Does anyone here have any experience in getting photos off of old RAZRs? I have a similar phone that (I believe) uses the same firmware. It looks like the software to do so (Motorola Media Link?) was offline, or at least I couldn't locate it anywhere. I've got some photos of an old friend who passed away on there, but no way to get them off.
I had a similar situation recently with the mini USB port broken for anything but charging. I recall trying bluetooth and running into trouble, but then succeeding using a data-only SIM card (T-Mobile) and emailing the photos.
I'm aware of the well-timed indictment, despite the fact that the public's mind was made up well before then. An indictment is not a conviction, and its evidence comes from sources (intelligence agencies) that have been proven numerously to lie, fabricate, and falsify evidence for political ends. For context, Mueller was FBI director under Bush and during the Iraq war. Pretend that someone other than Trump won, and now tell me honestly -- do you trust US intelligence agencies and do you find the indictment's technical evidence compelling?
(edit)
To bring the point of this post back to my earlier one -- where is the evidence that Assange "sided with Putin"? Siding with someone implies collusion, and mutual interest is not collusion. It implies Assange knew the source was a Russian state actor prior to publishing (whether it was is still speculation).
I apologise if this post seems long-winded and antagonistic, but I feel this is an important distinction that has been glossed over. I see Russiaphobia seeping into close friends who I consider to be rational and it worries me.
Maybe this time it is different. Maybe the massive capabilities of modern robotics and AI are more transformative than the assembly line and sewing machines. Maybe our society isn't ready to handle mass unemployment from entire categories of jobs being eliminated.
Currently, I see a few ways this could go. One is the bright shiny utopia of robot servants and abundance for all. I don't think it's likely.
The other is a world that clings to jobs as long as it can. A society that demands its citizens' labor to pay for their own basic needs, even as more and more people are unable to cobble together enough part time work and benefits to support themselves. The desolate turn to drugs or suicide, perhaps rioting eventually. People demand industries be brought back, long past the point they're a viable career. Under debt and unemployment, the economy collapses.
I see a lot more political support for the latter.
There's also the possibility that new technology creates new jobs. That seems like wishful thinking to me. Do you think everyone will be AI programmers and robot engineers? I don't see that happening today...but I do see those old jobs being eliminated, right in that article.
But if you want to assert that this time is different, there needs to exist evidence.
Such evidence should not be speculation. Such evidence should be things like "These quality of life metrics are going down, for these groups of people right NOW".
If this time is actually different, it should be measurable and provable, through quality of life or economic metrics.
But I don't think thats true. I think that society IS ready to handle the supposed "mass unemployment from entire categories of jobs being eliminated", as proven by the fact that it IS doing so, right now, because quality of life metrics aren't decreasing.
Valid criticism. I posted emotionally. I will further educate myself on actual statistics and put together better edited and sourced posts in the future rather than knee jerk rebuttals. I appreciate you even using the repetition in calling me out, because that's a cheap rhetorical crutch I lean too heavily on.
At this time, I'm forced to admit you're right. The numbers I'm aware don't seem to currently show my bleak predictions of mass unemployment, so it's just a less rational gut-feeling type of belief that is unjustified of the weight I've assigned it. However, I still wanted to respond to this post (albeit a day late) because it was an effective and worthwhile callout. (LMGTFY is always a tad too harsh IMO, but your tone is 100% justified in context of my post's tone, and knocked some sense into me)
In my defense, I have avoided digging further into statistics because, well, if it's "different", can I even trust the numbers? But dammit, I try to be rational and justified. If I think unemployment numbers might be missing wider cases, I need to verify that. If I'm going to hold a belief that inspires strong emotion, there needs to be strong evidence. I can't just blithely imply that "oh no it may already be happening!!1"; I need to bring more to the table to discuss than emotion and rhetoric. Humbly, thanks.
Am I the only one who views Facebook by Most Recent? They don't make it easy, and I don't think you can default to it, but I just point all my bookmarks to https://www.facebook.com/?sk=h_chr
Still though, Facebook could be so much better. The problem is that a profit-driven social media site is always going to have different goals than its users. Free ones seem to never gain traction. Currently, most of my friend groups are switching to Discord, but that's basically just going back to IRC without having to understand NickServ and such.
As many others have pointed out though, Facebook got bland when everyone's parents joined. Private groups somewhat help, but it really does need to be more directly baked in to the design. It's far too late for that now, but I dream one day someone will finally make the Facebook killer. Until then, I use Facebook, because it benefits me more than not using it. Shallow interaction, peoples kids, etc? That can easily be fixed. For me, the boost in mood I get from reconnecting to old friends makes it worth all the pain. I was a hold out too, and didn't join until ~5 years ago?
I think the problem is it's almost a utility at this point. Most everyone I know (non-techy crowd) is on it. If you aren't, you truly do miss out, which sucks. But do you know anyone who doesn't work, or want to work at Facebook who would say "I love Facebook!" Tweak all you want, but it's too much a behemoth to love.
Fair enough, perhaps not "cosplay" as a broad definition, but in the sense of modern fandom organizing "cons", I found it interesting it went back decades earlier than I'd assumed. I knew there were Star Trek conventions in the 1960's, but I would've never guessed as early as before the US entering WWII. Of course costumes and enjoying stories probably date back to before writing, but I thought the modern form was much newer.
Ok, fine. They still have to inherit that money. But as they grow up, the rich baby will have access to better nutrition, better education, a less stressful environment, etc compared to the poor baby. That's without considering fetal health/nutrition. There are many known factors that can affect a child's health, growth, and intelligence, and therefore success.
I don't think the distinction of "babies have $0" is relevant when considering all the other potential advantages. What are you getting at with that claim? I don't think it's particularly clear, judging by the other replies.
He suffers from the affliction, that, having mastered programming, all other domains of human endeavour must be as reducible to simple logical constructs, and the world just needs him, to come and show how simple it really is.
It’s crazy how many think they have a monopoly on intelligence by virtue of being able to tell the machine what to do.
A logical statement in isolation is seen as sufficient to win arguments (like “babies have no money at birth”).
Wow, thanks Socrates, now I see the light. The scales have fallen from my eyes.
Asteroid mining would disrupt the market for many rare elements, but I think it could be less chaotic than people think. It's not going to be like the Gold Rush where a deposit was found and prospectors flocked to it. It'll be a massive undertaking, almost certainly with multiple nations working together to achieve. The time between the project becoming public and the resulting mined resources being delivered would give markets time to settle on a price.
That said, yes, asteroids mining could certainly affect the price of gold, but not necessarily destroy all its value. There's a price floor set by the industrial applications for it.
With BitCoin, there is no floor. If no one wants to buy your BitCoins, you can't do anything else with them. They are just data representing proof of work, but no outside value.
Plus, in a world where you can mine asteroids for gold, suddenly there's potential for growth not only on Earth, but in the solar system at large, and there have to be industrial uses of gold on Mars...
I hadn't seen that Cincinnati Enquirer article though, so thank you for sharing. I'm not looking forward to hearing about the suffering, but I feel the need to educate myself. I worry this is the new normal.
Edit: God, the pacing of that article...all the lives lost in short vignettes, names unknown, punctuated by daily death/overdose numbers for just one city? Horrifying when you realize what a tiny facet this represents of the national suffering due to this epidemic.
