Even back in the 1950s there was porn and demand for it. Often it was sold as documentaries about nudists or dramas set in nudist camps.
What changed was not that the puritans went away, it's that it got cheaper to make porn. First theaters started showing it, so it became much more profitable. Then home video arrived and recording directly onto tape made the whole process a lot cheaper.
The increased competition and difficulty regulating the industry forced mainstream TV to loosen up.
Not even if you paid people a huge salary to remain fully attentive, would you get an attentive driver.
It can be done. This situation is hardly unique, and there are lots of tried and tested solutions.
GM has gaze tracking technology for their hands-off Supercruise system, and if it notices you are not looking out of the window at the road it starts demanding your attention and eventually shuts down. Uber could have used that tech and fired anyone who didn't have a 99% attentive rate.
In Japan they use a system where the operator has to point to things they are checking and sometimes say the name of that thing. It forces them to be attentive. Train drivers use it, but also people like security and safety check staff.
Limiting drivers to one hour shifts and banning distractions like mobile phones would be a good idea too. If they need to make notes just use a voice recorder.
If she was just standing in the left lane waiting to cross, the LIDAR may have seen her and just thought "well that lane is blocked, stick to this one". With the bike she might have looked like a barricade of some kind.
In which case it should have slowed down. A human driver knows that lanes are not randomly barricaded with no prior warning like signs and cones. It should be a huge red flag, a clear indication that something unusual and potentially dangerous is happening.
People dying or getting seriously ill tend to place a burden on the state.
Of course it's unlikely that some politician actually cares about the health of the people they represent, and is trying to protect them from employers creating a culture of massive overtime.
This is as close to a literal marketplace of ideas as we will ever get. The majority favour more gun controls now, and Citi is following the market to maximise profitability.
ggAutoBlock was decried as censorship and persecution, even though it was entirely voluntary. The creator was harassed. Creating and maintaining such lists is going to be a thankless, punishing task.
Such sites already exist, e.g. Voat will continue to allow this content and is largely community moderated.
Sometimes it works, sometimes the lack of detached, outside influence leads to bizarre little enclaves where things get more and more extreme due to a kind of feedback loop.
It's the sensor failures that really worry me. Radar should have seen her, the lidar should have seen her. The cameras should have seen her - most autonomous cars use cameras with some IR vision capability so they can see at night.
The cameras on my Nissan Leaf have better night vision than the one in the video, which makes me think it's not the one the system uses.
Did you read the court's judgement? You might think they are morons but your opposition to their verdict would be helped if you understood it.
There are lots of things you are legally obliged to do as a business. You might be required to inform the customer of some rights they have, for example. Since those things are not forcing you to express an opinion, merely to relay something the state wishes the customer to know, the 1st doesn't offer any protection.
In the strictest sense you are compelled to emit sounds from your mouth, but you are not compelled to pretend it's your opinion. For that you would have to look at something like the Pledge of Allegiance, which I do oppose.
No, because you are not allowed to discriminate against protected classes. One of the reasons those classes exist is because totalitarian regimes have historically mistreated them.
They lost in court because the text on the cake is clearly an expression of the buyer's views, so the compelled speech argument is weak. It would be weird to have the baker's views on display at the wedding...
So given that the only reason they could object is homophobia, which is not allowed, hence they lost.
So what is your solution? Allow discrimination against gay people? Who is the fascist now? Because that's exactly what fascists have always done - discriminate against gay people.
Wait wait wait... You have a problem with a business not serving people because of their politics, but not their sexual orientation? What kind of fucked up logic is that?
My point was that from the ordinary user's point of view, the kid who got a computer for their birthday or the adult looking to buy a machine for games or applications would have been considering machines like the Spectrum, Commodore 64 (discontinued 1994), Amiga, Archimedes and low end DOS/Win 3.11 PCs.
Computers back then had a much longer shelf life. The speed of developments seemed more rapid to people.
Having said that, the Spectrum was 1982, and in 1985 we had the Amiga, and later machines like the X68000. The PC-Engine with CD-ROM was only a few years after that, going from a few kilobytes on a slow loading tape to 650MB on an optical disc.
Compare with PCs from 2008. Core 2 Duo era. DDR3 was new. The relative difference compared to 2018 is much smaller.
SSDs are as fast a RAM from a decade ago, which is insane. But the 880k floppy drive on an Amiga could read 40k/sec, which is actually much faster than the base 16k Spectrum and I think maybe even the 48k version. Having said that, it also cost a lot more. It's hard to find like-for-like comparisons.
It's likely that EU privacy rules would be incompatible with these kinds of requests anyway, so no treaty would be possible. Any kind of deal would have to respect EU citizen's rights, and give them an opportunity to oppose requests.
Slashdot Mirror
Even back in the 1950s there was porn and demand for it. Often it was sold as documentaries about nudists or dramas set in nudist camps.
What changed was not that the puritans went away, it's that it got cheaper to make porn. First theaters started showing it, so it became much more profitable. Then home video arrived and recording directly onto tape made the whole process a lot cheaper.
The increased competition and difficulty regulating the industry forced mainstream TV to loosen up.
Try 4k Video Downloader. Works great for me.
Not even if you paid people a huge salary to remain fully attentive, would you get an attentive driver.
It can be done. This situation is hardly unique, and there are lots of tried and tested solutions.
GM has gaze tracking technology for their hands-off Supercruise system, and if it notices you are not looking out of the window at the road it starts demanding your attention and eventually shuts down. Uber could have used that tech and fired anyone who didn't have a 99% attentive rate.
In Japan they use a system where the operator has to point to things they are checking and sometimes say the name of that thing. It forces them to be attentive. Train drivers use it, but also people like security and safety check staff.
https://youtu.be/9LmdUz3rOQU (skip to 0:30 for a demo)
Limiting drivers to one hour shifts and banning distractions like mobile phones would be a good idea too. If they need to make notes just use a voice recorder.
If she was just standing in the left lane waiting to cross, the LIDAR may have seen her and just thought "well that lane is blocked, stick to this one". With the bike she might have looked like a barricade of some kind.
In which case it should have slowed down. A human driver knows that lanes are not randomly barricaded with no prior warning like signs and cones. It should be a huge red flag, a clear indication that something unusual and potentially dangerous is happening.
People dying or getting seriously ill tend to place a burden on the state.
Of course it's unlikely that some politician actually cares about the health of the people they represent, and is trying to protect them from employers creating a culture of massive overtime.
This is as close to a literal marketplace of ideas as we will ever get. The majority favour more gun controls now, and Citi is following the market to maximise profitability.
ggAutoBlock was decried as censorship and persecution, even though it was entirely voluntary. The creator was harassed. Creating and maintaining such lists is going to be a thankless, punishing task.
Such sites already exist, e.g. Voat will continue to allow this content and is largely community moderated.
Sometimes it works, sometimes the lack of detached, outside influence leads to bizarre little enclaves where things get more and more extreme due to a kind of feedback loop.
It's the sensor failures that really worry me. Radar should have seen her, the lidar should have seen her. The cameras should have seen her - most autonomous cars use cameras with some IR vision capability so they can see at night.
The cameras on my Nissan Leaf have better night vision than the one in the video, which makes me think it's not the one the system uses.
Japan just signed up to TTP. Opening up trade is good, if it's fair.
Japan is resisting US beef. US beef has unfair advantages that make it cheap. Lower animal and hygiene standards.
Question is, should the US raise standards or Japan lower them? Should China care more about IP or should the US care less?
I don't think many people here would argue that US patent and copyright laws are good.
China will retaliate with tariffs that hit Trump's base. Farm produce, cars, that sort of thing.
Did you read the court's judgement? You might think they are morons but your opposition to their verdict would be helped if you understood it.
There are lots of things you are legally obliged to do as a business. You might be required to inform the customer of some rights they have, for example. Since those things are not forcing you to express an opinion, merely to relay something the state wishes the customer to know, the 1st doesn't offer any protection.
In the strictest sense you are compelled to emit sounds from your mouth, but you are not compelled to pretend it's your opinion. For that you would have to look at something like the Pledge of Allegiance, which I do oppose.
So your argument boils down to you need YouTube to host gun videos because given a choice Mao+Stalin were worse than Hitler.
Gab can't save us, only YouTube can stop the government becoming tyrannical.
No, because you are not allowed to discriminate against protected classes. One of the reasons those classes exist is because totalitarian regimes have historically mistreated them.
They lost in court because the text on the cake is clearly an expression of the buyer's views, so the compelled speech argument is weak. It would be weird to have the baker's views on display at the wedding...
So given that the only reason they could object is homophobia, which is not allowed, hence they lost.
So what is your solution? Allow discrimination against gay people? Who is the fascist now? Because that's exactly what fascists have always done - discriminate against gay people.
So what happens when your politics require you to discriminate against gay people? Whose rights win?
Protecting political views is just a licence to discriminate on any grounds you like.
Wait wait wait... You have a problem with a business not serving people because of their politics, but not their sexual orientation? What kind of fucked up logic is that?
Compelled speech is the lesser evil. Discrimination against protected classes is worse.
We can of course argue over what is a protected class.
In the EU privacy rules apply to everyone, not just EU citizens. If the data is in the EU the rules apply, even if the subject is a US citizen.
Sexuality is not a choice. Politics are.
It's not at all equivalent.
That's a different argument because sexual orientation is a protected class. If the message was purely political they could refuse quite legally.
My point was that from the ordinary user's point of view, the kid who got a computer for their birthday or the adult looking to buy a machine for games or applications would have been considering machines like the Spectrum, Commodore 64 (discontinued 1994), Amiga, Archimedes and low end DOS/Win 3.11 PCs.
Computers back then had a much longer shelf life. The speed of developments seemed more rapid to people.
Having said that, the Spectrum was 1982, and in 1985 we had the Amiga, and later machines like the X68000. The PC-Engine with CD-ROM was only a few years after that, going from a few kilobytes on a slow loading tape to 650MB on an optical disc.
Compare with PCs from 2008. Core 2 Duo era. DDR3 was new. The relative difference compared to 2018 is much smaller.
SSDs are as fast a RAM from a decade ago, which is insane. But the 880k floppy drive on an Amiga could read 40k/sec, which is actually much faster than the base 16k Spectrum and I think maybe even the 48k version. Having said that, it also cost a lot more. It's hard to find like-for-like comparisons.
It's likely that EU privacy rules would be incompatible with these kinds of requests anyway, so no treaty would be possible. Any kind of deal would have to respect EU citizen's rights, and give them an opportunity to oppose requests.
So you feel that you have a right to be on popular platforms, even if they don't want your content?
What other platforms does this extend to? Fox News is pretty popular and has the ear of the president. Can I demand a half hour show on there?
For that matter, your account seem to be pretty popular. I'm gonna need to publish stuff on it.