Studies have addressed the puzzling fact that there is a correlation between cell phone talking but no correlation to be found with talking to a passenger. The dominant theory is that the passenger is within the same context as the driver, so if something happens around the car that requires the driver's attention it does not seem odd to the passenger that they stopped talking in the middle of a sentence.. and the passenger does not start saying "hello?? are you there?".
In the case of the radio, attention is optional. Media on the radio is highly repetitive with the assumption that you may have had lapses in attention.
With all the 3D printing related patents issued and still being issued it doesn't seem likely to me that 3D printing will become standardized any time within the next 20 years. There would just be too many royalties to pay.
I do think that alcohol lovers seem to be extraordinarily quick to case aspersions against anyone who posits an opinion that threatens their way of life. It must have something to do with their repetitive use of a substance that dulls their ability to learn.
Yes.. this whole incident is going to make great fodder for conspiracy theories for years to come at this rate.
I would like to coin the theory right now that there was a second plane that extracted all the passengers mid flight and carried them the rest of the way. After everyone was taken off the plane it was allowed to fly on until it ran out of fuel.
You obviously like alcohol very much. Perhaps you should go drink yourself into another senseless stupor and tell everyone that you're not doing it to forget.
Your argument can apply equally well to both sides of this debate. By pushing equally hard in both directions it has a net zero effect, and thus can be completely ignored.
If as the speed of anything increases, so does the resistance, why are galaxies speeding away from each other at an ever-increasing rate?
Technically they aren't. Technically they are getting further apart without moving away from each other at all (if you average momentum). But I expect you just threw that in there as a red herring, since even if galaxies were moving away from each other it does nothing to refute my claim that at some point in the future they would encounter a resistive force and stop accelerating at such a rate.
Wow, connie, it seems like all you're really saying is that you believe in the singularity, which, unfortunately, we all already knew. Yes, Moore's law is no more a law than Occam's razor. Moore's law is just a principal that works until it doesn't.
I see a car outside my window right now driving on the highway at 65mph. So I'm coining the term "Ablaze's law" right now that says that that car will just keep driving at 65mph forever. Ablaze's law will probably work for quite a while, certainly long enough for me to confirm it's validity. Does that mean it will continue to work as soon as conditions change in such a way as to make it absurd? Absolutely not.
If the road ends a mile up and I predict that the car will just keep going, well.. what it doesn't prove is that the nature of the car is going to change to fit my law. What it does prove is that my law doesn't apply to that situation.
In other words: The singularity is proof that the model doesn't accurately predict reality at some point in the future. It is not proof that reality is going to reconfigure itself to fit the model, no matter how much you happen to like the guy who came up with it.
A euphoric reaction can easily be created from a slightly different positioning of the electrodes. Think about it: euphoria combined with the inability to learn = instant panty dropper = huge profit for whoever can invent a social situation where everyone puts one on. Look at how much money alcohol makes, and they can't target different experiences.
The Singularity is just another type of slippery slope argument. Some foolish "experts" draw an exponential curve and say it intersects with infinity in ~50 years. Everyone who studies reality knows that as the speed of anything increases so does the resistance. That's why if you drop something out of an airplane it doesn't accelerate to infinite speed, and neither does technological progression.
I know someone who owns a house that his ex wife has been staying in. When they divorced it also resulted in a restraining order being taken out by her against him. It is his house though. So he is in the position of being unable to approach the house or her to collect rent on the house or to evict her.
The only young guys I've ever seen wearing makeup are actors.. or it's Halloween.
That said, competently applied makeup is difficult to spot, and the interviewer is probably not expecting it. People usually don't notice things they don't expect.
Yes, I often enjoy turning the tables on a bad interviewer. The funny thing is that on the somewhat rare occasions in which I decided I really didn't want this job and would rather tank the interview they have always seemed the most interested.
If anyone is having trouble finding a job, try making as many social mistakes (as in non-technical) as you can. Show up a little late, question their authority, ask for extra time off during the interview. I think you'll find it a very enlightening experience.
It doesn't have to be a kill switch. It could be something more subtle, like cap your speed at 55mph. The thing is no matter what they end up doing, if the car reacts to you getting suddenly angry in any way that will just serve to increase your road rage.
Injecting xanax would further inhibit your ability to drive, and let us not forget that for most people "happyness drugs" are highly addictive. It would serve no one if people were to develop a habit of getting into their car and getting really angry just so they could get their fix.
In short there is absolutely, positively no conceivable productive use for putting this technology in cars. It could, however, have a conceivable use if you were a patient in a hospital. Why anyone would try to apply this to cars is beyond me.
Well, the hidden cost of downloading his show or offering it for download on the internet and the related lifestyle seems to be something he is also failing to consider. And you would think he would consider it since, as you say, it is a central theme of his "art."
So.. you attempted to use google to get collaborative information about an article that claimed that google was giving out information too freely, and you failed to find the information you were looking for. Irony?
Slashdot Mirror
Careful studies of actual evidence have been done on this. No one has found an actual correlation.
Studies have addressed the puzzling fact that there is a correlation between cell phone talking but no correlation to be found with talking to a passenger. The dominant theory is that the passenger is within the same context as the driver, so if something happens around the car that requires the driver's attention it does not seem odd to the passenger that they stopped talking in the middle of a sentence.. and the passenger does not start saying "hello?? are you there?".
In the case of the radio, attention is optional. Media on the radio is highly repetitive with the assumption that you may have had lapses in attention.
With all the 3D printing related patents issued and still being issued it doesn't seem likely to me that 3D printing will become standardized any time within the next 20 years. There would just be too many royalties to pay.
I do think that alcohol lovers seem to be extraordinarily quick to case aspersions against anyone who posits an opinion that threatens their way of life. It must have something to do with their repetitive use of a substance that dulls their ability to learn.
Yes.. this whole incident is going to make great fodder for conspiracy theories for years to come at this rate.
I would like to coin the theory right now that there was a second plane that extracted all the passengers mid flight and carried them the rest of the way. After everyone was taken off the plane it was allowed to fly on until it ran out of fuel.
..says the anonymous coward.
You obviously like alcohol very much. Perhaps you should go drink yourself into another senseless stupor and tell everyone that you're not doing it to forget.
Your argument can apply equally well to both sides of this debate. By pushing equally hard in both directions it has a net zero effect, and thus can be completely ignored.
You just doubled down on stupid.
Is that a threat? Are you threatening to post for a third time??
If as the speed of anything increases, so does the resistance, why are galaxies speeding away from each other at an ever-increasing rate?
Technically they aren't. Technically they are getting further apart without moving away from each other at all (if you average momentum). But I expect you just threw that in there as a red herring, since even if galaxies were moving away from each other it does nothing to refute my claim that at some point in the future they would encounter a resistive force and stop accelerating at such a rate.
Wow, connie, it seems like all you're really saying is that you believe in the singularity, which, unfortunately, we all already knew. Yes, Moore's law is no more a law than Occam's razor. Moore's law is just a principal that works until it doesn't.
I see a car outside my window right now driving on the highway at 65mph. So I'm coining the term "Ablaze's law" right now that says that that car will just keep driving at 65mph forever. Ablaze's law will probably work for quite a while, certainly long enough for me to confirm it's validity. Does that mean it will continue to work as soon as conditions change in such a way as to make it absurd? Absolutely not.
If the road ends a mile up and I predict that the car will just keep going, well.. what it doesn't prove is that the nature of the car is going to change to fit my law. What it does prove is that my law doesn't apply to that situation.
In other words: The singularity is proof that the model doesn't accurately predict reality at some point in the future. It is not proof that reality is going to reconfigure itself to fit the model, no matter how much you happen to like the guy who came up with it.
A euphoric reaction can easily be created from a slightly different positioning of the electrodes. Think about it: euphoria combined with the inability to learn = instant panty dropper = huge profit for whoever can invent a social situation where everyone puts one on. Look at how much money alcohol makes, and they can't target different experiences.
The Singularity is just another type of slippery slope argument. Some foolish "experts" draw an exponential curve and say it intersects with infinity in ~50 years. Everyone who studies reality knows that as the speed of anything increases so does the resistance. That's why if you drop something out of an airplane it doesn't accelerate to infinite speed, and neither does technological progression.
People are going to be lining up around the blockfor the "learn slower" electric charge.. if our society's obsession with alcohol is any indication.
Haven't you ever seen "the rocketeer"?
I know someone who owns a house that his ex wife has been staying in. When they divorced it also resulted in a restraining order being taken out by her against him. It is his house though. So he is in the position of being unable to approach the house or her to collect rent on the house or to evict her.
The only young guys I've ever seen wearing makeup are actors.. or it's Halloween.
That said, competently applied makeup is difficult to spot, and the interviewer is probably not expecting it. People usually don't notice things they don't expect.
Yes, I often enjoy turning the tables on a bad interviewer. The funny thing is that on the somewhat rare occasions in which I decided I really didn't want this job and would rather tank the interview they have always seemed the most interested.
If anyone is having trouble finding a job, try making as many social mistakes (as in non-technical) as you can. Show up a little late, question their authority, ask for extra time off during the interview. I think you'll find it a very enlightening experience.
You had me until "pain miniatures". I don't know what that means but I'd rather not find out, no matter how qualified you are for the job.
I took it to mean that the OP has a sticky "t" key, and was intending to say "paint".
This whole article should be moderated (-1:Flamebait)
Why the long face, Bill Nye? Does it help with science?
Thank you for restating my point.
Yes, it sounds like typical corporate strategy to me "lets just go ahead and break the rules, we'll pay if we get caught, and if not profit!"
It doesn't have to be a kill switch. It could be something more subtle, like cap your speed at 55mph. The thing is no matter what they end up doing, if the car reacts to you getting suddenly angry in any way that will just serve to increase your road rage.
Injecting xanax would further inhibit your ability to drive, and let us not forget that for most people "happyness drugs" are highly addictive. It would serve no one if people were to develop a habit of getting into their car and getting really angry just so they could get their fix.
In short there is absolutely, positively no conceivable productive use for putting this technology in cars. It could, however, have a conceivable use if you were a patient in a hospital. Why anyone would try to apply this to cars is beyond me.
Well, the hidden cost of downloading his show or offering it for download on the internet and the related lifestyle seems to be something he is also failing to consider. And you would think he would consider it since, as you say, it is a central theme of his "art."
So.. you attempted to use google to get collaborative information about an article that claimed that google was giving out information too freely, and you failed to find the information you were looking for. Irony?