I actually look forward to it. Gas engines need to go for personal vehicles. They create smog and other problems. I'd love to have a reasonably priced electric vehicle that I could drive on one charge the same 340 miles I travel on a tank of gas now. The best I've seen at a decent price is the Chevy Bolt which is under 40K. That's still a lot to pay for such a tiny, cramped vehicle. If it was 20K I'd buy one now but I hate paying double price for a car just to save maybe $4,000 in fuel over 5 years. If I wanted to be miserable while driving I could get a Kia Soul for 16K.
I looked at the Macbook Pro last year, looked at my 2012 15" model, and passed on the new one. I acutally like my old one better than the new one and it's actually not that much slower. I'm not paying out 2K for a laptop that's 100 dollars faster.
It's entirely likely this is coming. In 8 years not a chance. Maybe in 20, maybe. Electric cars are just starting to make themselves felt but battery tech is still not where it needs to be. Right now electric vehicles make up less than 1 percent of personal vehicles in the US.
Before we jump to the self driving cars how about delivering on the damn flying cars that were only a decade away all the way back to the 60s? One pipe dream at a time.
I just moved to a little place 3 miles outside a little town of about 10,000 people. The cable company provides 300Mbps and it's rock steady at that speed.
I really don't think that's the plan. The EPA often goes way off the deep end. It makes sense to have clean air and water but often their regulations really don't add to that effort except to make business impossible. I suppose you could look at it from the position that if we shut down every American manufacturer then it would certainly be cleaner. Sometime it seems that is exactly the goal of the EPA. Like all government bureaucracies the EPA has at ton of dead weight, most at the top. Getting rid of half the rubber stamp people probably isn't going to seriously effect their operations.
I always presume that if I'm using a device that I don't personally own then it's probably not secure. This includes my AT&T cellphone. It's not really mine even though I paid them for it and I don't trust it. I'd never use it for anything I consider sensitive and this includes banking and credit card activity. To get back to the topic at hand, I'd say that children should be made aware of this fact with electronics. I told my children that my computers were mine and that anything they did on them was subject to my viewing through system logs and such. They were not to use them for anything I wouldn't approve of and that I had access to everything on the box. Where I worked for years had a sticker on all comm equipment including phones that all use was subject to monitoring. That avoids a lot of unpleasantness from the start and anyone caught after that statement needs to be fired anyway.
I put my teenage son a guest account on my computer back in the 90s so he could do email and school work and surf the web. I told him straight up that I had root access to the computer and not to do anything he didn't want me to know about because I was probably going to look. Had zero problems.
The entire question hinges on whether or not surrendering your phone's contents is self incrimination. If they want to search your house you can't stop them. They can read your journal. Essentially they're saying the contents of your phone is like a filing cabinet they can go through. I tend to agree with you but I can see where they're coming from.
Government is those things that don't generate direct profit. Roads don't generate profit but they make commerce possible and thus support profit. Some things are just to maintain society which profits everyone.
I think the whole point is that the Federal government setting regulations for what kids eat for lunch is ludicrous. The parents have control of local schools through school boards. They should run the show. This nanny state crap where the Fed tells you how to manage every aspect of your lives is more than just annoying. It's oppressive.
Taxes and government go hand in hand. There are certain functions that are required and funds for those things must be collected from somewhere. That stuff doesn't pay for itself.
Slashdot Mirror
It's really all about the batteries. When they get cheap enough that'll be the beginning of the end.
I actually look forward to it. Gas engines need to go for personal vehicles. They create smog and other problems. I'd love to have a reasonably priced electric vehicle that I could drive on one charge the same 340 miles I travel on a tank of gas now. The best I've seen at a decent price is the Chevy Bolt which is under 40K. That's still a lot to pay for such a tiny, cramped vehicle. If it was 20K I'd buy one now but I hate paying double price for a car just to save maybe $4,000 in fuel over 5 years. If I wanted to be miserable while driving I could get a Kia Soul for 16K.
I looked at the Macbook Pro last year, looked at my 2012 15" model, and passed on the new one. I acutally like my old one better than the new one and it's actually not that much slower. I'm not paying out 2K for a laptop that's 100 dollars faster.
It's entirely likely this is coming. In 8 years not a chance. Maybe in 20, maybe. Electric cars are just starting to make themselves felt but battery tech is still not where it needs to be. Right now electric vehicles make up less than 1 percent of personal vehicles in the US.
Before we jump to the self driving cars how about delivering on the damn flying cars that were only a decade away all the way back to the 60s? One pipe dream at a time.
I just moved to a little place 3 miles outside a little town of about 10,000 people. The cable company provides 300Mbps and it's rock steady at that speed.
Examples? No problem.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/r...
http://www.nationalreview.com/...
http://reason.org/blog/show/tw...
The EPA has a terrible track record with the SCOTUS, repeatedly getting slapped down often with scathing words about their nonsense.
Do you seriously think they're just going to gut all the regulations? That we're going back to Love Canal days?
I really don't think that's the plan. The EPA often goes way off the deep end. It makes sense to have clean air and water but often their regulations really don't add to that effort except to make business impossible. I suppose you could look at it from the position that if we shut down every American manufacturer then it would certainly be cleaner. Sometime it seems that is exactly the goal of the EPA. Like all government bureaucracies the EPA has at ton of dead weight, most at the top. Getting rid of half the rubber stamp people probably isn't going to seriously effect their operations.
I always presume that if I'm using a device that I don't personally own then it's probably not secure. This includes my AT&T cellphone. It's not really mine even though I paid them for it and I don't trust it. I'd never use it for anything I consider sensitive and this includes banking and credit card activity. To get back to the topic at hand, I'd say that children should be made aware of this fact with electronics. I told my children that my computers were mine and that anything they did on them was subject to my viewing through system logs and such. They were not to use them for anything I wouldn't approve of and that I had access to everything on the box. Where I worked for years had a sticker on all comm equipment including phones that all use was subject to monitoring. That avoids a lot of unpleasantness from the start and anyone caught after that statement needs to be fired anyway.
Congrats on the best analogy I've seen on the subject. I'm in full agreement with you.
Hurry up and grab a seat, the show is about to start.
I put my teenage son a guest account on my computer back in the 90s so he could do email and school work and surf the web. I told him straight up that I had root access to the computer and not to do anything he didn't want me to know about because I was probably going to look. Had zero problems.
If it's his phone, it's his phone.
That's no different from them planting evidence in your house or car. The prosecutor and police get the benefit of the doubt in court from the start.
I said they don't directly generate profit. I'll make an exception for toll roads.
You're in a bad mood, aren't you?
The entire question hinges on whether or not surrendering your phone's contents is self incrimination. If they want to search your house you can't stop them. They can read your journal. Essentially they're saying the contents of your phone is like a filing cabinet they can go through. I tend to agree with you but I can see where they're coming from.
Government is those things that don't generate direct profit. Roads don't generate profit but they make commerce possible and thus support profit. Some things are just to maintain society which profits everyone.
They punish you for working. Kind of stupid but that's progressives for you.
That's a question for the great great great grandkids. If ever.
I think the whole point is that the Federal government setting regulations for what kids eat for lunch is ludicrous. The parents have control of local schools through school boards. They should run the show. This nanny state crap where the Fed tells you how to manage every aspect of your lives is more than just annoying. It's oppressive.
I'm pretty sure we could come up with a definition for a robot. Some level of complexity that goes from being an actuator to being a mechanical robot.
Taxes and government go hand in hand. There are certain functions that are required and funds for those things must be collected from somewhere. That stuff doesn't pay for itself.
Florida has other taxes. They get you a lot of places. There are always property taxes.