..and cars that are transportation. Is that so gods-be-damned difficult?
Stop making your car a lifestyle. You're not 'accessorizing' your life with a car. Your car does not define you. Things like this that you think you 'own'? They end up owning you. How about a car that's just a car, transportation? Anything more than a radio that works decently and air conditioning is just more junk to distract you, to break down, and to cost you more money you probably don't have to start with. If we got rid of all this excessive crap in cars, they'd probably cost half as much. Come on, people, just say no to all this shit.
It's not going to be destroyed, it's going to fragment
That's my entire point; 'fragmenting' == 'destoying it'.
Enjoy the everyone-to-everyone connection you have now, while you still can.
I don't have that; so-called 'social media' is one of the aggressive cancers that is killing the Internet, and I refuse to participate in the destruction of something that once was beautiful.
The darknet already exists, doesn't it?
Sure it does.. for now. Like Tor, it only exists because the powers-that-be allow it to exist, for their own purposes; once those purposes become obsolete, Tor will become anathema, and anyone using it will be considered a criminal.
Want some advice, friend? Vote for any public library funding bills that come along, so long as it means that public libraries continue to exist, and continue to be stocked with printed paper books. Some time in the future we may need to fall back to those as a source of knowledge.
Good morning, Slashdotters! We sure don't want your ambient fear level dropping (because your higher reasoning abilities might actually start functioning at 100% again if they do), so this is your Monday morning FUD report! See your tax dollars at work? Remember, you're here forever! . . . . . . *facepalm*
I've been suspecting for quite some time now, but something like this makes it fairly obvious to me: The Internet is well on it's way to being more or less destroyed. I wouldn't at all be surprised if in the next 10 years or so, it gets literally fragmented to the point where it's just the 'U.S. Internet', and the 'PRC Internet', and the 'E.U. Internet', and the 'U.K. Internet', and so on, with no interconnection between the disparate networks, and before too much longer than that, no interoperability between them anyway. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.
What? I haven't had sufficient reason to get a smartphone so far, and it seems like every week something else comes up that convinces me even further that it's a bad idea. Overpriced, underperforming, get gouged for wireless service, and then it's like a swiss cheese so far as security goes, and there's not a hell of a lot you can do about it? All so I can have stupid games and mobile internet? LOL you, thanks but no thanks. I don't even use a cellphone as a phone all that much, I've got like 10000 'anytime' minutes racked up every single month. If it was any cheaper to have landline POTS at my house I think I'd just do that instead, but it costs about the same.
They should not only publish it publicly, they should also have a mapping app on the same page, much like the sex offender registry uses, so you can put in your address and see on a map if there are any drone owners in your vicinity, so when someone violates your privacy with their drone, you'll know whose doors to go knocking on.
Scientists invent a way to troll their fellow scientists with a new uber-high-resolution inkjet printing technique capable of printing "The Game" small enough to be seen only under a microscope
The company says it will only sell it to law enforcement agency
Yeah, sure you will. Aside from this making it's way into the hands of criminal organizations, one way or another, in a startlingly short period of time, the NSA and CIA (which more or less amount to criminal organizations, the way they conduct themselves domestically) probably already have this device in their posession well in advance of us hearing about it.
Thanks, assholes. Now I will never own a smartphone, ever. Hell, I'm half considering whether it even makes sense to continue having a cellphone of any kind anymore.
Well there's that too I've noticed, but if you ask them if they worry about people they don't know seeing everything they post about their lives, where they are at particular times, and all the photos of them that are tagged with their names, they look at you like you're nuts; they just don't get it.
Is privacy such an enemy of the state now that they have to push it through in the budget bill?
Riders on sweeping bills like the one that keeps the Federal government's doors open are SOP for our government, and has been for a long time now. Very often things literally get sneaked into it, hoping it doesn't get noticed, considering the full text of the bill is thousands of pages. It's 'high priority' for the Senate because otherwise the Federal government literally shuts down due to no funding; people literally get sent home without pay, contractors don't get paid, services to citizens stop, etc.
..enemy of the state..
Yes, apparently, it is, now. Look at how the younger generation views the concept of 'privacy': they 'share' every gods-be-damned little thing on social media platforms, never really giving a single thought to who or how many people are actually able to access and use that data however they wish, and they're convinced that anyone who values 'privacy' and goes out of their way to keep their lives private are either 'too old to understand' or that they're criminals/terrorists/predators and 'have something to hide'. This (in my opinion, so take it with a grain of salt, please) is due to the younger generation having been indoctrinated, from birth, to believe 'privacy is bad and selfish', and 'good people share', and Corporate America and our own government is behind it. Three-letter agencies love being able to see everything all the time, and if they had their fondest wishes, I wouldn't at all be surprised if they'd have us required to have cameras and microphones in our homes and in our vehicles, 'for our own safety', naturally, but so far pesky things like the rule of law, the Constitution, and the concept of basic human rights has kept them from doing things like that.
..government/military/emergency vehicle only, at worst. For safety purposes, you'd have to be a licensed pilot, with special training by the manufacturer and certified by the FAA, in order to operate it. How long did it take for the automated systems on current passenger jets to be certified? Will take at least that long to certify something like this is fail-safe enough. Maintenance would have to be performed with the same rules/laws as any other aircraft, i.e. you'd have to take it to a licensed aircraft mechanic; no home repair by amateurs allowed. They'd probably have to create a whole new class of insurance for the craft and the pilot, and it too wouldn't be cheap.
This is all assuming something like this would ever go into actual production, and even in 'production' it'd be more or less hand-built, one at a time, to order.
I can definitely see something like this being very useful in a military version, though, or as an emergency vehicle version (flying ambulance, for instance, better equipped for the job than a helicopter because it would need a smaller area for takeoff and landing). Not really practical for mass-production though; you could never make it affordable enough for even an upper-middle-class family, especially considering all the incidental expenses involved.
Oh for fucks' sake YOU calm down and learn the difference between conjecture and the 'paranoid ramblings' you're accusing me of, you Anonymous Coward jackhole.
Really, honestly, truly, I don't care if someone comes to this country and doesn't want to 'integrate' and fully embrace the typical American lifestyle; this country was founded with peoples from different countries and cultures, and continued to take in people from diverse cultures. It makes us who we are, and I'm OK with that, so long as nobody comes here and expects the rest of the nation to embrace their values/beliefs/culture/lifestyle, and abandon our own (which, in the context of the current subject, you can rightly interpret as not wanting to change our local/state/federal government to Sharia Law/Caliphate/Religious rule); at the very least that's rude, at the very worst it's seditionism and/or treason. Honestly, if you feel that way about the United States, then why even come here? I also, rightly so in my opinion, would take offense to someone who doesn't care to embrace our culture but wants to live here anyway, to look down their nose at us as if we're lesser human beings because we don't live the way they want to live. I guess you could put all of this under the general category of 'doing it wrong'. That would be like if I decided to emigrate to France or Germany (or {insert country here}) and never bothered myself to learn the local language and customs, regardless of how I personally conduct my life; I would be, in my opinion of myself in that situation, being extremely rude.
As previously stated: I'll be damned if I know what to do about all this. To say it's all a hot mess is putting it mildly.
On an associated subject, I suppose if anyone is looking for a bright side to things, I hear today that they're making some headway to negotiating a cease-fire in Syria (insert meme-pic, "Some faith in humanity restored", here). Having Assad step down peacefully, and having a smooth transition of power in Syria, would, I believe, go a long way to starting to defuse and improve the overall situation. The opposite of this would be the formation of a total power-vacuum in Syria, which is what Islamic State jackholes want, because then they could just swoop in and occupy the entire country, and it'd be damned near impossible to dislodge them once they got embedded there. If a cease-fire and eventual end to hostilities can be made to happen, with a smooth transition of leadership, then enough order could very well be maintained to block ISIL from being able to just take over the country. That, I think, plus the sustained effort of coalition forces who are chipping away at ISIL, could bring a swifter end to them. In my non-authoritative, non-expert opinion, of course.
It's looking more and more like a certain Sunni extremist group has already obtained one of their primary objectives: polarizing the United States against anyone of middle-eastern origin. I know this is at this point a 'Planet Texas' problem, but the problem is growing everywhere: people are already primed to be afraid of anyone who looks like they might conceivably be Muslim, and you give them any half-assed reason for a knee-jerk reaction, and you have what happened in this news story. One has to wonder how long it'll be, before someone (a cop, most likely) 'shoots and asks questions later', and some kid or other innocent dies just because they looked (or were in fact) Muslim -- and they weren't doing a damned thing wrong or even planned to do a damned thing wrong. After that, it'll likely be an avalanche. Something has to be done to stop this chain of events, now, before it gets to that point, but I'll be damned if I know what we need to do. Other than kick Trump out of the whole campaign process, and furthermore duct-tape him to a chair and stuff a sock in his mouth; that guy is doing at least as much damage to the whole situation as so-called Islamic State assholes are.
They shouldn't call such a thing an 'olympics' of any sort, because there's no real athleticism involved; it's more like a technology demonstration, and has more in common with 'Battlebots' than it does the Olympics.
Of course that being said, the Olympics, anymore, are more about world politics than they are about athleticism anyway.
Listen, you: The problem here is such a 'service' sets a dangerous precedent. When it becomes so ubiquitos that government and police say, 'Everyone is using it, so we're going to use it everywhere', suddenly you're living in an even worse surveillance society than you're living in right now -- and if you live in the UK, it's already pretty damned bad from what I hear. Add to this technology: License plate tracking technology, telephone and internet tracking, financial transaction tracking, and (if policitians have their way) 'backdoors' into any sort of encryption (which would naturally include the garden-variety SSL encryption used everywhere on the Internet), then the only thing that's missing is cameras inside your house (oh, whoops, forgot: your 'smart TV' has a microphone and camera now!) and something you wear on your body all day long (oh, whoops, forgot again: Fitbit!) and you're living in the equivalent of House Arrest, like an animal in a cage. Not my or anyone else's fault if you can't see past the end of your own nose so far as how technologies can be abused by police and government to make you a virtual prisoner. Of course then there's people who think trading away their 'freedom' and 'privacy' for 'safety' is a good deal, and that 'privacy' is only for people who have something to hide; of course those people are idiots. Hope you're not one of those.
We're already very close to living in a world where everyone is identified and tracked in realtime 24/7/365; you would hurry that process along? Do you enjoy having no privacy whatsoever? Or are you one of 'those' people who has been indoctrinated into believing that 'privacy' is something that only criminals and other wrong-doers seek?
That's what the pro-'autonomous car' people are saying right now. But that's never going to be the case and they need to accept that. What needs to happen is there needs to be reforms in the way drivers are educated, trained, and tested; the bar needs to be set higher, and testing needs to be performed on a more frequent basis. I cannot stress highly enough that the focus here shouldn't be on punishment; the focus needs to be on education and training -- but that having been said, incompetent drivers need to be excluded from operating motor vehicles entirely. Advocates of so-called 'autonomous vehicles' will now say 'Banning human drivers will solve all these problems', but the simple fact of the matter is, that all so-called 'autonomous vehicles' will always have a full set of manual controls and the ability to override the autonomous system without delay because, among other things, there will always be situations where only a human driver can get the job done; for this reason, even in a world where so-called 'autonomous vehicles' are ubiquitos, people will need to be better educated and trained at operating a motor vehicle, and tested more frequently to ensure that they're competent, due to the less frequent use of their driving skills ('use it or lose it').
An undercover (national || foreign national) government agent infiltrated our company and inserted a 'backdoor' into our firewall code
..or..
A member of a (criminal || terrorist) organization infiltrated our company and inserted a 'backdoor' into our firewall code
..or..
A (national || foreign national || criminal) organization (paid off || extorted) a Juniper Networks employee to insert a 'backdoor' into our firewall code
Take your pick from any of the above theories, since 'unauthorized' is about as thinly-veiled a euphemism as you can get.
Never fear, friend, there will always be a full set of manual controls, and all vehicle operators will be required to be educated, trained, tested, licensed, and insured, probably more rigidly so than today, because laziness will cause an atrophy of skills otherwise.
What we need to help fix this planet are people that run off of logic, not emotions.
Yes. At the same time maybe we could finally shrug off the onerous yoke of religion and other superstitions. Sadly, I'd rate the chance of that happening, before Humanity extincts itself, to be way less than 50% right now. We're still more animal than we are truly sentient, thinking beings, and that's not something that will change overnight.
Slashdot Mirror
..and cars that are transportation. Is that so gods-be-damned difficult?
Stop making your car a lifestyle. You're not 'accessorizing' your life with a car. Your car does not define you. Things like this that you think you 'own'? They end up owning you. How about a car that's just a car, transportation? Anything more than a radio that works decently and air conditioning is just more junk to distract you, to break down, and to cost you more money you probably don't have to start with. If we got rid of all this excessive crap in cars, they'd probably cost half as much. Come on, people, just say no to all this shit.
Mod the AC up because he's right, and those that are modding him down are probably H1-B workers sending their money out of the U.S.
It's not going to be destroyed, it's going to fragment
That's my entire point; 'fragmenting' == 'destoying it'.
Enjoy the everyone-to-everyone connection you have now, while you still can.
I don't have that; so-called 'social media' is one of the aggressive cancers that is killing the Internet, and I refuse to participate in the destruction of something that once was beautiful.
The darknet already exists, doesn't it?
Sure it does.. for now. Like Tor, it only exists because the powers-that-be allow it to exist, for their own purposes; once those purposes become obsolete, Tor will become anathema, and anyone using it will be considered a criminal.
Want some advice, friend? Vote for any public library funding bills that come along, so long as it means that public libraries continue to exist, and continue to be stocked with printed paper books. Some time in the future we may need to fall back to those as a source of knowledge.
Good morning, Slashdotters! We sure don't want your ambient fear level dropping (because your higher reasoning abilities might actually start functioning at 100% again if they do), so this is your Monday morning FUD report! See your tax dollars at work? Remember, you're here forever!
.
.
.
.
.
.
*facepalm*
..because you're using a system that is probably just as exploitable under similar conditions.
Well, no, actually, I'm not. At home it makes zero sense for me to use WiFi, it's a small place and ethernet makes so much more sense.
I've been suspecting for quite some time now, but something like this makes it fairly obvious to me: The Internet is well on it's way to being more or less destroyed. I wouldn't at all be surprised if in the next 10 years or so, it gets literally fragmented to the point where it's just the 'U.S. Internet', and the 'PRC Internet', and the 'E.U. Internet', and the 'U.K. Internet', and so on, with no interconnection between the disparate networks, and before too much longer than that, no interoperability between them anyway. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.
What? I haven't had sufficient reason to get a smartphone so far, and it seems like every week something else comes up that convinces me even further that it's a bad idea. Overpriced, underperforming, get gouged for wireless service, and then it's like a swiss cheese so far as security goes, and there's not a hell of a lot you can do about it? All so I can have stupid games and mobile internet? LOL you, thanks but no thanks. I don't even use a cellphone as a phone all that much, I've got like 10000 'anytime' minutes racked up every single month. If it was any cheaper to have landline POTS at my house I think I'd just do that instead, but it costs about the same.
They should not only publish it publicly, they should also have a mapping app on the same page, much like the sex offender registry uses, so you can put in your address and see on a map if there are any drone owners in your vicinity, so when someone violates your privacy with their drone, you'll know whose doors to go knocking on.
Scientists invent a way to troll their fellow scientists with a new uber-high-resolution inkjet printing technique capable of printing "The Game" small enough to be seen only under a microscope
The company says it will only sell it to law enforcement agency
Yeah, sure you will. Aside from this making it's way into the hands of criminal organizations, one way or another, in a startlingly short period of time, the NSA and CIA (which more or less amount to criminal organizations, the way they conduct themselves domestically) probably already have this device in their posession well in advance of us hearing about it.
Thanks, assholes. Now I will never own a smartphone, ever. Hell, I'm half considering whether it even makes sense to continue having a cellphone of any kind anymore.
Millennials
Well there's that too I've noticed, but if you ask them if they worry about people they don't know seeing everything they post about their lives, where they are at particular times, and all the photos of them that are tagged with their names, they look at you like you're nuts; they just don't get it.
Show a kid yummy junk food and candy, kid wants to eat yummy junk food and candy
Marketers will shamelessly and consciencelessly sell whatever they want to sell
Nothing to see here, move along, move along..
Is privacy such an enemy of the state now that they have to push it through in the budget bill?
Riders on sweeping bills like the one that keeps the Federal government's doors open are SOP for our government, and has been for a long time now. Very often things literally get sneaked into it, hoping it doesn't get noticed, considering the full text of the bill is thousands of pages. It's 'high priority' for the Senate because otherwise the Federal government literally shuts down due to no funding; people literally get sent home without pay, contractors don't get paid, services to citizens stop, etc.
..enemy of the state..
Yes, apparently, it is, now. Look at how the younger generation views the concept of 'privacy': they 'share' every gods-be-damned little thing on social media platforms, never really giving a single thought to who or how many people are actually able to access and use that data however they wish, and they're convinced that anyone who values 'privacy' and goes out of their way to keep their lives private are either 'too old to understand' or that they're criminals/terrorists/predators and 'have something to hide'. This (in my opinion, so take it with a grain of salt, please) is due to the younger generation having been indoctrinated, from birth, to believe 'privacy is bad and selfish', and 'good people share', and Corporate America and our own government is behind it. Three-letter agencies love being able to see everything all the time, and if they had their fondest wishes, I wouldn't at all be surprised if they'd have us required to have cameras and microphones in our homes and in our vehicles, 'for our own safety', naturally, but so far pesky things like the rule of law, the Constitution, and the concept of basic human rights has kept them from doing things like that.
..government/military/emergency vehicle only, at worst. For safety purposes, you'd have to be a licensed pilot, with special training by the manufacturer and certified by the FAA, in order to operate it. How long did it take for the automated systems on current passenger jets to be certified? Will take at least that long to certify something like this is fail-safe enough. Maintenance would have to be performed with the same rules/laws as any other aircraft, i.e. you'd have to take it to a licensed aircraft mechanic; no home repair by amateurs allowed. They'd probably have to create a whole new class of insurance for the craft and the pilot, and it too wouldn't be cheap.
This is all assuming something like this would ever go into actual production, and even in 'production' it'd be more or less hand-built, one at a time, to order.
I can definitely see something like this being very useful in a military version, though, or as an emergency vehicle version (flying ambulance, for instance, better equipped for the job than a helicopter because it would need a smaller area for takeoff and landing). Not really practical for mass-production though; you could never make it affordable enough for even an upper-middle-class family, especially considering all the incidental expenses involved.
Oh for fucks' sake YOU calm down and learn the difference between conjecture and the 'paranoid ramblings' you're accusing me of, you Anonymous Coward jackhole.
Really, honestly, truly, I don't care if someone comes to this country and doesn't want to 'integrate' and fully embrace the typical American lifestyle; this country was founded with peoples from different countries and cultures, and continued to take in people from diverse cultures. It makes us who we are, and I'm OK with that, so long as nobody comes here and expects the rest of the nation to embrace their values/beliefs/culture/lifestyle, and abandon our own (which, in the context of the current subject, you can rightly interpret as not wanting to change our local/state/federal government to Sharia Law/Caliphate/Religious rule); at the very least that's rude, at the very worst it's seditionism and/or treason. Honestly, if you feel that way about the United States, then why even come here? I also, rightly so in my opinion, would take offense to someone who doesn't care to embrace our culture but wants to live here anyway, to look down their nose at us as if we're lesser human beings because we don't live the way they want to live. I guess you could put all of this under the general category of 'doing it wrong'. That would be like if I decided to emigrate to France or Germany (or {insert country here}) and never bothered myself to learn the local language and customs, regardless of how I personally conduct my life; I would be, in my opinion of myself in that situation, being extremely rude.
As previously stated: I'll be damned if I know what to do about all this. To say it's all a hot mess is putting it mildly.
On an associated subject, I suppose if anyone is looking for a bright side to things, I hear today that they're making some headway to negotiating a cease-fire in Syria (insert meme-pic, "Some faith in humanity restored", here). Having Assad step down peacefully, and having a smooth transition of power in Syria, would, I believe, go a long way to starting to defuse and improve the overall situation. The opposite of this would be the formation of a total power-vacuum in Syria, which is what Islamic State jackholes want, because then they could just swoop in and occupy the entire country, and it'd be damned near impossible to dislodge them once they got embedded there. If a cease-fire and eventual end to hostilities can be made to happen, with a smooth transition of leadership, then enough order could very well be maintained to block ISIL from being able to just take over the country. That, I think, plus the sustained effort of coalition forces who are chipping away at ISIL, could bring a swifter end to them. In my non-authoritative, non-expert opinion, of course.
It's looking more and more like a certain Sunni extremist group has already obtained one of their primary objectives: polarizing the United States against anyone of middle-eastern origin. I know this is at this point a 'Planet Texas' problem, but the problem is growing everywhere: people are already primed to be afraid of anyone who looks like they might conceivably be Muslim, and you give them any half-assed reason for a knee-jerk reaction, and you have what happened in this news story. One has to wonder how long it'll be, before someone (a cop, most likely) 'shoots and asks questions later', and some kid or other innocent dies just because they looked (or were in fact) Muslim -- and they weren't doing a damned thing wrong or even planned to do a damned thing wrong. After that, it'll likely be an avalanche. Something has to be done to stop this chain of events, now, before it gets to that point, but I'll be damned if I know what we need to do. Other than kick Trump out of the whole campaign process, and furthermore duct-tape him to a chair and stuff a sock in his mouth; that guy is doing at least as much damage to the whole situation as so-called Islamic State assholes are.
They shouldn't call such a thing an 'olympics' of any sort, because there's no real athleticism involved; it's more like a technology demonstration, and has more in common with 'Battlebots' than it does the Olympics.
Of course that being said, the Olympics, anymore, are more about world politics than they are about athleticism anyway.
Listen, you: The problem here is such a 'service' sets a dangerous precedent. When it becomes so ubiquitos that government and police say, 'Everyone is using it, so we're going to use it everywhere', suddenly you're living in an even worse surveillance society than you're living in right now -- and if you live in the UK, it's already pretty damned bad from what I hear. Add to this technology: License plate tracking technology, telephone and internet tracking, financial transaction tracking, and (if policitians have their way) 'backdoors' into any sort of encryption (which would naturally include the garden-variety SSL encryption used everywhere on the Internet), then the only thing that's missing is cameras inside your house (oh, whoops, forgot: your 'smart TV' has a microphone and camera now!) and something you wear on your body all day long (oh, whoops, forgot again: Fitbit!) and you're living in the equivalent of House Arrest, like an animal in a cage. Not my or anyone else's fault if you can't see past the end of your own nose so far as how technologies can be abused by police and government to make you a virtual prisoner. Of course then there's people who think trading away their 'freedom' and 'privacy' for 'safety' is a good deal, and that 'privacy' is only for people who have something to hide; of course those people are idiots. Hope you're not one of those.
We're already very close to living in a world where everyone is identified and tracked in realtime 24/7/365; you would hurry that process along? Do you enjoy having no privacy whatsoever? Or are you one of 'those' people who has been indoctrinated into believing that 'privacy' is something that only criminals and other wrong-doers seek?
We need to ban human drivers as soon as possible!
That's what the pro-'autonomous car' people are saying right now. But that's never going to be the case and they need to accept that. What needs to happen is there needs to be reforms in the way drivers are educated, trained, and tested; the bar needs to be set higher, and testing needs to be performed on a more frequent basis. I cannot stress highly enough that the focus here shouldn't be on punishment; the focus needs to be on education and training -- but that having been said, incompetent drivers need to be excluded from operating motor vehicles entirely. Advocates of so-called 'autonomous vehicles' will now say 'Banning human drivers will solve all these problems', but the simple fact of the matter is, that all so-called 'autonomous vehicles' will always have a full set of manual controls and the ability to override the autonomous system without delay because, among other things, there will always be situations where only a human driver can get the job done; for this reason, even in a world where so-called 'autonomous vehicles' are ubiquitos, people will need to be better educated and trained at operating a motor vehicle, and tested more frequently to ensure that they're competent, due to the less frequent use of their driving skills ('use it or lose it').
An undercover (national || foreign national) government agent infiltrated our company and inserted a 'backdoor' into our firewall code
..or..
A member of a (criminal || terrorist) organization infiltrated our company and inserted a 'backdoor' into our firewall code
..or..
A (national || foreign national || criminal) organization (paid off || extorted) a Juniper Networks employee to insert a 'backdoor' into our firewall code
Take your pick from any of the above theories, since 'unauthorized' is about as thinly-veiled a euphemism as you can get.
This sort of thing is a cancer on civilization and needs to be stamped out, firmly and completely.
Never fear, friend, there will always be a full set of manual controls, and all vehicle operators will be required to be educated, trained, tested, licensed, and insured, probably more rigidly so than today, because laziness will cause an atrophy of skills otherwise.
What we need to help fix this planet are people that run off of logic, not emotions.
Yes. At the same time maybe we could finally shrug off the onerous yoke of religion and other superstitions. Sadly, I'd rate the chance of that happening, before Humanity extincts itself, to be way less than 50% right now. We're still more animal than we are truly sentient, thinking beings, and that's not something that will change overnight.