0
stringlengths 9
22.1k
|
|---|
The earth is about 6e24KG (6,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 KG).
The space elevator, lets say was a hefty 1,000,000,000 KG. The space shuttle, for reference, is about 2,300,000 KG.
Locating a 1TG (1 trillion gram) mass 100,000 km away from a 6NG (6 nonillion gram) as a ratio is about 1/6,000,000,000,000,000. |
You mean like almost every other antivirus software on the market?
[McAfee removal tool](
[Kaspersky Removal Tool](
[ESET NOD32]( |
Not to mention that from 1995 until sometime around 2005 or so the majority of consumers were still accessing the internet through dial-up. Which was subject to these exact same Title II regulations all along.
Then we can throw in the fact that the broadband carriers were already and always have been under FCC regulation, too. The difference being that FCC, exercising that very same regulatory authority, had formerly classified them as Title I. Where was all this gloom and doom about the government taking over the internet when that ruling was issued? There was none, because the big ISPs weren't spending millions on propaganda when they were getting the ruling they wanted. |
Google's motive is simple. Get users faster internet, so they can consume more Google services and thus be served more ads. I'm sure demographic data is collected as well, but that's not the major focus. Google doesn't have much issue with tracking now days. Instead it's trying to increase consumption. |
You need a source to make that sort of claim. you need some sort of evidence of foul play.
The thing about this fiasco is that Leo Laporte is one of the most unbiased tech reviewers out there and goes out of his way to make sure his integrity isn't compromised.
>They're atleast giving him free shit, which is like the same thing.
Do you have any evidence? A lot of reviewers such as Patrick Norton refuse to take anything for free from companies. All Leo received was a review copy of the product which you can only keep for seven days or buy it yourself. Of course leo couldn't review a bought copy because it came out the day before and are sold out. |
So true. Knew a guy in High School that got in trouble for something he said. Don't even remember what it was, but I'm sure it involved foul language. His counselor called him in to discipline and lecture at him and the guy defended himself by quoting the constituion including the first amendment. When it was clear the counselor wasn't winning the argument and couldn't quote ANY lines from the constitution he ended the conversation by saying
"you're not 18 yet. You don't have rights!"
that was pretty damn funny and the guy laughed all the way to detention and once he got there read a stephen king book with profanities and all. |
I suppose I was not enitrely clear in the intent of my above comment. I was drawing attention to implied and informed consent. For instance, every Air Force computer and phone of any classification level has a label on it stating "This information system is subject to monitoring at all times. Use of this information system constitutes consent to monitoring." The key diffenence between the AF issued computers and this school's computers would be the absence of a notification of monitoring.
Also, you certainly MAY give legal consent to allow another to subject you to otherwise illegal acts. I cannot just walk up to you and slap you. Also, if just you say "Someone slap me!", I may not slap you. However, if you were a Masochist and I a Sadist, and we have an agreement where we play out these roles, it would be legal for me to slap you until you retract your consent. Otherwise, it takes another law to say that one MAY NOT agree to be subjected to an illegal act, like in the instance of assisted suicide. |
I had a friend that went to a strict baptist school. Inside the school she was not allowed to wear pants, hats or anything showing the least bit of skin aside from the arms and face. But the thing is that the school, community and local baptist superchurch were so interconnected that the rules that kind of make sense in the school were enforced in all areas. She would catch detention and demerits for being outside without pantyhose or buying a pair of jeans. The whole congregation, parents and kids were in on this and would report each other. So honestly, I'm not that surprised with this article. |
What does refute it is the fact that a successful law firm is handling their case, the family isn't simply making excuses to the media. Attorneys are required to go to reasonable lengths to check the truthfulness of allegations, and knowingly submitting documents containing falsehoods is the sort of thing that will result in suspensions if not permanent disbarment. Considering that the technical issue underpins the entire case, I can see no way that they'd submit that PDF without having a reasonable sense of its truthfulness, and the suggestion that the parents just fabricated the story and got some lawyers to play along is laughable unless they happened to be planning career suicide at the time. Why on Earth would a successful litigator put his/her bar status on the line for a client they met a week ago? It wouldn't make any sense. |
The problem with ignoring Palin is that it is not helping solve anything. She and people like her use logical fallacies (or fail to conform to a logical flow in conversation) with implications far too serious to be granted any credibility. While filtering that which is irrational will preserve your sanity, the fallacy is reinforced in those who don't know any better. The only way to defeat ignorance is through education, but it's a never-ending battle. Those of us well enough educated to inform the uninformed and correct, without insulting, the misinformed are essential to our future. Our future -- as individuals, as communities, as a nation, as a world, as a people, and as one species among many -- depends on the willingness of the smart to lead and teach the ignorant truth without malice. Those receiving such instruction must see past being wrong, for it points you away from fantasy if not toward truth. |
The key here is skepticism in favor of outright "lol fuck that shit." I mean when quantum physics was first being looked into and people were saying "hey look these little dudes are in two places at once, wtf?" I'm sure there was a lot of people that were thinking "what the shit have you been smoking and where can I get some?" But then they look into it and they're like "oh, fuck yeah, two places at once." |
This is partly true, but ultimately not useful. When it comes to limiting the availability of services in this domain, technology is always the limiting factor. As you know, prices on technological good don't fall because people get bored with them and there is no longer any demand. Leaps in technology caused the same product to be available for cheaper.
So yes, it is entirely possible that at some leading research institution there is a machine that is capable of switching at these speeds, and that the cost of this machine is such that it will not be put in place commercially. But what will drive that cost down is not companies saving their pennies to be able to afford one, but rather improvements in technology that will make them cheaper.
I guess the |
It isn't an ad hominem, I love how people seem to assume that name calling instantly results in ad homnem fallacy. He is a moron...literally. He fails to understand a very clearly written argument I've been maintaining for several comments here. He responds ignoring completely points that I made, inserting his own point to discredit mine, except...it has nothing to do with my point. He makes no sense and is all as if he's somehow right about it? That's pretty dumb. He needs to learn to read. But ad hominem that is not. My calling him a moron me isn't trying to attack his arguments, but rather call it as I see it. His arguments are already dealt with in prior posts. I'm trying to make him go back over what I've already written and see he's ignoring everything I said to this point. |
The thing is, I left FB shortly after it introduced "apps" because I got sick of the spam. I always said that I wished that someone would put out a FB clone that was more like it was before the introduction of games, etc. A social network does not have to be a gaming platform, people like me use "social networks" to be social, not waste time and spam their friend with advertising. I love being able to keep track of my friends/acquaintances/work-friends from old jobs/people I went to school with, etc without having to either A) Try to keep updated email addresses/phone #'s or B) Wade through page after page of FB spam (eg. so-and-so needs help with their farm!). Yes, I know I can block apps on facebook, but it was too little too late for me, they'd already lost me. No doubt Google+ will implement something similar before long, but hopefully they'll make it less intrusive/spammy. So far my favourite thing about Google+ is the ability to share different posts, etc with different groups easily (via circles). If they can manage the apps as well as they've managed information sharing then they've got me, if not I will continue to use FB as I have been for years - as a glorified, auto-updating rolodex. |
You know that thing Redditors always say about being forever alone, and being confined to socializing on a faceless interface? In many cases, such as yours, its because they're a belligerent douche when it comes to talking to people, and can't tell when the other party is no longer interested in conversing. |
Although it's embarrassing that it took a peer-review by the internet, there was no intentional deception at any point. If you read the [AMNH's response]( they praise the clear description of the methodology which allowed the design flaw to be pointed out. This is what science is about: the ongoing quest for knowledge through experimentation .
Science is the mechanism we have for understanding the world. If the result of this episode is an increased awareness of the scientific method among the general population, then that's a great outcome. And if the student applies what he's now learned about research methodology, then that's another win. |
I hate kids because they're young and didn't work as long as i do' isn't interesting debate. It's ad-hominem crap that has no bearing on the story. The guy would have distrusted it even had it turned out the kid was right, he's not an intellectual or positing a clever point of view; he's just a dick. |
The kid should be defended - he is a bright, creative kid
It took me less than a minute reading the initial story to tell my wife the story was an embarrassment not to the kid - but to his science teacher who should have caught the voltage problem and the area of coverage problem immediately.
The museum should [not] require an actual breakthrough for a child's award.
But they too should have immediately realized the results were worthless and should have qualified their praise. |
Ok I can only say this once more before going crazy. WE CAN'T FUCKING HAVE IT ALL. Government is always a choice between two imperfect systems. If he were to come out and legislate for busing or affirmative action he would be shafting many of the kids being bused or qualified non-minorities. Paul's solution to this problem is to at least let the people closest to the problem decide. Those people are states and municipalities. |
There are some clips of him being questioned about his stance on abortion and gay marriage where he comes out and says that they aren't his main issues, and if these topics were the most important to the country, he wouldn't be running for president. There is no way he would be in favor of any federal ban on abortion or gay marriage. Which is about as far as the most liberal presidents have gone when elected. In the full text of the first link, he specifically says the federal government has no place regulating gay-marriage. I think that makes a very strong case for him as President.
In the full text second excerpt, his main point is, again, the federal government's misuse of its power. His problem is that federal courts are interfering in state matters. Whatever his stance, he has a very long track record of being consistent. I really don't think he would try to use the federal government in any way to interfere with gay rights. |
So what's the trade-off for the Civil Rights acts in the 60s? When you've got a minority being discriminated against, and the federal government has to intervene and tell the racist Southern states, "No, you cannot do this any more." If you left Civil Rights to the states we'd still have segregation. |
That's not the pro-government view, that's a strawman. There isn't one definitive "pro-government" view, there are several. What most want (in a mixed economy) is governmental regulation of businesses, not governmental protection of them. That's just what the businesses themselves want. |
I support the removal any notions of SOPA-like legislation (and also the removal of any legislator that supports such nonsense), but I'm not going to stop using the Internet. I don't think that you understand the ripple effect that this will have:
no phones (even non-smart phones)
no web browsing, online shopping, social networking, email
no cloud-based asset access (no streaming from iCloud, Dropbox, etc)
marketing services (whose sum, depending on industry could be 100%) wouldn't reach targeted audiences
other Internet based services: tech support, craigslist, research services, etc. would be
negatively effected
IOW, you essentially go dark. So who does this effect? You and me, businesses and consumers. Not some bureaucrat sitting behind an oak desk. Jimmy Wales thinks that this is a good idea - he's just trying to make a point. His business doesn't rely on buyers, suppliers, 100% availability to his customers. Jeff Bezos, I'm willing to bet, doesn't feel the same way. |
I just had a very rewarding experience with this thing. I searched my own name, and through pure serendipity the first result was an artist, with the same name as I. The art he paints is 50's-60's pin-up (the old-style classy kind, not the desperate new variety that melded with rockabilly, retro, and reality-tv-tattoo-culture.) Also really sweet looking vintage car ads for cars he imagined, and propaganda-type posters. Shit is so awesome. I threw money at him and got a few paintings, which I will be hanging in my living room, because consequently the paintings are signed with my name and I'm a pretty good liar. |
This is the most accurate |
The bigger problem is that Netflix's Instant service...well, it leaves a lot to be desired. While I have made good use of it, much more so than ordering DVDs, there were a number of movies in my queue that were (and still are) only available on DVD.
It didn't help that I would sometimes be watching a show on Instant, only to discover that the next episode is "DVD Only". Usually, that would change after some time, but it was a real pain in the ass.
Then, of course, you had stuff like Starz decide to take their content off of Netflix Instant, and, well, pretty much the only thing I use Netflix for anymore is for my son to watch old episodes of Thomas & Friends and Babar.
Basically, I was paying (IIRC) $8.99 for Instant and 1 DVD-at-a-time, and had access to a pretty decent library of movies and shows. Suddenly, Netflix gave me the option of 1) paying twice what I was already paying or 2) lose a significant portion of the selection I once enjoyed. |
The government is not only spying on your communications, but tracking your every move. There is a file on EVERYONE and a national video network can track your movements.
Orwell was right, but it's too late. The powers that be are too strong and entrenched for anything to be done about it now. What could be deemed illegal via legitimate avenues (courts, lawsuits etc) will be made retrocatively legal (re: warrentless wiretapping). Either that or any truth that might be uncovered via FOIA requests will be squashed by "it would compromise national security" excuses. |
Native Americans (please, political correctness) were so astonished by the complexity and sheer dimensions of the first ships they encountered, they mistook them for gods.
In Native American folklore, first encounters with gods traditionally involve mating with a native, producing a semi-divine offspring... |
That is not what Apple lawyers argued at all.
This article states that the copying of icons by Samsung was evident not because the pictures are the same, but because they are both pictures of sunflowers. Take this article. Both icons are of music notes. It makes sense to pick a music note as an icon for a music app. Some things just re-occur. I'm sure many video players use an icon of a film roll. Most wireless icons will have some sort of rounded radio waves coming from a center point.
When it comes to photo or picture applications you could for instance choose a picture frame. That is not what Apple did. They picked a picture of something. That something was a sunflower. They could just as well have picked a sandcastle. They could have picked a house. They could have picked anything .
Now then there is Samsungs decision. They could have also picked anything. You wouldn't blame Samsung for using a [musical note to signify a music application]( You would be very understanding if they picked [a film roll, or a play button for a video application]( But for a photo application? Are sun flowers now iconic for photos? When choosing an icon for a photo application you can choose anything!
This reminds me of the EA lawsuit against Zynga. EA claims Zynga copied the sims social, and as proof they have 8 colors. EA doesn't claim that they have patented or copyrighted those colors. Those 8 colors are the skin colors you can choose for your character. [Zyngas game uses the exact same colors.]( They could have picked from millions of colors. Even if they limit themselves to possible skin colors they would still have milions of choices to pick 8 different colors. But they didn't, because they didn't pick those colors themselves but just looked at EAs game.
Apple doesn't claim that nobody can use sunflowers. Apple is just saying it would have to be very very very coincidental that Samsung chose sunflowers as their icon when they could have picked anything. Just like EA is not claiming to own those 8 colors, but at the same time the fact that Zynga used those exact colors would be very very coincidental. (ie, not a coincidence at all since it was purposefully copied) |
So go grab the Arch Linux install medium and go grow.
If you can't get it up and running within 1 day, I'm going to sit here and laugh at your comment. Why? Because you have no idea how powerful a user centric OS like Linux is, and then how User centric Arch Linux or Gentoo are when compared to windows or max OSX.
The reality is, Windows is a built for everyone OS - Just as Mac OSX is. If you want an OS that is exactly what you want it to be - You need to move onto a much more flexible OS - an OS based on the Linux Kernel.
Windows is an OS made by a business to make money, and in this case they are leveraging windows and a unified experience to push into the tablet market. It's a sound business choice, and a bit of a gamble for the desktop environment. |
Don't bother. The title of this post is about 8 words shorter than the article. Absolutely no real information is provided.
A single, unspecified site ended up with a redirect.
It sounds from the tiny bit of info that there was maybe, a vulnerability in nginx, maybe tied to the package in Debian Squeeze. Or maybe the single site sort of referenced just had shit security. |
have you seen valve's anti-cheat: VAC? it's useless. lmao.
but on a different note, i've been saying for years that consoles will be cheap PCs in the future, since they utilize existing architecture and coders are sick of porting their games 3 times.
welcome to the future, death of the 'console', sony+nintendo both in financial difficulties. lmao, that's what happens when you use proprietary hardware. (ahem, apple). |
Free and open source software means you can be sure that there are no backdoors. It also means that you are likely promoting the use of standard formats such as ODF, XMPP, Vorbis, etc. That's enough [moral] benefit for me to switch to linux full time, but there are some more tangible benefits.
Modularity
Modularity is often associated with open source software because it is easy to have. In a closed OS, firefox comes in one big blob, but in an open OS it comes in many little pieces (modules). You may already have some of these modules for other apps on your system, so the resulting collection of modules is much smaller (no redundancy). This is why you can fit almost everything you'll ever need onto a single CD .
"But I don't care about filesize! I have gigabit internet and a 1 TB hard drive!". Each module has it's own development team, including firefox. When the jpeg rendering module gets patched by the jpeg development team, all the other modules that use the jpeg module (e.g. firefox) are instantly better than before. Now imagine if somebody patched a critical security module. Now all the modules that use that security module are instantly more secure. This is only possible within a modular ecosystem.
Ease of use
Update your entire system (including all modules/apps) with a single click. Not possible in Windows or Mac unless you only use Microsoft or Apple software (respectively).
In general, linux requires very minimal initial setup. Things that usually come by default:
non-IE web browser (Firefox)
archivers for everything (gzip, zip, rar, 7zip, bzip2, lzma)
non-free-trial word processor (libreoffice)
pdf viewer
software center where you can browse thousands of open source apps (none of that trial or ad crapware you see in other app stores)
Freedom of choice
If you don't like the user interface, there is probably an extension or plugin to fix that. Otherwise, there are plenty of other options. Unless you don't like any of the available desktop environments (see gnome-shell you'll find something you like the most, and it will always be there even if you switch linux distros.
Conclusion
I'm really not finished. I could go on and on, but I need to study for finals.
If you're still wary, just download a live image onto a USB thumb drive and try it out without even modifying your system!
For more info, see
Questions? /r/linuxquestions and /r/linux4noobs |
So... PC gamers often hate on consoles for being closed systems.
And... Gabe himself said Windows 8 was "awful for gaming" because it was a closed system.
Yet.... PC gamers are going apeshit for this news of a closed system. Because Valve are making it. Orgasms everywhere.
So typical. I've never known a group of people be so completely transparent. We get it, you love Valve. Stop being hypocrites like they're clearly being right now. |
I think this is a really good point.
Google, despite the recent issue of blocking MS devices from maps, has a reputation of trying to do the right thing for users. As an example, giving away 1 gb for gmail when it first came out even though they could have just joined the group of companies nickel and dimeing people over space.
Apple had it's sort of 'we'll try and be innovatie even if it's not what the market really cares about' thing.
I respect Google and Apple even if I don't always love what they do. Samsung, though, I don't really have any sort of brand loyalty to. There isn't something I can really look at and say 'yeah, that's why I like Samsung' other than just having cheaper or slightly better products than other companies. |
AdWords support is great . Like, bend over fucking backwards great. You don't even have to sign up for AdWords on the web site. You can call them and they'll have their people set up an account for you and custom tailor it to whatever you're advertising to get the most exposure for the money. I imagine Apps for Businesses is about on par.
The Play Store is picking up. They've had setbacks from the rocky product launches but the one time I had to contact Play Store support I really can't complain about. The girl I got connected to seemed very new and nervous but my problem was solved in one quick call. I needed a refund for a misbehaving app that was charging my account without my authorization. The developer ignored my support requests and after talking to Google they either refunded my money themselves or forced the hand of the developer because the money was back in my account by the next morning. |
You know every time you browse the internet Google makes $$. Most of it comes from ads but Google really doesn't have to do anything extra besides convince you to browse the web normally. In fact, when Iphone was first released, the sheer amount of web traffic from iphone generated a large percentage of ads revenue for Google. The business model for Google is very interesting, giving people cheap/free access to internet without any string attached can actually make money for them in the long run. Sure, most of their $$ come from ads, but if you are going to browse the web anyway, why not use a cheaper solution? |
It was a big scare back in the 90's and the local news was all over it. Tons of fish dead and found with sores. Humans swimming in the water also got sores and memory loss.
Wiki: "
One particularly harmful source of toxicity is Pfiesteria piscicida, which can affect both fish and humans. Pfiesteria caused a small regional panic in the late 1990s when a series of large blooms started killing large numbers of fish while giving swimmers mysterious rashes, and nutrient runoff from chicken farms was blamed for the growth.[31]" |
There's a kernel of truth in that (no pun intended, but I disagree).
For one, if something IS in the repos, it's a fair bit easier and safer to install from the repos than downloading installers from the internet. So that mitigates the difference quite a bit.
Hell, the most popular laptop on Amazon is the $250 Chromebook. Of the 1000s of applications in the repos, it comes with exactly ONE. And many people are apparently just fine with that. I would estimate that 50% of computer users just need a web browser and webapps. 90%+ of non-professional home computer users are totally fine with what's in the repos.
In the second instance, many non-repo software comes nicely packaged in .deb/.rpm format. You have to know if you are using Ubuntu or whatever, but that's it. It is literally exactly equivelant to installing .exes and .msis for Windows, there is no difference whatsoever. For all these, it's exactly the same.
The third set are binaries. These are certainly a bit trickier than installing windows stuff, but frankly not much. Maybe your grandma couldn't figure it out, but the average halfway intelligent person can.
Finally, we get to, yeah, stuff you have to compile from source. Which ranges from a pain in the ass in the best cases to a draconian torture with flails and red hot irons in the worst. But honestly, how often do you have to do this? In five years of linux, I've only had to once or twice, and that was playing around with bleeding edge linux nerd stuff to tweak the UI or whatever. I've heard that you have to do this with professional VFX software, and it's a royal pain in the ass. But how often are regular users doing this? |
I assume current time is relative to the device, and the last time update records the time at an interval. So if time is traveling forwards, that value will always be positive. However, if we reach 4:00 and it records that as the last time update, and then if time went backwards, that is where you would see a negative value. It is possible this is not how it works, and this device would not properly record backwards time because time is still going forwards relative to the device. Also, the device needs to be traveling faster then the speed of light, and I am not sure if that is possible or that the device is sturdy enough to handle those speeds. Basically, backwards time travel is all speculation, just like I am speculating on whether this device will work or not. |
Heard a really interesting comment about the fingerprint scanner and security:
Currently, if you are arrested by the police and your iphone has a passcode lock, all you need to do is enact your right to remain silent and not tell them the code to unlock the phone. However the same statutory protection does not apply to biometric data. You do not have the right to withhold your thumb print. Not only that, it would quite easy for a cop to forcible press your thumb to the iphone and then claim that your phone was unlocked. |
Well asking me the bill on the TV alone makes me think it is more a snide remark than a serious question considering it is not very common to get a power bill for each device in one's house. That said, according to the [tech specs]( it consumes 390 watts. However a [CNET review]( shows that it only consumes 245.04 Watts while on and 1.15 Watt in standby. Electricity costs 5.946 cents/kWh for me, so based on all of these numbers:
Running the TV constantly would cost $10.84 per month using CNet's numbers and $17.25 per month using Panasonic's tech specs.
Running the TV as much as the average American and $3.53 (Panasonic) per month.
I watch TV less than the average American, but my household has two people in it who don't always watch TV together. |
But noone is Colonel C. Clusterf*ck. Nobody has said it's just good fun, and if they are doing it for fun they are missing as many chromosomes as you. Nobody you have addressed has even come close to justifying annoying people with it on those grounds. I know you have the reading comprehension and thought process of Helen Keller, and that text is a poor medium for sarcasm, but I wasn't sarcastic at all. I still think that smoking should be done, outside, away from the public. I still think they are much larger health risks that you take part it, and I still think you have a poor ego so big that it has its own representation in the UN. So unlike you, where you complain and contribute nothing to anything but perhaps global warming with your moaning, I did some research.
"Results: The study showed that e-cigarettes are a source of secondhand exposure to nicotine but not to combustion toxicants. The air concentrations of nicotine emitted by various brands of e-cigarettes ranged from 0.82 to 6.23 µg/m3. The average concentration of nicotine resulting from smoking tobacco cigarettes was 10 times higher than from e-cigarettes (31.60±6.91 vs. 3.32±2.49 µg/m3, respectively; p = .0081).
Conclusions: Using an e-cigarette in indoor environments may involuntarily expose nonusers to nicotine but not to toxic tobacco-specific combustion products. More research is needed to evaluate health consequences of secondhand exposure to nicotine, especially among vulnerable populations, including children, pregnant women, and people with cardiovascular conditions." |
It's the same story over and over again. The business model that the legacy players used to rely on has melted away in the age of the internet. Rather than truly adapt and change, they just get jealous of successful tech companies, and think that those companies somehow "owe" them money. And the best way to legally do that is to get politicians to magically place legal liability on those companies, so they have to pay up.
the |
I'm not denying that the current situation has problems- the question is if the solution proposed is one that both accomplishes its goals in reducing piracy in the long term and does not cause significant collateral damage.
The proposed plans certainly will reduce piracy- many people pirate because it is easier than actually buying. On the other hand, they are probably ignorant of the harm it will cause (it won't affect them) or consider that harm as reasonably small, and the solution will not solve the problem of piracy through other means- torrents and the like. It would be best if there was some solution, but this solution is short-sighted and an attempt to push it through is similarly short-sighted. |
This is the end result of capitalism. Robots will take over manufacturing and as companies increase their profits, socialism will take over. Eventually, a large part of the profits will be confiscated for the "general good" and there will come a point where it is business owners providing minimal existences for everyone.
The wealth gap between rich and poor will narrow, but only as the rich and middle class become poorer. |
I'm sorry for being lazy. That's probably why I can't find a job as a licensed EMT. I should really get off my ass and stop being a professional mover(who carries things like pianos up and down stairs for a living) so I can get a job that pays enough to pay my rent AND buy food.
I'm so lazy.
Edit: You're saying people who don't take advantage of the educational system are lazy. I tried to. I did well on tests, got scholarships and was third in a class of 40. I applied to hospitals, fire houses, private sector, everything. The only INTERVIEW i got was at a private medical transportation corporation, I got the job offer and they were only willing to give me 30 hours a week at a similar hourly wage to what I was already doing sixty hours a week. It wouldn't have been a liveable wage.
I can't afford anything but free school because I can barely survive as it is. I went to school while working, had zero free time and barely any sleep, thinking my sacrifices now would make my life better later. I was wrong. I can't go to a conventional school because they're too expensive, a bachelors degree would take forever because I have to work while I'm in school( at low wages mind you, so I'd be pulling over time to pay bills) and even then, I still run the risk of not finding a job after earning my SECOND degree. |
Not all jobs can be replaced by robots, and replacement by robots will generate some additional jobs, but likely not proportional to the jobs lost. As a result of this, despite no change in the labor supply there's been a net loss in demand. If you reduce the supply sufficiently (e.g., by capping hours for skilled work), then you'll need more laborers to supply the same volume of labor. |
Which is one of the drivers to automation to begin with. Why bother hring 2 expensive people when I can automate? Forcing employers to pay higher wages to more people working less hours would be the exact driver needed to make adjustments to labor....ie....automate or outsource. |
My company installs robots into finishing lines (coating, curing, sanding, repeat).
Companies go robotic where they can for a reason, not least of which is payroll, but dependability and consistency are equally important.
In my industry, the fact is painters are generally unreliable, wasteful, and a bottleneck in the line. Robotic spraying removes those issues. Additionally, outside of replacing painters, robots can do things a human can't or wouldn't want to (obviously). There's a new wave of water-based "green" UV coatings being adopted by companies due to ease of use, lower dry times, and the "green" aspect. Our robot waves a UV wand on a fully assembled product (traditionally broken down for a conveyor) that hardens the coating in seconds. It's something that would not be possible without the likes of ABB or Fanuc but which completely changes a manufacturing process in a very small area. |
One red state response to your comment could be that work is good for the soul -- just not the repetitious work of assembly lines in mass produced consumerist culture, but work that is healthy physically and psychologically.
The labor difference between Europe and the US isn't just political, it's in the US's consumerist economy that heavily relies cheap, disposable, mass-produced-in-factories goods.
It's already harder to displace whole industries in Europe every time some group in China starts kicking out a cheaper version of a product, than it is here. Europe values its artisans, craftsmen and traditional industries where people have specialized for generations in doing beautiful stuff by hand. Do we really need the cheapest chair possible built in automated factories run on the cheap in China?
Part of increasing the status human labor is getting away from our consumerist fixation on cheap, mass produced disposables and switching to supporting regional specializations and artisanal craftsmanship like Europe does. The work environment of artisanal crafts is healthier than mass produced factories and the quality of life is better for consumers who value hand-built goods. |
I feel society will handle this well, unless such a quick surge in robotic skill comes about so quickly.
Society HAS dealt with this before, it's called the Industrial Revolution. Machines began taking job after job after job because it was a downright upgrade to the worker in every way. Of course, they still needed people to maintain them, but society handled it. As we see today, society is handling it. Robotics aren't cheap enough to start being employed in every factory to make it 100% automatic. Chances are as industry gets booming with these robotics agriculture will as well. The farmer will be replaced by automatic farms, creating food for an unemployed and entirely changed economy. Education I can predict will shift towards non-robotic jobs that can't be handled and these jobs will come with some sort of benefits. City planning, sciences, engineering, robotic engineering itself, and SO many more jobs are up for grabs and will be adjusted to accommodate the massive rush towards those jobs as no other jobs are really needed. That buys time for further development until everything is quite literally automated. |
Yes because what he is saying is that the generation to build the stuff will pass it on and that new generation will not "spread the wealth" to the whole world. |
My job is to facilitate communications between the various departments of the company in order to make sure that the product is made, quality is high, bills gets paid, expanding our product line and the marketing/sales team has what they need. In Short Operatins Managers run the business on a fundamental level... |
Technology is by definition the allocation of resources to a specific task. When resources are scarce there are debates about who gets to use them, and for what purpose. Most electricity comes from coal, which is a finite resource that is also having devastating ecological impacts. Basically you're making two primary assumptions that I can see:
That "Just because something happens in nature doesn't mean humans need to do it" assumes that humans a way around doing it that is both easy and effective. Sometimes we do, sometimes we don't. Yes it's just a piece of the puzzle, but often it's a much larger piece than most people realize.
You appear to assume that sufficient energy exists and is available for use to power all of the technology needed. It takes [1.3 gallons of gas to make a gallon of ethanol.]( So far, other biofuels have had similar rates of return. [Fracking has been linked to earthquakes]( and other highly invasive methods of obtaining fossil fuels suffer similar faults. ([Deepwater horizon anyone?]( Nuclear power is a high cost endeavor in virtually any terms that you care to name: The number of man-hours and raw resources for an initial setup are both mind boggling, and once created proper maintenance is equally intensive. |
There was a reason why Caesar crossed the Rubicon.
The Roman Republic had failed to be just that - a republic. It was wholly under control of the patriarchs. The labour of ordinary Roman citizens had been replaced by slaves.
Caesar saw the need for reform. The senators wanted none of that.
So 500 years of republicanism ended in a bloody civil war and the return of tyranny, with the plebeians pacified through bread and circuses.
The same thing will happen or it has already been happening. |
Give everyone a low minimum income completely unrelated to work. A couple hundred bucks a month.
It sounds great, but who is giving the money and where does it come from? I'll presume you mean that the government is distributing the money and that it comes from taxes. Let's follow this for a bit.
>Gradually increase the minimum income every year to counteract the effects of automation. Each year, the population will be able to live off their guaranteed income more and more, until eventually they decide it's not worth it to work full time.
So in our prospective utopia, each year we increase the amount that the government gives to each citizen (300+ million in the US, for example). This expenditure is in addition to other things that the government spends money on like bridges and schools and healthcare.
So each year, the government MUST generate more revenue in order to keep increasing the minimum payments...but where should it come from?
Personal income tax won't work, as fewer people are working now because of automation and our guaranteed wage system.
Property and sales tax? Under our new system, you are essentially taking back the same money that you just gave your population! There's no way to generate more than you give out, so you'll find yourself at a loss once again. They also discourage spending, which is necessary to keep the economy moving even in this post-work scenario.
Ok, so how about corporate income tax? This one makes sense, right? If people have money and leisure time and they're free to consume, they're going to be spending their cash on goods and services that are now being produced for minimal costs by automation. Companies no longer have human workers to pay, so their profit margins must be through the roof and we can tax all that extra money to pay people not to work.
Well, now we end up with the same problem but in reverse! If people are getting salaries comparable to what they received before being replaced by automation, and all of it is coming from corporate income tax, then companies aren't saving money at all. Because of the heavy tax burden for companies that use automation, it actually becomes cheaper to hire humans once again.
And all of this assumes that a) you trust the government to control your income and provide for all your basic needs and b) business leaders would allow these astronomical corporate taxes to go into effect without moving their businesses elsewhere. |
Hate to piss on your parade boys, but let's get some hard numbers in here.
Dragon has a 13,228 lb payload capacity. At $133M a pop, that's $10,050 per lb of payload. That's actually fairly expensive. The Shuttle (with all its life support systems and reentry/landing mechanisms) cost a bit over $10,000 per lb of payload.
The Falcon 9 launch vehicle (used to launch Dragon) currently costs $2350 per lb of payload ($54 million for 23,000 lbs of payload, though obviously Dragon does not currently take full advantage of that capacity, and payload to the ISS is a bit lower since it's higher than LEO). Though from NASA's perspective, it's about the same cost to resupply the ISS as using the Shuttle. SpaceX officials say they believe $500/lb is achievable. So hopefully we'll see costs plummet as the years go by.
For comparison, Soyuz costs about $2200/lb of payload to LEO (probably less - but the Russians have kept that secret).
An Atlas V about $2500/lb
An Ariane V is about $3000/lb
A Delta II is about $4400/lb (the smaller launch vehicles cost more per lb of payload) |
SpaceX majority funding is through NASA. The reason the JSF is taking forever is because the military can't actually figure out what it wants, plus the JSF involves almost 30 allied countries military budget and airframe requests. |
It's about jurisdiction and not quite relevant. Against a consumer it is essentially meaningless, because of the consumer protection under EU law, see the Rome I regulation on contracts and choice of law and the Brussels Regime on choice of forum. If a consimer wants to, he can always bring the case to a court in the country where he lives, and Steam will only be able to apply Luxembourg law if they can show it offers equal or better protection than national law (which may require some convincing of the court, and can by definition not give them a legal advantage anyway). |
In prison most rapes are a sign of power and dominance against someone weaker. They are most likely low on the totem pole to begin with and are easy pray due to few allies. If you do kill the person that raped you then your 1 year prison sentence just turned into life without parole so you will die in prison. You will get a trial and you will be convicted.
If you rat the guy out for raping you then you are a snitch and will probably be killed or at least beaten on a regular basis. Snitches are on about the same level as sex offenders and the rest of their sentence will be hell if they aren't in protective custody which is also hell.
Source I have a degree in law enforcement and focused on corrections (prison system) |
I think that means it is time for a new monitor, even if your computer booted up in the record 7 seconds for a linux build (not including BIOS checks)...that is way too long for a monitor to take to come up. |
Why is everyone assuming this means they're security isn't tight? I agree they are script kiddies but they also were probably interested in getting a password list from people who would register on their website.
I knew a guy with a popular Minecraft server who did this. He would require them to fill out their Minecraft username and their email when creating an account on the server. For most users, they use the same password on the forum as they did in MC. |
4chan's /g/ board holds a special venom for script kiddies, but I've never understood it.
Law enforcement has a VERY finite amount of money and resources to investigate computer crime, so you WANT as many easy to catch children running shitty, out of date, fully documented exploits to keep the heat busy.
Plus big picture: kids love doing stuff their not supposed to do. These shitty, worn out tools that the best don't even use anymore, work as hand me downs and make the tedium of learning networks, packet injection, handshakes, FEEL as bad ass as being a safecracker.
Which would you prefer: he's learning character mode interface or on Twitter learning to tweetspeak? |
Just to spread the information... You don't encrypt passwords. That's a common misconception generated by the media's complete misunderstanding of security.
If you put a password into an encryption algorithm multiple times, you never get the same information coming out the other end. This makes simple things like storage and validating that password a huge pain in the ass.
What you do is put them through a special one-way algorithm a specified number of times. This algorithm is called a hashing algorithm. It does two really useful things with passwords.
If you put the same password through the algorithm multiple times, the same data always comes out. This makes things like storage and validation super easy.
You can't reverse the process. So it's possible to generate a hash from the password, but impossible to get that password back when given only the hash. Because of this, Lizard Squad wouldn't have wanted to put the passwords through this process if they'd planned on stealing clients passwords. |
Actually a more ideal solution is to employ key stretching in addition to password salting. Salting only protects against rainbow tables, key stretching helps make password cracking more computationally expensive. Even this isn't "ideal" though, since you'd ideally want to make password generation something that can't simply be done in parallel fashion by a bank of ASICs (algorithms like scrypt try to mitigate this by consuming a lot of memory). |
Good catch! I was more specifically referencing more modern encryption ciphers. A good example is AES. When we were still using ECB as the goto cipher, if we put the same data in we would get the same data out.
Someone realized that was a problem. And to prove it, they encrypted a photo of Tux, the Linux penguin. When a frequency analysis attack was run on that encrypted photo of Tux... Well... See for yourself 😃
So we've moved onto Cipher Block Chaining. CBC requires an initialization vector, and then takes the 16 bit blocks AES encrypts with, and chains these blocks into each other while encrypting. This completely eliminates the vulnerability to frequency analysis by "randomizing" the data that comes out the other end. And it is still possible to decrypt as long as you have the key and the initialization vector. |
I really don't care what Samsung say and here's a really ranty, inane reason why.
I'll bet the entirety of my double digit bank account that Samsung will be utilizing every hat trick, every hack, ever single lie and lawyer-base legalese possible so that they can "legally" capture as much data as possible. This is an absolute goldmine of profitable info, one that makes Aegis VII pale in comparison.
Furthermore, considering that a TV is in the same area when most people have conversations....they aren't even going to have the decency to tell us to bite the pillow before cramming their fat marketing rod into our collective interests, simply to give Big Brother something to masturbate FURIOUSLY too. Because we all know how easily distracted Big Brother is, and as soon as his eyes are superglued to the violent violation orgy, Samsung can rake in the big data money like Kim-Jung Un rakes in nuclear secrets, human rights violations and really, really shitty hair advice. |
Americans already are, and have been for decades, required to pay taxes on items they purchase online.
It does not matter if you bought something:
on the internet
by phone
mail order
by carrier pigeon
or you drove to New Hampshire.
You are required to calculate the difference between the tax you paid at time of purchase, and how much your home state sales tax is. Then you have 3 months to cut a cheque.
Just because you have not been doing it doesn't mean you have not been committing tax fraud.
I realize you don't like paying taxes. But things cost money. And 30% of your state income is from sales tax. Yes, arguably, we should raise your income tax instead - as sales tax is regressive. But since nobody is clamoring to have their income and property taxes raised: we are where we are. |
because the lawsuit shouldn't have been filed in Virginia in the first place."
Thats the |
This is based on what? |
Interesting you mention it. In Hungary the last law the former leftist government made, was to ban Holocaust denial. It was done mostly as a political stunt, to have something to talk about during the election campaign. They lost the elections nevertheless. One of the first laws of the new right-centrist government was to modify the text of the law to ban denial "of sins of communism" the same way as it bans Holocaust denial.
The first one to be tried under the new law, will be the still living minister of interiors, who controlled the killings when the 1956 revolution was crushed. He gave an interview not so long ago, and denied any wrongdoings. Now he will be tried for denying the communist oppression which happened in Hungary after 1956. |
This. The key to understanding how the EU works is figuring out the roles of the Parliament, the Commission and the Council. One could start [here]( |
UHD display is 7680 × 4320 and has about 33 million pixels. So, each pixel has about 250 subpixels so about 16x16. If we assume they're using parallax barrier or some refraction layer, there is ~256 different images per single viewpoint. (Someone else will have to do the math for the permutations when two eyes are involved) |
Toe-heel reduces blunt force injuries in humans, and I imagine the same would roughly translate to a machine. HOWEVER, (and it's a big one) I imagine this two-legged robot is specifically designed to compensate for heel-toe walking through the nice little setup they put in near it's "hip joint."
Notice how it has a reverse knee way up near where a human's socket hip-joint is? I imagine that does an awful lot of compensating for the lack of a properly functioning foot arch that a human who lands the ball of his/her foot would have. The ball of the foot has a larger surface area than the heel, and the metatarsals of your feet are designed (whether through evolution or a higher power) to spread and absorb the shock of first contact when landing. All this backed by your arch-muscles and calves acting as damping springs. All of this works whether you're moving forward, back, or side-to-side.
Human legs are the most advanced suspension system in the world IMO. Problem is that $200 running shoes have taught us not to use them properly by letting heavy padding do all the work for us, and subsequently our legs get weak.
EDIT: |
Piracy is an effect of an industry that's been dominated by middle-men who only give 5% of material sales to the people who do, in fact, actually create something new (FYI, that's what a copyright is supposed to protect -- creativity). Everything else (marketing, distribution, production) is simply an off-shoot of that creativity. Its costs should be minimized wherever possible. Sorry, but the Internet has made it completely feasible for the artistically inclined to remove the production, distribution and marketing middle-men conglomerates and deal direct. That's cheaper. It's cheaper because you don't pay the middle-men. There are either less, or none. These middle-men have been enjoying a steady stream of revenue off the backs of those who actually do the hard, creative, work and they're a little scared that their existence is no longer necessary (it's not). So, yes it costs money to produce media but you don't need that middle man anymore. That helps reduce costs and make your products more accessible, where the "your" refers to the ones doing the "creating."...I could go on more about this but I think you get the idea. |
technically you yourself have no effect, as all TV ad revenue is derived based off ratings. Ratings are done through diary markets (which are only done during sweeps) and digital metered markets. The digital meters are how they can estimate viewership for the Superbowl the day after. The thing is these meters are in a select homes because they require some interaction to indicate who in your household is in the room, age, and demographic. |
People still use it because it's true. Over time, it hasn't got any less true.
No its not a lost sale. They have tried hard to prove lost sales but the only legit studies seem to indicate a small boost in sales, not lost ones. You think that way but have absolutely no proof to back it up.
You might think it self-evident, but I think it's self-evident it boosts sales if anything. Unless you can prove otherwise (actual evidence, not RIAA propaganda) your just stating your opinion based on truthiness or the feeling like something should be true. Doesn't mean it is.
Stealing means something. It means taking away something, and it's illegal not because you gain something for free. It's illegal because somebody else loses it. Stealing is about property rights.
Non-tangible things aren't property. They cannot be stolen. That's why people say its not stealing it's copyright infringement. They say it because there is a very distinct difference between the two.
Copyright is the legal basis (that is, a fiction created by the law) upon which somebody entering something into the public domain gains a temporary monopoly on the right to seek profit from that work.
To download a song that is copyrighted is to infinge upon that copyright. There is a real term for it, and it's not stealing. Calling it stealing is 100% propaganda. It's a mental trick to condition a link in your mind between stealing and copyright infringing.
You can try and make some moral argument but remember that morality has nothing to do with the law. Copyright itself is inherently immoral. Ideas aren't objects and to treat them as such is an abomination. Think otherwise? That's fine; morality is subjective.
Morality won't fly regardless, unless you aren't paying attention. Copyright is no longer fair. Things aren't really copyright for a reasonable amount of time anymore. The laws around copyright are so draconian, why should I bother?
The RIAA is the biggest pirate of music in America. They sell for profit the works of other they don't own the copyrights to. Want to argue lost sales? Those are real lost sales. When somebody buys pirated music, then it's a real lost sale. Hollywood only exists based upon copyright infringement and piracy. The very founding of Hollywood was as a way to "steal" as you call it, the rights and works of Edison and motion picture camera. They felt entitled to use motion pictures without paying fees. Even the copyrights companies don't respect copyright laws.
These are company's that rip off the musicians we like and want to support. They are exploitive assholes who are pirates themselves. Fuck 'em. When copyright is 1 generation, complete disclosure to the public domain and they themselves actually obey those laws, then we can talk about morality.
I don't download shit. I'm not stating this to defend piracy. I'm making an open statement that stealing and copyright infringement are two different things, simple because they are actually two different things. |
Unnecessary from who's perspective? If I recall, allocative efficiency is decided by wants, not needs.
What are you saying? That your wants are necessary? Wouldn't that make them needs? Why do you need to view content someone else created?
> My goal is to lower the profits for publishers until they get the message, while still providing 'feedback' of a sort to studios.
I understand this, and boycotting achieves this.
> Just look at what Spore's piracy figures show. I was eleven at the time and blissfully ignorant, so I bought it, but it certainly brought the anti-DRM movement to my attention.
I agree, the Spore DRM was atrocious. In this case, since you have purchased the game, I would see nothing wrong with downloading a cracked copy if you were unable to play your purchased version. I would then take this into consideration the next time a game came out from that publisher. However, if you did not purchase it, why would you be entitled to play it at all?
> If more people pirate than obtain legitimately, a strong anti-bullshit message is sent.
Again, the same message is sent through simply boycotting, and it eliminates the selfish aspect. Do you think that pirating sends a stronger message than boycotting? I think it's a weaker message. It is seen to them simply as selfish behavior rather than making a statement. The message they will get, and have gotten, is that they need better DRM than they currently have. This is why DRM has gotten progressively worse. Boycotting better sends the message you are looking to send.
I agree, DRM sucks as it is with many games, but having at least some way to make sure that someone pays for your product is necessary if you want to get paid for the work that you put into making the product. I avoid any companies that have released products with DRM I don't agree with.
Here's the thing though, things get pirated regardless of unfair DRM. How many copies of Avatar get pirated? What media do you feel has been able to escape piracy through the practices you suggest? Did you think the DRM for Minecraft was fair? I think so, but it gets pirated anyway. |
This argument is so far off I really don't know where to begin.
Ok, I have no idea what you are citing here, or how it relates to the discussion but how do you consolidate violence == wrong? I can think of several instances, mostly self preservation where violence is not considered wrong.
I can see your argument is attempting a Utilitarian standpoint, where the ends justify the means, but you seem to be mostly missing the point. Your means are not even necessary, you do not have to do wrong to achieve the same effect.
Edit: |
Access to someone else's intellectual property isn't a basic human right you have that is being violated by executive fat cats.
This is the fundamental problem with your way of thinking. The fact is that yes, by their very nature "Intellectual Property" laws, are a form of thought control and a violation of fundamental human rights.
"Intellectual Property" as a term obfuscates the reality that we are talking about ideas. Forming and sharing ideas is fundamental to basic human existence. The whole premise of "intellectual property" laws is to to control who has the right to use or express these ideas.
Now just like some of our other fundamental human rights we volunteer to forgo the exercise of our fundamental human right to use and express any idea that we can posses in our consciousness. We do this in exchange for specific benefits in this case the the benefit that is supposed to be provided by by this social/civil arrangement is increased sharing of ideas.
The mechanism by which we hope to achieve this increase in sharing is by giving exclusive control for a limited time to a originator of the idea.
With this time limited, exclusive control the originator is provided the opportunity seek financial compensation for the use of the the idea, but financial compensation is not the sole purpose of exclusive control. With exclusive control an originator can place other restrictions, such as acknowledgment of the originator, and so on.
Now with the understanding that the entire purpose of intelectual property laws is to increase the amount of ideas and increase the sharing of those ideas, we can measure the effectiveness of todays laws, by asking, "does the average person today have more or less access to new ideas than they would without these intellectual property laws."
Particularly with copyright I think that it is pretty clear that the current restrictions are definitely more of a burden on society than a benefit, and I think that it is pretty obvious that those pushing for more restriction are not actually the creators of new ideas, and it is pretty obvious that we don't need them to facilitate sharing these ideas either. These same people have had a heavier and heavier hand when trying to exert what control they have (illegitimately) acquired. To me and many others, this constitutes a violation of the principles under which the social contract with regard to IP was entered into.
Ok now to your questions.
>How is your, or anyone else's, piracy going to change that status quo?
If you ignore them long enough they will go away. If we refuse to "play by their rules" by not answering their demands for ransom, they will eventually be starved out. Since they violate the principle of the social contract with regard to IP, they forfeit their right to any benefits from it. This means though, that when you do find an artists who acknowledges that the system is fucked up and opts out, it is important to make an extra effort to support them, by what ever means seem reasonable. Things like [donating to kickstarter projects]( [pay what you want artists]( or other means.
>How, exactly, does the current system oppress artists?
Today there are more options available to the artist than ever, but that is a very recent development. When you look particularly at the music industry over the last 100 years it is rife with the abuse of artists. [Try this]( |
Youtubes"? It's a quote from the same person you are quoting, said on the senate floor during the same session you are quoting. And the original quote is truth, your quote is incorrect in the sense that it doesn't apply to what you think it does. Your quote is about section 1032, the quote in the video is about section 1031.
Your quote is from earlier, when he is explicitly talking about section 1032, which the Obama administration did not want, the one that required military detention (called "REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY."), not the section that authorizes detainment of US citizens and others indefinitely (that is section 1031). [He explicitly says he's talking about section 1032 (start at 1:30)]( and listen for ~6 minutes to get to your quote and also mention this is section 1032 he's talking about.
In the video above you, he explicitly says he's talking about section 1031,
>Levin: "The language which precluded the application of Section 1031 to American citizens was in the bill that we originally approved…and the administration asked us to remove the language which says that U.S. citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section" |
The major objection is that the bill does not clearly define a number of elements. (e.g. is a "Cyber Threat" an attack to the power system or downloading copyrighted material? The law cites theft or misappropriation of government information, intellectual property or personal information.) Once a "threat" has been identified, your information can be freely shared without recourse among the interested parties. In the broadest sense, the RIAA or MPAA could simple demand that your ISP tender your information because they believe you may have viewed a youtube video that contained a copyrighted song. Likewise, if someone were to send you a link to information that may not be well protected (e.g. a link to the CEO's unprotected private information that is not directly linked from the main section of their site), that could also trigger a threat and cause action against you.
Yes, the government can currently do a lot of these actions, but the information is limited to the government and may be dismissed in court unless properly acquired. With CISPA, your info can be disseminated outside the government with no recourse. That's why folks are up in arms about it. |
To borrow a turn of phrase from Stephen Fry: Ron Paul is an idea-shaped person. He starts from a near-religious devotion to ideology and forms opinions and actions from that. This makes him appear consistent which in a simplistic sense seems admirable, but in practice is inconsistent with reality, which is messy and complicated and required compromises and bug fixes all the time. As Emerson said, "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." What Emerson got wrong is it's the hobgoblin of a lot of big minds too. |
From what I know, which I concede economics is not my major, the comment "printing money out of thin air" comes across as a loaded statement, suggesting that money with a controlled creation rate and entire fields of study behind it is in some ways simply created chaotically. When I first heard the phrase and Ron Paul fans speak about this, it seemed they were almost suggesting that banks and the Fed went out of their way to create money haphazardly. If that were true, doesn't it seem the banking systems would have collapsed to depression era every 10 years at minimum?
Once again, I'm not speaking to contradict anyone but it just comes across as being a bit arrogant as it usually comes from people who either are too inexperienced to understand economic consequences in long term patterns or too idealistic and forget that economics isn't a science. |
Possibly, but it would still only be able to provide temporary fixes.
See, there are two ways that the Fed regulates the economy. One, they control the interest rates that banks have to pay for loans from the Fed. Two, they control the amount of currency in circulation.
The first function either encourages or discourages banks from borrowing money from the Fed. Why would banks need to borrow money? As a last resort, when their cash supplies are running low, banks are able to take out loans from the Fed to temporarily cover their customers' transactions. However, the indirect effect of this is that banks will likely raise and lower their own interest rates to reflect the change. This can either make their customers more or less likely to borrow as well. Lower interest rates means more customers will get loans, more customers getting loans means more money put into the pockets of the consumers.
The second function, also known as quantitative easing, actually affects the quantity of money in the economy. The Fed will buy, usually, treasury bonds using made-up money that they send electronically. Since this money is kept electronically, they do not actually have to print new money. Essentially, this raises inflation at a certain target rate.
Now, the last part is what really bugs me about the Fed. Let me get you the pros and cons of inflation from [Wikipedia](
>Inflation's effects on an economy are various and can be simultaneously positive and negative. Negative effects of inflation include a decrease in the real value of money and other monetary items over time, uncertainty over future inflation which may discourage investment and savings, and if inflation is rapid enough, shortages of goods as consumers begin hoarding out of concern that prices will increase in the future. Positive effects include ensuring central banks can adjust nominal interest rates (intended to mitigate recessions), and encouraging investment in non-monetary capital projects.
The positive effects are far less useful to the consumer, as they almost entirely benefit banks. The negative effects almost guarantee further economic problems, as consumers are less likely to spend if their money is worth less. (Decrease in buying power.)
Essentially, the Fed just keeps alternating what they're doing to the economy, trying to keep it in balance. It doesn't really work that well. Ideally, what should be done, is that the government stops the creation of money (electronically or otherwise). We currently have a capitalist free market. If the market is left to itself, producers will lower their prices to encourage consumers to buy again. Consumers will start buying, producers will raise prices to make more money. Consumers will slow down on buying, producers will lower prices etc. Supply and demand will set prices to a level comfortable to both consumers and producers.
Too often, I see Keynesian economists trying to put the government's hand in the economy. Free markets don't work like that; doing so would extremely hinder, if not entirely destroy, the power of a free market. Our economy would suffer from such unnecessary intervention. A college course in Economics will show you that our economy is meant to function with only consumers and producers, no outside influences. |
After 24 flights were automatically booked, it maxed out the travel credit card my school issued (they are paying for me to goto a conference). I cancelled 23 of them on the phone with customer service only to have the last one cancelled for me by them in the middle of the night. Plus my credit card is still maxed out because they haven't called my credit card company to de-authorize the funds. Since its only my travel card, my situation is inconsequential compared to others'.
The customer service people have been super nice, but this isn't 1999 anymore, you cannot blame a computer "glitch". IMO, there really is negligence here on the part of their IT/software engineer that clearly did not build out their e-commerce infrastructure with appropriate fail-safes. |
Continuing on the analysts: Apple only sold 5 million, instead of the expected 6-8 million because they ran out of their stockpile. The 5 million only counts the phones where the phone changed hands, not the pre-orders that have yet to be fulfilled. It's estimated that there were at least 6.5 million pre-ordered, but only 5 million sales are on the book for the weekend.
Also, the lack of stock resulted in them not being on display/for sale in stores which deterred more buyers, throwing analysts further off. |
If you "research" the same way you read my posts I understand where a lot of your misinformation comes from. In none of my posts do I advocate "removing" welfare or medicaid. The only reason I mentioned them is to illustrate to you the difference between an entitlement and a service - a distinction you seem unable to make. As it were, I don't single out any program to "remove" or cut or anything else. Stop with the selective reading/comprehension.
As for the Warren quote yes, that's the same crap Obama tried to dump on us too pretty much word for word. If I'm being polite it's rhetorical nonesense, if I'm not it's socialist propaganda bullshit - either way it's crap. If you are going to spout this kind of mess then be consistent. If you are an athiest you didn't do squat as nature provides the ground you build on, the raw materials you build with, the opposable thumbs that allow manipulation of tools and the larger brain to utilize these things. If you are a theist it is God that gives you these things. If you can't take it this far then just shutup. The reality is that these assets... the roads, the police, etc are available to pretty much everyone in the US. Now, not everyone in the US is a successful millionaire business person are they? More to the point, these business's that you want to plunder pay the people that you talk about and provide the lion's share of the money that provides this infrastructure. For every penny you pay in taxes (even what you get refunded to you if you are low income) that employer has to match, the employer also has to then pay taxes on all of it, the employer then also pays yet again on what they take out for themselves, they pay again for what they reinvest in the business. They also pay for the licenses and permits that allow them to do business. They also assume all the risk, if they fail you lose nothing except the time to go on to another job. For every dollar you pay in taxes the business's pay many, many more already.
As for the poor, well, there are very, very, very few truly poor in this country. Having traveled over a good portion of the world I have seen poor and they rarely exist in this country. As a matter of fact the standard of living of most welfare recipients are equal to or even better than what would be an affluent individual would have in some countries. Conversely, I have lived in or near the ghetto's in many parts of this country. I have seen the poor in this country so please don't expect me to shed a tear.
Here's some real facts for your tax rant:
That's from a real government agency, here let me quote it for you: "Because average federal tax rates rise with income, the share of federal taxes paid by higher-income households exceeded their share of before-tax income, and the opposite was true for lower-income households."
To translate this to something you might be able to understand... the rich pay a disproportionately larger amount of the income taxes in this country. Is it changing? Yes it is and it should. Here's a little primer for you... when you have a government that consistently lives beyond it's means you do not fix it by giving it more money as that simply exacerbates the problem. You hold the line and force them to become fiscally responsible.
You also don't distribute wealth, wealth comes to those who use the advantages this country provides and combines it with hard work and yes, some luck. If you do not have the drive, or the intelligence, or yes... the luck then you either toil in obscurity as I do or you sit at home and let the government take care of you as too many choose to do.
BTW, Cuba is very close to the US and they think as you think. Perhaps you would be better served moving there since they share your social and economic values. China also sees things as you do and while they are further away jets fly there everyday. |
I have been deploying Servers Since Windows NT and Novel netware 4 were the new shit, I have used linux extensivly since the days where you had to mount shit and as you will see, have many RH certs. I have deployed thousands of servers and clients running windows, linux, UNIX, Apple server, etc.
I literally have every CompTIA cert, many MCSE, the new MCITP, CCNA, RHCSA, RHCE,RHCA, RHCDS and RHCSS. I have an A.S. in CIS, a B.S. in MIS and am 2 sems away from my M.S. in CS from an Ivy League school.....all of this has been paid through my time serving my country.
I currently have, through my own LLC, a project with a large defense contractor where I am responsible a several million dollar budget.
Yeah, I pretty much know more on the subject than you ever will so please, shut your cock hole. Linux is a fucking JOKE in the business world, which is dominated by MS and will be for a long damn time because companies do NOT want to have to deal with the bullshit lack of centralization that is linux. Yeah...linux my be 'free' but it does in fact cost companies MORE simply because it is a pain in the ass OS that only aspy nerds with no business world experience or sense what so fucking ever use. |
Wow you really have a terrible argument, you just resort to ad hominem and don't even clearly explain your viewpoint. How would they blow their money on 1 city? Most big cities already have all the infrastructure to support faster broadband speeds, they just don't put it to full use because no one but businesses will pay for 100MBPS so they get huge profit margins on their internet plans. Case in point, Fios charges 70$ for 15/5 D/U MBPS, 80$ for 50/25 and 90$ for 75/35 and then a whopping 210$ for 300/65. These are monthly payment plans on a 2 year contract (taxes & fees were not included) |
but it still rings true that once the government owns this service, it's only a hop, skip, and jump to monitoring it.
You will have other options. Buy shitty DSL from At&t if it bothers you so much. Also, what makes you think verizon or comcast is less likely to nefariously monitor your internet connection then the government?
Silly.
If you are honestly concerned with privacy from your ISP, there are ways to ensure they have no idea what you are doing.
> What we need is more competition, not more government.
Really you mean like Comcast, At&T, Road Runner, Google, Century Link, Verizon, Socket and on and on and on......
Maybe what we need is anti-collusion laws that are taken seriously and enforced and some regulation on price fixing and overcharging. Also the government needs to come down hard on the telecoms who they invested millions with. Give them a deadline to meet, or they have to start paying it back. Fuck them. |
Just to build on Fenwick's point.
This is a pretty wild statement
> China also controls 90%+ of the rare earth metals in the world
When you make such a claim, a quick sanity check would be to ask yourself "Why would only 1 region of the planet have 90% of a particular resource?" Perhaps your thought experiment might conclude with "They don't.". Then you might find yourself [googling]( a bit to understand the distribution of [rare earth elements](
You might see this [graphic](
The land mass of the United States is pretty large. And in fact, has its own supply of very important [natural resources]( including lots of non-renewable ones like oil coal and [precious metals]( |
If only it was just a 10-20% increase in transport.
You forgot everything else:
The cost of holding 3 months of inventory in transit on container ships.
The cost of sending someone like me to fix mistakes at 5 figures a week.
The cost of being unable to respond to a dynamic market due to supply chain lead times and tooling/process control made difficult by production being so far removed from your market.
The cost of uncertainty: transpac TEU costs varied by several hundred percent of the past few years. Makes planning hard. Chinese wages have increased by almost a hundred percent in the past few years in some provinces. Makes that initial investment not so attractive.
Then the minor detail: The externalized cost of pollution and bad worker safety.
There are a lot of companies making softgoods, simple home appliances, shooting simple plastic parts, and making consumer electronics in the US. It's a model that works, for those that look at more than direct COGS. |
True, I am in engineering, and graduating from school I had multiple offers. That said, what I stated still applies, companies rarely offer pensions, so remaining in one place where you are treating poorly, or have crappy compensation is of no/minimal benefit. |
Not everything requires skilled labor.
That's true, but cell-based manufacturing has changed what were previously assembly line jobs. It's a process method that's found a huge roll low-skill production. There is a lot of domestically made clothing. There are a lot of domestically made really simple injection molded parts. Low-skill labor still plays an important roll. There is actually a place for low-skill labor in today's United States, especially as distortions in international markets start to unravel.
Slaughterhouses are perhaps as close as we come to the assembly lines you describe...Along with fast food. Most other industries have found a way to eliminate or make much more efficient use of their low-skill labor. |
I once found a security gleetch in Gmail...this was a while ago. It wasn't anything major but I could how many emails were in someone's inbox based off their email address. I contacted google, and I got an email from Paul Buchheit who ended up calling me on the phone....super nice guy. Within a week I had a interview with Google and he was personally showing me around. Yada yada yada...got a sweet job then was fired for slacking off. It was my own fault though, I was really into WoW since it just came out. I also lost my girlfriend because of WoW. I still play it but I've got my addiction under control now. |
This guy didn't "hack famous people's emails and expose their secrets". He found their email addresses.
So he's what actually went down--to call this "hacking" is insane. So there's this AT&T iPad login page and submits your iPad device ID in the URL and then AT&T takes that device ID, looks up your account and then automatically fills in your email address on the login page.
Literally all this guy did was go up to his browsers URL bar and change 1 digit in and it gave him someone else's email address. He was concerned spammers would use this to harvest the email address of everyone who owned an iPad. AT&T didn't care so he wrote a script to automatically change numbers and record email addresses. He got a ton of them and found a few celebrity email addresses in the mix so that Gawker would be interested. They published the story and AT&T rushed to fix it. |
I had a similar experience. A friend was working for a local ISP and asked me to take a look and see if I saw any security holes. And I found a couple, so I emailed my friend, told him the issues, and included the steps to fix them. At no time did I make any changes or gain control of their server - I didn't need to in order to see there were indeed issues. He forwarded the email to his boss, who was in charge of security (among other duties).
Rather than thank me, the asshat filled out an FBI hacker report against me. I called the guy and explained exactly what I'd done. The guy was mad as hell at the beginning of the call....maybe because I stepped on his toes - finding holes he was paid to secure. He finally calmed down and said he was just doing his job by reporting me to the FBI and that he would amend his statement - which he couldn't do since it was already submitted.
And then a few days later I got a call from the FBI (my contact information was in my signature tag-lines in the email that had been forwarded to asshat). I explained to the agent exactly what happened and he told me it had been filed as a "no damage done" hack, they did not intend to take any action, but even so I was entered into the FBI database as a hacker. He told me not to worry about it and that it might even help get me a job with a company in the security sector one day. But that I would forever remain on the FBI hacker list. |
My college's ID had a debit-like system where you could put money on it and swipe it at any of the places on campus. It also had a web site where you could enter your student ID and password, get your balance and see recent transactions. You couldn't do anything else, but there was a bit of personal information on the page (name, balance, transactions, I think your student ID but it's been a while).
As it turns out, the person who coded the system had neglected one major security issue. By accident, one day, I discovered that when you reloaded the page, it didn't necessarily submit your information back into the system. Instead, you could get a different page with a different student ID and a different transaction history. I reloaded a bunch of times to make sure I was seeing what I was seeing, then copied down the information from a few and sent a report to the support staff. Not surprisingly, the system went down almost immediately and, when it came back up, reloading the page didn't cause you to switch pages.
Still, had they not fixed it or ignored me, what would I have done? Would I have brought it to the attention of the school paper to try and get them to fix this glaring error? Is that substantively different from what he did here? |
Subsets and Splits