Have you considered that there might be a reason for that?
Linux has its place, it is indeed a useful OS that we should all be grateful for, but to the consumer computer market, it might as well not exist, and that isn't going to change.
Way too many things aren't supported or don't work the first time without any fiddling.
Oh sure, you can cherry pick hardware and find stuff that works great, but frankly you can install Windows 7 on ANY PC that is less than 8 years old and it will work. You can buy almost ANY computer add-on in the past 8 years and Windows 7 supports it.
Printers, scanners, USB devices, video cards, network cards, add-in this, add-in that, all work.
Linux just isn't there with such broad support. Joe Consumer crap printer or other random device has to work 100% of the time, or they'll get cranky.
And that doesn't even bring up the whole, "none of your software runs on it, WINE isn't a solution for Joe Consumer, and the "free" alternatives are not real substitutes.
5K isn't too bad... Keep in mind that 5K across a 5 year 0% loan is $83.33 extra a month. Not too bad when you're filling up 3 times a month at $85 each time.
At $20K extra, it is $333.33 a month, which would require that it never need gas and the power from the wall was free.
Neither of which would be the case.:)
But yes, $5K is fine on something like a Suburban.
People suggest rentals, but the problem with renting a minivan is that they all are spoken for on holiday weekends when everyone gets the same idea as you.
The other problem with rentals is that only a very limited selection of vehicles can be rented, and those are often base models.
It is pretty hard to rent a Suburban anywhere, and if you can, it is likely the basic version.
Knock me all you like for being spoiled (yea, I am), but I like my air conditioned seats in my truck. I like the power folding running boards, the dual DVD players, and the fact that I don't have to set all my favorite radio stations. Plus, for long drives, I have XM sat radio, something I wouldn't have in a rental.
Would I consider a Suburban with Volt technology? Yes, but they can't charge $20K more for it, that buys a LOT of gas.
If the Chevy Volt was $20,000 less, they'd sell like hotcakes...
Or, if it was a useful truck rather than a little car, it might be interesting.
I'd love to see a Suburban version of the Volt technology, but it really can't cost more, or much more, than it does now, or there would be little interest.
All true, but if I'm running low on gas, I can fill up my tank in 5 minutes.
If I'm driving cross country, I can't charge my batteries in 5 minutes.
Once batteries can be charged much quicker, a lot of the range issues will go away, but just converting gas stations to electric doesn't help, I'm not going to stand there for an hour.:)
You do know they can access your phone already, this isn't even a secret. The GPS chip is always tracking your location, it has to provide the location for E911 services regardless of the "setting" in Android. The feature is hardwired into the chips, turning it on and off in software doesn't actually do anything other than block your location from installed apps.
The camera and mic can be turned on remotely, and even the phone can be turned on remotely, if there is power from the battery, so it is never "really" off.
If you are paranoid about the three letter agencies, a cell phone with your name on it is the last thing you should have.
Yep, releasing the code says: "We don't care about you or your contacts, your location, or anything else, we just want to see how fast the cell network is running and gather data on that."
Frankly, it is part of the FCC's job, this is something they *should* be doing, so more power to them.
The FCC is charged with regulating the airwaves of the United States, so this is part of their publicly stated function.
I can chose not to use an application written by an entity that have absolutely no trust in. What I have to hide is everything.
That sounds reasonable, except that you're using a phone in the US that is, by design, not secure to those three letter agencies.
So... they don't need you to run this app to get access to your phone, it is hard-wired into the chips (installing a clean version of Android doesn't help with that).
You can't turn off the location, you can't turn off the camera and sound, and you can't disable it, unless you remove the battery. (turning off the camera in options disables it for apps that you install, not to the chips themselves. You'd have to rip the GPS chip out, for example, to actually disable location monitoring.)
So, if you really feel that way, why would you have a phone that they have access to?
Note: I'm not knocking your position or saying that you're wrong, maybe you have a reason to care, maybe you simply choose to because you believe in the 4th amendment and your privacy. More power to you. But you give that up by using a phone that is already open to them.
"all military bots have a remote kill switch.that is independent of software"
Imagine for a minute that we put "kill switches" inside our human soldiers. If they don't obey our orders, we can kill them remotely.
In such a case, well, that's it, they can't do *anything* about that, they just obey, right?
No possible way... they could... I don't know... Remove them?:)
It is possible that we'll wipe ourselves out before then. It is also possible that we'll become the machines, by implanting ever more technology in ourselves until the difference becomes a fuzzy gray area rather than a line.
Hard to predict the future is, always in motion...:)
Not all socialism is bad, it isn't black or white.
I'm a "dyed in the wool" capitalist, I own my own business, I do very well for myself, I fully believe in the freedom and principles of America.
That being said, having a police dept is socialist, yet few people are running around saying, "get rid of those".
I also happen to like the fire dept, I like having roads built, etc. Those are all socialist.
There is no profit in cleaning up the environment, in fact there can be huge profits in making the problem worse.
Companies do whatever makes them a profit. You can influence them via the tax code (which is why it is now 28,000 pages long), or you can have the government do it.
Either way is imperfect, but if we want to have clean water, we have to accept some regulations and some intervention.
I agree... that there are some massive obstacles...
But define "soon".
Is 50 years "soon"?
Rewind 50 years and look at computers, airplane technology, and a million other things? Now try fast forwarding 50 years.
Some things will look much as they do today, we'll probably still live in similar looking houses, drive similar looking cars (I don't see flying cars until we figure out a new type of power source), etc.
But here in the real world, machines require maintenance by humans.
For now, yes...
If you assume that will always be so... well, we know what assuming does...
The economic forces will drive the civilian side to develop machines that can repair other machines, it doesn't even have to be military tech to have that happen.
Amazon is actively trying to replace their warehouse workers, they recently purchased a robotics company to roll their own solution for automation in the warehouse.
Given how much stuff they sell, it is a huge challenge, a robot has to be able to tell the difference between a toaster over and a blender, and of course a set of sheets, or maybe a DVD player.
Not at all easy, but the money they could save if they get it right...
The new breed of officers (since around 1990) want troops who can & do think, understand the commander's intent, and accomplish missions while staying within engagement rules.
Yes, this is SO true... It only took us like forever to learn what the Germans learned in WWII.
One of the reasons the Germans were so effective is that they trained their soldiers to be able to perform two ranks above their current level if need be, they believed that the solider should be able to adapt and think and be smart, that he could handle more than just "ugg, point gun and shoot".
If the robot just follows orders without question, then you're completely correct.
What I'm suggesting is that "never" is a very long time, and technology has a funny way of catching up to "never".
Are you suggesting that we'll "never" have computers that can program themselves? That can improve and change their own code?
The minute a computer can adjust its own code, all the kill switches in the world won't help.
Here is a question... If a computer ever becomes self-aware, are we prepared to accept it as an equal and recognize that it has the same rights that we have?
You totally misunderstand... I'm fully in support of the 4th amendment, the NSA shouldn't be able to just look at anything you have.
My question is, if they do look at your computer, do you have anything they'd care about? I guess if you did, you probably wouldn't say so here.:)
Should the IRS keep my tax returns away from the NSA? Yes. Do they? No, I don't believe it for a second. I believe that the NSA can, more or less, access all of that and more with just a few keystrokes.
Is this a good thing? No, but there isn't anything I can do about it either. I can't ask Congress to change it, they don't work for me, they work for whomever pays their bills, and I'm being outspent.
Yes, yes, I know... Amazon will do what they are told like good little corporate citizens.
I was just saying that if Amazon decided to turn off the servers and not give the CIA access to *everyones* data, my example would then happen. Or something similar to it.
Oh, now stop trying to make sense, this is SlashDot!:)
I was making fun of the idea that Amazon "owns" the hardware and networking equipment.
The idea is that they "own" it just as long as the CIA wants them to. If the CIA decided they wanted to own it, they could.
Would they? No, of course not, but the principle is sound.
So long as they are comfortable that the data is secure and that they can access it any time they want, I doubt the CIA really cares.
If Amazon decided to "turn off" their servers, that is when my example would come into play. But I tend to agree with you that Amazon will just do whatever they are told.
Slashdot Mirror
Often missed when talking about nuclear reactors among the general media is that most are old and few new designs have been built.
We have newer, safer, designs. We should, quite frankly, scrap the 40 year old reactors and replace them all with something much newer and much safer.
And yes, hire people who know what they are doing.
Linux doesn't sell itself to the average person
Have you considered that there might be a reason for that?
Linux has its place, it is indeed a useful OS that we should all be grateful for, but to the consumer computer market, it might as well not exist, and that isn't going to change.
Way too many things aren't supported or don't work the first time without any fiddling.
Oh sure, you can cherry pick hardware and find stuff that works great, but frankly you can install Windows 7 on ANY PC that is less than 8 years old and it will work. You can buy almost ANY computer add-on in the past 8 years and Windows 7 supports it.
Printers, scanners, USB devices, video cards, network cards, add-in this, add-in that, all work.
Linux just isn't there with such broad support. Joe Consumer crap printer or other random device has to work 100% of the time, or they'll get cranky.
And that doesn't even bring up the whole, "none of your software runs on it, WINE isn't a solution for Joe Consumer, and the "free" alternatives are not real substitutes.
Linux has its place, but Windows isn't evil...
Unless you know something I don't of course. :) Maybe Windows turns into SkyNet or something...
At $20K extra, it is $333.33 a month, which would require that it never need gas and the power from the wall was free.
Neither of which would be the case. :)
But yes, $5K is fine on something like a Suburban.
People suggest rentals, but the problem with renting a minivan is that they all are spoken for on holiday weekends when everyone gets the same idea as you.
The other problem with rentals is that only a very limited selection of vehicles can be rented, and those are often base models.
It is pretty hard to rent a Suburban anywhere, and if you can, it is likely the basic version.
Knock me all you like for being spoiled (yea, I am), but I like my air conditioned seats in my truck. I like the power folding running boards, the dual DVD players, and the fact that I don't have to set all my favorite radio stations. Plus, for long drives, I have XM sat radio, something I wouldn't have in a rental.
Would I consider a Suburban with Volt technology? Yes, but they can't charge $20K more for it, that buys a LOT of gas.
If the Chevy Volt was $20,000 less, they'd sell like hotcakes...
Or, if it was a useful truck rather than a little car, it might be interesting.
I'd love to see a Suburban version of the Volt technology, but it really can't cost more, or much more, than it does now, or there would be little interest.
If I'm driving cross country, I can't charge my batteries in 5 minutes.
Once batteries can be charged much quicker, a lot of the range issues will go away, but just converting gas stations to electric doesn't help, I'm not going to stand there for an hour. :)
However...
You do know they can access your phone already, this isn't even a secret. The GPS chip is always tracking your location, it has to provide the location for E911 services regardless of the "setting" in Android. The feature is hardwired into the chips, turning it on and off in software doesn't actually do anything other than block your location from installed apps.
The camera and mic can be turned on remotely, and even the phone can be turned on remotely, if there is power from the battery, so it is never "really" off.
If you are paranoid about the three letter agencies, a cell phone with your name on it is the last thing you should have.
Just saying...
Frankly, it is part of the FCC's job, this is something they *should* be doing, so more power to them.
The FCC is charged with regulating the airwaves of the United States, so this is part of their publicly stated function.
I can chose not to use an application written by an entity that have absolutely no trust in. What I have to hide is everything.
That sounds reasonable, except that you're using a phone in the US that is, by design, not secure to those three letter agencies.
So... they don't need you to run this app to get access to your phone, it is hard-wired into the chips (installing a clean version of Android doesn't help with that).
You can't turn off the location, you can't turn off the camera and sound, and you can't disable it, unless you remove the battery. (turning off the camera in options disables it for apps that you install, not to the chips themselves. You'd have to rip the GPS chip out, for example, to actually disable location monitoring.)
So, if you really feel that way, why would you have a phone that they have access to?
Note: I'm not knocking your position or saying that you're wrong, maybe you have a reason to care, maybe you simply choose to because you believe in the 4th amendment and your privacy. More power to you. But you give that up by using a phone that is already open to them.
I think we should call it Obamabattery and have IRS fine anybody who doesn't use it.
"If you like your current battery, you can keep your current battery!"
You can't replace Einstein with 100 scientists.
Hmm, there is a joke about monkeys and typewriters in there somewhere, just can't quite put my fingers on it...
The power from the wall to recharge over and over isn't free, the car costs more to buy, and when it runs out of juice, you're stuck.
You won't get many takers until you fix all those issues.
"all military bots have a remote kill switch.that is independent of software"
Imagine for a minute that we put "kill switches" inside our human soldiers. If they don't obey our orders, we can kill them remotely.
In such a case, well, that's it, they can't do *anything* about that, they just obey, right?
No possible way... they could... I don't know... Remove them? :)
It is possible that we'll wipe ourselves out before then. It is also possible that we'll become the machines, by implanting ever more technology in ourselves until the difference becomes a fuzzy gray area rather than a line.
Hard to predict the future is, always in motion... :)
That might well be... the whole point... :)
The worldwide demand for it is such that someone, somewhere will invent it.
And besides, even if it needs recharging every week, have you never heard of recharging stations? :)
I'm a "dyed in the wool" capitalist, I own my own business, I do very well for myself, I fully believe in the freedom and principles of America.
That being said, having a police dept is socialist, yet few people are running around saying, "get rid of those".
I also happen to like the fire dept, I like having roads built, etc. Those are all socialist.
There is no profit in cleaning up the environment, in fact there can be huge profits in making the problem worse.
Companies do whatever makes them a profit. You can influence them via the tax code (which is why it is now 28,000 pages long), or you can have the government do it.
Either way is imperfect, but if we want to have clean water, we have to accept some regulations and some intervention.
But define "soon".
Is 50 years "soon"?
Rewind 50 years and look at computers, airplane technology, and a million other things? Now try fast forwarding 50 years.
Some things will look much as they do today, we'll probably still live in similar looking houses, drive similar looking cars (I don't see flying cars until we figure out a new type of power source), etc.
Computers? Robots? I wouldn't even try to guess.
But here in the real world, machines require maintenance by humans.
For now, yes...
If you assume that will always be so... well, we know what assuming does...
The economic forces will drive the civilian side to develop machines that can repair other machines, it doesn't even have to be military tech to have that happen.
Given how much stuff they sell, it is a huge challenge, a robot has to be able to tell the difference between a toaster over and a blender, and of course a set of sheets, or maybe a DVD player.
Not at all easy, but the money they could save if they get it right...
The new breed of officers (since around 1990) want troops who can & do think, understand the commander's intent, and accomplish missions while staying within engagement rules.
Yes, this is SO true... It only took us like forever to learn what the Germans learned in WWII.
One of the reasons the Germans were so effective is that they trained their soldiers to be able to perform two ranks above their current level if need be, they believed that the solider should be able to adapt and think and be smart, that he could handle more than just "ugg, point gun and shoot".
What I'm suggesting is that "never" is a very long time, and technology has a funny way of catching up to "never".
Are you suggesting that we'll "never" have computers that can program themselves? That can improve and change their own code?
The minute a computer can adjust its own code, all the kill switches in the world won't help.
Here is a question... If a computer ever becomes self-aware, are we prepared to accept it as an equal and recognize that it has the same rights that we have?
My question is, if they do look at your computer, do you have anything they'd care about? I guess if you did, you probably wouldn't say so here. :)
Should the IRS keep my tax returns away from the NSA? Yes. Do they? No, I don't believe it for a second. I believe that the NSA can, more or less, access all of that and more with just a few keystrokes.
Is this a good thing? No, but there isn't anything I can do about it either. I can't ask Congress to change it, they don't work for me, they work for whomever pays their bills, and I'm being outspent.
Again, not saying that is just, just that it is.
I was just saying that if Amazon decided to turn off the servers and not give the CIA access to *everyones* data, my example would then happen. Or something similar to it.
I was making fun of the idea that Amazon "owns" the hardware and networking equipment.
The idea is that they "own" it just as long as the CIA wants them to. If the CIA decided they wanted to own it, they could.
Would they? No, of course not, but the principle is sound.
So long as they are comfortable that the data is secure and that they can access it any time they want, I doubt the CIA really cares.
If Amazon decided to "turn off" their servers, that is when my example would come into play. But I tend to agree with you that Amazon will just do whatever they are told.