"Consider: Do you think a generic manager could step in and manager a newspaper without intimate knowledge of the newspaper business? How well do you think that company would do if it actually happened?"
The CEO of my wife's previous company which is the major business newspaper of Norway has no actual understanding of how a newspaper works. He buys stuff, mortgages stuff, he basically just talks to the board and plays golf and buys stuff. He remains successful primarily by buying other media which has a subscriber base and runs them into the ground by siphoning their profits to maintain the core newspaper.
I believe that since he's been there 15 years, it's extremely likely that a guy who's only real qualification is that he wears a tie can in fact keep a newspaper business running by doing little more than simply approving what the people beneath him say and schmoozing investors....
I actually agree with you about most of what you said, I just wanted to point out that your analogy was flawed as morons run newspapers too.
Symbian may actually be the worst code base humanity had ever seen.
Symbian = What happens when you try to implement all the features of an operating system without actually writing a kernel or develop development tools... or even have a debugger.
Then there was the infamous clean-up stack which was Symbian's famous "revolutionary" method of implementing crash handling without actually implementing exceptions.
I have to agree that Series 60 UI wasn't too awful, and Nokia did implement some of the most amazing features ever in telephones, but let's be honest, Symbian was what killed Nokia. People claim it was Windows, but Apple simple just took their entire market because they developed an operating system that could attract developers. Developers tries Symbian and just left... it was the worse thing ever made.
Wouldn't it be dependent on the project, the maintainers, the organization, the feedback mechanisms and the underlying structure of the code to begin with?
Or should we get into a "Which is better, Chocolate or Vanilla?" thing.
Open source projects managed by systems like GitHub and forums are often maintained very well. But there are hundreds of projects placed into the open source that are left floating with no support for every one project which actually has a support infrastructure.
Federal contracts work in such a way where the code will now be made open (at least within the federal government) and once the contract is half way done or delivered, the contractors will be moved to something else and the code will die a slow painful death with no support.
Closed code itself isn't more secure than open source. They are exactly the same. It's how well they were made and how well they were maintained that matters. What really matters is whether there's an organization that is supporting the product open or closed. If a company prefers their code to be closed and that they maintain it themselves, that's their choice. The government should however require that they receive a source license to all code they use.
Odd, I highly doubt my credentials to capably identify how professional a practitioner of medicine is in the field of my needs.
I tend to think of them as being like computer technicians and computer scientists... just because you're practicing as a doctor doesn't mean you don't suck at it. Almost universally, "general practitioners" are the least likely people to go back to school for further education while remaining isolated in their own practice.
No thank you! I'd honestly rather read a book/web page and just risk it. Takes less time and if I break myself at least I didn't have to have some guy grab my balls and say cough
I don't understand... I can't for the life of me understand one word of what it is you're talking about.
Are you advocating apps which help kill people?
Are you simply trying to make a comment which draws in argument by offending as many people as possible?
Are you a member of a group of people who feels persecuted (we all do at some point)?
Are you suggesting that preventing conception is killing a baby?
Was your point able to be made without trying to use an entire catalog of offensive slurs?
Could instead of "nigger" which I assume is referring to people in rap music since that's the only place I ever hear of people calling themselves that word, maybe you meant people in general but chose "nigger" because it would draw more outrage?
I can't really say after this entire rant that you have said anything sensible.
I'll try to extract something. - I think you might dislike "left wing liberals" - I think you might believe that if someone doesn't agree with you, they must be a left wing liberal - I think you believe that "left wing liberals" are cruel and hateful people hiding behind a facade - I think your biggest problem is that you seem to think there are a lot of people on the left. - I think you might be a half-white trash & half-black, southern, transvestite non-lesbian female living as a successful housewife descended from German Jews on your mother's side.
There may be a lot of people on the right or left. We call themselves idiots, fools and morons, you're of course included in that category. Left and Right is the new religions of America. There are many people who are neither left or right and address each issue one by one.
I have to ask... this is the second or third story I've read this morning with childish racist comments on the threads.
Slashdot forums are reserved for degrading the writers, the subjects of the stories and other commentors based on incorrect, incomplete or irrelevant information. We are a group of people who believe it's worth the effort to either show people we don't know how nifty smart we are (and generally fail) or to exert our passive aggressive behavior somewhere it's extremely likely we'll simply make fools of ourselves and not care about it.
You're ruining the comments by filling it with racism. If you want to be a racist, there are many forums available to you out there where you can be so in the good company of others who are like minded. Racists generally prefer segregation when possible and I believe that's a very good thing. I think it's generally best to keep racists away from civilized human beings. I don't think it's possible to cure stupid, so I won't try to fix you and teach you that there are far better reasons to hate other people than their skin color or nationality. I recommend you use me as a target. Instead of hating on people for something meaningless, you are welcome to hate me and I will respect you far more for doing so. I will even be proud of you for hating on me since I genuinely consider you to be meaningless and useless. In fact, I know I don't need racism since there are so many people like you to keep my hate quota filled.
So... either hate on people with good reason and have the balls to do it without the AC... or go join some white power group somewhere and talk with the other brilliant minds there about how "Yeh... that black guy (who I'm jealous of since I KNOW he must have a bigger dick than me) is such an asshole (because he's making millions bouncing a rubber ball for a living) and I don't like him."... that's how you guys talk right?
Please in the future reserve this forum for comments on a high quality of crap. It's absolutely terrible when I feel the need on Slashdot to inform people that we prefer to maintain a REALLY low standard here and if there is such a thing as a bottom, you're crossing it.
To be fair... when I read the title of the article, I was wondering to myself whether the news was that we're trying to identify whether a professional athlete was actually able to read or simply had a really good memory.
You see what I did there... it wasn't about race or nationality... it was about how I feel regarding people who prefer to devote their time to bouncing a rubber ball instead of learning to read and write and use their brains for something more than thinking "duh...". You can hate on basketball players for so many things. There's absolutely no reason to bring race into it.
I am certainly no Clinton fan and am resentful that the presidential options this year are down to Lieing, Evil & Stupid 1, Clueless, Evil & Stupid 2 and Blind, Stupid and Goofy 3 as the options. You can choose which is which. The problem with the election is that it has absolutely nothing to do with choosing a presidential candidate to be president but instead has devolved entirely into a reality TV show.
I will however say that I believe that people are always looking for a simple answer to every problem.
1) Hillary probably is not smart enough to understand anything about e-mail 2) Clintonemail.com is a fantastically stupid sounding domain. It's something that if you set it up is meant for friends and family. 3) With her lack of understanding of technology, she probably found the workflow of maintaining two separate e-mail accounts confusing 4) She liked whatever phone she was using and was able to figure out how to send and receive e-mails with it. 5) Her state department phone was probably a Blackberry and frankly... those have sucked for a long time... people who like them like them, people who don't think they are absolute shit. I personally know NATO officials who use free DropBox accounts because the NATO network is so confusing they can't share files or send them in e-mail. 6) She is not a patient person and as soon as she lost her 10th e-mail from her state department phone, she just said "Fuck it, I'll use my own" 7) She didn't want to have her personal conversations on state record. Things like "Bill, while you're at the shop getting cigars to put in your secretary's vagina, can you please pick up milk?" 8) She might even had the state department e-mail address on her phone and couldn't even figure out that you could click "Send from;" and switch accounts.
At the end of the day, I'm almost 100% convinced that while I think Hillary is the type of person who would recommend using a gas chamber to quiet the babies at a hospital, this was more a case of technical incompetence combined with a lack of patience as oppose to malicious intent. She has so many other places she can be evil, I believe you should give her some credit here. This time I think it was more that she was simply stupid.
The joys of law.
- Sony loses lawsuit regarding a change they made in 2010
- Six years later, you have to show proof that you bought a game system probably 7 years earlier... which you didn't keep because you bought the slimmer model or a PS4 or traded it in for something at the game store.
- The terms required to collect the $55 recompense are more or less unachievable except for that one guy who got the PS3 for Christmas and his mom actually saved the receipt for her accounting.
- The amount of time required to earn the $55 is about the same as McDonalds pays their french fry cooks.
So... for the $55... who would give a shit? This will cost Sony $2,000 in recompense and $1,000,000-$10,000,000 in legal fees.
Benjamin Franklin is possibly one of the greatest Americans ever. In fact, it is believed he took credit, through extensive use of the Pennsylvania Gazette, of proliferating the name "American" throughout the colonies in order to unite the people under a common name and cause. When people take pride in being an American, it's because of his efforts to get the people to stop being New Yorkers or Bostonians, etc...
Here is a megaship labeled "Benjamin Franklin... London". So his name is stamped on the ass of a ship that is registered in the place he fought against, because his own America has become less of a tyrant than England with regard to taxation.
Let me pause for a moment here and simply express myself with a question "Holy what the fucking fuck?"
Let's continue further and say that this ship is carrying cargo the wrong direction. Benjamin Frankly surely would have been pissed if he knew that his name was stamped on the ass of a megaship designed to carry everything from wind-up frogs to American flags all made in China while the American's shipped back raw materials and money. This ship damn near symbolizes the destruction of almost everything Benjamin worked his entire life to build.
Where the hell is the petition to remove his name from the ship... maybe label it the Genghis Khan instead or maybe just Earth Wrecker?
If someone from the FBI calls a communication company and says "Can I please have this information to aid in the investigation of....", the person with said ability to provide such information would likely turn them down. It has nothing to do with being rude... it's simply that giving up that information like that would almost certainly leave the company to insane lawsuits from someone who has nothing better to do from behind bars than to hire ambulance chasers to go on full attack.
The FBI, if they issue a request without the word please, they are actually more likely to gain the information they're looking for since unless said company is educating their support staff on the laws of privacy etc... they might be able to get what they want. They don't care if it's fruit from a poisoned tree. They'll probably simply use it as a means to get the guy. Sometimes it's just the information they need to bust the guy... it doesn't have to be used to indict him.
I sat through a great presentation at CERN the day the Higgs was discovered. The physicist who held the dissertation did an absolutely awful job. He honestly could not string together 10 words together into a single coherent sentence to save his life. He was "The guy in the barrel" that day. It was his job to speak to the visitors and explain what the purpose of the LHC was. He went through a stack of slides presenting the principles of particle physics and strangely enough even covered a little quantum physics which I found strange. He clearly hated speaking in front of "normal people" and beyond simply hating it seemed to lack the ability to do so. I've worked with similar scientists (as a translator to human) in other fields for years. It was basically my "turn in the barrel" because I would be responsible for saying "I think your brain is going far faster than your mouth and you skipped... I don't know... about 16 years worth of information in our terms because you didn't even remember where your mouth currently was. You need to take a step back... talk to me like I'm roughly as intelligent as a single cell organism and dumb it down a bit". I would then take what they said and run it though about 150 Google searches per minute of speech and then present "He said he wants pepperoni".
These guys are amazing and I'm not kidding when I say that the ones who smoke the bowl are far easier to communicate with. It slows them down to only 5 times human speed. On the other hand, given them nicotine and caffeine and their speed triples. They are well know for walking around with 5 or more nicotine patches and a 350ml cup of espresso and sugar when they're onto something. If you've see the movie "Hoodwinked"... think of Twitchy with a 190+ IQ.
That being said... scientists absolutely do postulate theories by plucking crazy ideas from their asses. Ideas like quantum pairs and dark matter almost certainly start off as wild assed guesses. And those are the absolute best theories out there. They take a certain level of creativity that is upon epic levels. BUT!!!! those are leaps that are founded on what is believed to be some sound principles.
Though there might be a ton of "If this is true and we believe this theory based on that is also true and therefore this would seem reasonable... it is possible that our lack of ability to observe this is likely because it's some form of matter which can't be observed since we only know how to observe matter as we already understand it. This other wild ass theory talks about anti-matter which we now seem to believe is actually quite possible, but now that we believe we can in fact observe anti-matter.. maybe there's some other state of matter we still haven't discovered that could be... counter-matter! Wait... counter-matter, while technically accurate sounds too much like anti-matter... we need a name for matter we can't really define yet and we also can't really observe... hmm... while simply being too black to see would be entirely wrong as simply not seeing past it would be good enough to detect it, this is more like invisible matter or truly transparent matter that neither absorbs, stores, etc... light or other EM we use to identify matter. Maybe we can call it vacuum matter... sounds stupid. So, for pop science we'll call it 'Dark Matter'... it worked for Superman. Though Bizarro was far cooler, but 'Bizarro matter' just is a little to DC comics."... then before publishing something, the progenitor (proper word?) stood up at a symposium an presented his theory (though it's more likely there was some correspondence before hand) and threw the idea out there with the some fairly vague theory that would apply some level of math or at least references to corresponding science to describe the properties of some sort of "dark matter" that would describe something that appears to have mass without actually being observable other than by consuming space where there should have simply been vacuum.
There was a hell of a leap of faith and to be fair, last I heard, the sta
I would suggest that there's something in the middle.
1) Theories typically have to start off as wild assed hypotheses plucked from somewhere. I know of a group of highly published physicists who sit around passing a joint giggling and coming up with theories which they investigate further once they sober up a bit. Thinking outside of the box to find answers often requires creativity... especially when the theory is completely unable to be observed.
2) Due to obvious lack of observed information, new theories are often published citing other theories as their foundation. This is amazing because it can help prove the original theory by providing a possible application. It's very little different than smoking the joint and giggling over "what if...?". It's a necessary step to allow peers to collaborate. Publishing for peer review does not actually mean "I believe I'm indisputably correct, bow to me or prove me wrong". It's a method of sharing information so other people can try and run with it too. There are too frigging many people (especially journalists... even "educated" journalists) who seem to believe papers publish for peer review are proofs. Or worse, because of this stupid religion vs. science debate, there are people "representing science" who are trying to explain "The theory of evolution" to idiots running museums displaying humans riding dinosaurs and misrepresenting the word "Theory" to make it sound like "As good as fact".
3) There are good scientists who work for a living and try to establish a foundation for their theories before simply grabbing 5 papers written by others, gluing them together like a collage and spamming them into the first journal to take them. These guys will actually put some effort into it, visit the local university and peer review with students, professors, etc... and eventually after believing they've reached a point of reasonable certainty that their theory isn't simply shit, they'll release the paper to be torn apart by a group of people who will like the idea and try to run with it, like the idea and try to disprove it as a favor to the author, or others who will try to disprove the idea using nothing but a crayon and a napkin because they're dicks.
4) There are bad scientists who somehow manage to establish published bibliographies that span multiple pages. Some of these guys are people who got their Ph.D., "mentored" shit loads of grad students and put his name first on the paper. What's worse is that he also made the student pay to get it published. Even worse is that he didn't put his name on other papers that he should have. Even worse, he didn't even really read the paper he put his name on, he simply said "He looks pretty smart... If I take credit for his work, I won't likely get burned". That scientist, when he eventually publishes his own work likely doesn't have 2 grams of originality. What's worse is that since he's such an amazingly highly published scientist with so many good papers under his belt, the journalists will flock to his paper.
Science and the scientific process is not flawless and has to be constantly improved on. I obviously represented it terribly here and that was because I'm playing devil's advocate. I hold science in incredibly high regard and respect. I spent two years of my life helping scientists and mathematicians translate from Ph.D. to human for the purpose of publishing papers or patents. I learned more by doing that then I could in a hundred years of reading. I believe part of the scientific process that works well is the hecklers and the critics. They're like the fellow who would stand behind the roman general upon his chariot while entering Rome whose job it was was to whisper "You're not a god" as a reminder.
I love it... the proper name for a TV is "The idiot box". I learned this from my friend's grandmother while I was growing up. She stomped around yelling "Quit sitting in front of that idiot box. Your brain will fall out of your heads".
I don't watch TV anymore. I have better things to do with my time. Movies are for airplanes and sometimes while sitting at a restaurant waiting for my food. There's absolutely no value what-so-ever to spending money on another one of those idiot boxes. In all fairness, while I do in fact own an idiot box capable of meeting the requirements mentioned, it's because I needed a low cost 4K screen to fit more code on. I have never used it for watching videos of any type... though my kids watch YouTube on it once in a blue moon.
So... do yourself a favor... don't waste your money... you'd be absolutely amazed at how awesome life is without one of those things.
Technically incorrect... 4K video is not actually sharper at the same bitrate. In fact, 1080p at the same bitrate generally produces much higher quality since most of the bitrate is used on things like actual data reducing the effects of quantization. Add additional color depth on top of that and it's amazing. In fact, you'd be absolutely shocked to see old fashioned SD at the same bitrate. I developed software to compress masters for years. I would receive 100 new films in 270Mb/s raw 10-bit 4:2:2 every year. Even now, 1080p H.265 at 50Mbit/sec is a much poorer quality picture than those were.
As you add resolution, you add massive amount of motion vector information as well as having to reduce the encoded data following quantization to scale across four times as many pixels. As such, the amount of data left over following compression is crap at 4K.
So... now the real question is... how do you get a decent 1080p stream from Netflix... the answer of course is... you don't. We don't watch Netflix for quality... we watch it for cost and variety.
Google is first and foremost a data warehouse who sells data directly or indirectly of every type to anyone willing to pay or it.
Every single project from Google exists for gathering data. This means that things like self-driving car data, traffic information gathering, etc... they are all gathered by Google at all times. You are willing to buy Android and use Google maps because it makes your life better... you're willing to pay for the features supplied by collecting location data from other peoples phones and soon cars. In exchange you give all your data to Google.
To be more accurate... Google is first and foremost a corporation responsible to the needs and desires of their shareholders and are responsible above all else (including any form of ethic related bonds) to produce a return on investment to all shareholders. As long as no written law is being broken or if the law is being broken, Google can beat it in court, or so long as any possible fines related to losing in court will be less than the profit gained by breaking the law, Google has a responsibility to its shareholders to rape, pillage and plunder every possible customer to make that return on investment.
This is free market capitalism. It's the core responsibility of free market capitalism. Return on investment is more important than anything else. There are gamblers managing your retirement fund somewhere who dump their money into your company and whether you're ethical or not, whether you have to have people murdered in back alleys or not... that's irrelevant... free market capitalism says "You must show a profit or we'll find someone to replace you who is willing to do what it takes"
That's not fair... you shouldn't laugh at him for saying " step out of the house." at least he didn't say "step outside of my house" which would of course be technically inaccurate. The technically accurate one would be "step outside of my parents basement".
I think there's a point around age 21 that it's no longer "my house" as opposed to "my parent's house" or possibly "my childhood home". If you're still living in your parents house after 21, you should be paying rent and utilities and pay to have your own door installed so that it's theoretically an apartment.
Stallman doesn't carry a phone? That's so awesome!!! It's so cool to think someone so amazing and being such a tech icon can live like it's 1899.
I have always assumed his rats nest hair and frizzy beard were fake... does he take them off when he travels so he can move entire unrecognized?
Dear god man... Stallman is new to the party... we've had telephone paranoia dating back to even before Kevin Mitnick. I'm almost sure there was even something related to it in Sneakers the movie.
Please never given Stallman credit for things he has no right to credit for... he already takes far more credit than he's due for things he actually had something to do with.
Thank you... that's the thing, when referring to "The Internet" it is to a very specific thing. When you are from New York, you don't refer to "Manhattan"... you refer to "The City". If you move to Tokyo, you still know "The City" is Manhattan.
Internets which is an abbreviation for inter-network of course has always been a generic. As another poster clearly defines, inter-network communication takes the term network which (annoyingly enough) refers to the bounds of a layer-2 broadcast domain... this is also known as a LAN or local area network. Upon connecting these two LANs or networks together using a routing device (surprisingly generally referred to as a router) that performs forwarding at based on layer-3 addressing (not necessarily using routing tables), inter-network communication is accomplished. This previously was referred to as internet communication. Though we no longer commonly use the term as it is easily confused with Internet communication which is absolutely not the same thing as internet communication.
Internet (with an upper-case "I") communication refers specifically to "The Internet" which there is and can only ever be one of.
internet (with a lower-case "I") simply requires two connected LANs via a router. This topology definition can be called internet but instead should be called inter-network communication.
The AP obviously lacks on-staff technical expertise, researchers or fact checkers, otherwise they would have caught this sooner.
I was heading to the office in a little bit... it's 1:30am... for shits and giggles, I should get my hard drive out of the box in the garage. If I can still read the thing and figure out how it works, I have 3-4 bitcoins I mined a while back in there:)
Paypal alternative... that isn't a bunch of scum...
Well, there's the bitch of it isn't it.
Let's imagine you're an honest person interested in setting up a payment processing system. You also want to provide your customers with some form of insurance against fraud and you want to operate on a scale large enough to accept payments worldwide and have legal means of moving cash in and out of your system. You also want to avoid violating tax laws, support proper reporting methods required by payment processing firms around the world. You want to make it flexible enough to support easy integration into people's websites and businesses.
Then you realize that because of :
a) banking regulation
b) electronic money transfer regulation
c) fear from banks over competition
d) scale (the world IS BIG)
e) trust (you're a small nobody, who will actually trust you with their money)
f) insurance laws
g) laundering laws
h) international trade restrictions
i) human stupidity (95% of all support calls are probably morons who can't find the any key and are on the phone for 25 minutes)
k) honesty (most of your initial customers are choosing you because they can't choose anyone else)
l) angel investors (there are some that don't suck.... but anyone willing to give you enough money to actually start such a business want a 70% or more)
m) advertising (you'll need to do it in 100 countries and 50+ languages to build legitimacy)
n) fraud fraud fraud... just like porn drives all new technologies, fraud drives all new payment systems. I worked as a developer in banking for a while... you'd be absolutely shocked.
I can go for a while. But believe it or not, PayPal is doing REALLY REALLY well considering what they do. They kinda suck now in many ways, they become more and more like a traditional bank every day... except they are "too big for their britches" so to say. Just guessing, they probably have nearly 100,000 transactions a day which are disputed by someone or another.
My experience so far has led me to believe their dispute system is handled by a room of monkeys that see the dispute messages and they click "For Buyer" or "For Seller" and then suspect that 90% of all disputes will end there. Then they make it as hard as humanly possible to contact them which will chase off another 90% of what's left... then they leave on hold long enough that their call room in India or China might be able to handle it... but you'll be talking to someone that has only talked with people who are REALLY REALLY REALLY pissed or REALLY REALLY REALLY desperate for 12+ hours a day 5-6 days a week for the past 2 years. Most everyone they talk to begs, cries or yells at them. They are utterly destroyed people you're talking to. They lack all human emotion anymore as they've been hardened. They probably get home from work, look at their kids and think to themselves "if they ask me for ANYTHING, I will kill them or myself or both".
So... while I sympathize with you... I think as long as there are dishonest people or stupid people in the world and there are regulations to hopefully help protect people, such a system is impossible.
I used to go to a store where after we finished shopping, we could buy french fries from a machine which deep fried individual portions and cooked them. It was cheap and easy.
Consider a simple machine which would lift a potato and pass it over a row of blades and then a single blade perpendicular to the row. This would cut multiple fries side by side. Let them drop into a basket which is then lowered into oil for two minutes. Using a rectangular vat, it should be possible to queue 4-8 orders in a relatively small bath of oil similar in size to what would be expected in a consumer deep fryer. Lift the basket from the oil, move it over a "salting area" and grind salt or shake salt onto them and flip the basket into a cardboard box and voila.
Fries are the easiest issue to solve.
Cycle the oil automatically by using two separate vats to keep the machine in operation at all times. Release oil that has cooled through a drain valve which pumps into a "bio-diesel dispensary" so that people driving biodiesel cars can be kind enough to dispose of the oil for McDonalds or buy a diesel generator to run the restaurant itself. A McDonalds delivery truck could pump some more oil into the tank on delivery. An intelligent design would automate this so the truck could be self-driving later on.
Burgers aren't a challenge either, automatic sauce dispensers are easy enough. If the burgers are frozen in stacks where the stack itself is engineered, you could have a stack that appears like a roll of 100 burgers (or more) which can be dispensed one by one onto a belt. The belts can feed a cooker (I'm assuming some sort of microwave oven?), the hardest part is the cheese which tends to be a bit sticky, but if the cheese is shipped as a block instead of slice by slice, then the cheese could be managed by using a Norwegian style wire cheese slicer mounted inverted. Onions can be cut more or less the same as potatoes.
Other deep fried foods are easy enough.
So far as I can figure, most parts could easily have "self cleaning" using disposable or washable sanitary wipes after each portion is prepared. The remaining part... less so.
In Europe for years, we've been using computers or telephone apps to order fast food (at least in Scandinavia and I first saw a touch screen ordering system in Strasbourg 10 years ago.
A conveyor belt system can easily allow food to be prepared and loaded onto a tray as it's prepared.
A second conveyor belt system can solve most of the waste disposal issues and can even properly sort recyclables.
For most of the cleaning of the restaurant, I recommend a rooba type robot capable of lifting chairs by their legs while vacuuming and washing the floor. Again pretty easy design... especially with the new Microsoft vision SDKs coming as part of the Hololens development kits.
Windows on the inside of the building should be pretty easy... adapt the roomba to have a squeegie. I am curious to try this one and will likely do so next week.
Bathrooms can be mostly cleaned using some of the "self-cleaning bathroom" technologies found at some of the European public facilities. It's not perfect, but it does work well enough.
I honestly don't see why it should be necessary to need more than one or two employees on staff at any time... and they should follow the steps told to them by a computer.
Of course, it would be better to pay that employee $15/hr before it becomes minimum wage and $20/hr when it does so a professional of some type is in the position instead of an unskilled laborer. They would spend most of their time managing when things go wrong and handling things the robots aren't versatile enough to do otherwise.
As for "robotic arms"... that's a stupid ass idea for people who don't think far enough ahead to properly design a restaurant to not need humans.
Slashdot Mirror
"Consider: Do you think a generic manager could step in and manager a newspaper without intimate knowledge of the newspaper business? How well do you think that company would do if it actually happened?"
...
The CEO of my wife's previous company which is the major business newspaper of Norway has no actual understanding of how a newspaper works. He buys stuff, mortgages stuff, he basically just talks to the board and plays golf and buys stuff. He remains successful primarily by buying other media which has a subscriber base and runs them into the ground by siphoning their profits to maintain the core newspaper.
I believe that since he's been there 15 years, it's extremely likely that a guy who's only real qualification is that he wears a tie can in fact keep a newspaper business running by doing little more than simply approving what the people beneath him say and schmoozing investors.
I actually agree with you about most of what you said, I just wanted to point out that your analogy was flawed as morons run newspapers too.
Oh hell no!!!
Symbian may actually be the worst code base humanity had ever seen.
Symbian = What happens when you try to implement all the features of an operating system without actually writing a kernel or develop development tools... or even have a debugger.
Then there was the infamous clean-up stack which was Symbian's famous "revolutionary" method of implementing crash handling without actually implementing exceptions.
I have to agree that Series 60 UI wasn't too awful, and Nokia did implement some of the most amazing features ever in telephones, but let's be honest, Symbian was what killed Nokia. People claim it was Windows, but Apple simple just took their entire market because they developed an operating system that could attract developers. Developers tries Symbian and just left... it was the worse thing ever made.
Wouldn't it be dependent on the project, the maintainers, the organization, the feedback mechanisms and the underlying structure of the code to begin with?
Or should we get into a "Which is better, Chocolate or Vanilla?" thing.
Open source projects managed by systems like GitHub and forums are often maintained very well. But there are hundreds of projects placed into the open source that are left floating with no support for every one project which actually has a support infrastructure.
Federal contracts work in such a way where the code will now be made open (at least within the federal government) and once the contract is half way done or delivered, the contractors will be moved to something else and the code will die a slow painful death with no support.
Closed code itself isn't more secure than open source. They are exactly the same. It's how well they were made and how well they were maintained that matters. What really matters is whether there's an organization that is supporting the product open or closed. If a company prefers their code to be closed and that they maintain it themselves, that's their choice. The government should however require that they receive a source license to all code they use.
So pay people to make content that they are willing to make for free? Why?
Isn't that the realistic plumber emoji?
Odd, I highly doubt my credentials to capably identify how professional a practitioner of medicine is in the field of my needs.
I tend to think of them as being like computer technicians and computer scientists... just because you're practicing as a doctor doesn't mean you don't suck at it. Almost universally, "general practitioners" are the least likely people to go back to school for further education while remaining isolated in their own practice.
No thank you! I'd honestly rather read a book/web page and just risk it. Takes less time and if I break myself at least I didn't have to have some guy grab my balls and say cough
I don't understand... I can't for the life of me understand one word of what it is you're talking about.
Are you advocating apps which help kill people?
Are you simply trying to make a comment which draws in argument by offending as many people as possible?
Are you a member of a group of people who feels persecuted (we all do at some point)?
Are you suggesting that preventing conception is killing a baby?
Was your point able to be made without trying to use an entire catalog of offensive slurs?
Could instead of "nigger" which I assume is referring to people in rap music since that's the only place I ever hear of people calling themselves that word, maybe you meant people in general but chose "nigger" because it would draw more outrage?
I can't really say after this entire rant that you have said anything sensible.
I'll try to extract something.
- I think you might dislike "left wing liberals"
- I think you might believe that if someone doesn't agree with you, they must be a left wing liberal
- I think you believe that "left wing liberals" are cruel and hateful people hiding behind a facade
- I think your biggest problem is that you seem to think there are a lot of people on the left.
- I think you might be a half-white trash & half-black, southern, transvestite non-lesbian female living as a successful housewife descended from German Jews on your mother's side.
There may be a lot of people on the right or left. We call themselves idiots, fools and morons, you're of course included in that category. Left and Right is the new religions of America. There are many people who are neither left or right and address each issue one by one.
I have to ask... this is the second or third story I've read this morning with childish racist comments on the threads.
... that's how you guys talk right?
Slashdot forums are reserved for degrading the writers, the subjects of the stories and other commentors based on incorrect, incomplete or irrelevant information. We are a group of people who believe it's worth the effort to either show people we don't know how nifty smart we are (and generally fail) or to exert our passive aggressive behavior somewhere it's extremely likely we'll simply make fools of ourselves and not care about it.
You're ruining the comments by filling it with racism. If you want to be a racist, there are many forums available to you out there where you can be so in the good company of others who are like minded. Racists generally prefer segregation when possible and I believe that's a very good thing. I think it's generally best to keep racists away from civilized human beings. I don't think it's possible to cure stupid, so I won't try to fix you and teach you that there are far better reasons to hate other people than their skin color or nationality. I recommend you use me as a target. Instead of hating on people for something meaningless, you are welcome to hate me and I will respect you far more for doing so. I will even be proud of you for hating on me since I genuinely consider you to be meaningless and useless. In fact, I know I don't need racism since there are so many people like you to keep my hate quota filled.
So... either hate on people with good reason and have the balls to do it without the AC... or go join some white power group somewhere and talk with the other brilliant minds there about how "Yeh... that black guy (who I'm jealous of since I KNOW he must have a bigger dick than me) is such an asshole (because he's making millions bouncing a rubber ball for a living) and I don't like him."
Please in the future reserve this forum for comments on a high quality of crap. It's absolutely terrible when I feel the need on Slashdot to inform people that we prefer to maintain a REALLY low standard here and if there is such a thing as a bottom, you're crossing it.
To be fair... when I read the title of the article, I was wondering to myself whether the news was that we're trying to identify whether a professional athlete was actually able to read or simply had a really good memory.
You see what I did there... it wasn't about race or nationality... it was about how I feel regarding people who prefer to devote their time to bouncing a rubber ball instead of learning to read and write and use their brains for something more than thinking "duh...". You can hate on basketball players for so many things. There's absolutely no reason to bring race into it.
I am certainly no Clinton fan and am resentful that the presidential options this year are down to Lieing, Evil & Stupid 1, Clueless, Evil & Stupid 2 and Blind, Stupid and Goofy 3 as the options. You can choose which is which. The problem with the election is that it has absolutely nothing to do with choosing a presidential candidate to be president but instead has devolved entirely into a reality TV show.
;" and switch accounts.
I will however say that I believe that people are always looking for a simple answer to every problem.
1) Hillary probably is not smart enough to understand anything about e-mail
2) Clintonemail.com is a fantastically stupid sounding domain. It's something that if you set it up is meant for friends and family.
3) With her lack of understanding of technology, she probably found the workflow of maintaining two separate e-mail accounts confusing
4) She liked whatever phone she was using and was able to figure out how to send and receive e-mails with it.
5) Her state department phone was probably a Blackberry and frankly... those have sucked for a long time... people who like them like them, people who don't think they are absolute shit. I personally know NATO officials who use free DropBox accounts because the NATO network is so confusing they can't share files or send them in e-mail.
6) She is not a patient person and as soon as she lost her 10th e-mail from her state department phone, she just said "Fuck it, I'll use my own"
7) She didn't want to have her personal conversations on state record. Things like "Bill, while you're at the shop getting cigars to put in your secretary's vagina, can you please pick up milk?"
8) She might even had the state department e-mail address on her phone and couldn't even figure out that you could click "Send from
At the end of the day, I'm almost 100% convinced that while I think Hillary is the type of person who would recommend using a gas chamber to quiet the babies at a hospital, this was more a case of technical incompetence combined with a lack of patience as oppose to malicious intent. She has so many other places she can be evil, I believe you should give her some credit here. This time I think it was more that she was simply stupid.
Sadly, as a former Obama supporter, that was the deal breaker for me. His entire White House legal staff was plucked from RIAA and MPAA :(
https://www.wired.com/2009/04/obama-taps-fift/
The joys of law.
- Sony loses lawsuit regarding a change they made in 2010
- Six years later, you have to show proof that you bought a game system probably 7 years earlier... which you didn't keep because you bought the slimmer model or a PS4 or traded it in for something at the game store.
- The terms required to collect the $55 recompense are more or less unachievable except for that one guy who got the PS3 for Christmas and his mom actually saved the receipt for her accounting.
- The amount of time required to earn the $55 is about the same as McDonalds pays their french fry cooks.
So... for the $55... who would give a shit? This will cost Sony $2,000 in recompense and $1,000,000-$10,000,000 in legal fees.
Benjamin Franklin is possibly one of the greatest Americans ever. In fact, it is believed he took credit, through extensive use of the Pennsylvania Gazette, of proliferating the name "American" throughout the colonies in order to unite the people under a common name and cause. When people take pride in being an American, it's because of his efforts to get the people to stop being New Yorkers or Bostonians, etc...
Here is a megaship labeled "Benjamin Franklin... London". So his name is stamped on the ass of a ship that is registered in the place he fought against, because his own America has become less of a tyrant than England with regard to taxation.
Let me pause for a moment here and simply express myself with a question "Holy what the fucking fuck?"
Let's continue further and say that this ship is carrying cargo the wrong direction. Benjamin Frankly surely would have been pissed if he knew that his name was stamped on the ass of a megaship designed to carry everything from wind-up frogs to American flags all made in China while the American's shipped back raw materials and money. This ship damn near symbolizes the destruction of almost everything Benjamin worked his entire life to build.
Where the hell is the petition to remove his name from the ship... maybe label it the Genghis Khan instead or maybe just Earth Wrecker?
Is there really a difference?
....", the person with said ability to provide such information would likely turn them down. It has nothing to do with being rude... it's simply that giving up that information like that would almost certainly leave the company to insane lawsuits from someone who has nothing better to do from behind bars than to hire ambulance chasers to go on full attack.
If someone from the FBI calls a communication company and says "Can I please have this information to aid in the investigation of
The FBI, if they issue a request without the word please, they are actually more likely to gain the information they're looking for since unless said company is educating their support staff on the laws of privacy etc... they might be able to get what they want. They don't care if it's fruit from a poisoned tree. They'll probably simply use it as a means to get the guy. Sometimes it's just the information they need to bust the guy... it doesn't have to be used to indict him.
I sat through a great presentation at CERN the day the Higgs was discovered. The physicist who held the dissertation did an absolutely awful job. He honestly could not string together 10 words together into a single coherent sentence to save his life. He was "The guy in the barrel" that day. It was his job to speak to the visitors and explain what the purpose of the LHC was. He went through a stack of slides presenting the principles of particle physics and strangely enough even covered a little quantum physics which I found strange. He clearly hated speaking in front of "normal people" and beyond simply hating it seemed to lack the ability to do so. I've worked with similar scientists (as a translator to human) in other fields for years. It was basically my "turn in the barrel" because I would be responsible for saying "I think your brain is going far faster than your mouth and you skipped... I don't know... about 16 years worth of information in our terms because you didn't even remember where your mouth currently was. You need to take a step back... talk to me like I'm roughly as intelligent as a single cell organism and dumb it down a bit". I would then take what they said and run it though about 150 Google searches per minute of speech and then present "He said he wants pepperoni".
These guys are amazing and I'm not kidding when I say that the ones who smoke the bowl are far easier to communicate with. It slows them down to only 5 times human speed. On the other hand, given them nicotine and caffeine and their speed triples. They are well know for walking around with 5 or more nicotine patches and a 350ml cup of espresso and sugar when they're onto something. If you've see the movie "Hoodwinked"... think of Twitchy with a 190+ IQ.
That being said... scientists absolutely do postulate theories by plucking crazy ideas from their asses. Ideas like quantum pairs and dark matter almost certainly start off as wild assed guesses. And those are the absolute best theories out there. They take a certain level of creativity that is upon epic levels. BUT!!!! those are leaps that are founded on what is believed to be some sound principles.
Though there might be a ton of "If this is true and we believe this theory based on that is also true and therefore this would seem reasonable... it is possible that our lack of ability to observe this is likely because it's some form of matter which can't be observed since we only know how to observe matter as we already understand it. This other wild ass theory talks about anti-matter which we now seem to believe is actually quite possible, but now that we believe we can in fact observe anti-matter.. maybe there's some other state of matter we still haven't discovered that could be... counter-matter! Wait... counter-matter, while technically accurate sounds too much like anti-matter... we need a name for matter we can't really define yet and we also can't really observe... hmm... while simply being too black to see would be entirely wrong as simply not seeing past it would be good enough to detect it, this is more like invisible matter or truly transparent matter that neither absorbs, stores, etc... light or other EM we use to identify matter. Maybe we can call it vacuum matter... sounds stupid. So, for pop science we'll call it 'Dark Matter'... it worked for Superman. Though Bizarro was far cooler, but 'Bizarro matter' just is a little to DC comics."... then before publishing something, the progenitor (proper word?) stood up at a symposium an presented his theory (though it's more likely there was some correspondence before hand) and threw the idea out there with the some fairly vague theory that would apply some level of math or at least references to corresponding science to describe the properties of some sort of "dark matter" that would describe something that appears to have mass without actually being observable other than by consuming space where there should have simply been vacuum.
There was a hell of a leap of faith and to be fair, last I heard, the sta
I would suggest that there's something in the middle.
1) Theories typically have to start off as wild assed hypotheses plucked from somewhere. I know of a group of highly published physicists who sit around passing a joint giggling and coming up with theories which they investigate further once they sober up a bit. Thinking outside of the box to find answers often requires creativity... especially when the theory is completely unable to be observed.
2) Due to obvious lack of observed information, new theories are often published citing other theories as their foundation. This is amazing because it can help prove the original theory by providing a possible application. It's very little different than smoking the joint and giggling over "what if...?". It's a necessary step to allow peers to collaborate. Publishing for peer review does not actually mean "I believe I'm indisputably correct, bow to me or prove me wrong". It's a method of sharing information so other people can try and run with it too. There are too frigging many people (especially journalists... even "educated" journalists) who seem to believe papers publish for peer review are proofs. Or worse, because of this stupid religion vs. science debate, there are people "representing science" who are trying to explain "The theory of evolution" to idiots running museums displaying humans riding dinosaurs and misrepresenting the word "Theory" to make it sound like "As good as fact".
3) There are good scientists who work for a living and try to establish a foundation for their theories before simply grabbing 5 papers written by others, gluing them together like a collage and spamming them into the first journal to take them. These guys will actually put some effort into it, visit the local university and peer review with students, professors, etc... and eventually after believing they've reached a point of reasonable certainty that their theory isn't simply shit, they'll release the paper to be torn apart by a group of people who will like the idea and try to run with it, like the idea and try to disprove it as a favor to the author, or others who will try to disprove the idea using nothing but a crayon and a napkin because they're dicks.
4) There are bad scientists who somehow manage to establish published bibliographies that span multiple pages. Some of these guys are people who got their Ph.D., "mentored" shit loads of grad students and put his name first on the paper. What's worse is that he also made the student pay to get it published. Even worse is that he didn't put his name on other papers that he should have. Even worse, he didn't even really read the paper he put his name on, he simply said "He looks pretty smart... If I take credit for his work, I won't likely get burned". That scientist, when he eventually publishes his own work likely doesn't have 2 grams of originality. What's worse is that since he's such an amazingly highly published scientist with so many good papers under his belt, the journalists will flock to his paper.
Science and the scientific process is not flawless and has to be constantly improved on. I obviously represented it terribly here and that was because I'm playing devil's advocate. I hold science in incredibly high regard and respect. I spent two years of my life helping scientists and mathematicians translate from Ph.D. to human for the purpose of publishing papers or patents. I learned more by doing that then I could in a hundred years of reading. I believe part of the scientific process that works well is the hecklers and the critics. They're like the fellow who would stand behind the roman general upon his chariot while entering Rome whose job it was was to whisper "You're not a god" as a reminder.
I love it... the proper name for a TV is "The idiot box". I learned this from my friend's grandmother while I was growing up. She stomped around yelling "Quit sitting in front of that idiot box. Your brain will fall out of your heads".
I don't watch TV anymore. I have better things to do with my time. Movies are for airplanes and sometimes while sitting at a restaurant waiting for my food. There's absolutely no value what-so-ever to spending money on another one of those idiot boxes. In all fairness, while I do in fact own an idiot box capable of meeting the requirements mentioned, it's because I needed a low cost 4K screen to fit more code on. I have never used it for watching videos of any type... though my kids watch YouTube on it once in a blue moon.
So... do yourself a favor... don't waste your money... you'd be absolutely amazed at how awesome life is without one of those things.
Technically incorrect... 4K video is not actually sharper at the same bitrate. In fact, 1080p at the same bitrate generally produces much higher quality since most of the bitrate is used on things like actual data reducing the effects of quantization. Add additional color depth on top of that and it's amazing. In fact, you'd be absolutely shocked to see old fashioned SD at the same bitrate. I developed software to compress masters for years. I would receive 100 new films in 270Mb/s raw 10-bit 4:2:2 every year. Even now, 1080p H.265 at 50Mbit/sec is a much poorer quality picture than those were.
As you add resolution, you add massive amount of motion vector information as well as having to reduce the encoded data following quantization to scale across four times as many pixels. As such, the amount of data left over following compression is crap at 4K.
So... now the real question is... how do you get a decent 1080p stream from Netflix... the answer of course is... you don't. We don't watch Netflix for quality... we watch it for cost and variety.
Google is first and foremost a data warehouse who sells data directly or indirectly of every type to anyone willing to pay or it.
Every single project from Google exists for gathering data. This means that things like self-driving car data, traffic information gathering, etc... they are all gathered by Google at all times. You are willing to buy Android and use Google maps because it makes your life better... you're willing to pay for the features supplied by collecting location data from other peoples phones and soon cars. In exchange you give all your data to Google.
To be more accurate... Google is first and foremost a corporation responsible to the needs and desires of their shareholders and are responsible above all else (including any form of ethic related bonds) to produce a return on investment to all shareholders. As long as no written law is being broken or if the law is being broken, Google can beat it in court, or so long as any possible fines related to losing in court will be less than the profit gained by breaking the law, Google has a responsibility to its shareholders to rape, pillage and plunder every possible customer to make that return on investment.
This is free market capitalism. It's the core responsibility of free market capitalism. Return on investment is more important than anything else. There are gamblers managing your retirement fund somewhere who dump their money into your company and whether you're ethical or not, whether you have to have people murdered in back alleys or not... that's irrelevant... free market capitalism says "You must show a profit or we'll find someone to replace you who is willing to do what it takes"
That's not fair... you shouldn't laugh at him for saying " step out of the house." at least he didn't say "step outside of my house" which would of course be technically inaccurate. The technically accurate one would be "step outside of my parents basement".
I think there's a point around age 21 that it's no longer "my house" as opposed to "my parent's house" or possibly "my childhood home". If you're still living in your parents house after 21, you should be paying rent and utilities and pay to have your own door installed so that it's theoretically an apartment.
Stallman doesn't carry a phone? That's so awesome!!! It's so cool to think someone so amazing and being such a tech icon can live like it's 1899.
I have always assumed his rats nest hair and frizzy beard were fake... does he take them off when he travels so he can move entire unrecognized?
Dear god man... Stallman is new to the party... we've had telephone paranoia dating back to even before Kevin Mitnick. I'm almost sure there was even something related to it in Sneakers the movie.
Please never given Stallman credit for things he has no right to credit for... he already takes far more credit than he's due for things he actually had something to do with.
Thank you... that's the thing, when referring to "The Internet" it is to a very specific thing. When you are from New York, you don't refer to "Manhattan"... you refer to "The City". If you move to Tokyo, you still know "The City" is Manhattan.
Internets which is an abbreviation for inter-network of course has always been a generic. As another poster clearly defines, inter-network communication takes the term network which (annoyingly enough) refers to the bounds of a layer-2 broadcast domain... this is also known as a LAN or local area network. Upon connecting these two LANs or networks together using a routing device (surprisingly generally referred to as a router) that performs forwarding at based on layer-3 addressing (not necessarily using routing tables), inter-network communication is accomplished. This previously was referred to as internet communication. Though we no longer commonly use the term as it is easily confused with Internet communication which is absolutely not the same thing as internet communication.
Internet (with an upper-case "I") communication refers specifically to "The Internet" which there is and can only ever be one of.
internet (with a lower-case "I") simply requires two connected LANs via a router. This topology definition can be called internet but instead should be called inter-network communication.
The AP obviously lacks on-staff technical expertise, researchers or fact checkers, otherwise they would have caught this sooner.
I was heading to the office in a little bit... it's 1:30am... for shits and giggles, I should get my hard drive out of the box in the garage. If I can still read the thing and figure out how it works, I have 3-4 bitcoins I mined a while back in there :)
and it will drop 50% next week. That's trading in general. But since bitcoin can't really be regulated, there's absolutely no protection.
Paypal alternative... that isn't a bunch of scum...
... just like porn drives all new technologies, fraud drives all new payment systems. I worked as a developer in banking for a while... you'd be absolutely shocked.
Well, there's the bitch of it isn't it.
Let's imagine you're an honest person interested in setting up a payment processing system. You also want to provide your customers with some form of insurance against fraud and you want to operate on a scale large enough to accept payments worldwide and have legal means of moving cash in and out of your system. You also want to avoid violating tax laws, support proper reporting methods required by payment processing firms around the world. You want to make it flexible enough to support easy integration into people's websites and businesses.
Then you realize that because of :
a) banking regulation
b) electronic money transfer regulation
c) fear from banks over competition
d) scale (the world IS BIG)
e) trust (you're a small nobody, who will actually trust you with their money)
f) insurance laws
g) laundering laws
h) international trade restrictions
i) human stupidity (95% of all support calls are probably morons who can't find the any key and are on the phone for 25 minutes)
k) honesty (most of your initial customers are choosing you because they can't choose anyone else)
l) angel investors (there are some that don't suck.... but anyone willing to give you enough money to actually start such a business want a 70% or more)
m) advertising (you'll need to do it in 100 countries and 50+ languages to build legitimacy)
n) fraud fraud fraud
I can go for a while. But believe it or not, PayPal is doing REALLY REALLY well considering what they do. They kinda suck now in many ways, they become more and more like a traditional bank every day... except they are "too big for their britches" so to say. Just guessing, they probably have nearly 100,000 transactions a day which are disputed by someone or another.
My experience so far has led me to believe their dispute system is handled by a room of monkeys that see the dispute messages and they click "For Buyer" or "For Seller" and then suspect that 90% of all disputes will end there. Then they make it as hard as humanly possible to contact them which will chase off another 90% of what's left... then they leave on hold long enough that their call room in India or China might be able to handle it... but you'll be talking to someone that has only talked with people who are REALLY REALLY REALLY pissed or REALLY REALLY REALLY desperate for 12+ hours a day 5-6 days a week for the past 2 years. Most everyone they talk to begs, cries or yells at them. They are utterly destroyed people you're talking to. They lack all human emotion anymore as they've been hardened. They probably get home from work, look at their kids and think to themselves "if they ask me for ANYTHING, I will kill them or myself or both".
So... while I sympathize with you... I think as long as there are dishonest people or stupid people in the world and there are regulations to hopefully help protect people, such a system is impossible.
I used to go to a store where after we finished shopping, we could buy french fries from a machine which deep fried individual portions and cooked them. It was cheap and easy.
... that's a stupid ass idea for people who don't think far enough ahead to properly design a restaurant to not need humans.
Consider a simple machine which would lift a potato and pass it over a row of blades and then a single blade perpendicular to the row. This would cut multiple fries side by side. Let them drop into a basket which is then lowered into oil for two minutes. Using a rectangular vat, it should be possible to queue 4-8 orders in a relatively small bath of oil similar in size to what would be expected in a consumer deep fryer. Lift the basket from the oil, move it over a "salting area" and grind salt or shake salt onto them and flip the basket into a cardboard box and voila.
Fries are the easiest issue to solve.
Cycle the oil automatically by using two separate vats to keep the machine in operation at all times. Release oil that has cooled through a drain valve which pumps into a "bio-diesel dispensary" so that people driving biodiesel cars can be kind enough to dispose of the oil for McDonalds or buy a diesel generator to run the restaurant itself. A McDonalds delivery truck could pump some more oil into the tank on delivery. An intelligent design would automate this so the truck could be self-driving later on.
Burgers aren't a challenge either, automatic sauce dispensers are easy enough. If the burgers are frozen in stacks where the stack itself is engineered, you could have a stack that appears like a roll of 100 burgers (or more) which can be dispensed one by one onto a belt. The belts can feed a cooker (I'm assuming some sort of microwave oven?), the hardest part is the cheese which tends to be a bit sticky, but if the cheese is shipped as a block instead of slice by slice, then the cheese could be managed by using a Norwegian style wire cheese slicer mounted inverted. Onions can be cut more or less the same as potatoes.
Other deep fried foods are easy enough.
So far as I can figure, most parts could easily have "self cleaning" using disposable or washable sanitary wipes after each portion is prepared. The remaining part... less so.
In Europe for years, we've been using computers or telephone apps to order fast food (at least in Scandinavia and I first saw a touch screen ordering system in Strasbourg 10 years ago.
A conveyor belt system can easily allow food to be prepared and loaded onto a tray as it's prepared.
A second conveyor belt system can solve most of the waste disposal issues and can even properly sort recyclables.
For most of the cleaning of the restaurant, I recommend a rooba type robot capable of lifting chairs by their legs while vacuuming and washing the floor. Again pretty easy design... especially with the new Microsoft vision SDKs coming as part of the Hololens development kits.
Windows on the inside of the building should be pretty easy... adapt the roomba to have a squeegie. I am curious to try this one and will likely do so next week.
Bathrooms can be mostly cleaned using some of the "self-cleaning bathroom" technologies found at some of the European public facilities. It's not perfect, but it does work well enough.
I honestly don't see why it should be necessary to need more than one or two employees on staff at any time... and they should follow the steps told to them by a computer.
Of course, it would be better to pay that employee $15/hr before it becomes minimum wage and $20/hr when it does so a professional of some type is in the position instead of an unskilled laborer. They would spend most of their time managing when things go wrong and handling things the robots aren't versatile enough to do otherwise.
As for "robotic arms"