Totalitarian states in constant war
A post-scarcity utopia that hinges on karma
A utopia where the people are bribed into apathy/foolishness
I'd go with Doctorow.
Totalitarian states in constant war
A post-scarcity utopia that hinges on karma
A utopia where the people are bribed into apathy/foolishness
I'd go with Doctorow.
Right, sure, there's still demand.
And that demand would be fulfilled by Japanese, Korean, or possibly Chinese manufacturers who have their shit together rather than the decaying and bloated corpse that is Detroit. And it most certainly wouldn't be a situation where "startups fill the void".
Buying up GM's old plants? Why the hell would Nissan, Toyota, Kia, or SAIC want old and busted facilities with only wealthy union workers to hire in a state with strong union laws, in a country with a working EPA? Shipping costs aren't that much. And now that China has come online, all the parts that GO INTO the car are produced in China anyway, so you either ship the car over as a whole or ship it over in parts.
It would most certainly be an "end of the world of USA car manufacturing" scenario. Which is arguably already on it's way. Hey, you're looking at this problem from the perspective of small business vs big business. There's a LOT that can learned from that. But in this case it's a matter of INTERNATIONAL competition where the capabilities of the nation are involved and it has close ties to national security. As in, can we build tanks and planes and bombs sort of stuff. This is a little detail that people tend to ignore, but our civilan manufacturing plants are all viewed as emergency war-machine makers by the top brass and people that play the international politics game. That's less important with nukes on the table, but China desperately wants to be able to wave their dick around in the form of a fully capable military power.
You're just not looking at the big picture.
Just so someone that isn't a coward responds to this: BULLSHIT if you think it boils down to something as simple as "priority". Because there are a lot of ways to do QoS. You're right that, in theory, QoS is a good idea. The problem is that it can be abused. Unless they do it in a fair way. And "fair" is a tough one. But I sure as shit know that if they start charging for priority then it's all going to go to hell. How is it any different than bribing the TV station to make your competitors shows staticy?
It's BLATANTLY breaking network neutrality. This guy is promoting the idea of a non-neutral Internet. Where it's no longer an open field where anyone and everyone can play ball, but a series of closed locked gates with a myriad of gatekeepers demanding their fees and having the power to decide what does and doesn't go through. I'm not some crazy idealist that believes the Internet is perfectly neutral. TCP is simply different than UDP. But it's certainly something we can strive for. And things like QoS have to have a very careful eye kept on them least some asshole thinks that all torrents are illegal, bitcoin is treason, porn doesn't belong on the Internet, Arkansas is stupid, or Starcraft is less important than Netflix because Netflix shelled out some cash.
Is prioritizing one kind of traffic logically the same as de-prioritizing all other traffic?
Yes, it pretty much is. Did you think it was otherwise? By definition, if something has priority over something else, that "something else" has lower priority.
And some REALLY valid points from my cowardly brothers here:
1) They don't have to charge extra to perform QoS. Which you sort of acknowledge.
2) While some applications don't mind latency and what they really care about is bandwidth, if the ISP have oversold their lines (of course they do), giving streaming priority can affect bandwidth.
3) It'd be nice if the ISPs were dumb pipes and no more than common carriers who can't inspect all of our packets.
Wheeler: "Netflix might say, "I'll pay in order to make sure that my subscriber might receive the best possible transmission of this movie."
Huh, that's funny. I though I ALREADY PAID the ISP to get the best possible transmission.
Oh, I'm sorry, you wanted to buy access to ALL of the Internet? You only bought basic Internet. That simply doesn't include Netflix. But it includes Youtube now that Google ponied up some cash. You need to pay the premium rate to get Netflixs. Plus an extra surcharge for Wikipedia because they said something nasty about us once.
According to Wikipedia, the US has an active manpower of almost 1.5 million people. When mobilised, It is safe to assume they with training and equipment they can kill at least 5 a day, meaning the epidemic is over in less than a fortnight.
Unfortunately most of those kills per day would be living humans rather than dead zombies.
A lot of people seem to think that the zombie genre is about the zombies. That's the material for the low pulp material like comic books and B-grade gore movies that buy blood in bulk. Oh look at how horrific zombies are! Shock, awe, puke... No, zombies represent man's inhumanity to man. The good stories are about how people react to a crisis. In this case the crisis is zombies. The real monsters are people.
So in a hypothetical zombie apocalypse, the real threat isn't the undead rising up and nibbling on everyone. It's all the other bloody fucking idiots out there who will flip their shit and do something crazy. From looting, to hoarding, to general panic in the streets, to something as simple as not going to work. Which is important when you take care of the nukey-plant or refine the oil which keeps those 1.5 million people with guns moving and active. Think about how stupid/foolish/unreasonable the average person is. Half the population is worse than that. Now give him a gun, make him scared, and you have to trust him enough to go ask him for food. Or worse, you have food and he doesn't. How's that go down?
Some people are rational and calm under stressful scenarios and don't do stupid things. The definition of "stupid" gets turned 180 degrees depending on how bad it all gets. But all those men and guns will be occupied with a desperate attempt at keeping shit from falling apart. And little things like "you are ordered to cull that city" tend to put stress on concept of the chain of command. There's no training that prepares you for that.
Seriously, what the hell?
I understand how people can live in an echo chamber and suffer from monoculture. And targeted ads and recommended searches and all that jazz can contribute.
But, seriously? Just log out of google. Run your search. If they don't know who you are, you get an unfiltered search.
Is that so hard?
Nobody else pointed this out? Come on guys.
Alright, I'll bite.
So we have chimps that are now legally people, but of course we can't just free them as they wouldn't obey any of the laws. (Whoa, I imagine that a lot of white slave owners said something similar... creepy feeling. But no, the chimps actually wouldn't know of or obey any laws and couldn't be taught.) We have to keep them contained, cared for, etc.
They'd be legal people that don't have basic rights, as someone else holds their power of attorney or whateverthefuck it's called. Their caregivers would be the ones to give consent to medical tests, use them in entertainment settings, and control transfer of care (buying and selling the animal). The only difference would be that judges could now smack them down if there is abuse and things aren't done in their best interest. As it's done now for invalids and retards. Oh, and animals as you can't abuse animals. We have laws against that.
But now we have a subset of people that are officially second class citizens. I mean, we always have had this subset of people who can't care for themselves, but now it's far more common and the court system probably won't want to deal with these matters once they're so common. You've managed to lower retards and crazy grandma's to the level of chimps. Congratulations.
And oh so slowly you've started to degrade the rights of humans on the bottom rung.
No, this isn't as simple as it seems on the surface, and I don't think you've looked at it anywhere NEAR deep enough. Look at all the players involved and how they've dealt with similar changes in the past.
I absolutely agree that geek mentality is formed way before kids hit college. And plenty of people are smart enough to pick up coding in their 30's even if they've never touched a compiler.
And yeah, fuck that gender stereotyping. Even that stuff like Goldieblocks, which is an honest effort to fix this sort of problem, falls into the role of assuming girls enjoy playing with pink ribbon.
Come on, Legos is gender neutral. COMPLETELY GENDER NEUTRAL. They are square blocks. As long as you don't fuck up the marketing, or do something balls to the walls crazy like releasing a minifig that looks like Barbie, it's a cakewalk for breaking that gender stereotyping pitfall.
But get this: understanding the problem with what toys and how they're marketed to children affects the cultural diversity of the various industries is LEAPS AND BOUNDS different then trying to "fix it". Seriously, now that we collectively know what the problem is, what do we do?
Make engineering toys that girls can play with? Good. Done. We do that. There is nothing stopping girls from playing with Legos and trebuchets.
Market engineering toys to girls? Good. Done. We do that. As long as you don't market exclusively to boys, anything marketed to children fits the bill.
Make and market engineering toys which are exclusive to girls? Uhhhhh.... That's a little weird, but yeah, there's a bit of that. I guess it pushes back against those gender sterotypes. Like scholarships for women. It's sexist affirmative action, but it's for the underdog so it's ok.
Encourage parents to buy toys which break gender stereotypes? hmmmm... That's a bit like trying to steer culture. Some people try to do this.
Force parents to buy engineering toys for their girls? Whoa there. That sounds evil.
Fine schools that don't have a 50/50 gender split in their coding class? Evil. You're attacking a segment of society that isn't even at fault here*.
Rip the doll from the crying girls hands and flog her until she solves soduku puzzles? Nope, stop, you've gone way overboard into evil-ville.
*You know, probably. Hey, there could be that weird CS professor that kicks girls out of his class. Fire that guy. But that doesn't appear to be the problem here.
There's a nature vs nurture debate about which girls will go into engineering and which won't, and if there is anything we can do about that. I dunno the answer. Encouraging the potential engineers to be engineers is a good thing because we need engineers. But once you start telling parents how they ought to raise their children it gets a little wonky. And once you hit the point where you try to raise the children against the wishes of the parent, or start forcing the parents to raise their children a certain way, the end-state better be on DAMN solid ground. I mean, we force parents to raise their kids not to be murderous thieving cretins. Anyone who does do so is held liable for said cretins. Forcing girls to be raised like they're geeks, when they are not, is probably a bad idea.
This is how. [goldieblox.com]
You encourage, not demand, or force.
But ugh, jesus fucking christ... Did they really have to do this with pink ribbons?
No it's really not. We're disagreeing about the definition of sexism and discrimination.
If someone. sabotages your career, denies you a job, or pushes you away from a field of study, because of your sex, that's discrimination. If they tell little jane that she shouldn't code and should play with dolls instead, that's sexism. Bad stuff. But you're doing more than fighting sexism. You're overshooting. You want more than just a level playing field. Or maybe you just didn't read my post and think that I actually stated that fighting sexism is fascism.
Culture is not the sort of thing you should be trying to control. Those social expectations, and cultural norms. That sort of old tradition that's ingrained into our culture even though we rationally know perfectly well that women are for more than making babies. Trying to control people on a cultural level, yes, that's got an evil edge to it. Trying to control people on a legal level is typically called enforcing the law. And fighting to get those laws in place is a good thing. And it was mighty hard because of the culture of sexism. Anti-discrimination laws? Good. Trying to make the old white slave-owners love the freed slaves? That simply isn't going to happen. And the more you try, the deeper ingrained that sentiment gets. It's like the fight over evolution. Darwin has a great idea here. Trying to "fix" the other side through force or argument isn't going to get you anywhere. Simply be better. Be correct. And their arguments will fade. Culture has a shit-ton of inertial. Steering it is a slow process. Give it time. Be a quality female software engineer and prove those fuckers wrong. And in the mean time, don't get your panties in a twist.
And this isn't really directed at you, but to everyone else that gave me grief for being attracted to geek girls; I married a materials engineer. I got her involved in roguelikes and D&D while she got me into anime. Now she games more than I do and beat me to the orb of Zot and I'm pissed that nothing is ever explained about Titans. I have no idea why being attracted to smart women is considered as contributing to sexism. If you think you have ANY hope of keeping people from being attracted to certain subsets of humanity, your goals are laughably impossible.
But... Are there any social inequalities when it comes to female software engineers? Is the man somehow keeping chicks out of coding classes? Is the ol' boys club not allowing cooties to spoil their source?
You're looking at the end result and and claiming that there must be social inequality that lead to it. I understand this line of reasoning when it comes to the military, corporate CEO positions, and professional sports. They have a history of barring or diminishing women.
But engineering? Software engineering? Dude, during my time in academia I saw them bend over BACKWARDS to get girls into their program. Between the scholarships, special clubs, awareness programs, and general reports like this that stated more women needed to go be geeks. Even culturally, we geeks LOVE geek girls. It's a thing.
Now, it might be some sort of culturally imbued sexism. The sort that diverts men from being grade-school teachers and women from being truckers. There are plenty of counter-examples, but they're a minority. But it's not so much social inequality, so much as latent social norms and expectations. Breaking them doesn't get you burnt at the stake, but it might raise some eyebrows.
If you want to stop the NFL from being assholes to women, or to break that glass ceiling when it comes to corporate CEO positions, I'm all for that and you have my full support. But if you want to shape culture so that there's no stigma with being a male nurse or a female software engineer, that's getting a little close to the sort of fascism that demands we think a certain way. Your way. Sorry, but you just can't steer culture like that.
But hey, we need more female software engineers, because we need more software engineers. So I'm down with this sort of effort. But the lack of chicks around here has very little to do with social inequality. So don't get your panties in a twist.
Alright Jane, I'm willing to give you a shot.
Explain how the thermodynamics of the greenhouse model are wrong.
The culture clash of progressives vs religious fundamentalists is already here dude. And they're christian. See the post about texans fighting evolution in the classroom. (Although, hey, maybe you're European)
Now then. "Our" progressive social democracy isn't reproducing at the replacement rate. Our survival relies indoctrinating others.
"Your" survival is doomed. You're going to grow old and die and the next generation won't like your music and won't do things like you want them to. You'll call them whippersnappers and you'll yell at them to get off your lawn.
Correspondingly, the forces of acid-face burning and honor killings are reproducing rapidly.
And the witch-burning, commie-hunting forces are angry about that. Tough shit.
(Really dude, this is bordering on racism, just stop. There's no way that 3rd-world culture is going to come and dominate our 1st-world culture. Relax)
Some of the best and brightest of our social democracy (affluent technocratic geeks) are giving up on our social democracy. Call this mutiny near the top of the stack.
I'm in that crowd of "best and brightest", I'm an affluent technocratic geek. I'm not giving up on out society. I believe in democracy. Call it being rational.
Also, a few pseudo-intellectuals making cheap claims that alternate forms of government would work a lot better than what we have now isn't anywhere near a new predicament. And wanting to exert control over how you're governed isn't anything new. That goes for the rich and wealthy to the working man to the down & out poor.
Really, this is all just routine stuff. You're fear-mongering over nothing.
Well, actually no, you're missing the part where E-Coli DOESN'T have the innate ability to eat citrus (er, citrate, not citrus). The strains in the lab evolved that ability. We have observed major evolution in action.
But really, you're on Slashdot making bad arguments against evolution. You're either woefully delusional, or you're simply trolling the pro-evolution crowd to get a cheap laugh.
Come on dude
No skis take rocks like rental skis!