Ok.
So basically zoning but pretending it's not called zoning.
986 karma · joined September 30, 2009
So basically zoning but pretending it's not called zoning.
Zoning is extremely important. You should not be allowed to build a factory in the middle of a neighborhood next to a school.
There are certainly bad zoning laws but to say they are all bad is just ignorant nonsense.
First off there's no way Zuckerberg wrote this. Might've been involved but these are the words of a marketing team working with a legal team.
Secondly why do you see Zuckerberg as a great CEO?
Underage users would find ways to appear to be 18 or older. Or use multiple accounts to continue playing. This is already common in many grind games. You have support accounts that feed the main account items.
Or just straight up hacking the timer system. Or playing games published outside if China.
Where there's a will, there's a way.
It's not complicated. If someone is overweight and consuming 3,000 calories a day and then reduces to 2,000 they might not lose weight. But then they just need to reduce further.
All humans will lose weight at 0 calories per day. You just gotta find the right calorie level.
Yes exact absorption greatly varies and is impossible to measure. But that's why you just reduce until you are losing at the desired speed. You don't need to precisely measure anything. You just need to be able to tell if overall consumption is going up or down.
Of course this is mentally very challenging so people try to find reasons for it to not work. But energy has to come from somewhere.
They are ignoring expert opinion and answers. And instead making a lot of big claims based on some correlations.
The most laughable part being the claim that reducing calorie intake doesn't work. Everyone will lose weight by reducing calorie intake. It's just physics.
Now in practice people have an extremely hard time sticking to diets which makes them ineffective. But people not following diets is not proof that you can't lose weight by reducing calories.
The most recent high profile one being Michael Hastings(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hastings_(journalist)#...)
Could be paranoid nonsense. But white hat researchers have demonstrated a disturbing number of attack vectors that could be used for this sort of thing.
Reeks of "Trump is for it so it's must be bad" issue that has plagued journalism since he took office.
There's pros and cons to this method of fighting dumping but it's certainly a good thing for American solar panel manufacturers just not the installers (in the short term at least).
"Just because you think DICSS is amusing, doesn't mean you want your boss to know about it. How about your SO?"
If you are writing code you need to hide from your SO you have some serious relationship problems.
What makes you think that's their goal?
What we've seen so far is more toy like. But imagine an AR tutorial app that guides you through replacing the brake pads on your car.
It could point the the exact spot for the next step, instruct you which tool and size to use and all sorts of things assuming you can recognize the objects well enough and a specific tutorial was built for your car. You could even build tutorials by having it observe what you do.
That sort of application is probably pretty far off but having it as a HUD instead of having to pull out your phone every 30 seconds would be super useful.
In the industrial setting some workers are already using Google Glass type devices to have some information readable without pulling out a phone but those don't have any real AR features yet.
Also no idea in India but in the US a lot of times although their are existing power poles internet providers can't necessarily get permission to string their fiber on them. Same problem can happen with existing in ground pipes. And any trenching or installing new poles becomes very expense.
This is not true at all.
Net neutrality rules allow for "Reasonable Network Management" which includes prioritizing classes of traffic. Here's a discussion on it https://www.reddit.com/r/networking/comments/6nddmx/does_net...
pros: all of that becomes legal so ISPs can increase profits through anti-consumer practices
cons: ISPs disrupt commerce through anti-consumer practices
There's also lots of examples from other countries that don't have net neutrality like Mexico https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/6x6izw/guys_m%C... (certain websites are not available on the lower tiered plans)
Skilled thieves can get into the vast majority of homes. Deadbolts just stop opportunists looking for an easy quick grab.
It's harder than a walled garden you control but very feasible.
Heck most software engineers could put together a smart lock and app to do this in a couple of months. Wouldn't be consumer ready by any means but this isn't some huge engineering challenge.
Figuring out how to market the product successfully is the harder part.
Skilled technical people don't write for publications because the pay is terrible compared to even an entry level tech job. The best articles I see anymore are by guest writers who do work in industry but wanted to write an article for whatever reason.
Though really would be better to fingerprint all removed photos and automatically prevent any matching photos from being uploaded.
"We remove photographs of people displaying genitals or focusing in on fully exposed buttocks. We also restrict some images of female breasts if they include the nipple, but our intent is to allow images that are shared for medical or health purposes. We also allow photos of women actively engaged in breastfeeding or showing breasts with post-mastectomy scarring. We also allow photographs of paintings, sculptures, and other art that depicts nude figures. Restrictions on the display of sexual activity also apply to digitally created content unless the content is posted for educational, humorous, or satirical purposes. Explicit images of sexual intercourse are prohibited. Descriptions of sexual acts that go into vivid detail may also be removed." https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards#nudity
I don't think we should be thinking about this from a psychological perspective but instead a sociological one. Yes individuals can disconnect and do whatever they need to assuming adequate resources but that's beside the point.
If you think of people as boxes with inputs and outputs I think it's very worth understanding how social media impacts those boxes and what the long term affects are.
Has nothing to do with being a victim. Just if you press this button on every box does something desirable for society happen? Or something negative? Or we can't tell still?
And if it is negative then do we as a society want regulations to reduce the impact?
I think 100% is misleading.
You could say that a morning newspaper connected people 100% when that was a new thing. Phones/computers only connect us as often as we use them to connect.
For instance something like AR goggles with a constant ticker of information would connect us even more.
I think it's more accurate to simply say that we are more connected. In specifics that the 24 hour cycle of evening news and morning newspapers has changed into an on-demand system that pushes information to people that want to receive it and that anyone can pull it when they have free time.
That said I think in the long term Amazon's brand could be being damaged by this more by more than they are profiting. But who knows.
They must be very aware of the problem and either working on a solution or purposely just letting it go for now.
Then anyone can query against that database to verify if a product is legitimate.