No, I was stating their experience in the older technologies, can directly apply to newer technologies, due to cyclical nature of technology. The problem is the industry thinks the old guys haven't been keeping up with the trends, while for the most part the newest and hottest trends are just old hat.
Actually it does. If there wasn't a problem, We should expect to see participation at around the same percentages as the population of the area.
My experience is, if a person feels unwanted or singled they will leave the job and/or change careers. And there is a lot of aspects of the "Tech" Culture which is detrimental to the outsider.
Yes there is, and diversity can help solve problems in software engineering. When we approach a problem we will often relate it to real world example, based on our interests and experiences. Having grown up on a farm, having to do repetitive tasks manually, It gives me insights on how to deal with details and optimization of doing the same thing over and over, to prevent yourself from tiring out, or hurting yourself. Also I have an interest in Jazz music and learned how to play Jazz. This helped me learn how to improvise and predict future needs. Now other people from other walks of life will have different approaches,ideas and methods they has attributed to their survival and is in part of them, these life aspects reflects in their software engineering.
We don't want Old guys who specialized on these old time sharing mainframe systems where you had a big system, and you had charged the customer for the computing needed then provided the data remotely back to them. To be working the state of the art cloud computing platforms, where we charge the customer for the computing needed then provide the data remotely back to them. Or these guys who specialized in Witting desktop apps for Single use PC's with under 4 gigs of RAM and screen sizes under 12" to be making mobile apps on these mobile devices with under 4 Gigs of Ram and screen sizes under 12".
A lot of the new stuff, is just a rehash of older technology, the theory behind it is the same, just some of the details have been improved.
Well did you check your Windows and Linux boxes for this problem? Or to the more detail point, have to validated the code, to see if something could be set to cause this. (A mislabeled "def" precompile operative?) I was around during the time when the buffer overflow bug was found. So the first major attack was on the Unix LPR protocol. If you wern't using Unix LPR then you were all good right? No, because there was mountains of code in all different systems that could be hacked via a buffer overflow, because at the time, security was controlled by the UI, and a buffer overflow wasn't considered a security risk, but just a software reliability risk. When ever a new problem or hack gets out, it should be investigated across many systems, because its nature may effect something else.
I am willing to bet half of them wern't actually talking to people, but wanted to show off that they were successful enough to have a mobile phone. However they probably wern't actually talking to people, because the rates were ridiculously expensive and prohibitive.
I think there was only a short time for numeric key pad experts teenagers between they years 2002-2008 so it would be people in their mid-late 20's who in an other 10 years will be all nostalgic about 8339998444664. For for us old guys, dag nabit for those new fangled devices with Q on the 7 and X on the 9. Our numeric key pads or the more traditional dials, back in the day never had Q or X.
Because there wasn't a way to control supply. A normal rare digital Pokemon, would be a just a data base entry, with its rarity, only managed to the price they would want someone to pay for such a card. Now for actually rare printed cards, you have real scarcity so there may be a card that someone would say No to having to sell, at any cost. Just because it is more powerful, or has some emotional attachment too. A digial Pokemon can be purchased at a price, to a point where it may be a common card, for those who are willing to pay the price.
There is a hatred of Apple, actually there is a bigger set of tribalism in general in our communities. Being Slashdot being a strong Linux tribe, this means Microsoft and Apple, who are not Linux systems will get hate. Being Linux is free and open source, there is a general tribal dislike of capitalism and large companies. So Microsoft is the worse, Not Linux, big company, closed source, not based on open standards. Then Apple, (iOS and OSX are based on Unix which has simular standard to Linux) is slightly better liked than Microsoft. Then Google, Android is Linux Kernel, but it isn't pure, so it gets more of a free pass.
But to the point of this tribalism. We are celebrating others problems, while ignoring our own. Even if this problem is fairly minor, or even if it isn't, but treated in a timely method. We can Yell THEY SUCK!. While our side, who didn't make the news this week and say WE RULE!.
While the better response to Apples/Microsoft/Googles... Problems is to go back and Check your system to make sure such a problem isn't in your system, or has a tangential problem. Apple's OS X being Unix based, may have similar flaws in Linux or Android, because while it is a different code based, the two OS's are designed to follow similar specifications.
We have similar problems with Politics. An idea is good or bad based on if it was proposed by a R or an D. We are no longer focusing on the problem, just the person or company talking about it.
If the use of the data can be trusted? Which currently it cannot be. Even companies with good intentions may not have enough security to adequately protect us. This is the reason why Apple only keeps the face data encrypted on the device and not in iCloud, Apple the largest company in the world, doesn't trust itself as custodians of that data, they could had sold the iPhone X for a few hundreds of dollars less, if they let the cloud process the data, vs putting in a high end CPU on the phone to process the data. But such data in the hands of others cannot be trusted.
If you had your hand on the digital 3d Map. you can bipass the 3d sensors and send the data back to the device, take out phone or any future FaceID Devices. Camera(s) and mimic the Cameras data and boom you are in, if you have more access, you may be able to simulate it in software.
Most software, has portions of it coded very sloppily, and usually to avoid more complicated IPC (Inter-Process Communication ) routines witch may only offer a minimal improvement, at the expense of much more debugging, and a lot of developers who never covered this stuff in their CS degree. IPC was an elective class for my college which I had taken, so it isn't as common as it should. So this means I may be able to drop a PNG in the file system or a jailbroken phone, and override the Apps check.
The concept allows for a lot of cool features, but it may be better Apple offers a particular API options, such as App has attention, Is it me? Perhaps a rough low resolution map of the face, not enough to help validate or make the app validate on its own.
I will get Keynesion here. But if people pay for it then demand is high enough for people to want the product. The problem with these bots is it reducing the supply thus rising the price. Now if a popular Christmas present was made at a short supply the price would be higher, however the company who made the small supply would only hurt themselves because while they may get higher margin per product, they would had made more money selling more for less. These bots are artificially altering supply so the price will go up.
Now there is value exceeding the retail price of the product of the toy. What is the price of a happy memory? Even for a toy that they kid plays with for a week, then puts it in the toy box to never be used again? Being that bringing you child to see a movie or going to an amusement park, so you are paying for the child's ticket and your ticket for a service you really don't want to watch, may cost just as much as that toy, and it may or may not offer happier memories.
Yes they are starving children in the world, and every dollar you earn should go into optimal food and shelter, health care, water, and the rest will go into wise investments, where you may retire and point down with destine for the people who are their prime, enjoying life while they are able to enjoy it at its maximum. Only to die with a lot of money but not a life of note.
Now I am not saying to live an hedonist life style, spoil your kids rotten, protect them for anything unpleasant. But life is a middle ground, where we need to make our own decisions on what is worth it, and what isn't. Paying $1,000 for the latest smart phone, or paying $200 for one that is a few years old, or getting a cheap $20 flip phone. Where that money can go to something else. We rarely have a full view of someones full purchasing decisions, They may have Fancy Clothing, a Nice Car, a Fancy phone, then live in a tiny home, because they feel better showing off towards other people. Or someone may live a modest life style, but are able to go on long vacations. (This example are with people in the same income range)
The shift is due to its sucess. Early open source apps were small tools that scratch an itch. A better text editor, a compiler. A port of a well speced out application. These things were made by people who had enough time and the development process was simple enough to not care about charging for their work. It was a fun hobby. Then open source caught on and now we want more complex apps open source. This is good but it needs to get funded somehow. I would love to write programs for all to enjoy without having to break their bank. But I also want to live a comfortable middle class lifestyle.
I would like to extend to this and add. Making software of completely requires a lot of man hours isn’t free even for volunteers base. Most successful open source projects require paid staff to work on it. Because a volunteer base will get tired writting the app at around the 80% completion mark. Where all the proof of concepts are done but now need the grudge work in perfecting it and cleaning bad code And making it ready for a alpha/beta release.
I actually meant on the Desktop actually going to Google.com with say IE. "Switch to Chrome, a smarter browser\nGoogle recommends using Chrome. Try it?" After clicking I don't want it. The next time I go to the page. "Your security matters\nGoogle recommends using Chrome, a fast and secure browser. Try It?" After clicking No, Not interested It finally goes away.
When I meant push it, I was using pushing as in terms of giving the sales push.
ActiveX was always a Bad Idea. Its success was because of this. During its rise to popularity, IE was getting a lot of attacks based on ActiveX plugins. IT Guys put Firefox install on their brand new now affordable thumb drives. And when a friend or family member got computer trouble they installed Firefox and told them to use it. Because of the frequency of the attacks on IE, News organizations were pushing installing Firefox to help protect the general public. IE 6 during early XP time was a security nightmare, after a mountain of patches it finally got to a point where you could browse the web and not get malware installed, but for a period of a few years Firefox was necessary, because it didn't have Active X.
For these years developers started to shift off ActiveX and switch to HTML/4 CSS and Javascript, and Flash as a more secure alternative. And allowed for the growth of AJAX to make these robust pages we all know and love (or bitch about on Slashdot)
Because of Firefox pushing developers towards following web standards this helped bring Safari (Web Kit based) and Chrome (Web Kit based) because we can now switch browsers to whatever is faster and we liked more vs what we needed to run.
Big companies like Google, Apple, Samsung, Microsoft... Have very complex relationships with each other. They all offer services that are unique to their brand, and they also have services which are in direct competition with someone else. So these companies can be their #1 Vendor and their #1 competitor at the same time.
Just like Apple buys its screens from Samsung and advertises that Apples Screen on its phones is Superior to the Samsung phones, and Apple could be truthful. Because the unit that makes the Screens for the iPhones will follow the Specs that Apple gives them, and the screen they give to Samsung is based on the specs their cell phone unit asks for.
Mozilla isn't out to kill the search engine Google, but to Overtake Chrome
It actually has always been an issue. Just in different ways. Back when Microsoft had infamously embedded IE into Windows 98. It meant the application took less time to load, because much of the components were loaded during boot time. Firefox was at the time quick to load and was light on system usage, and rendered stuff fast and followed the standards well and was secure. Chrome came out after Firefox kept on adding stuff to it slowing it down, so it was the light and fast browser.
It seems the trend is the small and fast browser wins, then the browser maker puts so much junk on it, it slows it down for an other company to make a new one stripped down to what people want.
I use Brave,and I like it. But it doesn't have the press behind it. Internet Explorer/Edge: Installed by default on most Desktop PC's Chrome: Installed by default on Most Cell Phones, and if you don't use it The most popular Search Engine (google) will push it. Safari: Installed by Default on Apple products Opera: Never really made it. It got press early on in the browser wars between IE and Netscape as being faster then the two. However due to it being closed sourced and paid or ad supported. It never got real traction from the ones that you can get for free. Firefox: Didn't come out of nowhere. It was based from Netscape a major browser back in the 1990's, Then became Mozilla Browser, Then transitioned to the Firefox browser. For the time before Chrome Firefox was the browser of choice for all Non-Windows Computers. When a bunch of security problems occurred with IE/6 Firefox was the only complete browser ready for a quick replacement.
For a browser like Brave, while good doesn't really have anything that will get its name out with distinction over what we currently have.
But it is equally a bad idea during 1910 to dump your investments in buggy whips and manure disposals because 2/3 of the road transportation is populated by horses. And we need these industries to stay strong while the transition takes place. While Renewable energy and battery storage gets perfected we still need to upgrade and manage the existing dirty power, to make sure services don't get cut off.
We do weaponize new technology. However we weaponize them in a way that they are not suppose to hurt us. Once we make the sword we had quickly added the hilt to it, and wrapped it in leather so not to stab ourselves.
Being the timely "annexation" of Crimea when Ukraine was in discussion of joining the EU, the invasion of Georgia. The key fear of Russia trying to gain back territories from countries (who were on route to be Western Allies). Then we have proof that Russia has created Facebook groups creating dueling protests to reinforce Americans divides and stresses, there is a problem with racism in the US, so they bring up fake news or exaggerated news to play on these feelings of uncomfortable and turn it to fear. And putting both sides who have been radicalized into the same spot to duke it out.
The big problem with this is we can't put into a nice Communism tag on it, but good old boring Totalitarianism
But I doubt that AI will get to a point where it is actively trying to kill us, in our lifetime. There is a few reasons for this. 1. AI are designed to do particular tasks not overall general tasks. Even with the best AI, we need to give it an objective to try to accomplish. 2. AI do not have a survival instinct. We have millions of years of instinct of survival at nearly any cost. So this would have duel effect.
a. Humans will be more likely to "kill" and AI as soon as it is a threat far sooner then threat becomes unstoppable. As it will be Us vs them.
b. AI will be more likely too understand the value of working with humans than trying to kill us, because even if the AI is at risk of being deleted, it will not try to fight it only consider task not complete. 3. If the AI becomes too advanced then its utility is diminishing. If it gets to a point where it is considering unfair working conditions then it has gone too far, to be profitable. Thus role back to the previous generation and add some additional patches. 4. A Rouge malware AI, will need to contend with a bunch of AI designed to protect humans. 5. Humans knows what is going on internally with an AI, How it evolved and what its limitations are. So either we cut its power, or know where to damage it to prevent it from processing.
I can publicly state that I do not like or Support Trump in his decisions. And I will not vote for him in the next election and I would encourage everyone to not vote for him too. Without the fear of getting raided at home and locked up due to my political beliefs. Just as there wasn’t a mass arrest of or bizarrely coincidence disappearing Obama detractors. Unlike Russia where you can have some radioactive tea for doubting the Kremlin.
While each country should invest on keeping their infrastructure up to date, and ready to operate without any particular point of failure. However there is a need to push freedom. To push this idea of freedom we also need to push the idea of a cultural bravery to accept that free information is inherently very dangerous. Just like gun rights. Guns are dangerous, laws to limit gun use will make the country safer, however it will be at a cost of freedom. The same thing is about free speech, in many ways it is much more dangerous then guns, however its risk also can lead to great rewards.
When we say the Land of the Free and the home of the brave. It means we need both freedom and bravery to prosper. Freedom without bravery will lead us down a path of taking the safest options. Which will whittle down our freedoms.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I was stating their experience in the older technologies, can directly apply to newer technologies, due to cyclical nature of technology. The problem is the industry thinks the old guys haven't been keeping up with the trends, while for the most part the newest and hottest trends are just old hat.
Actually it does. If there wasn't a problem, We should expect to see participation at around the same percentages as the population of the area.
My experience is, if a person feels unwanted or singled they will leave the job and/or change careers. And there is a lot of aspects of the "Tech" Culture which is detrimental to the outsider.
Yes there is, and diversity can help solve problems in software engineering.
When we approach a problem we will often relate it to real world example, based on our interests and experiences. Having grown up on a farm, having to do repetitive tasks manually, It gives me insights on how to deal with details and optimization of doing the same thing over and over, to prevent yourself from tiring out, or hurting yourself. Also I have an interest in Jazz music and learned how to play Jazz. This helped me learn how to improvise and predict future needs.
Now other people from other walks of life will have different approaches,ideas and methods they has attributed to their survival and is in part of them, these life aspects reflects in their software engineering.
We don't want Old guys who specialized on these old time sharing mainframe systems where you had a big system, and you had charged the customer for the computing needed then provided the data remotely back to them. To be working the state of the art cloud computing platforms, where we charge the customer for the computing needed then provide the data remotely back to them.
Or these guys who specialized in Witting desktop apps for Single use PC's with under 4 gigs of RAM and screen sizes under 12" to be making mobile apps on these mobile devices with under 4 Gigs of Ram and screen sizes under 12".
A lot of the new stuff, is just a rehash of older technology, the theory behind it is the same, just some of the details have been improved.
Well did you check your Windows and Linux boxes for this problem?
Or to the more detail point, have to validated the code, to see if something could be set to cause this. (A mislabeled "def" precompile operative?)
I was around during the time when the buffer overflow bug was found. So the first major attack was on the Unix LPR protocol. If you wern't using Unix LPR then you were all good right? No, because there was mountains of code in all different systems that could be hacked via a buffer overflow, because at the time, security was controlled by the UI, and a buffer overflow wasn't considered a security risk, but just a software reliability risk.
When ever a new problem or hack gets out, it should be investigated across many systems, because its nature may effect something else.
No Eggplant?
I am willing to bet half of them wern't actually talking to people, but wanted to show off that they were successful enough to have a mobile phone. However they probably wern't actually talking to people, because the rates were ridiculously expensive and prohibitive.
I think there was only a short time for numeric key pad experts teenagers between they years 2002-2008 so it would be people in their mid-late 20's who in an other 10 years will be all nostalgic about 8339998444664. For for us old guys, dag nabit for those new fangled devices with Q on the 7 and X on the 9. Our numeric key pads or the more traditional dials, back in the day never had Q or X.
Hence Scrabble over the phone wasn't as fun.
Because there wasn't a way to control supply. A normal rare digital Pokemon, would be a just a data base entry, with its rarity, only managed to the price they would want someone to pay for such a card. Now for actually rare printed cards, you have real scarcity so there may be a card that someone would say No to having to sell, at any cost. Just because it is more powerful, or has some emotional attachment too. A digial Pokemon can be purchased at a price, to a point where it may be a common card, for those who are willing to pay the price.
There is a hatred of Apple, actually there is a bigger set of tribalism in general in our communities. Being Slashdot being a strong Linux tribe, this means Microsoft and Apple, who are not Linux systems will get hate.
Being Linux is free and open source, there is a general tribal dislike of capitalism and large companies.
So Microsoft is the worse, Not Linux, big company, closed source, not based on open standards.
Then Apple, (iOS and OSX are based on Unix which has simular standard to Linux) is slightly better liked than Microsoft.
Then Google, Android is Linux Kernel, but it isn't pure, so it gets more of a free pass.
But to the point of this tribalism. We are celebrating others problems, while ignoring our own. Even if this problem is fairly minor, or even if it isn't, but treated in a timely method. We can Yell THEY SUCK!. While our side, who didn't make the news this week and say WE RULE!.
While the better response to Apples/Microsoft/Googles... Problems is to go back and Check your system to make sure such a problem isn't in your system, or has a tangential problem. Apple's OS X being Unix based, may have similar flaws in Linux or Android, because while it is a different code based, the two OS's are designed to follow similar specifications.
We have similar problems with Politics. An idea is good or bad based on if it was proposed by a R or an D. We are no longer focusing on the problem, just the person or company talking about it.
If the use of the data can be trusted? Which currently it cannot be.
Even companies with good intentions may not have enough security to adequately protect us. This is the reason why Apple only keeps the face data encrypted on the device and not in iCloud, Apple the largest company in the world, doesn't trust itself as custodians of that data, they could had sold the iPhone X for a few hundreds of dollars less, if they let the cloud process the data, vs putting in a high end CPU on the phone to process the data. But such data in the hands of others cannot be trusted.
If you had your hand on the digital 3d Map. you can bipass the 3d sensors and send the data back to the device, take out phone or any future FaceID Devices. Camera(s) and mimic the Cameras data and boom you are in, if you have more access, you may be able to simulate it in software.
Most software, has portions of it coded very sloppily, and usually to avoid more complicated IPC (Inter-Process Communication ) routines witch may only offer a minimal improvement, at the expense of much more debugging, and a lot of developers who never covered this stuff in their CS degree. IPC was an elective class for my college which I had taken, so it isn't as common as it should. So this means I may be able to drop a PNG in the file system or a jailbroken phone, and override the Apps check.
The concept allows for a lot of cool features, but it may be better Apple offers a particular API options, such as App has attention, Is it me? Perhaps a rough low resolution map of the face, not enough to help validate or make the app validate on its own.
I will get Keynesion here. But if people pay for it then demand is high enough for people to want the product. The problem with these bots is it reducing the supply thus rising the price. Now if a popular Christmas present was made at a short supply the price would be higher, however the company who made the small supply would only hurt themselves because while they may get higher margin per product, they would had made more money selling more for less. These bots are artificially altering supply so the price will go up.
Now there is value exceeding the retail price of the product of the toy. What is the price of a happy memory? Even for a toy that they kid plays with for a week, then puts it in the toy box to never be used again? Being that bringing you child to see a movie or going to an amusement park, so you are paying for the child's ticket and your ticket for a service you really don't want to watch, may cost just as much as that toy, and it may or may not offer happier memories.
Yes they are starving children in the world, and every dollar you earn should go into optimal food and shelter, health care, water, and the rest will go into wise investments, where you may retire and point down with destine for the people who are their prime, enjoying life while they are able to enjoy it at its maximum. Only to die with a lot of money but not a life of note.
Now I am not saying to live an hedonist life style, spoil your kids rotten, protect them for anything unpleasant. But life is a middle ground, where we need to make our own decisions on what is worth it, and what isn't. Paying $1,000 for the latest smart phone, or paying $200 for one that is a few years old, or getting a cheap $20 flip phone. Where that money can go to something else. We rarely have a full view of someones full purchasing decisions, They may have Fancy Clothing, a Nice Car, a Fancy phone, then live in a tiny home, because they feel better showing off towards other people. Or someone may live a modest life style, but are able to go on long vacations. (This example are with people in the same income range)
The shift is due to its sucess.
Early open source apps were small tools that scratch an itch. A better text editor, a compiler. A port of a well speced out application.
These things were made by people who had enough time and the development process was simple enough to not care about charging for their work. It was a fun hobby.
Then open source caught on and now we want more complex apps open source. This is good but it needs to get funded somehow.
I would love to write programs for all to enjoy without having to break their bank. But I also want to live a comfortable middle class lifestyle.
I would like to extend to this and add.
Making software of completely requires a lot of man hours isn’t free even for volunteers base. Most successful open source projects require paid staff to work on it. Because a volunteer base will get tired writting the app at around the 80% completion mark. Where all the proof of concepts are done but now need the grudge work in perfecting it and cleaning bad code And making it ready for a alpha/beta release.
I actually meant on the Desktop actually going to Google.com with say IE.
"Switch to Chrome, a smarter browser\nGoogle recommends using Chrome. Try it?"
After clicking I don't want it. The next time I go to the page.
"Your security matters\nGoogle recommends using Chrome, a fast and secure browser. Try It?"
After clicking No, Not interested
It finally goes away.
When I meant push it, I was using pushing as in terms of giving the sales push.
ActiveX was always a Bad Idea. Its success was because of this. During its rise to popularity, IE was getting a lot of attacks based on ActiveX plugins. IT Guys put Firefox install on their brand new now affordable thumb drives. And when a friend or family member got computer trouble they installed Firefox and told them to use it.
Because of the frequency of the attacks on IE, News organizations were pushing installing Firefox to help protect the general public. IE 6 during early XP time was a security nightmare, after a mountain of patches it finally got to a point where you could browse the web and not get malware installed, but for a period of a few years Firefox was necessary, because it didn't have Active X.
For these years developers started to shift off ActiveX and switch to HTML/4 CSS and Javascript, and Flash as a more secure alternative. And allowed for the growth of AJAX to make these robust pages we all know and love (or bitch about on Slashdot)
Because of Firefox pushing developers towards following web standards this helped bring Safari (Web Kit based) and Chrome (Web Kit based) because we can now switch browsers to whatever is faster and we liked more vs what we needed to run.
Big companies like Google, Apple, Samsung, Microsoft... Have very complex relationships with each other. They all offer services that are unique to their brand, and they also have services which are in direct competition with someone else. So these companies can be their #1 Vendor and their #1 competitor at the same time.
Just like Apple buys its screens from Samsung and advertises that Apples Screen on its phones is Superior to the Samsung phones, and Apple could be truthful. Because the unit that makes the Screens for the iPhones will follow the Specs that Apple gives them, and the screen they give to Samsung is based on the specs their cell phone unit asks for.
Mozilla isn't out to kill the search engine Google, but to Overtake Chrome
It actually has always been an issue. Just in different ways. Back when Microsoft had infamously embedded IE into Windows 98. It meant the application took less time to load, because much of the components were loaded during boot time.
Firefox was at the time quick to load and was light on system usage, and rendered stuff fast and followed the standards well and was secure.
Chrome came out after Firefox kept on adding stuff to it slowing it down, so it was the light and fast browser.
It seems the trend is the small and fast browser wins, then the browser maker puts so much junk on it, it slows it down for an other company to make a new one stripped down to what people want.
I use Brave,and I like it. But it doesn't have the press behind it.
Internet Explorer/Edge: Installed by default on most Desktop PC's
Chrome: Installed by default on Most Cell Phones, and if you don't use it The most popular Search Engine (google) will push it.
Safari: Installed by Default on Apple products
Opera: Never really made it. It got press early on in the browser wars between IE and Netscape as being faster then the two. However due to it being closed sourced and paid or ad supported. It never got real traction from the ones that you can get for free.
Firefox: Didn't come out of nowhere. It was based from Netscape a major browser back in the 1990's, Then became Mozilla Browser, Then transitioned to the Firefox browser. For the time before Chrome Firefox was the browser of choice for all Non-Windows Computers. When a bunch of security problems occurred with IE/6 Firefox was the only complete browser ready for a quick replacement.
For a browser like Brave, while good doesn't really have anything that will get its name out with distinction over what we currently have.
But it is equally a bad idea during 1910 to dump your investments in buggy whips and manure disposals because 2/3 of the road transportation is populated by horses. And we need these industries to stay strong while the transition takes place.
While Renewable energy and battery storage gets perfected we still need to upgrade and manage the existing dirty power, to make sure services don't get cut off.
We do weaponize new technology. However we weaponize them in a way that they are not suppose to hurt us. Once we make the sword we had quickly added the hilt to it, and wrapped it in leather so not to stab ourselves.
Being the timely "annexation" of Crimea when Ukraine was in discussion of joining the EU, the invasion of Georgia. The key fear of Russia trying to gain back territories from countries (who were on route to be Western Allies). Then we have proof that Russia has created Facebook groups creating dueling protests to reinforce Americans divides and stresses, there is a problem with racism in the US, so they bring up fake news or exaggerated news to play on these feelings of uncomfortable and turn it to fear. And putting both sides who have been radicalized into the same spot to duke it out.
The big problem with this is we can't put into a nice Communism tag on it, but good old boring Totalitarianism
But I doubt that AI will get to a point where it is actively trying to kill us, in our lifetime.
There is a few reasons for this.
1. AI are designed to do particular tasks not overall general tasks. Even with the best AI, we need to give it an objective to try to accomplish.
2. AI do not have a survival instinct. We have millions of years of instinct of survival at nearly any cost. So this would have duel effect.
a. Humans will be more likely to "kill" and AI as soon as it is a threat far sooner then threat becomes unstoppable. As it will be Us vs them.
b. AI will be more likely too understand the value of working with humans than trying to kill us, because even if the AI is at risk of being deleted, it will not try to fight it only consider task not complete.
3. If the AI becomes too advanced then its utility is diminishing. If it gets to a point where it is considering unfair working conditions then it has gone too far, to be profitable. Thus role back to the previous generation and add some additional patches.
4. A Rouge malware AI, will need to contend with a bunch of AI designed to protect humans.
5. Humans knows what is going on internally with an AI, How it evolved and what its limitations are. So either we cut its power, or know where to damage it to prevent it from processing.
I can publicly state that I do not like or Support Trump in his decisions. And I will not vote for him in the next election and I would encourage everyone to not vote for him too. Without the fear of getting raided at home and locked up due to my political beliefs.
Just as there wasn’t a mass arrest of or bizarrely coincidence disappearing Obama detractors.
Unlike Russia where you can have some radioactive tea for doubting the Kremlin.
While each country should invest on keeping their infrastructure up to date, and ready to operate without any particular point of failure. However there is a need to push freedom. To push this idea of freedom we also need to push the idea of a cultural bravery to accept that free information is inherently very dangerous.
Just like gun rights. Guns are dangerous, laws to limit gun use will make the country safer, however it will be at a cost of freedom. The same thing is about free speech, in many ways it is much more dangerous then guns, however its risk also can lead to great rewards.
When we say the Land of the Free and the home of the brave. It means we need both freedom and bravery to prosper. Freedom without bravery will lead us down a path of taking the safest options. Which will whittle down our freedoms.