The obvious political bias now calls into question the integrity of the Internet Archive. A friend recently pointed out something there that suggested an inaccuracy in reporting by a right leaning publication. I simply chalked it up to a minor error made by that publication and moved on. Particularly as I had not seen the offending image on the right leaning publication itself.
After seeing this I'm left to wonder if it is at all possible that the archive was manipulated for political reasons.
If they were truly concerned they would simply increase their backups. Having servers outside the US are only useful once they were forced to make an edit, and Canada would be one of my last choices as a censorship free country. This is either using the state of affairs to scam funding from liberals as is being done by MANY organizations currently, making a political statement or both.
Pity... I would have preferred they stayed impartial and maintained their integrity.
No, the mainstream media is not as bad as the fake news. It's not perfect, but the idea that it is as bad as people who just willfully invent rumors out of thin air and disseminate them as truth is absurd. It's a classic fallacy of the false equivalency.
This article is from 2013 and the perpetrator was using a disguised camera. Legalizing such behaviour, in the absence of a camera, doesn't seem to be likely to decrease the chance of such abuses. Additionally, a campus is an unlikely place for such things to occur as students are typically governed by a code of conduct. Just as corporate bathrooms are unlikely to suffer such abuse. Truly public bathrooms however wouldn't have that issue for the would-be pervert abusing society's good will.
Overall I think this could be remedied by moving to single occupant rest rooms and doing away with gender designations on them. While that last bit is unnecessary it would make the subject of gender in regards to rest rooms moot.
Of course, the validity of it's assertions is still in question, but it seems relevant to your statement. Particularly the part that says, "this law establishes a statewide anti-discrimination policy in North Carolina which is tougher than the federal government’s." It will be interesting to see how things play out over time.
All true, but how much damage can be done before a pattern is established? I think that such insurance will be expensive at the outset. I think having manual controls in the event of a problem will reduce the cost of that insurance. I also hope that they avoid costly mistakes that could make this technology common in the distant future.
Still, while there are techniques to make releasing software as safe as it can be companies still find the need every year to perform a live network change. The issue might not exhibit itself in a small initial release, but be devastating (read kills people) once it reaches a larger audience. For example, the software works great in Sunnyvale, but in icy conditions in northern states cars spin out their traction control failing to account for it.
Furthermore, what about some malware attack that exploits a newly added hole. The insidious rogue code waits for a period of time to propagate using vehicle to vehicle communication then one day goes on a murderous rampage at noon on a Tuesday?
Everyone was out to lunch to get some wonderful tacos, but instead... vehicular armageddon ensues!
Well, that is a bit far out there, but I still don't envy the position of the insurance companies. Having a licensed driver at the wheel and override controls at the ready can mitigate much risk. I wouldn't feel comfortable in a car that lacked manual controls. I would also prefer that early adopters of this new technology be made to remain at attention and ready to take over or face a hefty citation. At least for five years or so until the technology had proven itself. If no death or serious damage to property occurs within such a time we could re-evaluate the idea that someone in the driver's seat must remain at attention. Removing override controls should take much longer.
Your comparison is a bit apples and oranges. How may people have stepped out in front of an air plane in flight? The systems for avoidance here are a bit more advanced. Aircraft typically know about collision threats miles away. Human traffic controllers manage this avoidance. Are we going to fit all the things that might get into the path of the car with transponders? Automating the piloting of a motor vehicle safely is far more complex than flight.
The thing is that a third party would actually be responsible for the accident, and as such you would need additional coverage specifically for the case. Insurance policies spell out such things. They want to even know how much you drive it on average, where you drive and in what conditions. They take into account things like if it is a motor cycle all the way up to a tractor trailer. The price of insurance is based on these factors.
Now add the concept of hardware driving the car. Sure, we can demonstrate that this car with this software is this safe, but then comes a software update. This makes the insurance company's management of their risk much more difficult. All it takes is one bad update and lets say, hypothetically, a vehicle or two careens into the side of a bus. Some analysis and a patch later and all of a sudden we are at a new version without the bus smashing feature, but did that update add a toddler avoidance error?
AI "drivers" receiving software updates only add to the chaos that is our roads. No one has died yet, but someday someone will.
I've actually cut over already, and Windows 10 is to blame. It wasn't just the terrible UI, but also how Cortana seemed to break constantly. When it did it forced a reboot that could require several more reboots to get running again. I was sick of buying a computer for Microsoft to use as they see fit, and instead opted to have a personal computer again. What was funny is that I managed to get all the games I play, short of Skyrim, to run under Linux. If the game can't be played on my Linux box or one of our game consoles it's not really worth the headache of playing it on such a terrible OS.
It troubles me that the dice fam has purchased the now sold out Slashdot. These days it is difficult to find unbiased news sources, and selling to a spammer company is telling. I hope everyone who made Slashdot what it was makes a killing off of Dice. I'm also somewhat pleased that I have found better sources of news for nerds on stuff that matters.
Slashdot always allowed me to turn off ads. I never did, but now I will blacklist slashdot's advertisers via ghostery through my "untrusted" browser. That is, if I ever bother to come back. I don't care for Dice. I think they are, in my opinion, a disreputable company. You may, of course, do as you will.
What we will likely get is some SJW BS. Pro tip, when they change dealers on you at the table; get up and grab a drink. Find a new table. May I suggest Hackaday?
Exactly, and that is the leading reason why everyone I've ever talked to, who already owns one or more firearms, refuses to ever get one of these "smart" guns. It is the reliability issue. There is enough concern that such a tool, with a 0.01% failure rate, could strike when it was needed to preserve life.
You could see that failure rate just from ammunition. So, why add another point of failure?
Of the 4000 people polled I would wager less than that 59% of them would actually buy a firearm despite the claims of the poll.
They show a 22 on the article. A gun I would never buy. Just not enough stopping power, but decent for target practice I guess. Still, it is better to practice on a gun that you might actually have to use someday.
If the government really wants to improve gun safety they should subsidize and promote the use of gun safes and other locking mechanisms to make gun theft as difficult as possible. I have three rifles and I even keep the bolts and receivers separate from them to decrease the chance my devices will ever be stolen and used in a criminal action.
No, you aren't a troll... you are just making too much sense. Stop that... choose an agenda and stick with it. The climate holy wars aren't kind to fence sitters.
The problem is that people in the field disagree, the scientific method cannot be applied when you only have one earth and the data is at best questionable. I'm of the opinion that no one actually has a firm grasp of what is happening here on earth, and liken our "scientists" to be cut from the same cloth as those who may have debated the value of leeches a hundred or so years ago.
Even at the height of bloodletting these people look like idiots today where the only time leeches are used makes some sense. Not to let the "demons" out, but rather to remove blood from a localized area. Someday mankind will look back on us all and laugh. On every "sky is falling" loonie and every person who thought there is no impact on earth from the pollution of humanity.
Of course there is a study that shows the hockey stick is totally true... of course. It is an agenda. People with money and an agenda are buying "scientists" on both sides, and they are paid to publish their conjecture.
Always remember, if you aren't part of the solution there is money in prolonging the problem as a "Climate Conjecturist".
Slashdot Mirror
Its called Windows Powered Off Edition. :P
Don't worry... this is CNN, the mistrusted name in news! It's likely just more fake news.
The obvious political bias now calls into question the integrity of the Internet Archive. A friend recently pointed out something there that suggested an inaccuracy in reporting by a right leaning publication. I simply chalked it up to a minor error made by that publication and moved on. Particularly as I had not seen the offending image on the right leaning publication itself.
After seeing this I'm left to wonder if it is at all possible that the archive was manipulated for political reasons.
If they were truly concerned they would simply increase their backups. Having servers outside the US are only useful once they were forced to make an edit, and Canada would be one of my last choices as a censorship free country. This is either using the state of affairs to scam funding from liberals as is being done by MANY organizations currently, making a political statement or both.
Pity... I would have preferred they stayed impartial and maintained their integrity.
No, the mainstream media is not as bad as the fake news. It's not perfect, but the idea that it is as bad as people who just willfully invent rumors out of thin air and disseminate them as truth is absurd. It's a classic fallacy of the false equivalency.
Like... CNN, "The mistrusted name in news!" ;)
About the same time we had to tolerate climate conjecturists such as yourself.
http://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/imac
At least that is how I took care of my Windows 10 issue. Now my OS is version ten and actually doesn't suck.
http://abc7.com/archive/9102790/
This article is from 2013 and the perpetrator was using a disguised camera. Legalizing such behaviour, in the absence of a camera, doesn't seem to be likely to decrease the chance of such abuses. Additionally, a campus is an unlikely place for such things to occur as students are typically governed by a code of conduct. Just as corporate bathrooms are unlikely to suffer such abuse. Truly public bathrooms however wouldn't have that issue for the would-be pervert abusing society's good will.
Overall I think this could be remedied by moving to single occupant rest rooms and doing away with gender designations on them. While that last bit is unnecessary it would make the subject of gender in regards to rest rooms moot.
"Myths vs Facts: What New York Times, Huffington Post and other media outlets aren't saying about common-sense privacy law"
https://governor.nc.gov/press-release/myths-vs-facts-what-new-york-times-huffington-post-and-other-media-outlets-arent-0
Of course, the validity of it's assertions is still in question, but it seems relevant to your statement. Particularly the part that says, "this law establishes a statewide anti-discrimination policy in North Carolina which is tougher than the federal government’s." It will be interesting to see how things play out over time.
Because conjecture doesn't actually have to prove its assertions.
All true, but how much damage can be done before a pattern is established? I think that such insurance will be expensive at the outset. I think having manual controls in the event of a problem will reduce the cost of that insurance. I also hope that they avoid costly mistakes that could make this technology common in the distant future.
Still, while there are techniques to make releasing software as safe as it can be companies still find the need every year to perform a live network change. The issue might not exhibit itself in a small initial release, but be devastating (read kills people) once it reaches a larger audience. For example, the software works great in Sunnyvale, but in icy conditions in northern states cars spin out their traction control failing to account for it.
Furthermore, what about some malware attack that exploits a newly added hole. The insidious rogue code waits for a period of time to propagate using vehicle to vehicle communication then one day goes on a murderous rampage at noon on a Tuesday?
Everyone was out to lunch to get some wonderful tacos, but instead... vehicular armageddon ensues!
Well, that is a bit far out there, but I still don't envy the position of the insurance companies. Having a licensed driver at the wheel and override controls at the ready can mitigate much risk. I wouldn't feel comfortable in a car that lacked manual controls. I would also prefer that early adopters of this new technology be made to remain at attention and ready to take over or face a hefty citation. At least for five years or so until the technology had proven itself. If no death or serious damage to property occurs within such a time we could re-evaluate the idea that someone in the driver's seat must remain at attention. Removing override controls should take much longer.
Your comparison is a bit apples and oranges. How may people have stepped out in front of an air plane in flight? The systems for avoidance here are a bit more advanced. Aircraft typically know about collision threats miles away. Human traffic controllers manage this avoidance. Are we going to fit all the things that might get into the path of the car with transponders? Automating the piloting of a motor vehicle safely is far more complex than flight.
The thing is that a third party would actually be responsible for the accident, and as such you would need additional coverage specifically for the case. Insurance policies spell out such things. They want to even know how much you drive it on average, where you drive and in what conditions. They take into account things like if it is a motor cycle all the way up to a tractor trailer. The price of insurance is based on these factors.
Now add the concept of hardware driving the car. Sure, we can demonstrate that this car with this software is this safe, but then comes a software update. This makes the insurance company's management of their risk much more difficult. All it takes is one bad update and lets say, hypothetically, a vehicle or two careens into the side of a bus. Some analysis and a patch later and all of a sudden we are at a new version without the bus smashing feature, but did that update add a toddler avoidance error?
AI "drivers" receiving software updates only add to the chaos that is our roads. No one has died yet, but someday someone will.
I've actually cut over already, and Windows 10 is to blame. It wasn't just the terrible UI, but also how Cortana seemed to break constantly. When it did it forced a reboot that could require several more reboots to get running again. I was sick of buying a computer for Microsoft to use as they see fit, and instead opted to have a personal computer again. What was funny is that I managed to get all the games I play, short of Skyrim, to run under Linux. If the game can't be played on my Linux box or one of our game consoles it's not really worth the headache of playing it on such a terrible OS.
Slashdot's however leaves much to be desired.
Hey, if I get a sig that says "fuck slashdot" can I get a 0 rating upon post whilst logged in? Please?
Fuck you, sellout Slashdot. You need to die. You betrayed every last nerd upon you delivered new that mattered. DIAF.
LMAO
Hello,
It troubles me that the dice fam has purchased the now sold out Slashdot. These days it is difficult to find unbiased news sources, and selling to a spammer company is telling. I hope everyone who made Slashdot what it was makes a killing off of Dice. I'm also somewhat pleased that I have found better sources of news for nerds on stuff that matters.
Slashdot always allowed me to turn off ads. I never did, but now I will blacklist slashdot's advertisers via ghostery through my "untrusted" browser. That is, if I ever bother to come back. I don't care for Dice. I think they are, in my opinion, a disreputable company. You may, of course, do as you will.
Actually my posts were at +2 before... now they start at +1 strangely.
Sold out, what don't you understand?
What we will likely get is some SJW BS. Pro tip, when they change dealers on you at the table; get up and grab a drink. Find a new table. May I suggest Hackaday?
Just what the IoT needed, to be weaponized. >.
Exactly, and that is the leading reason why everyone I've ever talked to, who already owns one or more firearms, refuses to ever get one of these "smart" guns. It is the reliability issue. There is enough concern that such a tool, with a 0.01% failure rate, could strike when it was needed to preserve life.
You could see that failure rate just from ammunition. So, why add another point of failure?
Of the 4000 people polled I would wager less than that 59% of them would actually buy a firearm despite the claims of the poll.
They show a 22 on the article. A gun I would never buy. Just not enough stopping power, but decent for target practice I guess. Still, it is better to practice on a gun that you might actually have to use someday.
If the government really wants to improve gun safety they should subsidize and promote the use of gun safes and other locking mechanisms to make gun theft as difficult as possible. I have three rifles and I even keep the bolts and receivers separate from them to decrease the chance my devices will ever be stolen and used in a criminal action.
No, you aren't a troll... you are just making too much sense. Stop that... choose an agenda and stick with it. The climate holy wars aren't kind to fence sitters.
Whoa whoa whoa dude... stop trying to factor in everything that should be in the equation. Its making it hard for both sides to ply their agenda!
Not to mention you are missing a few million factors.
The problem is that people in the field disagree, the scientific method cannot be applied when you only have one earth and the data is at best questionable. I'm of the opinion that no one actually has a firm grasp of what is happening here on earth, and liken our "scientists" to be cut from the same cloth as those who may have debated the value of leeches a hundred or so years ago.
Even at the height of bloodletting these people look like idiots today where the only time leeches are used makes some sense. Not to let the "demons" out, but rather to remove blood from a localized area. Someday mankind will look back on us all and laugh. On every "sky is falling" loonie and every person who thought there is no impact on earth from the pollution of humanity.
Of course there is a study that shows the hockey stick is totally true... of course. It is an agenda. People with money and an agenda are buying "scientists" on both sides, and they are paid to publish their conjecture.
Always remember, if you aren't part of the solution there is money in prolonging the problem as a "Climate Conjecturist".