Yes there is. I'd post a link but there are so many links to it I just couldn't pick one. BBC, new york times, everyone has the video of the art shredding live on camera.
Why would I EVER connect to in-store wifi? Even if they manage to change the law enough to let them turn the store into a faraday cage, I can still GO OUTSIDE and find out anything I want.
When you cool a volume of air you squeeze all the water out of it. The water condenses on the computer components, and your computer breaks.
I suppose as long as you dehydrated the inside first and kept several moisture absorption packs in there it would be ok.
Honestly water cooling is going to be better bang for the buck. you're just going to do an inefficient job of what the ambient air does fine to normal functional components.
You most certainly can! It simply becomes criminalized. That means if you ever have a problem with the government and they CAN'T simply read all your communications they'll simply jail you for making it difficult for them to pin something else on you.
Computers are machines that help us think. If we can think better, we can do all the rest of those things you are talking about much, much easier. I would say more and better computing power is the only thing that is going to elevate us out of the purely biological drive to expand until collapse.
For the auto maker to be found liable for an accident their vehicle would have to be the cause of the accident.
By their very nature self driving cars are roadcam powerhouses, every possible angle is accounted for and recorded, so not only will a self driving car never willfully make a decision that could cause them liability they would _always_ be able to prove that the other driver was at fault in an accident, by virtue of having every moment of the accident caught on video!
Self driving cars could even get a reputation for being vicious prosecutors. If you cause an accident you'll find your insurance notified before you can call them. The police too. In the case of a hit and run the car could report you to the police before you even turned the corner with pictures showing that you were texting.
If you have a habit of cutting autonomous cars off, perhaps they will begin lowering your rating as a driver. You may find that they often swarm to passively box you in and force you to behave on the freeway. What are you going to do about that? An AI swarm could be the king of malicious compliance.
Both Netflix and Bittorrent allow you to download the movie on an unmetered network for later viewing. Netflix because they graciously allow you to do so, bittorrent because that's just how it works when you have a drm free file.
I'll never buy a self driving car. That's ridiculous! I will pay for a subscription service and let someone else worry about whether they need maintenance or upgrades.
The vast majority of the time I don't even need a car. Really I need my car AT MOST about an hour a day, the rest of the time it just sits there slowly falling apart.
Hate to break it to you dude, but that guy was either misinformed or pulling your leg;
The GAU-8/A ammunition is linkless, reducing weight and avoiding a great deal of potential for jamming. The feed system is double-ended, allowing the spent casings to be recycled back into the ammunition drum,[12] instead of ejected from the aircraft, which would require considerable force to eliminate potential airframe damage.
I kind of think we're going to see a lifestyle emerge of people having no residence other than their truck cab. Think about it; get to hang out in a car all day every day, stop whenever you want anywhere you can find cargo to run, and more or less screw around or work a programming job. Someone stops a rig like that to rob it they're going to get an ass full of buckshot from someone who doesn't have to worry about keeping on the road.
You know, it'll all be on camera, any hijacking attempt would be immediately filmed and broadcast to the police, even in an unmanned vehicle. A single guard could cover a whole convoy of automatics, but frankly I think the whole hijacking thing is probably going to happen as much as high-stakes train robberies happen these days.
the ogg file format has supported multiple streams pretty much since inception. Couple this with a bit of positional tagging information and you're done.
The gag orders have made speech entirely pointless. It is not legal for this company to tell us the truth without going to jail because their right of free speech has been suspended. That make every statement about the subject entirely meaningless, because anyone who knows the truth is prohibited by law from saying anything about it, or even insinuating the truth via omission.
Free speech was fun, free speech is over. It's lost all meaning now.
Saying it's the 'right' thing to do is purely subjective. You don't know what he believes is the right thing to do, I'm sure in his mind he's already done the right thing and trying to argue that he should do YOUR right thing instead of his own right thing will never get you anywhere. It's a null argument.
It very much will affect his position at that company. His overriding goal is to make choices that keep the company strongest to the exclusion of all other considerations. If there is a choice to be made, his job is literally to make the choice that keeps the company as strong as possible. If he takes other concepts into consideration, such as 'the greater good' or 'common human decency or dignity' or even 'keep us from going extinct in a thousand years' he is quite literally not doing the job he's payed so very very much money to do. That's what could get him fired!
I personally share the same perspective of you, I think this is a dick move by a dick of a person in service to a dick corporation and it saddens me that there's no good way to make it more profitable to be ethical and responsible than it is to make every shady 'fuck you' deal you can. I think the only effective, non-violent solution to this will probably be the erosion of privacy for the upper classes, think universal ubiquitous paparazzi letting anyone who wanted to watch them 24 hours a day, even when they sleep, to make sure nobody's whispering shady evil deals into their profit hungry ears. It's only fair, the upper classes literally have the capacity to do that to any of us already, things will begin to change when we can do it back. The evil ones will wither under the glare of public attention while those honorable and respectable will be proven so and rewarded. I can't see any other positive future.
Nukes are as powerful as they are because it was originally quite difficult to aim them. You could point them at a city but they might actually land miles away, which is no big deal if you're devastating a multi-mile area.
Nukes are very messy though! Wouldn't it be so much more fun to be able to launch hellfire-equivalent munitions from space? All you really need to do to achieve that is make sure you can hit your target.
The better your aim is, the smaller the projectile can be. Wouldn't it be cool to assassinate people by dropping an arrow made of white hot supersonic depleted uranium through the tops of their skulls?
The government is sitting on millions of dollars of Bitcoin seized successfully from the Dread Pirate Roberts' Silk Road shutdown. What a perfect way to put this money back in circulation; political manipulation!
Backing is required for fiat currencies because they do not have any sort of built in scarcity other than what is enforced by the owner of the fiat. The promise is really to bust down my door with guns if I try to produce any US$ myself, thus creating an artificial scarcity of valuable pieces of basic paper and ink.
Bitcoin is not a fiat currency, it's closer to gold in that it has an actual scarcity, just like one day we'll run out of gold one day we'll run out of bitcoins and our option for expanding the supply will boil down to further subdividing the pool that remains. The backing is fundamentally mathematical in nature, just like gold's value as a currency is that it is very difficult to produce for ANYONE, but if I discover a gold mine in my back yard I can produce all the gold I want without worrying that someone will put me in jail for doing so.
The way the united states was weaned off the gold standard was to enforce fiat style rules on gold, treating ownership of gold the same way we treat counterfeiters, as if the act of owning gold was counterfeiting currency. They took the gold and provided fiat currency instead. It was not until the fiat US$ was firmly established that laws on gold ownership were relaxed.
So far the most effective NSA attack has been the $3 wrench; they put people in a room and tell them they need to comply or a man with a gun will put them in a metal box forever. Secret laws, secret courts, gag orders preventing you from even talking to a lawyer? These are fundamentally incompatible with the legitimate rule of law.
At what arbitrary point does a chemical reaction jump from being 'just' a chemical reaction to being a chemical reaction that qualifies as 'life'?
Note that this is fundamentally human-centric question. Life is a word that we made up, there is no intrinsic property of life. If I take a handful of carbon, water, and trace elements, then use a magic machine to put them together in a new shape that farts and asks for tea, I've not imbued the items with some material substance that was not there before to make it alive, it's just the same items as before in a new shape with the difference that they're very slowly burning in a way that wants tea and causes flatulence.
The difference between a burning match and a grasshopper is one of complexity, not of a fundamental universal natural difference. The word 'life' is like the Fahrenheit scale; it serves to demarcate the world in a way that makes it easier for us to understand at our scale and with our level of understanding. It's a comparison to ourselves. When we say something is 'alive', we mean 'alive like I'm alive'. We are the metric, which is why we do not consider other complex chemical reactions to be alive despite the fact that simpler reactions like fire really do match up with the basic tenets of life.
I have no doubt that should we encounter an alien entity that has slow, deeply nuanced and complicated thoughts on the timescale of the lives of stars, it would consider all of our thrashings to be no more complicated and difficult to understand than basic chemistry. It would not consider our individual selves to be alive any more than you consider a single cell in your body to be independently alive. We would not be 'alive like it' is alive, but that won't change that we feel that we are 'alive like us' alive, because our definition of life has our kind of life at the center of it.
Slashdot Mirror
I encourage all other parents to do this, as it will give my own children an immeasurable advantage once they join the workforce.
Yes there is. I'd post a link but there are so many links to it I just couldn't pick one. BBC, new york times, everyone has the video of the art shredding live on camera.
Click on your username at the upper right
click 'options'
go to the 'Exclusions' tab
click the box next to msmash
click save.
Enjoy a social justice free slashdot!
Thankfully this nonsense made me aware of the fact that I wasn't logged in.
Why would I EVER connect to in-store wifi? Even if they manage to change the law enough to let them turn the store into a faraday cage, I can still GO OUTSIDE and find out anything I want.
When you cool a volume of air you squeeze all the water out of it. The water condenses on the computer components, and your computer breaks.
I suppose as long as you dehydrated the inside first and kept several moisture absorption packs in there it would be ok.
Honestly water cooling is going to be better bang for the buck. you're just going to do an inefficient job of what the ambient air does fine to normal functional components.
You most certainly can! It simply becomes criminalized. That means if you ever have a problem with the government and they CAN'T simply read all your communications they'll simply jail you for making it difficult for them to pin something else on you.
Computers are machines that help us think. If we can think better, we can do all the rest of those things you are talking about much, much easier. I would say more and better computing power is the only thing that is going to elevate us out of the purely biological drive to expand until collapse.
For the auto maker to be found liable for an accident their vehicle would have to be the cause of the accident.
By their very nature self driving cars are roadcam powerhouses, every possible angle is accounted for and recorded, so not only will a self driving car never willfully make a decision that could cause them liability they would _always_ be able to prove that the other driver was at fault in an accident, by virtue of having every moment of the accident caught on video!
Self driving cars could even get a reputation for being vicious prosecutors. If you cause an accident you'll find your insurance notified before you can call them. The police too. In the case of a hit and run the car could report you to the police before you even turned the corner with pictures showing that you were texting.
If you have a habit of cutting autonomous cars off, perhaps they will begin lowering your rating as a driver. You may find that they often swarm to passively box you in and force you to behave on the freeway. What are you going to do about that? An AI swarm could be the king of malicious compliance.
Both Netflix and Bittorrent allow you to download the movie on an unmetered network for later viewing. Netflix because they graciously allow you to do so, bittorrent because that's just how it works when you have a drm free file.
I'll never buy a self driving car. That's ridiculous! I will pay for a subscription service and let someone else worry about whether they need maintenance or upgrades.
The vast majority of the time I don't even need a car. Really I need my car AT MOST about an hour a day, the rest of the time it just sits there slowly falling apart.
I didn't see any ads either, I pay for youtube red as part of my indispensable google music account.
There is absolutely nothing about being a middle aged man that would intrinsically prevent you from doing either one of those things.
Hate to break it to you dude, but that guy was either misinformed or pulling your leg;
The GAU-8/A ammunition is linkless, reducing weight and avoiding a great deal of potential for jamming. The feed system is double-ended, allowing the spent casings to be recycled back into the ammunition drum,[12] instead of ejected from the aircraft, which would require considerable force to eliminate potential airframe damage.
The point is that by changing the laws they can use a $5 wrench to get your passwords rather than a 5 billion dollar super computer.
The policeman camera is the best reign of all, and many cities are implementing it.
I kind of think we're going to see a lifestyle emerge of people having no residence other than their truck cab. Think about it; get to hang out in a car all day every day, stop whenever you want anywhere you can find cargo to run, and more or less screw around or work a programming job. Someone stops a rig like that to rob it they're going to get an ass full of buckshot from someone who doesn't have to worry about keeping on the road.
You know, it'll all be on camera, any hijacking attempt would be immediately filmed and broadcast to the police, even in an unmanned vehicle. A single guard could cover a whole convoy of automatics, but frankly I think the whole hijacking thing is probably going to happen as much as high-stakes train robberies happen these days.
the ogg file format has supported multiple streams pretty much since inception. Couple this with a bit of positional tagging information and you're done.
It's working.
The gag orders have made speech entirely pointless. It is not legal for this company to tell us the truth without going to jail because their right of free speech has been suspended. That make every statement about the subject entirely meaningless, because anyone who knows the truth is prohibited by law from saying anything about it, or even insinuating the truth via omission.
Free speech was fun, free speech is over. It's lost all meaning now.
Neither of these statements are facts.
Saying it's the 'right' thing to do is purely subjective. You don't know what he believes is the right thing to do, I'm sure in his mind he's already done the right thing and trying to argue that he should do YOUR right thing instead of his own right thing will never get you anywhere. It's a null argument.
It very much will affect his position at that company. His overriding goal is to make choices that keep the company strongest to the exclusion of all other considerations. If there is a choice to be made, his job is literally to make the choice that keeps the company as strong as possible. If he takes other concepts into consideration, such as 'the greater good' or 'common human decency or dignity' or even 'keep us from going extinct in a thousand years' he is quite literally not doing the job he's payed so very very much money to do. That's what could get him fired!
I personally share the same perspective of you, I think this is a dick move by a dick of a person in service to a dick corporation and it saddens me that there's no good way to make it more profitable to be ethical and responsible than it is to make every shady 'fuck you' deal you can. I think the only effective, non-violent solution to this will probably be the erosion of privacy for the upper classes, think universal ubiquitous paparazzi letting anyone who wanted to watch them 24 hours a day, even when they sleep, to make sure nobody's whispering shady evil deals into their profit hungry ears. It's only fair, the upper classes literally have the capacity to do that to any of us already, things will begin to change when we can do it back. The evil ones will wither under the glare of public attention while those honorable and respectable will be proven so and rewarded. I can't see any other positive future.
Nukes are as powerful as they are because it was originally quite difficult to aim them. You could point them at a city but they might actually land miles away, which is no big deal if you're devastating a multi-mile area.
Nukes are very messy though! Wouldn't it be so much more fun to be able to launch hellfire-equivalent munitions from space? All you really need to do to achieve that is make sure you can hit your target.
The better your aim is, the smaller the projectile can be. Wouldn't it be cool to assassinate people by dropping an arrow made of white hot supersonic depleted uranium through the tops of their skulls?
The government is sitting on millions of dollars of Bitcoin seized successfully from the Dread Pirate Roberts' Silk Road shutdown. What a perfect way to put this money back in circulation; political manipulation!
Backing is required for fiat currencies because they do not have any sort of built in scarcity other than what is enforced by the owner of the fiat. The promise is really to bust down my door with guns if I try to produce any US$ myself, thus creating an artificial scarcity of valuable pieces of basic paper and ink.
Bitcoin is not a fiat currency, it's closer to gold in that it has an actual scarcity, just like one day we'll run out of gold one day we'll run out of bitcoins and our option for expanding the supply will boil down to further subdividing the pool that remains. The backing is fundamentally mathematical in nature, just like gold's value as a currency is that it is very difficult to produce for ANYONE, but if I discover a gold mine in my back yard I can produce all the gold I want without worrying that someone will put me in jail for doing so.
The way the united states was weaned off the gold standard was to enforce fiat style rules on gold, treating ownership of gold the same way we treat counterfeiters, as if the act of owning gold was counterfeiting currency. They took the gold and provided fiat currency instead. It was not until the fiat US$ was firmly established that laws on gold ownership were relaxed.
So far the most effective NSA attack has been the $3 wrench; they put people in a room and tell them they need to comply or a man with a gun will put them in a metal box forever. Secret laws, secret courts, gag orders preventing you from even talking to a lawyer? These are fundamentally incompatible with the legitimate rule of law.
At what arbitrary point does a chemical reaction jump from being 'just' a chemical reaction to being a chemical reaction that qualifies as 'life'?
Note that this is fundamentally human-centric question. Life is a word that we made up, there is no intrinsic property of life. If I take a handful of carbon, water, and trace elements, then use a magic machine to put them together in a new shape that farts and asks for tea, I've not imbued the items with some material substance that was not there before to make it alive, it's just the same items as before in a new shape with the difference that they're very slowly burning in a way that wants tea and causes flatulence.
The difference between a burning match and a grasshopper is one of complexity, not of a fundamental universal natural difference. The word 'life' is like the Fahrenheit scale; it serves to demarcate the world in a way that makes it easier for us to understand at our scale and with our level of understanding. It's a comparison to ourselves. When we say something is 'alive', we mean 'alive like I'm alive'. We are the metric, which is why we do not consider other complex chemical reactions to be alive despite the fact that simpler reactions like fire really do match up with the basic tenets of life.
I have no doubt that should we encounter an alien entity that has slow, deeply nuanced and complicated thoughts on the timescale of the lives of stars, it would consider all of our thrashings to be no more complicated and difficult to understand than basic chemistry. It would not consider our individual selves to be alive any more than you consider a single cell in your body to be independently alive. We would not be 'alive like it' is alive, but that won't change that we feel that we are 'alive like us' alive, because our definition of life has our kind of life at the center of it.