Asus starts industry's first fully-automated graphics card production

[Bouzoo]

-snip-

Well if we're gonna go there capitalism isn't the ideal solution, it has it's bad sides. And I agree on Switzerland and Germany, but I would rather have a country that's more like Austria, Finland or even Norway. Now I won't go in this debate, I understand that you have your opinion and I respect it. We agree to disagree and I'm gonna stop here since there's no point to this discussion (it's also way off topic as it is).

[MageTank]

Do not twist my words. You make your bed, you sleep in it. If you want to do social work or education, get a more professional degree and get a related job in higher demand until the market is more favorable for what you want to do exactly. I'm very much considering education as semi-retirement after I work myself to the edge of insanity as a developer for one or several firms. I still intelligently chose the private sector and higher industry to make enough money to live comfortably before pursuing a career which is in low demand and low respect right now.

 

Every decision in life needs to be carefully thought out as best as it can be. You are not less intelligent to pursue the work you love, but you are less intelligent if you don't position yourself to be more flexible early on in pursuit of that end goal. And perhaps you made a single bad decision. You can still do many things to fix that bad decision.

 

You come off as a very intelligent person in every post you make, but this is a subject you cannot rationalize with your experience. It differs per person. I too believe that anyone can change their fate with enough effort and will, but there are forces in this world that just refuse to give people a break, regardless of how hard they try. Granted, i am not old enough to speak with the best experience possible, i can say that i am old enough to witness enough people fail, even those who were pretty much destined to succeed at their field.

 

Not everyone has the luxury of having a higher education. Some people are dealt terrible hands by fate, and are forced to take care of sick or dying loved ones, even at a very young age. My mother, an extremely intelligent woman, had to spend her youth taking care of her grand parents, and then her parents, barring her from obtaining an education (she did not graduate high school) because the full extent of her time was focused around caring for her parents. Of course, having us children did not aid her in her quest to find employment, or finishing high school for a shot at better employment, but you make what you can of life. Your logic would dictate that if she would just try harder, she would have been able to obtain what she wanted, but it was not that simple. In fact, it seldom ever is. 

 

As for the post regarding children respecting their parents work ethic, i think you fail to understand the point that was made. It has nothing to do with the child wanting the parent home, and more to do with the care of the child in the first place. Finding a trustworthy babysitter is difficult. Not to mention it can be costly if you use a daycare. Then you factor in the time and scheduling of going to and from a daycare and picking them up/dropping them off, you have to find a job that allows you to do so. You also have to factor in the statistics of single parents. Not all love stories are happy endings. Not all people make the most intelligent decision in their youth, and plenty of people have children before they are financially stable. This all factors in to the situation at hand.

 

I am not going to defend the poor choices of others, but mistakes are often made before one learns from them. Regardless of how hard you work, or what education you have, these are obstacles that can and have held people back. 

 

I will not go far into the relocation comments you made, as they only apply when relocating to an area that speaks your language. For a majority of the rest of the world, where dialects and language differs vastly compared to that of North America, being able to change ones location and find employment will not be possible without learning a new language. Lets not forget that a vast amount of unemployment and poverty comes from natural disasters. Regardless of ones skill and education, finding a job after a tsunami wiped out your workplace will be difficult to say the least. Granted, this has little to do with automation, just adhering to your logic behind employment in general.

 

After all is said and done, i do agree with you on one thing. Putting all your eggs in one basket is not the best way to live out life. Having a backup plan, and different skill sets will always be helpful in ensuring your survival. I believe the majority of us understand that you have to do what you must first, and then do what you love when you are capable of doing so without putting your survival at risk. 

[Techhog]

I worked under the table to help my parents and worked my ass off in school to get a full ride through college to ensure my family wasn't cash-strapped for my younger brother. I positioned myself to never enter poverty, and I did my part to help my family get out and stay out. Once again, the difference between elitism and being elite is actually being elite, actually doing the work, actually having the skill to have authority to say "it's not that hard." I may come across as judgmental, but I know that life and I know what it takes to get out of it. It's not impossible, it's not so arduous as it's made out to be, and the vast majority of the people complaining don't deserve to. The U.S. could slash 90% off the unemployment lines and put more resources toward those who truly need to be served due to disability, disease, old age, and other truly awful circumstances. The able-bodies can fight for their lot in life like the rest of us.

 

If you made your bed, you sleep in it. Don't come crying to us with your tales of woe asking for a handout. Ask for work, for help getting to work, and most people would be happy to lend a hand. Asking for more money and resources is just insulting. The poor who truly take advantage of the system (and there are tens of thousands in every city which do) do not live a hard life unless they get tangled in crime, crime brought on by their own corruption in the first place and lack of self and community respect. For most, I can say without batting an eye that the problem is them, not the system. For those truly unfortunate and truly cursed with horrible circumstances, my sympathies. I donate time and money to soup kitchens, and I can see the difference in the eyes between those working for a better future and those sitting on their butts. I have seen and been on both sides of that counter. The world is full of charity already. It doesn't need more where the poor are concerned but a few edge cases, edge cases blurred out by the clamoring of the entitled.

So, basically, you had to work hard, but you have to say "it's not that hard" because you want people to actually think that. Look, I know you mean well, but lying isn't going to get anyone anywhere. It's hard. It takes time, effort, and dedication. Telling people that it's easy when it's not just causes them to be discouraged when they try to do it and find out the hard way that you lied.It's completely counter-productive.  You have to encourage people to do the hard work and convince them that it's worth it. Things don't suddenly become easy because you say that it is. You also still ignore social differences, but that seems to be because you're incapable of empathy.

[elfensky]

I lost my 'he''s right you know' meme.

 

this has become the natural selection for humans to keep our population in check. Normally a population can only grow as large as there is enough food to feed them. So there can only be as many lions as there are zebra to feed them. For humanity thats not really a factor, so our natural selection has become the jobs available in order to make money to buy the food. Its sad to see people starve to death yes, but its not something that you can change really.

By limiting jobs they are limiting the growth of humanity which in the long run is a very good thing unless you would like your descendants to live in a world like what is depicted in Elysium. I'm sure that will happen eventually anyway, but overpopulation of earth is not a good thing, neither is encouraging that growth.

 

[Toddskins]

Where are the errors? If I'm wrong, prove it. I presented you a paradox you say is false. Prove it.

You're really young in your thinking, and have not learned basic principles.  And most important, is a desire to learn and know the Creator.  I teach people how to think and disciple them, but you are nowhere near ready.  

 

But so I do not sound like an arrogant ass, I'll point out a basic issue in your so-called paradox.

 

1) You have not defined your term(s).  So begin there.  Define evil, and you will begin to take notice of your error.

2) You make an assumption about God, and all your understandings come from 1/2 understood messages.  (Again, you did not figure things out on your own, but taking half understood concepts, you have used your misunderstandings and your outright hatred of God, to continue to rebel against God).

# 1 is enough for now.  #2 is obvious.

[patrickjp93]

You're really young in your thinking, and have not learned basic principles.  And most important, is a desire to learn and know the Creator.  I teach people how to think and disciple them, but you are nowhere near ready.  

 

But so I do not sound like an arrogant ass, I'll point out a basic issue in your so-called paradox.

 

1) You have not defined your term(s).  So begin there.  Define evil, and you will begin to take notice of your error.

2) You make an assumption about God, and all your understandings come from 1/2 understood messages.  (Again, you did not figure things out on your own, but taking half understood concepts, you have used your misunderstandings and your outright hatred of God, to continue to rebel against God).

# 1 is enough for now.  #2 is obvious.

Anything evil is that which one chooses with intent to do which causes harm to the mind and body of others and oneself. Again, where did Lucifer's pride arise from if God didn't create the idea of it? Either evil existed the moment God did, or God created it. It's assumed God created the universe we inhabit. Where did evil come from if God didn't create it? If God did not create it, that makes evil a fundamental force with equal standing. 

 

My thoughts are far from immature and tend to be very complex in nature. If you rely on faith for your argument instead of reason, then you cannot convince me. The logic is sound, and the paradox is tight by definition. You say the paradox is false. Prove it.

[Toddskins]

Anything evil is that which one chooses with intent to do which causes harm to the mind and body of others and oneself. Again, where did Lucifer's pride arise from if God didn't create the idea of it? Either evil existed the moment God did, or God created it. It's assumed God created the universe we inhabit. Where did evil come from if God didn't create it? If God did not create it, that makes evil a fundamental force with equal standing. 

 

My thoughts are far from immature and tend to be very complex in nature. If you rely on faith for your argument instead of reason, then you cannot convince me. The logic is sound, and the paradox is tight by definition. You say the paradox is false. Prove it.

 

 

 Wrong again.

 

Evil is not that which does harm to another or yourself, though it probably might be.  You cause harm to a person about to kill you.  That is evil???

You do harm to a person about to rape a woman.  You call that evil?

 

So you see, your thinking is not complex, and not your own.  Immature.

There's plenty wrong in your comments, and I have only spoken on 1 or 2.  Here is yet another error you borrow from others.  "Lucifer" is not the name of the devil. His name is Satan.  Period.  It's a transliteration issue that occurs in one religious writing in all of history - the King James Version bible.  And it may not even be much of a transliteration error since the people reading that version of the bible (400+ years ago) MIGHT have understood the true meaning from the Hebrew (which was then translated into Greek, and then Latin, and then Old English).  The meaning from that verse in Isaiah, has nothing to do with the devil, and the reference to "Morning star"  (KJV - lucifer) is the planet Venus.

But this has little to do with your erroneous paradox, but just another fact to illustrate how immature you are in your development.

I'm done with this topic, as it is truly a waste of my time.  You are not even close to remorseful over your own sin, let alone have a desire to be forgiven of it.  So senseless for me to toss my pearls.

[Agent181]

this thread went a complete turn from what I expected.....

[patrickjp93]

 Wrong again.

 

Evil is not that which does harm to another or yourself, though it probably might be.  You cause harm to a person about to kill you.  That is evil???

You do harm to a person about to rape a woman.  You call that evil?

 

So you see, your thinking is not complex, and not your own.  Immature.

There's plenty wrong in your comments, and I have only spoken on 1 or 2.  Here is yet another error you borrow from others.  "Lucifer" is not the name of the devil. His name is Satan.  Period.  It's a transliteration issue that occurs in one religious writing in all of history - the King James Version bible.  And it may not even be much of a transliteration error since the people reading that version of the bible (400+ years ago) MIGHT have understood the true meaning from the Hebrew (which was then translated into Greek, and then Latin, and then Old English).  The meaning from that verse in Isaiah, has nothing to do with the devil, and the reference to "Morning star"  (KJV - lucifer) is the planet Venus.

But this has little to do with your erroneous paradox, but just another fact to illustrate how immature you are in your development.

I'm done with this topic, as it is truly a waste of my time.  You are not even close to remorseful over your own sin, let alone have a desire to be forgiven of it.  So senseless for me to toss my pearls.

The thinking is my own, and complete. In a perfect world you'd stop both without doing harm. Despite the fact most would see such actions as justified, there is still a better way.

 

No, Lucifer and Satan are equally correct names, for he is still an angel even if cast down. Lucifer was the name bestowed upon the angel before his rebellion. He only earned the title of Satan because he literally became man's greatest adversary. I'm a bit of a historian on the bible and its many stages of translation and editting over the course of history, the most damaging being the Council of Nicaea.

 

I do my absolute best to avoid sin and think every day on the mistakes I've made. You are blind yet think yourself a visionary unto others. Remove the branch from your own eye before seeking the splinter in mine.

[MageTank]

 Wrong again.

 

Evil is not that which does harm to another or yourself, though it probably might be.  You cause harm to a person about to kill you.  That is evil???

You do harm to a person about to rape a woman.  You call that evil?

 

So you see, your thinking is not complex, and not your own.  Immature.

There's plenty wrong in your comments, and I have only spoken on 1 or 2.  Here is yet another error you borrow from others.  "Lucifer" is not the name of the devil. His name is Satan.  Period.  It's a transliteration issue that occurs in one religious writing in all of history - the King James Version bible.  And it may not even be much of a transliteration error since the people reading that version of the bible (400+ years ago) MIGHT have understood the true meaning from the Hebrew (which was then translated into Greek, and then Latin, and then Old English).  The meaning from that verse in Isaiah, has nothing to do with the devil, and the reference to "Morning star"  (KJV - lucifer) is the planet Venus.

But this has little to do with your erroneous paradox, but just another fact to illustrate how immature you are in your development.

I'm done with this topic, as it is truly a waste of my time.  You are not even close to remorseful over your own sin, let alone have a desire to be forgiven of it.  So senseless for me to toss my pearls.

 

I am sorry, but i do believe you are mistaken. You claim to teach people, yet you offer absolutely no insight on your own words. You deliberately neglected the context of Patrick's words. The key word being intent. One cannot intentionally defend oneself, as intent implies a plan to do so. When defending oneself, it is instinctual, not intentional. You also fail to understand your own logic, which is ironic considering you called his thinking "not complex". If someone is getting raped, and you attempt to stop them, your intent is not to harm the rapist, but to save the person under attack. If you have to harm them to do so, then so be it. 

 

You are also completely incorrect in your statement regarding the origin of Lucifer and Satan. Satan literally translates to "Adversary" in Hebrew. Lucifer was the name of the fallen angel in Christianity, and he is referred to as Satan, because Satan is known as "the one who rebelled against God". This is further proven as Lucifer earned his title "Fallen Angel" for being the accuser, a title also shared by Satan. The "devil" differs depending on the religion, but it all comes down to him being a force of evil, against God, the force of good. The fact that you try to change context to better suit your argument will do no good here. Context means absolutely everything. Your ability to paste Wikipedia articles would be impressive to someone that does not know the religion, but to someone educated on the subject, you are easily seen as someone who is severely misinformed. 

 

@patrickjp93: To answer your question, god created free will. Before the freedom of choice, neither good nor evil existed. At least that is what i was told as a child, and it made enough sense at the time. Something to do with wanting people to choose to worship him. Though, when you put it like that, it makes him sound pretty vain. 

[patrickjp93]

I am sorry, but i do believe you are mistaken. You claim to teach people, yet you offer absolutely no insight on your own words. You deliberately neglected the context of Patrick's words. The key word being intent. One cannot intentionally defend oneself, as intent implies a plan to do so. When defending oneself, it is instinctual, not intentional. You also fail to understand your own logic, which is ironic considering you called his thinking "not complex". If someone is getting raped, and you attempt to stop them, your intent is not to harm the rapist, but to save the person under attack. If you have to harm them to do so, then so be it. 

 

You are also completely incorrect in your statement regarding the origin of Lucifer and Satan. Satan literally translates to "Adversary" in Hebrew. Lucifer was the name of the fallen angel in Christianity, and he is referred to as Satan, because Satan is known as "the one who rebelled against God". This is further proven as Lucifer earned his title "Fallen Angel" for being the accuser, a title also shared by Satan. The "devil" differs depending on the religion, but it all comes down to him being a force of evil, against God, the force of good. The fact that you try to change context to better suit your argument will do no good here. Context means absolutely everything. Your ability to paste Wikipedia articles would be impressive to someone that does not know the religion, but to someone educated on the subject, you are easily seen as someone who is severely misinformed. 

 

@patrickjp93: To answer your question, god created free will. Before the freedom of choice, neither good nor evil existed. At least that is what i was told as a child, and it made enough sense at the time. Something to do with wanting people to choose to worship him. Though, when you put it like that, it makes him sound pretty vain. 

Thank you, and inventing free will is one thing, but who then created the options? How can the idea of rebellion exist if God did not create it? Let's take this to a private chat.

[Dabombinable]

Well......there goes the neighborhood.

[patrickjp93]

Well......there goes the neighborhood.

Nah, the argument's done. Back to the subject at hand: Asus, economics, jobless people, and the ongoing struggle between consumers, firms, and laborers.

[Bouzoo]

This is the most off topic topic that I've ever seen. How did we come from Asus and their fully automized dGPU production to what's the name of the devil and the definition of evil beats me. And the ammount of arrogance some people have (not talking about patrick) is... yeah.