Comment Re:Client replacemnet: Arq Backup (Score 1) 137
I recently switched to Arq backup (https://www.arqbackup.com/) and have been very happy with how it works. It is cloud service agnostic, and allows you to backup to your own server as well.
I recently switched to Arq backup (https://www.arqbackup.com/) and have been very happy with how it works. It is cloud service agnostic, and allows you to backup to your own server as well.
One of the hottest trends in app building these days is to use Javscript frameworks such as React Native (invented by Facebook) or NativeScript. Everyone seems to be jumping on that bandwagon (it isn't necessarily without merit, as it allows developers to create a native UI experience with cross-platform tools, and share code with the web as well).
One of the side-effects of this is a huge javascript dependency graph, with (often) thousands of packages. A simple hello world app written in React Native is probably somewhere near 100MB.
I agree, the solution should be to evolve the system to actually make these labour saving devices actually save labour.
The problem is this... if there are fewer workers needed there are less people to tax. Where does the money come from to support society? Or these ideas of universal basic income, etc? Companies automate to save money and thus increase profits. They are the ONLY ones (and the stock market) benefiting from the automation. In order for these efficiencies to benefit society as a whole, wealth is going to have to be redistributed somehow. The only way governments know how to do this is through tax. Bill Gates is not suggesting automation is the enemy. He is just trying to explore metrics to use for taxation in a future where all the money is earned by a few powerful companies using highly automated systems.
I don't necessarily think his idea is a good one. But I do believe it is attempting to address the right question.
The natural world has a TON of information to process. Things like predators, weather, food... all of those things require being able to process a vast quantity of constantly changing external outputs simultaneously. We are probably attention deficit for a reason. Can you imagine if in the wilds we were able to focus on something at the exclusion of everything else going on around us. We would be dead in a day. I think that the modern world is expecting things from us that we were never designed to do, and also probably why we crave distraction.
I recently made the switch to working full-time from home. One thing I noticed was that I spent way less time being active, as I didn't have to walk much farther than from my bed to the desk which was only a couple of steps, at most. One of the best decisions I ever made (I wish I had done this years earlier) was to build a treadmill desk. I wrote a blog post and how-to on the process here: http://www.toesalad.com/articles/treadmill-desk-part-2-how-i-built-my-treadmill-desk
I am now much more active on a daily basis than I ever was.
With all of these people on the planet consuming lots of plant matter, couldn't we put all of that human waste to better use by turning it into biogas? It surely wouldn't meet all of our needs, but perhaps it could significantly reduce the burden on our increasingly rare energy staples.
This has a few benefits: We could use the available farm land to feed people. The more people there are the more fuel we get. This energy source is local to every country in the world, in fact, each household could potentially have their own digester.
I haven't studied this much, but I have always been intrigued by the idea.
These days, I feel like a cabinet maker working in home depot. I have a bunch of skills that are not being utilized because the majority of the work happening (at least where I work anyways) has shifted from creating custom solutions to installing, maintaining, and supporting 3rd party applications. My job satisfaction is eroding. While I used to take pride in creating stable, elegant solutions to complicated problems, I now spend most of my time fighting with messy integrations.
So, how do we make science (and other "intelligent" subjects) popular again?
Here are a two suggestions:
Participate in activities that involve active learning, exploration, and participation in the real world rather than passive entertainment or propaganda. Here are a few ideas:
I could go on-and-on with all kinds of activities that people could participate in that have foundations in chemistry, biology, maths, engineering, etc. Unfortunately, we seem to gravitate towards activities that involve consuming (media, shopping, food, etc.) rather than producing something. To consume something all you need is money and appetite. To produce something you actually need to think and develop skills.
Remember: Silly is a state of Mind, Stupid is a way of Life. -- Dave Butler