Pretty soon, the argument about whether you have in any given facet of your life a "reasonable expectation of privacy" may take on a whole new meaning.
No, it absolutely will not. People need to get through their heads that just because your rights are violated, that doesn't mean expecting them not to be becomes unreasonable. If someone breaks into your house every day, it doesn't become "reasonable" for them to do so, or unreasonable for you to expect people to stay out of your house.
The logic espoused by the quoted idea is the same as saying if police were to start strip searching everyone without cause, it would be reasonable simply because it always happens.
Not sure why this was modded down. It's a simple econ question.
If virtually no one is willing to buy, then people who want or need to sell have to offer a price that the people who ARE willing to buy will pay. In other words, the price falls.
Why? Because the entire nation is obsessed with that very issue now, and it's relevant. Sure, he has enough money that he could pay for his dad's care for the rest of MY lifetime, but that's not the point. $8,000/month wasted is $8,000/month wasted.
If this came from the traditional medical, you would have to go to a doctor who would release the results to your insurance company, it would cost about $1000, and you wouldn't even get to see the results yourself unless the doctor wanted to show you something.
Nope. My test results are reported in full on my medical record, which I have access to. I usually get my results within hours of them leaving the lab. For imaging studies, I usually get a copy on CD if I want it. In one case, they told me I'd have to go to medical records and pay $10. At least in my part of the medical world, the days when doctors knew everything and told you what they thought you should know seem to be gone.
If I were the US Government, I wouldn't bother about shutting off the Internet, I'd bother about getting people to stop attaching critical infrastructure to it. The internet is not and was never designed to be a secure network. It's a lot more like a common sewer.
That depends very much on what kind of health care you need.
This is something people persistently misunderstand. Insurance doesn't decrease your average expected costs. It increases them. It's value is that it also smoothes them.
Imagine a population of 1000 people. The only disease is cancer. One person, on average, gets it every year. It costs $250,000 to treat. The average cost of health care, then, is $250. Everyone can choose to be uninsured, and assuming that one person doesn't have $250,000 lying around, one person drops dead every year.
If everyone is insured, then they have to kick in $250/year to cover the predicted cost of treatment. Oh, but there's overhead costs. Employees of the insurance company don't work for free. Records have to be kept, etc. Also, no one is going to bother to run an insurance company if there isn't some profit in it, so figure really everyone kicks in $300 or so.
You're trading an unlikely, but ruinous cost for a certain but bearable cost.
Realistically, those 75% of people either are right, or have been right up until very recently.
Still, I think they're asking the wrong question. It shouldn't be "can a computer drive a car NOW better than you can?", it should be "If and when computers PROVABLY drive better than you, would you let it?" If that day never comes, we just never do it. Personally, I think that day's coming, and I'll be glad when it gets here.
Dude, I read the summary. I'm responding to the "Marshall needs to retire; he's damned old" comment, not the summary, and not TFA (which I actually read).
There's one of those apps near me. There's a road that's 65 mph for most of it's length, with one 55mph stretch for a mile or so in the middle. For some strange reason, the sign that proclaims it to be 55 is often moderately obscured by bushes nobody ever bothers to trim. For some probably related strange reason, there's also a speed trap right there.
Being old isn't a reason to retire. Not wanting to work anymore is a reason to retire. Not being good at your job is a reason to retire.
If this guy's still good at his job, still wants to do it, and we still need the work done, making him quit is nothing more than rote obedience to an antiquated rule.
It doesn't have to be closed source, or DRM, which i think is not the term you want anyway. Having some kind of non-repudiation would be nice, but still not completely required. Just take speeding tickets now. The cop catches you on radar speeding and does what? Writes it on a piece of paper. Could he be lying? Absolutely! It's still accepted as evidence.
Yup, I agree. I can drive the speed limit to work and get there in 30 minutes, or speed and get there in 25. To really cut a lot of time off, you have to speed A LOT. I'd rather snooze for 30 than get there 5 minutes earlier.
I really want driverless cars. Enforcement will outright go away when nothing ever speeds. Speed limits will also go up, so you won't be complaining that you speed and do 74, you'll just be legally doing 75 or more.
I was once almost fired from a job because my employer thought I went to customer B first instead of customer A, when customer A was already really upset with our company. I forget the details as it was around 20 years ago, but when I arrived at customer A, they informed me they were cancelling the 8:00 am service call, so I went off to customer B, getting there around 8:30 or so. Boss**2 was livid and wanted to blame me for the loss of the account, even though the customer was ticked because $COMPANY had really screwed up something completely unrelated to me. Boss**2 called customer B and asked the entirely wrong question, something like "Did SG arrive at or before 8?" Customer B, who liked me, tried to "cover" for me and said yes. If they'd had some kind of GPS tracker on THEIR $100,000+ truck, it would have shown that I rolled up at Customer A on time, stayed there for about 10 minutes, then went to Customer B.
Yeah, sort of this. There's no such thing as a software only "cloud" service. That's marketing nonsense. If you're just setting up some service on a box somewhere else, it's not cloud, it's just a service on a box somewhere else. If that "box" isn't really one, but n, if you can scale it from just big enough to hold some word docs to many, many TB just by charging your credit card, if the (one of the) data center(s) that contain your service can get hit by a meteor and your service keeps on running, then yeah, maybe it's cloud.
Just a pet peeve of mine. The way some people define cloud, we had it 40 years ago and called it FTP.
This is completely false. I was a mechanic for a few years and both replaced clutches and rebuilt transmissions.
There is zero wear on the clutch when it's disengaged OR engaged. When it's disengaged (clutch pedal pressed) it's spinning merrily away, touching nothing. When it's engaged (clutch pedal released) it's forcibly pressed against the flywheel and is not moving at all relative to the flywheel. Wear happens in the in-between, mostly when you're releasing the pedal and the spinning flywheel contacts the non-spinning clutch with increasing pressure as you release the pedal.
I really, really want you to try that sometime. In my youth I tried similar arguments. I never found that traffic court judges were impressed with silly technicality arguments. The response was usually along the lines of "*snicker* Guilty. $XXX fine plus court costs."
This is traffic court, people. If you really think the standard is absolute truth, you're kidding yourself. In my experience, it's not even beyond a reasonable doubt. It's more like "probably guilty", and if there's a LEO there saying you did it, you're probably guilty.
I used to drive ~40,000 miles a year in the days before GPS and had a collection of detailed street maps, one for each county in my state and some for neighboring states. They were the size of big books. A company called ADC made them, I think. And yeah, referring to them while driving is pretty much how I got everywhere. It was so long ago I don't recall if I only used them while stopped or not. I was young, so probably not.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it absolutely will not. People need to get through their heads that just because your rights are violated, that doesn't mean expecting them not to be becomes unreasonable. If someone breaks into your house every day, it doesn't become "reasonable" for them to do so, or unreasonable for you to expect people to stay out of your house.
The logic espoused by the quoted idea is the same as saying if police were to start strip searching everyone without cause, it would be reasonable simply because it always happens.
Stop that.
Not sure why this was modded down. It's a simple econ question.
If virtually no one is willing to buy, then people who want or need to sell have to offer a price that the people who ARE willing to buy will pay. In other words, the price falls.
Says who, exactly?
Why? Because the entire nation is obsessed with that very issue now, and it's relevant. Sure, he has enough money that he could pay for his dad's care for the rest of MY lifetime, but that's not the point. $8,000/month wasted is $8,000/month wasted.
Nope. My test results are reported in full on my medical record, which I have access to. I usually get my results within hours of them leaving the lab. For imaging studies, I usually get a copy on CD if I want it. In one case, they told me I'd have to go to medical records and pay $10. At least in my part of the medical world, the days when doctors knew everything and told you what they thought you should know seem to be gone.
If I were the US Government, I wouldn't bother about shutting off the Internet, I'd bother about getting people to stop attaching critical infrastructure to it. The internet is not and was never designed to be a secure network. It's a lot more like a common sewer.
The 0.051 is annual failure rate (12 months, not 18), so your survival rate should be .949**1.5, which is ~92%.
And that's where you lose me. No thanks, I'm not taking out a small loan if failing to pay it back means I lose my house.
Also, this is great: "Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love."
I'm going to use that.
That depends very much on what kind of health care you need.
This is something people persistently misunderstand. Insurance doesn't decrease your average expected costs. It increases them. It's value is that it also smoothes them.
Imagine a population of 1000 people. The only disease is cancer. One person, on average, gets it every year. It costs $250,000 to treat. The average cost of health care, then, is $250. Everyone can choose to be uninsured, and assuming that one person doesn't have $250,000 lying around, one person drops dead every year.
If everyone is insured, then they have to kick in $250/year to cover the predicted cost of treatment. Oh, but there's overhead costs. Employees of the insurance company don't work for free. Records have to be kept, etc. Also, no one is going to bother to run an insurance company if there isn't some profit in it, so figure really everyone kicks in $300 or so.
You're trading an unlikely, but ruinous cost for a certain but bearable cost.
Realistically, those 75% of people either are right, or have been right up until very recently.
Still, I think they're asking the wrong question. It shouldn't be "can a computer drive a car NOW better than you can?", it should be "If and when computers PROVABLY drive better than you, would you let it?" If that day never comes, we just never do it. Personally, I think that day's coming, and I'll be glad when it gets here.
Dude, I read the summary. I'm responding to the "Marshall needs to retire; he's damned old" comment, not the summary, and not TFA (which I actually read).
There's one of those apps near me. There's a road that's 65 mph for most of it's length, with one 55mph stretch for a mile or so in the middle. For some strange reason, the sign that proclaims it to be 55 is often moderately obscured by bushes nobody ever bothers to trim. For some probably related strange reason, there's also a speed trap right there.
Being old isn't a reason to retire. Not wanting to work anymore is a reason to retire. Not being good at your job is a reason to retire.
If this guy's still good at his job, still wants to do it, and we still need the work done, making him quit is nothing more than rote obedience to an antiquated rule.
It doesn't have to be closed source, or DRM, which i think is not the term you want anyway. Having some kind of non-repudiation would be nice, but still not completely required. Just take speeding tickets now. The cop catches you on radar speeding and does what? Writes it on a piece of paper. Could he be lying? Absolutely! It's still accepted as evidence.
Yup, I agree. I can drive the speed limit to work and get there in 30 minutes, or speed and get there in 25. To really cut a lot of time off, you have to speed A LOT. I'd rather snooze for 30 than get there 5 minutes earlier.
I really want driverless cars. Enforcement will outright go away when nothing ever speeds. Speed limits will also go up, so you won't be complaining that you speed and do 74, you'll just be legally doing 75 or more.
Seriously. We now do the very things we used to mock the Soviets for doing in the 80s.
I was once almost fired from a job because my employer thought I went to customer B first instead of customer A, when customer A was already really upset with our company. I forget the details as it was around 20 years ago, but when I arrived at customer A, they informed me they were cancelling the 8:00 am service call, so I went off to customer B, getting there around 8:30 or so. Boss**2 was livid and wanted to blame me for the loss of the account, even though the customer was ticked because $COMPANY had really screwed up something completely unrelated to me. Boss**2 called customer B and asked the entirely wrong question, something like "Did SG arrive at or before 8?" Customer B, who liked me, tried to "cover" for me and said yes. If they'd had some kind of GPS tracker on THEIR $100,000+ truck, it would have shown that I rolled up at Customer A on time, stayed there for about 10 minutes, then went to Customer B.
Yeah, sort of this. There's no such thing as a software only "cloud" service. That's marketing nonsense. If you're just setting up some service on a box somewhere else, it's not cloud, it's just a service on a box somewhere else. If that "box" isn't really one, but n, if you can scale it from just big enough to hold some word docs to many, many TB just by charging your credit card, if the (one of the) data center(s) that contain your service can get hit by a meteor and your service keeps on running, then yeah, maybe it's cloud.
Just a pet peeve of mine. The way some people define cloud, we had it 40 years ago and called it FTP.
Good idea! We can make the whole thing just a special feature to the movie Contact.
Very true. We call that "riding the clutch" here, and it is indeed a terrible practice for exactly that reason.
This is completely false. I was a mechanic for a few years and both replaced clutches and rebuilt transmissions.
There is zero wear on the clutch when it's disengaged OR engaged. When it's disengaged (clutch pedal pressed) it's spinning merrily away, touching nothing. When it's engaged (clutch pedal released) it's forcibly pressed against the flywheel and is not moving at all relative to the flywheel. Wear happens in the in-between, mostly when you're releasing the pedal and the spinning flywheel contacts the non-spinning clutch with increasing pressure as you release the pedal.
I really, really want you to try that sometime. In my youth I tried similar arguments. I never found that traffic court judges were impressed with silly technicality arguments. The response was usually along the lines of "*snicker* Guilty. $XXX fine plus court costs."
This is traffic court, people. If you really think the standard is absolute truth, you're kidding yourself. In my experience, it's not even beyond a reasonable doubt. It's more like "probably guilty", and if there's a LEO there saying you did it, you're probably guilty.
Oh, for mod points. This is a brilliant example.
I used to drive ~40,000 miles a year in the days before GPS and had a collection of detailed street maps, one for each county in my state and some for neighboring states. They were the size of big books. A company called ADC made them, I think. And yeah, referring to them while driving is pretty much how I got everywhere. It was so long ago I don't recall if I only used them while stopped or not. I was young, so probably not.
The flaw there is thinking they don't all enforce it selectively. For example, 56 in a 55 is still speeding.