I don't think it's realistic in most of the metro until you're pulling in at least 200k these days. Median houses in King County are ~625k now. Anywhere that isn't pretty rough or an unconscionable commute from somewhere two working adults can make that much will start in the 750-800k range. The only marginally affordable houses are in the ghetto of South Seattle where a post-war shack with 1 bathroom and 2-3 bedrooms are being remodeled and snatched up at 400-500k these days. It's mind boggling.
I live somewhere an almost unconscionable commute east of downtown (11 miles; people claim it's not even that bad) and basic houses in my neighborhood are approaching 1M. We couldn't afford to live here if it wasn't for our below-market rent. We want to buy, but with her only pulling in ~50k, our combined incomes are insufficient to buy anything livable that isn't at least another 5-10 traffic-filled miles further from work.
Yeah, that won't last long. Setting a fake VIN will probably be easy.
If they're not, expect people to use junkyard parts. Who are you gonna cry to when the VIN is from a totaled car sitting in the east bumf*ck scrap yard and that part was never sold to anyone.
Expect criminals and terrorists to make full use of these capabilities.
Knowing what direction the signal is coming from is easy. If you have a car built in the last 5 or so years with keyless entry, it is already doing this (it knows where your fob is and won't let someone on the other side of your car open a door just because you're standing nearby).
Sugar free isn't really good. Humans tend to seek out sugar. Most foods have sugars in them. Our bodies are designed to process them effectively.
The problem is that people like to use fake sugar due to a fear of sugar, or they replace fat with sugar... These things confuse the digestive tract, which causes the body to do weird things it shouldn't do to compensate. It's why "sugar substitutes" that insulin doesn't break down seem to be contributors to diabetes in the long term.
It does remind me of the way I couldn't even comprehend what I was seeing when Hillary openly described people that opposed her for valid reasons as "deplorables". This person wants to be the president of the United States?! If anything, Hillary's picture should be added to every definition of hubris on the internet.
The major mass media groups are quite strongly skewed to left-wing positions and report according with a heavy bias in that direction. This election was proof of that.
I'm not sure why they'd be considered "liberal", though, as liberalism has nothing to do with their positions (which appear closer aligned with socialism and totalitarianism, which is common to both major parties in the US and antithetical to liberalism).
There are true liberal news sources, including a number on the "fake news" list. They did oppose Hillary due to her positions. The fact Trump was incoherent and inconsistent made him a difficult target, but he was similarly disliked. I will admit that he was the least-fought candidate I've seen in these circles, but that's probably more an effect of the extreme repulsiveness of Hillary to actual liberals than any implied support of Trump.
This is incorrect. Up until the 2000 election, networks were highly inconsistent in how they colored the parties, but there was a general pattern that blue was republican and red was democrat. The change was unusual - the network's got together and actually synchronized on it for some unknown reason prior to the election, although they deny it now and claim it was a post-election development (it wasn't; I was there).
Truth. It was a hard pill to swallow, but no matter how much mud they slung and how unpopular the opinion was, he was the better candidate for so many reasons that it wasn't even a contest. She stood for the war machine and so many deplorable things, while standing in front of the country and calling us "deplorables" for not supporting her shitty positions. I'm glad others can see why perfectly rational people would vote for the orange raisin.
My suspicion is that this is closer to the truth. That she was counting on vote tampering or creation that was widespread (and clearly involved paper). There were similar discrepancies found in Florida after the 2000 election that gave Al Gore a big boost by invalidating GWB votes. Everything has told me for some time that they have been cooking the numbers in quite a few large states for years, perhaps decades, and this tells me that there is something going on...
This has been my experience with both lithium batteries and supercaps. In fact, supercaps are worse as they can discharge more quickly and don't need to wait on slow chemical reactions.
Supercap explosions are very frightening and could be very dangerous.
On a government project a number of years ago, we used a bank of supercapacitors to launch something very quickly off an average vehicle battery every minute or so.
It sounds great, but we also had the damned things explode quite spectacularly. And by that, I mean, if we didn't have it inside a very tough metal box, shrapnel might have killed the tech that was near it when it went.
Not that lithium batteries are much better; I've seen some really exciting fires when the LiPo batteries in R/C race cars fail... If you thought a phone battery bursting into flame was exciting, you have never seen one of these go up.
You can't get something from nothing. That's a fact. Humans can fill in some gaps and AI could probably do the same, but there is no guarantee the results are correct.
On the other hand, if it could actually discern more from a video (which humans can also do, but probably not quite as well), it might be able to "enhance" individual images to some extent and have accurate results.
That people can be convicted by the results is a little scary, but at some level no different from a jury misinterpreting a low resolution image. Aside from the fact it was a single opinion that swayed that of the entire jury.
The root problem is that we provided the politicians the ability to do this to us. Time zones are also political footballs that could be easily fixed by using local solar time.
What's worse is that the most recent change under Dubya proved what science has been telling us all along: DST increases electricity usage *and* disrupts natural circadian rhythms. DST should be abolished worldwide.
Time zones are political footballs. Not as bad as DST, but they still give political types the opportunity to screw with them. Most time zones are garbage and don't come anywhere near matching solar time.
End DST. Use UTC for official timekeeping. Use local solar time for human needs.
I use ISO 8601 (replacing "T" with a space in human contexts) in my daily life. It annoys some stupid Americans, but they can't deny that they understand what I mean. Everyone understands it universally, regardless of their cultural context, which makes it far superior. It also keeps them in order from most to least significant part - Year, month, day, hour, minute, second, millisecond, and even offset from UTC down to the minute (I think it should have an addendum to go down to the second, but that's just me, since I also advocate using solar time).
Time zones are an artifact of an era when travel was at a fraction of the current speed and communication over long distances was rare/expensive. DST is worse than time zones (it's pure evil), but TZs are only marginally better. Both suffer from the politician problem. When something like that can be politicized, it will be, and they'll screw with/argue it often. They will change it, which will harm not only people, but all the systems people depend upon.
I say end them all. Time zones are pointless when you can readily calculate local solar time. DST is pointless because it has never had an actual positive scientific argument (but there are tons of negative ones). Just get rid of the whole mess and go modern.
I've been advocating this for years. Aside from everyone's excessive conservatism regarding time and their obsession with archaic mechanical watches, I have yet to get a reasonable argument against it. People so obsessed with outdated tech can just use an average local time for the center of their world (home/work/city/etc).
As for noon being solar noon, the problem is that morning/evening will continue to vary, which is why I advocate the use of Roman timekeeping to keep our circadian rhythms in sync with the sun at our latitude.
The last problem is why I advocate using all our advanced technology to utilize Roman timekeeping in our day-to-day lives. End DST. End time zones. All official times should be in UTC and all human-oriented times should be solar.
I have long felt very alone in this, but after writing a lot of software dealing with time over my 20-year (thus far) career, it has always been a nightmare. Worse-yet, implementations of time zones by others can be even more problematic (.NET CF has hard-coded dates that are wrong in it so you have to correct for them when trying to calculate UTC correctly). Every official time should be in UTC in every context. It's arbitrary, but I don't see a better solution. It isn't like travel or communication takes days anymore. A major bonus is that this will also keep it out of the hands of those filthy political types (they love to screw with DST and time zones).
I have also advocated the use of solar time in a day-to-day context, since you can get location and UTC from global positioning. You could even use Roman timekeeping, keeping circadian rhythms tied directly to the sun as your body/mind expects.
In any case, this would completely end the insanity of political time zone fights around zone borders and DST games, which would be a great thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering the state of industrial control systems, I would be surprised if they have much in the way of security at all.
I don't think it's realistic in most of the metro until you're pulling in at least 200k these days. Median houses in King County are ~625k now. Anywhere that isn't pretty rough or an unconscionable commute from somewhere two working adults can make that much will start in the 750-800k range. The only marginally affordable houses are in the ghetto of South Seattle where a post-war shack with 1 bathroom and 2-3 bedrooms are being remodeled and snatched up at 400-500k these days. It's mind boggling.
I live somewhere an almost unconscionable commute east of downtown (11 miles; people claim it's not even that bad) and basic houses in my neighborhood are approaching 1M. We couldn't afford to live here if it wasn't for our below-market rent. We want to buy, but with her only pulling in ~50k, our combined incomes are insufficient to buy anything livable that isn't at least another 5-10 traffic-filled miles further from work.
Yeah, that won't last long. Setting a fake VIN will probably be easy.
If they're not, expect people to use junkyard parts. Who are you gonna cry to when the VIN is from a totaled car sitting in the east bumf*ck scrap yard and that part was never sold to anyone.
Expect criminals and terrorists to make full use of these capabilities.
Knowing what direction the signal is coming from is easy. If you have a car built in the last 5 or so years with keyless entry, it is already doing this (it knows where your fob is and won't let someone on the other side of your car open a door just because you're standing nearby).
Sugar free isn't really good. Humans tend to seek out sugar. Most foods have sugars in them. Our bodies are designed to process them effectively.
The problem is that people like to use fake sugar due to a fear of sugar, or they replace fat with sugar... These things confuse the digestive tract, which causes the body to do weird things it shouldn't do to compensate. It's why "sugar substitutes" that insulin doesn't break down seem to be contributors to diabetes in the long term.
The difference is that the mass media doesn't care anymore. Tabloids have more journalistic integrity these days.
I don't know how anyone could claim it was just one party. At least 95% of voters in this country are "low information voters".
It does remind me of the way I couldn't even comprehend what I was seeing when Hillary openly described people that opposed her for valid reasons as "deplorables". This person wants to be the president of the United States?! If anything, Hillary's picture should be added to every definition of hubris on the internet.
The major mass media groups are quite strongly skewed to left-wing positions and report according with a heavy bias in that direction. This election was proof of that.
I'm not sure why they'd be considered "liberal", though, as liberalism has nothing to do with their positions (which appear closer aligned with socialism and totalitarianism, which is common to both major parties in the US and antithetical to liberalism).
There are true liberal news sources, including a number on the "fake news" list. They did oppose Hillary due to her positions. The fact Trump was incoherent and inconsistent made him a difficult target, but he was similarly disliked. I will admit that he was the least-fought candidate I've seen in these circles, but that's probably more an effect of the extreme repulsiveness of Hillary to actual liberals than any implied support of Trump.
This is incorrect. Up until the 2000 election, networks were highly inconsistent in how they colored the parties, but there was a general pattern that blue was republican and red was democrat. The change was unusual - the network's got together and actually synchronized on it for some unknown reason prior to the election, although they deny it now and claim it was a post-election development (it wasn't; I was there).
See the section on origins of these colors, which also mentions that the 2000 presidential election was the source of this.
Truth. It was a hard pill to swallow, but no matter how much mud they slung and how unpopular the opinion was, he was the better candidate for so many reasons that it wasn't even a contest. She stood for the war machine and so many deplorable things, while standing in front of the country and calling us "deplorables" for not supporting her shitty positions. I'm glad others can see why perfectly rational people would vote for the orange raisin.
My suspicion is that this is closer to the truth. That she was counting on vote tampering or creation that was widespread (and clearly involved paper). There were similar discrepancies found in Florida after the 2000 election that gave Al Gore a big boost by invalidating GWB votes. Everything has told me for some time that they have been cooking the numbers in quite a few large states for years, perhaps decades, and this tells me that there is something going on...
This has been my experience with both lithium batteries and supercaps. In fact, supercaps are worse as they can discharge more quickly and don't need to wait on slow chemical reactions.
Supercap explosions are very frightening and could be very dangerous.
On a government project a number of years ago, we used a bank of supercapacitors to launch something very quickly off an average vehicle battery every minute or so.
It sounds great, but we also had the damned things explode quite spectacularly. And by that, I mean, if we didn't have it inside a very tough metal box, shrapnel might have killed the tech that was near it when it went.
Not that lithium batteries are much better; I've seen some really exciting fires when the LiPo batteries in R/C race cars fail... If you thought a phone battery bursting into flame was exciting, you have never seen one of these go up.
...that clause that requires keeping the license and email address with derivative software clearly had some surprisingly results.
You can't get something from nothing. That's a fact. Humans can fill in some gaps and AI could probably do the same, but there is no guarantee the results are correct.
On the other hand, if it could actually discern more from a video (which humans can also do, but probably not quite as well), it might be able to "enhance" individual images to some extent and have accurate results.
That people can be convicted by the results is a little scary, but at some level no different from a jury misinterpreting a low resolution image. Aside from the fact it was a single opinion that swayed that of the entire jury.
The root problem is that we provided the politicians the ability to do this to us. Time zones are also political footballs that could be easily fixed by using local solar time.
What's worse is that the most recent change under Dubya proved what science has been telling us all along: DST increases electricity usage *and* disrupts natural circadian rhythms. DST should be abolished worldwide.
Yes!
It's an old idea, but it's better for humans.
Time zones are political footballs. Not as bad as DST, but they still give political types the opportunity to screw with them. Most time zones are garbage and don't come anywhere near matching solar time.
End DST. Use UTC for official timekeeping. Use local solar time for human needs.
Except time zones themselves are stupid. Solar time is far superior to time zones.
I use ISO 8601 (replacing "T" with a space in human contexts) in my daily life. It annoys some stupid Americans, but they can't deny that they understand what I mean. Everyone understands it universally, regardless of their cultural context, which makes it far superior. It also keeps them in order from most to least significant part - Year, month, day, hour, minute, second, millisecond, and even offset from UTC down to the minute (I think it should have an addendum to go down to the second, but that's just me, since I also advocate using solar time).
Time zones are an artifact of an era when travel was at a fraction of the current speed and communication over long distances was rare/expensive. DST is worse than time zones (it's pure evil), but TZs are only marginally better. Both suffer from the politician problem. When something like that can be politicized, it will be, and they'll screw with/argue it often. They will change it, which will harm not only people, but all the systems people depend upon.
I say end them all. Time zones are pointless when you can readily calculate local solar time. DST is pointless because it has never had an actual positive scientific argument (but there are tons of negative ones). Just get rid of the whole mess and go modern.
I've been advocating this for years. Aside from everyone's excessive conservatism regarding time and their obsession with archaic mechanical watches, I have yet to get a reasonable argument against it. People so obsessed with outdated tech can just use an average local time for the center of their world (home/work/city/etc).
As for noon being solar noon, the problem is that morning/evening will continue to vary, which is why I advocate the use of Roman timekeeping to keep our circadian rhythms in sync with the sun at our latitude.
The last problem is why I advocate using all our advanced technology to utilize Roman timekeeping in our day-to-day lives. End DST. End time zones. All official times should be in UTC and all human-oriented times should be solar.
I have long felt very alone in this, but after writing a lot of software dealing with time over my 20-year (thus far) career, it has always been a nightmare. Worse-yet, implementations of time zones by others can be even more problematic (.NET CF has hard-coded dates that are wrong in it so you have to correct for them when trying to calculate UTC correctly). Every official time should be in UTC in every context. It's arbitrary, but I don't see a better solution. It isn't like travel or communication takes days anymore. A major bonus is that this will also keep it out of the hands of those filthy political types (they love to screw with DST and time zones).
I have also advocated the use of solar time in a day-to-day context, since you can get location and UTC from global positioning. You could even use Roman timekeeping, keeping circadian rhythms tied directly to the sun as your body/mind expects.
In any case, this would completely end the insanity of political time zone fights around zone borders and DST games, which would be a great thing.