I don't know which data for your referring to, but the impact of China's 8% per year growth rate should probably be taken into consideration. They're sufficiently underdeveloped that it's going to continue that way for at least a few more years regardless of what happens globally.
Well never fear, I'm sure having your (apparently very fragile) agricultural system tied ever more closely to more highly contested sources of fossil fuels also has absolutely no chances of working out badly.
High oil prices are already a reality, but you'll be much better off if you get ahead of the adaptation process by collecting some of it in taxes then wait for those prices to straight reality.
Actually the real problem is you can't hit "no" and continue with the installation.
Knowing what an app wants to do is one thing, but it doesn't tell me whether it's actually malicious. Getting an intelligent list of what it tried to do would help. Being able to tell my tablet to disallow or just lie about certain things would help more though - i.e. prevent access to contacts data, or, better, pretend I don't have any contacts data.
Telling me something wants a bunch of vague permissions is about as useless as the iPhone "This app may read private data" message, since pretty much everything wants to do that.
What I want is to be able to see exactly what it's planning to do. If an eBook reader app wants SD cart access, maybe I want to only give it access to the "Books" directory on the card, since it has no reason to look anywhere else. If something wants full web access...well I'd like to prevent that, and then see if the app has any actual problems. Or I'd like to be notified about the hostname's being contacted and whitelist/blacklist them selectively.
Of course, these aren't Android or even smartphone specific problems IMO - it's a problem with providing user security on every single platform in existence. No one's made it suitably simple to tell what an app is doing, or wants to do, and allow or deny that with reasonable, but not owerpowering, fidelity.
In fact I'd go with the idea that many iOS apps are just more intelligent parasites then the well-known examples of Android malware. If you sit around all day spamming premium SMS, you kill your hosts pretty quickly.
iOS can give away all your private information happily, and no one's the wiser. The app store review process is basically encouraging this kind of intelligent evolution.
Actually they care about experience. If the common point of discrimination is going to be that you look "black" then that's what you are. It doesn't matter what else you are, because the guy who wants to put some uppity black guy in his place sure as hell doesn't care that your mother is white.
It also doesn't really matter - the point is to stop accelerating. If you have time to react, chances are the car has time to stop before hitting anything at lethal speeds, and airbags and seatbelts take care if it doesn't.
Being not dead and writing off a car, is better then being dead.
I posted it earlier, but I'll also post it again: you punch the great big "power" button, and it turns off - or flicks to neutral, and either way isn't that exactly what we're all asking for?
I'll put high marks on the notion that the one which crashed the owner never tried to turn off the engine at all.
If you prevent your own death, or the death of others, you've done the right thing no matter what the consequence.
The big problem here is we don't train people beforehand about what to do if they find themselves in an apparently out of control car. I don't know about anyone else, but the first 2-3 times I used it, cruise control was a thoroughly alien and uncomfortable experience, since the car felt like it was surging forward out of my control. Transcribe that feeling to thinking you actually can't control the vehicle, and I'm sure plenty of people panic.
Do you also have trouble operating a microwave? Because "push button" is literally as simple as it gets. The days are long over that the ignition was actually wired - in any serious way - to critical engine systems.
I'm starting to doubt this rather blunt kind of assessment. I suspect NASA could be great at rockets, if they weren't used as a political football over them. Watching a congressman try and railroad into yet another solid-fuel booster system because it happens to be in his district has really made me suspect that there's a lot of under the table bullshit they have to put up with in that regard.
However in any other walk of life, ignorance is not a defense for negligence. Your employer can't claim that they didn't realize people might fall into the steel cauldron even accidentally, nor should they be able to. Similarly, you can't argue that since your employees didn't realize the danger that you saw no need to mitigate it.
While parenting is somewhat a special issue, it's not that special. There's no magic wisdom or ability associated with it - it's a basic biological function. But it deals with very real human lives, in a very similar situation to the latter example above.
And then watch them get diabetes when the same people fail to realize that the difference between soft drink and fruit juice is the origin, not the sugar content.
I don't know. I despise anti-vaxxers, but I'm not sure it should be expressly illegal for many of the reasons listed above. Conversely, it is in no way comparable to population control policies (which it should be noted, are largely implemented via the absence of tax breaks for the second and third child etc.)
As a society, we should be getting vaccines because we collectively agree its the right thing to do - not because we force people too. Down that path when it comes to medicine is nothing good.
Conversely: just because it's not a legal requirement, doesn't make you not an idiot for not doing something.
Actually the OP notes that 86% "opted out" of vaccination. That remaining 14% is going to include children who can't be vaccinated, or for whom the vaccine doesn't work (i.e. does not convey immunity, for whatever reason).
Both those two groups get no real choice in their vulnerability, but they are affected by the 86% who are being parented by idiots.
You do realize the solar system is not necessarily aligning its orbital plane with the galactic orbital plane, and that the volume of the galaxy around it's orbital plane is enormous?
Something going "up" isn't heading out of the galaxy necessarily. In fact, unless it achieves galactic escape velocity, or falls into a conduit of unusual gravity interactions, then it's going to be orbit in and be captured by something, somewhere, eventually.
Also any chemist knows that you always get a little of an unlikely reaction product if your original volume is big enough, or you mix things for long enough. You only need to make a self-replicator (or just a vaguely catalytic) product once.
I disagree - or at least, I think the market is not that intelligent about this idea.
I think what we're seeing is a reflection of the fact that people still tend to appreciate the distinction between things which require internet access, and things which do not - even if it isn't that well informed. People want to be able to say "right, this device can do all of these things with no internet access, and contains this data". But they also want to make sure that, from as many places as possible, they can synchronize and update or change that information. To a huge extent, this is what Dropbox - and the LAN sync protocol - is really all about.
The real problem is that for a variety of reasons, companies draw a hazy, hard to distinguish line around these things (and then stuff like the iPhone doesn't let you stick a bookmark on the main screen like it's an app - if you could, I suspect downloads of the Facebook app would drop to near 0 overnight).
While we're at it, let's imagine a world where unicorns have been genetically engineered into reality...
We don't live in that world, and there are very good reasons to think we may never. There are other, equally good reasons, to think it would be a horrible idea to design a modern economy/society based solely on that assumption. But all of that is a sideshow to the fact that we do not live in that world now.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know which data for your referring to, but the impact of China's 8% per year growth rate should probably be taken into consideration. They're sufficiently underdeveloped that it's going to continue that way for at least a few more years regardless of what happens globally.
Actually it already has, as have high oil prices resulted in an upswing in fuel efficient vehicles, and less vehicle use overall.
The doom-and-gloomers if we do anything seem to display startlingly little faith in market economics, when you get right down to it.
Well never fear, I'm sure having your (apparently very fragile) agricultural system tied ever more closely to more highly contested sources of fossil fuels also has absolutely no chances of working out badly.
High oil prices are already a reality, but you'll be much better off if you get ahead of the adaptation process by collecting some of it in taxes then wait for those prices to straight reality.
Actually the real problem is you can't hit "no" and continue with the installation.
Knowing what an app wants to do is one thing, but it doesn't tell me whether it's actually malicious. Getting an intelligent list of what it tried to do would help. Being able to tell my tablet to disallow or just lie about certain things would help more though - i.e. prevent access to contacts data, or, better, pretend I don't have any contacts data.
This, so much this.
Telling me something wants a bunch of vague permissions is about as useless as the iPhone "This app may read private data" message, since pretty much everything wants to do that.
What I want is to be able to see exactly what it's planning to do. If an eBook reader app wants SD cart access, maybe I want to only give it access to the "Books" directory on the card, since it has no reason to look anywhere else. If something wants full web access...well I'd like to prevent that, and then see if the app has any actual problems. Or I'd like to be notified about the hostname's being contacted and whitelist/blacklist them selectively.
Of course, these aren't Android or even smartphone specific problems IMO - it's a problem with providing user security on every single platform in existence. No one's made it suitably simple to tell what an app is doing, or wants to do, and allow or deny that with reasonable, but not owerpowering, fidelity.
In fact I'd go with the idea that many iOS apps are just more intelligent parasites then the well-known examples of Android malware. If you sit around all day spamming premium SMS, you kill your hosts pretty quickly.
iOS can give away all your private information happily, and no one's the wiser. The app store review process is basically encouraging this kind of intelligent evolution.
Actually they care about experience. If the common point of discrimination is going to be that you look "black" then that's what you are. It doesn't matter what else you are, because the guy who wants to put some uppity black guy in his place sure as hell doesn't care that your mother is white.
That will do nothing (I own a push button start car - Prius). It won't restart after you turn it off, but it won't stop.
It also doesn't really matter - the point is to stop accelerating. If you have time to react, chances are the car has time to stop before hitting anything at lethal speeds, and airbags and seatbelts take care if it doesn't.
Being not dead and writing off a car, is better then being dead.
Again: the software didn't fail here. The accelerator was stuck down by an improperly installed aftermarket floor mat.
I posted it earlier, but I'll also post it again: you punch the great big "power" button, and it turns off - or flicks to neutral, and either way isn't that exactly what we're all asking for?
I'll put high marks on the notion that the one which crashed the owner never tried to turn off the engine at all.
If you prevent your own death, or the death of others, you've done the right thing no matter what the consequence.
The big problem here is we don't train people beforehand about what to do if they find themselves in an apparently out of control car. I don't know about anyone else, but the first 2-3 times I used it, cruise control was a thoroughly alien and uncomfortable experience, since the car felt like it was surging forward out of my control. Transcribe that feeling to thinking you actually can't control the vehicle, and I'm sure plenty of people panic.
Do you also have trouble operating a microwave? Because "push button" is literally as simple as it gets. The days are long over that the ignition was actually wired - in any serious way - to critical engine systems.
I'm starting to doubt this rather blunt kind of assessment. I suspect NASA could be great at rockets, if they weren't used as a political football over them. Watching a congressman try and railroad into yet another solid-fuel booster system because it happens to be in his district has really made me suspect that there's a lot of under the table bullshit they have to put up with in that regard.
Claiming you have no idea if you could look at my data is not reassuring.
Reassuring would be if you were certain you couldn't.
I agree with this.
I don't see anything inherently disasterous about this, provided we keep the well known domains, and very non-specific ones free for general use.
What do you know, I learned something today. I would still argue my point stands.
However in any other walk of life, ignorance is not a defense for negligence. Your employer can't claim that they didn't realize people might fall into the steel cauldron even accidentally, nor should they be able to. Similarly, you can't argue that since your employees didn't realize the danger that you saw no need to mitigate it.
While parenting is somewhat a special issue, it's not that special. There's no magic wisdom or ability associated with it - it's a basic biological function. But it deals with very real human lives, in a very similar situation to the latter example above.
And then watch them get diabetes when the same people fail to realize that the difference between soft drink and fruit juice is the origin, not the sugar content.
I don't know. I despise anti-vaxxers, but I'm not sure it should be expressly illegal for many of the reasons listed above. Conversely, it is in no way comparable to population control policies (which it should be noted, are largely implemented via the absence of tax breaks for the second and third child etc.)
As a society, we should be getting vaccines because we collectively agree its the right thing to do - not because we force people too. Down that path when it comes to medicine is nothing good.
Conversely: just because it's not a legal requirement, doesn't make you not an idiot for not doing something.
Actually the OP notes that 86% "opted out" of vaccination. That remaining 14% is going to include children who can't be vaccinated, or for whom the vaccine doesn't work (i.e. does not convey immunity, for whatever reason).
Both those two groups get no real choice in their vulnerability, but they are affected by the 86% who are being parented by idiots.
You do realize the solar system is not necessarily aligning its orbital plane with the galactic orbital plane, and that the volume of the galaxy around it's orbital plane is enormous?
Something going "up" isn't heading out of the galaxy necessarily. In fact, unless it achieves galactic escape velocity, or falls into a conduit of unusual gravity interactions, then it's going to be orbit in and be captured by something, somewhere, eventually.
Also any chemist knows that you always get a little of an unlikely reaction product if your original volume is big enough, or you mix things for long enough. You only need to make a self-replicator (or just a vaguely catalytic) product once.
I disagree - or at least, I think the market is not that intelligent about this idea.
I think what we're seeing is a reflection of the fact that people still tend to appreciate the distinction between things which require internet access, and things which do not - even if it isn't that well informed. People want to be able to say "right, this device can do all of these things with no internet access, and contains this data". But they also want to make sure that, from as many places as possible, they can synchronize and update or change that information. To a huge extent, this is what Dropbox - and the LAN sync protocol - is really all about.
The real problem is that for a variety of reasons, companies draw a hazy, hard to distinguish line around these things (and then stuff like the iPhone doesn't let you stick a bookmark on the main screen like it's an app - if you could, I suspect downloads of the Facebook app would drop to near 0 overnight).
While we're at it, let's imagine a world where unicorns have been genetically engineered into reality...
We don't live in that world, and there are very good reasons to think we may never. There are other, equally good reasons, to think it would be a horrible idea to design a modern economy/society based solely on that assumption. But all of that is a sideshow to the fact that we do not live in that world now.