Comment Re:Elon said (Score 1) 40
I would say the non-litterer is preferable to the person who even litters on the moon.
I would say the non-litterer is preferable to the person who even litters on the moon.
It's the same reasons that CEOs who wreck multiple companies one after the other seem top find a golden parachute and a new job waiting for them.
Just wait until they get that massive ticket for littering...
I have also been WFH for years before covid. I don't believe my circumstances are the same as everybody's, but I do know I am far from the only person whose duties almost exclusively involve working with people and things that are in another region anyway.
Put another way, employers who gave everyone an effective raise due to exigent circumstances and suffered no harm as a result are now mystified as to why their employees are reluctant to accept an effective pay cut now for no apparent benefit. Given the latter part, they rightly suspect some sort of malfeasance somewhere in management.
Workers want or even need a cost of living adjustment. Employers do not want to and may not be able to afford to increase payroll. For that reason, the COL increases are often several years in arrears as it is. WFH gives the employees an effective raise by eliminating their commute costs and an opportunity to save even more by living somewhere with a lower COL.
As an additional incentive, the employer saves on office space.
On the other hand, WHF was a win-win for employers too. The employees got an effective raise by lowering their cost of living and a reduction in unproductive daily aggravation and wasted time. The employer didn't have to actually pay them any extra to make that happen and could even save on expensive office space. It just wasn't a win for the managers who could no longer hide how bad they were at their jobs.
Perhaps not narcicism so much as short-sighted self interest. Either way, it would be in the company's interest (and the shareholders) to give THEM the heave-ho and leave the workers remote. The workaround for their ineffectiveness costs millions a year.
Now, demand for EVs is rising due to high fuel prices, and a good public charging network making EVs a viable alternative for many people. And also people looking for bargains are hitting the market, and with used batteries not being the problem they were thought to be, used EVs have its own value proposition. We have here the normal effect of demand rising more than the available supply.
They won't want to touch the other side of it either. If what Flock is doing is fine, so is the creeper snapping photos on a public playground and creating a giant database somewhere.
That seems...undesirable.
Agency is just it's ability to act upon it's conclusions. While there is a great argument that AI should not be given agency, it had it.
If you're trying to say it had no sentience, I'll agree with that.
In the same sense that a gerbil has agency but not sentience. It too might escape from a cage.
College stripper party is a complicated situation? Ri-ight. People should realize a few things going into that situation...
The whole bury it for 100,000 years seems to be FUD anyway. That figure leaves the waste less radioactive than the uranium rocks the fuel came from ever were. If we applied the same standard to natural sources we'd be up in arms about banana peel disposal.
Replacing garbage trucks burned by angry villagers can get expensive.
On the other hand, it is actually common to make the duress password VERY similar to the correct password so it looks about the same when you enter it. Especially on something like a phone where you can generally re-load the data later if you want. The consequences of an accidental wipe may be quite small.
Other posible explanations include the defendant remembering the wrong password under pressure. The defendant having any history of mis-typing is irrelevant.
Men love to wonder, and that is the seed of science.