I'm taking a 'wait and see' approach to driverless cars on snow and ice. Often when I drive on ice the front wheels do not point in the direction that the car is going. It's just a fact. If you want to drive without the front wheels losing grip then you need spiked tires or to drive walking speed almost all the time.
But if shit happens in an automated car then it isn't my fault, so why would I pay for insurance to protect myself. If someone else has a manual car and they hit me, then their insurance pays for it. That's how it works where I am, at least.
If I have a driverless car that is supposed to be 100% infallible, there should be no reason for me to have insurance at all. If someone hits me with a vehicle that is manual, then their insurance covers my damages, and I can't get in an accident so why would I have insurance?
I look at the pictures of the snow storm in DC and I find it almost humorous that so many people think that driverless cars will be possible in that. I guess I'll believe it when I see it. What I am worried about is that the parts of the world with snow will simply be left behind. Driverless cars will never work in that and no one will care.
OwnCloud has improved a lot over the last little while. I'm a solo developer and even use it to sync my code between machines so far with no issues though setting up a proper git repo is on my list of things I would like to do.
Ok, yes that I could see the use of. Although I can't see myself ever being to stand the lag time to draw the gui. I suppose if it was some sort of java applet that loaded once and then ran locally it could be ok. But I use Thunderbird in favor of web email clients as it is, because I can't stand web clients. No matter how well they are implemented, you always end up being limited by html.
Let's see. So I'm working hellish hours on project X which I hope will make me a billion dollars one day... But I'm going to give all the code to a third party to scan and peruse all they want because I can't take the time to manage my own local IDE. No FREAKING way.
The thing you have to realize is, there isn't enough room on your shit mountain for everyone. In fact, there is only enough room for around 1/4 of the current population. So the more you fight for people to be responsible for themselves, the less room you are allowing for them to be so. Inevitably, people will give up and either go on welfare or demand a minimum living wage. If there is enough accessible opportunity for everyone then we can frown on people being on welfare. But the people living at the bottom of shit mountain can't afford the helicopter ride to the top. They make $5 a day and don't even have a bicycle to their name to sell. Frankly, I can't say I blame them for taking advantage of every social service they can.
1. You're totally wrong there. A person who wants to build a house can't make it out of 2x2s. A drug company has the burden to prove a drug is safe before releasing it for public consumption. Food producers must clean their equipment with a certain regularity and prove it is safe as well. Restaurants must use stainless steel cooking surfaces. The list goes on and on of regulations that people must suffer though. By your definition there can really be no such thing as a truly free society because we would quite plainly all be dead of some sort of bacterial infection. Perhaps the closest thing we see to a free society by your definition would be in certain areas of Africa or India.
2. This is one thing we can agree on. I believe that governments don't do nearly enough to act in a way that represents the desires of the people. The system truly sucks, but so far it is the best thing we have. Any citizen who feels unrepresented by government should fight to change the government. I'm not so disillusioned with the way government is working that I feel a need to spend my life changing it. If you feel so defeated that you're ready to throw your hands up and let free enterprise handle it, then your proper course of action is to either fight to change the way it works or to move to a place with a less restrictive government. But we live in a country with a set of laws and a government and the system is set up in a way that it is supposed to work for everyone. You just can't decide to skirt the system and expect people not to cry foul.
No, in my world governments should care that the country is becoming a black pit of despair with a few spots that are so densely populated that people are fighting each other for a small piece of it.
Sure... Not all societies are civilized. In societies without civilization there are warlords killing and raping people. You can't have civilization without a certain common set of rules that everyone plays by. These days civilization in our neck of the woods is certainly undergoing a challenge. I am merely fighting to keep a civilized society because I realize that I enjoy the benefits of it and I want my kids to enjoy the benefits of it. I'm really surprised how hard people like you fight against it.
You people supporting Uber are all over the place. You don't trust the government to regulate taxis, but you do trust them to test the health and fitness of drivers and the safety of vehicles. Make up your mind.
Well that depends on whether society has got together and decided as one whether mayo should be outlawed or not. All I am saying is I am one person putting his hand up and saying that there should be laws regulating Uber. I am not saying these judgments I am making should be enforced because I alone think them. I'm willing to hold it to a vote. YOU are the ones saying that it should not be voted on, that anyone should be able to do anything they want if it is physically possible. I'm saying that isn't how civilization works. We have a system for deciding things together so that we can all live in harmony. It should not be skirted, it should be used and enforced once a decision is made, because that is the only way we have to protect people from being screwed over. The more we come to a consensus, the more civilized society is. Your needs do not trump mine, so let's not say "you can or cannot do this" until it has been put to a proper vote and decided fairly.
Let me use the Oregon occupation as an example. The government set land aside for various purposes since 1908, and in current day it is a wildlife preserve. The preserve came about through government forces, so we can reasonably assume that it was a combined decision of the people to put it there. Many people enjoy the wildlife preserve for what it is, and appreciate the government and the people for putting it there. Along comes someone who thinks they alone can burn 140 acres of it down with a fire that they attempted to control but got out of control. Then another group comes along and takes over a building, thereby tromping on everyone's rights to enjoy the park as a wildlife preserve. How is that ever right? For someone to come along to an area established by the people since 1908 and destroy the use of that area because they think they have some sort of freedom claim on it. They're not fighting for freedom, they're just fighting for what THEY think they should be able to do. It's not right. Government is there for a reason. The occupiers are the ones who are bullying.
Taxi regulations are also in place for a reason. Unregulated, there were too many cars, and there was no control. The streets were clogged, people were getting ripped off. I do not take comfort in the thought of Uber taking this out of the government's hands and running the show on their own. Many people feel the same way, and all I am saying is that it should get put to a vote. How can anyone voluntarily living in a democratic country NOT believe in a fair vote?
You know what, this may seem over the top. But honestly, the concept that people should move to the money always is an idea I would expect a three year old to have. So I thought I would explain it in terms of piss and shit so that you would understand.
Besides, I've been told that the uber system is flawless. That every driver has a picture and every stat about them, and they have a rating that is accurate and there is no way around it. and it's all for the good of the children.
You know what, you sound like the type that supports the occupation in Oregon. People should just be able to burn 140 acre fires wherever they hell want and not be punished. Public land is every one's land, so if you want to take a building on it then you should be able to. Well civilization doesn't work like that. There are people who want to use that land to see nature and that's what the land is there for. Not for fires, not for your own 'I will do what I want to do'. This is how people live together. This is what laws are for.
You know what, sometimes in life people have things done to them that they don't want for the sake of others. For example, I can't walk into a restaurant and start spitting into every one's food. It's called civilization.
I was very young when this all happened and I can't really say how it all went down. I just remember that it was a big problem. There was a lot of stubbornness and toxic personalities thrown into the mix and I'm sure it wasn't dealt with in a totally rational way.
But the point is, now we are giving these people a financial incentive to keep driving, it will happen.
But we haven't talked about piss lake yet! Piss lake is where you piss, and it's bordered by the Atlantic, the Pacific, Mexico, and Canada. Mexico and Canada don't get any of the piss, because they have walls now due to their poor influences on you. Many people have to live in piss lake, but they are weak because they like to see their parents more than twice a year. Their children are also weak because they know who their grandparents are. So you can have your shit mountains where New York used to be, and a large shit mountain in California... and wherever the hell you think is a good place for one. Silicon Valley will be a very special shit mountain indeed because it will be made of the game consoles and big screen TVs of the poor, because even forbid they should enjoy any part of their lives. They are poor and they should always be working harder to get to a shit mountain.
If that isn't an absolute break down of society I don't know what is.
Bur what are you doing to be 'worthy' of protection? You're certainly not protecting (or caring) about anyone else. This isn't just about paying taxes. This is about how societies treat others within them.
Oh, and at the top of the mountain of shit is where the school and fucking hospital will be. Good luck to those little poor kids getting to school in the morning. They should probably just work the farms instead. Hope they don't INJURE themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm taking a 'wait and see' approach to driverless cars on snow and ice. Often when I drive on ice the front wheels do not point in the direction that the car is going. It's just a fact. If you want to drive without the front wheels losing grip then you need spiked tires or to drive walking speed almost all the time.
But if shit happens in an automated car then it isn't my fault, so why would I pay for insurance to protect myself. If someone else has a manual car and they hit me, then their insurance pays for it. That's how it works where I am, at least.
If I have a self driving car that can't get in an accident, why do I need insurance? If it gets in an accident it isn't my fault.
If I have a driverless car that is supposed to be 100% infallible, there should be no reason for me to have insurance at all. If someone hits me with a vehicle that is manual, then their insurance covers my damages, and I can't get in an accident so why would I have insurance?
I look at the pictures of the snow storm in DC and I find it almost humorous that so many people think that driverless cars will be possible in that. I guess I'll believe it when I see it. What I am worried about is that the parts of the world with snow will simply be left behind. Driverless cars will never work in that and no one will care.
Ok I wouldn't know about that. I've had root on every server I've ever been on.
OwnCloud has improved a lot over the last little while. I'm a solo developer and even use it to sync my code between machines so far with no issues though setting up a proper git repo is on my list of things I would like to do.
I would never give any credentials to the cloud. Creds are for me, and me only. That is an absolute show stopper for me.
Ok, yes that I could see the use of. Although I can't see myself ever being to stand the lag time to draw the gui. I suppose if it was some sort of java applet that loaded once and then ran locally it could be ok. But I use Thunderbird in favor of web email clients as it is, because I can't stand web clients. No matter how well they are implemented, you always end up being limited by html.
Let's see. So I'm working hellish hours on project X which I hope will make me a billion dollars one day... But I'm going to give all the code to a third party to scan and peruse all they want because I can't take the time to manage my own local IDE. No FREAKING way.
Well, enjoy your shit mountain then. I guess it isn't that bad where I am, and I have my entire family too so I guess I win.
The thing you have to realize is, there isn't enough room on your shit mountain for everyone. In fact, there is only enough room for around 1/4 of the current population. So the more you fight for people to be responsible for themselves, the less room you are allowing for them to be so. Inevitably, people will give up and either go on welfare or demand a minimum living wage. If there is enough accessible opportunity for everyone then we can frown on people being on welfare. But the people living at the bottom of shit mountain can't afford the helicopter ride to the top. They make $5 a day and don't even have a bicycle to their name to sell. Frankly, I can't say I blame them for taking advantage of every social service they can.
1. You're totally wrong there. A person who wants to build a house can't make it out of 2x2s. A drug company has the burden to prove a drug is safe before releasing it for public consumption. Food producers must clean their equipment with a certain regularity and prove it is safe as well. Restaurants must use stainless steel cooking surfaces. The list goes on and on of regulations that people must suffer though. By your definition there can really be no such thing as a truly free society because we would quite plainly all be dead of some sort of bacterial infection. Perhaps the closest thing we see to a free society by your definition would be in certain areas of Africa or India.
2. This is one thing we can agree on. I believe that governments don't do nearly enough to act in a way that represents the desires of the people. The system truly sucks, but so far it is the best thing we have. Any citizen who feels unrepresented by government should fight to change the government. I'm not so disillusioned with the way government is working that I feel a need to spend my life changing it. If you feel so defeated that you're ready to throw your hands up and let free enterprise handle it, then your proper course of action is to either fight to change the way it works or to move to a place with a less restrictive government. But we live in a country with a set of laws and a government and the system is set up in a way that it is supposed to work for everyone. You just can't decide to skirt the system and expect people not to cry foul.
No, in my world governments should care that the country is becoming a black pit of despair with a few spots that are so densely populated that people are fighting each other for a small piece of it.
Sure... Not all societies are civilized. In societies without civilization there are warlords killing and raping people. You can't have civilization without a certain common set of rules that everyone plays by. These days civilization in our neck of the woods is certainly undergoing a challenge. I am merely fighting to keep a civilized society because I realize that I enjoy the benefits of it and I want my kids to enjoy the benefits of it. I'm really surprised how hard people like you fight against it.
I'm well above 30. Well above.
You people supporting Uber are all over the place. You don't trust the government to regulate taxis, but you do trust them to test the health and fitness of drivers and the safety of vehicles. Make up your mind.
Well that depends on whether society has got together and decided as one whether mayo should be outlawed or not. All I am saying is I am one person putting his hand up and saying that there should be laws regulating Uber. I am not saying these judgments I am making should be enforced because I alone think them. I'm willing to hold it to a vote. YOU are the ones saying that it should not be voted on, that anyone should be able to do anything they want if it is physically possible. I'm saying that isn't how civilization works. We have a system for deciding things together so that we can all live in harmony. It should not be skirted, it should be used and enforced once a decision is made, because that is the only way we have to protect people from being screwed over. The more we come to a consensus, the more civilized society is. Your needs do not trump mine, so let's not say "you can or cannot do this" until it has been put to a proper vote and decided fairly.
Let me use the Oregon occupation as an example. The government set land aside for various purposes since 1908, and in current day it is a wildlife preserve. The preserve came about through government forces, so we can reasonably assume that it was a combined decision of the people to put it there. Many people enjoy the wildlife preserve for what it is, and appreciate the government and the people for putting it there. Along comes someone who thinks they alone can burn 140 acres of it down with a fire that they attempted to control but got out of control. Then another group comes along and takes over a building, thereby tromping on everyone's rights to enjoy the park as a wildlife preserve. How is that ever right? For someone to come along to an area established by the people since 1908 and destroy the use of that area because they think they have some sort of freedom claim on it. They're not fighting for freedom, they're just fighting for what THEY think they should be able to do. It's not right. Government is there for a reason. The occupiers are the ones who are bullying.
Taxi regulations are also in place for a reason. Unregulated, there were too many cars, and there was no control. The streets were clogged, people were getting ripped off. I do not take comfort in the thought of Uber taking this out of the government's hands and running the show on their own. Many people feel the same way, and all I am saying is that it should get put to a vote. How can anyone voluntarily living in a democratic country NOT believe in a fair vote?
You know what, this may seem over the top. But honestly, the concept that people should move to the money always is an idea I would expect a three year old to have. So I thought I would explain it in terms of piss and shit so that you would understand.
Besides, I've been told that the uber system is flawless. That every driver has a picture and every stat about them, and they have a rating that is accurate and there is no way around it. and it's all for the good of the children.
You know what, you sound like the type that supports the occupation in Oregon. People should just be able to burn 140 acre fires wherever they hell want and not be punished. Public land is every one's land, so if you want to take a building on it then you should be able to. Well civilization doesn't work like that. There are people who want to use that land to see nature and that's what the land is there for. Not for fires, not for your own 'I will do what I want to do'. This is how people live together. This is what laws are for.
Haha... They ask me if I need glasses every year, that's it. That's the test. I had one eye test when I got my license at 16 and that was it.
You know what, sometimes in life people have things done to them that they don't want for the sake of others. For example, I can't walk into a restaurant and start spitting into every one's food. It's called civilization.
I was very young when this all happened and I can't really say how it all went down. I just remember that it was a big problem. There was a lot of stubbornness and toxic personalities thrown into the mix and I'm sure it wasn't dealt with in a totally rational way.
But the point is, now we are giving these people a financial incentive to keep driving, it will happen.
But we haven't talked about piss lake yet! Piss lake is where you piss, and it's bordered by the Atlantic, the Pacific, Mexico, and Canada. Mexico and Canada don't get any of the piss, because they have walls now due to their poor influences on you. Many people have to live in piss lake, but they are weak because they like to see their parents more than twice a year. Their children are also weak because they know who their grandparents are. So you can have your shit mountains where New York used to be, and a large shit mountain in California... and wherever the hell you think is a good place for one. Silicon Valley will be a very special shit mountain indeed because it will be made of the game consoles and big screen TVs of the poor, because even forbid they should enjoy any part of their lives. They are poor and they should always be working harder to get to a shit mountain.
If that isn't an absolute break down of society I don't know what is.
Bur what are you doing to be 'worthy' of protection? You're certainly not protecting (or caring) about anyone else. This isn't just about paying taxes. This is about how societies treat others within them.
Oh, and at the top of the mountain of shit is where the school and fucking hospital will be. Good luck to those little poor kids getting to school in the morning. They should probably just work the farms instead. Hope they don't INJURE themselves.