I don't know if I'd want locked doors on the cockpit. What if the pilots become incapacitated like in the movie "Airplane!"? Imagine being a passenger on a plane that has become pilotless but nobody can do anything about it because the cockpit is barricaded.
Just what do you think anybody could really do? These are jets that we are talking about. It's not that easy with no training whatsoever to just fly and land a plane.
I say have nothing less than a bulkhead between the cockpit and the cabin that is impossible to open during pressurized flight. It would require equalized pressure between the outside of the plane, cockpit, and passenger area to remove the bulkheads.
There is a reason why there is a co-pilot. Plenty of instances in which the pilot had a heart attack, or other serious condition, and the co-pilot took over.
If you keep those areas separate, add an armed sky marshal to the flight, prevent the passenger area from having any communication with the cockpit, hijacking becomes nigh impossible. It doesn't matter what anybody says inside the passenger cabin. That plane is going to land at the airport and you can call in Chuck Norris to sort it out.
With rapidly declining advertising revenues in the traditional distribution channels due to a fundamental shift in the way people are consuming entertainment, there is a massive glut of advertising budgets and an absolute panic in the marketing douchebag asshole fucktard executives world.
Twitter provides massive amounts of data for marketers to masturbate over and determine just what is in our little pea brains at the moment and what we might buy. Value to marketing? HIGH.
Redhat makes operating systems. Value to marketing? LOW.
FB is the poster child for not just marketing data, but the destination for the attention deficit order generation to get their communication fix, consume entertainment, and progressively more and more, obtain news about what goes on in the world. Do I understand it? Not one fucking bit. Shoot me first. Is it valuable to marketing? Apparently extremely valuable. Every business out there is fumbling around with consultants and 3rd party vendors to get a FB presence up and running.
MS makes operating systems, office collaboration software, database systems, a beginning attempt at a phone system, and a complete failure in the entertainment market. Value to marketers? Moderate, and only in the form of crapware.
Zynga is valuable for the same reason as FB.
EA? I dunno about those assholes. Ever since most of those companies went full retard with DLC, DRM, and general stupidity I don't play video games from them anymore. I'm into the indie stuff out there. Surprising quality from most stuff Humble Bundle sells.
I dunno. There are limits to that kind of approach.
We are talking about $3 billion. With a fucking capital B. How much is Snapchat at now in total investment with the shareholders? If all parties are in for maybe $20 million, that $3 billion starts to look like one hell of a successful exit plan.
I would take the first offer in a split second if it was at a couple hundred times the initial investment. Take it, move on, innovate someplace else.
Unless you had some sort of ideological reason not to. Only thing I can think about is if I created a successful zero-knowledge service with very little competition I would keep it alive for those reasons. Snapchat does not qualify for that. It's a fad and they should know it.
I would love to use the phone. Two problems though:
1) Apple sucks balls in every way possible except a nice shiny product. I'm not going to sell my soul and my freedom to join their walled garden filled with zombies. Plus, Siri is not actually that fucking good. I laugh my ass off constantly when my buddy starts to repeat himself several times to her.
2) As much as Apple does suck balls, everybody else sucks so much worse for voice recognition.
There is literally no product on Earth that reliably captures my voice and executes the commands properly.
Although, many years ago at Comdex (yes it was some time ago), I saw a mini notebook with voice recognition from a oil & gas tech company. It was capable of recognizing commands from people, in loud environments (the floor at Comdex), with no previous training at all. Acted flawlessly. I have no idea why a nearly 20 year old piece of tech surpasses Android and Apple today.
I have voice controls in my vehicle. You would think that would be better right? To make a call I need to press and say:
Voice command Phone Address Book Say the Name Confirm the name by number LISTED ON DISPLAY Confirm which phone number a number LISTED ON DISPLAY Confirm I want to dial
I get so damn frustrated that I just use the keypad at an intersection (very quick) and then use my handsfree the rest of time. That's only if it's important. Otherwise, the time I spend driving is actually a release at this point.
One is navigation. Looking at your built in navigation and hitting a few buttons or zooming on the map is not all that bad at an intersection. I find that I am at an intersection for at least 15-30 seconds, if not a lot more during traffic. Taking 5 seconds to review the map should not lead to a distraction where you create a delay in traffic. You really have to not be paying attention to stop picking things up in your peripheral vision while stopped.
Two is communications. This is just evidence of how bad the addiction is to information technology today. I see plenty of people who cannot go more than 5 minutes without checking FaceFuck or Twatter. That near constant need for connection and feedback is based on the same psychological principles that keep people at slot machines for hours on end.
What makes it worse is that these people are creating the STANDARD for communication in the future. When I tell people that I did not respond to them since I was driving and on my way back to the office I actually get the response back, "That's no excuse. You could have just sent a text message. You need to work on your communication skills".
I think these people would literally go insane if you transported them back to say around 1719. "What the fuck do you mean I have to wait 5 months to get a letter back!", and "You mean I have to walk all the way across town, knock on a door, be welcomed into the house, BEFORE I can talk to my friend?"
Not sure that I can call where we are headed progress. It seems that attention span is at a historically low level for humanity.
I have the solution to this kind of misconceptions about driving.
Put them in a car and create a controlled accident at 20mph with a fucking wall. That should make them think of what it would have been like without a 5 point harness, helmet, and padding.
Then explain to them how much worse it would be at 45-55mph, which seems to be the average speed on roads today.
I get your point about the profit, however, getting people to stop growing weed is easy.
Do you raise your own chickens for eggs and meat? Do you grow your own vegetables? Probably not. Do you go to the store and buy premium organic vegetables on occasion? Do you shop for the best meat? I do.
If weed does become legal it will be an issue with quality. It really is not all that easy to grow weed with high quality results, and it takes money to do so.
Most people are lazy. If they can go down to the store and buy it versus the hard work and financial investment of growing it, I think they will buy it cheaply instead. It will be cheap. I mean it's WEED.
Sorry to double post here, but if meth was available at a pharmacy, maybe the worst stupid thing to happen would be a meth addict shoplifting some drugs. By shoplifting I mean grabbing it from the pharmacist when they open the cupboard that has it stocked. Same way spray paint is protected these days (and that is truly stupid).
If it was legal and cheap, than there would be no place for a "criminal" to go and get it outside of legal means. Jay and Silent Bob would not make a living on the corner handing shit out anymore. I just don't see the stupid things that can be done anymore to obtain it in a society where it's legalized.
You know what is far more fucking addictive than meth? FOOD. Food is outright the most addictive substance known to man with horrifying withdrawal symptoms that are always fatal.
Yet, I don't see a pandemic of homeless people going insane and stabbing people to go and get food. They seem to get by with the homeless shelters, food pantries, and existing charities/foundations just fine.
I know that if I saw a homeless person crying and literally going insane with hunger approach me that my only option available to me would be to feed him/her. It's the only option.
He's clearly referring to heavy drugs. Meth addicts will do stupid things for their next fix.
That's the whole point. If the "stupid" thing a meth addict has to do is panhandle for 20 minutes, walk to Walgreens, by a little baggie and kit, that's far less damaging to society.
All of those "stupid" things are completely eliminated when you get rid of drug prohibition.
Do you need to stupid things, pay exorbitant amounts of money, enable organized crime, slink in the shadows, etc. to get some fucking beer? Or do you go down to the liquor store, slap down a few bucks, and get fucked up in your own home peaceably?
You take world wide distribution digitally at an annual cost of around $100 (adjusting for local economies) and that adds up to a shitload of residuals for the artists. Can you fucking imagine how much money Disney cartoons, The Three Stooges, M*A*S*H, etc. would generate at that volume?
There is so much good content that has been created that is considered classic, cult classic, etc.
Unfortunately, they want to force feed you the newer content at ever increasing rates. Having quality hand picked older content that stands the test of time and multiple generations cannot be allowed to compete with the crap of today that is only a vehicle for marketing.
Drug use is not the problem, nor is it something that needs to be prevented. In fact, you get rid of the bullshit, it practically prevents itself.
The vast majority of all drug use is not harmful to society. Let's face some facts here. Alcohol is far more dangerous to health and safety than most drugs have ever been combined. Let's also be realistic and set aside marijuana into another category; Use and Distribution. Only its distribution is associated with crimes beyond the act of distribution itself. Crimes associated with use are less prevalent and damaging than crimes associated with alcohol. IIRC, several campuses have outright admitted they wished there was more weed usage than alcohol usage for that same reason.
An artificial economy created by prohibition is responsible for the crimes. If an addict could get meth/heroin/coke cheaply at a pharmacy along with the opportunity for help that would eliminate most of the problems.
We never did learn any lessons from prohibition of alcohol did we?
This really speaks to the Full Retard status of Big Entertainment.
The writing has been on the wall for a long damn time, they just can't see it. Not possible for them I guess.
Netflix/Hulu/Amazon Prime is a piracy killer. What more proof do they want? If you offer a service at a reasonable price that people actually want.... surprise surprise.. people will pay the money.
I don't pirate nearly as much these days simply because of how easy (and cost effective) the alternative is now.
The price points of these services are affordable as well. Most young people that are poor with little discretionary income can afford some bandwidth at this point and $20 for Netflix.
Perhaps that's the real battle. Big Entertainment must have constant growth and increase in prices and $100+ per month simply is not going to work. At least not in this fucking economy.
Don't just delete your account. That does nothing.
TRANSFER ALL OF IT TO VIMEO OR AN EQUIVALENT
One of the biggest things that pisses me off is that I had to deal with the absolute suck that is the YouTube API and develop automated content creation and BI platforms that used YouTube. Google (surprise it has something to do with OAUTH) deprecated YouTube API v2. Now you have zero ability to fully automate anything with YouTube.
Why did I have to do this in the first place? Businesses are under the impression that YouTube is the only brand out there and they have to use it to create their presence
The more people that start using a YouTube equivalent the better........
Of course it will just repeat itself all over at Vimeo some day. Don't marketers and execs fuck up everything at some point?
As a "hoarder", I've documented my collection pretty well. I never burn anything to DVD's or USB hard drives. Everything is networked and available to all devices.
It's about saving the really classic stuff. The real jewels of my collection are all the Disney and Looney Tunes cartoons. Stuff that is just not available on market today due their outright greed and insane copyright mentality. Some of the collections like M*A*S*H I ripped direct from the DVDs themselves.
The real value of my collection? At some point in the future the stuff I have, while classic, will not be readily available. My collection, nearing triple digit TB's, will be easily duplicated and shared.
My cartoon collection alone is very hard to come by. My younger relatives love to be able to watch Donald Duck and his nephews. Sadly, Disney being the douchenozzles they are have adamantly refused to share those cartoons with today's children.
It would be one thing if the residents on the island identified with being Argentinian and the majority wished to be part of that country. However, it's not.
Why does Argentina continue to assert that the island is theirs at all?
It's about the same stupidity that China engages in claiming that Taiwan is theirs.
If we are going to be fair here, this is an electric car. Drawing a direct comparison between the rates of internal combustion cars and electric cars hardly seems wise.
That being said, 1 in 6300 is a lot. We should develop safer battery systems for these cars.
I would buy one in a second though if I could afford a house, the money needed to outfit it with solar, etc. Otherwise it just seems wholly impractical to charge it up with municipal power, and emission standards on hybrids are already pretty impressive.
Slashdot Mirror
Its not pleasant to examine a 500 year old clam
That seems rather self explanatory doesn't it?
It was actually named after the Ming Dynasty
That does make more sense than Ming the Merciless...
I don't know if I'd want locked doors on the cockpit. What if the pilots become incapacitated like in the movie "Airplane!"? Imagine being a passenger on a plane that has become pilotless but nobody can do anything about it because the cockpit is barricaded.
Just what do you think anybody could really do? These are jets that we are talking about. It's not that easy with no training whatsoever to just fly and land a plane.
I say have nothing less than a bulkhead between the cockpit and the cabin that is impossible to open during pressurized flight. It would require equalized pressure between the outside of the plane, cockpit, and passenger area to remove the bulkheads.
There is a reason why there is a co-pilot. Plenty of instances in which the pilot had a heart attack, or other serious condition, and the co-pilot took over.
If you keep those areas separate, add an armed sky marshal to the flight, prevent the passenger area from having any communication with the cockpit, hijacking becomes nigh impossible. It doesn't matter what anybody says inside the passenger cabin. That plane is going to land at the airport and you can call in Chuck Norris to sort it out.
Simple.
With rapidly declining advertising revenues in the traditional distribution channels due to a fundamental shift in the way people are consuming entertainment, there is a massive glut of advertising budgets and an absolute panic in the marketing douchebag asshole fucktard executives world.
Twitter provides massive amounts of data for marketers to masturbate over and determine just what is in our little pea brains at the moment and what we might buy. Value to marketing? HIGH.
Redhat makes operating systems. Value to marketing? LOW.
FB is the poster child for not just marketing data, but the destination for the attention deficit order generation to get their communication fix, consume entertainment, and progressively more and more, obtain news about what goes on in the world. Do I understand it? Not one fucking bit. Shoot me first. Is it valuable to marketing? Apparently extremely valuable. Every business out there is fumbling around with consultants and 3rd party vendors to get a FB presence up and running.
MS makes operating systems, office collaboration software, database systems, a beginning attempt at a phone system, and a complete failure in the entertainment market. Value to marketers? Moderate, and only in the form of crapware.
Zynga is valuable for the same reason as FB.
EA? I dunno about those assholes. Ever since most of those companies went full retard with DLC, DRM, and general stupidity I don't play video games from them anymore. I'm into the indie stuff out there. Surprising quality from most stuff Humble Bundle sells.
I dunno. There are limits to that kind of approach.
We are talking about $3 billion. With a fucking capital B. How much is Snapchat at now in total investment with the shareholders? If all parties are in for maybe $20 million, that $3 billion starts to look like one hell of a successful exit plan.
I would take the first offer in a split second if it was at a couple hundred times the initial investment. Take it, move on, innovate someplace else.
Unless you had some sort of ideological reason not to. Only thing I can think about is if I created a successful zero-knowledge service with very little competition I would keep it alive for those reasons. Snapchat does not qualify for that. It's a fad and they should know it.
I would love to use the phone. Two problems though:
1) Apple sucks balls in every way possible except a nice shiny product. I'm not going to sell my soul and my freedom to join their walled garden filled with zombies. Plus, Siri is not actually that fucking good. I laugh my ass off constantly when my buddy starts to repeat himself several times to her.
2) As much as Apple does suck balls, everybody else sucks so much worse for voice recognition.
There is literally no product on Earth that reliably captures my voice and executes the commands properly.
Although, many years ago at Comdex (yes it was some time ago), I saw a mini notebook with voice recognition from a oil & gas tech company. It was capable of recognizing commands from people, in loud environments (the floor at Comdex), with no previous training at all. Acted flawlessly. I have no idea why a nearly 20 year old piece of tech surpasses Android and Apple today.
Sweeet
That would be awesome. Have that simulator make a tour around the country at all the high schools.
I have voice controls in my vehicle. You would think that would be better right? To make a call I need to press and say:
Voice command
Phone
Address Book
Say the Name
Confirm the name by number LISTED ON DISPLAY
Confirm which phone number a number LISTED ON DISPLAY
Confirm I want to dial
I get so damn frustrated that I just use the keypad at an intersection (very quick) and then use my handsfree the rest of time. That's only if it's important. Otherwise, the time I spend driving is actually a release at this point.
This should be put into categories apparently.
One is navigation. Looking at your built in navigation and hitting a few buttons or zooming on the map is not all that bad at an intersection. I find that I am at an intersection for at least 15-30 seconds, if not a lot more during traffic. Taking 5 seconds to review the map should not lead to a distraction where you create a delay in traffic. You really have to not be paying attention to stop picking things up in your peripheral vision while stopped.
Two is communications. This is just evidence of how bad the addiction is to information technology today. I see plenty of people who cannot go more than 5 minutes without checking FaceFuck or Twatter. That near constant need for connection and feedback is based on the same psychological principles that keep people at slot machines for hours on end.
What makes it worse is that these people are creating the STANDARD for communication in the future. When I tell people that I did not respond to them since I was driving and on my way back to the office I actually get the response back, "That's no excuse. You could have just sent a text message. You need to work on your communication skills".
I think these people would literally go insane if you transported them back to say around 1719. "What the fuck do you mean I have to wait 5 months to get a letter back!", and "You mean I have to walk all the way across town, knock on a door, be welcomed into the house, BEFORE I can talk to my friend?"
Not sure that I can call where we are headed progress. It seems that attention span is at a historically low level for humanity.
I have the solution to this kind of misconceptions about driving.
Put them in a car and create a controlled accident at 20mph with a fucking wall. That should make them think of what it would have been like without a 5 point harness, helmet, and padding.
Then explain to them how much worse it would be at 45-55mph, which seems to be the average speed on roads today.
Can you be wrapped in invisibility? I think not.
You obviously never suffered through high school...
That's assuming that it's genetic and not environmental.
I get your point about the profit, however, getting people to stop growing weed is easy.
Do you raise your own chickens for eggs and meat? Do you grow your own vegetables? Probably not. Do you go to the store and buy premium organic vegetables on occasion? Do you shop for the best meat? I do.
If weed does become legal it will be an issue with quality. It really is not all that easy to grow weed with high quality results, and it takes money to do so.
Most people are lazy. If they can go down to the store and buy it versus the hard work and financial investment of growing it, I think they will buy it cheaply instead. It will be cheap. I mean it's WEED.
Sorry to double post here, but if meth was available at a pharmacy, maybe the worst stupid thing to happen would be a meth addict shoplifting some drugs. By shoplifting I mean grabbing it from the pharmacist when they open the cupboard that has it stocked. Same way spray paint is protected these days (and that is truly stupid).
If it was legal and cheap, than there would be no place for a "criminal" to go and get it outside of legal means. Jay and Silent Bob would not make a living on the corner handing shit out anymore. I just don't see the stupid things that can be done anymore to obtain it in a society where it's legalized.
You know what is far more fucking addictive than meth? FOOD. Food is outright the most addictive substance known to man with horrifying withdrawal symptoms that are always fatal.
Yet, I don't see a pandemic of homeless people going insane and stabbing people to go and get food. They seem to get by with the homeless shelters, food pantries, and existing charities/foundations just fine.
I know that if I saw a homeless person crying and literally going insane with hunger approach me that my only option available to me would be to feed him/her. It's the only option.
He's clearly referring to heavy drugs. Meth addicts will do stupid things for their next fix.
That's the whole point. If the "stupid" thing a meth addict has to do is panhandle for 20 minutes, walk to Walgreens, by a little baggie and kit, that's far less damaging to society.
All of those "stupid" things are completely eliminated when you get rid of drug prohibition.
Do you need to stupid things, pay exorbitant amounts of money, enable organized crime, slink in the shadows, etc. to get some fucking beer? Or do you go down to the liquor store, slap down a few bucks, and get fucked up in your own home peaceably?
FRAND would be the most sane thing to do.
You take world wide distribution digitally at an annual cost of around $100 (adjusting for local economies) and that adds up to a shitload of residuals for the artists. Can you fucking imagine how much money Disney cartoons, The Three Stooges, M*A*S*H, etc. would generate at that volume?
There is so much good content that has been created that is considered classic, cult classic, etc.
Unfortunately, they want to force feed you the newer content at ever increasing rates. Having quality hand picked older content that stands the test of time and multiple generations cannot be allowed to compete with the crap of today that is only a vehicle for marketing.
What is profoundly sickening is that you would be cheered on by a tearful crowd in some places right now...
(I'm thinking Iowa)
Drug use is not the problem, nor is it something that needs to be prevented. In fact, you get rid of the bullshit, it practically prevents itself.
The vast majority of all drug use is not harmful to society. Let's face some facts here. Alcohol is far more dangerous to health and safety than most drugs have ever been combined. Let's also be realistic and set aside marijuana into another category; Use and Distribution. Only its distribution is associated with crimes beyond the act of distribution itself. Crimes associated with use are less prevalent and damaging than crimes associated with alcohol. IIRC, several campuses have outright admitted they wished there was more weed usage than alcohol usage for that same reason.
An artificial economy created by prohibition is responsible for the crimes. If an addict could get meth/heroin/coke cheaply at a pharmacy along with the opportunity for help that would eliminate most of the problems.
We never did learn any lessons from prohibition of alcohol did we?
You know it might just be possible that Swedish prisons were actually working to rehabilitate the prisoners. Victims of their own success?
Swedish Prison?
That sounds better at this point than trying to survive in the US economy with fuckwits running the show....
(I mean all of them, not one side)
This really speaks to the Full Retard status of Big Entertainment.
The writing has been on the wall for a long damn time, they just can't see it. Not possible for them I guess.
Netflix/Hulu/Amazon Prime is a piracy killer. What more proof do they want? If you offer a service at a reasonable price that people actually want.... surprise surprise.. people will pay the money.
I don't pirate nearly as much these days simply because of how easy (and cost effective) the alternative is now.
The price points of these services are affordable as well. Most young people that are poor with little discretionary income can afford some bandwidth at this point and $20 for Netflix.
Perhaps that's the real battle. Big Entertainment must have constant growth and increase in prices and $100+ per month simply is not going to work. At least not in this fucking economy.
Don't just delete your account. That does nothing.
TRANSFER ALL OF IT TO VIMEO OR AN EQUIVALENT
One of the biggest things that pisses me off is that I had to deal with the absolute suck that is the YouTube API and develop automated content creation and BI platforms that used YouTube. Google (surprise it has something to do with OAUTH) deprecated YouTube API v2. Now you have zero ability to fully automate anything with YouTube.
Why did I have to do this in the first place? Businesses are under the impression that YouTube is the only brand out there and they have to use it to create their presence
The more people that start using a YouTube equivalent the better. .... ...
Of course it will just repeat itself all over at Vimeo some day. Don't marketers and execs fuck up everything at some point?
As a "hoarder", I've documented my collection pretty well. I never burn anything to DVD's or USB hard drives. Everything is networked and available to all devices.
It's about saving the really classic stuff. The real jewels of my collection are all the Disney and Looney Tunes cartoons. Stuff that is just not available on market today due their outright greed and insane copyright mentality. Some of the collections like M*A*S*H I ripped direct from the DVDs themselves.
The real value of my collection? At some point in the future the stuff I have, while classic, will not be readily available. My collection, nearing triple digit TB's, will be easily duplicated and shared.
My cartoon collection alone is very hard to come by. My younger relatives love to be able to watch Donald Duck and his nephews. Sadly, Disney being the douchenozzles they are have adamantly refused to share those cartoons with today's children.
I never did understand that.
It would be one thing if the residents on the island identified with being Argentinian and the majority wished to be part of that country. However, it's not.
Why does Argentina continue to assert that the island is theirs at all?
It's about the same stupidity that China engages in claiming that Taiwan is theirs.
If we are going to be fair here, this is an electric car. Drawing a direct comparison between the rates of internal combustion cars and electric cars hardly seems wise.
That being said, 1 in 6300 is a lot. We should develop safer battery systems for these cars.
I would buy one in a second though if I could afford a house, the money needed to outfit it with solar, etc. Otherwise it just seems wholly impractical to charge it up with municipal power, and emission standards on hybrids are already pretty impressive.