Same photon/different photon with exactly the same properties (of which a photon has a limited and fixed number)... it's somewhat arbitrary and philosophical as to whether that makes it the same photon.
If I were to use Ring, then the people who wanted to talk to me via video conferencing would install it, too.
You hope. Even if that's true for you, it's not going to be true for the vast majority of people.
A far more likely scenario is that one person moves to Ring, tells everyone else "hey I moved to Ring! Move to Ring!" and everyone else just says "Eh? Ring? No, I use Skype. Everyone else I know uses Skype."
And then you need to consider the people who don't get to choose what they can install and use.
What's at stake here is that they agreed with his choice of email address and now suddenly no more.
People lose email addresses all the time, for various reasons. I doubt his contract with them specifies that the address was to be immutably his for all time.
and now they don't have the right do damage his interests so much only because for some reason they suddenly don't like his address anymore.
Sure they do. It's their service and it's provided at their discretion. They're not discriminating against him. Things have changed since he registered that email address. noreply@ is now a de facto standard, and there may be all manner of technical, possibly even legal (depending on what contracts they have with others), reasons why they are no longer willing to let him use that email address.
Has anyone ever bothered to count the number of caricature troll videos, gifs, and pictures that troll political leaders such as GWB, Obama, Clinton, and yes Trump?
None of them have ever previously had their work endorsed by the president himself. This is nothing to do with some random on the internet mocking CNN. In fact the video could be seen just as easily to be mocking Trump, if not for the context of who retweeted it.
It's the fact that the president endorsed it, and by implication appearing to condone violence against journalists, that made this newsworthy. The creator of the video, along with anti-semitic and other comments, is now irrevocably linked to the story as well. Perhaps somewhat unfairly, unless it turns out that Trump is knowledgable of more of his "work" than this video.
Operative word. It's their product, and they're changing it. It's no longer to be available to this customer in its current form. Does a company have "no right" to stop offering POP3 mailboxes just because some people might want to continue to pay for them?
Imagine a world where companies were forced to continue to offer exactly the same products for as long as people were paying for them.
We don't know why it plowed into the truck. I doubt it was a "conscious," if you'll forgive the completely wrong use of the word, decision by the AI.
Basically, the failure mode for autopilot doesn't have to be "pull over and park safely".
Whatever the failure mode is, it does have to recognise that there has been a failure in the first place. It quite possibly didn't do that in this case, for whatever reason.
* Why didn't the car slow down if you have your hands off the wheel for more then 5+ minutes?
Slow down how much? And if nothing changes, then what? Come to a stop in the middle of the road?
* Why didn't the car pull over the side of the road after 15 minutes of hands free driving?
Because that's a much harder thing to do than simply keeping a car between standardised lane markings and away from relatively slow-moving traffic (not that it fully succeeded in the latter in this case).
If that's a requirement, why didn't the car just pull over and shut off?
Because the car isn't smart enough to do that. It can keep you between the lines on the road; it can't take you out of the lanes and park you up. That's actually a harder thing to do.
Slashdot Mirror
Photon, numb nuts.
No, a photon does not have mass. Its energy comes solely from its momentum.
The full formula is
E^2=(mc^2)^2+(pc)^2
where p is momentum.
evolutionary adds: "The article doesn't specify the tone suggests emails sent were unencrypted."
Can we have that in English?
The end result is physically and fundamentally impossible to distinguish from "real", sci-fi teleportation though.
Same photon/different photon with exactly the same properties (of which a photon has a limited and fixed number)... it's somewhat arbitrary and philosophical as to whether that makes it the same photon.
A photon has mass. It's both a particle and a wave.
Right, first of all, no, it absolutely does not have mass.
Secondly, the fact that it's both a particle and a wave (which is an oversimplification) has nothing to do with whether it should have mass or not.
A photon has mass. It's both a particle and a wave.
Ditto.
No, not by definition.
If I were to use Ring, then the people who wanted to talk to me via video conferencing would install it, too.
You hope. Even if that's true for you, it's not going to be true for the vast majority of people.
A far more likely scenario is that one person moves to Ring, tells everyone else "hey I moved to Ring! Move to Ring!" and everyone else just says "Eh? Ring? No, I use Skype. Everyone else I know uses Skype."
And then you need to consider the people who don't get to choose what they can install and use.
but Skype's users used it for what it was: simple video conferencing.
A lot of them don't use it for that at all.
Oh, sure, that'll solve everything. Just got to make everyone else move all at once as well, no problem.
What's at stake here is that they agreed with his choice of email address and now suddenly no more.
People lose email addresses all the time, for various reasons. I doubt his contract with them specifies that the address was to be immutably his for all time.
and now they don't have the right do damage his interests so much only because for some reason they suddenly don't like his address anymore.
Sure they do. It's their service and it's provided at their discretion. They're not discriminating against him. Things have changed since he registered that email address. noreply@ is now a de facto standard, and there may be all manner of technical, possibly even legal (depending on what contracts they have with others), reasons why they are no longer willing to let him use that email address.
Has anyone ever bothered to count the number of caricature troll videos, gifs, and pictures that troll political leaders such as GWB, Obama, Clinton, and yes Trump?
None of them have ever previously had their work endorsed by the president himself. This is nothing to do with some random on the internet mocking CNN. In fact the video could be seen just as easily to be mocking Trump, if not for the context of who retweeted it.
It's the fact that the president endorsed it, and by implication appearing to condone violence against journalists, that made this newsworthy. The creator of the video, along with anti-semitic and other comments, is now irrevocably linked to the story as well. Perhaps somewhat unfairly, unless it turns out that Trump is knowledgable of more of his "work" than this video.
Doesn't mean most of them aren't shit. There's one that reads out Zoidberg quotes, and another that plays firework noises. Yay.
They have no right. One of their products
Operative word. It's their product, and they're changing it. It's no longer to be available to this customer in its current form. Does a company have "no right" to stop offering POP3 mailboxes just because some people might want to continue to pay for them?
Imagine a world where companies were forced to continue to offer exactly the same products for as long as people were paying for them.
Then the crossover, AV v. VC1.
As in, the estate was highly offended that they didn't get as much cash out of if as they thought they could have.
PBS Bets $3 Million That Monkeys Are Better CS Preschool Teachers Than Rabbits
Rabbits and monkeys have shit all to do with the actual story here. Which monkey did you pay to approve that headline?
Didn't you know? If driverless cars can't work 100% perfectly now, how will they ever do so in the future?
I mean, that is proper actual logic, that.
You would also disprove about 90% of Earths religions
As if. They've survived dinosaurs, evolution, the Big Bang, and countless other discoveries that contradict them.
Go on, someone post a link to that story Manna in lieu of any actual informed discussion.
We don't know why it plowed into the truck. I doubt it was a "conscious," if you'll forgive the completely wrong use of the word, decision by the AI.
Basically, the failure mode for autopilot doesn't have to be "pull over and park safely".
Whatever the failure mode is, it does have to recognise that there has been a failure in the first place. It quite possibly didn't do that in this case, for whatever reason.
It actually can't, not in an on-the-road production model. That's a test.
* Why didn't the car slow down if you have your hands off the wheel for more then 5+ minutes?
Slow down how much? And if nothing changes, then what? Come to a stop in the middle of the road?
* Why didn't the car pull over the side of the road after 15 minutes of hands free driving?
Because that's a much harder thing to do than simply keeping a car between standardised lane markings and away from relatively slow-moving traffic (not that it fully succeeded in the latter in this case).
If that's a requirement, why didn't the car just pull over and shut off?
Because the car isn't smart enough to do that. It can keep you between the lines on the road; it can't take you out of the lanes and park you up. That's actually a harder thing to do.
Err... what?