I thought overdosing on opiates was highly easy to achieve, basically pain free, and also relatively cheap even in the social backwaters of the world where they have death penalties?
I don't know, I recall in music repetition actually being enjoyed by the listeners (although not always so much the craftsmen and critics). Same seems to go for verbal communication, while some claim that great authors wouldn't repeat themselves, poetry is also generally rated prettier/better/more enjoyable wording despite often incorporating repetition. Why would visual design/style be any different in regards to human preference for symmetry and repetition/recognizability (even though the ones who create it tire of doing samey stuff all day, every day)?
After a quick check I found the "HP Deskjet Plus 4130" new for 350 NOK (so about 37 USD, which includes 25% VAT and a 2 or 5 (probably 5) year warranty mandated of the vendor). Seems similar to the others that come up when sorting by price on one of the local price comparison sites. So 70 USD would for most people appear to be about twice as much money up front for something that needs to produce the bare minimum and otherwise be easy to dust.
The reason to buy a colour inkjet printer is that it's the cheapest thing you can get your hands on. Usually because the various education systems throughout the world somehow fail to centrally handle printing of course material. Either that, or you're one of the couple of dozen people who prints photos, and additionally in the subset that hasn't also decided to pay for someone else to deal with the cursed product category.
> But using a multipurpose computer without qubes is unsafe at any speed, worse than driving without a seatbelt.
Could you elaborate on the odds of death and permanent disability occurring through use of unsecured general purpose computers? Because if not using qubes has the same risk profile as not wearing seatbelts I might feel like taking some measures
> So because some people can't use some information well, we should deny that information to all?
The argument isn't that using information is bad, it's that world scale maps are so shit at conveying usable information that there is no point in picking one projection over another (or any really) outside niche settings like sailing. Better to just use other non-map representations of the relevant information at that point.
> I do not consume news purely for entertainment, neither do those in my circle
Here my point was not that all news is entertainment, but rather that news one needs to reference a world scale map to make sense of in all likelihood isn't impacting anywhere near where one is living, nor near anyone amongst family or friends living abroad (hopefully one would remember the closest relevant neighbours), so those pieces are basically entertainment for the masses. (The assumption being that local impact to where the media is would be what's highlighted if there is some, hence the non-need for checking world scale maps in the event that the piece of news is impactful to the individual. So the pieces one feels like checking where on the globe are actually happening, one is in all likelihood checking because one is personally amused by finding out, not because it is useful beyond emotional gratification. And again no projections one could choose from would change the non-impact on the actions/decisions of the consumer of that piece of news.)
I remain unconvinced. Even with regional maps people struggle with conceptualising that similar distances at places even relatively close can vary dramatically in time needed to traverse, or with regard to energy/fuel cost to cover, or population density, or a number of things that are important in the moment. It would be extremely hard to use a world scale map to convey actionable information that couldn't be delivered better in another way, the more likely outcome is that it would just be misleading the audience by making them rely on their (almost certainly wrong) intuition rather than the information actually needed in the situation.
As far as the news usecase goes I also don't really see how checking world maps would be applicable outside the news in question being consumed as entertainment, where my previous point on entertainment boiling down to personal pleasure and being fungible still stands.
What are the practical uses of a world scale map beyond sailing? I mean they could be neat for visualizing some useful route calculated as vectors and further used as vectors, but it would still be of mostly an aesthetic value, appealing to the viewers emotions, which could be achieved just as well with some palm oil and sugar.
I don't know, while I miss the super+right click drag to resize window and super+left click drag to move window from KDE on my work machine, I also kinda miss the smoothness of macOS's handling of many windows and desktops utilizing the trackpad on my gaming desktop. The swipe up and down/ctrl+arrow up and down to juggle windows within the desktop, and then left/right to move between desktops even makes their at first awkward handling of fullscreening apps feel right and efficient. What I really miss in KDE though is multiple virtual desktops per display I can switch independently per display. Actually makes me enjoy using multiple monitors slightly slightly more on macOS. What I sadly can't see happening is a merging of KDE, macOS, and the superior i3, as there would be too few few safe shortcut combinations available for programs to rely on.
I always found writing to be an unnecessarily arduous tool for communication, so I never do it until I've overthought what I want to express and approximately how. At that point I flesh out the skeleton of the message, and pile on words and structure and references and other rhetorical tricks until the packaging feels sufficient. Rarely, if ever, have I experienced writing things down altering my perception of the strength or weaknesses of the chosen arguments, or revealing new ones. That is to say, I really don't vibe with the concept of writing being thinking, rather it's a waste of humanity's resources to push it as The Tool.
As our surroundings grow more secure, the justice system variant of swatting becomes a greater portion of the threats to worry about. There will be abuseable bugs and situations in our non static world, there is no way we'll ever have perfect security of anything. So a motivated actor with a grudge should be able to plant something a place you provably beyond reasonable doubt have sole control of, given enough time. How do you propose then that we secure deniability once the justice system is wielded as a weapon against the innocent, when everyone feels that there is no reasonable way defects exist and could have been used? Just look at the British post office scandal, real world justice systems have already operated under the assumption that software doesn't have bugs for decades, which speaks volumes on their inclination to believe that they both exist and are used by a unknown third party with ill intent. Thus the widespread trust in that things are secure is a threat in itself. And unlike airports we don't need the users to have an artificial sense of security for computers, networks, software, and digital services to be viable markets.
PoE2 is still in early access, I feel it would be wrong to say that it is out until the makers claim that the product is ready to stand on its own two feet in the market
Using Denmark as an example of somewhere doing well because they didn't adapt the euro would be wrong though. They pegged the Danish krone to the euro decades ago, and have as far as I know had to follow the European central banks interest rates fairly closely as a consequence.
"Being needed" is a poor choice of source of existential happiness and contentment though. Sure, it's an easy and accessible one for the masses with some mental gymnastics around how you view your income generating activities (or by having kids). But it's still dependent on others, as you need them being at hand to impact. See all the needless depression arising from kids moving out, or when people retire and complain about not being needed instead of finding new activities to explore or grow in.
As for the fear of human labour not being needed at scale due to me as most others needing an income, I'm optimistic there for two reasons. First, large unfed masses tend to start revolutions, something both governments and the not-working are interested in avoiding. Second, large amounts of young idle people has tended to result in stupid destructive behaviour at scale. So I'm confident there will be created opportunities for paid work for mostly everyone, and the conditions won't be too poor as there would be no profit motive to push people too far. Rather, the people having both the resources, time, and energy to consume, would still be what props up the system (until we can agree on trying something better now that we have excellent tools for guaranteeing transparency and optimising allocation at scale in real time).
> You can't use propaganda to trick people into becoming experts at calculus, for instance.
Perhaps not an individual instantly. But how about settling for making a generation of parents fear that there will be no future for their kids unless they get fantastic grades, and that they have to use them to go into stem?
It is for netflix, or the cloud image storage provider that wants to secure against the consumer easily extracting data and going to someone else. The user being able to easily take a program made by a third party and have it completely rearrange the guts of any other program is the basis of consumer security in a world without a unified government keeping commercial interests at bay.
Unless the organisation is on the brink of collapse there is valuable learning and understanding in honestly attempting the research. If nothing else one gets a bit more knowledge on how to research the topic, although some knowledge of the state of the field is hard to avoid if you're so new to it that it's resource intensive to research.
For the company it would probably pay off better (over time) to let the people who regularly get stuck after trying nothing spend some energy figuring out than what they get in return for shipping them to conferences.
How do you secure against the system vendor (in this case the browser) limiting what the consumer/user can or can't do (alone or with the help of third parties) with the product after acquiring it though? After all security for individuals against commercial and otherwise organized interests is one of the, if not the most important security after life and health. Even if one values the market overall for financial reasons, there is a solid argument that preventing modifications (and thus also repairs) is anti-competitive. It would be damaging to society if manifestV4 is realized restricting what can run further, much like printers and operating systems where the users ability to run software they bring themselves is limited has been. Just as no one should have to go to a mechanic with a special deal with the manufacturer to get their car or tractor to work as desired, neither should users of software.
> is it ethical to allow a model to give medical advice, knowing that it can be wrong. Most people would say no,
I wouldn't be so sure, most people I've met seem to be all too eager to suggest what worked for them (or they have heard is supposed to work) in conversations about medical issues, so I can't really see the public generally categorizing advice or guidance being given in non-professional setting or by non-experts as unethical. The taxpayers representatives having to bear the costs of the outcomes (at the very least as reductions of tax revenue) I can see being of a different opinion though.
Even with opportunities for remote work, after having spent ages 8 though 19 rurally and in suburbia, you'd have to pay me enough so I'd be able to comfortably retire to a proper city after about 3 to 5 years. I've gotten to know myself, I'm deeply not into nature or generic sports, and only digitally socialising with people you share interests with (i.e. not parents and siblings) makes existence suck immeasurably (sure modern multiplayer games are a bit better than what you got over dialup, but still).
There are many indirect ways to get information though. Better would be to ban "discrimination" of customers/humans (no loyalty programs for long term customers/whales or people who know people), and ban of usage of all personal information for decision making except short pre approved lists. Most industries would do fine with "payment received", some maybe could make legitimate cases for also "delivery address" or perhaps "age". Would probably also be good for efficient competition on merit, which should appeal to the groups with enough wealth to use it to accumulate wealth.
Online retailers in the nordics occasionally try to post terms and conditions that contradict consumer protection laws, for instance retailers being on the hook for warrantying product(ion) defects for 5 years after purchases of products that ought to be durable, like electronics. The retailers win out on a substantial amount of the population not contesting it, but if you as a consumer go through the process the findings is basically always in your favor, despite there being agreements to something else. Telecommunications providers also have a long history of having their consumer invoices being voided for being unconscionable despite service agreements, especially in cases with children playing with devices (but otherwise also), going all the way back to the landline age.
I disagree. Writing became seriously unfun after the 8th year of school. Now after grad school it seems very wasteful to spend any calories focusing on the packaging of the ideas and things. Especially at a time when we have achieved the technology to not need a team of writers, editors, and typesetters to create presentations of a worthwhile quality for the actual content in a reasonable timeframe.
You have (the perception of having) someone to forward the claim to once you're hit by one where the damages are quantified in money like a life insurance or disability payout caused by the data loss?
What would drive a love of technology over ones peers in the formative years? And when society further obstructs the path to working with one's interests by further exposure to the peer group and its passions, why would the society become beloved by the individual? People demonstrably cannot be put on the path of caring for others without being showed that they are seen and cared about themselves, and no intro to philosophy, or ethincs for graduates course, has ever focused on that aspect.
Not to say that all who love technology are outcasts, but hoping for reaching the ones behaving problematically by talking about the academic sport of philosophy or related disciplines doesn't seem effective if the goal is more pro-social behaviour.
As long as the odds are good enough (and/or you know the distribution), there is nothing wrong in relying on and profiting from stochastic systems despite not every outcome being positive. What matters is the sum of outcomes, not the individual ones.
It means you need to be able to handle failure, but you should always have a good grip on how to correct if you intend to set things out in the real world which messes up everything always anyways.
What stops someone from adding a watermark to an actually photographed (carefully framed?) picture to discredit it? There is no certainty either way, just suggestions from someone else about what the truth might be.
Please don't export US labour and safety standards. The amount of paid time off is hard to argue is not unethical, the conflation of vacation time and sick time clearly is unethical, the amount of parental leave (especially maternity) is a crime against humanity. The firing procedures are also something you'd expect to read about in a history book besides a picture of a child visibly yearning for the coal mines, contracts with a mutual resignation period giving both parties adequate time to transition is a bare minimum. And that is just the tip of the iceberg. Please please America spend serious efforts developing your labour standards to a humane level instead of exporting them.
A lot of the local newspapers have abandoned third party comments systems and gone for only allowing comments under full verified name (often using the national id system). The result is that only the trolls and and generic perspectives anyone could have reasoned their way to possibly existing in less than 5 minutes remain. The ones willing to provide entertainment in the form of vigorously refuting the more extreme viewpoints are gone, because who wants to needlessly antagonize the likely crazy, and the interesting tangents are also mostly gone.
If you want to use social media to chill out with your friends, real name mandates for writing can work, at least as long as the content is not too publicly accessible. But if you want to have more interesting conversations than the ones you can have in the local park where you need to watch out for not publicly denouncing the sport favoured by your peers and neighbours in favour of something locally exotic, real name by default will more or less wipe them out.
As for proof of humanness it sounds interesting, but I think it's insufficient. Much like I dislike promotions of interests which are not my own as much when they are done by a human handing out fliers vs a poster showing the same advertisement, I don't think that the sender of the message being a paid or otherwise recruited human is going to make the desirable difference on social media either, even if they're known to be human.
What's really needed is a signal that the content is the persons genuine personal input, and comes without an ulterior agenda. And if such a signal can exist I'd very much like to be able to use it when navigating the physical world as well.