unprepare

>The settings menu of an iPhone is idiotic

>the API is more restrictive

> there are things you can do on Android that are impossible on an iPhone

>such poor UI design

Do you honestly think these are the things an average consumer thinks about when deciding what phone to get?

Have iphones ever been banned by the FAA for explosion risk?

iphone SE starts at 399$ brand new

iphone 5s starts at 130$ used

iphone 6 starts at 235$ used

iphone 6s 299$ used

iphone 6 plus 330$ used

Youre right, theres plenty of phones for less than 1k, and theres plenty of iphones under 1k too.

https://swappa.com/buy/devices/verizon

uhh, we are commenting on a post about a school who had to pull all of their videos because they were sued that the closed captioning was not accurate enough. try harder? did you forget an /s?

Why are Americans with disabilities more important than people from other nations?

This is entirely separate from your examples, as people in india arent taking american buses or elevators - but they most certainly are taking advantage of american educational content that is publicly available.

ah, "let he who is without sin throw the first stone" an oldie but a goodie.

in other words, only the infallible may criticize anyone/thing? that seems counterproductive.

If my hair is messed up and i tell a stranger that their hair is messed up, does that make me wrong? should they ignore what i said because /my/ hair is messed up?

I would argue this is a major selling point of nintendo. I can't count the number of times i've seen people express disappointment that its so hard to have friends over and play a game these days.

modern consoles were designed seemingly to discourage single console multiplayer gaming; everything is being pushed to online. I think nintendo is smart by catering to the split screen gamers out there, since no one else seems to.

>Who knows where it will be in 40 years. Look where computer technology was 40 years ago.

The Commodore PET, Apple II, and TRS-80 all came out exactly 40 years ago (1977)[1]

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1977_in_science#Computer_scien...

areyousure?

im kidding, but seriously thats a really interesting article/event - what search terms did you use, or did you have prior knowledge of that incident?

I'll admit that I am surprised youve managed to find an election influenced by fraud, unfortunately the proposed solution of voter id laws dont seem to address this situation.

How would voter id laws prevent an american citizen from voting in a different district?

For example the texas election ID doesnt even include your address.[1]

[1]http://www.dps.texas.gov/DriverLicense/electionID.htm

Yeah, i noticed this a couple hours ago, but after the edit time had expired.

iirc, we largely ended prohibition because it was giving massive profits to organized crime

a bit ironic now when we have a president railing against mexican cartels and promoting prohibition of marijuana.

those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it and all that...

likely a result of its questionable legality, since cigarettes are a perfectly valid reason to smell like smoke.

you're unclear about how voter fraud is investigated, and your solution to that is to create more legislation about voting? That is deeply unsettling.

Youve linked an example of a woman who registered some non-citizens to vote which did not sway the election in her favor. I agree that non-citizens should not vote, but i do not agree with increased regulation from the government in order to fight against voter fraud which did not influence an election.

Can you link to a single instance of voter fraud effecting the outcome of an election?

can you quote me saying non-programmers would be making software?

have you read my comments here?

Im talking about tools that enable a single developer to do the work of a great many developers, thus lowering the demand for developers in the marketplace over time.

you are talking about non programmers writing software(no clue where you got that from at all?) and you even admit that this looks like a great tool to enable developers to get more work done?

Go back and read my comments before you respond please, otherwise im not interesting in having a discussion with someone who isnt even reading my responses.

There is zero reason to believe it will not.

look i too can make baseless assertions.

>economics says that decreasing price, the price for a given unit of work going down increases the demand for such

an AI costs nothing in the long term, so you are agreeing here that demand for AI produced software will rise more sharply than demand for human developers, because they are more expensive.

So if you accept that basic law of economics, then you must arrive at the conclusion that human labor will inevitably be outpaced by cheaper labor. the fact that that labor is coding seems to be where people get really stuck here. I dont really understand why this is where people get stuck.

the population of the world, and thus its demand for food has very much grown over time, and is still growing. Yet we have fewer people producing food than ever before. The reason for this is that the augmentation of technology outpaced the increase in demand. So we had fewer farmers making more food than ever.

similarly with software development, the demand for software will continue to increase over time, but the demand for human developers will inevitably fall, due to augmentations of technology enabling fewer workers to produce vastly more output. So we will have fewer developers working than we have, say, today[1], but those fewer developers will be producing orders of magnitude more[2] software

[1]im not actually trying to predict the inflection point of this growth curve as today, i meant this only as an example to make my point easy to understand

[2] where more could mean more complex, more efficient, etc.

you can read it online for free here

http://www.george-orwell.org/1984/

Immediately i see you have this line:

>And until we develop an AI powerful enough to write clear, step by step instructions for any random task, code will be written.

so its "will never be at risk of automation UNTIL" which is vastly different from "will never be at risk of automation"

The article we are commenting on is about an AI writing code, so im not sure im seeing a convincing argument here.

secondly, automation isnt about some industry disappearing overnight, its about an ever decreasing amount of jobs in that industry. You cant imagine a system/tool/framework that allows such greater efficiency that a single developer can now reach the output of 5 or 10 developers?

I'm not making an argument that it is bad by any means, im only countering a common thread in development circles that 'development will never be at risk of automation'

for an example, see kapv89's response to my comment. Its a seemingly very prevalent view that somehow development will not suffer job losses from the efficiency gains innovation is able to create.

I think things like psychology/psychiatry, social work, child protective services, and other jobs that rely on a lot of interpersonal communication will be around longer than development; at least at any scale worth talking about.

yes and each new tool or helpful framework reduces the total number of developers needed. Just because we have yet to meet the demand for developers, doesn't mean that that demand is not decreasing over time.

software development is quite a young industry, so its growth can easily outpace the efficiency gains resulting in more developers, until it doesnt. Development as an industry will need to maintain stronger growth than efficiency gains through innovation, and i just dont see that happening long term.

edit: in my first paragraph i should have said " Just because we have yet to meet the demand for developers, doesn't mean that growth of that demand is not decreasing over time."

making people in an industry more efficient at their jobs == job losses for that industry.

if one programmer can now do the work of 5 with the help of an AI, companies will quickly be hiring less developers.

yet everytime i mention this, im told that "software developers are the one job that will never be at risk of automation"

You seem to be arguing that innovation is good.

api seems to be arguing that invention is good.

these are not mutually exclusive ideas, and i dont see where api is saying the innovation is bad or we should have less of it, only that we should have more invention (and presumably, more of both)

"RT is the only media outlet criticized for bias"

riiight

i cant even downvote you because you responded to me? but you can blame me if you want.

anyways, even the fake news phenomena that is being discussed today has been around for quite a while, so you are still incorrect in your assertion that its a recent phenomena started by the DNC and hillarys campaign

snopes even did a write up about fake news sites in january of 2016[1]

[1]http://www.snopes.com/2016/01/14/fake-news-sites/

ok but you are misrepresenting this completely now.

>Conversely, 57 percent of Americans have an unfavorable view of the country’s standing in the world. That’s the highest that number has been in a decade, according to Gallup.[1] And Trump’s approval rating, of 41 percent, is lower at this point than any other president Gallup has tracked since Dwight Eisenhower.

the link in the politifact article is very clearly talking about americans having an unfavorable view of the country, and not approval ratings.

Why are you lying?

If you look on gallup for the day of the politifact article[2], you will see that it shows % approve is 41%.

as for why they would choose the gallup approval ratings over rasmussen, there are very many answers to that question. rasmussen is an online poll, which has been viewed by pollsters since forever as much less accurate than live phone surveys (since online polls can very easily be gamed brigading, they dont verify the identity of the respondent, etc.)

The average from all the approval ratings is 45%[3]

[1]http://www.gallup.com/poll/203834/americans-world-standing-w... [2]http://www.gallup.com/poll/201617/gallup-daily-trump-job-app... [3]https://imgur.com/a/MzDa4

how does Trump react when hes called out on a lie, and how does Obama react when hes called out?

> I understand I said there were 57 states today. It’s a sign that my numeracy is getting a little, uh …”

>“I don’t know,” Trump repeated. “I was given that information.”

>"Fake news" (along with Russia-panic) started ... to justify why Hillary lost that didn't involve blaming her.

>fake news started long ago

you can only pick one.