No, the ACLU would not fight it. They only take on cases that have to do with protecting civil rights related to the constitution. Driving is not a right, nor is it protected by the constitution.
Also, you are making assumptions about the automated traffic system without actually having used one. People made the same kinds of arguments about airbags, seatbelts, etc.
My father was the first person to get to a car accident when seatbelts were pretty new. He could not get the driver out of the car which was on fire because of the seatbelt. It had jammed during the crash. To this day, he blames the seatbelt for the woman's death because he couldn't get her out of the car. He thinks that seatbelts are a bad, bad idea. I don't argue with him about it either.
Airbags have decapitated children. I know people who think they are a bad, bad idea.
And if you think catalytic converters are great, my parents have a 1976 MG Midget to sell you. This car was made the first year catalytic converters were required. The catalytic converter in it doesn't work for shit and the car was constantly in need of repair to the catalytic converter.
I have never bought a GM car and I probably never will. Their cars are just *so lame*. I really wanted a Saab for a while, but when I went to buy my last car, the new Saabs were really lame. (GM now owns Saab.)
I don't know. I could see this happening. At first, maybe someone creates one experimental road with this technology. If GM and Ford could use it as differentiation, they might have the clout to get some assistance from congress. GM and Ford really need to do something serious to shake things up very soon.
If it worked, the fact that it would work would be a compelling reason. Think about cities like Seattle, Houston, etc. where the freeways are very crowded and the costs of new freeways are too high to be practical.
The ACLU is not some all powerful "spoiler" out to hold back innovation.
Plus, if your argument would hold, then people wouldn't have catalytic converters, airbags, or seatbelts. These are all features which make cars cost a lot of money and most people don't want.
And also I think he means that 50% of scientific papers are flawed in some major way - not that they are complete junk.
I took structural equations modeling while in graduate school. After taking it, I noticed that I never ran across a psychology paper in a scientific journal that used this particular technique and used it correctly - except for the papers that my teacher used to show us in stats class.
However, that's a very small sample as I dropped out of graduate school shortly after. But, I did encounter many papers that were clearly using LISREL (Structural Equations Modeling) incorrectly. Some of them were reading assignments for other classes where I was asked to comment on the paper and my teachers didn't think much of my comments which were all about how the author had incorrectly used the stats. They were intereseted in the ideas expressed rather than the stats. But the stats were the fun part for me.
There is such a thing as hardware costs. When you are designing hardware and trying to make money on it, the price of the "bill of materials" is very important on something that is going to be mass produced. Cables and connectors have to be extremely cheap and at the same time extremely reliable. Otherwise, companies just flat out won't adopt them in their designs.
I work for a company that makes both hardware and software. We make the vast majority of our revenue from hardware sales. Saving $1 in the bill of materials of a product design is a big deal around here. Saving 50 cents can sometimes be a big deal.
If there was a USB connector like what you are talking about, it would cost much more than the regular ones and we wouldn't use them.
For example, let's say that there was a USB disk on key that currently sells for $20 at Frys. The parts for that thing probably cost $5-7. By the time you pay for it, the cost is going to be 3x the parts price because you have to pay for the company's overhead, shipping it to you, some labor costs, marketing costs such as paying Frys to put it on the shelf, etc. Lets say it was an extra $30 for your fancy connector - you'd be paying $110 for the unit instead of $20. Would you really buy it, or would you say "that's OK. I'll buy the $20 one and remember to eject it."
You can hold down the control key when you click to get a context menu on a Mac with a one button mouse. I realize this is a problem if you are one-handed or looking at pr0n.
For instance, I know a guy who swears up and down that he "needs" a Mac because he is going to study music in college, and might need to record something. Although I kept explaining to him that both Linux and Windows have audio hardware and apps, and that much professional recording is done on various Unix machines (SGI, anybody?), he never listened.
Sounds like a real idiot. Doesn't he know that he owes you an explanation? Doesn't he know that it is your business - not his - what computer he should buy. Why, that just burns me up.
Hey, I was down at the Apple store the other day trying to tell everyone in there not to buy any Macintoshes or iPods. I told them to buy Linux and some player that uses Ogg Vorbis. Those fools wouldn't listen to me - even after I yelled at them to get their attention.
And then these two total idiots dressed in blue came and I told them they were using the wrong kind of 2 way radio. They wouldn't listen either! Then they handcuffed me in the *wrong brand* of handcuffs and put me in the back of a police car which was made by Ford. And they wouldn't listen when I told them to go buy a Chevy instead.
And, unlike Linux, OS X lacks the consistent package management, dependency management, and updating to cope with that automatically.
Please describe in detail the magical thing that Linux does to solve this problem. I have been developing professionally for MacOS for ten years. There are currently several ways to check to see if a facility exists before calling it. For example, there is Gestalt which has been around forever. If you are programming in Cocoa, there is a different facility. These can be used together and are not particularly difficult to comprehend.
And many OS X applications just deal with it by saying "only works on Tiger" or "doesn't work on Tiger".
I'm sorry, but I have yet to see an "application" that says "doesn't work with Tiger". I've seen hacks that don't work with Tiger. If you make use of undocumented APIs, then yes, your applications are more likely to break. As far as making use of new features, that has been a problem on the Macintosh for many years. Some new wizz bang feature is announced - you'd like to use it. Apple is promoting it. But your app has to run on older versions of the OS, so you have to check for that facility at run time or not use it, or change the minimum requirements for your app. The examples of this go all the way back to color quickdraw. Let's say I want to use SearchKit which was introduced in 10.3, but I also have to support 10.2. My options are to either not use search kit at all, require 10.3, or check at run time whether search kit is available before using it.
So, please tell me the magical way that Linux solves this? By not adding new features? By some other means? Please explain this in detail so I will understand why OS X sucks so much.
Well, if my powerbook was broken, or was an older TiBook, then I would probably do the same. As it is, I have the last rev of the TiBook which seems pretty new to me in the grand scheme of things. I don't feel like I'm missing that much by not having Airport Extreme. Plus, I have a newer 17" Aluminum PowerBook and a Mac Mini at work, so that kind of evens it out.
I'll probably buy an Intel PowerBook either right at launch, or after the first motherboard rev. I used to also have a policy on not buying rev. A hardware. I've had very luck with non-rev A hardware from Apple over the years. And some hardware problems with rev A hardware that I've had to deal with at work. So, your probably right to avoid rev. A intel hardware.
Intel has made their whole company strategy around low power high performance chips. That was the stated reason for moving to Intel. Therefore, I would think that Portables would be the first thing to move. For example, there is no G5 portable and we've been waiting a long time for a portable with a better chip than the G4. My powerBook is getting long in the tooth, but I won't replace it with another G4 powerBook - what would be the point? - unless it quit working.
The G5 desktops are still very fast and I could see staying with PPC there for a while, but not on portables.
Asking stupid questions like how to cut a cake into 8 pieces in three cuts, how to make a desk calendar with 2 cubes to represent the days of the month, etc. is a waste of time IMHO.
I personally don't like campus environments. I've worked at an IBM campus and at Microsoft and am currently at a small campus sized environment. In between I was at a startup that had an office in a building in a downtown area. I liked downtown better.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the ACLU would not fight it. They only take on cases that have to do with protecting civil rights related to the constitution. Driving is not a right, nor is it protected by the constitution.
Also, you are making assumptions about the automated traffic system without actually having used one. People made the same kinds of arguments about airbags, seatbelts, etc.
My father was the first person to get to a car accident when seatbelts were pretty new. He could not get the driver out of the car which was on fire because of the seatbelt. It had jammed during the crash. To this day, he blames the seatbelt for the woman's death because he couldn't get her out of the car. He thinks that seatbelts are a bad, bad idea. I don't argue with him about it either.
Airbags have decapitated children. I know people who think they are a bad, bad idea.
And if you think catalytic converters are great, my parents have a 1976 MG Midget to sell you. This car was made the first year catalytic converters were required. The catalytic converter in it doesn't work for shit and the car was constantly in need of repair to the catalytic converter.
It was a short story called "The Roads Must Roll" and it was by Robert Heinlein.
I have never bought a GM car and I probably never will. Their cars are just *so lame*. I really wanted a Saab for a while, but when I went to buy my last car, the new Saabs were really lame. (GM now owns Saab.)
I bought a mercedes instead.
The first actual real production car you could buy in the US that was equiped with air bags was a mercedes.
I don't know. I could see this happening. At first, maybe someone creates one experimental road with this technology. If GM and Ford could use it as differentiation, they might have the clout to get some assistance from congress. GM and Ford really need to do something serious to shake things up very soon.
If it worked, the fact that it would work would be a compelling reason. Think about cities like Seattle, Houston, etc. where the freeways are very crowded and the costs of new freeways are too high to be practical.
The ACLU is not some all powerful "spoiler" out to hold back innovation.
Plus, if your argument would hold, then people wouldn't have catalytic converters, airbags, or seatbelts. These are all features which make cars cost a lot of money and most people don't want.
And also I think he means that 50% of scientific papers are flawed in some major way - not that they are complete junk.
I took structural equations modeling while in graduate school. After taking it, I noticed that I never ran across a psychology paper in a scientific journal that used this particular technique and used it correctly - except for the papers that my teacher used to show us in stats class.
However, that's a very small sample as I dropped out of graduate school shortly after. But, I did encounter many papers that were clearly using LISREL (Structural Equations Modeling) incorrectly. Some of them were reading assignments for other classes where I was asked to comment on the paper and my teachers didn't think much of my comments which were all about how the author had incorrectly used the stats. They were intereseted in the ideas expressed rather than the stats. But the stats were the fun part for me.
There is such a thing as hardware costs. When you are designing hardware and trying to make money on it, the price of the "bill of materials" is very important on something that is going to be mass produced. Cables and connectors have to be extremely cheap and at the same time extremely reliable. Otherwise, companies just flat out won't adopt them in their designs.
I work for a company that makes both hardware and software. We make the vast majority of our revenue from hardware sales. Saving $1 in the bill of materials of a product design is a big deal around here. Saving 50 cents can sometimes be a big deal.
If there was a USB connector like what you are talking about, it would cost much more than the regular ones and we wouldn't use them.
For example, let's say that there was a USB disk on key that currently sells for $20 at Frys. The parts for that thing probably cost $5-7. By the time you pay for it, the cost is going to be 3x the parts price because you have to pay for the company's overhead, shipping it to you, some labor costs, marketing costs such as paying Frys to put it on the shelf, etc. Lets say it was an extra $30 for your fancy connector - you'd be paying $110 for the unit instead of $20. Would you really buy it, or would you say "that's OK. I'll buy the $20 one and remember to eject it."
Don't buy a Saab - you'll have to put the ignition key into the center console, not next to the steering wheel like on most cars.
You can hold down the control key when you click to get a context menu on a Mac with a one button mouse. I realize this is a problem if you are one-handed or looking at pr0n.
For instance, I know a guy who swears up and down that he "needs" a Mac because he is going to study music in college, and might need to record something. Although I kept explaining to him that both Linux and Windows have audio hardware and apps, and that much professional recording is done on various Unix machines (SGI, anybody?), he never listened.
Sounds like a real idiot. Doesn't he know that he owes you an explanation? Doesn't he know that it is your business - not his - what computer he should buy. Why, that just burns me up.
Hey, I was down at the Apple store the other day trying to tell everyone in there not to buy any Macintoshes or iPods. I told them to buy Linux and some player that uses Ogg Vorbis. Those fools wouldn't listen to me - even after I yelled at them to get their attention.
And then these two total idiots dressed in blue came and I told them they were using the wrong kind of 2 way radio. They wouldn't listen either! Then they handcuffed me in the *wrong brand* of handcuffs and put me in the back of a police car which was made by Ford. And they wouldn't listen when I told them to go buy a Chevy instead.
Has the whole world gone mad?
OS X is the equivalent of Versailles and Windows the equivalent of the Kremlin, but those are not good places to live.
Apparently you haven't visited Versailles. It's gorgeous. I'd love to live in Versailles.
The ca-tar-el button is usually right next to the option button.
And, unlike Linux, OS X lacks the consistent package management, dependency management, and updating to cope with that automatically.
Please describe in detail the magical thing that Linux does to solve this problem. I have been developing professionally for MacOS for ten years. There are currently several ways to check to see if a facility exists before calling it. For example, there is Gestalt which has been around forever. If you are programming in Cocoa, there is a different facility. These can be used together and are not particularly difficult to comprehend.
And many OS X applications just deal with it by saying "only works on Tiger" or "doesn't work on Tiger".
I'm sorry, but I have yet to see an "application" that says "doesn't work with Tiger". I've seen hacks that don't work with Tiger. If you make use of undocumented APIs, then yes, your applications are more likely to break. As far as making use of new features, that has been a problem on the Macintosh for many years. Some new wizz bang feature is announced - you'd like to use it. Apple is promoting it. But your app has to run on older versions of the OS, so you have to check for that facility at run time or not use it, or change the minimum requirements for your app. The examples of this go all the way back to color quickdraw. Let's say I want to use SearchKit which was introduced in 10.3, but I also have to support 10.2. My options are to either not use search kit at all, require 10.3, or check at run time whether search kit is available before using it.
So, please tell me the magical way that Linux solves this? By not adding new features? By some other means? Please explain this in detail so I will understand why OS X sucks so much.
My wife and I bought platinum rings because neither of us like diamonds. The pair was around $1000.
Instead they will develop Sinclair molecule chain.
No, but now I have this urge to go home and try eating an ice cream cone full of butter.
I've never been a Pascal programmer, but does the variable "i" increment itself?
their business strategy!
Well, if my powerbook was broken, or was an older TiBook, then I would probably do the same. As it is, I have the last rev of the TiBook which seems pretty new to me in the grand scheme of things. I don't feel like I'm missing that much by not having Airport Extreme. Plus, I have a newer 17" Aluminum PowerBook and a Mac Mini at work, so that kind of evens it out.
I'll probably buy an Intel PowerBook either right at launch, or after the first motherboard rev. I used to also have a policy on not buying rev. A hardware. I've had very luck with non-rev A hardware from Apple over the years. And some hardware problems with rev A hardware that I've had to deal with at work. So, your probably right to avoid rev. A intel hardware.
Intel has made their whole company strategy around low power high performance chips. That was the stated reason for moving to Intel. Therefore, I would think that Portables would be the first thing to move. For example, there is no G5 portable and we've been waiting a long time for a portable with a better chip than the G4. My powerBook is getting long in the tooth, but I won't replace it with another G4 powerBook - what would be the point? - unless it quit working.
The G5 desktops are still very fast and I could see staying with PPC there for a while, but not on portables.
Yeah, my wife is smarter at cleaning the floor and I know a whore who's real smart at blowjobs.
There are no women on slashdot. All of the women are men pretending to be women.
Why the hell would I want to spend $200 on sushi for a date? I can rent a whore for $200!
Asking stupid questions like how to cut a cake into 8 pieces in three cuts, how to make a desk calendar with 2 cubes to represent the days of the month, etc. is a waste of time IMHO.
Asking coding sample questions is ok.
I personally don't like campus environments. I've worked at an IBM campus and at Microsoft and am currently at a small campus sized environment. In between I was at a startup that had an office in a building in a downtown area. I liked downtown better.