Just what I need. Additional reasons for the person behind me who does not understand that only a gentle press is needed for a touch screen to be tap-tap-tapping the back of my seat.
This is what happens when Narcissists become scientists.
So wrapped up in the idea that of course an intelligent species would want to visit us that they contrive an explanation for why they haven't.
A species near our level of development is most likely unable to visit, even if they wanted to.
A species advanced enough to travel here, is probably advanced enough it would be the equivalent of us visiting with Neanderthals or monkeys. Not much point and you can probably get what you want just through observation, which can be done from a distance.
And we make it easy for that. Beaming out every facet of every mundane thought out for everyone to see and hear. If we really want to get the aliens to visit, we just need to go into media silence and they'll come running to find out what happened to their "stories".
Of course it is. A 10 hour epic about the slow development of a lasting bond.
I'm looking forward to the sequel set 10 years later when after years of having the world eat away at that bond, the wall replaces the paint for a newer version.
While on its face this reaction appears quite stupid, if there were just one physical attack on one theater, the survivors and families of the victims would sue Sony for a lot claiming that they had a credible threat and ignored it.
Mind you, I believe that they are just using this as a propaganda move. Free publicity, and when it does finally get released the attendance will be significantly higher than it otherwise would have been.
Fair enough. I would not be surprised to see a news source inflate numbers. Though it is also just as likely that VG is trying to downplay the numbers.
Apple Pay provides a new unique transaction number with each purchase. No credit card information is provided. This is to avoid being able to use information from a transaction for a second purchase. Big for security. Not so much for correlating transactions with a user.
While a number of projects certainly are treated this way, it is this attitude from users that has ruined my enjoyment of backing projects.
Backers are certainly not investing in the traditional sense since they do not get any share of profits, etc, but once upon a time, they were investing in having an idea become available. I backed many projects just to see the idea come to be. Ideas that could not get funding through traditional means. Between a mix of people who were trying to get a fast buck and backers loudly complaining that their "pre-order" was taking too long, it just became too much trouble.
People could no longer take chances on interesting things because they had to provide constant assurances to backers that they would get their loot.
A project pretty much has to be good to go now which has made it difficult for new people to get into the game with fresh ideas. There is too much risk those projects might fail and backers will come screaming for their money back.
If the total doesn't change, that really doesn't prove anything. Other technologies help reduce accidents. 1 in 4 accidents were linked to cell phone use. If all of those accidents could have been avoided, you would probably have seen a drop in rates.
I do honestly believe that some people can drive and talk on a phone at the same time safely, but they should have to prove they have that skill rather than just let everyone do it and hope for the best.
That's the point. While it may be legal, it has been shown in studies to be unsafe (hands free or otherwise). Government has failed to act to address this safety issue.
If the government had actually dealt with known issues regarding driving and cell phone use, his vigilantism would not have been necessary. I know I have thought about doing the same thing myself. And I wonder how many politicians receive contributions from the cell phone companies.
Still... he committed a crime and should be punished. Civil disobedience requires a willingness to accept the punishment to help solve the problem.
Wow. You must be superman or something to jump that far.
I'm simply positing where some of the hostility may be coming from. Nothing in there about whether or not you should own one.
While it does not excuse their behavior (theft and violence are rarely excused), it is meant to explain it. If you ignore what motivates people, you open yourself up for unexpected reactions.
I wish we lived in a society where people ask questions before they react to things they don't understand, but that is often not the case.
Not really a valid comparison. Most people don't go running around wearing their $500 video card everywhere they go. Flaunting is not owning something, it is showing it off. By the nature of the device, it is visible and goes everywhere the user goes. The user may not be intentionally doing it, but to people around them it may come off that way.
Most people see the value in paying more for a good camera. While there may be value in Google Glass, most people don't see it. As such, they see the device as frivolous. It may be worth that much, or even more, but they don't recognize it. People understand "saving up" for a good camera. I have yet to hear of anyone saving up for Google Glass.
Additionally, someone who can't afford your expensive camera can opt for a cheaper version of similar technology. In the case of the Glass, if you can't afford it (or are not "invited" to purchase it) you can't just buy a cheaper version of something similar. Once other similar cheaper products are available a lot of the stigma will go away.
While for a lot of people, the issue is the potential for recording secretly (though most of that is just not understanding what the product is primarily for), I believe (opinion) for many people that is just the convenient excuse they give so that they don't come off petty.
While I would prefer to see a red led indicating that it is actively recording, that's not the only issue.
The early adopters are also actively running around flaunting that they had an extra $1,500 just lying around. It is also similar to the hostility growing about the elite companies busing their employees. There is a level of elitism that is being flaunted about by these people and that doesn't sit well with many people. Especially with a growing divide of haves and have nots.
In this case it seems that since they eventually just grabbed the device, that all of the bluster was probably just show to get them in a position to steal it.
Slashdot Mirror
Just what I need. Additional reasons for the person behind me who does not understand that only a gentle press is needed for a touch screen to be tap-tap-tapping the back of my seat.
And on a personal note, if I ever needed a reason to boycott PepsiCo products, there it is.
"for Iran" seems to make more sense.
Looking forward to the influx of student requests for a class in Establishing AI Legal Rights.
"They suggested I take it. Who am I to question it?"
This is what happens when Narcissists become scientists.
So wrapped up in the idea that of course an intelligent species would want to visit us that they contrive an explanation for why they haven't.
A species near our level of development is most likely unable to visit, even if they wanted to.
A species advanced enough to travel here, is probably advanced enough it would be the equivalent of us visiting with Neanderthals or monkeys. Not much point and you can probably get what you want just through observation, which can be done from a distance.
And we make it easy for that. Beaming out every facet of every mundane thought out for everyone to see and hear. If we really want to get the aliens to visit, we just need to go into media silence and they'll come running to find out what happened to their "stories".
The VR angle is most likely an attempt to just make the study appear more modern and relevant.
To properly test the VR aspect, they should repeat the study with non-VR stimulus to see if there is a significant difference in improvement.
Otherwise it is just a study in meditation effect on stress response with the VR just tacked on so that tech news will carry it.
Of course it is. A 10 hour epic about the slow development of a lasting bond.
I'm looking forward to the sequel set 10 years later when after years of having the world eat away at that bond, the wall replaces the paint for a newer version.
The newest cosmetic treatment coming soon.
Tired of those drab blue eye? Make them green with Etox.
Assuming of course that this isn't just Sony doing viral marketing.
Why not take advantage of being hacked to promote up a movie that was going to bomb hard. Create "evidence" that the subject of mocking was behind it.
Not saying that is what they are doing, but I won't be surprised to find out 6 months from now that they did.
While on its face this reaction appears quite stupid, if there were just one physical attack on one theater, the survivors and families of the victims would sue Sony for a lot claiming that they had a credible threat and ignored it.
Mind you, I believe that they are just using this as a propaganda move. Free publicity, and when it does finally get released the attendance will be significantly higher than it otherwise would have been.
A fair response. VG is probably reporting based on formal requests while the article is probably based on polling.
Fair enough. I would not be surprised to see a news source inflate numbers. Though it is also just as likely that VG is trying to downplay the numbers.
30/700 = 4% even if you round it to the more than 700 as 800 you get 3.75% which is more than 3%, not less.
Better check those tolerances again.
Apple Pay provides a new unique transaction number with each purchase. No credit card information is provided. This is to avoid being able to use information from a transaction for a second purchase. Big for security. Not so much for correlating transactions with a user.
While a number of projects certainly are treated this way, it is this attitude from users that has ruined my enjoyment of backing projects.
Backers are certainly not investing in the traditional sense since they do not get any share of profits, etc, but once upon a time, they were investing in having an idea become available. I backed many projects just to see the idea come to be. Ideas that could not get funding through traditional means. Between a mix of people who were trying to get a fast buck and backers loudly complaining that their "pre-order" was taking too long, it just became too much trouble.
People could no longer take chances on interesting things because they had to provide constant assurances to backers that they would get their loot.
A project pretty much has to be good to go now which has made it difficult for new people to get into the game with fresh ideas. There is too much risk those projects might fail and backers will come screaming for their money back.
If your car stopped on a freeway and wouldn't start again. I'm pretty sure the police would show up and want an explanation.
Because no one has ever lied to try to garner sympathy.
If anything like this had happened, there would be a police report to back it up.
Cribbage... that's where those fat cat card manufacturers get you with their fancy wood board and peg upgrades.
If the total doesn't change, that really doesn't prove anything. Other technologies help reduce accidents. 1 in 4 accidents were linked to cell phone use. If all of those accidents could have been avoided, you would probably have seen a drop in rates.
I do honestly believe that some people can drive and talk on a phone at the same time safely, but they should have to prove they have that skill rather than just let everyone do it and hope for the best.
That's the point. While it may be legal, it has been shown in studies to be unsafe (hands free or otherwise). Government has failed to act to address this safety issue.
If the government had actually dealt with known issues regarding driving and cell phone use, his vigilantism would not have been necessary. I know I have thought about doing the same thing myself. And I wonder how many politicians receive contributions from the cell phone companies.
Still... he committed a crime and should be punished. Civil disobedience requires a willingness to accept the punishment to help solve the problem.
If they were simply confiscating it, they would not have felt the need to run.
Wow. You must be superman or something to jump that far.
I'm simply positing where some of the hostility may be coming from. Nothing in there about whether or not you should own one.
While it does not excuse their behavior (theft and violence are rarely excused), it is meant to explain it. If you ignore what motivates people, you open yourself up for unexpected reactions.
I wish we lived in a society where people ask questions before they react to things they don't understand, but that is often not the case.
Not really a valid comparison. Most people don't go running around wearing their $500 video card everywhere they go. Flaunting is not owning something, it is showing it off. By the nature of the device, it is visible and goes everywhere the user goes. The user may not be intentionally doing it, but to people around them it may come off that way.
Most people see the value in paying more for a good camera. While there may be value in Google Glass, most people don't see it. As such, they see the device as frivolous. It may be worth that much, or even more, but they don't recognize it. People understand "saving up" for a good camera. I have yet to hear of anyone saving up for Google Glass.
Additionally, someone who can't afford your expensive camera can opt for a cheaper version of similar technology. In the case of the Glass, if you can't afford it (or are not "invited" to purchase it) you can't just buy a cheaper version of something similar. Once other similar cheaper products are available a lot of the stigma will
go away.
While for a lot of people, the issue is the potential for recording secretly (though most of that is just not understanding what the product is primarily for), I believe (opinion) for many people that is just the convenient excuse they give so that they don't come off petty.
While I would prefer to see a red led indicating that it is actively recording, that's not the only issue.
The early adopters are also actively running around flaunting that they had an extra $1,500 just lying around. It is also similar to the hostility growing about the elite companies busing their employees. There is a level of elitism that is being flaunted about by these people and that doesn't sit well with many people. Especially with a growing divide of haves and have nots.
In this case it seems that since they eventually just grabbed the device, that all of the bluster was probably just show to get them in a position to steal it.