Does the daily treadmill at the office also count?
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Agree on that. I read another article about that issue today, and that guy indeed had a point. (if you can ignore that facebook and google have been included for attention whoring)
The problem he mentioned was that actual phone operators are for example required to build all kind of gouvernment required bells and whistles into their network (emergency calls, independant power supply, wiretapping access...) while Skype et.al. don't have to spend that money and therefore can undercut them.
That point of view is still up to discussion, but at least not plain wrong as "Deutsche Telekom wants Google to be regulated"
"A spokesman for Clinton defended her use of the personal email account and said she has been complying with the "letter and spirit of the rules.""
That alone made me blow my coffee across my desk.
When there are regulations about email retention in place, using your personal email is NEITHER to the letter NOR to the spirit of the rules.
Even more absurd than to "smoke, but not inhale".
That's why they're starting including those charging devices into lamps.
In any case, if something breaks in normal use, email IKEA. They have a customer service that works. At the very least they can mail you broken parts.
And spare parts are available even years after you bought the cabinet. That's what I like about IKEA. Their stuff is custumizable and even after years I can get teh stuff that I need to extend or reconfigure my wardrobe. And about durability.... check the uproar that their announced change in Expedit caused. That thing seems to be the only shelv that could be loaded fully with records (or a fish tank) without bending. (Compared to more expensive and more sturdy looking stuff)
On the other hand, I have to agree with the couches. Great idea again to have a few basic constructions and lots of different covers that can be washed or replaced easily. But I can't remember sitting on anything as uncomfortable as an ikea couch.
And with their habot over the last years of retiring products and moving to shorter lived series, they're giving up that special IKEA-ness that made them popular with geekd. (ikeahacks.com)
Others are just plain unoriginal observations. The one you linked to is a good example of this.
That's why you can quote them on so many occasions.
Of course. debt in percent of GDP is probably a better indicator. But whatever indicator you use, you can't ignore debts. And if you can afford to LOAN more money that you have to borrow yourself (negative debt) that's definitly a sign of being "rich".
In the end, its gone anyway. that's just the future and you can't fight it. But pissing off people that can make it happen faster is what a complete fool does. [...] slapping people around that are building the machines that will replace them... is moronic. And that is apparently their little brainchild.
Is it really moronic? If the end of your business line is forseeable within the next few years, it might be the better idea to go all in and grab as much as you can, as long as the "machine that will replace you" has NOT been constructed yet.
Yes, It may speed up the end a year or two, but is that really such a big difference? Grab what you can get as long as you still have the chance.
I think that's called "exit strategy".
As the article points out, this is not a big cost for the companies involved. Unionisation of the buses is not going to make the slightest bit of difference whatsoever to Google's desire to generate a self-driving vehicle.
Please note that Google is not listed among those 5 companies that contracted their busses out to that other company. I don't know about their transportation, but espescially Google has a lot of their service done by their own staff instead of outsourcing to the cheapest bidder:
Oh, so you're from Norway?
You have a key that is far larger than the data you are encrypting, you never reuse parts of the key. The key is random garbage not generated by the computer, but sampled, e.g. random video mashes together or random noise audio mashed together. You transfer the private key by trusted method,
If you have a trusted communication method you could use the same method to send the actual message. (Exception being when you have a trusted channel once in a while)
Next is that video and audio are far too regular to count as reliable source of randomness. Have a look what work went into defining the entropy sources for the Linux pseudo random number generator. Things you thought should be more than random over a large stretch of time showed to be surprisingly predictable.
Take 5min to read this short essay by Asimov, you won't be dissapointed. Asimov was more than just the guy who wrote about fictional robot laws, for example, he was also well known skeptic. Not the modern anti-science kind, a real skeptic, spelt the old fashioned way!
None of it is about robot ethics, it's a metaphor about the folly of thinking that a list of rules, such as the ten commandments, could ever encapsulate all the vagaries of human morality.
Well, Kant with his categoric imperative managed that with even a single rule. (But kind of cheated as it was kind of recursive)
Besides, thanks for the hint. I know I should have read more Asimov (as I always liked what I read) but somehoe never could quite adjust to the style somehow.
Naturally, the theories we now have might be considered wrong in the simplistic sense of my English Lit correspondent, but in a much truer and subtler sense, they need only be considered incomplete.
But the importantthing is to keep the basic humility and remember that no matter if your current knowledge is incomplete or plain wrong, one day it will be amended or rectified. And by his own logic, the diffrence between remembering that and assuming your current theory is "right" in the simplistic way, is much much larger than between "wrong" or "incomplete"
c.f. Isaac Asimov and his laws of robotics, for example "I, Robot" (not the unrelated movie of the same title) Whatever I read so far by Asimov (not THAT much I admit) centered around such robo-ethical questions and how to circumvent them
So, according to the robot laws:
No, it SHOULD not as it would endanger a human.
Thinking this through to the end would mean that a robot should never serve any drug (down to coffee) to a human.
But yes, it would serve alcohol to an alcoholic as he would be kept from checking the contents of the brown bad it serves to the human and that has been packed by ANOTHER robot. Neither wrapping a beer bottle in a brown bag, nor fetching a brown paper bag is dangerous.
The realistic solution would be (as circumvention is that easy) to serve that drink but log it.
I don't mean that it should be like that, but it would be an alternative to those multi-million development companies that are currently for big construction projects. Rental houses create a constant stream of revenue and a share of that probably would make much a bigger difference for a construction worker who build the house than dumping it on top of the pile of a nameless hedgefund.
Already posted, so please accept this +1 insightfull.
But there is one flaw: How would you measure if we have "enough" people in music creation? Do numbers count at all? What about quality? How many pop idols would be needed to outweigh a Leonard Bernstein? How many for an Elvis Presley?