With the deregulated and privatized power grid in the US, the corps won't invest in the infrastructure needed for large fleets of electric vehicles until the demand on the grid starts causing it to actually fail. And then they'll use it as an excuse to up the price of electricity.
You don't drive one of these up there. The advent of stage 4 self driving cars doesn't mean that all other cars are going to be banned from the roadways. It's the same with an electric car, you don't drive one if your goal is to travel across the country.
There are already self-driving ubers out in Pittsburg. Granted, self-driving is different than "driverless", since I'm pretty sure insurance laws right now still require an operator to be in the seat. But the industry is really pushing the tech and R&D for these vehicles, so it's not impossible that we'll see test runs by the end of 2019 of vehicles without steering wheels in a city or two.
Well, considering that these vehicles are being deployed for a retirement village, they should include an emergency call button that the person can press to get medical assistance in such events (OnStar/911/etc). Or, the vehicles could include biometric monitoring features to monitor the condition of the passenger and automatically alert medical personnel/drive the vehicle to an appropriate place in the event of a medical emergency.
Obviously, the service time interval in the event a technician's presence is required shouldn't be any greater (and should be far less) than comparatively waiting for a tow truck to arrive as if a taxi got a flat tire or otherwise broke down. Or, don't even make the customer wait for a service tech, automatically dispatch the nearest unoccupied working vehicle to the scene and ask the customer to switch vehicles.
You can play devil's advocate all you want, but, one way or another there is a way to reduce the scenarios down to the point where they are little different than what would happen if a human driven taxi encountered a problem - minus being able to administer immediate medical care to the passenger, but how many taxi drivers in the US are trained to handle medical emergencies anyway? That may be a thing in some other countries, but I don't see any evidence of it in the case of the US. Certainly Uber and Lyft drivers aren't.
It pulls over and pages a technician who either assumes control of the vehicle remotely to put it back on the road or who drives to the location and fixes it while commercial laden video entertains the passenger (who may or may not get the cost of their ride refunded in exchange for the inconvenience).
First, I'd like to see a lot more sense and accountability in government spending. There's no excuse for one side of the budget (the military) to swallow up such an enormous percentage of our country's tax dollars (particularly when you compare the US's military spending to that of other nations).
Second, Inheriting money is not Earning money. The inheritor did absolutely nothing to earn that money other than being lucky. It's practically the same as if they won the lottery. No one complains about the tax rate on lottery winnings now do they? It's free money that they didn't have before and that they didn't earn themselves so it should be taxed (exceptions should be made/the tax should be lowered if the amount is below various thresholds and/or the recipient earns below various economic thresholds).
Humans created technology to make their lives easier. Technology will one day provide for every basic human need and eliminate the need for anyone to do anything that they don't want to do. However, the road leading up to this point has many pitfalls and potholes. But, just because it's going to be a bit of a rough ride doesn't mean it's a road that shouldn't be traveled.
One of the first pitfalls is that low skilled labor jobs are going to be eliminated by automation. Next, medium skilled labor jobs are going to be made easier by technology and end up requiring fewer medium skilled workers until they are eliminated too. Eventually, even highly skilled jobs are going to be taken over or made much easier by AI and even highly skilled workers will end up displaced.
First though, we have to deal with the displaced low skilled labor. What can we do for those people? Well, we train them to handle other jobs and make sure that they aren't dumped out on the street with no health care or money for food while they're doing it. It will require a short term investment, but it will provide long term gains.
The solar industry is booming, so, with a properly designed panel how much technical expertise does it take to install one? The baby boomer generation is retiring, so how about we train people to provide basic services for the elderly like cooking and cleaning?
One of the biggest markets for self driving cars is providing car service for people that can no longer drive themselves safely. No longer will a senior citizen who has lost their license (or has just become to afraid to drive) be dependent on their friends/neighbors/children to get them to the doctor's office on time or down to the corner grocery store to pick up some bananas and prunes.
I can understand the potential severity of the reported issue, but, iirc doesn't it also rely on the attacker having penetrated the system far enough to have permission to execute malicious code? I don't think it's something that they could manage with javascript in a rogue ad on facebook.
Technically, you'd have to replace the motherboard too. Really no such thing as just replacing the chip since all motherboards are pretty much designed for a specific chip series at this point, unless there exists a chip in the same series without the flaw. I certainly couldn't name a single motherboard where you could choose between installing an LGA 2066 Core i9 and a Socket sTR4 Ryzen Threadripper.
Except that Mr Orange Tweets McGee has increased the military's budget, substantially. And there's no incentive for him to decrease it since he's running around trying to sell massive stockpiles of weapons to the middle east.
It seems that companies, be they Microsoft (with it's multiple prompts and begging to keep you using Edge), Google (with it's reported prompts of "hey want to try chrome?"), or Amazon ("I see you're not subscribed to Amazon Prime, are you sure you want to place this order without it? Come on, just subscribe to Prime already and give us your money") can get away with just about anything they want to as long as they leave a way out in place.
Amazon's though is the one that really sickens me since it's a direct attempt to try and get $80+ dollars of my money the instant I'm not paying very careful attention while placing an order. Also their automatic selection of "Standard $20+ Shipping" instead of "Free Shipping" even when an order is eligible for Free Shipping. Much as I try to avoid shopping there these days they really do have something of a minor monopoly on the largest selection of assorted stuff with the best prices, even if it's from third party listings.
It is not always necessary to know why something is the way it is to know that it is so. It's easy to deride a climate change denier in the same way that it is easy to deride a flat-earther.
Secondly, in the case of deriding Trump by name, it's an obvious ploy by the article for clicks and attention. It also a direct link to another article on the same site covering another story they did recently about Trump and climate change. The poster of this article to/. copied the article pretty much verbatim, as opposed to summarizing it.
If I had to guess, ocean currents. Sharks were probably cruising in a nice warm one then slammed into a cold one (that wasn't supposed to be there) and got shocked by it. Shock made them beach themselves, at which point they froze to death.
The other possibility is that such extremely cold temperatures at the surface causes behavior in the water similar to the behavior in the arctic regions, where the surface water gets so cold so quickly that it sinks much farther than usual. This graphic shows the behavior better than I can explain it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I think you hit the nail on the head right there. In this country it's the dollar that wins over just about anything. If plant based meat hits the market at a significantly lower price than real meat, with a greater profit margin, and with a decent enough flavour to satisfy a portion of the population that wants to eat meat but would prefer to save the extra money over real meat, there will be a shift in market demand away from real meat.
If there is enough shift in market demand, or plant based meat is shown to be significantly more profitable compared to real meat, we may see less production of real meat. Depending on where the market trends shift, real meat may end up becoming more costly as supply lessens, forcing more people to choose between real meat and plant meat. Eventually it could come to a point where real meat is only served in higher class restaurants and an entire generation of poor and middle class individuals never taste it.
And it's not just beef either, chicken and pork could also be prime targets for plant based replacements.
What's most likely to happen is Congress will use this as an opportunity to pass a "fake" Net Neutrality bill (like the one already introduced by Marsha Blackburn), that they will claim will force Net Neutrality standards but won't classify ISPs as Title II common carriers. While it may codify some of Net Neutrality on it's face, it'll leave in loopholes such that the end result is that ISPs will still be able to do whatever they want.
And then they'll use any opposition against the fake bill as justification either to bury public dissent against the original FCC decision, or to bury Democrats, or both.
"No blocking" - this part is ok
"No throttling" - well, this part is actually iffy, because without the other half "No throttling or prioritization" they can just say "Hey, we're not throttling anyone, we're just prioritizing some content above everyone else's. It's not our fault that there's not enough room in the pipe for that other stuff."
"Of content" - what kind of content? Every kind? Or is it the "Lawful Content" a lot of ISPs have put in their statements recently? Who determines what is and is not "Lawful Content"? Is encrypted VPN traffic "Lawful Content"? The ISP can't determine what's traveling over it, it could be anything. Is BitTorrent "Lawful Content"? Is reddit? Is 4chan? Is porn? By leaving the terminology ambiguous is opens the path to outright censorship.
There are several kinds of people that police work attracts. Some of them actually do want to make a difference in their communities and protect people. Others want the power that being a police officer gives them to be able to lord it over the commoners. Others want the freedom to enforce their racially biased view points. And some just want to play with guns.
The fact is that in the U.S. we have a drastically ineffective training system and requirements. IIRC police in the EU get three times as much training as the ones do here in the U.S.
Additionally, equipping the police with military surplus weaponry and minus the proper training in restraint on when to use that weaponry is an outright recipe for disaster. If you give a kid a cool toy, they're going to want to play with it. And a poorly trained police officer with an assault rifle is far more dangerous than a kid with a BB-gun.
Yeah, this is dumb. Cops are trained and paid to "Serve and Protect" the citizenry, the citizens aren't supposed to need to come to the aid of the cops. This only makes even remote sense for off-duty police officers.
Wine makers wanted to sell more wine and make more money.
They couldn't easily convince people to drink more glasses of wine because people know that they shouldn't drink "too much". So, they went to the glass blowers and said, "Hey, lets make a deal. You make wine glasses that are bigger so you have to use more glass and get to charge more for them. People will pour more wine into the larger glasses since no one just fills a glass half full. You'll still sell the same number of glasses and you'll get more for them. I'll get to sell more wine because people will either drink more of it or throw the excess away. We'll even cut you in on some of the profits."
And it works for the restaurants too because they get to charge more for larger drinks even if the customer never finishes the drink.
I'd just as soon he not sign it. We spend far too much on the military as is. China and Russia combined spend less than half what we spend. We already spend more than the next eight countries (including China and Russia) combined.
The "basic" QoS traffic shaping you refer to you be used by Verizon and Comcast to prioritize their own streaming services only, not streaming services in general.
I could be wrong but I believe VOIP traffic is already prioritized, if you're using an actual VOIP box supplied by your service provider. The likes of Skype and others probably aren't though.
IIRC the FTC is more of a reactionary body - one that only investigates complaints brought to it's attention from outside, not one that proactively establishes or enforces any rules. And under this administration? I wouldn't expect it to rule in favor of the consumer in any but the most blatantly obvious cases.
Congress should get off it's ass and establish some proper rules that apply directly to fairness on the internet - but, would you trust a bunch of 60 and 70 year olds to even remotely understand enough about the internet to write clear legislation regarding it? Especially the current set of them that think they should write all their legislation behind closed doors with a bunch of lobbyists and not hold a single public hearing with experts or public comment.
The Common Carrier designation is the best we're going to get to apply to ISPs for now. And there is zero reason to revoke that designation prior to new rules being put in place by congress.
The fact that the internet can get "slowed down" during a major event (like Xmas day) is the direct result of a complete separate problem compared to NN. The lack of available bandwidth is caused by the big ISPs having little to no incentive to build out their network infrastructure because of the monopolistic contracts they hold in most areas. They suck up endless profits while investing only the bare minimum back into their equipment.
Slashdot Mirror
With the deregulated and privatized power grid in the US, the corps won't invest in the infrastructure needed for large fleets of electric vehicles until the demand on the grid starts causing it to actually fail. And then they'll use it as an excuse to up the price of electricity.
You don't drive one of these up there. The advent of stage 4 self driving cars doesn't mean that all other cars are going to be banned from the roadways. It's the same with an electric car, you don't drive one if your goal is to travel across the country.
There are already self-driving ubers out in Pittsburg. Granted, self-driving is different than "driverless", since I'm pretty sure insurance laws right now still require an operator to be in the seat. But the industry is really pushing the tech and R&D for these vehicles, so it's not impossible that we'll see test runs by the end of 2019 of vehicles without steering wheels in a city or two.
Just like cars. Doesn't stop the industry execs from wanting people to buy new ones every two years though.
Well, considering that these vehicles are being deployed for a retirement village, they should include an emergency call button that the person can press to get medical assistance in such events (OnStar/911/etc). Or, the vehicles could include biometric monitoring features to monitor the condition of the passenger and automatically alert medical personnel/drive the vehicle to an appropriate place in the event of a medical emergency.
Obviously, the service time interval in the event a technician's presence is required shouldn't be any greater (and should be far less) than comparatively waiting for a tow truck to arrive as if a taxi got a flat tire or otherwise broke down. Or, don't even make the customer wait for a service tech, automatically dispatch the nearest unoccupied working vehicle to the scene and ask the customer to switch vehicles.
You can play devil's advocate all you want, but, one way or another there is a way to reduce the scenarios down to the point where they are little different than what would happen if a human driven taxi encountered a problem - minus being able to administer immediate medical care to the passenger, but how many taxi drivers in the US are trained to handle medical emergencies anyway? That may be a thing in some other countries, but I don't see any evidence of it in the case of the US. Certainly Uber and Lyft drivers aren't.
It pulls over and pages a technician who either assumes control of the vehicle remotely to put it back on the road or who drives to the location and fixes it while commercial laden video entertains the passenger (who may or may not get the cost of their ride refunded in exchange for the inconvenience).
First, I'd like to see a lot more sense and accountability in government spending. There's no excuse for one side of the budget (the military) to swallow up such an enormous percentage of our country's tax dollars (particularly when you compare the US's military spending to that of other nations).
Second, Inheriting money is not Earning money. The inheritor did absolutely nothing to earn that money other than being lucky. It's practically the same as if they won the lottery. No one complains about the tax rate on lottery winnings now do they? It's free money that they didn't have before and that they didn't earn themselves so it should be taxed (exceptions should be made/the tax should be lowered if the amount is below various thresholds and/or the recipient earns below various economic thresholds).
Humans created technology to make their lives easier. Technology will one day provide for every basic human need and eliminate the need for anyone to do anything that they don't want to do. However, the road leading up to this point has many pitfalls and potholes. But, just because it's going to be a bit of a rough ride doesn't mean it's a road that shouldn't be traveled.
One of the first pitfalls is that low skilled labor jobs are going to be eliminated by automation. Next, medium skilled labor jobs are going to be made easier by technology and end up requiring fewer medium skilled workers until they are eliminated too. Eventually, even highly skilled jobs are going to be taken over or made much easier by AI and even highly skilled workers will end up displaced.
First though, we have to deal with the displaced low skilled labor. What can we do for those people? Well, we train them to handle other jobs and make sure that they aren't dumped out on the street with no health care or money for food while they're doing it. It will require a short term investment, but it will provide long term gains.
The solar industry is booming, so, with a properly designed panel how much technical expertise does it take to install one? The baby boomer generation is retiring, so how about we train people to provide basic services for the elderly like cooking and cleaning?
One of the biggest markets for self driving cars is providing car service for people that can no longer drive themselves safely. No longer will a senior citizen who has lost their license (or has just become to afraid to drive) be dependent on their friends/neighbors/children to get them to the doctor's office on time or down to the corner grocery store to pick up some bananas and prunes.
I can understand the potential severity of the reported issue, but, iirc doesn't it also rely on the attacker having penetrated the system far enough to have permission to execute malicious code? I don't think it's something that they could manage with javascript in a rogue ad on facebook.
Technically, you'd have to replace the motherboard too. Really no such thing as just replacing the chip since all motherboards are pretty much designed for a specific chip series at this point, unless there exists a chip in the same series without the flaw. I certainly couldn't name a single motherboard where you could choose between installing an LGA 2066 Core i9 and a Socket sTR4 Ryzen Threadripper.
Security? How about that personal iPhone Trump runs around tweeting with. Take that away too.
Except that Mr Orange Tweets McGee has increased the military's budget, substantially. And there's no incentive for him to decrease it since he's running around trying to sell massive stockpiles of weapons to the middle east.
It seems that companies, be they Microsoft (with it's multiple prompts and begging to keep you using Edge), Google (with it's reported prompts of "hey want to try chrome?"), or Amazon ("I see you're not subscribed to Amazon Prime, are you sure you want to place this order without it? Come on, just subscribe to Prime already and give us your money") can get away with just about anything they want to as long as they leave a way out in place.
Amazon's though is the one that really sickens me since it's a direct attempt to try and get $80+ dollars of my money the instant I'm not paying very careful attention while placing an order. Also their automatic selection of "Standard $20+ Shipping" instead of "Free Shipping" even when an order is eligible for Free Shipping. Much as I try to avoid shopping there these days they really do have something of a minor monopoly on the largest selection of assorted stuff with the best prices, even if it's from third party listings.
I find that MS browsers suck in at least one major area: debugging support.
It is not always necessary to know why something is the way it is to know that it is so. It's easy to deride a climate change denier in the same way that it is easy to deride a flat-earther.
/. copied the article pretty much verbatim, as opposed to summarizing it.
Secondly, in the case of deriding Trump by name, it's an obvious ploy by the article for clicks and attention. It also a direct link to another article on the same site covering another story they did recently about Trump and climate change. The poster of this article to
If I had to guess, ocean currents. Sharks were probably cruising in a nice warm one then slammed into a cold one (that wasn't supposed to be there) and got shocked by it. Shock made them beach themselves, at which point they froze to death.
The other possibility is that such extremely cold temperatures at the surface causes behavior in the water similar to the behavior in the arctic regions, where the surface water gets so cold so quickly that it sinks much farther than usual. This graphic shows the behavior better than I can explain it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
if I want to eat meat and I can afford it
I think you hit the nail on the head right there. In this country it's the dollar that wins over just about anything. If plant based meat hits the market at a significantly lower price than real meat, with a greater profit margin, and with a decent enough flavour to satisfy a portion of the population that wants to eat meat but would prefer to save the extra money over real meat, there will be a shift in market demand away from real meat.
If there is enough shift in market demand, or plant based meat is shown to be significantly more profitable compared to real meat, we may see less production of real meat. Depending on where the market trends shift, real meat may end up becoming more costly as supply lessens, forcing more people to choose between real meat and plant meat. Eventually it could come to a point where real meat is only served in higher class restaurants and an entire generation of poor and middle class individuals never taste it.
And it's not just beef either, chicken and pork could also be prime targets for plant based replacements.
What's most likely to happen is Congress will use this as an opportunity to pass a "fake" Net Neutrality bill (like the one already introduced by Marsha Blackburn), that they will claim will force Net Neutrality standards but won't classify ISPs as Title II common carriers. While it may codify some of Net Neutrality on it's face, it'll leave in loopholes such that the end result is that ISPs will still be able to do whatever they want.
And then they'll use any opposition against the fake bill as justification either to bury public dissent against the original FCC decision, or to bury Democrats, or both.
The crux is in the wording.
"No blocking" - this part is ok
"No throttling" - well, this part is actually iffy, because without the other half "No throttling or prioritization" they can just say "Hey, we're not throttling anyone, we're just prioritizing some content above everyone else's. It's not our fault that there's not enough room in the pipe for that other stuff."
"Of content" - what kind of content? Every kind? Or is it the "Lawful Content" a lot of ISPs have put in their statements recently? Who determines what is and is not "Lawful Content"? Is encrypted VPN traffic "Lawful Content"? The ISP can't determine what's traveling over it, it could be anything. Is BitTorrent "Lawful Content"? Is reddit? Is 4chan? Is porn? By leaving the terminology ambiguous is opens the path to outright censorship.
There are several kinds of people that police work attracts. Some of them actually do want to make a difference in their communities and protect people. Others want the power that being a police officer gives them to be able to lord it over the commoners. Others want the freedom to enforce their racially biased view points. And some just want to play with guns.
The fact is that in the U.S. we have a drastically ineffective training system and requirements. IIRC police in the EU get three times as much training as the ones do here in the U.S.
Additionally, equipping the police with military surplus weaponry and minus the proper training in restraint on when to use that weaponry is an outright recipe for disaster. If you give a kid a cool toy, they're going to want to play with it. And a poorly trained police officer with an assault rifle is far more dangerous than a kid with a BB-gun.
Yeah, this is dumb. Cops are trained and paid to "Serve and Protect" the citizenry, the citizens aren't supposed to need to come to the aid of the cops. This only makes even remote sense for off-duty police officers.
Wine makers wanted to sell more wine and make more money.
They couldn't easily convince people to drink more glasses of wine because people know that they shouldn't drink "too much". So, they went to the glass blowers and said, "Hey, lets make a deal. You make wine glasses that are bigger so you have to use more glass and get to charge more for them. People will pour more wine into the larger glasses since no one just fills a glass half full. You'll still sell the same number of glasses and you'll get more for them. I'll get to sell more wine because people will either drink more of it or throw the excess away. We'll even cut you in on some of the profits."
And it works for the restaurants too because they get to charge more for larger drinks even if the customer never finishes the drink.
I'd just as soon he not sign it. We spend far too much on the military as is. China and Russia combined spend less than half what we spend. We already spend more than the next eight countries (including China and Russia) combined.
The "basic" QoS traffic shaping you refer to you be used by Verizon and Comcast to prioritize their own streaming services only, not streaming services in general.
I could be wrong but I believe VOIP traffic is already prioritized, if you're using an actual VOIP box supplied by your service provider. The likes of Skype and others probably aren't though.
IIRC the FTC is more of a reactionary body - one that only investigates complaints brought to it's attention from outside, not one that proactively establishes or enforces any rules. And under this administration? I wouldn't expect it to rule in favor of the consumer in any but the most blatantly obvious cases.
Congress should get off it's ass and establish some proper rules that apply directly to fairness on the internet - but, would you trust a bunch of 60 and 70 year olds to even remotely understand enough about the internet to write clear legislation regarding it? Especially the current set of them that think they should write all their legislation behind closed doors with a bunch of lobbyists and not hold a single public hearing with experts or public comment.
The Common Carrier designation is the best we're going to get to apply to ISPs for now. And there is zero reason to revoke that designation prior to new rules being put in place by congress.
The fact that the internet can get "slowed down" during a major event (like Xmas day) is the direct result of a complete separate problem compared to NN. The lack of available bandwidth is caused by the big ISPs having little to no incentive to build out their network infrastructure because of the monopolistic contracts they hold in most areas. They suck up endless profits while investing only the bare minimum back into their equipment.