In Europe, even if the accident isn't your fault your insurance premium usually goes up anyway. Turns out there is a statistical link, maybe some people drive in such a way as to cause others to make mistakes that lead to accidents such as lingering in blind spots.
Anyway, that's how it is. It's a real pain to deal with to, you have to figure out how much the premium went up due to the accident and then pass the bill to the at-fault driver's insurance company, argue with them about it... It's actually the biggest issue with car insurance IMHO.
The main difference would be that if the AI turns out to be a bad driver it won't put your insurance premiums up. The manufacturer will have to bear the cost, and would be encouraged to fix any issues. Could also apply to professional insurance, e.g. of a medical AI makes a mistake.
They are really just looking for the best legal framework to ensure that flaws in the AI don't become a burden on the consumer, and that if an AI does cause damage/injury the consumer is not left having to sue the manufacturer in court but can make a much simpler and cheaper insurance claim.
You can always find someone who thinks everything is shit, but actually Netflix has produced some really good stuff over the years.
Some of the Marvel stuff is great. Jessica Jones season 1 was some of the best TV of the last decade. Daredevil was pretty good, even The Punisher was quite enjoyable. Shame The Defenders sucked.
Other stuff generally regarded as very good:
- The Crown - Stranger Things - Black Mirror - Star Trek Discovery - Altered Carbon - House of Cards - The Foreigner - Better Call Saul - Making a Murderer - Orphan Black - The Expanse - Sense8 - Master of None - Glow
There is a lot more, especially if you don't mind subtitles.
At the moment the owner of the car would be liable just as if they were driving it themselves, but clearly they aren't driving it and are not responsible for it's failures. At best they could sue the manufacturer to recover their costs. So it would be better if the car had its own insurance, bought by the manufacturer, which all the usual rules about car insurance that are designed to protect the victim and ensure a relatively quick, court-free payout.
In Europe the general principal is that the consumer is protected over the corporation.
public safety had to be balanced with privacy concerns
These are the SAME THING. If you weaken encryption people become less safe from those who want to invade their privacy and steal their data.They become more vulnerable to criminals and oppressive governments.
He seems to live in a fantasy world where there are good guys and bad guys and magical thinking actually works.
The post you are replying to has been modded "troll".
Can you explain how it is insulting or of lower quality than yours? There is no insulting language, it doesn't use any name calling, it's a simple statement of opinion in the same manner as yours.
This thread is proof that this happens, and if you examine affected posts you will find it happens all too often.
It's more the down modding of any dissenting opinions that are critical of trump that are the problem. Even when they do end up with a positive score there are always troll and flamebait mods too.
I actually managed to convince most of my friends to move to WhatsApp as an alternative to Facebook. WA at least does end-to-end encryption and isn't a social network, so while not perfect it's a lot better.
Sorry, I'm kinda busy so don't always have time to post detailed responses.
It's not totally impossible, but consider what they would have to do to make it work:
- Hide the recording code in the binary somehow, and you can bet that binary gets pulled apart a lot to look for exploits.
- Keep power consumption low enough that it doesn't give the Facebook app a reputation as a battery hog.
- Exfiltrate the data somehow, either as audio or as processed keyword info. Again, the traffic is under heavy scrutiny and HTTPS is easy to man-in-the-middle if you control the device.
- Break multiple privacy/bugging laws around the world and convince every engineer involved to both incriminate themselves and not whistleblow, in a post-Dieselgate world.
- This this is all worth the effort when they already have legal methods to do pretty much the same thing. In fact those methods are so good they cause people to start wondering if their phones are listening to their conversations.
It's not impossible, but it's moon landing conspiracy level stuff.
Actually Japanese companies have had some success growing food in sterile environments. They were mostly converted facilities, factories that were no longer needed but already had all the clean room infrastructure in place.
Of course scaling it is not at all trivial, but it's a technology we will need to master if we want to live on Mars for example.
It took us a while to learn how to control technologies like cookies. The original implementation had zero security, and abuse was widespread and easy. Now we are reaching a point where a lot of clients block 3rd party cookies by default and limit 1st party cookie lifetimes.
This is the reason why trolls and SJWs exist. It's why nobody can say anything, no matter how innocuous or how much it's made clear that it's just an opinion, without someone picking it apart.
Welcome to the internet. You will find that people mostly come here to argue, and there are a lot of them, so people are gonna disagree with you.
There are echo chambers available for most views if that's your thing (most anti-SJWs seem to prefer that), but out here people are going to exercise their freedom of speech and if that bothers you then you should find a website with a Code of Conduct to your liking.
As the Cambridge Analytica case shows, they do sell access to the data. Maybe not your actual photos, but things like your name, gender, where you live, where you work, who you know and the nature of your relationships with them, your political views and affiliations, what stuff you are shopping for right now etc.
They can sell on-going access to it because their customers are interested in how people's behaviour and views change over time. They want to target individuals and then see what the result of their effort is, then refine and repeat.
Before dedicated social networks we used mailing lists, Usenet and forums. They were great because you could meet interesting, like-minded people, and they didn't harvest your personal data.
These days it's harder to avoid social networks. They offer a lot of features that people want, like easy photo sharing and real-time chat built in. Sure, you can replicate it all, but try getting random non-techies to install an IRC client, or spell Diaspora.
Modern life has become reliant on those services. People are too busy, they aren't going to post everything to five different networks and your personal email address.
The only solution is an open protocol. Make Facebook a protocol, let people choose the platform and client that suits them the best.
It's positioned as a competitor to other high end smart speakers from Google and several others. The problem is compatibility.
It doesn't work well with anything other than other Apple products. It doesn't work well with apps other than Apple's. It doesn't even have a simple line in.
Even if you are stuck in the Apple ecosystem, you have to use Apple services too. It's double lock-in and apparently Apple found the limit beyond which most consumers will not go.
It's just another employment scam. The government puts immense pressure on young people to do work, any work, and people take advantage of that with fake jobs.
It is timely, actually. Competition for these kinds of records has really heated up in the last decade or so, with the rise of video streaming and communities and events.
Tech has got better too. A lot of the games have been disassembled and understood, enabling players to develop new techniques.
It's been there since the 80s but the popularity and rate at which records have been broken is at an all time high.
And now one of the biggest names from the old guard has fallen, thanks to advances in fraud detection.
No, that's a fundamental misunderstanding of the right to be forgotten and how the real world works.
Sure, someone could go through old newspapers, or maybe go to their individual web sites and search for his name. But they almost certainly won't, because it's too much hassle for the fairly remote possibility of finding something of interest. Services like Google, credit reference agencies and police criminal record checks exist to make finding such information easier.
The right to be forgotten applies to services who offer to research someone for you, and who are not journalistic in nature. It's not perfect by any means, but not need to let that be the enemy of good.
In practice, not having the fact that he was convicted of a relatively minor crime 10 years ago on Google greatly increases the chances of him being able to get a job, get a mortgage and generally rebuild his life. Like most laws it's a balance between competing rights.
It depends if he was selling them as genuine or "pattern" (compatible) parts. Apple's contract can't override his right to do that. Such terms are illegal in the EU.
Couldn't a victim of a Greykey demand to see the source code at their trial? How else could the cops demonstrate that the device doesn't also plant evidence or alter the phone in some other way? It clearly alters the device being unlocked in some way, which seems to make it dubious as evidence.
Slashdot Mirror
In Europe, even if the accident isn't your fault your insurance premium usually goes up anyway. Turns out there is a statistical link, maybe some people drive in such a way as to cause others to make mistakes that lead to accidents such as lingering in blind spots.
Anyway, that's how it is. It's a real pain to deal with to, you have to figure out how much the premium went up due to the accident and then pass the bill to the at-fault driver's insurance company, argue with them about it... It's actually the biggest issue with car insurance IMHO.
The main difference would be that if the AI turns out to be a bad driver it won't put your insurance premiums up. The manufacturer will have to bear the cost, and would be encouraged to fix any issues. Could also apply to professional insurance, e.g. of a medical AI makes a mistake.
They are really just looking for the best legal framework to ensure that flaws in the AI don't become a burden on the consumer, and that if an AI does cause damage/injury the consumer is not left having to sue the manufacturer in court but can make a much simpler and cheaper insurance claim.
You can always find someone who thinks everything is shit, but actually Netflix has produced some really good stuff over the years.
Some of the Marvel stuff is great. Jessica Jones season 1 was some of the best TV of the last decade. Daredevil was pretty good, even The Punisher was quite enjoyable. Shame The Defenders sucked.
Other stuff generally regarded as very good:
- The Crown
- Stranger Things
- Black Mirror
- Star Trek Discovery
- Altered Carbon
- House of Cards
- The Foreigner
- Better Call Saul
- Making a Murderer
- Orphan Black
- The Expanse
- Sense8
- Master of None
- Glow
There is a lot more, especially if you don't mind subtitles.
At the moment the owner of the car would be liable just as if they were driving it themselves, but clearly they aren't driving it and are not responsible for it's failures. At best they could sue the manufacturer to recover their costs. So it would be better if the car had its own insurance, bought by the manufacturer, which all the usual rules about car insurance that are designed to protect the victim and ensure a relatively quick, court-free payout.
In Europe the general principal is that the consumer is protected over the corporation.
Explain Okian's post then.
Also, if that is the case then it is impossible to fix the problem. I won't accept that, because Slashdot is important to me.
He is crazy. Look at this statement:
public safety had to be balanced with privacy concerns
These are the SAME THING. If you weaken encryption people become less safe from those who want to invade their privacy and steal their data.They become more vulnerable to criminals and oppressive governments.
He seems to live in a fantasy world where there are good guys and bad guys and magical thinking actually works.
Because AC comments start below the default threshold many people view at, it is definitely harder for them to get modded up.
The post you are replying to has been modded "troll".
Can you explain how it is insulting or of lower quality than yours? There is no insulting language, it doesn't use any name calling, it's a simple statement of opinion in the same manner as yours.
This thread is proof that this happens, and if you examine affected posts you will find it happens all too often.
It's more the down modding of any dissenting opinions that are critical of trump that are the problem. Even when they do end up with a positive score there are always troll and flamebait mods too.
I actually managed to convince most of my friends to move to WhatsApp as an alternative to Facebook. WA at least does end-to-end encryption and isn't a social network, so while not perfect it's a lot better.
Sorry, I'm kinda busy so don't always have time to post detailed responses.
It's not totally impossible, but consider what they would have to do to make it work:
- Hide the recording code in the binary somehow, and you can bet that binary gets pulled apart a lot to look for exploits.
- Keep power consumption low enough that it doesn't give the Facebook app a reputation as a battery hog.
- Exfiltrate the data somehow, either as audio or as processed keyword info. Again, the traffic is under heavy scrutiny and HTTPS is easy to man-in-the-middle if you control the device.
- Break multiple privacy/bugging laws around the world and convince every engineer involved to both incriminate themselves and not whistleblow, in a post-Dieselgate world.
- This this is all worth the effort when they already have legal methods to do pretty much the same thing. In fact those methods are so good they cause people to start wondering if their phones are listening to their conversations.
It's not impossible, but it's moon landing conspiracy level stuff.
Actually Japanese companies have had some success growing food in sterile environments. They were mostly converted facilities, factories that were no longer needed but already had all the clean room infrastructure in place.
Of course scaling it is not at all trivial, but it's a technology we will need to master if we want to live on Mars for example.
It took us a while to learn how to control technologies like cookies. The original implementation had zero security, and abuse was widespread and easy. Now we are reaching a point where a lot of clients block 3rd party cookies by default and limit 1st party cookie lifetimes.
Unfortunately, it took a quarter of a century.
This is the reason why trolls and SJWs exist. It's why nobody can say anything, no matter how innocuous or how much it's made clear that it's just an opinion, without someone picking it apart.
Welcome to the internet. You will find that people mostly come here to argue, and there are a lot of them, so people are gonna disagree with you.
There are echo chambers available for most views if that's your thing (most anti-SJWs seem to prefer that), but out here people are going to exercise their freedom of speech and if that bothers you then you should find a website with a Code of Conduct to your liking.
As the Cambridge Analytica case shows, they do sell access to the data. Maybe not your actual photos, but things like your name, gender, where you live, where you work, who you know and the nature of your relationships with them, your political views and affiliations, what stuff you are shopping for right now etc.
They can sell on-going access to it because their customers are interested in how people's behaviour and views change over time. They want to target individuals and then see what the result of their effort is, then refine and repeat.
Before dedicated social networks we used mailing lists, Usenet and forums. They were great because you could meet interesting, like-minded people, and they didn't harvest your personal data.
These days it's harder to avoid social networks. They offer a lot of features that people want, like easy photo sharing and real-time chat built in. Sure, you can replicate it all, but try getting random non-techies to install an IRC client, or spell Diaspora.
Modern life has become reliant on those services. People are too busy, they aren't going to post everything to five different networks and your personal email address.
The only solution is an open protocol. Make Facebook a protocol, let people choose the platform and client that suits them the best.
It's positioned as a competitor to other high end smart speakers from Google and several others. The problem is compatibility.
It doesn't work well with anything other than other Apple products. It doesn't work well with apps other than Apple's. It doesn't even have a simple line in.
Even if you are stuck in the Apple ecosystem, you have to use Apple services too. It's double lock-in and apparently Apple found the limit beyond which most consumers will not go.
And yes, Siri is not very smart either.
China hit peak coal a few years ago. They are doing far, far more than the US to clean up. The US has no excuse.
It's just another employment scam. The government puts immense pressure on young people to do work, any work, and people take advantage of that with fake jobs.
Funny you should mention students. Is Adderall cheating? How about those web sites that you pay to write your essays for you?
Maybe the ones who get caught are just not as good at cheating, or can't afford the undetectable methods.
It is timely, actually. Competition for these kinds of records has really heated up in the last decade or so, with the rise of video streaming and communities and events.
Tech has got better too. A lot of the games have been disassembled and understood, enabling players to develop new techniques.
It's been there since the 80s but the popularity and rate at which records have been broken is at an all time high.
And now one of the biggest names from the old guard has fallen, thanks to advances in fraud detection.
In a nutshell, it tries to control what people are allowed to think
Bollocks. You aren't allowed to see random people's medical records, is that trying to control what you think? No, it's protecting their privacy.
This is no different.
No, that's a fundamental misunderstanding of the right to be forgotten and how the real world works.
Sure, someone could go through old newspapers, or maybe go to their individual web sites and search for his name. But they almost certainly won't, because it's too much hassle for the fairly remote possibility of finding something of interest. Services like Google, credit reference agencies and police criminal record checks exist to make finding such information easier.
The right to be forgotten applies to services who offer to research someone for you, and who are not journalistic in nature. It's not perfect by any means, but not need to let that be the enemy of good.
In practice, not having the fact that he was convicted of a relatively minor crime 10 years ago on Google greatly increases the chances of him being able to get a job, get a mortgage and generally rebuild his life. Like most laws it's a balance between competing rights.
It depends if he was selling them as genuine or "pattern" (compatible) parts. Apple's contract can't override his right to do that. Such terms are illegal in the EU.
Couldn't a victim of a Greykey demand to see the source code at their trial? How else could the cops demonstrate that the device doesn't also plant evidence or alter the phone in some other way? It clearly alters the device being unlocked in some way, which seems to make it dubious as evidence.