Same reason they use python - you don't need to be aware of much to get results. In reality, there is very little difference between python and php other than (around) a 200:1 ratio of code in the field and that php is almost exclusively found in world-facing code and python isn't.
As evil atheist pointed out, you missed a bit while reading the article. Anyway, that desktop is very very similar to what my own desktop currently looks like (I run WindowMaker).
The supposition that an entire city would leave *nothing* when the bones of ancient animals can be found is a faulty presupposition.
Dinosaurs existed for around 80 million years. Sheer numbers alone, we're talking hundreds of billions of dinosaurs[1]. How many complete dinosaurs remains lasted long enough for us to find?
If there was a civilisation prior to the dinosaurs, and if they numbered in the billions, we still wouldn't find any trace of them (maybe space junk if they got that far, but even then with the time that has elapsed the space junk may have fell out of orbit too).
[1]Humans only existed for a fraction of that time and we have 7 billion of us here
When news first hit, the media was broadsided and reports/anchors, even from CNN, were positive and even commending Trump.
The next morning (after their 4 AM talking points) the reports were more along the lines of "Oh, we've heard this from North Korea before. It won't really happen.".
And they're right, in a way. These deals take years to complete. Once Trump is no longer president NK will back out of any "deal" they agreed to. Their only reason for wanting peace is due to Trump's willingness to pull the trigger. If a new president, one with a more Obama-ish attitude, comes in then NK will revert to previous behaviour.
Level 4 vehicles (fully self-driving, no human attendant, but geofenced to a specific area) are already here, working in real life, and have been all year.
From your link:
"On November 7, Waymo announced that it was going to start testing cars without a safety driver. "
So when did they start? That announcement and entire article says that they intend to start. It doesn't say that they have started.
Hundreds of these are already ferrying the public around Phoenix, and they now have a licence for full commercial operation.
You claim that they are already ferrying people, the article says that they intend to use the license to ferry people. Do you have another link? This one doesn't support your claim. What they intend to do and what they are currently doing are two different things.
It's irrelevant - the only thing I care about in this debate is where I have a higher chance of being a victim of any crime, gun crimes included.
Most people only care about whether they are safe or not, not whether the gun death rate is higher than the non-gun-death rate. IOW, they care about the murder rate. They care about how safe or not they are, not about how many guns are in the area.
If you really want to drag in relevant stats, how about you pull in the number of gun deaths attributable to gang activity?
My odds of dying by gun goes way down when I am not in a gang, falls further when I am not a criminal, and practically vanishes into nothing when I'm not in an urban area, even though I *OWN* a gun.
The odds of a kid (mine or anyone elses) dying by a gun (mine or anyone elses) is a lot lowerthan the odds of them drowning in my pool. I'm not getting rid of my pool either.
That was hilarious! Almost coffee-out-the-nose funny. I guess you've never been hit by a driver that was driving with a suspended license. I bet you've also never been hit by an illegal^^^ sorry, "undocumented" immigrant with no license or insurance. How nice for you.
If they can't be bothered to get a license you think they are going to get a Tesla? You're right - that *IS* hilarious.
I am serious; if you took some of the worst drivers today and gave them self driving cars with existing tech, you would be saving lives and reducing accidents.
No, you won't. The worst drivers frequently have their license pulled. The worst drivers are already taken of the road.
The remaining drivers will average perhaps three to four accidents over their lifetime, with the odds of a fatality so small it's hardly a rounding error (source). The average american drives 13,476 miles per year (source). Figure on a 40 years worth of driving (giving *YOUR* argument the benefit of bias here), we're looking at 500k miles with a non-fatal accident every 125k miles at worst, and every 250k miles at best for the average driver. We can't say what the fatal accident rate is because it is below 1 for the average driver.
Current *BEST* measured self-driving needs human intervention every 5600 miles (or so says Waymo). It is nowhere near comparable to the 125k miles (worst case). Current SDC is so far off average human drivers they are not even comparable.
In summary, current BEST SDC will have an accident every 5.6k miles. Current human drivers will have an accident every 125k miles. Your assertion makes no sense.
won't get close to the amount of supervision even the best SD system in existence needs.
I also receive data. The E-mail message gets read, and auto-archived on my encrypted IMAP server VM. Unless Google changes IMAP to have expiration dates and forces Dovecot to respect that, the message is going to remain.
Usually I see two ways of having disappearing E-mail work. One is that the E-mail stays with the provider. This works, but once a protocol like IMAP, POP, or another snarfs the E-mail and copies/moves it, that protection is useless. Another way is requiring a special extension, be it a web app, or the content only viewable in some specific program. That also works, but in the age of ransomware, who trusts running a content viewer?
I use IMAP to read gmail. I'm probably not the only one. They would have to disable IMAP/POP for those messages. Then they would have to enforce gmail usage via their chrome browser only so that they can lock down the copy-n-paste hole.
Ultimately it becomes a proprietary message reader that can also read emails and surf the web (approved content only)! Once the a monopoly is achieved they can introduce foolproof google-only DRM into their browser.
The DRM won't be used for Hollywood releases, it will be used to detect wrongthink.
Of course proprietary email standards never took off before, so there is not reason to be afraid that it will take off now.
"I don't need, you know, 200-page reports on something that can be handled on a page. That I can tell you."
So you prefer 200-page reports on something that can be handled by a page? Why?
Because if it is handled on a page, I am not given the full picture, and I have no idea what I sign.
If you don't have the full picture then it isn't being handled on a page. As per your quote, we're talking specifically about things that can be handled on a page.
The entire purpose of TPP was to create a countervailing economic force against China's influence in Asia and the world economy. That was obvious to anyone who read even a few pages about TPP, but of course that's too much to ask of someone who is unwilling to read even a single page of non-bulleted text:
"Trump said he likes his briefings short, ideally one-page if it's in writing. "I like bullets or I like as little as possible. I don't need, you know, 200-page reports on something that can be handled on a page. That I can tell you."
So you prefer 200-page reports on something that can be handled by a page? Why?
You can have a middle ground when you give protection to people based on who they are, not what they're talking about.
BTW, where the hell did this revisionism that the Hitler came out of the left wing come from?
It isn't revisionism. What do you think the national socialist workers party was? The hard-left provides an ideal place to breed authoritarianism because hard-left ideals place the collectives' rights over that of the individual.
You'd have a hard time breeding dictators in an environment that valued individual rights over collective rights. The worst dictators in history come from the hard-left.
Are you a Christian? Would you be fine with it if a shop owner told you he doesn't sell his wares to Christians? Only to, say, Muslims? What if you lived in a small town and the 3 shop owners in the town in addition to the barber decided to not sell any wares or services to Christians, would you be fine with that, too?
Are you white? What if you stopped at a gas station and the owner, a black man, told you "sorry, we don't serve white men". Would that be totally okay to you? Even if your car had to town away? Do you really it would some kind of crime if the law forced this gas station owner to sell to white men, too?
Why is all of that suddenly okay when Google, Facebook and Twitter do it?
Whether you're talking about "free speech" as a legal concept or a moral concept, it only extends to your right to say something. [...] It doesn't mean that other people are obligated to promote your speech or provide you with a platform.
You mean like a wedding cake?
You see, this is where the argument breaks down - either the government forces all businesses to allow all legal speech, or the government allows all businesses to determine what speech they want to allow on businesses platform/cake.
Any in between turns into the government picking the winners of any argument, by allowing only certain arguments to be made.
You know, there's a reason that the hard-left gave rise to Hitler. It's because they were in such a fucking hurry to shutdown down wrongthink by the individual in favour of groupthink by the society.
Popular speech needs no protection - repeat that three times every day before going to bed until you get it.
Well yes. Darwin awards is most definitely victim blaming.
The car killed him.
Nope, he killed himself using a car. He had every opportunity along with the knoledge of what would happen right in the specific circumstances to prevent a car from killing him. But he did nothing to do so.
The car didn't kill him anymore than a gun kills a person, a gun with a warning label that when the trigger is pulled a bullet will be discharged passing through flesh and killing you if it goes through your head,... and yet a person *choses* to shoot himself in the head anyway.
*choice* matters. He had a choice. Not only did the car not kill him, given the circumstances this can barely be considered an accident.
If the gun manufacturer makes a repeated and well-publicised claim that the gun is smart enough to know when it is pointed at people and will not kill people, then your argument holds. Right now Tesla makes stupid claims. They should walk back from those claims - especially any claim including the words "autopilot", because an actual autopilot in an aircraft does not require sub-6 second human interventions to prevent loss of life.
Call me when a gun manufacturer claims that their gun is smart enough to not kill people, and then we'll talk.
"Are you saying that 6 seconds is enough time to go from "not in control of car" to "take control of car"?"
Easily, with time to spare for even modest drivers. You might as well ask if 6 seconds is enough time for a driver to see an obstruction and start to brake.
If you're the driver, you're already in control of the car. You really think that 6 seconds is enough to context switch from seeing a movie, or reading a book, to avoiding an obstacle?
Get ready to receive your nobel prize if you have any evidence of this - you've obviously got some findings the rest of the world will be happy to review.
"Six seconds is plenty of time for an aircraft pilot? Just what aircraft did you fly in that required sub-6 second response times in the air?"
If you think 6 seconds isn't enough time to react to a problem then hand in your driving license - if you even have one - because you'd be lethal on the road.
I didn't say that. Are you saying that 6 seconds is enough time to go from "not in control of car" to "take control of car"? Because it sure as hell is enough to go from "not in control of aircraft" to "take control of aircraft".
In any other scenario I agree with you, but the single person to blame for the death in this case is the driver.
Not only did the driver know it was buggy, he apparently knew that the car steered towards THAT SPECIFIC DIVIDER, and even attempted to demonstrate it to his wife by her own admission.
Victim blame much?
If I do something that I know is going to get me raped, in a place that is going to get me raped, and ignore warnings telling me that what I'm doing is about to get me raped then there's two possible explainations for that: attempted suicide, or Darwin award.
The car killed him. If Tesla stoppe using the words self-driving in all of their literature I'd agree that not steering while in the drivers seat is stupid. But, Tesla uses the words "self-driving" in their literature to sell cars.
They should stop claiming that their car has any self-driving capabilities.
Well, to be fair many of the alt right carry nazi flags, have SS tattoos, and so on.
No. A *few* of the alt-right carry nazi flags, have SS tattoos, and so on. General society shuns these people anyway so they aren't a threat.
OTOH, very many people want to silence speech that they do not agree with. This group is not only a lot larger than the nazi group, they are also a larger threat to society.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do people use php?
Same reason they use python - you don't need to be aware of much to get results. In reality, there is very little difference between python and php other than (around) a 200:1 ratio of code in the field and that php is almost exclusively found in world-facing code and python isn't.
You DO realize this isn't a binary choice, right?
* Indent with tabs; align with spaces * Elastic Tabstops * Smart Tabs
= Smart Tabs =
Emacs: * https://github.com/jcsalomon/s...
Vim: * https://www.vim.org/scripts/sc... * http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Inde...
So, you're telling me that, insead of simply using spaces and getting it all correct, I should use tabs, and where tabs break down *then* use spaces?
You mean something like WorldWideWeb
As evil atheist pointed out, you missed a bit while reading the article. Anyway, that desktop is very very similar to what my own desktop currently looks like (I run WindowMaker).
>
The supposition that an entire city would leave *nothing* when the bones of ancient animals can be found is a faulty presupposition.
Dinosaurs existed for around 80 million years. Sheer numbers alone, we're talking hundreds of billions of dinosaurs[1]. How many complete dinosaurs remains lasted long enough for us to find?
If there was a civilisation prior to the dinosaurs, and if they numbered in the billions, we still wouldn't find any trace of them (maybe space junk if they got that far, but even then with the time that has elapsed the space junk may have fell out of orbit too).
[1]Humans only existed for a fraction of that time and we have 7 billion of us here
When news first hit, the media was broadsided and reports/anchors, even from CNN, were positive and even commending Trump.
The next morning (after their 4 AM talking points) the reports were more along the lines of "Oh, we've heard this from North Korea before. It won't really happen.".
And they're right, in a way. These deals take years to complete. Once Trump is no longer president NK will back out of any "deal" they agreed to. Their only reason for wanting peace is due to Trump's willingness to pull the trigger. If a new president, one with a more Obama-ish attitude, comes in then NK will revert to previous behaviour.
You read it here first.
Level 4 vehicles (fully self-driving, no human attendant, but geofenced to a specific area) are already here, working in real life, and have been all year.
From your link:
"On November 7, Waymo announced that it was going to start testing cars without a safety driver. "
So when did they start? That announcement and entire article says that they intend to start. It doesn't say that they have started.
Hundreds of these are already ferrying the public around Phoenix, and they now have a licence for full commercial operation.
You claim that they are already ferrying people, the article says that they intend to use the license to ferry people. Do you have another link? This one doesn't support your claim. What they intend to do and what they are currently doing are two different things.
It's irrelevant - the only thing I care about in this debate is where I have a higher chance of being a victim of any crime, gun crimes included.
Most people only care about whether they are safe or not, not whether the gun death rate is higher than the non-gun-death rate. IOW, they care about the murder rate. They care about how safe or not they are, not about how many guns are in the area.
If you really want to drag in relevant stats, how about you pull in the number of gun deaths attributable to gang activity?
My odds of dying by gun goes way down when I am not in a gang, falls further when I am not a criminal, and practically vanishes into nothing when I'm not in an urban area, even though I *OWN* a gun.
The odds of a kid (mine or anyone elses) dying by a gun (mine or anyone elses) is a lot lowerthan the odds of them drowning in my pool. I'm not getting rid of my pool either.
That was hilarious! Almost coffee-out-the-nose funny. I guess you've never been hit by a driver that was driving with a suspended license. I bet you've also never been hit by an illegal^^^ sorry, "undocumented" immigrant with no license or insurance. How nice for you.
If they can't be bothered to get a license you think they are going to get a Tesla? You're right - that *IS* hilarious.
Georgia's murder rate is much higher than New York's, if we're talking states. Alaska is #1 for gun deaths, Hawaii #50, New York #48.
There is only one reason to use "gun deaths" instead of "murder": intellectual dishonesty.
Seriously, you have to lie to yourself to make your argument work. Do you really think you have a sound argument if you have to lie to yourself?
And others vastly underestimate the challenges of designing a system that can perform better than humans without human oversight
And still OTHERS appear to be utterly ignorant as to the state of the art in self-driving car research and delivery.
Kind of strange for a place like Slashdot to have some many people so very, very ignorant of technology.
As I pointed out in my reply above, current SDC capability is orders of magnitude (two orders, to be exact) worse than the average human driver.
We aren't ignorant of tech, we're just better at stats than you are.
I am serious; if you took some of the worst drivers today and gave them self driving cars with existing tech, you would be saving lives and reducing accidents.
No, you won't. The worst drivers frequently have their license pulled. The worst drivers are already taken of the road.
The remaining drivers will average perhaps three to four accidents over their lifetime, with the odds of a fatality so small it's hardly a rounding error (source). The average american drives 13,476 miles per year (source). Figure on a 40 years worth of driving (giving *YOUR* argument the benefit of bias here), we're looking at 500k miles with a non-fatal accident every 125k miles at worst, and every 250k miles at best for the average driver. We can't say what the fatal accident rate is because it is below 1 for the average driver.
Current *BEST* measured self-driving needs human intervention every 5600 miles (or so says Waymo). It is nowhere near comparable to the 125k miles (worst case). Current SDC is so far off average human drivers they are not even comparable.
In summary, current BEST SDC will have an accident every 5.6k miles. Current human drivers will have an accident every 125k miles. Your assertion makes no sense.
won't get close to the amount of supervision even the best SD system in existence needs.
The UK can be very good at low-volume hand built stuff.
Like the Titanic? ;-)
I also receive data. The E-mail message gets read, and auto-archived on my encrypted IMAP server VM. Unless Google changes IMAP to have expiration dates and forces Dovecot to respect that, the message is going to remain.
Usually I see two ways of having disappearing E-mail work. One is that the E-mail stays with the provider. This works, but once a protocol like IMAP, POP, or another snarfs the E-mail and copies/moves it, that protection is useless. Another way is requiring a special extension, be it a web app, or the content only viewable in some specific program. That also works, but in the age of ransomware, who trusts running a content viewer?
I use IMAP to read gmail. I'm probably not the only one. They would have to disable IMAP/POP for those messages. Then they would have to enforce gmail usage via their chrome browser only so that they can lock down the copy-n-paste hole.
Ultimately it becomes a proprietary message reader that can also read emails and surf the web (approved content only)! Once the a monopoly is achieved they can introduce foolproof google-only DRM into their browser.
The DRM won't be used for Hollywood releases, it will be used to detect wrongthink.
Of course proprietary email standards never took off before, so there is not reason to be afraid that it will take off now.
"I don't need, you know, 200-page reports on something that can be handled on a page. That I can tell you."
So you prefer 200-page reports on something that can be handled by a page? Why?
Because if it is handled on a page, I am not given the full picture, and I have no idea what I sign.
If you don't have the full picture then it isn't being handled on a page. As per your quote, we're talking specifically about things that can be handled on a page.
The entire purpose of TPP was to create a countervailing economic force against China's influence in Asia and the world economy. That was obvious to anyone who read even a few pages about TPP, but of course that's too much to ask of someone who is unwilling to read even a single page of non-bulleted text: "Trump said he likes his briefings short, ideally one-page if it's in writing. "I like bullets or I like as little as possible. I don't need, you know, 200-page reports on something that can be handled on a page. That I can tell you."
So you prefer 200-page reports on something that can be handled by a page? Why?
You can have a middle ground when you give protection to people based on who they are, not what they're talking about.
BTW, where the hell did this revisionism that the Hitler came out of the left wing come from?
It isn't revisionism. What do you think the national socialist workers party was? The hard-left provides an ideal place to breed authoritarianism because hard-left ideals place the collectives' rights over that of the individual.
You'd have a hard time breeding dictators in an environment that valued individual rights over collective rights. The worst dictators in history come from the hard-left.
Are you a Christian? Would you be fine with it if a shop owner told you he doesn't sell his wares to Christians? Only to, say, Muslims? What if you lived in a small town and the 3 shop owners in the town in addition to the barber decided to not sell any wares or services to Christians, would you be fine with that, too?
Are you white? What if you stopped at a gas station and the owner, a black man, told you "sorry, we don't serve white men". Would that be totally okay to you? Even if your car had to town away? Do you really it would some kind of crime if the law forced this gas station owner to sell to white men, too?
Why is all of that suddenly okay when Google, Facebook and Twitter do it?
Whether you're talking about "free speech" as a legal concept or a moral concept, it only extends to your right to say something. [...] It doesn't mean that other people are obligated to promote your speech or provide you with a platform.
You mean like a wedding cake?
You see, this is where the argument breaks down - either the government forces all businesses to allow all legal speech, or the government allows all businesses to determine what speech they want to allow on businesses platform/cake.
Any in between turns into the government picking the winners of any argument, by allowing only certain arguments to be made.
You know, there's a reason that the hard-left gave rise to Hitler. It's because they were in such a fucking hurry to shutdown down wrongthink by the individual in favour of groupthink by the society.
Popular speech needs no protection - repeat that three times every day before going to bed until you get it.
Victim blame much?
Well yes. Darwin awards is most definitely victim blaming.
The car killed him.
Nope, he killed himself using a car. He had every opportunity along with the knoledge of what would happen right in the specific circumstances to prevent a car from killing him. But he did nothing to do so.
The car didn't kill him anymore than a gun kills a person, a gun with a warning label that when the trigger is pulled a bullet will be discharged passing through flesh and killing you if it goes through your head, ... and yet a person *choses* to shoot himself in the head anyway.
*choice* matters. He had a choice. Not only did the car not kill him, given the circumstances this can barely be considered an accident.
If the gun manufacturer makes a repeated and well-publicised claim that the gun is smart enough to know when it is pointed at people and will not kill people, then your argument holds. Right now Tesla makes stupid claims. They should walk back from those claims - especially any claim including the words "autopilot", because an actual autopilot in an aircraft does not require sub-6 second human interventions to prevent loss of life.
Call me when a gun manufacturer claims that their gun is smart enough to not kill people, and then we'll talk.
"Are you saying that 6 seconds is enough time to go from "not in control of car" to "take control of car"?"
Easily, with time to spare for even modest drivers. You might as well ask if 6 seconds is enough time for a driver to see an obstruction and start to brake.
If you're the driver, you're already in control of the car. You really think that 6 seconds is enough to context switch from seeing a movie, or reading a book, to avoiding an obstacle?
Get ready to receive your nobel prize if you have any evidence of this - you've obviously got some findings the rest of the world will be happy to review.
"Six seconds is plenty of time for an aircraft pilot? Just what aircraft did you fly in that required sub-6 second response times in the air?"
If you think 6 seconds isn't enough time to react to a problem then hand in your driving license - if you even have one - because you'd be lethal on the road.
I didn't say that. Are you saying that 6 seconds is enough time to go from "not in control of car" to "take control of car"? Because it sure as hell is enough to go from "not in control of aircraft" to "take control of aircraft".
If an airliners autopilot made a mistake that the pilot had plenty of time to correct but didn't bother we'd be blaming the pilot, not the automation.
Six seconds is plenty of time for an aircraft pilot? Just what aircraft did you fly in that required sub-6 second response times in the air?
Are you seriously saying you only care about this one edge case and not the 40% less accidents?
There isn't a "40% less accidents". If there was I'd care, but there isn't.
In any other scenario I agree with you, but the single person to blame for the death in this case is the driver. Not only did the driver know it was buggy, he apparently knew that the car steered towards THAT SPECIFIC DIVIDER, and even attempted to demonstrate it to his wife by her own admission.
Victim blame much?
If I do something that I know is going to get me raped, in a place that is going to get me raped, and ignore warnings telling me that what I'm doing is about to get me raped then there's two possible explainations for that: attempted suicide, or Darwin award.
The car killed him. If Tesla stoppe using the words self-driving in all of their literature I'd agree that not steering while in the drivers seat is stupid. But, Tesla uses the words "self-driving" in their literature to sell cars.
They should stop claiming that their car has any self-driving capabilities.
Well, to be fair many of the alt right carry nazi flags, have SS tattoos, and so on.
No. A *few* of the alt-right carry nazi flags, have SS tattoos, and so on. General society shuns these people anyway so they aren't a threat.
OTOH, very many people want to silence speech that they do not agree with. This group is not only a lot larger than the nazi group, they are also a larger threat to society.