I think people will keep taking risk. If you want to be extreme, people will be travelling to base-jumping using their safer self-driven cars. The thing about driving is not really the risk, but the fact most drivers don't actually like driving. It's a neccesary loss of time that is hard to avoid. Also being safer just makes for a lot better PR to Google, of course.
The beautiful thing about automated systems, though, is if such a condition occours, it can be patched to not occour again. Whereas if one human driver gets into a hairy situation and learns something, the rest of the world is none the wiser - a different person can (and more than likely will) repeat the mistake.
I don't think wear-and-tear is any significant percent in the causes of car-related accidents. And when they become, you will see laws to have your car routinely inspected (which you are supposed to do in every 2 years where I live). Your self-driving car will probably also complain to you to do so.
If you would see two robo-cars driving 160km/h bumper to bumper, you should fill a bug report asap. Just because an AI drives them, the cars don't magically become something else than a 1.5-2 ton steel cube barelling down at dangerous speeds.
I would imagine the self-driven cars would keep enough distance between each other to allow a full to stop in case of emergency, or bring the car to a slow speed where there is low risk of injury (less than 30km/h).
So, if anything, I would expect that following distances between cars would actually increase. Human drivers are notoriously bad at that - thinking they can stop in 20m even when they are speeding along.
Where I come from, that's called "gross negligence" and "endangering lives". If you need to be taken to a hospital ASAP, call the police or an ambulance. They are trained to drive ignoring the traffic rules, and are equipped to warn the other drivers that someone ignoring the rules is coming. If you had failed to yield (because you're going with 80mph all the time) and killed someone, that'd have been certifiably less cool, huh?
Higher-than-thou attitudes like this are one of the reasons why I would absolutely welcome self-driving cars. And a lot more stricter police enforcement of existing traffic rules.
That kind of thinking only works until the whole EU decides on doing the same. I bet there's a lot of people who would really wish US services couldn't be reached from thier countries, giving them opportunities to catch up/cash in.
Of course, judging by your reply... to you, it probably doesn't matter if the "internet" becomes "arpanet" again.
...prisoner's dilemma. Throwing your patents under FRAND means they are essentially not yours anymore; sure, you get paid something, but because of how "fair and reasonable" can be interpreted, it's probably really difficult to enforce anything. HOWEVER, if you do not do that, another company might offer a FRAND patent and turn that into an industry standard instead. And then you end up with a worthless patent.
It's good to know all our standards are only based on companies unable/unwilling to cooperate properly.
There's a lot more to it than just comparing the impact power of a bullet against a plate, otherwise you'd have seen a lot more dead occupiers in Iraq. Range of the shot, angle of impact, etc. Sure, head-on and in optimal range those bullets would penetrate, but they'd still loose a lot of force making a deadly hit "only" seriously wound, and in less favourable conditions they could turn into a glancing hit. Body armour isn't meant to make you invincible, just increase your chances to not die outright. The guys in Iraq even had fully automatic infantry weapons (even if using 7.62x39), and they still didn't exactly fare well against the occupying forces. The bodycount methodology makes determining ratios rather hard, but for each dead american soldier the insurgents paid a very steep price. If the US army was hell bent on taking Iraq and staying there, they could have squished them pretty darn well.
So I'd still like (okay, not really;) ) to see how guerillas armed with hunting weapons and basically zero protection fare against trained soldiers who are still wearing armour that - even if not completely eliminating the damage - protects them to a degree. But let's asume that the local militia still manages to hold ground against infantry in combat. But that's only a small part of the opposing force - they would likely be backed up by IFVs, tanks, UAVs and possibly other mechanized assets. Got any RPG as well?
That's why home weapons (wheter "rusty junk" or state of the art) aren't particularly useful against an army; they might be meaningful if your side had the other parts of the arsenal as well, but without that backup, they still leave you without any real chance. Even assuming all the guys wielding them got proper combat training and practiced those regularly. You know, like how the army does.
The ordinary ones sure are. But there are plates providing effective (read: not absolutely worthless) protection against rifle fire. Heck, otherwise they wouldn't be issued to soldiers.
They are weak and ineffective against armoured vehicles, UAVs or soldiers wearing ballistic armour with ceramic plates.
They are hilariously effective against civilians who incidentally have nothing of those. Unless you know a lot of people who go to work in an IFV and wear bulletproof vest on a daily basis.
I understand IPv4 might not be personally identifiable, but you are supposed to keep your IPv6 subnet forever. Sure, there's some privacy extension which is supposed to help, but IIRC that only assigns randomized addresses in your own/64 subnet - not helping much in this case...
Gotta agree there. The way you communicate with the users actually is pretty damn important. But I think that's a corporate culture thing. If the users actually listen to the IT and IT isn't being a total prick, it can work out pretty well.
The thing is, that's kind of rare. Users are often repeating the same behavour over and over - and it gets aggrevating really quick. "Don't copy all your junk onto the production system share, you are only meant to store critical project data there." Then tomorrow, the drive is 98% full again, and not filled with mission critical data either. Most you can do is complain at your manager, who - chances are - will not do anything, because being "confrontational" will hinder his career. Then... what?
Issues are usually caused by lack of training, faulty assumptions and generally being absolutely clueless as to how the systems they are interacting with works. Trained personnel are much less problematic. Want to guess the percentage of the users who received formal training for computers, let alone the specific systems?
If you break your car too badly the mechanic might tell you it's beyond repair and send you away. IT admins can't say that. Most users demand EVERYTHING, even when they are too clueless to find MS Word when they accidentally drag the icon from the desktop into a folder.
"God complex" is really justified when most of the idiots on the system can easily cause significant problems, which are then blamed onto the IT because "it's the software that's broken!" The users are never at fault.
If you have a card, did you try holding down the power button? Most people simply press it briefly when the engine is running and assume it's not doing anything.
Older diesel engines could run without electric power as long as they had fuel; modern diesels depend on high-pressume injectors which in turn only work with a properly functioning ECU. Cutting power to any of those prevents the engine from working that instant, and that should be the case once you manually remove power...
Well, you could always get Cyanogen which ships without all the google apps and opt not to install any of them. If you are worried about Google spying on you, that is.
I didn't try to imply most would. But as far as this discussion thread goes, only a very few select countries are relevant;)
At any rate, you don't need to land a lot of missiles. You just need to land one nuke on a (few) major population center, you don't need complete annihilation. That risk is already sufficient to deter most decision-makers, which is the whole point of keeping those things anyway. And as rainbow-tinted your glasses are, I'm not buying that the US Navy is patrolling both coastlines in their entirety 24/7, especially in a depth that'd render any SRBM launch impossible. Was that the case, everyone else would just stick to building diesel carrier-group-hunting subs and invest into land-based MIRV missiles only, but I'm not really seeing that (not that I have a great insight into this matter mind you).
The more realistic description would be, "everyone has subs that can sneak close to shorelines and fire off nukes that noone can't do a damn thing about".And that's why noone wants to start this game: everyone is almost guaranteed to lose. Way too high risks for virtually zero gain, even excluding the economial disaster that would follow. Virtually every industry is heavily reliant on foreign supplies/subsidiaries these days.
If you have iptable/firewall rules (like exposing port 22 to WAN), is there a way to automate renumbering for them too, or is that a manual fun all the time? I don't think I'd like having to write a script that runs every 6 hrs to check if my ISP decided to rotate my IP again and update everything accordingly.
Looking at your links, that thing sounds like the solution to one of the biggest problems (I have) with IPv6. But, it also looks... pretty experimental. Looking it up, it's added into linux kernel 3.7 on 2012 Dec. I'd rather not make assumptions just when it'll reach consumer level devices...
Kind of annoying that even when EVERYONE SHOULD USE IPV6 such solutions are still just starting to get accepted and are faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar put into use.
Slashdot Mirror
I think people will keep taking risk. If you want to be extreme, people will be travelling to base-jumping using their safer self-driven cars. The thing about driving is not really the risk, but the fact most drivers don't actually like driving. It's a neccesary loss of time that is hard to avoid. Also being safer just makes for a lot better PR to Google, of course.
The beautiful thing about automated systems, though, is if such a condition occours, it can be patched to not occour again. Whereas if one human driver gets into a hairy situation and learns something, the rest of the world is none the wiser - a different person can (and more than likely will) repeat the mistake.
I don't think wear-and-tear is any significant percent in the causes of car-related accidents. And when they become, you will see laws to have your car routinely inspected (which you are supposed to do in every 2 years where I live). Your self-driving car will probably also complain to you to do so.
If you would see two robo-cars driving 160km/h bumper to bumper, you should fill a bug report asap. Just because an AI drives them, the cars don't magically become something else than a 1.5-2 ton steel cube barelling down at dangerous speeds.
I would imagine the self-driven cars would keep enough distance between each other to allow a full to stop in case of emergency, or bring the car to a slow speed where there is low risk of injury (less than 30km/h).
So, if anything, I would expect that following distances between cars would actually increase. Human drivers are notoriously bad at that - thinking they can stop in 20m even when they are speeding along.
Where I come from, that's called "gross negligence" and "endangering lives". If you need to be taken to a hospital ASAP, call the police or an ambulance. They are trained to drive ignoring the traffic rules, and are equipped to warn the other drivers that someone ignoring the rules is coming. If you had failed to yield (because you're going with 80mph all the time) and killed someone, that'd have been certifiably less cool, huh?
Higher-than-thou attitudes like this are one of the reasons why I would absolutely welcome self-driving cars. And a lot more stricter police enforcement of existing traffic rules.
I'm pretty sure they are just a tad overzealous in their disaster-recovery test scenarios ;)
At least the US responds to bad press and enough kicks in the rear, eventually rolls over and complies.
Which is precisely why I still get all my non-encrypted traffic stuffed into a database in Utah, right?
That kind of thinking only works until the whole EU decides on doing the same. I bet there's a lot of people who would really wish US services couldn't be reached from thier countries, giving them opportunities to catch up/cash in.
Of course, judging by your reply... to you, it probably doesn't matter if the "internet" becomes "arpanet" again.
...prisoner's dilemma. Throwing your patents under FRAND means they are essentially not yours anymore; sure, you get paid something, but because of how "fair and reasonable" can be interpreted, it's probably really difficult to enforce anything. HOWEVER, if you do not do that, another company might offer a FRAND patent and turn that into an industry standard instead. And then you end up with a worthless patent.
It's good to know all our standards are only based on companies unable/unwilling to cooperate properly.
There's a lot more to it than just comparing the impact power of a bullet against a plate, otherwise you'd have seen a lot more dead occupiers in Iraq. Range of the shot, angle of impact, etc. Sure, head-on and in optimal range those bullets would penetrate, but they'd still loose a lot of force making a deadly hit "only" seriously wound, and in less favourable conditions they could turn into a glancing hit. Body armour isn't meant to make you invincible, just increase your chances to not die outright.
;) ) to see how guerillas armed with hunting weapons and basically zero protection fare against trained soldiers who are still wearing armour that - even if not completely eliminating the damage - protects them to a degree. But let's asume that the local militia still manages to hold ground against infantry in combat. But that's only a small part of the opposing force - they would likely be backed up by IFVs, tanks, UAVs and possibly other mechanized assets. Got any RPG as well?
The guys in Iraq even had fully automatic infantry weapons (even if using 7.62x39), and they still didn't exactly fare well against the occupying forces. The bodycount methodology makes determining ratios rather hard, but for each dead american soldier the insurgents paid a very steep price. If the US army was hell bent on taking Iraq and staying there, they could have squished them pretty darn well.
So I'd still like (okay, not really
That's why home weapons (wheter "rusty junk" or state of the art) aren't particularly useful against an army; they might be meaningful if your side had the other parts of the arsenal as well, but without that backup, they still leave you without any real chance. Even assuming all the guys wielding them got proper combat training and practiced those regularly. You know, like how the army does.
The ordinary ones sure are. But there are plates providing effective (read: not absolutely worthless) protection against rifle fire. Heck, otherwise they wouldn't be issued to soldiers.
Quick google result: http://www.bulletblocker.com/bullet-proof-ceramic-strike-plates-two.html
Quote:"These ceramic plates are certified to protect against rifle fire."
They are weak and ineffective against armoured vehicles, UAVs or soldiers wearing ballistic armour with ceramic plates.
They are hilariously effective against civilians who incidentally have nothing of those. Unless you know a lot of people who go to work in an IFV and wear bulletproof vest on a daily basis.
I understand IPv4 might not be personally identifiable, but you are supposed to keep your IPv6 subnet forever. Sure, there's some privacy extension which is supposed to help, but IIRC that only assigns randomized addresses in your own /64 subnet - not helping much in this case...
Gotta agree there. The way you communicate with the users actually is pretty damn important. But I think that's a corporate culture thing. If the users actually listen to the IT and IT isn't being a total prick, it can work out pretty well.
The thing is, that's kind of rare. Users are often repeating the same behavour over and over - and it gets aggrevating really quick. "Don't copy all your junk onto the production system share, you are only meant to store critical project data there." Then tomorrow, the drive is 98% full again, and not filled with mission critical data either. Most you can do is complain at your manager, who - chances are - will not do anything, because being "confrontational" will hinder his career. Then... what?
Issues are usually caused by lack of training, faulty assumptions and generally being absolutely clueless as to how the systems they are interacting with works. Trained personnel are much less problematic. Want to guess the percentage of the users who received formal training for computers, let alone the specific systems?
If you break your car too badly the mechanic might tell you it's beyond repair and send you away. IT admins can't say that. Most users demand EVERYTHING, even when they are too clueless to find MS Word when they accidentally drag the icon from the desktop into a folder.
"God complex" is really justified when most of the idiots on the system can easily cause significant problems, which are then blamed onto the IT because "it's the software that's broken!" The users are never at fault.
If you have a card, did you try holding down the power button? Most people simply press it briefly when the engine is running and assume it's not doing anything.
Older diesel engines could run without electric power as long as they had fuel; modern diesels depend on high-pressume injectors which in turn only work with a properly functioning ECU. Cutting power to any of those prevents the engine from working that instant, and that should be the case once you manually remove power...
Turn the ignition key to OFF will unpower everything, including engine systems.
If you have a more recent car with keycards, press and hold the POWER button and pull out the card. It's not very complicated either way....
Well, you could always get Cyanogen which ships without all the google apps and opt not to install any of them. If you are worried about Google spying on you, that is.
I didn't try to imply most would. But as far as this discussion thread goes, only a very few select countries are relevant ;)
At any rate, you don't need to land a lot of missiles. You just need to land one nuke on a (few) major population center, you don't need complete annihilation. That risk is already sufficient to deter most decision-makers, which is the whole point of keeping those things anyway. And as rainbow-tinted your glasses are, I'm not buying that the US Navy is patrolling both coastlines in their entirety 24/7, especially in a depth that'd render any SRBM launch impossible. Was that the case, everyone else would just stick to building diesel carrier-group-hunting subs and invest into land-based MIRV missiles only, but I'm not really seeing that (not that I have a great insight into this matter mind you).
Just keep in mind they have those things too.
The more realistic description would be, "everyone has subs that can sneak close to shorelines and fire off nukes that noone can't do a damn thing about".And that's why noone wants to start this game: everyone is almost guaranteed to lose. Way too high risks for virtually zero gain, even excluding the economial disaster that would follow. Virtually every industry is heavily reliant on foreign supplies/subsidiaries these days.
Given Java's recent track record with security, I'd rather advise to keep java the hell away from any browser...
If you have iptable/firewall rules (like exposing port 22 to WAN), is there a way to automate renumbering for them too, or is that a manual fun all the time? I don't think I'd like having to write a script that runs every 6 hrs to check if my ISP decided to rotate my IP again and update everything accordingly.
Looking at your links, that thing sounds like the solution to one of the biggest problems (I have) with IPv6. But, it also looks... pretty experimental. Looking it up, it's added into linux kernel 3.7 on 2012 Dec. I'd rather not make assumptions just when it'll reach consumer level devices...
Kind of annoying that even when EVERYONE SHOULD USE IPV6 such solutions are still just starting to get accepted and are faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar put into use.
Let me know when you get SMS forwarding or time based caller blacklisting working on that phone.