Should there be more bicycle-oriented infrastructure? Yes. However if you're saying that at the same time cyclists should be banned from roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, then I have to vehemently disagree with you, that would completely ruin cycling for everyone, from the most minimal commuter, all the way up to pro-level road racers, and everyone in between.
I think you have to wait a generation to see the REAL deleterious effects of Zika.
Sure, that would be the selling point of weaponizing something like Zika: the damage isn't immediate, it takes a while for it to start being noticed. By then it's too late to really stop it. If Zika was in fact weaponized then that's the point we're at now: it probably can't be stopped, and the damage will be widespread.
They should just be more honest and give these sorts of things away for free, considering that they're collecting all your 'fitness' data and monetizing it, using it to target ads at you, giving it to governments to add to your profile, etc. At least that way you're getting 'paid' something for all that you're having taken from you.
A talented pickpocket can get your wallet, phone, wristwatch, and the rings off your fingers, and you'll never even know it.
Is there a PIN that you need to use with this ring? Or is it literally single-factor authentication, and as soon as someone divests you of it, they can go nuts with it until it gets deactivated?
On a less serious note, are sex workers in Rio going to have payment terminals compatible with this by the time the athletes arrive? That'll be the most common use for athlete's dollars, I'd think. XD
On a tin-foil-hat conspiratorial note, anyone else wonder if someone has weaponized Zika and seeded the world with carrier mosquitos, to create an extinction-level event for the human race? Thought's occurred to me..
No, I'm not trolling or kidding, I'm dead serious. If this is a widespread problem in the U.S., then could it be making people dumber and less emotionally stable?
It's a gigantic undertaking. Nine years from now, is he really going to have all the resources and funding necessary to pull it off, or would the attempt bankrupt him? It's about as far from being a trivial accomplishment as you can get.
You must be rolling your eyes at least as hard as I am at these people who think we're going to have so-called 'AI' creating masterpiece works of art or composing classic symphonies like human masters, and that in the next few years so-called 'self-driving cars' will be 100% safe, need no manual controls for a human, and you'll be able to put your kids, alone, into one of them and send them off on a trip in it.
Well, either the composer's brains work by magic or they can be emulated by some kind of machine.
NO. You're missing the fundamental point: We do not understand how the human brain does what it does yet, not even close, and without that fundamental understanding you CANNOT build a machine or write mere software that duplicates it's fuinctionality. They write clever mimicks that only go so far but fall way, WAY short of the mark. There is a hard limit to this until we fully, completely understand how our own brains work. Stop buying into all the hype.
It's the medias' fault. They've taken the term 'artificial intelligence' and turned it into a meaningless buzzword. We have no clue how our own minds work yet, therefore trying to create machines that are equivalent is absurd. All they've produced so far are cheesy algorithms that fall way short of the mark.
Remember, artificial intelligence works like normal intelligence but only in fantasy and science fiction novels, we don't have real 'AI' in the real world.
Fixed that for you.
We don't even really have a clue how our own brains work yet, let alone being able to even begin to emulate it with a machine. All we have right now are cheesy imitations that fall way, way short of the mark.
Don't anyone sit there and try to convince me that some cheesy algorithm is going to totally emulate human master composers because that's total and complete bullshit. Until we have fully human-level artificial intelligence, completely self-aware, with a full complement of human-level emotion and imagination, there won't be any machine-generated art of music that is equivalent to new works by human artists or human composers. Period.
I'm 100% with you on that one, friend. Way too 1984 as far as I'm concerned. Inside your house is about the only place left anymore where you have any sort of privacy.
Slashdot is obviously challenging us with a trick question.
I posed the question because the idea of a 'smart TV', ever since they came out with them, just doesn't make sense to me, so I thought I'd see if Slashdot was willing to give me some perspective on the subject. So far what I'm seeing is generally 'what do you mean, we don't want smart TV'.
Not to mention the problem of maintaining a stable orbit for a large industrial complex. It would make more sense to build colonies on the Moon and put industry there, before putting them in Earth orbit, or even in any of the L-points.
That's all I care about. All the Asteroids emulators were fine and good, but none of them play exactly like the original vectorscan black-and-white game, running on a 6502 processor and a discrete logic state machine/vector generator. Lots of fun to debug failures on the logic board, and you'd always need to keep a supply of 2N3716 and 2N3792 power transistors on hand to repair the monitors. The heck with the Internet of Things, bring back classic Asteroids!
Can I ask you, why you even want an Internet-connected TV to start with? Can't you connect a media center PC to it instead? Or a DVR, like I do? Just use it as a monitor?
Oh shut the fuck up, Microsoft shill. Windows 7 user: "I'm perfectly happy with Windows 7, I don't want Windows 10" Microsoft: "We don't care, have Windows 10 anyway" Microsoft: *Tries various different ways to trick users into upgrading* Microsoft: *Sneaks the upgrade in anyway* Microsoft: *installs spyware, adware, and takes control of your PC*
If you think those are all OK then you're an obvious paid shill. Shove it up your ass, fuck off, drink Drano, and DIE.
This is beyond rediculous. Why would you pay for a TV that pulls this shit on you? I do not pay premium dollars for a television set that shoves gods-be-damned ADS in my face! All I need a TV to be is a monitor, that's all. I don't even understand why anyone would buy a so-called 'smart' TV in the first place; doesn't everyone either have a DVR, a media center computer, or just watch cable/satellite/OTA broadcasts? On top of all that are the news stories we've all read about how these so-called 'smart TVs' are spying on us. What's next? Are they going to require you to watch streaming ads before it'll allow you to watch whatever you're feeding to the TV to watch? Why is anyone putting up with this shit?
I'd just like to point out that while the above AC sounds 99% like me, and while I agree with him/her 110%, it is not, in fact, me. Nice job, though, AC, you've hit the nail squarely on the head.:-)
When we're all forced at gunpoint to use Facebook, then the article may have a point.
Amen to that, brother. Zuckerberg can't send a goon squad out to force me to have a Facebook account, and likewise he can't send a goon squad out to silence me when I say things like Facebook SUCKS ASS and you're a fool to use it! either.
Waaah, I don't get party invitations!
Seriously, did that guy really say that? Sounds like he's some whiny kid on 4chan/r9k/ or something. Here's the fact of the matter for you, kiddies: If someone on Facebook forgets to invite you to some party they're throwing just because you're not on Facebook, then they probably aren't really your 'friend' in the first place and maybe you need to re-evaluate your criteria for who you consider to be your 'friends'. The social world of Humans existed many many centuries before the Internet, and long long before some jackass named 'Zuckerberg' opened up some website called 'Facebook', and it'll continue to exist long after Facebook finally dies and goes away, so maybe you'd better spend more time working on your in-real-life social lives and less on your pseudo-social online life.
I use an add-on for Firefox called "selective cookie delete" that allows you to create a whitelist (or blacklist) of sites to either keep or prevent cookies.
o Offer gigabit broadband with no data caps o Allow a few years for Rural America to get used to having it o Impose Shadow Datacaps on the biggest bandwidth users o Complain about 'data hogs' and 'lost profits' o Impose 'overage fees' o Impose data caps for all subscribers o Profit!
Slashdot Mirror
Should there be more bicycle-oriented infrastructure? Yes.
However if you're saying that at the same time cyclists should be banned from roads that don't have a dedicated bicycle lane, then I have to vehemently disagree with you, that would completely ruin cycling for everyone, from the most minimal commuter, all the way up to pro-level road racers, and everyone in between.
I think you have to wait a generation to see the REAL deleterious effects of Zika.
Sure, that would be the selling point of weaponizing something like Zika: the damage isn't immediate, it takes a while for it to start being noticed. By then it's too late to really stop it. If Zika was in fact weaponized then that's the point we're at now: it probably can't be stopped, and the damage will be widespread.
They should just be more honest and give these sorts of things away for free, considering that they're collecting all your 'fitness' data and monetizing it, using it to target ads at you, giving it to governments to add to your profile, etc. At least that way you're getting 'paid' something for all that you're having taken from you.
A talented pickpocket can get your wallet, phone, wristwatch, and the rings off your fingers, and you'll never even know it.
Is there a PIN that you need to use with this ring? Or is it literally single-factor authentication, and as soon as someone divests you of it, they can go nuts with it until it gets deactivated?
On a less serious note, are sex workers in Rio going to have payment terminals compatible with this by the time the athletes arrive? That'll be the most common use for athlete's dollars, I'd think. XD
On a tin-foil-hat conspiratorial note, anyone else wonder if someone has weaponized Zika and seeded the world with carrier mosquitos, to create an extinction-level event for the human race? Thought's occurred to me..
No, I'm not trolling or kidding, I'm dead serious. If this is a widespread problem in the U.S., then could it be making people dumber and less emotionally stable?
It's a gigantic undertaking. Nine years from now, is he really going to have all the resources and funding necessary to pull it off, or would the attempt bankrupt him? It's about as far from being a trivial accomplishment as you can get.
The way Congress appears to view NASA funding, it's more likely that private enterprise will be responsible for the first humans on Mars.
You must be rolling your eyes at least as hard as I am at these people who think we're going to have so-called 'AI' creating masterpiece works of art or composing classic symphonies like human masters, and that in the next few years so-called 'self-driving cars' will be 100% safe, need no manual controls for a human, and you'll be able to put your kids, alone, into one of them and send them off on a trip in it.
Well, either the composer's brains work by magic or they can be emulated by some kind of machine.
NO. You're missing the fundamental point: We do not understand how the human brain does what it does yet, not even close, and without that fundamental understanding you CANNOT build a machine or write mere software that duplicates it's fuinctionality. They write clever mimicks that only go so far but fall way, WAY short of the mark. There is a hard limit to this until we fully, completely understand how our own brains work. Stop buying into all the hype.
It's the medias' fault. They've taken the term 'artificial intelligence' and turned it into a meaningless buzzword. We have no clue how our own minds work yet, therefore trying to create machines that are equivalent is absurd. All they've produced so far are cheesy algorithms that fall way short of the mark.
Remember, artificial intelligence works like normal intelligence but only in fantasy and science fiction novels, we don't have real 'AI' in the real world.
Fixed that for you.
We don't even really have a clue how our own brains work yet, let alone being able to even begin to emulate it with a machine. All we have right now are cheesy imitations that fall way, way short of the mark.
Don't anyone sit there and try to convince me that some cheesy algorithm is going to totally emulate human master composers because that's total and complete bullshit. Until we have fully human-level artificial intelligence, completely self-aware, with a full complement of human-level emotion and imagination, there won't be any machine-generated art of music that is equivalent to new works by human artists or human composers. Period.
I'm 100% with you on that one, friend. Way too 1984 as far as I'm concerned. Inside your house is about the only place left anymore where you have any sort of privacy.
Slashdot is obviously challenging us with a trick question.
I posed the question because the idea of a 'smart TV', ever since they came out with them, just doesn't make sense to me, so I thought I'd see if Slashdot was willing to give me some perspective on the subject. So far what I'm seeing is generally 'what do you mean, we don't want smart TV'.
Not to mention the problem of maintaining a stable orbit for a large industrial complex. It would make more sense to build colonies on the Moon and put industry there, before putting them in Earth orbit, or even in any of the L-points.
That's all I care about. All the Asteroids emulators were fine and good, but none of them play exactly like the original vectorscan black-and-white game, running on a 6502 processor and a discrete logic state machine/vector generator. Lots of fun to debug failures on the logic board, and you'd always need to keep a supply of 2N3716 and 2N3792 power transistors on hand to repair the monitors. The heck with the Internet of Things, bring back classic Asteroids!
Can I ask you, why you even want an Internet-connected TV to start with? Can't you connect a media center PC to it instead? Or a DVR, like I do? Just use it as a monitor?
Oh shut the fuck up, Microsoft shill.
Windows 7 user: "I'm perfectly happy with Windows 7, I don't want Windows 10"
Microsoft: "We don't care, have Windows 10 anyway"
Microsoft: *Tries various different ways to trick users into upgrading*
Microsoft: *Sneaks the upgrade in anyway*
Microsoft: *installs spyware, adware, and takes control of your PC*
If you think those are all OK then you're an obvious paid shill. Shove it up your ass, fuck off, drink Drano, and DIE.
It all comes down to CHOICE, and how Microsoft is unilaterally deciding that you don't get one anymore, with hardware YOU OWN.
This is beyond rediculous. Why would you pay for a TV that pulls this shit on you? I do not pay premium dollars for a television set that shoves gods-be-damned ADS in my face! All I need a TV to be is a monitor, that's all. I don't even understand why anyone would buy a so-called 'smart' TV in the first place; doesn't everyone either have a DVR, a media center computer, or just watch cable/satellite/OTA broadcasts? On top of all that are the news stories we've all read about how these so-called 'smart TVs' are spying on us. What's next? Are they going to require you to watch streaming ads before it'll allow you to watch whatever you're feeding to the TV to watch? Why is anyone putting up with this shit?
I will NEVER buy a 'smart TV'. Ever.
I'll sign that petition! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit!
What do we want?
Lawsuit!
When do we want it?
Now!
What do we want?
Lawsuit!
When do we want it?
Now!
Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit! Law-suit!
I'd just like to point out that while the above AC sounds 99% like me, and while I agree with him/her 110%, it is not, in fact, me. Nice job, though, AC, you've hit the nail squarely on the head. :-)
When we're all forced at gunpoint to use Facebook, then the article may have a point.
Amen to that, brother. Zuckerberg can't send a goon squad out to force me to have a Facebook account, and likewise he can't send a goon squad out to silence me when I say things like Facebook SUCKS ASS and you're a fool to use it! either.
Waaah, I don't get party invitations!
Seriously, did that guy really say that? Sounds like he's some whiny kid on 4chan/r9k/ or something. Here's the fact of the matter for you, kiddies: If someone on Facebook forgets to invite you to some party they're throwing just because you're not on Facebook, then they probably aren't really your 'friend' in the first place and maybe you need to re-evaluate your criteria for who you consider to be your 'friends'. The social world of Humans existed many many centuries before the Internet, and long long before some jackass named 'Zuckerberg' opened up some website called 'Facebook', and it'll continue to exist long after Facebook finally dies and goes away, so maybe you'd better spend more time working on your in-real-life social lives and less on your pseudo-social online life.
I use an add-on for Firefox called "selective cookie delete" that allows you to create a whitelist (or blacklist) of sites to either keep or prevent cookies.
Like that government doesn't have a history of violating the rights of its citizens.
By definition the North Korean government doesn't violate any of it's citizens' rights, ever, because their citizens have no rights to begin with.
o Offer gigabit broadband with no data caps
o Allow a few years for Rural America to get used to having it
o Impose Shadow Datacaps on the biggest bandwidth users
o Complain about 'data hogs' and 'lost profits'
o Impose 'overage fees'
o Impose data caps for all subscribers
o Profit!