The easiest Evil use for your robot twin is to have it sit calmly in a bar for an hour or two, while you commit whatever crime it is you want to commit. Presto, an airtight alibi is yours! (assuming you can get the robot into and out of the bar without anyone noticing, of course)
If you only have robot drivers (and you will, cause with lower accident rates, you'll have lower insurance rates if you always let the computer drive), you won't need visible signs or traffic lights.
Until humans driving cars is actually made illegal, there will always be some cars still driven by humans (if only because some people like doing the driving themselves, or want to use a "classic" car that doesn't support auto-drive, or -- most likely -- don't trust a computer to drive them safely). And as long as there are any humans driving, visible signs and traffic lights will still be required.
So maybe in a number of decades, practically no humans will be driving anymore... but all of the world's robot-cars will be designed to work with the existing traffic lights and visible signs. So even then, the traffic lights and visible signs will still be necessary, for backwards compatibility with all of the existing robot cars on the roads.
246 posts and nobody has discussed the magnetic covering? That seems to be the biggest design change. I'm can't decide if it's really cool, or really silly....
Not looking to make a movie, I'm looking for a consumer quality camera I can hold steady without a tripod. You used to be able to buy those in the $500 range. Now everything in the consumer range is "Hey, look at how small this is now! Isn't that great?!?!"
Teensy little consumer camera? Check. 10 pound block of wood? Check. Duct tape? Check. Okay, I think I have solution for your problem;)
A user-facing webcam for video-chat, okay, but what's the other for?
If you go by Apple's video spiel, its for showing your remote video-chat partner what you are looking at. (e.g. the kids blowing out the candles on their birthday cake while you hold the iPad to document the occasion)
Funny, it seemed to be the exact opposite sentiment prior to 2008. Any invasion of privacy was immediately decried as evil-doing by Bush and Bush alone. But now that the Democrats have "their man" at the top, it switches to "No! Congress is to blame!"
The thing is, a lot of the things the Bush Administration was doing (warrantless wiretaps, kidnapping, torture) were (and are) completely illegal. So yes, Bush gets the blame when his minions break the law. That's a very different situation from what Obama is being criticized for above -- Obama is being criticized for not repealing the Patriot Act. But it's not the President's job to pass or repeal legislation, it's Congress's job to do that.
My grandmother's white fence has had 0 jailbreaks. My grandmother's fence is more secure than Alcatraz! Just because few people take advantage of such a system doesn't mean anything.
It means a lot to your grandmother. I'm sure she's much happier living in a nice house with a nice white fence, than she would be living in Alcatraz. And in either location, she hasn't had her living space broken into.
How is Apple doing with respecting the intelligence level and freedoms of their customers?
It seems to be doing okay... at least, people keep buying Apple products. Perhaps those people are using their intelligence to freely make that choice?
I agree with the first half of your post, but "before the web, the computers were not that useful to many people"? For FSM's sake...
Parent poster was correct. Before the web, computers were used mainly for business, and for games. Computers were useful for many people, but there were whole classes of people (e.g. parents, grandparents, non-geeky kids) who had little interest in using a computer, simply because the computer didn't solve any problems that they needed solved.
Compare to today, where everybody and their dog has an email address and a Facebook account, and a computer without a working Internet connection is only good for... well, only video games (even businesses now rely on the web to get things done). There are very few people left who do not find a computer useful.
First of all, you can go back to Smalltalk for object-oriented, garbage collected GUIs, and it pulled object-orientation from Simula, garbage collection from Lisp, and GUIs from Doug Engelbart. Variations on these ideas have been "in the air" for a long time.
The parent poster wasn't talking about what we "could have been doing", but rather what we "would have been doing". There are always lots of good ideas "in the air", but they don't do any good for anyone unless and until they are successfully brought to market.
And let's face it, without Apple's GUI progress with OS/X, how much motivation would Microsoft have had to improve their own OS? Without OS/X, Microsoft would have just coasted on their monopoly, and 2011's Microsoft OS would probably still look and act very much like Windows 2000.
So how do you explain the NeXT's failure to deliver a popular product?
NeXT made great products... but almost nobody was willing to pay $10,000+ for a computer, no matter how awesome it was.
Jobs knew what he wanted to sell, but (in hindsight) that product wasn't viable until the technology got cheap enough that the people who would want to use it, could afford to buy it.
It took you guys this long to figure out that the guy who did nothing to repeal the PATRIOT Act when he had free reign is evil?
"Free reign"? Really? There seems to be this delusion that the USA is a dictatorship, where the President can simply enact or repeal any law he desires.
Contrast that with reality -- it is Congress that makes the laws, and the President can, at best, ask them to make laws he likes, or veto newly passed laws that he doesn't like.
Go ahead and fault Obama for not trying harder and twisting more arms, if you like, but let's not pretend he's Superman, or that Congress is a rubber stamp. The truth is that Congress deserves at least as much of the blame as the Obama Administration, and arguably the majority of it.
For example, does any organization have a security posture that can effectively block access by a quantum neural network AI based on topological quantum computing principles, should such a thing exist?
No, they are appallingly unprepared for that possibility. What's worse, they also have absolutely no defenses against intruders who read the contents of classified hard drives via ESP, should such a thing exist. They should all be sacked for negligence.
Although I'm not sure I can envision a way of writing the repeal which wouldn't open the door for widespread abuse.
The traditional way would be to put a tax/duty on incandescents so that they become more expensive than CFLs. That way anyone who didn't absolutely positively require an incandescent bulb for some reason would tend to buy the (now cheaper) CFLs.
but tell me why in a supposedly free country I can't burn the power I pay for using the light source I find safer and better?
Just to be pedantic... you're still allowed to use incandescent light bulbs. Stores just won't be allowed to sell them anymore. Hence the stockpiling mentioned in the article.
So what prevents people from modifying their gcc to allow malicious code?
Nothing... but it wouldn't do them much good, since the NaCL client would detect the non-compliant instructions in the downloaded binary, and refuse to run it.
No, but it will have something substantially better; access to a cloud-based "Watson" that is constantly learning from human interaction just like the current Watson.
Of course, unlike the current Watson, the cloud-based "Watson" will be constantly learning how better to track you down via your cell phone signal, in order to terminate you.
Slashdot Mirror
Was the VCS ever marketed as a "computer"?
Dunno about the marketing, but have a look at this. Crazy, no?
The easiest Evil use for your robot twin is to have it sit calmly in a bar for an hour or two, while you commit whatever crime it is you want to commit. Presto, an airtight alibi is yours! (assuming you can get the robot into and out of the bar without anyone noticing, of course)
How will the computer know what kind of surface I am on [...] so it can break accordingly.
Ah, a WinCE-based system, I see.
I don't want my car to have an existential crisis while on the freeway.
Here I am, brain the size of a planet, and they ask me to drive to the AM/PM to pick up beer. Call that job satisfaction? 'Cause I don't.
If you only have robot drivers (and you will, cause with lower accident rates, you'll have lower insurance rates if you always let the computer drive), you won't need visible signs or traffic lights.
Until humans driving cars is actually made illegal, there will always be some cars still driven by humans (if only because some people like doing the driving themselves, or want to use a "classic" car that doesn't support auto-drive, or -- most likely -- don't trust a computer to drive them safely). And as long as there are any humans driving, visible signs and traffic lights will still be required.
So maybe in a number of decades, practically no humans will be driving anymore... but all of the world's robot-cars will be designed to work with the existing traffic lights and visible signs. So even then, the traffic lights and visible signs will still be necessary, for backwards compatibility with all of the existing robot cars on the roads.
246 posts and nobody has discussed the magnetic covering? That seems to be the biggest design change. I'm can't decide if it's really cool, or really silly....
Not looking to make a movie, I'm looking for a consumer quality camera I can hold steady without a tripod. You used to be able to buy those in the $500 range. Now everything in the consumer range is "Hey, look at how small this is now! Isn't that great?!?!"
Teensy little consumer camera? Check. 10 pound block of wood? Check. Duct tape? Check. Okay, I think I have solution for your problem ;)
A user-facing webcam for video-chat, okay, but what's the other for?
If you go by Apple's video spiel, its for showing your remote video-chat partner what you are looking at. (e.g. the kids blowing out the candles on their birthday cake while you hold the iPad to document the occasion)
How do your port an emulator with graphics capabilities to plain vanilla ANSI C? C doesn't include any graphics API.
Funny, it seemed to be the exact opposite sentiment prior to 2008. Any invasion of privacy was immediately decried as evil-doing by Bush and Bush alone. But now that the Democrats have "their man" at the top, it switches to "No! Congress is to blame!"
The thing is, a lot of the things the Bush Administration was doing (warrantless wiretaps, kidnapping, torture) were (and are) completely illegal. So yes, Bush gets the blame when his minions break the law. That's a very different situation from what Obama is being criticized for above -- Obama is being criticized for not repealing the Patriot Act. But it's not the President's job to pass or repeal legislation, it's Congress's job to do that.
Work in a place with 1500+ mac's and it's hell
Care to explain what makes it hell? I'm genuinely curious.
My grandmother's white fence has had 0 jailbreaks. My grandmother's fence is more secure than Alcatraz! Just because few people take advantage of such a system doesn't mean anything.
It means a lot to your grandmother. I'm sure she's much happier living in a nice house with a nice white fence, than she would be living in Alcatraz. And in either location, she hasn't had her living space broken into.
How is Apple doing with respecting the intelligence level and freedoms of their customers?
It seems to be doing okay ... at least, people keep buying Apple products. Perhaps those people are using their intelligence to freely make that choice?
I agree with the first half of your post, but "before the web, the computers were not that useful to many people"? For FSM's sake...
Parent poster was correct. Before the web, computers were used mainly for business, and for games. Computers were useful for many people, but there were whole classes of people (e.g. parents, grandparents, non-geeky kids) who had little interest in using a computer, simply because the computer didn't solve any problems that they needed solved.
Compare to today, where everybody and their dog has an email address and a Facebook account, and a computer without a working Internet connection is only good for... well, only video games (even businesses now rely on the web to get things done). There are very few people left who do not find a computer useful.
First of all, you can go back to Smalltalk for object-oriented, garbage collected GUIs, and it pulled object-orientation from Simula, garbage collection from Lisp, and GUIs from Doug Engelbart. Variations on these ideas have been "in the air" for a long time.
The parent poster wasn't talking about what we "could have been doing", but rather what we "would have been doing". There are always lots of good ideas "in the air", but they don't do any good for anyone unless and until they are successfully brought to market.
And let's face it, without Apple's GUI progress with OS/X, how much motivation would Microsoft have had to improve their own OS? Without OS/X, Microsoft would have just coasted on their monopoly, and 2011's Microsoft OS would probably still look and act very much like Windows 2000.
So how do you explain the NeXT's failure to deliver a popular product?
NeXT made great products... but almost nobody was willing to pay $10,000+ for a computer, no matter how awesome it was.
Jobs knew what he wanted to sell, but (in hindsight) that product wasn't viable until the technology got cheap enough that the people who would want to use it, could afford to buy it.
It took you guys this long to figure out that the guy who did nothing to repeal the PATRIOT Act when he had free reign is evil?
"Free reign"? Really? There seems to be this delusion that the USA is a dictatorship, where the President can simply enact or repeal any law he desires.
Contrast that with reality -- it is Congress that makes the laws, and the President can, at best, ask them to make laws he likes, or veto newly passed laws that he doesn't like.
Go ahead and fault Obama for not trying harder and twisting more arms, if you like, but let's not pretend he's Superman, or that Congress is a rubber stamp. The truth is that Congress deserves at least as much of the blame as the Obama Administration, and arguably the majority of it.
For example, does any organization have a security posture that can effectively block access by a quantum neural network AI based on topological quantum computing principles, should such a thing exist?
No, they are appallingly unprepared for that possibility. What's worse, they also have absolutely no defenses against intruders who read the contents of classified hard drives via ESP, should such a thing exist. They should all be sacked for negligence.
"This tells us the Obama Administration will do everything that the Bush Administration did"
I, for one, am looking forward to next year's invasion of some annoying-yet-irrelevent country. Where will we fail to find the WMDs this time?
Although I'm not sure I can envision a way of writing the repeal which wouldn't open the door for widespread abuse.
The traditional way would be to put a tax/duty on incandescents so that they become more expensive than CFLs. That way anyone who didn't absolutely positively require an incandescent bulb for some reason would tend to buy the (now cheaper) CFLs.
but tell me why in a supposedly free country I can't burn the power I pay for using the light source I find safer and better?
Just to be pedantic... you're still allowed to use incandescent light bulbs. Stores just won't be allowed to sell them anymore. Hence the stockpiling mentioned in the article.
the US does this every day to many hundrerds, if nog thousands of people.
Citation? Evidence? Anything?
HEADLINE: The two kids that couldn't get dates to the prom decide to dance together.
Well, geez. When you put it that way, it's kind of romantic. True love at last! Mazel tov Nokia and Microsoft!
So what prevents people from modifying their gcc to allow malicious code?
Nothing... but it wouldn't do them much good, since the NaCL client would detect the non-compliant instructions in the downloaded binary, and refuse to run it.
No, but it will have something substantially better; access to a cloud-based "Watson" that is constantly learning from human interaction just like the current Watson.
Of course, unlike the current Watson, the cloud-based "Watson" will be constantly learning how better to track you down via your cell phone signal, in order to terminate you.