Have these people had the insurance premiums deducted from their pay — either explicitly, or otherwise?
It doesn't matter.
If a company doesn't deduct unemployment benefits and they fire you. The government will still go after that said company for the backpayments it hasn't paid.
My brother did the same thing with Excel. Green, the project was good. Red, the project was a no-go. He designed the criteria himself, so there was nothing groundbreaking
It was just a way to keep himself honest. Too many times, he got too emotionally invested in a transaction and lied to himself about the numbers. By deciding on the criteria beforehand and codifying the rules in a spreadsheet, it helped him see things more clearly and it made it easier for him to walk away.
Even the prototypes need steering wheels if they currently want to to be allowed on public roads since the States issuing the permit require them to have a backup human driver. And obviously, even the prototypes are not ready yet for testing on public roads.
And even if the prototypes were ready, I assume there is probably even more bureaucracy involved in getting them approved for the public roads.
For example, I think that Orson Scott Card is an asshole, but his Ender's Game is still a fine piece of writing and worth a read.
Orson Scott Card is publicly anti-homosexual. That's like antagonizing 20% of his audience vs. antagonizing 75% of her audience. So even if all the gays that like scifi, read his book at the public library, or buy his book used, that's not going to bankrupt him. Besides Orson Scott Card is the master of his own ship. If he wants to risk sinking his own ship, he's sure free to do so.
This woman, on the other hand, jeopardized her job and all the jobs of her coworkers with her public comments to a customer. If she was making her own game all by herself, then she certainly could do what she wants. Or if her audience was mostly women who didn't care about what she said, that would have been fine too.
If this was the first incident I think she deserved a warning and not to be fired right away.
A warning? A warning can only come after an apology is given. She hasn't apologized yet, only doubled down. In her mind, she's at war against half the population on the planet and she's not giving up.
And what about her coworkers, didn't they deserve a warning too before she decided to go to war with most of her company's customers? Didn't they deserve a warning before she decided to risk their jobs for them?
As I understand it, every company is approaching the problem from a different perspective and (I would think a bigger issue) is that each company has a different sensor set and philosophy which means that there is different information provided for the system to plan it's way forwards (excuse the pun).
In the case of Uber vs. Waymo, the blueprints of one sensor were completely identical. And a vendor "inadvertently" emailed Waymo an email that was meant for Uber. That's what tipped off Waymo according to them that they were using an identical part that Waymo had designed itself.
You also have to keep in mind that it only took three months for the original exec to leave Waymo, create his own company called Otto, and sell it to Uber for 680 US million dollars. 680 million dollars for three months work, that's unusually good, don't you think?
You also have to keep in mind that the trial wasn't going well for Uber and that the only reason Waymo settled the case so easily was because Google/Alphabet had already invested billions of dollars into Uber, so destroying Uber wasn't in Google's self-interest. Google really wanted for Travis to step down as CEO and that's the key thing that happened that made Google bury the hatchet.
Without Google owning a significant portion of Uber, Google/Waymo would have pursued the matter to the end and Levandowski would be in prison by now.
Or at least you have keys to the goddamn data center and don't have to provide the CFO's p-card to resolve the problem.
One data center, even your own, doesn't help if there is a hurricane, an earthquake, a snowstorm, a backbone fiber cut, a wildfire, a power outage, sabotage, a bug, a mistake, etc.
You need to have contingency plans of your own, whether it's on your own premises or whether it's on the cloud.
Uber also suspended its testing in San Francisco and Pittsburgh following the crash,
Lie #1: Uber was permanently banned from testing in San Francisco in December several months before the crash. This is the reason why. See the video for yourself. At the time, Uber placed the entire blame on the driver saying that he was the only one driving the car and that the system was disengaged, but internal documents later obtained by the New York Times show the direct opposite of that claim. That's lie #2.
And please note, at that time Travis Kalanick was no longer in charge, so the lying is not something they can blame on him anymore. Also note that San Francisco has nothing against self-driving cars themselves, it's currently allowing two self-driving car companies to test their cars 24/7 all over its city. And the State of California itself has nothing against self-driving cars/trucks, it is currently allowing a number of different self-driving cars and self-driving 18-wheelers to drive within its State and even on public freeways at normal speeds 24/7.
it let its California permit for testing self-driving vehicles lapse that month.
Lie #3: While it's correct that Uber preemptively suspended all its testing on public roads after the crash, the real truth is that California, Arizona, and one other State informed it that Uber would no longer be allowed to test on their public roads as soon as they learned of the deadly accident themselves. So letting their California permit lapse is complete hogwash too.
And while the NTSB could give its ok, after all it's a Federal government organization under the influence of President Trump. It's very unlikely that States would allow Uber self-driving cars on their public roads ever again (unless some serious campaign contributions/bribes exchanged hands). So for that reason, I would recommend everyone to stay vigilant and be proactive about contacting your State representatives to let them know that you don't think Uber can be trusted.
Self-driving cars and trucks are coming. That is for certain. In the US alone, there are 50+ companies working on the problem. It's just that Uber should not be one of those companies. It still lies too much. Uber is too desperate for an IPO right now. It's only interested in self-driving cars as an excuse for raising billions of dollars. That's why they've been cutting so many corners. That, and the fact that their company is still rotten to the core despite Travis no longer being CEO.
That's why Amazon wants you to buy 5 vans (at the minimum) and 5 sets of uniforms instead of just 1 van and 1 set of uniform. In other words, your delivery people don't need to be independent, they can be YOUR employees.
So if someone gets sued, you get sued, not Amazon. Or if someone goes belly up, you go belly up, not Amazon. In other word, they found a loophole around the FedEx dilemna.
That I understand. What I don't understand is the three hour delay. If you assume you're going to be caught quickly, why not just stab the crap out of whomever, then just stand there waiting for the police to show up?
Hookers and coke.
If I was an internet troll, and probably still a virgin, that's what I would do if I knew I was going to spend the next 10+ years in prison.
No, I think this patent was about their self-driving car. To be turing complete, a self-driving car should probably be able to yell at its passengers to sit the fuck back down and to put their pants back on before safely exiting the vehicle.
Since they filed this application in 2016, at the time they probably still had high hopes for their self-driving platform.
I really don't know much about CRISPR, but I know at least one couple that was hoping for it to control the sex of their child. That couple already has a child with (pretty serious) autism and according to the dad at least, he was hoping that having a baby girl would cut the chances of having a second autistic child by a huge margin. Unfortuately, this new study doesn't sound like good news for them.
I think that the scientists are unworthy of grants.
So because you don't like the results, you want to take away their grants? Are you kidding me? That's not how science works.
In any case, like you, I also hope that the results are wrong, but even if I hate the results, I just can't wish them away (assuming their results are correct, I have no idea if they are, or not).
Trump is not a great example for your argument. There are better examples!
Trump is mostly driven by emotions, not facts. And while there are many people from the left who are just like him. I am pretty sure we can both agree that people that are mostly driven by emotions, whether from the left or the right, make lousy government leaders. And yes, I do count Theresa May as a lousy government leader as well.
But coming back to President Trump, it also doesn't help his public image that he's incapable of admitting when he's wrong. That makes the entire emotions thing even worse. For instance, this case of the Central Park gang rape. Trump is still insisting that the five boys (four blacks and one hispanic) were guilty. Or the Obama birth certificate. Or even in the case where Trump got all wound up because someone made up a racial incident in Sweden.
Trump needs to apologize when he makes a mistake. Mistakes happen. He's just a human being like the rest of us. But he also needs to put measures in place to double-check information before he acts on it or retweets it. As President, he has the resources to do so. Trump is no longer just a citizen. He represents our entire country. Every single thing he says is dissected and analyzed. He needs to be more careful.
And when he says that players can't kneel, he needs to be careful there too. He's acting as the voice of the government. As a private citizen, he can say anything he wants, but as President, threatening a boycott or threatening to take away a tax status because of political speech, is precisely what the US Constitution was designed to prevent.
Nobody is using a weapon with their name on it to commit a crime, and nobody is willingly transferring a weapon with their name on it to someone else who may use it to commit a crime without ensuring that the transfer has been recorded. Too much liability.
If there is no law preventing background checks for private sales, how do you know there is a liability? How can there be a liability if nothing illegal was done? Can you cite an example of someone privately and legally selling a perfectly working gun to an adult and then losing a lawsuit because of what that person did with it?
But that's the point, the light was no longer "red", it had turned green, forcing two cars who had been waiting to go around her, thus she was blocking the flow of traffic for no good reason.
In New York, the problem would have been immediately resolved after 100 milliseconds by the other drivers yelling loudly obscenities at her and continuously honking on their horns. In Canada, the other drivers were probably just too polite to honk or say anything, or if they did say something, they probably just mumbled an apology under their breath, that she probably couldn't hear in the first place.
It could just be bad luck (or good luck if you're the vandal), you do it enough times, it's bound to happen at least once, or it could be someone having access to the logs and knowing when the Googlebot was actively indexing the site. The latter being the equivalent of following the Google street view car going around when it reached your town and going ahead of it to pose for it doing the "heil hitler" salute while wearing the Trump golfing outfit with a MAGA hat and a tiki torch in hand.
Slashdot Mirror
Have these people had the insurance premiums deducted from their pay — either explicitly, or otherwise?
It doesn't matter.
If a company doesn't deduct unemployment benefits and they fire you. The government will still go after that said company for the backpayments it hasn't paid.
If you get yourself a job, work for 8 hours, and get yourself fired after a week, you won't qualify for unemployment.
If that were possible, everybody would be doing it. Obviously, the same rules still apply.
My brother did the same thing with Excel. Green, the project was good. Red, the project was a no-go. He designed the criteria himself, so there was nothing groundbreaking
It was just a way to keep himself honest. Too many times, he got too emotionally invested in a transaction and lied to himself about the numbers. By deciding on the criteria beforehand and codifying the rules in a spreadsheet, it helped him see things more clearly and it made it easier for him to walk away.
Even the prototypes need steering wheels if they currently want to to be allowed on public roads since the States issuing the permit require them to have a backup human driver. And obviously, even the prototypes are not ready yet for testing on public roads.
And even if the prototypes were ready, I assume there is probably even more bureaucracy involved in getting them approved for the public roads.
For example, I think that Orson Scott Card is an asshole, but his Ender's Game is still a fine piece of writing and worth a read.
Orson Scott Card is publicly anti-homosexual. That's like antagonizing 20% of his audience vs. antagonizing 75% of her audience. So even if all the gays that like scifi, read his book at the public library, or buy his book used, that's not going to bankrupt him. Besides Orson Scott Card is the master of his own ship. If he wants to risk sinking his own ship, he's sure free to do so.
This woman, on the other hand, jeopardized her job and all the jobs of her coworkers with her public comments to a customer. If she was making her own game all by herself, then she certainly could do what she wants. Or if her audience was mostly women who didn't care about what she said, that would have been fine too.
If this was the first incident I think she deserved a warning and not to be fired right away.
A warning? A warning can only come after an apology is given. She hasn't apologized yet, only doubled down. In her mind, she's at war against half the population on the planet and she's not giving up.
And what about her coworkers, didn't they deserve a warning too before she decided to go to war with most of her company's customers? Didn't they deserve a warning before she decided to risk their jobs for them?
As I understand it, every company is approaching the problem from a different perspective and (I would think a bigger issue) is that each company has a different sensor set and philosophy which means that there is different information provided for the system to plan it's way forwards (excuse the pun).
In the case of Uber vs. Waymo, the blueprints of one sensor were completely identical. And a vendor "inadvertently" emailed Waymo an email that was meant for Uber. That's what tipped off Waymo according to them that they were using an identical part that Waymo had designed itself.
You also have to keep in mind that it only took three months for the original exec to leave Waymo, create his own company called Otto, and sell it to Uber for 680 US million dollars. 680 million dollars for three months work, that's unusually good, don't you think?
You also have to keep in mind that the trial wasn't going well for Uber and that the only reason Waymo settled the case so easily was because Google/Alphabet had already invested billions of dollars into Uber, so destroying Uber wasn't in Google's self-interest. Google really wanted for Travis to step down as CEO and that's the key thing that happened that made Google bury the hatchet.
Without Google owning a significant portion of Uber, Google/Waymo would have pursued the matter to the end and Levandowski would be in prison by now.
Italians let a media mogul buy up all the media under the guise of media consolidation.
Then, that media mogul became Prime Minister.
That's the reason they're so screwed.
Obviously, it wasn't deemed that important enough to put a contingency plan in place after the first time it happened.
Or at least you have keys to the goddamn data center and don't have to provide the CFO's p-card to resolve the problem.
One data center, even your own, doesn't help if there is a hurricane, an earthquake, a snowstorm, a backbone fiber cut, a wildfire, a power outage, sabotage, a bug, a mistake, etc.
You need to have contingency plans of your own, whether it's on your own premises or whether it's on the cloud.
More lies spouted off by the Uber PR machine.
Uber also suspended its testing in San Francisco and Pittsburgh following the crash,
Lie #1: Uber was permanently banned from testing in San Francisco in December several months before the crash. This is the reason why. See the video for yourself. At the time, Uber placed the entire blame on the driver saying that he was the only one driving the car and that the system was disengaged, but internal documents later obtained by the New York Times show the direct opposite of that claim. That's lie #2.
And please note, at that time Travis Kalanick was no longer in charge, so the lying is not something they can blame on him anymore. Also note that San Francisco has nothing against self-driving cars themselves, it's currently allowing two self-driving car companies to test their cars 24/7 all over its city. And the State of California itself has nothing against self-driving cars/trucks, it is currently allowing a number of different self-driving cars and self-driving 18-wheelers to drive within its State and even on public freeways at normal speeds 24/7.
it let its California permit for testing self-driving vehicles lapse that month.
Lie #3: While it's correct that Uber preemptively suspended all its testing on public roads after the crash, the real truth is that California, Arizona, and one other State informed it that Uber would no longer be allowed to test on their public roads as soon as they learned of the deadly accident themselves. So letting their California permit lapse is complete hogwash too.
And while the NTSB could give its ok, after all it's a Federal government organization under the influence of President Trump. It's very unlikely that States would allow Uber self-driving cars on their public roads ever again (unless some serious campaign contributions/bribes exchanged hands). So for that reason, I would recommend everyone to stay vigilant and be proactive about contacting your State representatives to let them know that you don't think Uber can be trusted.
Self-driving cars and trucks are coming. That is for certain. In the US alone, there are 50+ companies working on the problem. It's just that Uber should not be one of those companies. It still lies too much. Uber is too desperate for an IPO right now. It's only interested in self-driving cars as an excuse for raising billions of dollars. That's why they've been cutting so many corners. That, and the fact that their company is still rotten to the core despite Travis no longer being CEO.
That's why Amazon wants you to buy 5 vans (at the minimum) and 5 sets of uniforms instead of just 1 van and 1 set of uniform. In other words, your delivery people don't need to be independent, they can be YOUR employees.
So if someone gets sued, you get sued, not Amazon. Or if someone goes belly up, you go belly up, not Amazon. In other word, they found a loophole around the FedEx dilemna.
That I understand. What I don't understand is the three hour delay. If you assume you're going to be caught quickly, why not just stab the crap out of whomever, then just stand there waiting for the police to show up?
Hookers and coke.
If I was an internet troll, and probably still a virgin, that's what I would do if I knew I was going to spend the next 10+ years in prison.
Unless they're judgment-proof, in which case, it might take a while to get the device pulled.
Gun control?
What makes you say that? Are you an antivaxxer? Or is there a different controversy I missed?
No, I think this patent was about their self-driving car. To be turing complete, a self-driving car should probably be able to yell at its passengers to sit the fuck back down and to put their pants back on before safely exiting the vehicle.
Since they filed this application in 2016, at the time they probably still had high hopes for their self-driving platform.
Yes, let's hope for cancer! Hooray! /sarcasm
I really don't know much about CRISPR, but I know at least one couple that was hoping for it to control the sex of their child. That couple already has a child with (pretty serious) autism and according to the dad at least, he was hoping that having a baby girl would cut the chances of having a second autistic child by a huge margin. Unfortuately, this new study doesn't sound like good news for them.
I think that the scientists are unworthy of grants.
So because you don't like the results, you want to take away their grants? Are you kidding me? That's not how science works.
In any case, like you, I also hope that the results are wrong, but even if I hate the results, I just can't wish them away (assuming their results are correct, I have no idea if they are, or not).
Trump is not a great example for your argument. There are better examples!
Trump is mostly driven by emotions, not facts. And while there are many people from the left who are just like him. I am pretty sure we can both agree that people that are mostly driven by emotions, whether from the left or the right, make lousy government leaders. And yes, I do count Theresa May as a lousy government leader as well.
But coming back to President Trump, it also doesn't help his public image that he's incapable of admitting when he's wrong. That makes the entire emotions thing even worse. For instance, this case of the Central Park gang rape. Trump is still insisting that the five boys (four blacks and one hispanic) were guilty. Or the Obama birth certificate. Or even in the case where Trump got all wound up because someone made up a racial incident in Sweden.
Trump needs to apologize when he makes a mistake. Mistakes happen. He's just a human being like the rest of us. But he also needs to put measures in place to double-check information before he acts on it or retweets it. As President, he has the resources to do so. Trump is no longer just a citizen. He represents our entire country. Every single thing he says is dissected and analyzed. He needs to be more careful.
And when he says that players can't kneel, he needs to be careful there too. He's acting as the voice of the government. As a private citizen, he can say anything he wants, but as President, threatening a boycott or threatening to take away a tax status because of political speech, is precisely what the US Constitution was designed to prevent.
Nobody is using a weapon with their name on it to commit a crime, and nobody is willingly transferring a weapon with their name on it to someone else who may use it to commit a crime without ensuring that the transfer has been recorded. Too much liability.
If there is no law preventing background checks for private sales, how do you know there is a liability? How can there be a liability if nothing illegal was done? Can you cite an example of someone privately and legally selling a perfectly working gun to an adult and then losing a lawsuit because of what that person did with it?
And even if it does, all that would happen would be geoblocking of Austria by YouTube.
Isn't Austria part of the EU?
If this ruling stands, it could influence the rest of the EU.
Yes, but now Bayer will be the name that attracts all the hate for Monsanto's portfolio of products.
Not that I disagree with that move, it's actually more honest, but still...
But that's the point, the light was no longer "red", it had turned green, forcing two cars who had been waiting to go around her, thus she was blocking the flow of traffic for no good reason.
In New York, the problem would have been immediately resolved after 100 milliseconds by the other drivers yelling loudly obscenities at her and continuously honking on their horns. In Canada, the other drivers were probably just too polite to honk or say anything, or if they did say something, they probably just mumbled an apology under their breath, that she probably couldn't hear in the first place.
It could just be bad luck (or good luck if you're the vandal), you do it enough times, it's bound to happen at least once, or it could be someone having access to the logs and knowing when the Googlebot was actively indexing the site. The latter being the equivalent of following the Google street view car going around when it reached your town and going ahead of it to pose for it doing the "heil hitler" salute while wearing the Trump golfing outfit with a MAGA hat and a tiki torch in hand.
Actually, the manufactured diamonds from De Beers won't be perfect. They'll be tainted. They'll have a dye in them that shows up under a black light.