It's the TV channel format I object to. They always try to schedule things against other channels so you need several tuners and a big HDD to grab it all, and the ad-blocking facilities are primitive to say the least.
I'm much happier since I stopped organizing my life around TV schedules and worrying about setting up recordings. Now I just log on to Netflix or The Pirate Bay and it's all on-demand, ad free, at a reasonable price.
Here's a better solution: Don't buy stupidly expensive phones.
Instead of spending $700 on an iPhone, spend $300 on a high end, well made and more powerful Android phone from someone like OnePlus, Motorola, Xaomi or even LG. Then replace it after 2-3 years when the software updates stop coming.
OnePlus do two years of OS updates, for example, and then you just get security patches from Google. Then get a nice new phone, new battery, upgraded features, more storage etc. And give the old one to your kid to use as a toy, or keep it as a spare in case you drop your primary one in the toilet. Or install LineageOS and carry on using it.
No need to carry on with 4 year old hardware just to get your money's worth.
Only if the individual is healthy. Lots of people have impaired smell (allergies being the most common reason) and lots of people have weakened immune systems that can't tolerate things that a normal immune system could.
That's why the use-by dates are so conservative. They have to account for poor quality refrigeration and the weakest members of society.
If these labels are cheap and environmentally OK they could both save a lot of food waste and protect people better than use-by dates.
That requires all telemarketers to register and use phone lines marked as for telemarketing calls. It will never work.
The best solution is for people to simply stop accepting calls from numbers they don't know. Phones should by default only ring if the number is in the user's phone book, otherwise it gets logged and declined.
At first that will cause some problems as legitimate companies adapt to using email and the postal system instead of calling. Of course, customers can always call them, or whitelist them if they really want to. Things will rapidly improve for everyone though - spam calls will be largely eliminated, and legitimate communications will start to move to more secure platforms like end-to-end encrypted chat.
There should be jail for companies. Some countries have it already. The company can be ordered to shut down and suspend all business operations, except paying staff, for a number of days.
Just impose heavy fines for people who are this grossly negligent. In the UK there is something called the Information Commissioner's Office, which can and does fine companies for this kind of mis-handling of sensitive, personal data.
Apart from some trolls most of the people using the term "nazi" were warning the right that there were actual Nazis in their midst. Then Charlottesville happened and suddenly it dawned on people that the warnings were justified, and that there were actual Nazis and KKK wizards among them.
Actually, that MP has been widely supported and her forced resignation condemned. It's true that she could have worded it better, but she definitely has a lot of support now. It may even have boosted her career in the longer term, and it certainly damaged Labour's leader for taking that action.
It's more than just syntax and grammar rules. For example, Google has been mining the web for that kind of knowledge. You can see it in Google Translate sometimes. It generates suggestions for your input, and sometimes screws up like thinking "alot" is a word. It also uses colloquialisms in its output, which again it gathered from analysis of the web and which doesn't fit standard grammar or syntax rules.
In the UK it could be argued that the seller "accepted" the sale. In a physical shop, if you see an item mis-priced you can't just take it to the sales counter, slap down the cash and walk out. The shop has to agree the sale with you, typically by putting it through the till and producing a receipt.
Years ago, in the early 2000s I think, some supermarket sold TVs for £0.10 instead of £1000 on their web site. They argued that even though the web site had taken the order, they had not accepted and shipped it. In the end they prevailed and no-one got their 10p televisions.
In the bank example, if you spent the money the bank wouldn't be able to reclaim it. This has happened to people with things like house purchases. The bank isn't going to create a debt by making the receiving account go negative, for two reasons. First, that debt would be the banks in reality. If it was theft they might never recover the cash and be left in the hole for potentially millions. Secondly, if it was a genuine mistake that person might have spent money they thought they legitimately had, and the general principal in law is that you should not lose out (with fees etc.) when it is someone else's mistake.
Not any more. One of the ways that they got the accuracy up so high is by giving the machine an understanding of English and common phrases, similar to what a human has. It's been used for input correction on smartphones for a while too, e.g. with the Google keyboard it can correct the previous word based on the next one you type if it realizes that they don't make sense together.
Oh right, last year where a comedian was being charged for the crime of "insulting a foreign head of state".
You own link says that he wasn't charged, merely that the state's prosecutors were allowed to decide if there should be charges based on Turkey's request for extradition. There was no prosecution in the end.
Basically she refused to block it outright for diplomatic reasons (Turkey helping with the migrant crisis), knowing that it wouldn't go anywhere and that it was due to be repealed next year anyway. And Germany is hardly alone in having stupid old laws on its books.
And to be clear, Merkel or anyone in the government doesn't have the power to prosecute people, only the judiciary can do that.
though the current status of that effort I do not know. Who knows, maybe the made the motion of repealing it but it "Died in committee" only for the law to be dusted off again when it is convenient.
Or perhaps if you read your own fucking link you would have noticed that they are planning to do it next year, and due to the linear nature of time that means it hasn't happened yet.
But the question remains, why was that particular thing codified into law?
Historical reasons. You may remember Germany had some issues with bad laws in the past.
another example of the chilling effects
Not really. This guy set out to test the limits of the law, and his actions resulted in it being changed. If anything, this episode should have emboldened people wishing to say controversial things as it has proven that the old law won't be used and no prosecution will result.
A robot that can shoot lasers and punch through walls should probably require human oversight, especially in an unpredictable and volatile emergency situation. If such a robot were used in war under close human direction, it would be like any guided missile or drone.
What Musk is talking about is robots with enough AI to go into an area, decide on targets for itself and decide if it is going to kill them or not. There isn't really any reasonable civilian use for such a robot. A robot that is designed to look for disaster survivors and then definitely avoid killing them at all costs would need a lot of modification to be more than a improvised booby-trap type device, which again is little different to existing improvised weapons.
People seem to misunderstand what these bans are far. Nukes are banned, but North Korea made them anyway, so might as well not ban them? Is the ban really totally ineffective, or has it allowed us to prevent many more countries from getting nukes and put immense pressure on NK (including sanctions) to stop its own programme?
Banning killer robots will make it harder to build them, and create negative consequences for having them. Every country will have to decide if it is worth the sanctions and economic fall-out just to have that weapon. Every business will have to decide if it is worth suffering the consequences of being involved in development and manufacture.
$200,000 would be enough to live comfortably and start a good life in somewhere like South America around that time. Quite a few criminals went that route with similar or even smaller amounts of cash and did quite well out of it, as long as they used it to set themselves up rather than just spending it.
I guess the issue there is that if he had used it to start a new life, you would think there might be some evidence of a foreigner suddenly arriving with a large amount of USD in cash. Then again, back then record keeping wasn't what it is today and even now many South American countries are not exactly in a hurry to help the FBI with information and record searches.
Programming is also a great way to get kids interested in maths. A lot of the resistance children have to maths is the mental aspect and having to work things out by hand when they know that a calculator could do it for them. Programming lets them learn about maths and experiment with it in a much more interactive, immediate and enjoyable way.
Creating code to generate their own graphs also gives them a deeper understanding and "feel" for mathematical functions, rather than just entering y=sin(x) into a graphic calculator that was obsolete technology in 1993.
In the UK they might, if it could be shown that they realised what was happening and decided to abuse it. All EU countries are similar I think.
It's similar if someone accidentally transfers money to your bank account. If you suddenly find a million Euros in there that you weren't expecting and decide to spend it, you stole that money. You could not have reasonably have thought it was yours. If it's just 100 Euros and you normally get thousands a month from your job anyway it could be an honest mistake to spend it and you wouldn't be arrested.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the TV channel format I object to. They always try to schedule things against other channels so you need several tuners and a big HDD to grab it all, and the ad-blocking facilities are primitive to say the least.
I'm much happier since I stopped organizing my life around TV schedules and worrying about setting up recordings. Now I just log on to Netflix or The Pirate Bay and it's all on-demand, ad free, at a reasonable price.
Here's a better solution: Don't buy stupidly expensive phones.
Instead of spending $700 on an iPhone, spend $300 on a high end, well made and more powerful Android phone from someone like OnePlus, Motorola, Xaomi or even LG. Then replace it after 2-3 years when the software updates stop coming.
OnePlus do two years of OS updates, for example, and then you just get security patches from Google. Then get a nice new phone, new battery, upgraded features, more storage etc. And give the old one to your kid to use as a toy, or keep it as a spare in case you drop your primary one in the toilet. Or install LineageOS and carry on using it.
No need to carry on with 4 year old hardware just to get your money's worth.
Only if the individual is healthy. Lots of people have impaired smell (allergies being the most common reason) and lots of people have weakened immune systems that can't tolerate things that a normal immune system could.
That's why the use-by dates are so conservative. They have to account for poor quality refrigeration and the weakest members of society.
If these labels are cheap and environmentally OK they could both save a lot of food waste and protect people better than use-by dates.
That requires all telemarketers to register and use phone lines marked as for telemarketing calls. It will never work.
The best solution is for people to simply stop accepting calls from numbers they don't know. Phones should by default only ring if the number is in the user's phone book, otherwise it gets logged and declined.
At first that will cause some problems as legitimate companies adapt to using email and the postal system instead of calling. Of course, customers can always call them, or whitelist them if they really want to. Things will rapidly improve for everyone though - spam calls will be largely eliminated, and legitimate communications will start to move to more secure platforms like end-to-end encrypted chat.
There should be jail for companies. Some countries have it already. The company can be ordered to shut down and suspend all business operations, except paying staff, for a number of days.
Just impose heavy fines for people who are this grossly negligent. In the UK there is something called the Information Commissioner's Office, which can and does fine companies for this kind of mis-handling of sensitive, personal data.
Apart from some trolls most of the people using the term "nazi" were warning the right that there were actual Nazis in their midst. Then Charlottesville happened and suddenly it dawned on people that the warnings were justified, and that there were actual Nazis and KKK wizards among them.
Actually, that MP has been widely supported and her forced resignation condemned. It's true that she could have worded it better, but she definitely has a lot of support now. It may even have boosted her career in the longer term, and it certainly damaged Labour's leader for taking that action.
AMD CPUs have better features anyway. ECC RAM support on the desktop, for example.
It's more than just syntax and grammar rules. For example, Google has been mining the web for that kind of knowledge. You can see it in Google Translate sometimes. It generates suggestions for your input, and sometimes screws up like thinking "alot" is a word. It also uses colloquialisms in its output, which again it gathered from analysis of the web and which doesn't fit standard grammar or syntax rules.
In the UK it could be argued that the seller "accepted" the sale. In a physical shop, if you see an item mis-priced you can't just take it to the sales counter, slap down the cash and walk out. The shop has to agree the sale with you, typically by putting it through the till and producing a receipt.
Years ago, in the early 2000s I think, some supermarket sold TVs for £0.10 instead of £1000 on their web site. They argued that even though the web site had taken the order, they had not accepted and shipped it. In the end they prevailed and no-one got their 10p televisions.
In the bank example, if you spent the money the bank wouldn't be able to reclaim it. This has happened to people with things like house purchases. The bank isn't going to create a debt by making the receiving account go negative, for two reasons. First, that debt would be the banks in reality. If it was theft they might never recover the cash and be left in the hole for potentially millions. Secondly, if it was a genuine mistake that person might have spent money they thought they legitimately had, and the general principal in law is that you should not lose out (with fees etc.) when it is someone else's mistake.
Not any more. One of the ways that they got the accuracy up so high is by giving the machine an understanding of English and common phrases, similar to what a human has. It's been used for input correction on smartphones for a while too, e.g. with the Google keyboard it can correct the previous word based on the next one you type if it realizes that they don't make sense together.
2015: Sorry snowflakes, there are no safe spaces in real life
2017: Help I need somewhere safe to discuss my nationalist bullshit
Oh right, last year where a comedian was being charged for the crime of "insulting a foreign head of state".
You own link says that he wasn't charged, merely that the state's prosecutors were allowed to decide if there should be charges based on Turkey's request for extradition. There was no prosecution in the end.
Basically she refused to block it outright for diplomatic reasons (Turkey helping with the migrant crisis), knowing that it wouldn't go anywhere and that it was due to be repealed next year anyway. And Germany is hardly alone in having stupid old laws on its books.
And to be clear, Merkel or anyone in the government doesn't have the power to prosecute people, only the judiciary can do that.
though the current status of that effort I do not know. Who knows, maybe the made the motion of repealing it but it "Died in committee" only for the law to be dusted off again when it is convenient.
Or perhaps if you read your own fucking link you would have noticed that they are planning to do it next year, and due to the linear nature of time that means it hasn't happened yet.
But the question remains, why was that particular thing codified into law?
Historical reasons. You may remember Germany had some issues with bad laws in the past.
another example of the chilling effects
Not really. This guy set out to test the limits of the law, and his actions resulted in it being changed. If anything, this episode should have emboldened people wishing to say controversial things as it has proven that the old law won't be used and no prosecution will result.
A robot that can shoot lasers and punch through walls should probably require human oversight, especially in an unpredictable and volatile emergency situation. If such a robot were used in war under close human direction, it would be like any guided missile or drone.
What Musk is talking about is robots with enough AI to go into an area, decide on targets for itself and decide if it is going to kill them or not. There isn't really any reasonable civilian use for such a robot. A robot that is designed to look for disaster survivors and then definitely avoid killing them at all costs would need a lot of modification to be more than a improvised booby-trap type device, which again is little different to existing improvised weapons.
People seem to misunderstand what these bans are far. Nukes are banned, but North Korea made them anyway, so might as well not ban them? Is the ban really totally ineffective, or has it allowed us to prevent many more countries from getting nukes and put immense pressure on NK (including sanctions) to stop its own programme?
Banning killer robots will make it harder to build them, and create negative consequences for having them. Every country will have to decide if it is worth the sanctions and economic fall-out just to have that weapon. Every business will have to decide if it is worth suffering the consequences of being involved in development and manufacture.
Indeed, zero cost orders are not that uncommon as they are used for things like warranty replacements and exchanges.
$200,000 would be enough to live comfortably and start a good life in somewhere like South America around that time. Quite a few criminals went that route with similar or even smaller amounts of cash and did quite well out of it, as long as they used it to set themselves up rather than just spending it.
I guess the issue there is that if he had used it to start a new life, you would think there might be some evidence of a foreigner suddenly arriving with a large amount of USD in cash. Then again, back then record keeping wasn't what it is today and even now many South American countries are not exactly in a hurry to help the FBI with information and record searches.
I got the impression that most of the maths they taught us after about age 12 was purely for the sake of passing exams.
Programming is also a great way to get kids interested in maths. A lot of the resistance children have to maths is the mental aspect and having to work things out by hand when they know that a calculator could do it for them. Programming lets them learn about maths and experiment with it in a much more interactive, immediate and enjoyable way.
Creating code to generate their own graphs also gives them a deeper understanding and "feel" for mathematical functions, rather than just entering y=sin(x) into a graphic calculator that was obsolete technology in 1993.
I actually did programming before algebra, and then when we finally did do algebra it was quite familiar to me.
In the UK they might, if it could be shown that they realised what was happening and decided to abuse it. All EU countries are similar I think.
It's similar if someone accidentally transfers money to your bank account. If you suddenly find a million Euros in there that you weren't expecting and decide to spend it, you stole that money. You could not have reasonably have thought it was yours. If it's just 100 Euros and you normally get thousands a month from your job anyway it could be an honest mistake to spend it and you wouldn't be arrested.
Not sure we want the FBI deciding that some cases aren't worth the effort. Any open case should be investigated whenever possible.
Spotify and streaming in general. The kids don't bother with MP3s any more, they just stream.
I gave up on Winamp because its unicode support was crap. Unicode itself is crap but at least Foobar2000 supports it.