The "Reply to This" button and the end of the comments are mashing together. So now beta is beta, but original is the new alpha?

I took a class in college called Psych of Personal Growth or something like that, the professor had some interesting topics I didn't see coming: one of them was how much we under-estimate marketing's effect on us. This type of emotional advertising is actually the most effective. Think of coke, they get their logo and slogans and products all over the place. In things that have nothing inherently to do with food or beverage even. This creates long-lasting associations, especially in the young. Setting them up for a 'lifetime of coke' hopefully (and often it works). I just had an video of a polar bear drinking it play in my head since I started writing this, and I don't drink the stuff. The hope with emotional advertising being that it appeals to emotions. Down? Grab a coke! Tired? Grab a refreshing coke. Feel like a winner... and on and on. Do you really think these huge companies would do this kind of advertising so much if it wasn't effective? The effectiveness of NEW advertising is (drastically) reduced with age, but there are more younger people and these "emotional advertising bonds" for lack of a better term can persist in people after long after new marketing stops being effective on them ("He only drinks Budweiser".). People tend to under-estimate the effect this has on them greatly.

Who suggested it was a right?

Im taking a class on Windows 8.1 client administration and its very hard to actually learn this shit for exactly this reason. So many of MS's new names are not even self-descriptive! It's horrible! The MS Press book is written half like a sales pitch. The FOSS world is very far from perfect, but at least the conventions make sense once you learn why they are the way they are. Microsoft's latest round of technologies to lock everything down (a large % of the class) and confuse the shit out of users with marketing gobledeegook! I swear I'd rather be back on 95 than use this latest shit they are serving up (8.1/8), if only there were more viable competitors.

Some people buy loud motorcycles, or modify the exhaust on a bike because they're under the (somewhat) mistaken belief that it will make them safer. I'm not talking about harley or superbike guys who rev for no reason (not good for engines). These guys draw a lot of attention to themselves but are not the majority of motorcyclists.

Smart motorcyclists WEAR EAR PLUGS! Trust me. Not everyone wants to go deaf. You might think "Oh but i can't hear impending danger", but you can, you just won't fatigue from the insane wind noise, your own engine noise, and of course traffic.

It's spooky on a bicycle because you can hear EVERY other vehicle coming from behind you.

BYOD?

This whole systemd thing is largely irrelevant to desktop users anyway. It's system administrators (read: people who use the console all day to do Advanced Stuff) who have a bone to pick. There's nothing wrong with being glad you are a Windows user, but it probably has nothing to do with Systemd. These news stories don't affect Joe Ubuntu much, just as news stories about HyperV nested virtualization don't affect grandma and her email even though she's on Windows.

Only the "elite". At most top 30% would be my guess based on a few documentaries seen and wiki entries read. Probably more like ~10% or less (I mean power is really shitty unless you are in Pyongyang). As for how many can reach the public internet? Only their "cyber warriors" I believe. But if you make it to South Korea they have better broadband infrastructure and pricing than us from what I understand.

With those ping times, you sure won't have the first laugh.

You still fail to deal with the fact that automated "labor" will get cheaper over time while human capital really can only get so much cheaper. Those huge up front costs you imagine will shrink and shrink. You know it's true and so do I. How do you imagine that human labor can do the same? Just get cheaper and cheaper? And why should it, to make the wealthy wealthier as we make less and less to compete with robots. You think this will work?

Bingo. Politicians allow the stats (and encourage them) to be taken this way so that they can claim they are making progress on the economy. Or even that joblessness isn't an issue! But look around, talk to people, the numbers don't match the reality.

The fundamental flaw is that you imagine "high" minimum wages (I hope you aren't talking about the US national minimum), and "plush" benefits are the cause of underemployment/stagnation in employment. I disagree, but, I also think it's a red herring. You miss the bigger picture: you can't compete with a robot. That's what the recent harvard business review article was about, what happen's when your job is replaced by automation. You can't find work in the same field for obvious reasons, so you look in another field: it's been automated too, or it has zero vacancies because everyone else wants that job. Historically, when buggy whip manufacturing went away, we started making cars. People that is, built cars. But when you and all your coworkers are replaced by machines that just *keep getting cheaper* you will never be able to compete. The developed vs developing world comparison you make is also not really valid to the topic at hand. We know human manufacturing jobs aren't coming back here, but the ones in asia are being displaced by robots as well. What NEW jobs does that make? Over time this is very likely to cause societal tension at bare minimum, bloody revolution and quality of life going backwards at worst. Do you get it? You could take away minimum wage, people would still not work for you for less than $5/hr for very well or long in any part of the country. They couldn't afford their basic needs. A robot needs only electricity and perhaps occasional repairs (but not enough to even come close to make up for the net loss in jobs).

But our current system means that companies are essentially punished (by lowered stock prices) if they don't make MORE every quarter. When automation comes so far, jobs are not cut to 20 hours a week at the same pay. Instead, half the people are simply fired!