Comment Re:Humans are logical in their self-interest (Score 1) 65
BZZZT!
I was talking about commercial space, not residential. The residential space tends to get rented.
BZZZT!
I was talking about commercial space, not residential. The residential space tends to get rented.
Given the current state of the art, there's not even a guarantee that the real harm won't show up in the 2nd or even 3rd generation. Not all state of the art modifications prove to be stable.
That summary at the top of this story is just way too long. I'll have a chatbot break it down and give me the gist.
If something goes wrong and the child needs expensive lifelong medical care for an unanticipated problem, guess who will be first to shout "NOT IT!"
Most of the second guessing of the pilot seems to assume the pilot could press pause and work out the alternatives on a chalkboard for an hour or two and then resume real-time with a solution in hand.
The fact is, it all happened in a handful of seconds. I doubt the pilot even had time to fully assess the problem before hitting the ground.
The problem is in the solution. Rationally, those Herdsmen need to hash out an agreementfor the fair use of that land to keep it just below it's carrying capacity.
But what really happens that some 'nobleman' declares the entire commons to belong to him and sends a goon squad to wipe out any herdsman who disagrees. He then 'allows' the herdsmen to use the land in exchange for a painfully large share of their productivity. For some reason he expects gratitude for that arrangement.
Alas, we've moved beyond even that. Now the 'nobleman', seeing that the herdsmen are making do with a smaller commons over the hill but unable to grab control of it sends his goons to salt the earth overnight so the herdsmen will have to 'rent' land from him.
But even that isn't enough for some. They want more 'rent' than any herdsman can pay while still making a living. So they leave the field fallow while trying to grab even more land. For some reason they think they can squeeze blood from a turnip.
If you find that unbelievable as an analogy, explain why there are entire blocks in NYC that haven't seen any space rented in over 10 years, yet the asking price hasn't budged even as the neighborhood has been given over to rats and junkies.
There is no new Firefox for OS/2, I will not supporting Kit.
If you're locked inside an ATM, have you tried banging on the case to alert passers by?
Strangely, no one connects the many claims that garbage collected languages "eliminate a whole class of programming errors" is good with the aforementioned "typed languages eliminate a whole class of programming errors" as good also.
Almost nobody uses "untyped languages". Few of those even exist, with Forth and various assembly languages being the main examples. (C, with its type system that is as airtight as a sieve, gets an honorary mention.)
You're probably harping about dynamically typed languages. In such languages, the runtime still knows *exactly* what type every item of data has. These are not weakly typed. But what you obviously prefer are "statically typed" languages.
Static typing might statistically reduce some errors, but it certainly can't "eliminate whole classes". Consider "set_warhead_target(float latitude, float longitude)". Did the type system give you any protection from accidentally swapping the two parameters? That's really the problem that you're so worried about: accidentally using the wrong data value in the wrong place.
However, very few statically typed languages (with Rust being a notable exception) have eliminated the biggest source of type errors in computing: Null, which is a bogus placeholder that matches any pointer type (or reference type, depending on the language's nomenclature). So in many cases you have no less risk with static typing than you do with accidentally feeding a string into a Python sqrt() function. And in the case of C or C++, you can be much worse off, as in segfaults and remote exploits.
I can't say I would blame them.
And further tilt the balance towards on-prem.
I'll be sure to tell my very real clients their infrastructure doesn't exist.
At the rate the shutdown is going, perhaps we should take a cue from the billionaires and just stop paying.
So those funny things that look like desktop machines are not? and there's no LDAP or domain controllers involved?
That's funny because the places I'm familiar with have desktop machines, domain controllers, often a NAS or two, and a router with a firewall.
Cloud servers may have more than one user running things on the same CPU. God only knows who the other users actually are. In a corporate environment, everyone running jobs on the server works for the company. It doesn't reduce the risks to zero, but it does reduce them a lot.
You can technically do your taxes for free by manually filling out the forms yourself.
I can't think of any business or other government function that still makes me fill out any paper forms. At one recent employer I did not fill out a single paper or PDF-style form, HR or otherwise, in the entire experience from the day I applied until the day I resigned.
Nobody uses paper forms any more. Everything is online. Taxes should be no different, and there should be no 3rd party middlemen collecting tolls for the "privilege" of doing something online the way everything else is done.
If imprinted foil seal under cap is broken or missing when purchased, do not use.