate variables other than the one you're looking at, or there is no way to isolate any signal in the data.
You're right in your implication that using your world view as a basis for identifying confounding variables would be bad. But I wasn't actually even having ideas, man. Read a book sometime, will you?
If the context is "health effects of paleo diet compared to other modern diet choices" and there is a claim being made that people didn't live as long on that diet, it is just not supported by the known facts. The known facts are not that people had a shorter maximum life expectancy. People who died of old age are believed to have been dying at close to the same age as modern humans. Child mortality obviously has little to do with dietary choices. If you starve, you didn't choose the wrong foods. It isn't related to food choices. If you're gored by a woolly rhino or eaten by a cave bear, that tells us nothing about your diet. If Grog smashes your head in with a rock because attempting communication with you is frustrating, that tells us nothing about your diet choices. Only if you make it to the end of your natural life do we discover what the result of your diet choices was.
And they were all getting a lot of exercise and eating a varied diet by necessity. Their diet was fine. They had a lot of disease, a lot of parasites, and strong immune systems.
When Dufus Realitycouch stops eating vegetables and declares he's gone paleo, the health outcomes are different. And office workers are not going to do much better unless their hobbies are seriously hardcore.
The California Refund Value (CRV) is the amount paid to consumers when they recycle beverage containers at certified recycling centers. The minimum refund value established for each type of eligible beverage container is 5 cents for each container under 24 ounces and 10 cents for each container 24 ounces or greater.
Here in Oregon we just raised it to 10 cents for everything, even water. But I think California is doing fine.
In the `90s what you said was actually true. But it is a really bad idea to treat memories of what you were told about places in place of actual data. If you're near a web browser while you're writing internet comments, and you want to talk about the amount of some deposit, fee, tax, product, etc., you can just look it up. It takes almost no time. It takes the same amount of time to look it up and find out the AM radio lied to you as it does to type the ignorant shit out.
It was true Once Upon A Time, though. I remember around 1995 there were some rednecks from California that pulled into town with a whole pickup truck load of aluminum cans. They thought there were going to drive up here and make a fortune off of those dumb hippies and their idiotic bottle deposit. Then they found out that the containers with the deposit are all marked, and that the produce stockers who used to also have to count the cans were really good at checking. They didn't count cans exactly, they counted "OR 5c" labels.
LOL we don't even have oil refineries in Oregon, you think we want a freakin' spaceport?!
I guarantee you that if you actually filed the regulatory documents for that and you had sufficient funding to actually build the thing, we would pass a tax higher than California's before you could even finish your first attempt at an environmental impact statement.
We don't even have private beaches here. Most of our coast is continuous parks. The path navigable by foot closest to the ocean is a public right-of-way, so not only is there no private beaches, places without beaches don't even have a private clifftop.
If you're a sea lion in California, you have to deal with that rocket launch shit. If you have good territory in Oregon, you don't. That's how we do it here.
And if you want to buy water in a bottle, you can pay a 10 cent deposit on that bottle. That ensures that some homeless person will recycle it for you. (OTOH our tap water is higher quality than the bottled stuff)
Washington would permit launches more readily than Oregon if it generated large tax revenue. But they certainly wouldn't get in a competition over low taxes! They would only allow it if their location was so premium that they could charge higher taxes than California and Oregon; the SW corner of Washington that would be appropriate is highly treasured park land, after all.
Instead of just hearing "tax" and waving your hands that they would create oceanic launch platforms, you might instead want to revise your logic to consider the likely situation where the cost of the tax is below the cost of developing a new launch site.
I mean, seriously, how many rocket scientists drive with fake license plates on their cars to protest taxes? That is the sort of person it would take to waste a whole bunch of money moving their business over the mere existence of taxes without even doing a cost analysis.
No, if you pay attention to the part where the tax goes down the farther you fly, you can realize that the purpose of this tax is to discourage the "space" tourism flights that barely go anywhere, without much impact on real launches that have a traditional purpose, like putting hardware into orbit, or flying far enough to get some science done.
Space tourism flights would have significant negative impacts on the surrounding community, and would be much more frequent than satellite launches; even when the tourism flights are much much smaller business. You don't want small fries inconveniencing millions of people to make thousands of dollars, that is just not good management of the commons. But if those flights were generating lots of tax revenue, then maybe the convenience is worth it.
But also, maybe people in Texas have different quality of life expectations, and won't be bothered. Everybody wins! Just like, here in Oregon we don't want to breath the fumes from gas refineries, so we let them do that in California and we pay an extra ~ 10 cents a gallon for locally cleaner air. Everybody wins!
California is where new industries go to die. Why bother going there where companies that create jobs are punished? You're right, they'll go elsewhere and thrive instead of staying there.
People, this right here is what happens when you try to "think" with your political flag instead of with your brain. You end up saying stupid shit like that.
Slashdot Mirror
As far as translating English into local languages, I agree. I doubt many local languages will ever provide large enough data sets for translation from those languages to be any good.
It was in `98 I tried to speak to a Chinese student on the bus and she smiled and bowed a couple times speaking Chinese and then pulled out a phone-sized computer and started speaking into it, and the computer explained that she didn't speak English but had a translator device. It worked pretty well. We have lots of students that don't speak English. But only from China. Nobody else has advanced enough language support to get away with it, even now.
"business license" isn't a thing as you imagine it, and it certainly isn't a bludgeon that would be legal to use instead of enforcing other laws. Give me a freakin' break, go read a book for once in your life.
"Business license" is something that exists in some places and not others, and where it exists it is merely a registration of the name of the company and who owns it and who the formal contacts are. And there is some fee or tax associated with that listing. You would have to already be banned from doing business for some other reason for it to be denied to anybody.
This investigation seems instead designed to go after a bunch of executives and engineers rather than the corporation itself.
There are lots of things that are official company actions that violate laws that they could be investigating, but they're investigating part that people were keeping secret but using anyways. That means that this is going to implicate individuals criminally, and most of the corporate liability will be civil negligence.
1) They didn't refuse service, they continued providing app data to those users. It was just intentionally false data.
2) "We Reserve The Right to Refuse Service" is a dog-whistle sign that is intended to be understood in a certain way by certain people. If you don't know who that is, you won't know anything is wrong. Luckily though, the owner of the shop is generally not able to communicate that to employees, and so it doesn't get "enforced."
3) There is no right to refuse service, nor any right to be served. All the rights have to do with other things.
I would say it is more like radar jammer where it uses a false transmission to hide the activity.
Highly illegal, of course.
The National Enquirer is one of the few news magazines still doing traditional investigative reporting.
They've been legit ever since Bat Boy left for the Weekly World News in 1982!
Who ended Gary Hart's political career? The National Enquirer. They also took down John Edwards. Who attempted to out Bill Cosby as a serial abuser in 2005? The National Enquirer. Who paid for the tip that solved the murder of Bill Cosby's son, Ennis in 1997? The National Enquirer. They even spent 18 months investigating Charlie Sheen's health before outing his as HIV-positive. They even reported Steve Jobs having cancer long before anybody else.
Isn't this all important news?!?!? What about Rush Limbaugh's drug addiction, was that real news? Mel Gibson's divorce? Tiger Woods' wife didn't know he was cheating until The National Enquirer reported it. Ouch.
No, they're not actually going to use sloppy, overly-broad, incorrect phrasing chosen by The Independent as a legal document. They'll use stuff written by lawyers and politicians, perhaps even the text of the statute.
When your currency devalues, stuff you import isn't any cheaper. Instead, prices go up. Services provided by foreign companies are likely to be priced based on the exchange rate.
When your currency devalues, imports become more expensive and exports earn more.
If people there are going to subscribe because they're a more-captive audience than before, they might even end up paying extra even beyond the exchange rate difference.
Watching Game of Thrones from a dodgy website does not warrant a ten year jail sentence.
Considering the difference in both quality and efficiency between streaming and torrenting, I would support at least a 5 year sentence to an reeducation camp.
Creeping up?! Wasn't that the traditional system in the UK?
The situation with John Deere is exactly what the DMCA was supposed to do.
Just because you only paid attention to the part about filesharing doesn't mean anything.
Protecting proprietary commercial services from trespass was exactly the point of the parts of it that John Deere makes use of.
IMO it is a good thing because it prevents them from mixing their proprietary crap with the open stuff that I use. They stay on their side, I stay on my side. No embracing, no extending, no problems. If the customer does even a tiny bit of research they'll learn that they can't use a regular mechanic if they buy that brand, and they'll either be happy about that, or not. And they'll buy it, or not.
When my ancestors were running the place they'd hang you from Tower for less.
Probably why their children fled to America.
They don't have the population to take over the world, and if they blow up the world I still don't have to speak Russian!
To be a business language people have to be able to learn it as adults, and be able to identify documents using just a phrase book.
The written form has to be based on the Latin alphabet. The reason is simple; lots of languages already use it. So there is broad familiarity with the concept of having a phonetic encoding system using approximately these same letters. No other writing system has that.
Russian is not viable in a post-Soviet world. It is laughable.
Chinese or Arabic-speaking people can look up phrases in a Latin alphabet using a phrase book. And nobody else is going to easily use theirs. So it is not even viable. It is not even 1% chance. Plus, other reasons.
Chinese is too difficult for non-native speakers to ever become a glue language that business people would want to learn to speak to other non-native Chinese speakers. Also, almost all Chinese people speak a second language. Younger people English, older people Russian.
Spanish or German are the only really viable alternatives to English for that use case in most of the world. And what business uses as a glue language is the one that parents will want children to learn in school.
Chinese is a useful language to learn, and it is increasingly useful in the world we live in, but that is only for the use case of talking to people in China.
Even people so stupid they can't tell the difference between "is not decreasing in use" and "is the only important thing" realize they better learn a few words of it, eh?
Baka baka baka sou da ne?
He probably doesn't realize that all the French voter rolls are processed and the data input by Bulgarians who don't speak French.
Without using English, they wouldn't even be able to have their ballots printed.
All their government documents have to be translated into all the dozens of EU languages... by the same people. And those people only speak Bulgarian, English, and German. Very few people in the world want to learn French, and that includes people who translate French documents all day! It also includes French people, who often write the originals in English.
Considering French labor laws, there is no way that France would be able to afford to hire French people to do that sort of work.
It is true that if you visit France and appear to be a native English speaker, lots of people will pretend they don't speak it. Just practice asking, "Do you speak Russian?" first and then they'll answer you in English.
Without English, the EU wouldn't even work. If the French really think English is on the decline, they should be studying German because that would be the next choice for a "glue language" in Europe.
No, you have to eliminate variables other than the one you're looking at, or there is no way to isolate any signal in the data.
You're right in your implication that using your world view as a basis for identifying confounding variables would be bad. But I wasn't actually even having ideas, man. Read a book sometime, will you?
If the context is "health effects of paleo diet compared to other modern diet choices" and there is a claim being made that people didn't live as long on that diet, it is just not supported by the known facts. The known facts are not that people had a shorter maximum life expectancy. People who died of old age are believed to have been dying at close to the same age as modern humans. Child mortality obviously has little to do with dietary choices. If you starve, you didn't choose the wrong foods. It isn't related to food choices. If you're gored by a woolly rhino or eaten by a cave bear, that tells us nothing about your diet. If Grog smashes your head in with a rock because attempting communication with you is frustrating, that tells us nothing about your diet choices. Only if you make it to the end of your natural life do we discover what the result of your diet choices was.
And they were all getting a lot of exercise and eating a varied diet by necessity. Their diet was fine. They had a lot of disease, a lot of parasites, and strong immune systems.
When Dufus Realitycouch stops eating vegetables and declares he's gone paleo, the health outcomes are different. And office workers are not going to do much better unless their hobbies are seriously hardcore.
Here in Oregon we just raised it to 10 cents for everything, even water. But I think California is doing fine.
In the `90s what you said was actually true. But it is a really bad idea to treat memories of what you were told about places in place of actual data. If you're near a web browser while you're writing internet comments, and you want to talk about the amount of some deposit, fee, tax, product, etc., you can just look it up. It takes almost no time. It takes the same amount of time to look it up and find out the AM radio lied to you as it does to type the ignorant shit out.
It was true Once Upon A Time, though. I remember around 1995 there were some rednecks from California that pulled into town with a whole pickup truck load of aluminum cans. They thought there were going to drive up here and make a fortune off of those dumb hippies and their idiotic bottle deposit. Then they found out that the containers with the deposit are all marked, and that the produce stockers who used to also have to count the cans were really good at checking. They didn't count cans exactly, they counted "OR 5c" labels.
LOL we don't even have oil refineries in Oregon, you think we want a freakin' spaceport?!
I guarantee you that if you actually filed the regulatory documents for that and you had sufficient funding to actually build the thing, we would pass a tax higher than California's before you could even finish your first attempt at an environmental impact statement.
We don't even have private beaches here. Most of our coast is continuous parks. The path navigable by foot closest to the ocean is a public right-of-way, so not only is there no private beaches, places without beaches don't even have a private clifftop.
If you're a sea lion in California, you have to deal with that rocket launch shit. If you have good territory in Oregon, you don't. That's how we do it here.
And if you want to buy water in a bottle, you can pay a 10 cent deposit on that bottle. That ensures that some homeless person will recycle it for you. (OTOH our tap water is higher quality than the bottled stuff)
Washington would permit launches more readily than Oregon if it generated large tax revenue. But they certainly wouldn't get in a competition over low taxes! They would only allow it if their location was so premium that they could charge higher taxes than California and Oregon; the SW corner of Washington that would be appropriate is highly treasured park land, after all.
Instead of just hearing "tax" and waving your hands that they would create oceanic launch platforms, you might instead want to revise your logic to consider the likely situation where the cost of the tax is below the cost of developing a new launch site.
I mean, seriously, how many rocket scientists drive with fake license plates on their cars to protest taxes? That is the sort of person it would take to waste a whole bunch of money moving their business over the mere existence of taxes without even doing a cost analysis.
It would have to be both, rich people normally only pay a small token amount of taxes.
No, if you pay attention to the part where the tax goes down the farther you fly, you can realize that the purpose of this tax is to discourage the "space" tourism flights that barely go anywhere, without much impact on real launches that have a traditional purpose, like putting hardware into orbit, or flying far enough to get some science done.
Space tourism flights would have significant negative impacts on the surrounding community, and would be much more frequent than satellite launches; even when the tourism flights are much much smaller business. You don't want small fries inconveniencing millions of people to make thousands of dollars, that is just not good management of the commons. But if those flights were generating lots of tax revenue, then maybe the convenience is worth it.
But also, maybe people in Texas have different quality of life expectations, and won't be bothered. Everybody wins! Just like, here in Oregon we don't want to breath the fumes from gas refineries, so we let them do that in California and we pay an extra ~ 10 cents a gallon for locally cleaner air. Everybody wins!
Which Universe do you live in when you're sleeping?
California is where new industries go to die. Why bother going there where companies that create jobs are punished? You're right, they'll go elsewhere and thrive instead of staying there.
People, this right here is what happens when you try to "think" with your political flag instead of with your brain. You end up saying stupid shit like that.