What's going to stop Autonomous Car Owner A from charging a bit less than Autonomous Car Owner B, in order to get more customers?
The "no commercial use" in individual auto insurance policies (that costs extra), AND the EULA Clause in the autonomous vehicle makers' click-through agreement that says No commercial Resale or Ride-sharing of the autonomous vehicle's driving service.
Governments have the right to lay reasonable taxes required to fund public goods agreed by the people. That doesn't mean they can force you to organize your affairs to maximize their taxation capabilities. Cryptocurrencies don't prevent taxation, anyways.
Russian government has many more instruments at their disposal to convince businesses and individuals to "cooperate"
While that might be true; I doubt they would risk it.
Probably you are at a MUCH higher risk if you replace Kaspersky software with McAfee LiveSafe, just because the McAfee offering is crap.
Also, the risk of VULNERABILITIES in your AV product is at a much higher risk than an intentional backdoor existing (IMO).
Personally; I use neither antivirus product favoring WebRoot instead, but I have some respect for Kaspersky, and nobody's shown any evidence specific to Kaspersky that they could not be trusted.
The Vatican? As if they're ones to talk. That's one of those oddball cities in Italy that is administered by cult leaders and still maintains the frivolous claim of being their own sovereign nation embedded inside another country, but they have no military so at the end of the day, their compound is at the mercy of the local authorities.
Logic is a subcategory within Epistemology, and within logic there is Mathematical Logic, and Mathematics derives from the combination of Mathematical logic and other branches of philosophy.
the Nobel Prizes are conducted in accordance with instructions in his will. that's how it is.
Should he be allowed to maintain those instructions forever, though? I think not. He has been dead LONG since he wrote that will, and a dead person can't hold perpetual interest in things. After perhaps 100 years or so following their death, the public ought to say his authority to direct use of the funds has expired, and they will be used in whatever manner is in the best public interest, Or if he created an organization or gave the funds to a non-profit, the organization's trustees will direct the funds and alter the nature of the organization however they desire in a manner approved by the local government.
One of the previous winners is for the invention of the Blue LED. Wouldn't that be considered technology?
Maybe.... The real category that's missing is fundamental advancements in computation that are Shared with mankind; not patented for exclusive use or kept secret.
There's a fundamental difference between scientists who make discoveries and publish their work VS businesses who invent things or do things based on their own science kept secret and marketed for maximum personal profits.
Given the privacy concerns, lawmakers are worried that the always-on device could build an "in-depth profile of children and their family."
Why is it an issue if a solution internally builds an in-depth profile of children and their family? please explain the perceived damage. Is this more about what the advancement makes people THINK a product that looks like this may be capable of, due to cultural reasons, than what it actually does?
I mean: Practically speaking, privacy is something children don't have in the first place --- parents and teachers can literally see ANYTHING the child does and exercise almost absolute control of their activities, should they so wish, and the product is doing nothing more than becoming an extension of the parents.... So why should this be any more a privacy `risk' to the kid, than the general risk of having a parent?
It's not like they're doing anything TRULY risky like putting the child's Social Security Number in a massive database with all their financial+housing information, and then being negligent in securing their database, *cough* *Equifax* *cough*
I use "noarchive" to prevent the caching of pages that change frequently
That is absolutely not what noarchive is for -- there are are other directives to control caching. Noarchive is for asserting that projects and tools such as archive.org shall not save and make available historic versions of a web page allowing users who explicitly want to see old versions to see them.
The page creator has that right legally to say nobody should redistribute archived versions of their page, which is what that tag is for --- but as far as I'm concerned anyone setting Noarchive is being Evil / anti-internet by making their site part of the disease that is information that can be lost -- in most cases trying to squeeze their idea of maximum Profit, which is not what the world wide web is for, and not the kind of content I want my Google searches to bring me to, unless there's no other option.
That's a good indicator.... now if Google would please modify search so that NOARCHIVE documents are listed in search results with No snippet, AND the Search result will only be returned based on keywords in the Title, NOT a document search against content made visible only to Google.
The designer and their managers who allowed a critical emergency service to be dependent on an internet domain registration should be jailed for gross negligence.
When failure of a service would mean lives are at risk DO NOT make that service dependent upon resources from 3rd parties that can be terminated at will or that are subject to natural disruptions with no consequences for the 3rd parties (Or agreement with them that the services are used for functions critical to life).
A DNS domain registration can be terminated or suspended at will at the decision of a domain registrar or registry for any number of potential reasons
(although it is rare; a domain can even be terminated by mistake or hijacked by a malicious adversary in some cases), or DNS servers connected to the internet can be nuked by evil folks in a DDoS attack, or temporarily suspended by various service providers for network maintenance; Or various situations on the internet under 3rd party control and no SLA can cause temporary outages of access to the DNS.
the batteries probably only enable it to fly for about 30 minutes before it needs to land.
Not too bad; that's about the total average amount of time per day I spend driving --- most of that time spent waiting at red lights or stop signs, so assuming a decent speed, I would expect travel by flying car to decrease my trip times by more than 50%, so if we get a well-executed product (It will need to be completely automatic in terms of takeoff, landing, and navigation) this could still replace the car for most purposes....
I DONT WANT content in search results that I can't actually view.
Fine, get rid of FCF if you want, but then either blacklist subscription sites from search indexes, OR require indexed content match what I can see and give me a checkbox to omit them from search results (preferably checked by default).
Not a efficient way to run a business but it is his way. He has never been hacked.
Such businesses can still be "hacked" without knowing it immediately. Burglar sneaks in and steals one of the notebooks or takes a picture of some pages; someone else bribes one of your employees to covertly tamper with some numbers or entries in your ledger or tamper with a check, transfer, deposit form, or other bank document, Etc, Etc; even a CEO Scam doesn't necessarily require the targeted business have computers --- It's INFORMATION Security that leads to breach risks, not solely the use of technology, wherever the business has and needs to rely on information, there exist some risk.
No it doesn't. Certain Over-the-air broadcasts are subject to community decency rules (what can be broadcast over the air on certain transmission licenses), but most Television is consumed over Cable or encrypted satellite feeds, and there is no government agency censoring or regulating their content.
There are all sorts of ways that speech in the US can get you into legal difficulties.
These "legal difficulties" occur after a shown harm; they DONT allow the authorities to mandate proactive deletion of your message before a court order referring to you specifically is issued.
Except for "leaking state secrets" --- as for that, you signed papers agreeing NOT TO leak state secrets, before you received legitimate access those secrets; if you took actions to steal secrets, then you did more than speak them.
Nudity isn't a reason to kick-ban you from European media
Ahah, an IRC user, perhaps!...... most would just say ban.
Anyways, perhaps they would step away from these ridiculous demands if social media became more decentralized and distributed: store messages locally, removing the ability of a central agency to "censor through forced deletion".
What if we change the message to: DEATH TO ALL HUMANS
Is that a crime? Also, is the message illegal to quote as an example?
How can we have a reasonable discussion about what is a crime and what is not if some government is trying to rule the existence of certain sequences of information as "Illegal" --- this is just as dangerous as burning books, And it shows the EU is falling apart, as in freedom is failing --- because the freedom of speech as appearing in the UN Universal declaration of human rights is the most fundamental and important right of them all.
And attempts to "illegalize" or "regulate it" just go against not only fundamental inalienable human liberties, but nature itself
Standing in front of a Jewish shop and shouting: 'Death to all Jews!' is a crime.
Only because standing on a public street in front of any shop and repeatedly shouting just about ANYTHING is a crime, of disturbance of the peace. Also, the message may be harassment given the CHOICE of place you setup to use illegal means of delivering that message.
Facebook is a private venue, so the website owners have a right to accept your message, and also, people who dislike or don't agree your message, or that feel what you are expressing may be hate or just a "troll" message intended to get people riled up, can freely block you with the click of a mouse, so there is absolutely no comparison to doing that in the real world.
If it's a server-to-server or client-to-server app, then a well-designed one will NOT require a refresh button.
Either because clients and servers are well-written AND state changes occur using a well-defined protocol that ensures synchronization OR because the client automatically refreshes on its own according to some policy.
For example: IRC Clients do not require a refresh button to keep your view of a Chat room and its On-screen userlist accurate after the initial/NAMES request, because (Non-buggy) IRC servers always send the proper MODE, JOIN, PART, KICK, and QUIT messages to servers and clients over the TCP channel to keep both sides of the conversation updated with the current information as changes occur.
Also, while the protocol is versatile enough a client could technically re-request information and force a self-Refresh of its view: you don't see a REFRESH button on any major IRC client, and in fact, the operation would be a major waste of resources.
Why don't we as consumers buy reusable bottles.... and fill them up ourselves for the same rates.
We get their large packs of bottled water, or in some cases filter our own water, because the available municipal water available has made us sick before.
We regularly get postcards months later from the water district informing us that "Our water was contaminated" above coliform limits.... (Gee thanks!).
And the quality of municipal water in the city 10 miles away isn't too great either.... "Brown water" coming out of everyone's taps is a common complaint, and despite numerous promises from the mayor and other crony politicians, hasn't been fixed after 2 years.
Perhaps by getting our water packaged a PRODUCT with an Accountable Company; there's actually some serious $$$ Value in the additional safety worth paying for.... I mean, who is anybody other than the buyer to legitimately judge that it isn't worth paying for a bottled drinkable product from a brand much more consistent and trustworthy than the local product that comes through the tap?
but both of its statements are inaccurate..localhost is reserved for 127.0.0.1 and no other thing..invalid is reserved for NO use, it should never resolve.
No... these BOTH can be used on your Local host for private development testing, they are perfectly fine for private usage; that doesn't imply you can or should try to create a DNS server and add these zones to it.
RFC6761 is binding on the registries and DNS' communication protocol only, and only the registry aspects of this RFC are actually called upon in the DNS standards and implemented.
".localhost" goes to 127.0.0.1, which is the whole point, you don't need to map "site.dev to 127.0.0.1" you can map blah.localhost to 127.0.0.1, and use that, instead.
For known resolver implementations, you can map.localhost and.invalid however you want in your HOSTS file, and it will just work.
So even 'site.invalid' can be mapped to 127.0.0.1 with a simple HOSTS file entry.
If you want to use a domain name on multiple hosts and add it to your intranet or public DNS servers for usage off of a single server, then you should register a domain for that purpose.
Slashdot Mirror
What's going to stop Autonomous Car Owner A from charging a bit less than Autonomous Car Owner B, in order to get more customers?
The "no commercial use" in individual auto insurance policies (that costs extra), AND
the EULA Clause in the autonomous vehicle makers' click-through agreement that says No commercial Resale or Ride-sharing of the autonomous vehicle's driving service.
Has a government no right to tax income?
Governments have the right to lay reasonable taxes required to fund public goods agreed by the people.
That doesn't mean they can force you to organize your affairs to maximize their taxation capabilities.
Cryptocurrencies don't prevent taxation, anyways.
Russian government has many more instruments at their disposal to convince businesses and individuals to "cooperate"
While that might be true; I doubt they would risk it.
Probably you are at a MUCH higher risk if you replace Kaspersky software with McAfee LiveSafe, just because the McAfee offering is crap.
Also, the risk of VULNERABILITIES in your AV product is at a much higher risk than an intentional backdoor existing (IMO).
Personally; I use neither antivirus product favoring WebRoot instead, but I have some respect for Kaspersky, and nobody's shown any evidence specific to Kaspersky that they could not be trusted.
Call on line 1. From the vatican or something.
The Vatican? As if they're ones to talk. That's one of those oddball cities in Italy that is administered by cult leaders and still maintains the frivolous claim of being their own sovereign nation embedded inside another country, but they have no military so at the end of the day, their compound is at the mercy of the local authorities.
The study of knowledge is epistemology.
Logic is a subcategory within Epistemology, and within logic there is Mathematical Logic, and Mathematics derives from the combination of Mathematical logic and other branches of philosophy.
the Nobel Prizes are conducted in accordance with instructions in his will. that's how it is.
Should he be allowed to maintain those instructions forever, though? I think not. He has been dead LONG since he wrote that will, and a dead person can't hold perpetual interest in things. After perhaps 100 years or so following their death, the public ought to say his authority to direct use of the funds has expired, and they will be used in whatever manner is in the best public interest, Or if he created an organization or gave the funds to a non-profit, the organization's trustees will direct the funds and alter the nature of the organization however they desire in a manner approved by the local government.
One of the previous winners is for the invention of the Blue LED. Wouldn't that be considered technology?
Maybe.... The real category that's missing is fundamental advancements in computation that are Shared with mankind; not patented for exclusive use or kept secret.
There's a fundamental difference between scientists who make discoveries and publish their work VS businesses who invent things or do things based on their own science kept secret and marketed for maximum personal profits.
The XKCD missed Philosophy..... Mathematics is applied Philosophy :-)
Given the privacy concerns, lawmakers are worried that the always-on device could build an "in-depth profile of children and their family."
Why is it an issue if a solution internally builds an in-depth profile of children and their family? please explain the perceived damage. Is this more about what the advancement makes people THINK a product that looks like this may be capable of, due to cultural reasons, than what it actually does?
I mean: Practically speaking, privacy is something children don't have in the first place --- parents and teachers can literally see ANYTHING the child does and exercise almost absolute control of their activities, should they so wish, and the product is doing nothing more than becoming an extension of the parents.... So why should this be any more a privacy `risk' to the kid, than the general risk of having a parent?
It's not like they're doing anything TRULY risky like putting the child's Social Security Number in a massive database with all their financial+housing information, and then being negligent in securing their database, *cough* *Equifax* *cough*
I use "noarchive" to prevent the caching of pages that change frequently
That is absolutely not what noarchive is for -- there are are other directives to control caching.
Noarchive is for asserting that projects and tools such as archive.org shall not save and make available historic versions of
a web page allowing users who explicitly want to see old versions to see them.
The page creator has that right legally to say nobody should redistribute archived versions of their page, which
is what that tag is for --- but as far as I'm concerned anyone setting Noarchive is being Evil / anti-internet by
making their site part of the disease that is information that can be lost -- in most cases trying to squeeze their idea of maximum Profit, which is
not what the world wide web is for, and not the kind of content I want my Google searches to bring me to, unless there's no other option.
That's a good indicator.... now if Google would please modify search so that NOARCHIVE documents are listed in search results with No snippet, AND the Search result will only be returned based on keywords in the Title, NOT a document search against content made visible only to Google.
The designer and their managers who allowed a critical emergency service to be dependent on an internet domain registration should be jailed for gross negligence.
When failure of a service would mean lives are at risk DO NOT make that service dependent upon resources from 3rd parties that can be terminated at will or that are subject to natural disruptions with no consequences for the 3rd parties (Or agreement with them that the services are used for functions critical to life).
A DNS domain registration can be terminated or suspended at will at the decision of a domain registrar or registry for any number of potential reasons
(although it is rare; a domain can even be terminated by mistake or hijacked by a malicious adversary in some cases), or DNS servers connected to the internet can be nuked by evil folks in a DDoS attack, or temporarily suspended by various service providers for network maintenance; Or various situations on the internet under 3rd party control and no SLA can cause temporary outages of access to the DNS.
the batteries probably only enable it to fly for about 30 minutes before it needs to land.
Not too bad; that's about the total average amount of time per day I spend driving --- most of that time spent waiting at red lights or stop signs, so assuming a decent speed, I would expect travel by flying car to decrease my trip times by more than 50%, so if we get a well-executed product (It will need to be completely automatic in terms of takeoff, landing, and navigation) this could still replace the car for most purposes....
I DONT WANT content in search results that I can't actually view.
Fine, get rid of FCF if you want, but then either blacklist subscription sites from search indexes, OR require indexed content match what I can see and
give me a checkbox to omit them from search results (preferably checked by default).
Not a efficient way to run a business but it is his way. He has never been hacked.
Such businesses can still be "hacked" without knowing it immediately. Burglar sneaks in and steals one of the notebooks or takes a picture of some pages; someone else bribes one of your employees to covertly tamper with some numbers or entries in your ledger or tamper with a check, transfer, deposit form, or other bank document, Etc, Etc; even a CEO Scam doesn't necessarily require the targeted business have computers --- It's INFORMATION Security that leads to breach risks, not solely the use of technology, wherever the business has and needs to rely on information, there exist some risk.
Oh wait it does.
No it doesn't. Certain Over-the-air broadcasts are subject to community decency rules (what can be broadcast over the air on certain transmission licenses), but most Television is consumed over Cable or encrypted satellite feeds, and there is no government agency censoring or regulating their content.
There are all sorts of ways that speech in the US can get you into legal difficulties.
These "legal difficulties" occur after a shown harm; they DONT allow the authorities to mandate proactive deletion of your message before a court order referring to you specifically is issued.
Except for "leaking state secrets" --- as for that, you signed papers agreeing NOT TO leak state secrets, before you received legitimate access those secrets; if you took actions to steal secrets, then you did more than speak them.
Nudity isn't a reason to kick-ban you from European media
Ahah, an IRC user, perhaps!...... most would just say ban.
Anyways, perhaps they would step away from these ridiculous demands if social media became more decentralized
and distributed: store messages locally, removing the ability of a central agency to "censor through forced deletion".
Really? What is the purported crime?
What if we change the message to: DEATH TO ALL HUMANS
Is that a crime? Also, is the message illegal to quote as an example?
How can we have a reasonable discussion about what is a crime and what is not if some government is trying to rule the existence of certain sequences of information as "Illegal" --- this is just as dangerous as burning books, And it shows the EU is falling apart, as in freedom is failing --- because the freedom of speech as appearing in the UN Universal declaration of human rights is the most fundamental and important right of them all.
And attempts to "illegalize" or "regulate it" just go against not only fundamental inalienable human liberties, but nature itself
Standing in front of a Jewish shop and shouting: 'Death to all Jews!' is a crime.
Only because standing on a public street in front of any shop and repeatedly shouting just about ANYTHING is a crime, of disturbance of the peace.
Also, the message may be harassment given the CHOICE of place you setup to use illegal means of delivering that message.
Facebook is a private venue, so the website owners have a right to accept your message, and also, people who dislike or don't agree your message, or that feel what you are expressing may be hate or just a "troll" message intended to get people riled up, can freely block you with the click of a mouse, so there is absolutely no comparison to doing that in the real world.
If it's a web-based application, MAYBE.
If it's a server-to-server or client-to-server app, then a well-designed one will NOT require a refresh button.
Either because clients and servers are well-written AND state changes occur using a well-defined protocol that ensures synchronization
OR because the client automatically refreshes on its own according to some policy.
For example: IRC Clients do not require a refresh button to keep your view of a Chat room and its On-screen userlist accurate after the /NAMES request, because (Non-buggy) IRC servers always send the proper MODE, JOIN, PART, KICK, and QUIT messages
initial
to servers and clients over the TCP channel to keep both sides of the conversation updated with the current information as changes occur.
Also, while the protocol is versatile enough a client could technically re-request information and force a self-Refresh of its view:
you don't see a REFRESH button on any major IRC client, and in fact, the operation would be a major waste of resources.
Then the military craft was in violation and responsible for the crash, due to flying below minimum altitude....
Why don't we as consumers buy reusable bottles .... and fill them up ourselves for the same rates.
We get their large packs of bottled water, or in some cases filter our own water, because the available municipal water available has made us sick before.
We regularly get postcards months later from the water district informing us that "Our water was contaminated" above coliform limits.... (Gee thanks!).
And the quality of municipal water in the city 10 miles away isn't too great either.... "Brown water" coming out of everyone's taps is a common complaint, and despite numerous promises from the mayor and other crony politicians, hasn't been fixed after 2 years.
Perhaps by getting our water packaged a PRODUCT with an Accountable Company; there's actually some serious $$$ Value in the additional safety worth paying for.... I mean, who is anybody other than the buyer to legitimately judge that it isn't worth paying for a bottled drinkable product from a brand much more consistent and trustworthy than the local product that comes through the tap?
but both of its statements are inaccurate. .localhost is reserved for 127.0.0.1 and no other thing. .invalid is reserved for NO use, it should never resolve.
No... these BOTH can be used on your Local host for private development testing, they are perfectly fine for private usage;
that doesn't imply you can or should try to create a DNS server and add these zones to it.
RFC6761 is binding on the registries and DNS' communication protocol only, and only the registry aspects
of this RFC are actually called upon in the DNS standards and implemented.
".localhost" goes to 127.0.0.1, which is the whole point, you don't need to map "site.dev to 127.0.0.1" you can map blah.localhost to 127.0.0.1,
and use that, instead.
For known resolver implementations, you can map .localhost and .invalid however you want in your HOSTS file, and it will just work.
So even 'site.invalid' can be mapped to 127.0.0.1 with a simple HOSTS file entry.
If you want to use a domain name on multiple hosts and add it to your intranet or public DNS servers for usage
off of a single server, then you should register a domain for that purpose.
It looks like those old remote controls. The Notch is an unwanted blemish IMO.
I would rather see developers hide it.