Personally I think the government should step in, that's what their job is after all
They think their job is to do whatever the people who pay them want them to do, and the people paying them are the people making money off of being allowed to game the system.
This looks like a good place to point to Mayday PAC. If you want to change how the system works, this might be the best opportunity right now. Hopefully it will pay off in 2016. The people in Congress need to be replaced with people who are going to work for the people instead of for companies.
At the stock exchange, I think such a scheme is called "options"
It's high-frequency trading. An order comes in at one price, but the computers sitting on a fiberoptic connection right next to the trading servers have gotten an updated price that is lower than the one on the order. So, they buy at the lower price, and sell it to the guy who made the order. That's why traders pay for the privilege of locating their servers right next to the trading servers. They want to be a middle man in the connection. It's also why they pay brokers to send orders to them instead of the exchange. The only value that an order has is if you can buy it for less and sell it to them, and that's what computers enable. It's illegal when a person does that, but not when they have a computer do it.
They are selling something the don't own, so it won't be around long.
They're not selling anything. They're asking for payment to leave the spot. If no one wants to pay them, presumably they'll leave after they're done waiting. If someone wants to pay, great. I value my own time too much to go back to my car after I'm done doing whatever I'm doing and sit there and wait for people to bid on it. If I'm walking back and someone has bid on it, great, I'll hit accept and wait a minute or two for them before I leave the spot, otherwise I'm not waiting. I'm not selling anything though.
no matter how abstract you make it, somewhere there is a wire connected to the starter motor and something that controls the state of that wire (whether is a button in your dash or on your keyfob)
Yes, but I don't see how that is any different than a mechanical switch. The only difference is the actual switch, not the wires connecting the switch to the rest of the system. The wires and connections can either be good and solid or shoddy regardless of whether or not the switch that they connect to is operated with a key or a button. I don't know enough about ignition switches to guess whether a key switch or a button has more points of failure. I've only been driving a car with a button for a few weeks so I don't have any experience to speak of there (0 failures in 2 weeks), but I did manage to blow out a key switch on more than one occasion (it wasn't necessarily the fault of the switch or wires, but it did happen).
Seriously, how can "skepticism grow" about something that had almost no basis for belief in the first place?
I don't understand it either. It is a fact whether or not the plane is where they claim it is. Either it is there, or it is not (or both, depending on who you ask ). Instead of trying to convince people or being skeptical or whatever, how about someone just look? There's not a free sub or boat capable of scanning the ocean floor that can head out there and look? Why bother having a debate about a fact when you can just verify what the actual fact is?
Well, that's true, but neither of those are required for keyless ignition, either. If a manufacturer wants to throw their car together in a shitty way, they can do that with any technology. There is a world of difference between a GM or a Chevy and, say, a Mercedes.
All a switch to electronic system will do is replace infrequent mechanical recalls with increasingly more frequent updates of shoddy on-board software.
Which is made possible by software being much easier to update than hardware. Think about how many mechanical components are in your car that could have or should have been recalled, but the manufacturer decided it was too expensive. A car that can update its software over the air doesn't have that problem. If they fix a problem today, you can get the fix tomorrow without even realizing it.
A physical key still unlocks the doors when the car's battery has died. A physical key doesn't itself have a battery to die, leaving you stranded in a blizzard in the middle of nowhere after you stop to pee on the side of the road.
There's no reason to get rid of keys entirely, just going electrical has its advantages. I don't even need to take my keys out my pocket any more. I walk up to the car, touch the handle with the fob in my pocket, and the car unlocks. I sit down, press the brakes, push the start button, and while the car is starting I put on my seatbelt. Put it in gear, and go. When I park I push the button again to turn it off, open the door, lock the doors, and go. If I forgot to lock the doors I can reach into my pocket and push the button on the fob to lock the car.
And if something has no power and I need access to the car, then I slide the little lock on the fob, pull, and remove the mechanical key, which I can then use to unlock the driver's door. I'm walking around with a mechanical key inside the fob and I never have to take them out of my pocket.
No one is "demanding" that you do anything, plenty of people just think it is sort of silly to insist on using a 13 year old operating system that is 4 versions behind. You are more than welcome to continue using it as long as you want to though, no one is going to physically stop you.
After Vista, they owe use a decent amount of time to get onto the next decent OS. Windows 7 counted as decent, and has been out 3 years.
3 years is not a decent amount of time to upgrade? Windows XP entered extended support from mainstream support in 2009. It's not like this is a surprise.
Or, I suppose, myself for expecting any better from/. nowadays...
I would say yourself, since you obviously lack anything resembling perspective. Yes, surely the worst example of a person being stupid is some attention whore who thinks that Microsoft should really stop having anything to do with Windows XP.
It works exactly the same as it always has. It's just no longer under warranty. Expect any security updates to be few and far between, and only for the biggest issues. Otherwise, you're on your own. Use it as long as you like, but don't come crying when you get infected or it doesn't run the newest programs.
That's the other side effect we'll see: within a few years, software vendors will no longer be testing their products on XP.
You think there is going to be an active community of people fixing flaws in Windows XP? Why would anyone do that? Moreover, how would anyone do that? It's not like they have the original problematic source code for core files, how can they patch things without knowing that they aren't breaking something else?
This is not a legal precedent. Read the Windows XP EULA if you want to see how liable Microsoft is for people using Windows XP after the end of life (or at all).
Can it not be that the wealthy love their country enough to volunteer their own hard-earned wealth to improve it (as they see it)?
The problem is that, as far as the ultra-wealthy go, the improvements that this country needs are the ones that allow the ultra-wealthy to keep or make more money, at the expense of everyone else. Obviously, there are exceptions to that rule, but in general that is the reason why 196 people donated 80% of the money to super PACs in 2012.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally I think the government should step in, that's what their job is after all
They think their job is to do whatever the people who pay them want them to do, and the people paying them are the people making money off of being allowed to game the system.
This looks like a good place to point to Mayday PAC. If you want to change how the system works, this might be the best opportunity right now. Hopefully it will pay off in 2016. The people in Congress need to be replaced with people who are going to work for the people instead of for companies.
At the stock exchange, I think such a scheme is called "options"
It's high-frequency trading. An order comes in at one price, but the computers sitting on a fiberoptic connection right next to the trading servers have gotten an updated price that is lower than the one on the order. So, they buy at the lower price, and sell it to the guy who made the order. That's why traders pay for the privilege of locating their servers right next to the trading servers. They want to be a middle man in the connection. It's also why they pay brokers to send orders to them instead of the exchange. The only value that an order has is if you can buy it for less and sell it to them, and that's what computers enable. It's illegal when a person does that, but not when they have a computer do it.
They are selling something the don't own, so it won't be around long.
They're not selling anything. They're asking for payment to leave the spot. If no one wants to pay them, presumably they'll leave after they're done waiting. If someone wants to pay, great. I value my own time too much to go back to my car after I'm done doing whatever I'm doing and sit there and wait for people to bid on it. If I'm walking back and someone has bid on it, great, I'll hit accept and wait a minute or two for them before I leave the spot, otherwise I'm not waiting. I'm not selling anything though.
Set the car on fire.
Wait for the tow truck.
That's brilliant, you'll have a parking space with only about 2 hours of wait time.
They are forcing the students to return the books, and you think the electronic version is going to be DRM-free? Ha!
no matter how abstract you make it, somewhere there is a wire connected to the starter motor and something that controls the state of that wire (whether is a button in your dash or on your keyfob)
Yes, but I don't see how that is any different than a mechanical switch. The only difference is the actual switch, not the wires connecting the switch to the rest of the system. The wires and connections can either be good and solid or shoddy regardless of whether or not the switch that they connect to is operated with a key or a button. I don't know enough about ignition switches to guess whether a key switch or a button has more points of failure. I've only been driving a car with a button for a few weeks so I don't have any experience to speak of there (0 failures in 2 weeks), but I did manage to blow out a key switch on more than one occasion (it wasn't necessarily the fault of the switch or wires, but it did happen).
Seriously, how can "skepticism grow" about something that had almost no basis for belief in the first place?
I don't understand it either. It is a fact whether or not the plane is where they claim it is. Either it is there, or it is not (or both, depending on who you ask ). Instead of trying to convince people or being skeptical or whatever, how about someone just look? There's not a free sub or boat capable of scanning the ocean floor that can head out there and look? Why bother having a debate about a fact when you can just verify what the actual fact is?
Well, that's true, but neither of those are required for keyless ignition, either. If a manufacturer wants to throw their car together in a shitty way, they can do that with any technology. There is a world of difference between a GM or a Chevy and, say, a Mercedes.
All a switch to electronic system will do is replace infrequent mechanical recalls with increasingly more frequent updates of shoddy on-board software.
Which is made possible by software being much easier to update than hardware. Think about how many mechanical components are in your car that could have or should have been recalled, but the manufacturer decided it was too expensive. A car that can update its software over the air doesn't have that problem. If they fix a problem today, you can get the fix tomorrow without even realizing it.
A physical key still unlocks the doors when the car's battery has died. A physical key doesn't itself have a battery to die, leaving you stranded in a blizzard in the middle of nowhere after you stop to pee on the side of the road.
There's no reason to get rid of keys entirely, just going electrical has its advantages. I don't even need to take my keys out my pocket any more. I walk up to the car, touch the handle with the fob in my pocket, and the car unlocks. I sit down, press the brakes, push the start button, and while the car is starting I put on my seatbelt. Put it in gear, and go. When I park I push the button again to turn it off, open the door, lock the doors, and go. If I forgot to lock the doors I can reach into my pocket and push the button on the fob to lock the car.
And if something has no power and I need access to the car, then I slide the little lock on the fob, pull, and remove the mechanical key, which I can then use to unlock the driver's door. I'm walking around with a mechanical key inside the fob and I never have to take them out of my pocket.
It does sometimes take a few extra cranks to get a gasoline engine to start, even if it is tuned and in working order.
The computer that controls ignition knows that too.
State of Colorado should halt the river until California dedicates funds toward this.
Riiight. Shut down the Hoover Dam and destroy the ecosystem of the Colorado river to teach California a lesson.
No one is "demanding" that you do anything, plenty of people just think it is sort of silly to insist on using a 13 year old operating system that is 4 versions behind. You are more than welcome to continue using it as long as you want to though, no one is going to physically stop you.
I'm not sure, I don't know if that EULA has ever been tested in court.
Why should I be forced to pay for a replacement?
Because you don't want to use an outdated OS and you require that your OS can run Autocad. Your own requirements dictate your options.
When the warranty runs out on your car, do you still expect free parts?
After Vista, they owe use a decent amount of time to get onto the next decent OS. Windows 7 counted as decent, and has been out 3 years.
3 years is not a decent amount of time to upgrade? Windows XP entered extended support from mainstream support in 2009. It's not like this is a surprise.
Or, I suppose, myself for expecting any better from /. nowadays...
I would say yourself, since you obviously lack anything resembling perspective. Yes, surely the worst example of a person being stupid is some attention whore who thinks that Microsoft should really stop having anything to do with Windows XP.
It works exactly the same as it always has. It's just no longer under warranty. Expect any security updates to be few and far between, and only for the biggest issues. Otherwise, you're on your own. Use it as long as you like, but don't come crying when you get infected or it doesn't run the newest programs.
That's the other side effect we'll see: within a few years, software vendors will no longer be testing their products on XP.
You think there is going to be an active community of people fixing flaws in Windows XP? Why would anyone do that? Moreover, how would anyone do that? It's not like they have the original problematic source code for core files, how can they patch things without knowing that they aren't breaking something else?
You paid for XP, why wouldn't you pay for the replacement?
This is not a legal precedent. Read the Windows XP EULA if you want to see how liable Microsoft is for people using Windows XP after the end of life (or at all).
Anticipating all dumb questions is easier said than done. As soon as you make something idiot-proof, they go and make a better idiot.
Can it not be that the wealthy love their country enough to volunteer their own hard-earned wealth to improve it (as they see it)?
The problem is that, as far as the ultra-wealthy go, the improvements that this country needs are the ones that allow the ultra-wealthy to keep or make more money, at the expense of everyone else. Obviously, there are exceptions to that rule, but in general that is the reason why 196 people donated 80% of the money to super PACs in 2012.
I think that there's probably a way to regain control of our country with destroying the world economy.
Electric, gas, and food bills do not go away when you own a car.