Well not radiology technicans as they are required to use equipment on patients to get diagnostic data. AI could possibly reduce the amount of radiologists (they are doctors) jobs.
A private organization that is tied into governments and police departments across the country have cameras everywhere that can track license plates and have 24-hour video for tracking people and it is completely unregulated.
Flock has also set themselves up on a way to intentionally make both themselves and their customers largely unaccountable to the public through legal channels.
Well that's great for you. That's some knowledge that you will possess for the rest of your life.
I want a green lawn and big bushy shrubs in front of my house. Do I need to know the intricate biology of my soil and habitat? No, of course not. I just do the surface-level things that make the lawn and shrubs thrive.
>No, of course not. I just do the surface-level things that make the lawn and shrubs thrive.
And others want the green lawn and big bushy shrubs, but don't want to learn all of the surface level things to make their lawn thrive so they hire a service to do it for them. And there's nothing wrong with that - not everyone enjoys the yard work, but they still want the thriving lawn and shrubs... and they are happy to write a check to OpenAI... err...Lawn Doctor every month to get that result since the time they save by not dealing with their lawn, they can pursue things they do want to do.
Not everyone wants to (or needs to) learn every detail along the way of getting the results they want.
I understand your point, but also imagine applying that across the whole spectrum of computing.
It's very useful that there's an intermediary that knows how that stuff works so I can build things without thinking about it in excruciating detail the whole time, I can dip down lower and learn stuff when it's relevant (like cache access and nested arrays) but I can also not do that in many situations.
There's also the argument that you can do engineering without understanding the underlying science as seen in th pyramids, the beautiful old european churches, etc
More productive? If the result can be trash, of course the AI work wins. In industries where quality and performance BOTH need to be upheld, knowing these details lets you guide the LLMs in a way that they will simply never do by themselves, and lets you meaningfully review performance critical code.
This reduces the cycle time on issues and reduces bugs and performance regressions. If I pitched that last sentence to your boss, chances are he'd take it.
One of my great regrets in life is not knowing anything about how to rebuild an engine (and various other car parts). It's not exactly a cheap hobby, so it's probably for the best, but I have the feeling I would love working on cars (my wife probably not so much).
I started last year. I had most of the tools already. I picked 90s ford trucks as my platform: cheap, plentiful, variety of models, known to be reliable, easy enough to work on with simple tools, parts still readily available, lots of YouTube material for any job I need to do.
I bought a couple and I've already had to do a lot of work.
It turns out, it's not that difficult. The systems are simple, each on their own, with few exceptions. When you isolate systems, you can just learn one at a time without pressure to be a whole mechanic. I still reserve the right to send it to the shop if needed.
I haven't had to rebuild an engine yet, but I've been all around the wheels, tires, axels, AC, fuel system, timing, vacuum lines, trailer wiring, brakes, coolant system, and of course I service all my own fluids.
I put it off way too long. My advice is to start now, if you think you'll like it. And you can start with mowers...a whole lot of the tools and concepts transfer.
It doesn't have to be a super expensive hobby. Plenty of old cars need some love, and you can buy them (and their replacement parts) quite inexpensively. In my experience, if you're willing to learn, break a few tools and old parts, get dirty, and persevere, you'll more than likely succeed, and your bank account won't be too broken at the end of it.
(Owner of two old german cars, one which has seen a partial engine rebuild, the other significant chassis welding. No formal training doing either.)
See if you can find a copy of 'How to keep your Volkswagen Alive' by John Muir and have a read through.
Find an older VW (or similar) and that's the basics and a bit more. Definitely replace the fuel lines on an old VW, but otherwise drive it and let it tell you what needs doing. IMHO, fuel injection is nicer than carburetion, but you some early injection systems have a bad reputation; Bosch L-jetronic seems pretty reasonable. Some people really like carbs though, so up to you.
Lots and lots of forums, some of them helpful even.
When it's an extra car that you have for fun, you don't have as much of the 'needs to work asap' stress and you can also get one that's more questionable cosmetically to save some money.
"Usury" is still a word in use but now, for legal purposes, it means "interest that a lender charges a borrower at a rate above the lawful ceiling on such charges" rather than just any interest at all.
traditional usage of usury was the same, any interest charges at a rate above the lawful ceiling, just where the ceiling was 0% for christians and in a like manner for moslems.
That's a strange way to phrase things. It's a bit like saying that the Church recognizes the licitness of murder under a lawful ceiling, but that this ceiling just happens to be 0 per year.
Interest as such is recognized as theft and therefore an injustice.
Well murder is similar in that it means an illegal or immoral killing. There are times (say in self defence) where it has taunt it is moral and should be legal to kill, because that isn't murder. So similar to this, it changed usury to illegal lending rather than lending.
How far would you take this? Let's grant that the difference between murder and a just killing is what someone (maybe the guy in power) says it is, nothing more. Would you say the same about robbery? Is it only robbery to point a gun at someone and take his money if someone says it is? If yes, at what point does the distinction between one thing and another thing become real, and not just based on what some guy says?
Well yes, there are times where it legal to take someones possessions/money such as if they owe a debt or have a legal judgement against them. In that case it could mean for instance sheriff deputies showing up at your house with guns and taking things in a manner that would be legal and not be considered robbery. When it becomes one thing or another is going to depend on your position on other things, there is a legal answer for when it becomes robbery/murder but also moral answers. I am for example a moral realist, so my answer to that would be different than someone who was a moral relativist.
no, not really, you have to order it chronologically: charging interest was verboten and in law it was called usury. later, interest was deemed ok... but charging too much interest was to be sanctioned and usury was a handy word to use.
In the Islamic finance model Muslims lending to Muslims, you don't charge interest so much as take a position in an investment with an eye to future value. At least that's how I understand it. There can still be a lein over assets, and a tail of payments and the final state would put both lender and debtor "where they expected to be" under the contract.
Between Christians and Muslims, Christians and Jews, Jews and Muslims different rules may/may-have applied.
Kings (of england, and other places) valued Jews precisely because of the fluidity of their lending to the crown at interest under catholic proscription regarding loans between christians, not the least because at long term consequences in access to jewish loans you could repudiate the debt and (or encourage your citizens to) conduct a pogrom.
reply