There's nothing wrong with showing your vagina in a magazine for money, but it implies that you're relatively vain and that you're focusing your energies on frivolous crap. Not attributes that you want to see in a president.
If you take just the part about "smoking doesn't kill" it does make him sound worse than he deserves
Not at all. Telling people something doesn't kill you because it only kills 33% of the people who use it is completely illogical. Putting it in context does not make it any less insane.
If there were a system in place to help retrain these workers, get them new jobs, and importantly, help them retain their dignity, then this wouldn't have to be such a sad day. Capitalism is probably necessary, but not sufficient for a well functioning society.
Pilots have far, far more time to correct an autopilot than Tesla allows to correct its "Autopilot". Further, pilots go through thousands of hours of training. How much training is required to operate Tesla's "Autopilot"? My point is that Tesla's "Autopilot" is not anything remotely equivalent to a commercial airliner's autopilot, and Tesla's marketing strategy callously blurs this line which, in this case, may have led to death.
sounds like the Tesla autopilot is considerably better than the average driver
It only "sounds" like Teslas are safer because Tesla keeps on repeating that statement in their marketing material. But no studies validating Autopilot's safety have been done. Tesla's safety claims are another example of their wildly misleading marketing. I wish they focused more on technology and less on deception.
Pilots operating under autopilot do not need to "keep [their] hands on the steering wheel at all times."
You're nitpicking, that is a minor detail that isn't material to the situation...
Seriously, nitpicking? Pilots have many seconds, to a minute to respond to irregularities in autopilot control. Drivers of Tesla's "Autopilot" have less than a second. They aren't remotely the same.
Tesla's coverage of these incidents is a smear campaign.
Tesla brought this upon themselves with a massive marketing campaign claiming autonomous driving features that are safer than humans, when the truth is, they are nothing of the sort. I love Tesla's technology, but no company should get a pass when they make lies that have, allegedly, led to death.
Here's hoping that a few fools silly enough to trust their lives, and by extension others' lives, with something in beta doesn't mess up everything for autonomous vehicle research.
Here's hoping that companies have the ethics to not deceptively name their products as being more autonomous than they are. The term "autopilot" strongly suggests an automatic pilot, i.e., with little or no human intervention. Tesla created a media firestorm with their "Autopilot" feature, which very likely increased the number of deposits placed on the Model 3, bumping their bottom line. But the truth is that "Autopilot" is nothing at all like an autopilot. Tesla's branding, marketing and product information is misleading, deceptive, and already appears to have taken a life. I love technology, but I despise misleading claims, especially deadly ones.
Do you think airplane pilots who are using the autopilot are allowed to just ignore what is going on and watch a movie?
Pilots operating under autopilot do not need to "keep [their] hands on the steering wheel at all times." Tesla's "Autopilot" is not an autopilot. They created a media sensation with the deceptive "autopilot" marketing, and now they are rightly bearing the brunt of it.
Auto means self. Pilot means pilot. If you call something an autopilot it must pilot itself.
I agree with your premise, but just to nit here, "auto" is short for "automatic", which means working by itself with little or no direct human control. So technically autopilot means piloting with little or no direct human control.
Why do they call it "Autopilot" if it is only "an assist feature that requires you to keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times"? Tesla deserves all of the bad press they're getting.
You're attacking Hillary with Trump's verbatim rhetoric, and complimenting his rhetoric. It's an obvious endorsement of Trump, but maybe that's difficult for you to see.
Consultants/Politicians: We're going to move you to electronic healthcare records, you're going to love it! Doctors: I know it's old fashioned, but my paper records worked fine, why do we have to change? Consultants/Politicians: Ha, ha, that's adorable. Now sign here to get your e-records database for $500k. Doctors: Do I have to? Consultants/Politicians: Do you like jail? Doctors: Okay... now what? Consultants/Politicians: Welcome to the future! Now, you and your staff just have to take this one week course to learn how to use our awesome software! Doctors: When do I go back to being a doctor? Consultants/Politicians: Ha, silly. Now every you time you see a patient, don't forget to check these sixteen boxes, double click twelve times in the box, and go through the four drop-down menus where the selection is always the second to last. And of course, make sure you click the box releasing us of liability! Doctors: This is ridiculous, and these password requirements? Consultants/Politicians: We're doing that for your benefit! It's so easy, just change your password twice a week, and make sure to use at least one letter, one number, and three chinese symbols whenever you choose one. Doctors: Where's that post-it pad? Consultants/Politicians: OMG! You wrote your password down, you have been hacked, how could you possibly break such a fool-proof system!
It's really pretty staggering, considering that Democrats were supposed to be the "party of RIAA" back in the Clinton days
Net neutrality has little to do with strong copyright protections. You can easily support strong copyright laws (as well as DRM, closed source software, and other things technophiles hate), while still supporting net neutrality.
Anonymous does what they want, without process, open debate, or accountability. Even if you agree with what they're doing today, that could easily change tomorrow. Anonymous has no place in modern society.
I am shocked by all of the negative comments here. This was a great purchase by MS and I'm surprised they didn't jump sooner. Microsoft makes a huge chunk of its revenue from office workers. LinkedIn is the social graph of office workers. The two are a perfect fit with each other.
Imagine office integration where you can easily share documents, send messages, and video conference among LinkedIn contacts. That's just the beginning, with a bit more work on the LinkedIn side, the social graph on LinkedIn could easily translate to the company's entire intranet, a public/private social network amalgam. Hope that MS is thinking this big.
Based on the WSJ's coverage, Theranos retracted previous tests results and the FDA threatened to shut them down. I don't claim to know the details of the Theranos technology, but those two facts are enough to be very suspicious of the company.
Books deteriorate, digital files do not. There is already a de-facto limit on how much a physical good can be re-sold. Lifting that limit by allowing digital resales changes the status quo, and is unfair to publishers. However, an outright ban on reselling goods would also change the status quo. There should be a happy medium.
Slashdot Mirror
There's nothing wrong with showing your vagina in a magazine for money, but it implies that you're relatively vain and that you're focusing your energies on frivolous crap. Not attributes that you want to see in a president.
If you take just the part about "smoking doesn't kill" it does make him sound worse than he deserves
Not at all. Telling people something doesn't kill you because it only kills 33% of the people who use it is completely illogical. Putting it in context does not make it any less insane.
The problem is jobs come from consumer buying power ... So yes, it sucks a little when you lose your job
That's a lot of written words, but what's your premise?
...gotta love capitalism.
If there were a system in place to help retrain these workers, get them new jobs, and importantly, help them retain their dignity, then this wouldn't have to be such a sad day. Capitalism is probably necessary, but not sufficient for a well functioning society.
You're arguing that pilots have less training than drivers... okay, have fun with that.
Pilots have far, far more time to correct an autopilot than Tesla allows to correct its "Autopilot". Further, pilots go through thousands of hours of training. How much training is required to operate Tesla's "Autopilot"? My point is that Tesla's "Autopilot" is not anything remotely equivalent to a commercial airliner's autopilot, and Tesla's marketing strategy callously blurs this line which, in this case, may have led to death.
sounds like the Tesla autopilot is considerably better than the average driver
It only "sounds" like Teslas are safer because Tesla keeps on repeating that statement in their marketing material. But no studies validating Autopilot's safety have been done. Tesla's safety claims are another example of their wildly misleading marketing. I wish they focused more on technology and less on deception.
Pilots operating under autopilot do not need to "keep [their] hands on the steering wheel at all times."
You're nitpicking, that is a minor detail that isn't material to the situation...
Seriously, nitpicking? Pilots have many seconds, to a minute to respond to irregularities in autopilot control. Drivers of Tesla's "Autopilot" have less than a second. They aren't remotely the same.
I thought the *entire* point of SNAPCHAT was that nothing was supposed to be saved!
The entire point of snapchat is to make money. It's hard to advertise to people if you don't have any saved data about them, duh.
Tesla's coverage of these incidents is a smear campaign.
Tesla brought this upon themselves with a massive marketing campaign claiming autonomous driving features that are safer than humans, when the truth is, they are nothing of the sort. I love Tesla's technology, but no company should get a pass when they make lies that have, allegedly, led to death.
Here's hoping that a few fools silly enough to trust their lives, and by extension others' lives, with something in beta doesn't mess up everything for autonomous vehicle research.
Here's hoping that companies have the ethics to not deceptively name their products as being more autonomous than they are. The term "autopilot" strongly suggests an automatic pilot, i.e., with little or no human intervention. Tesla created a media firestorm with their "Autopilot" feature, which very likely increased the number of deposits placed on the Model 3, bumping their bottom line. But the truth is that "Autopilot" is nothing at all like an autopilot. Tesla's branding, marketing and product information is misleading, deceptive, and already appears to have taken a life. I love technology, but I despise misleading claims, especially deadly ones.
Do you think airplane pilots who are using the autopilot are allowed to just ignore what is going on and watch a movie?
Pilots operating under autopilot do not need to "keep [their] hands on the steering wheel at all times." Tesla's "Autopilot" is not an autopilot. They created a media sensation with the deceptive "autopilot" marketing, and now they are rightly bearing the brunt of it.
Auto means self. Pilot means pilot. If you call something an autopilot it must pilot itself.
I agree with your premise, but just to nit here, "auto" is short for "automatic", which means working by itself with little or no direct human control. So technically autopilot means piloting with little or no direct human control.
Why do they call it "Autopilot" if it is only "an assist feature that requires you to keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times"? Tesla deserves all of the bad press they're getting.
Can't do stairs
Or ...
What pro-Trump comments are you referring to?
You're attacking Hillary with Trump's verbatim rhetoric, and complimenting his rhetoric. It's an obvious endorsement of Trump, but maybe that's difficult for you to see.
Consultants/Politicians: We're going to move you to electronic healthcare records, you're going to love it! ... now what?
Doctors: I know it's old fashioned, but my paper records worked fine, why do we have to change?
Consultants/Politicians: Ha, ha, that's adorable. Now sign here to get your e-records database for $500k.
Doctors: Do I have to?
Consultants/Politicians: Do you like jail?
Doctors: Okay
Consultants/Politicians: Welcome to the future! Now, you and your staff just have to take this one week course to learn how to use our awesome software!
Doctors: When do I go back to being a doctor?
Consultants/Politicians: Ha, silly. Now every you time you see a patient, don't forget to check these sixteen boxes, double click twelve times in the box, and go through the four drop-down menus where the selection is always the second to last. And of course, make sure you click the box releasing us of liability!
Doctors: This is ridiculous, and these password requirements?
Consultants/Politicians: We're doing that for your benefit! It's so easy, just change your password twice a week, and make sure to use at least one letter, one number, and three chinese symbols whenever you choose one.
Doctors: Where's that post-it pad?
Consultants/Politicians: OMG! You wrote your password down, you have been hacked, how could you possibly break such a fool-proof system!
Expressions of homosexuality are also heavily restricted ...Putin wouldn't be posting all those homoerotic pictures of himself if that were the case.
Being gay for putin is the only type of gay allowed.
There is irony here that people are posting pro-trump comments on an article about scammers. No one is a bigger scammer than the drumpf.
... So our sick workplace atmospheres are fostering crime... I hadn't thought about this before.
"I don't like to work, therefore I am forced to commit crime." You haven't heard that one before?
It's really pretty staggering, considering that Democrats were supposed to be the "party of RIAA" back in the Clinton days
Net neutrality has little to do with strong copyright protections. You can easily support strong copyright laws (as well as DRM, closed source software, and other things technophiles hate), while still supporting net neutrality.
Anonymous does what they want, without process, open debate, or accountability. Even if you agree with what they're doing today, that could easily change tomorrow. Anonymous has no place in modern society.
I am shocked by all of the negative comments here. This was a great purchase by MS and I'm surprised they didn't jump sooner. Microsoft makes a huge chunk of its revenue from office workers. LinkedIn is the social graph of office workers. The two are a perfect fit with each other.
Imagine office integration where you can easily share documents, send messages, and video conference among LinkedIn contacts. That's just the beginning, with a bit more work on the LinkedIn side, the social graph on LinkedIn could easily translate to the company's entire intranet, a public/private social network amalgam. Hope that MS is thinking this big.
The original article was essentially bullshit ...
Based on the WSJ's coverage, Theranos retracted previous tests results and the FDA threatened to shut them down. I don't claim to know the details of the Theranos technology, but those two facts are enough to be very suspicious of the company.
Books deteriorate, digital files do not. There is already a de-facto limit on how much a physical good can be re-sold. Lifting that limit by allowing digital resales changes the status quo, and is unfair to publishers. However, an outright ban on reselling goods would also change the status quo. There should be a happy medium.