#i hope to be more active it’s one of my 2025 resolutions | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

wallpaperpainter · 4 years ago

Text

8 Common Mistakes Everyone Makes In Ubuntu Remote Desktop From Windows | ubuntu remote desktop from windows

Linux Mint afresh appear its latest abiding abutment (LTS) adaptation of its accepted desktop Linux desktop, Linux Mint 20, “Ulyana.” This edition, based on Canonical’s Ubuntu 20.04, is, already more, an outstanding Linux desktop distribution.

Connect to a Windows PC from Ubuntu using Remote Desktop .. | ubuntu remote desktop from windows

As before, you can use three altered desktop looks with Mint 20. These are my own admired Cinnamon, which was aggressive by GNOME 2.x; MATE, a angle of the GNOME 2; and the ultra-lightweight Xfce. Best desktop users will be blessed with Cinnamon or MATE. I use Xfce on low-powered systems or aback active Linux on Chromebooks or Windows 10 PCs with Windows SubSystem for Linux (WSL) 2.

And, aback I say low-powered, I beggarly Low-Powered. Alike PCs from the 2000s can run Mint. The abounding adaptation of Linux Mint requires a bald 2GBs of RAM. If you’re a crammer for punishment, you can alike run it with as little as 1GB.

One affair you can’t do anymore is run it on 32-bit processors. While there are a scattering of 32-bit bales retained for Steam amateur and Wine, which provides Windows appliance interoperability for Linux, Mint 20 has alone boilerplate 32-bit support.

You’ll additionally charge at atomic 15GBs of deejay space, but I acclaim 20GBs. Finally, you’ll charge a cartoon agenda and adviser that supports a 1024×768 resolution. In short, you can appealing abundant run Mint on any PC you acquisition in a buzz clutter store.

Under the hood, Mint 20 runs on top of the 5.4 Linux kernel. Its best notable new appearance are abutment for AMD Navi 12 and 14 GPUs, AMD Arcturus cartoon cards, AMD Dali APU, AMD 2020 APU platforms, and Intel Tiger Lake CPUs.

One affair you can’t do calmly yet is advancement from Mint 19.3 to 20. Clement “Clem” Lefebvre, Mint’s advance developer, explained, you can’t use the 19.3’s amend administrator because “the action will be absolutely altered aback this is a new above adaptation and a new amalgamation base.” By mid-July, Mint will absolution an accessible advancement path. For now, you charge install Mint 20 from scratch.

Ubuntu Remote Desktop – 8.8 Bionic Beaver Linux – LinuxConfig | ubuntu remote desktop from windows

For my tests, rather than use old hardware, I acclimated a 2019 Dell XPS 13. This model, which came with Ubuntu 18.04, was powered by an Intel Core i7-10710U processor. It additionally came with a 512GB SSD and 16GBs of RAM. This is awfully added able accouterments than you charge for Mint.

First, I installed Linux Mint 19.3 on it so I could get an abstraction of how able-bodied Mint 20 compares to its actual ancestor. Then, I installed Linux Mint 20 on it with the Cinnamon 4.6 desktop. I did this by downloading the Mint 20’s 2GB ISO angel and again afire it to a USB stick. That done, I set the XPS 13’s firmware to cossack from the USB stick and installed 20, displace it to cossack from the SSD and I was on my way. The absolute process, from alpha to end took about half-an-hour.

Once up, alike admitting Linux Mint 20’s brand-spanking new, I begin I had 39 updates to make. This included a atom update, which meant I had to reboot the system.

That done, the arrangement ran flawlessly. In particular, I was afflicted by how Nemo, Mint’s book manager, was abundant faster. It does this prioritizing agreeable and aeronautics over announcement thumbnails. Sure, as a result, you see all-encompassing icons afore the thumbnails, but the advance addition is remarkable. I accumulate assignment files not on my bounded machines, but on my Samba-powered Network-Attached Accumulator (NAS) accessories and bounded and alien Nextcloud servers. Aback I was extenuative screenshots and added files from the Mint 20-powered XPS 13 to my alien drives, it adored me seconds. This, in a word, is “impressive.”

If, clashing me, you don’t run your own book and billow servers, Mint now comes with its own easy-to-use bounded breadth arrangement file-sharing program: Warpinator. With it, you can calmly annoyance and bead files from one Mint 20 apparatus to another. It’s easy, fast, but, for now, it’s alone accessible on Linux Mint 20 systems. Aback it’s both advantageous and open-source I apprehend to see it adopted by added Linux distros soon.

Do you use NVIDIA Optimus cartoon on your system? If you do, Mint’s NVIDIA Prime applet displays your GPU renderer. It additionally supports NVIDIA “On-Demand” profile. With that, you can cede your accustomed programs appliance your onboard Intel graphics, while allotment a GPU power-hungry appliance to use your NVIDIA agenda and cast amid them as needed.

Connect to Ubuntu 8.8 | 8.8 | 8.8 Desktop via Remote Desktop .. | ubuntu remote desktop from windows

Cinnamon 4.6 additionally comes with apportioned scaling. Until now your ascent was either 100% (normal mode) or 200% (HiDPI mode) and it was the above for all your monitors. Now, anniversary adviser can accept a altered ascent and it can be set to ethics amid 100% and 200%.

As Mint credibility out, “in accustomed mode, the resolution you set is the resolution you see. In HiDPI, at 200% scaling, the awning is assuming alert the pixel body so aggregate looks sharper, but the resolution you see on the awning is alone bisected the resolution of your monitor. Many HiDPI displays accept a resolution which is absolutely absolutely baby already HiDPI is activated.”

I’ve apparent this myself with the Dell XPS 13. Its 4K abounding resolution renders argument too baby for my old eyes to use comfortably. With the new Cinnamon, it was accessible to set up my affectation so I got both fonts big abundant to be accessible to see, while still befitting HiDPI’s sharpness.

For applications, Mint has bigger abutment for Electron applications. These are cross-platform, open-source desktop apps appliance JavaScript, HTML, and CSS. These “desktop” apps, such as Slack on Linux, run on top of the Chromium web browser. Mint 20 now does a bigger job of amalgam Electron applications into the arrangement tray and desktop.

At the above time, though, Mint no best supports Ubuntu’s Snap software packaging system. This agency the above Chromium is not present in the absence repositories. You can still install Chromium appliance another ways, but it’s not easy. It’s like activity aback a decade aback installing Linux apps appropriate able knowledge.

The Ubuntu Snap Abundance is additionally disabled. Without it, you can’t install Snap applications. You can reinstall it — I acclaim you do — with the afterward commands:

Remote Desktop Connection from Windows 8 to Ubuntu 8 | ubuntu remote desktop from windows

sudo rm /etc/apt/preferences.d/nosnap.prefapt updateapt install snapd

For added details, see Mint’s Snap documentation. You can apprehend added on Mint’s arguments adjoin Snap, and Ubuntu’s attack to accomplish accord with Mint and adjudge for yourself if you appetite to use Snap on Mint.

Of course, the accepted alternative of Linux desktop programs appear accessible to run. These accommodate Firefox 77 for web browsing; LibreOffice 6.4.2 for your appointment needs; and Thunderbird 68.7 for email.

Overall, Mint charcoal a amusement to use. I absolutely ambition Mint included Snap. Best desktop affairs developers accede that it, and its battling Flatpak, are the approaching for Linux desktop apps.

Looking ahead, Linux Mint 20 will accept aegis updates until 2025. Until 2022, approaching versions of Linux Mint will use the above amalgamation base. This agency it will be atomic to advancement to the abutting few versions.

If you’re new to Mint and appetite to accord it a try, analysis out my How to install Linux Mint on your Windows PC article. It’s accessible to do whether you appetite to clean out Windows, run it with Windows, or aloof accord it a balloon run appliance a USB stick with assiduous storage.

Ubuntu Remote Desktop – 8.8 Bionic Beaver Linux – LinuxConfig | ubuntu remote desktop from windows

Despite the Snap nuisance, Mint is both powerful, full-featured, and accessible to use — alike if you’ve never larboard Windows before.

Top Stories This Week

Bitcoin ready to push above key resistance to hit $10,000The world’s biggest cryptocurrency has started 2020 fighting. For a time on Friday, Bitcoin hit $9,000 — with analysts claiming there are multiple signs that a “bullish transformation” is underway. This weekend also saw the BTC network’s mean hash rate hit new all-time highs, meaning it’s never been harder to mine new coins. Although BTC fell from highs of almost $9,200 on Sunday to hover at about $8,600, analysts believe it is ready to push above the resistance to hit $10,000. Even despite the latest turbulence, which saw prices drop $500 in five minutes, BTC is up 20% year to date — and by more than 5% over the past week. The strong performance will leave crypto skeptics such as Peter Schiff red-faced. Back in November, the gold bug had predicted BTC would imminently drop to $1,000.Research: Binance and Huobi received over 52% of total $2.8 billion illicit BTC in 2019Sticking with the Bitcoin theme, let’s look at some worrying new research that suggests just two exchanges — Binance and Huobi �� together received 52% of illicit Bitcoin transfers worth $2.8 billion in 2019. According to Chainalysis, the crypto was moved from 300,000 individual accounts associated with criminal activity — and 75% of the illicit BTC was sent to just 810 accounts. Researchers believe that some over-the-counter brokers may be specializing in providing money laundering services to criminals and taking advantage of loose Know Your Customer requirements. Huobi did not respond to the claims, but Binance said it was committed to tackling financial crime in crypto and continually improving its Anti-Money Laundering measures.United Nations: Stay away from North Korean crypto conferenceThe public is being warned not to attend North Korea’s upcoming cryptocurrency conference, with experts warning it could violate sanctions. Reports suggest that the event, due to take place in February, will include discussions focused on how crypto can be used to evade sanctions and launder money. One British government spokesman said attendance would effectively support the isolated state’s use of this technology and “unavoidably increase” their ability to generate revenue for prohibited weapons programs. Earlier this month, Ethereum Foundation researcher Virgil Griffith was charged with conspiracy to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, amid allegations he attended last year’s conference.New analysis finds Mondays are best days to buy BitcoinMondays are enough to fill many of us with dread, but there might be a bright spot. Research shows that Mondays actually offer the best average daily return for Bitcoin at 0.54%, while Wednesdays attract a loss of about 0.23%. This is based on analysis of the cryptocurrency’s performance from April 2013 to January 2020. Over a shorter time frame — from the beginning of 2019 to Jan. 13, 2020 — Fridays delivered the highest average return at 1.1%, with Mondays coming second with Tuesdays and Thursdays delivering negative returns on average.

Singer Akon says world’s first “crypto city” is set for Senegal in 2025Akon says he had finalized an agreement to launch a “crypto city” in West Africa. Akon City is expected to open its doors in Senegal by 2025, and vows to be a “100% crypto-based city with Akoin at the center of transactional life.” The metropolis is being built on 2,000 acres of land gifted to the project by Senegal, and the first phase of construction is scheduled to finish in about five years’ time. It is hoped that Akoin will empower “rising entrepreneurs with digital and real-life tools and services, and enable brands to unlock the power of Africa’s rising economy.” Rest assured, we’ll give you plenty of updates on how the project progresses.

Winners and Losers

At the end of the week, Bitcoin is at $8,670.33, Ether at $165.92 and XRP at $0.23. The total market cap is at $236,788,834,292.

For more info on crypto prices, make sure to read Cointelegraph’s market analysis.

Most Memorable Quotations

“The state should become a digital platform that is created for people.”Mikhail Mishustin, new Russian prime minister“We cannot discount the future role of cryptocurrencies in funding acts of domestic extremism, both within New Jersey and across the United States.”Jared Maples, director of the New Jersey Office of Homeland Security and Preparedness“Supporting the DPRK’s use of cryptocurrency and blockchain technology, risks violating the Security Council’s resolutions because it would unavoidably increase the DPRK’s ability to subvert sanctions and generate revenue for its weapons programs.”British government spokesman“Be cautious if considering an investment in an IEO. Claims of new technologies and financial products, such as those associated with digital asset offerings, and claims that IEOs are vetted by trading platforms, can be used improperly to entice investors with the false promise of high returns in a new investment space.”U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission“So right now, Bitcoin and Ether are the two that we think fall under our jurisdiction.”Heath Tarbert, Commodity Futures Trading Commission chairman“We are looking forward to our joint efforts with Z Corporation/TaoTao in bringing our services to Japan. Foremost, we want to ensure that we work in full compliance with Japanese laws and regulations where local and global standards function as a key role in establishing sustainable development industry-wide and greater public adoption.”CZ, Binance CEO“We're not looking to build a service here, make money and enjoy the revenue, we're looking to create a standard”Eyal Hertzog, Bancor co-founder and product architect

Prediction of the Week

“Weak hands are out” — Trader who called $20,000 Bitcoin top calls bottomWaiting for prices to dip to $6,000 before you invest in Bitcoin? You’ve missed your chance, according to Peter Brandt. The veteran trader — who successfully predicted in early 2018 that crypto markets would fall 80% from their all-time highs of $20,000 — struck a bullish tone during an interview with Cointelegraph. “The weak hands are out; the strong hands own it,” he surmised. Brandt added that “anybody who is interested in what Bitcoin has to offer” should dedicate 10% to 20% of their portfolio to the cryptocurrency.

FUD of the Week

U.S. SEC warns investors that IEOs may be breaking the lawThe United States Securities and Exchange Commission has warned that initial exchange offerings may be breaking the law. After the initial coin offering boom turned into a bust, many projects have taken to launching their tokens directly on exchanges. But the regulatory body says: “Be cautious if considering an investment in an IEO. Claims of new technologies and financial products, such as those associated with digital asset offerings, and claims that IEOs are vetted by trading platforms, can be used improperly to entice investors with the false promise of high returns in a new investment space.” The SEC said that alarm bells should ring if IEO organizers fail to address federal securities laws or mislead investors, adding: “There is no such thing as an SEC-approved IEO.”U.S. SEC charges convict and associates for $30 million fraudulent ICOAnd speaking of the SEC, this week saw the regulator charge a group of criminals who raised over $30 million through a fraudulent ICO. Boaz Manor, one of his business associates and two companies are accused of violating the anti-fraud and securities registration provision of federal securities law. They are accused of marketing and selling securities with a plan to develop technologies for hedge funds and other investors in digital assets. According to the SEC, Manor changed his hair color, grew a beard and used aliases to conceal his identity because he had previously served a year in prison after pleading guilty to criminal charges arising from the collapse of a large Canadian hedge fund.Singapore crypto consultant kidnapped for $1 million ransomA businessman was recently kidnapped in Thailand and tortured for a $740,000 ransom in BTC. Mark Cheng transferred all his available funds of $46,000 to his captors and reportedly made a daring escape as they prepared to murder him. He was on a business trip to Thailand when he was bundled into a truck by masked men. A Thai actor is believed to have owned that pickup truck, and police have now identified him as a person of interest in their investigation. Describing his escape, Cheng said: ”One of them held the gun against the back of my head while the others stepped away. Fortunately, I know martial arts. I reached behind my head and grabbed the pistol, and then I fled.”

Best Cointelegraph Features

Predictions for 2020Take a look at the biggest and best predictions for 2020. We’ve asked prominent industry experts which altcoins they’ll be keeping a close eye on in the coming 12 months, what Bitcoin’s price might look like this year, what this year’s biggest topics are likely to be, and for their thoughts on the major themes for crypto and blockchain in 2020.Telegram’s legal battle with the SEC heats up over TON recordsJoseph Birch looks back at Telegram’s clash with the SEC, which became one of the crypto world’s most closely followed legal dramas in 2019.Interview with Daniel Marco on the state of blockchain in CataloniaCointelegraph features editor Alex Cohen speaks to Daniel Marco, the director general of innovation and the digital economy in the government of Catalonia, to find out how the region’s ambitious blockchain strategy is taking shape.Original Article - CoinTelegraph.com Read the full article

#Binance #Bitcoin #blockchain #Cryptocurrencies #NorthKorea

0 notes

dailytechnologynews · 7 years ago

Photo

The 10 Years Cycle

*This post is Inspired by Ray Kurzweil and his Law of Accelerating Returns. (my english is not perfect)

I've seen a patern within technosocial paradigms (I mean, main technologies with the ability to change society and, at the same time, used by almost every person) since the Web... There're three phases of adoption and perfection of the tech:

3-4 Years of Early Adoption (A1): the product isn't good and it's very expensive, only a few milions buy it.

4-5 Years of Mass Adoption (A2): the product gets good enough to mainstream adoption, it becomes cheaper and better so a vast majority buys it.

2 Years of Technological Plateau (A3): there are no more major innovations and the product is almost perfect and impossible to improve. Almost everybody uses it and the society as a whole is absolutely affected by it.

Yes, I'm talking about the famous S curve... First, I thought "why 10 years if technology is exponential?" So maybe I'm wrong about further predictions but, what if it's not about the time but about the tech itself? I mean, the next tech is exponetially better even if the curve lasts the same amount of time... I hope I'm wrong, but that's just my intuition...

Lets begin, I'll need your help to know if I'm wrong or right so, if you can remember how things were back in time, please, help me to correct and improve this post :) (Note, this is for developed countries, sadly, other humans suffer a tech delay because of X causes...)

THE WEB:

A1 1996-2001: Internet becomes more and more popular but just a few millions use it and connections are very rudimental, limited by time and bandwitch etc.

A2 2001-2005: Connections get fast, cheaper and web 2.0 makes everything better. Google, Facebook, Youtube become more popular and full of new services. More than 70% of people use internet.

A3 2005-2007: Adoption stabilizes around 75%, a lot of new services have born and been perfected.

Note: I know it's very unfair to consider Web has reached tech limits by 2007 but in my mind it makes sense xD

THE SMARTPHONE:

A1 2007-2011: I guess everybody remember first iPhone's keynote, I don't like Apple but they did it very well, puting BB like a nice try but not enough for what we could do with this tech.

A2 2011-2015: this tech gets better, with better screens, cameras, sensors, sizes, uses etc.

A3 2015-2017: we all know smartphones have reached tech limits, iPhoneX is the proof, after a few years of no major improvements we've started dreaming about the next big thing...

MIXED REALITY:

A1 2016-2020: I know Oculus and Google started with AR and VR back in 2010-2011 but that was a development phase, we had to wait for 2016 for a consumer product for VR and still we're waiting for a decent AR one, maybe Magic Leap will do something about this by the next year. Hololens consumer version came this year, even if devs had it in 2016. There are more MR products from MS, HTC etc., of course.

A2 2020-2025: I think VR resolution and GPU power will become cheaper enough to allow a very good experience and even displace monitors and other productivity screens. At least if Moore's Law keeps alive in other way (optical-3D-Cloud-5G... computing). This video seems very possible to me by this time... Plus, battery tech could have evolved to next gen etc. I don't want to do the math about FLOPS, miniaturization etc., I don't like numbers sorry xD

A3 2025-2027: it's very likely that everybody wears glasses by this time, I know it seems absurd (and very hipster) but if could asked some guy by the 2000s that everybody will look at tiny screens from their pockets while walking on the street and in the metro, in just 10 years, you know what I mean... Damn, and even pay things with you fingerprint! A lot of social, consumer and work activity (if jobs still exist) will take place in VR/AR places. But, we need something more isn't it? We are humans.

NEURAL LINK:

A1 2027-2030: this is starting to sound very crazy but consider this tech already exists. Today we can connect the human brain to computers and even other brains, its very rudimental but promising enough to induce Elon Musk to create "Neuralink" a company hoping to connect the human brain to the cloud/internet/other people with neural implants by 2027 (that's literally the goal). Sorry guys, but I can't imagine other paradigm before this one, I feel it's the next logical step and, Moore's Law by our side, it's congruent.

A2 2030-2035: maybe thanks to some short of nanotech, with or without surjery, almost everybody will get his/her neuralink. Why? Isn't dangerous? Can I get a virus and die? Well, I repeat what I said before, now we can't imagine allowing ourselves to do this kind of crazy things, but time goes on and minds change, people will accept it. There will be dangers, of course, but it will worth the risk: what about becoming Einstein? what about Matrix-like VR? what about...

A3 2035-2037: everybody is neuro-connected and max bandwitch achieved.

MERGING WITH AI: Sorry, my human mind is too much limited to even imagine what this could mean.

Thanks for reading my shitpost and I hope you share your thoughts with me :D If this post can be corrected and improved, please tell me!

#Futurology #Technology #Tech #Studies #Humanity #Development #New #Gadgets

1 note · View note

jeroldlockettus · 6 years ago

Text

Why Is This Man Running for President? (Ep. 362)

Andrew Yang supports a universal basic income (a “Freedom Dividend”), the use of “social credits,” and a White House psychologist. (Photo: Stephen McCarthy/Collision)

In the American Dream sweepstakes, Andrew Yang was a pretty big winner. But for every winner, he came to realize, there are thousands upon thousands of losers — a “war on normal people,” he calls it. Here’s what he plans to do about it.

Listen and subscribe to our podcast at Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or elsewhere. Below is a transcript of the episode, edited for readability. For more information on the people and ideas in the episode, see the links at the bottom of this post.

* * *

Hey there. Hope your new year is off to a good start. Hope you haven’t broken all your resolutions yet. A couple quick announcements. First: next week, we’ll be resuming our “Hidden Side of Sports” series with a look at the mental side of sports. But also: in a couple months, we’ll be participating in the famous M.I.T. Sloan Sports Analytics Conference, which means we’ll have access to some of the sharpest sports analysts, coaches and owners, and athletes in the world. So: we want your questions for them. Send us the sports questions you’ve always wanted answered, on any aspect of sport whatsoever — the weirder the question, the better. Our e-mail is [email protected]. Thanks.

* * *

Andrew Yang is not famous. Not yet, at least — maybe he will be someday. But let me tell you his story. He’s 44 years old; he was born in Schenectady, N.Y., a city long dominated by General Electric, the sort of company that had long dominated the American economy. But which, as you likely know, doesn’t anymore. Yang’s parents had both immigrated from Taiwan, and met in grad school. His mother became a systems administrator and his father did research at I.B.M.; he got his name on 69 patents. Their son Andrew studied economics and political science at Brown, got a law degree at Columbia, and ultimately became a successful entrepreneur, with a focus on widespread job creation. In the American Dream sweepstakes, Andrew Yang was a pretty big winner. But along the way, he came to see that for every winner, there were thousands upon thousands of losers.

The economist Joseph Schumpeter famously described capitalism as an act of “creative destruction” — with new ideas and technologies replacing the old, with nimble startup firms replacing outmoded legacy firms, all in service of a blanket rise in prosperity. The notion of creative destruction has for many decades been part of the economic orthodoxy. And it’s undeniable that global prosperity has risen, and not just a little bit. But Yang — like many others — has stopped believing in the economic orthodoxy of creative destruction. As he sees it, there’s just too much destruction; and the blanket rise in prosperity isn’t covering enough people. We’re living through what Yang calls “a war on normal people” — a war that Yang fears is getting uglier all the time. And that’s why he has taken to saying this:

Andrew YANG: I’m Andrew Yang, and I’m running for president as a Democrat in 2020.

Stephen DUBNER: I can think of a million things that you personally, Andrew Yang — with your resources and abilities and so on — could have done other than running for president of the United States. And yet that’s the one you’ve chosen. So why?

YANG: So imagine if you were the guy getting medals and awards for creating jobs around the country and realizing that the jobs are about to disappear in an historic way. And all of the solutions involve really a much more intelligent, activated government than you currently have. And I went around and talked to various people being like, “Hey guys, anyone going to solve the biggest problem in the history of the world?” And I could not identify anyone who was going to run and take it on.

DUBNER: So you put your hand up and said, “I guess I will?”

YANG: Yeah. I’m a parent like you are. I’ve got kids who are going to grow up in this country, and to me just believing that we’re going to leave them this shit-show that I think is coming and not doing something about it struck me as really pathetic.

* * *

The conversation you’re about to read is in many ways a continuation of conversations we’ve had in multiple episodes over the years. Episodes like “Is the American Dream Really Dead?” and “Is the World Ready for a Guaranteed Basic Income?” Episodes like “Yes, the American Economy Is in a Funk — But Not for the Reasons You Think” and “Did China Eat America’s Jobs?” You may want to give those episodes a listen for a deeper look at the economics involved. But first: who exactly is Andrew Yang? Years ago, he worked as:

YANG: A knife salesman.

DUBNER: A knife salesman?

YANG: Oh yeah, Cutco, I still know the sales patter.

DUBNER: Let’s hear it.

YANG: What’s really dangerous is not a sharp knife. It’s a dull knife, because then you start putting elbow grease into, and that’s when accidents happen.

DUBNER: So here’s how I would thumbnail your story: immigrant kid, smart, got a good education, tried a few things in the labor force, including high-end lawyer, then some entrepreneurship, got involved with a company that was sold. So you cashed out, then took the nonprofit route to try to inspire other people to become entrepreneurs in places where there wasn’t a lot of drive for that already. And then during that process you got exposed to the way the economy was failing in large parts of America. But then instead of just saying, “Wow, that’s tough. But I got mine and I’m going to go back to my coast and lead my comfortable life, and for the people who are not leading this life — I wish them well, but I’m out of here,” you disrupted your life in order to do something about it.

YANG: As an entrepreneur, I feel driven to try and solve problems, and this seems like the greatest problem that we face. And you think, “Hey, if I bust my ass for several years, I have a chance to potentially accelerate the eradication of poverty and helping my country manage through the most difficult transition in decades. And I think if I put my heart and soul into it, I have some chance of making that happen.” And then if you don’t do that, you must be an asshole.

When he was 24, Yang landed a job in New York at Davis Polk, one of the most prestigious law firms in the world.

YANG: I was making $125,000 plus a bonus of maybe another $25,000 or so. And I have Asian parents, so they were quite pleased with this state of affairs. And I thought, “Wow, this is really lousy job.” When I was growing up as a kid playing Dungeons and Dragons, I didn’t dream about being the scribe. I dreamt about going in the woods and killing something, which did not help my parents feel any better about my decision to quit the firm.

So yes, he quit what many people might see as a dream job. He got involved in an internet startup that combined celebrity and charity.

YANG: So we called it stargiving.com. And we got Hootie and the Blowfish and MTV and Magic Johnson to donate meet-and-greets with themselves to their nonprofits.

The launch of StarGiving coincided with the bursting of the dot-com bubble; the firm lasted just five months.

YANG: I mean, I was a very sad 26-year-old who still owed $100,000 in law school loans and had parents still telling people I was a lawyer even though I was not. And I joined another startup, and I was very worried that it was also going to go under. So I started throwing parties on the side as a side hustle. And then I also started teaching the GMAT on the side for a friend’s company. So I had three jobs during that time.

The job that stuck was the GMAT teaching — GMAT being the standardized test you take to get into business school. The company was called Manhattan Prep and Yang ended up becoming its C.E.O.

YANG: That’s right. So I personally taught the analyst classes at McKinsey, Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, Morgan Stanley. And so imagine doing that for six, seven years and then seeing the country go to shit during the financial crisis. And then think, Well, I know why that is — because the smart kids have been becoming Wall Street bankers and management consultants while the rest of the country was getting hollowed out.

In 2009, Yang’s company was bought by the testing firm Kaplan, which was owned by the Washington Post Company.

YANG: We were acquired for low tens of millions. So I walked away with some number in the millions.

He soon left the Washington Post Company to start a non-profit called Venture for America, modeled on Teach for America.

YANG: Venture for America takes a recent college graduate, trains them with various business skills, and then sends them to work at a startup or an early-stage growth company in Detroit, New Orleans, Cleveland, Baltimore, a city that could use the talent. Then you work at that startup for two years, helping it grow. And at the end of two years if you want to start your own business, we have an accelerator and a seed fund to help you do so. It’s going to create 100,000 jobs around the country. We’ve helped create over 3,000 jobs to date, and dozens of our alums have started companies, some of which have now raised millions of dollars and generated millions in revenue.

DUBNER: So you said you hoped to create 100,000 jobs, and then you just said you’ve created 3,000 jobs, so that sounds like you’re a little short.

YANG: Well, create 100,000 by a certain date.

DUBNER: What’s the date?

YANG: So we had 2025 as our target date.

DUBNER: Okay.

YANG: So we would need algorithmic growth.

DUBNER: I gather what you learned about how the world worked outside of the coastal corridors and outside the Ivy League, and so on, was an awakening. Yes?

YANG: Yeah, it was for sure.

DUBNER: What was different in Detroit, in Pittsburgh, and elsewhere that you went, from what you imagined?

YANG: Well, so some of the structural force, and I’ll describe this — a company, it had a couple of very bright founders out of Brown University, and they got started in Providence. And the company starts to do well, hits its strides, doing a couple of million in revenue, and then an investor in Silicon Valley says, “Hey, you guys should come out here, and we’ll invest $10, $20 million in you. But you should really come here.” So then the guys say, “Well I guess we have to take that.” So that company goes from 100 employees in Providence, R.I., to zero employees.

DUBNER: And I can feel the mayor of Providence and the governor of Rhode Island thinking right now, “No, no, no, please don’t go.”

YANG: They were there. I mean the mayor — they were saying, “Please don’t go.” And the guys were like, “Well, you’ve got to do what’s right for your business.” And they went out to Silicon Valley and now the company has 100 employees in San Francisco. It becomes this really unfortunate dynamic that if you are an entrepreneur who’s succeeding in a place like Detroit or Providence or St. Louis, the goal is to get sucked up to the big leagues and wind up in San Francisco or Boston or New York.

DUBNER: But the other part is that what we used to think of as the backbone jobs of this country, the nature of that is changing really, really fast, due to technology and particularly automation. How much of that were you starting to see up close, and how surprising was that to you?

YANG: Yeah, so my thesis was that if you started a tech company in a place like Detroit that it would create additional jobs in that community that were not necessarily skilled jobs. But what I learned was that these companies, in order to be successful, did not need to hire huge numbers of people. That right now, the way businesses grow is that businesses grow lean and mean. They’re not going to hire the thousands of employees that industrial companies used to employ in a place like Detroit or Cleveland or St. Louis.

And it became clear to me that as much as I was excited about and proud of the work I was doing, it felt like I was pouring water into a bathtub that had a giant hole ripped in the bottom. Because we’re blasting away hundreds of thousands of retail jobs, call-center jobs, food-service jobs, eventually truck-driving jobs. And so my army of entrepreneurs, doing incredible work, starting companies that might employ 20, 30, 40 people, was not going to be a difference-maker in the context where that community was going to lose 20, 30, 40,000 retail jobs, call-center jobs, transportation jobs, etc. And I was horrified. I was flying back and forth being like, “What the hell are we doing? We are blasting communities to dust and then pretending like we’re not and pretending like it’s their fault, and pretending that somehow it’s unreasonable to be upset about your way of life getting destroyed.”

I had a wakeup call, a reckoning as you said. But then when Donald Trump became president in 2016 I was convinced that the reason why he won the presidency is that we automated away four million manufacturing jobs in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri. And we’re about to triple down on that by blasting away millions of retail jobs, call-center jobs, fast-food jobs, truck-driving jobs.

David AUTOR: I think if we had realized how traumatic the pace of change would have been, we would have at a minimum had much better policies in place to assist workers in communities that suffered these very severe and immediate consequences.

That’s the M.I.T. labor economist David Autor from our 2017 episode “Did China Eat America’s Jobs?”

AUTOR: And we might have tried to moderate the pace at which it occurred. And we also had a huge trade deficit and that meant we simply did a lot less manufacturing. So that meant that workers had to make a tougher transition out of manufacturing, into something altogether new. And I think that upped the challenge.

I think the other thing that we have to recognize, and that economists have tended not to emphasize, is that jobs aren’t purely income. They are part of identity. They structure people’s lives. They give them a purpose and a social community and a sense of relevance in the world. And I think that is a lot of the frustration that we see in manufacturing-intensive areas. And I think that that’s costly even beyond the direct financial costs.

It’s been tempting, especially from a political view, to blame all this job loss on global trade, immigrant labor, and offshoring. But Autor and most other economists agree that the much larger driver of job loss is technology and automation in particular.

YANG: So we automated away 4 million manufacturing jobs.

Back to Andrew Yang.

YANG: This is like the auto-manufacturing plants, a lot of the even consumer-goods, like furniture manufacturing in North Carolina, a lot of that stuff has gotten automated away. Now, I studied economics. And according to my economics textbook, those displaced workers would get retrained, re-skilled, move for new opportunities, find higher productivity work, the economy would grow. So everyone wins. The market, invisible hand has done its thing.

So then I said, “Okay, what actually happened to these four million manufacturing workers?” And it turns out that almost half of them left the workforce and never worked again. And then half of those that left the workforce then filed for disability, where there are now more Americans on disability than work in construction, over 20 percent of working-age adults in some parts of the country.

DUBNER: So the former manufacturing workers, a lot of them are on disability a lot of them are also especially if they’re younger men, they’re spending 25–40 hours a week playing video games.

YANG: Yeah so it did not say in my textbook, half of them will leave the workforce never to be heard from again. Half of them will file for disability and then another significant percentage will start drinking themselves to death, start committing suicide at record level, get addicted to opiates to a point where now eight Americans die of opiates every hour.

So when you say, “Am I for automation and artificial intelligence and all these fantastic things?” of course I am. I mean, we might be able to do things like cure cancer or help manage climate change more effectively. But we also have to be real that it is going to displace millions of Americans. People are not infinitely adaptable or resilient or eager to become software engineers, or whatever ridiculous solution is being proposed. And it’s already tearing our country apart by the numbers, where our life expectancy has declined for the last two years because of a surge in suicides and drug overdoses around the country.

None of this was in my textbook. But if you look at it, that’s exactly what’s happening. The fantasists — and they are so lazy and it makes me so angry, because people who are otherwise educated literally wave their hands and are like, “Industrial Revolution, 120 years ago. Been through it before,” and, man, if someone came into your office and pitched you an investment in a company based on a fact pattern from 120 years ago, you’d freakin’ throw them out of your office so fast.

The Industrial Revolution is a textbook example of creative destruction. Old technologies giving way to new; the rising tide lifting all boats. But history doesn’t actually happen that smoothly …

YANG: If you look at the Industrial Revolution, there was massive social change. Labor unions were originated in 1886 to start protesting for rights. There were massive riots that led to dozens of deaths and caused billions of dollars’ worth of damage that led to Labor Day becoming a holiday. Universal high school got implemented in 1911 in response to all of these changes. And it was a tumultuous time. I mean there was a whiff of revolution the whole time. And according to Bain, this labor-force displacement, this time, the fourth Industrial Revolution, is going to be three to four times faster and more vicious than that Industrial Revolution was.

So even for those lazy-ass people who are just like, “We’ve been through this before, Industrial Revolution,” be like, “Well, the Industrial Revolution was hellacious and it’s going to be three to four times worse according to Bain, who presumably you respect because they’re good at figuring this stuff out.” I mean if you look at government-funded retraining programs, the efficacy level, according to independent studies, is between 0 and 15 percent. And only 10 percent of workers would even qualify for these programs anyway. So we’re talking about a solution that will apply to between 1 and 2 percent of displaced workers. And that’s the kind of lazy crap that people are putting out there as a solution.

DUBNER: So if a revolution happens, how does it start, and what’s it look like?

YANG: So to me the rubber hits the road with the truck drivers. I mean there are 3.5 million truck drivers in this country, only 13 percent of them are unionized. The odds of there being a collective negotiation are very low. Eighty-seven percent of them are part of small firms of let’s call it 20 to 30 truckers, and 10 percent of them own their own trucks.

So think about that. If you borrow tens of thousands of dollars to be your own boss and be an entrepreneur and then your truck cannot compete against a robot truck that never stops — the odds then of these truckers showing up at a state capitol saying, “Fuck this, let’s get 30 guys together with our trucks and our guns” and show up and protest the automation of their jobs. So we’re disintegrating by the numbers. You can see it in our political and social dysfunction. Expecting that disintegration process to be gentle would be ignoring history.

DUBNER: Well even though revolutions do happen and armed violent revolutions obviously have happened, most bold predictions turn out to be wildly wrong. And usually there’s a lot less deviance from the past than predictors predict. So what makes you think you’re not wrong on this one?

YANG: I don’t know thousands of truck drivers, but I do know some. And they do not strike me as the sort who will just shrug and say, “Okay, I guess that was a good run. I’m going to go home now and figure out what job is there for someone who’s a 50-year-old former truck driver.”

But you also are going to see call-center workers, fast-food workers, retail workers — I mean there are 8.8 million people working in retail in this country. The average retail worker is a 39-year-old woman with a high-school degree who makes $11 to $12 an hour. When 30 percent of malls close in the next four years, what is their next opportunity going to be? So we have to start being honest about what’s happening where the market does not care about unemployed cashiers or truck drivers or fast-food workers.

And the biggest issue to me is that we’re measuring economic value in a very narrow, archaic way. We invented G.D.P. almost 100 years ago during the Great Depression. The government’s looking around saying, “Things are going really badly, we need a number for this.” And then Simon Kuznets comes up with G.D.P. and says a few things: He says we should not use this as a measurement for national well-being because it’s really bad for that. We should include parenthood and motherhood in the calculation because it adds so much value. And we should not include national defense spending in the calculation because—

DUBNER: If I remember my history, all three of those were ignored then, yes?

YANG: Yes, yes, yes. We’re like, “That’s great, Simon.” And now it’s our end-all, be-all. My wife is at home with our two boys right now, one of whom is on the autism spectrum. And what is her work valued at?

DUBNER: I’m guessing $0.

YANG: Yeah, about $0. And I know that she’s working harder than I am and the work she is doing is more important.

DUBNER: So your wife doesn’t really factor into G.D.P. In fact, she’s probably kind of a drain on it really, right? Because she could be out there where there’s opportunity cost of her not working.

YANG: She might be able to be a management consultant somewhere and that would be a much more valuable use of her—

DUBNER: So management consultants and the finance industry, financial services, banking, real estate. You argue that many of the most remunerative occupations in America are rent-seeking activities. Rent-seeking as economists use it to describe, basically, extracting value from transactions without really adding value. And you argue that many of the most beneficial-for-society jobs — teaching, nurturing, caring, creating, etc. — are the least remunerative jobs. How can you rail against that disparity while also wanting to bask in the benefits of the capitalism that set up those incentives?

YANG: Capitalism is a wonderful, magical, powerful thing. But it optimizes for capital efficiency and capital gains above all else, really. And that worked well for a long time, because in order for capital efficiency, workers needed to benefit, the consumer economy needed to benefit, the middle class needed to benefit. It’s like Henry Ford and his, “How can my workers buy my car?” But we’re now at a point where Ford does not need those humans to build that car and they can have markets all over the place and don’t really care what’s going on in their own backyard.

There are just these big changes afoot, and the question is how we’re going to manage them as a country. And that’s what I’m trying to answer. That’s why I’m running for president.

* * *

Until recently, Andrew Yang was running Venture for America, a non-profit that tries to persuade young, would-be Wall Streeters to launch startups in places like Cleveland, Baltimore, Detroit, and St. Louis. In 2014, he published a book about this effort; it was called Smart People Should Build Things. While the book pointed out the need for a dramatic overhaul of the American economy, it was for the most part an optimistic book. Last year, Yang published another book, called The War on Normal People, and it is not remotely optimistic. He argues that the American economy has failed most Americans, and that the American political class has failed them again by refusing to focus on the underlying fault lines in the economy.

This collapse in Andrew Yang’s optimism is what led him to run for President. He’s already been to Iowa and New Hampshire several times but, let’s be honest: he’s a very long shot in what’s expected to be a very crowded field. Let’s use Twitter followers as a proxy for the viability of some other possible Democratic candidates. Joe Biden has 3 million followers; Cory Booker, 4 million; Elizabeth Warren, 4.7 million; Bernie Sanders, 9 million. Mike Bloomberg has 2 million Twitter followers and over 40 billion dollars. Andrew Yang, meanwhile, has raised about $600,000, and has roughly 27,000 Twitter followers. But he also has ideas that he thinks will compensate. There’s one idea in particular that he’s banking on.

YANG: My first big policy is the freedom dividend, a policy where every American adult between the ages of 18 and 64 gets $1,000 a month, free and clear, no questions asked.

DUBNER: So the freedom dividend is your phrase for what most of us know as a universal basic income, yes?

YANG: It’s a rebrand of “universal basic income” because it tests much better with Americans with the word “freedom” in it.

DUBNER: Right, as nomenclature. The idea is the same.

YANG: So “universal basic income” tests great with about half the country. And then the other half of the country do not like it.

DUBNER: Because…

YANG: Because there’s—

DUBNER: It’s got welfare connotations?

YANG: Something along those lines. We tested a bunch of names and then when you had the word “freedom” in it, then all of a sudden testing shot up among self-identified conservatives. They hated “universal basic income,” hated “prosperity dividend,” all of a sudden “freedom dividend” is like “ding ding ding!”

DUBNER: What about progressives, liberals, Democrats?

YANG: Progressives, liberals, Democrats liked it no matter what the name was.

DUBNER: What were some of the other names that didn’t work?

YANG: “Citizens’ dividend,” “future dividend,” “prosperity dividend.” We had a lot of dividends.

DUBNER: I think of a dividend as a payout on an investment. What does it mean in this case?

YANG: Well, it’s a payout to ownership and we are the owners and shareholders of this, the most wealthy and advanced society in the history of the world. So this is a dividend for us. And there’s nothing stopping a majority of shareholders, a majority of citizens, from voting themselves a dividend. It’s been law in Alaska and it’s wildly popular in a deeply conservative state, where a Republican governor said, “Hey, who would you rather get the oil money: the government, who’s just going to screw it up, or you, the people of Alaska?” And the people of Alaska now love it, wildly popular, has created thousands of jobs, has improved children’s health and nutrition, has lowered income inequality, and it’s untouchable through many different regimes.

DUBNER: The Alaska dividend comes from oil revenues from the state, whereas the freedom dividend that would go to every person in the U.S. would be funded how?

YANG: So the headline cost of this is $2.4 trillion, which sounds like an awful lot. For reference, the economy is $19 trillion, up $4 trillion in the last 10 years. And the federal budget is $4 trillion. So $2.4 trillion seems like an awfully big slug of money. But if you break it down, the first big thing is to implement a value-added tax, which would harvest the gains from artificial intelligence and big data from the big tech companies that are going to benefit from it the most.

So we have to look at what’s happening big-picture, where who are going to be the winners from A.I. and big data and self-driving cars and trucks? It’s going to be the trillion-dollar tech companies. Amazon, Apple, Google. So the big trap we’re in right now is that as these technologies take off, the public will see very little in the way of new tax gains from it. Because if you look at these big tech companies — Amazon’s trick is to say, “Didn’t make any money this quarter, no taxes necessary.” Google’s trick is to say, “It all went through Ireland, nothing to see here.” Even as these companies and the new technologies soak up more and more value and more and more work, the public is going to go into increasing distress.

So what we need to do is we need to join every other industrialized country in the world and pass a value-added tax which would give the public a slice, a sliver of every Amazon transaction, every Google search. And because our economy is so vast now at $19 trillion, a value-added tax at even half the European level would generate about $800 billion in value.

Now, the second source of money is that right now we spend almost $800 billion on welfare programs. And many people are receiving more than $1,000 in current benefits. So, we’re going to leave all the programs alone. But if you think $1,000 cash would be better than what you’re currently receiving, then you can opt in and your current benefits disappear. So that reduces the cost of the freedom dividend by between $500 and $600 billion.

The great parts are the third and fourth part. So if you put $1,000 a month into the hands of American adults who — right now, 57 percent of Americans can’t pay an unexpected $500 bill — they’re going to spend that $1,000 in their community on car repairs, tutoring for their kids, the occasional night out. It’s going to go directly into the consumer economy. If you grow the consumer economy by 12 percent, we get $500 billion in new tax revenue.

And then the last $500 billion or so we get through a combination of cost savings on incarceration, homelessness services, health care. Because right now we’re spending about $1 trillion on people showing up in emergency rooms and hitting our institutions. So we have to do what good companies do, which is invest in our people.

DUBNER: So what persuades you that that number, $2.4 trillion, could even be close to justified through the menu of savings that you just described? I guess more broadly, why should someone believe that this Democratic-inspired version of higher taxes — or new taxes, with a V.A.T. — and more income redistribution, why should someone believe that any more than Democrats disbelieve the Republicans’ idea of lower taxes and trickle-down economics?

YANG: Oh man. I mean, if you put $1,000 into the hands of a struggling American, it’s going to make a much bigger difference not just to that person but it’s also going to go back into the economy. If you give a wealthy person $1,000 they wouldn’t even notice. You could just slap it into their account and it would be a non-event. Everyone knows that putting money into the hands of people that would actually use it is going to be much more effective at strengthening our economy and society.

DUBNER: One easy argument against a U.B.I. is that if you give everyone a dividend like you’re proposing, $1,000 a month per person, all that new money in the economy will cause the kind of inflation that will render that $1,000 much less powerful. What’s your argument against that?

YANG: Yeah, so I looked into the causes of inflation that are making Americans miserable right now, and they are not in consumer goods like media or clothing or electronics.

DUBNER: Those are all still getting much cheaper.

YANG: Yeah, and a lot of that is being made more efficient by technology and supply chains and everything else. The three things that are making Americans miserable in terms of inflation are housing, education, and health care. And each of those is being driven by something other than purchasing power.

Housing is being driven by the fact in some markets people feel like they need to live in let’s say New York or Seattle or San Francisco to be able to access certain opportunities and then there’s not much flexibility in terms of their ability to commute like a long distance. Education, it’s because college has very sadly gotten two-and-a-half times more expensive even though it has not gotten two-and-a-half times better. And then the third is health care, which is dysfunctional because of a broken set of incentives and the fact that individuals aren’t really paying in a marketplace.

So if you put $1,000 into the hands of Americans, it’s actually going to help them manage those expenses much better. But it’s not going to cause prices to skyrocket, because you can’t have every vendor colluding with every other vendor to raise prices. And there’s still going to be price sensitivity among every consumer and competition between firms.

AUTOR: I think people should have a guaranteed minimum income.

That, again, is the M.I.T. economist David Autor.

AUTOR: Essentially, our system of income distribution is primarily based on the scarcity of labor, right, the most valuable asset you own is your human capital. And if all of a sudden, there was a machine that could do exactly what you did it wouldn’t be clear what skills would you sell to the market.

The idea of a universal basic income has been around for a long time, and you might be surprised by the political diversity of its supporters. In the 18th century, founding father Thomas Paine argued for a universal payout, representing our collective share of America’s natural resources. In the 20th century, the economist Milton Friedman pushed for a different version, called a negative income tax. Then and now, there is a common objection:

Evelyn FORGET: If you give people money for nothing, why won’t they just quit their jobs?

The economist Evelyn Forget studied the effects of a small Canadian experiment that paid out a universal income. Her finding?

FORGET: The finding was that primary earners really don’t reduce the number of hours they work very much when you offer a guaranteed annual income.

YANG: A neuroscientist in Seattle said something to me that really stuck with me. He said, “The enemy of universal basic income is the human mind.” And what he meant by that is that people are programmed for resource scarcity. They think, “Hey, there is not enough to go around. If you get it, I don’t get it. And then if we all get it, it’s somehow going to harm us.” And that’s what we have to overcome. We have to overcome this knee-jerk sense of scarcity that is baked into, in many ways, the way we’re trained to perceive value in money.

So that’s big policy No. 1.

Alright, and what’s big policy No. 2 for would-be President Yang?

YANG: No. 2 is digital social credits.

Which are what?

YANG: Digital social credits are a new way to reward behaviors that we need more of in society. So right now, the monetary market does not recognize things that we know are crucial to humanity, like caregiving and raising children, volunteering in the community, arts and creativity, journalism, environmental sustainability. We’re getting less and less of those things because the market does not care about them. What I’m proposing is we create a new currency that then maps to various activities that we want to see more of.

DUBNER: Give me a for instance of how it would work. Let’s pretend that I am a 58-year-old laid-off carpenter. Maybe you, President Yang, are already giving me a freedom dividend, which I appreciate. So talk to me about what digital social credits would do for me and how it would actually work.

YANG: Right. So you get a message on your phone saying, “Hey, a neighbor has had a shelf break and they could use some help repairing it.” And then you click on your phone and say, “Yeah, I’ll do that.” Then you drive over, repair the shelf, and then the person thanks you, gives you a hug. Takes a picture of it. And then you then get this digital social credit. Let’s say call it 300 points. So you have these 300 points and you’re like, “Okay that’s good.”

And then you get another ping, it’s saying, “Hey, your neighbor needs a ride and they don’t have a vehicle,” and you do. So you give them a ride and then you get some more points and then at the end of the week you say, “You know what, if I go to Cabela’s, I can trade those points for hunting gear or camping gear. I could use it to go to the local ballgame.”

DUBNER: Okay. And then the vendors who are giving their goods or services to you for those social credits, what did they do with the social credits?

YANG: They can take the social credits and go to the government and then the government can exchange it for money.

DUBNER: And what’s funding the money for the social credits from the vendors?

YANG: So, the U.S. government would be backing it, or foundations or various companies, because if you are a company you respond to this. I mean you’d enjoy the heck out of it and it would drive business to your establishments. But the great thing about this is you could induce hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of social activity at a small fraction of the cost. Because right now if I have 100,000 American Express points, how much does that cost American Express?

DUBNER: A thousand dollars maybe?

YANG: Zero, because I haven’t done anything with it yet. Before I redeem it, it costs them nothing, but I love my points. I look at them. They seem to have value. I could trade them in whenever I want. What you’d see is you’d end up building up a parallel economy around people doing things for each other. This is based on a practice called time banking that’s in effect in hundreds of communities around the country.

DUBNER: Time banking is one of these ideas that’s been around for a while now, and it’s met with some success in some places, but it’s certainly never been scaled up the way that you’re talking about. What makes you think that it’s attractive enough for enough people to want to use it and that it is ultimately scalable?

YANG: Time banking holds that everyone’s time has intrinsic value and that if I do something for you for an hour, I then get a time credit that I can then give to someone else to do something for me for an hour. And everyone can do something — watch your kids or walk your dog or move some trash or whatever the task happens to be.

So the obstacle to more widespread adoption of time banking has been the administration, because you need a person in each community who is tabulating and keeping track of transactions. And now with technology—

DUBNER: This sounds like a job for the blockchain.

YANG: Yes, you could have a public ledger on the blockchain. You could make this happen much, much more easily, much more cost-effectively. And there are people I’m happy to say who were working on technical solutions for this.

People like this:

Anitha BEBERG: My name is Anitha Beberg and I am the C.E.O. of Seva Exchange Corporation, which is an A.I. and blockchain startup that’s reinventing volunteerism using time banking.

The chairman of Seva is Edgar Cahn, who helped launch the modern concept of time banking and wrote a book about it, called No More Throw-Away People.

BEBERG: He came up with this in 1980, when he was actually given a diagnosis after having a heart attack at 46. And he was only given two years to live and maybe two hours a day to do anything. So what he was thinking about was, Hmm, what can I do in this world to still be useful? So he came up with the idea of time banking, where you give an hour of your time within a community and you’ll receive a credit of that hour, redeemable for something you need. So it’s a give-and-take system rather than a one-way volunteering.

Edgar Cahn obviously lived on, and so has time banking. It exists in a few dozen countries, usually at quite small scale; one of the larger exchanges, similar to what Andrew Yang is proposing, is a British organization called Tempo. It found that nearly 60 percent of its participants had rarely or never volunteered before. Beberg’s time-banking group, meanwhile, Seva Exchange Corporation…

BEBERG: Seva actually means volunteer in Sanskrit or service, to serve.

The Seva app is a spinoff of Timebanks.org.

BEBERG: What we’re doing is trying to create the largest volunteer exchange network.

How would it work?

BEBERG: We offer powerful motivators to retain volunteers.

Motivators like gamification.

BEBERG: It’s a lot more exciting to run up a score and earn badges especially if you’re doing good.

Also: skills-matching.

BEBERG: Whatever you’re passionate about or you’re highly skilled at and willing to offer, you get matched to the critical needs of either an organization or a person.

And rewards, via the blockchain.

BEBERG: Our digital social credits is called Seva coins. And they will be redeemable for more time. Or you can donate them. We’re also working with colleges for loan forgiveness and micro-scholarships for students.

Beberg and Seva have gotten some pushback from religious institutions.

BEBERG: They’ve said, “Oh, we volunteer for the sake of volunteering.” And I said, “That’s wonderful. The more people like that, the better, because now they can just donate those to an institution in need or give it back to the church for hours.” So every hour you give, another hour can go to someone else in need.

Those are the micro components of how Seva’s digital social credits would work. But it’s the macro view that makes this idea particularly attractive to a would-be politician like Andrew Yang.

BEBERG: We’re redefining work. So there are some forms of work that money will not easily pay for building strong families, revitalizing neighborhoods, making democracy work, advancing social justice. Time credits were specifically designed to reward, recognize, and honor that work that most people never valued before or felt valued for.

Andrew Yang believes that injecting all that undervalued work into the “real economy,” would solve a couple problems at once: it would give people access to more of the goods and services they need and can’t afford; and it’d boost morale by revaluing skills that the market no longer values.

YANG: Yeah, that’s right.

DUBNER: I don’t mean to be a skeptic or a cynic, but what makes you think that the best overseer of a big scaled-up time banking or digital social currency is the government itself?

YANG: I don’t think so. I mean one thing I’ll say, to quote my friend Andy Stern: the government is terrible at most things but it is excellent at sending large numbers of checks to large numbers of people promptly and reliably. The government would not be administering this at all. The best the government would be doing would be allocating social credits to various communities, who could then have the credits flow through nonprofits and NGOs and organizations that are closer to the ground that could administer it more effectively.

DUBNER: But ultimately, when all those vendors want to take in their DSCs, their digital social currency coins, whatever, and cash them in for real cash, it’s the government they’re coming to, it’s the Treasury they’re coming to, yes?

YANG: Yeah, yeah. So there is a government budget allocation. But the government budget allocation would be essentially proportional to population and then each community would be doing different things with it. Because something that would be effective in Mississippi would not be necessary in Montana or Missouri.

So digital social credits and a universal basic income, these are Andrew Yang’s two most prominent proposals in his Presidential campaign. There are, of course, many others, most of which align with a standard Democratic platform. You can see them all at Yang2020.com. I’d asked him his most outlandish position.

YANG: We should have a psychologist in the White House that’s looking in on the mental health of the executive branch, because it doesn’t make any sense to me to have that much power and responsibility without some sort of mental-health professional monitoring.

DUBNER: Did you have this idea before the current presidency?

YANG: I always thought so. I mean, my brother’s a psychology professor. I think it would also help destigmatize mental-health issues and anxiety and depression around the country, and just say, “Look, we all have struggles.” That includes people at the top of the government.

Another thing I think is really important is that right now we expect people to be sort of martyrs if they enter into government service, and then they turn around and become lobbyists to make a lot of money. We need to take advantage of the fact that the government can pay much, much more, and then just require people to not go back to industry afterwards. Because if you’re a human being and your stint is going to end in two or three years, you don’t want to be too harsh on the companies that could end up paying you and giving you lots of money later.

DUBNER: So you’re arguing for a $4 million salary for the U.S. president.

YANG: Yeah, because it’s true for presidents too. I mean, if you’re going to get paid a quarter of a million by some company after you leave office just to show up and schmooze and give a speech, then human nature is like, “Maybe I shouldn’t be too harsh on this company.” And I’ll say, this raise can go into effect for the president after me. I do not give a shit how much I get paid. But the president after me should get paid enough so that we know that they’re just looking out for us and not going to just speech it up afterwards.

DUBNER: You happen to be the Democratic-entrepreneur-as-would-be-President who happens to be running after the successful campaign of a Republican-entrepreneur-as-President who a lot of people agree, his entrepreneurship and CEO-ship have not contributed to a stable presidency or to a business-like presidency, etc. Does that not strike you as potentially terrible timing?

YANG: Well, the reason why Donald Trump in my mind won — aside from the fact that we’ve blasted away all these manufacturing jobs — is that many Americans are desperate for some kind of change agent. And if you look at it, there has been a thirst for that not just with Donald Trump but with Bernie Sanders’s outsized success, even to some extent with Barack Obama winning in ‘08, where the citizens of the United States have been casting about for some kind of change because they know that our government is failing us.

Donald Trump is a terrible president because he’s a terrible president. He’s not necessarily a terrible president because he was not steeped in our government for decades. And genuine entrepreneurs like myself regard Donald Trump as a bullshit marketing charlatan. So he gives us all a bad name. And the goal is to show what real builders and entrepreneurs would do to solve some problems.

DUBNER: If you were a bookmaker, what are the odds that you’re laying off for Andrew Yang winning the presidency in 2020?

YANG: I think the latest odds I saw were like 200-to-1.

DUBNER: Let’s pretend for just a second that you don’t win the presidency. But that you do impress a lot of people with your energy and ideas and vision. And you are invited to run as V.P. on the Democratic ticket.

YANG: One of the fun things about running for president is you spend time with other candidates on the trail. I have some ideas, but my vision is that there is a set of patriots that are all heading to D.C. to try and save this country. I plan to be in that group. And if it’s as president, fantastic, if it’s as vice president, also fantastic.

I just want to solve problems, man. I don’t really care about the seating chart. And someone said to me, “Hey, what if Joe Biden takes all your ideas?” I would say that’s fan-freaking-tastic. I’m not some freaking crazy person who has been measuring the drapes since I was 16 or any of that jazz. I just want to keep this country together for your kids and mine.

* * *

Freakonomics Radio is produced by Stitcher and Dubner Productions. This episode was produced by Harry Huggins. Our staff also includes Alison Craiglow, Greg Rippin, Alvin Melathe, and Zack Lapinski. Our theme song is “Mr. Fortune,” by the Hitchhikers; all the other music was composed by Luis Guerra. You can subscribe to Freakonomics Radio on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Here’s where you can learn more about the people and ideas in this episode:

SOURCES

Anitha Beberg, c.e.o. of Seva Exchange.

Evelyn Forget, economist at the University of Manitoba.

Andrew Yang, entrepreneur and Democratic candidate for president.

RESOURCES

“Labor 2030: The Collision of Demographics, Automation and Inequality,” Karen Harris, Austin Kimson and Andrew Schwedel, Bain & Company (February 2018).

No More Throw-Away People by Edgar Cahn (Essential Books 2004).

Smart People Should Build Things by Andrew Yang (HarperBusiness 2014).

The War on Normal People by Andrew Yang (Hachette Books 2018).

The post Why Is This Man Running for President? (Ep. 362) appeared first on Freakonomics.

from Dental Care Tips http://freakonomics.com/podcast/andrew-yang/

0 notes

eurekakinginc · 7 years ago

Photo

"The 10 Years Cycle"- Detail: *This post is Inspired by Ray Kurzweil and his Law of Accelerating Returns. (my english is not perfect)I've seen a patern within technosocial paradigms (I mean, main technologies with the ability to change society and, at the same time, used by almost every person) since the Web... There're three phases of adoption and perfection of the tech:3-4 Years of Early Adoption (A1): the product isn't good and it's very expensive, only a few milions buy it.4-5 Years of Mass Adoption (A2): the product gets good enough to mainstream adoption, it becomes cheaper and better so a vast majority buys it.2 Years of Technological Plateau (A3): there are no more major innovations and the product is almost perfect and impossible to improve. Almost everybody uses it and the society as a whole is absolutely affected by it.Yes, I'm talking about the famous S curve... First, I thought "why 10 years if technology is exponential?" So maybe I'm wrong about further predictions but, what if it's not about the time but about the tech itself? I mean, the next tech is exponetially better even if the curve lasts the same amount of time... I hope I'm wrong, but that's just my intuition...Lets begin, I'll need your help to know if I'm wrong or right so, if you can remember how things were back in time, please, help me to correct and improve this post :) (Note, this is for developed countries, sadly, other humans suffer a tech delay because of X causes...)THE WEB:A1 1996-2001: Internet becomes more and more popular but just a few millions use it and connections are very rudimental, limited by time and bandwitch etc.A2 2001-2005: Connections get fast, cheaper and web 2.0 makes everything better. Google, Facebook, Youtube become more popular and full of new services. More than 70% of people use internet.A3 2005-2007: Adoption stabilizes around 75%, a lot of new services have born and been perfected.Note: I know it's very unfair to consider Web has reached tech limits by 2007 but in my mind it makes sense xDTHE SMARTPHONE:A1 2007-2011: I guess everybody remember first iPhone's keynote, I don't like Apple but they did it very well, puting BB like a nice try but not enough for what we could do with this tech.A2 2011-2015: this tech gets better, with better screens, cameras, sensors, sizes, uses etc.A3 2015-2017: we all know smartphones have reached tech limits, iPhoneX is the proof, after a few years of no major improvements we've started dreaming about the next big thing...MIXED REALITY:A1 2016-2020: I know Oculus and Google started with AR and VR back in 2010-2011 but that was a development phase, we had to wait for 2016 for a consumer product for VR and still we're waiting for a decent AR one, maybe Magic Leap will do something about this by the next year. Hololens consumer version came this year, even if devs had it in 2016. There are more MR products from MS, HTC etc., of course.A2 2020-2025: I think VR resolution and GPU power will become cheaper enough to allow a very good experience and even displace monitors and other productivity screens. At least if Moore's Law keeps alive in other way (optical-3D-Cloud-5G... computing). This video seems very possible to me by this time... Plus, battery tech could have evolved to next gen etc. I don't want to do the math about FLOPS, miniaturization etc., I don't like numbers sorry xDA3 2025-2027: it's very likely that everybody wears glasses by this time, I know it seems absurd (and very hipster) but if could asked some guy by the 2000s that everybody will look at tiny screens from their pockets while walking on the street and in the metro, in just 10 years, you know what I mean... Damn, and even pay things with you fingerprint! A lot of social, consumer and work activity (if jobs still exist) will take place in VR/AR places. But, we need something more isn't it? We are humans.NEURAL LINK:A1 2027-2030: this is starting to sound very crazy but consider this tech already exists. Today we can connect the human brain to computers and even other brains, its very rudimental but promising enough to induce Elon Musk to create "Neuralink" a company hoping to connect the human brain to the cloud/internet/other people with neural implants by 2027 (that's literally the goal). Sorry guys, but I can't imagine other paradigm before this one, I feel it's the next logical step and, Moore's Law by our side, it's congruent.A2 2030-2035: maybe thanks to some short of nanotech, with or without surjery, almost everybody will get his/her neuralink. Why? Isn't dangerous? Can I get a virus and die? Well, I repeat what I said before, now we can't imagine allowing ourselves to do this kind of crazy things, but time goes on and minds change, people will accept it. There will be dangers, of course, but it will worth the risk: what about becoming Einstein? what about Matrix-like VR? what about...A3 2035-2037: everybody is neuro-connected and max bandwitch achieved.MERGING WITH AI: Sorry, my human mind is too much limited to even imagine what this could mean.Thanks for reading my shitpost and I hope you share your thoughts with me :D If this post can be corrected and improved, please tell me!. Title by: INTP-02 Posted By: www.eurekaking.com

#future #prediction #technology #trending #breaking #science #scientist #engineer

0 notes

csenews · 8 years ago

Text

WEEKLY NEWS WRAP-UP NEWS OF NOTE FROM AROUND THE STATE AND 73RD DISTRICT

Compliments of Rep. Jimmy Eldridge

WEEKLY NEWS WRAP-UP

NEWS OF NOTE FROM AROUND THE STATE AND 73RD DISTRICT

February 17, 2017

Legislature Moves Forward With Confirmation Of University Governing Boards

Appointments will aid in state meeting Drive to 55 challenge

This week in Nashville, the legislature moved forward with the confirmation of 48 appointments to Tennessee’s new university governing boards, giving the higher education institutions involved increased autonomy to support student success as the state continues its Drive to 55 initiative: the goal of getting 55 percent of Tennesseans equipped with a college degree or certificate by the year 2025 to meet the demands of the 21st Century job market.

The 48 appointments include the governing boards of Austin Peay State University, East Tennessee State University, Middle Tennessee State University, Tennessee State University, Tennessee Technological University, and the University of Memphis. The boards are the result of the Focus On College And University Success (FOCUS) Act, which was passed by the General Assembly in 2016.

Prior to the passage of the FOCUS Act, many education experts raised questions as to whether the higher education structure in place at that point was organized appropriately to meet today’s changing education environment – including a 10 percent increase in overall first-time freshman enrollment at Tennessee universities and a nearly 25 percent increase in first-time freshman enrollment at state community colleges last year alone. With 46 institutions under its belt to look after, proponents agreed it was difficult for the Board of Regents to meet all of the diverse challenges of today’s educational system.

With the FOCUS Act, the massive 46 institution conglomerate under the Board of Regents was shifted and local governing boards were created, allowing community colleges the ability to focus at a system level, while giving the state’s four-year universities the benefit of greater overall autonomy and decision-making.

Now that they are appointed, the new boards will have the authority to appoint campus presidents, manage university budgets and set tuition, and guide other operational tasks of the universities they oversee.

Tennessee Treasury Returns Record Amount Of Unclaimed Property To Tennesseans In 2016 $789.2 million still waiting to be claimed across state

The Tennessee Treasury Department returned a record amount of unclaimed property in 2016 to Tennesseans across the state, marking a 28% increase over the prior year. In total, 41,827 claims were processed in 2016, totaling more than $34 million with an average claim amount of $817.

Unclaimed property is money that has been turned over to the state by businesses and organizations that cannot locate their original owners. Each year, millions of missing dollars are returned with the assistance of the Tennessee Treasury Department helping get that money back to original owners. And, while $34 million was returned during 2016, there is currently $789.2 million of money and property still waiting to be claimed.

Types of unclaimed funds held by the Treasury include stocks, bonds, gift certificates, checks, unclaimed wages, refunds from utility and other companies, life insurance annuities, among others. In Tennessee, unclaimed property does not include real estate or physical items.

The Treasury Department credits the large increase in returned property in 2016 to the Department’s website: ClaimItTn.gov. This searchable online database contains all unclaimed property in Tennessee dating back to the beginning of the program. You can visit www.ClaimItTn.gov to search for your name, and can file your claim through the website. The Department recommends searching for common misspellings of your name and addresses as well.

There is no expiration date for unclaimed property in Tennessee and it is held by the state until claimed by its rightful owner.

These unclaimed property services are offered by the Treasury Department free of charge and no fees are associated with processing a claim. Once a claim is received, the Treasury verifies the funds are going to the correct person, with many claims being returned within two weeks of being submitted.

For those without internet access, the Unclaimed Property Division can be contacted by phone at (615) 741-6499.

Tennessee Names First Female State Architect

Earlier this week, the State Building Commission voted unanimously to appoint Ann McGauran as Tennessee State Architect. With the appointment, McGauran becomes the first woman to serve the state in this capacity since the position was first created in 1955.

McGauran is a senior architect with more than 25 years of architectural and project management experience. Since 2014, she has worked at the Tennessee Department of General Services, most recently serving as the Executive Director of Business Operations. McGauran has substantial experience as an architect in the private sector, including with Vanderbilt Medical Center, where she worked as a project manager and in other capacities.

The State Architect and staff serve as support for the functions of the State Building Commission and also provide oversight for all capital projects and real estate transactions that are under authority of the State Building Commission.

The motion to appoint McGauran as State Architect was made by House Speaker Beth Harwell, who currently serves as the first female Speaker of the House in Tennessee history.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

HASLAM ANNOUNCES BOB ROLFE AS ECD COMMISSIONER Rolfe has 33 years of experience in business and investment banking in Tennessee

NASHVILLE – Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam today announced Nashville business executive Bob Rolfe as commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development (ECD). An innovative business leader, Rolfe, 56, has more than three decades of experience in business and investment banking in Tennessee.

“Bob Rolfe has spent his career growing companies and creating jobs, and he will bring incredible experience and energy to our work of making Tennessee the No. 1 location in the Southeast for high quality jobs and ensuring that success is felt throughout the state,” Haslam said. “Bringing someone of Bob’s caliber to this position says a lot about the momentum we have right now in Tennessee, and I know that will continue to flourish under his leadership.”

Rolfe comes to the administration from Medical Reimbursements of America (MRA), a 250-employee Franklin company that provides specialty reimbursement solutions for more than 500 hospitals and health systems across the country. As chairman and CEO, he led the development and rollout of the first technology-based solution dedicated exclusively to the resolution of complex accident claims.

In 2011, Rolfe co-founded West End Holdings, a Nashville-based private equity partnership that acquires and manages underperforming companies, transforming their operating and financial performance. He spent the first 18 years of his career as an investment banker at J.C. Bradford and Co.

“As a lifelong Tennessean, it is an honor to have the opportunity to serve our governor and the citizens of our great state,” Rolfe said. “After spending many years working in the business community, I look forward to applying my energy and efforts toward recruiting additional capital investment and jobs across the state of Tennessee.”

A native of Nashville, Rolfe received his executive MBA from the Owen Graduate School of Management at Vanderbilt and his bachelor’s degree from the University of Alabama. An active member of the Nashville community, he currently serves on the advisory board of Monroe Carell Jr. Children’s Hospital at Vanderbilt.

He and his wife, Kathy, live in Nashville and have three adult children, Robert, Carly and Leslie. They are members of First Presbyterian Church, where Rolfe has served as an elder for more than 20 years.

Rolfe joins the administration on March 1. He replaces Randy Boyd who left ECD earlier this month to return to the private sector.

For immediate release:

Nearly 26,000 Tennessee high school seniors participate in first ACT Retake Day;

More than 1,300 new students now able to access up to $21 million in HOPE Scholarship funds

NASHVILLE—Education Commissioner Candice McQueen announced today that 25,977 students in the state’s high school class of 2017 participated in the department’s first ACT Senior Retake Day last fall. Of those, nearly 40 percent increased their overall score, and 1,331 seniors raised their composite above a 21—creating access to HOPE Scholarship funds that provide up to $16,000 to help students pay for college. Tennessee is the first state to offer the retake opportunity on a statewide scale.

There were several highlights in the results. In addition to the students who raised their overall composite, thousands of students raised individual subject test scores, which will help them be more competitive at institutions that allow for students to “superscore,” where they take the highest individual subscores across multiple ACT tests. The ACT retake also resulted in more students hitting the ACT college-readiness benchmarks in all four subjects. In Knox County Schools, for example, 25 percent of students who retook the ACT hit all four benchmarks during their junior year. The retake resulted in 32.1 percent of these students hitting all four benchmarks. Statewide, the percentage of retake students in the class of 2017 who met all four benchmarks increased from 21.5 percent to 26.8 percent.

Additionally, over a third of school districts increased their districtwide ACT average, with the best gains in Maryville City, which increased its composite average by a full point.

“Our goal is to open more doors for students after high school, and these results are one more step toward that vision,” McQueen said. “We want students to graduate from high school with the ability to access whatever path they want to explore, and we know too often low ACT scores create a barrier. This retake option is not just strengthening our students’ future opportunities, but it is strengthening our state’s future, as well.”

October 2016 was the first time Tennessee offered public high school seniors the chance to retake the ACT for free. The department proposed this option since its research shows students have a high likelihood of increasing their score when they take the college entrance exam a second time. Higher composite scores not only provide access to state support, but they also make a student more competitive for entry into higher education institutions and for institutional and private scholarships. They also allow students to enroll directly into credit-bearing coursework instead of remedial classes. Gov. Haslam’s FY18 budget, released last month, proposed to continue funding the ACT Senior Retake option.

Today’s results also point to areas where the state can target future efforts to maximize this investment. For example, the department is encouraging districts to focus on ensuring that the students whom its research indicates will most benefit from a retake—typically those who were lower-performing—take advantage of this free opportunity. A review of the data show that students who generally earned higher composite scores participated in the retake day last fall, while those who scored below a 17 were far less likely to do so. However, those students scoring in that lower range increased their composite score the most on average.

Tennessee Tourism News

View in your browser.

Memphis' New Show "Sun Records" Debuts on CMT

There’s more exciting news about Tennessee’s continued rise as the global music destination of choice. CMT is launching a new TV series that will tell the story of Memphis’ Sun Studios. The red-blooded, born-from-the-blues series Sun Records premieres Thursday, Feb. 23, at 10 p.m. ET/PT and joins Nashville to complete CMT's new Thursday line-up. Set in Memphis, Sun Records tells the story of nothing less than the birth of rock ‘n’ roll. Guided by Sam Phillips, young musicians like Johnny Cash, Elvis Presley, Carl Perkins and Jerry Lee Lewis combined the styles of country music with the 1950s R&B sound created by artists like Muddy Waters, B.B. King, Fats Domino and Ike Turner and changed the course of music forever. The series chronicles these young artists’ often jarring and sudden meteoric rise to fame in the face of sweeping political change. [ Continue Reading... ]

Kimberly Leonard Promoted to TDTD Director of Sales

Kimberly Leonard, most recently part of the TDTD team as PR media manager, has been promoted to director of sales. In this role, Kimberly will oversee tourism’s sales activities, including managing details for TDTD’s participation in sales trade shows including ABA, NTA, IPW, and more, working with all sales partners to manage Tennessee’s group and leisure sales efforts.

Mark Your Calendars for Tourism Opportunities

The Tourism Industry is made up of forward-thinking professionals, which means we are all planning ahead and seeing to it that important events, conferences and workshops are part of our annual schedules. Don’t miss out on key events. Take a look at this list, see which ones are a good fit for your needs and mark your calendars accordingly. As a reminder, TDTD regularly updates the industry calendar. So keep checking back for updates.

Heartland Travel Showcase March 3-5, 2017 Pigeon Forge, TN TN Association of Museums Conf. March 15-17, 2017 Pigeon Forge, TN STS Spring Symposium March 27-29, 2017 Knoxville, TN TDTD Sales Sampler April 4-6, 2017 Multiple Markets Spring Training TnHTA CVB/DMO Professional Development Conf. April 19-20, 2017 Manchester/Coffee County Conference Center West TN Travel Writer FAM April 18-23, 2017 Memphis and Surrounding Region

Smoky Mountain Travel Writer FAM May 8-13, 2017 Sevier, Blount and Cocke Counties STS Marketing College May 14-19, 2017 University of North Georgia Governor’s Conference on Tourism Oct. 4-6, 2017 Gatlinburg, TN Sunbelt Agricultural Expo Oct. 17-19, 2017 Moultrie, GA Tennessee is the Spotlight State Rural Tourism Conference Oct. 23-25, 2017 Pickwick Landing State Park TN/AL/MS Governor’s Conference on Economic and Community Dev. Oct. 26-27, 2017 Gatlinburg, TN

0 notes

wallpaperpainter · 4 years ago

Text

The Five Common Stereotypes When It Comes To Ubuntu Windows Remote Desktop | ubuntu windows remote desktop

Connect To Windows 10 From Ubuntu Via Remote Desktop – Liberian Geek – ubuntu windows remote desktop | ubuntu windows remote desktop

How To Configure Remote Access To Your Ubuntu Desktop – Page 10 .. | ubuntu windows remote desktop

Once up, alike admitting Linux Mint 20’s brand-spanking new, I begin I had 39 updates to make. This included a atom update, which meant I had to reboot the system.

How to Use Remote Desktop Protocol to Connect to Ubuntu VMs – ubuntu windows remote desktop | ubuntu windows remote desktop

The Ubuntu Snap Abundance is additionally disabled. Without it, you can’t install Snap applications. You can reinstall it — I acclaim you do — with the afterward commands:

Remote Desktop Connection from Windows 10/10 to Ubuntu 10 | ubuntu windows remote desktop

sudo rm /etc/apt/preferences.d/nosnap.prefapt updateapt install snapd

Ubuntu Remote Desktop – 10.10 Bionic Beaver Linux – LinuxConfig | ubuntu windows remote desktop

Despite the Snap nuisance, Mint is both powerful, full-featured, and accessible to use — alike if you’ve never larboard Windows before.