Users are also capable of not telling the truth. The logs are almost certainly accurate.
That doesn't entirely rule out a fault - if the system erroneously reads a 100% accelerator pedal depression, then it will record that and act on it; the error then being in the sensor, not the logging or action taken by the car.
But when somebody is parking, they are going to press the brake to stop - and if they find they are not stopping, or accelerating, they'll press it harder. So a 100% depression is also consistent with someone mistakenly pressing the accelerator instead of the brake.
When you make it possible to the blame the car, some people are going to do so instead of taking responsibility. On balance, I'm inclined to believe this was user error.
The immediate reaction is to say it is silly that they are not offering a 64-bit version.
But many developers are likely using a number of extensions - which will currently be 32-bit because that's what Visual Studio is, and 64-bit would require all the extensions provide new versions as well.
It probably wouldn't take a huge effort to offer Visual Studio as both 32-bit and 64-bit versions (just like Office). But a more useful - although much longer - use of engineering effort would be to take the full Visual Studio experience on to the CLR.
My initial thought was to worry about the safety of the flight - more so than a car, where it's easier for you to get cold feet about the car or driver and change your mind.
And I suppose you can't do much about a lunatic thinking they can book it and then hijack it / blow it up.
But actually, in terms of airworthiness of the plane / pilot - well, you kind of hope that the pilot has a vested interest in making it to their destination safely too.
- random jumps of categories, when all you want to do is go to "my list". - "my list" on the TV app is frequently out of date - the TV app often shows the wrong image for the entry - the TV app crashes too frequently - apps don't always remember that you are logged in / they change the log in procedures - expiry dates are now completely hidden (used to be easily visible on the "My list" of the website
Add to that, it has always been difficult / impossible to accurately see what has been added recently (thank god for "New on Netflix" - without that site, the service would be completely unusable).
Every single change they've made to the website / apps since I signed up for the service a couple of years ago has made it worse. And there is no sign that they are actually listening to what people need from the service.
Assuming that this is the same as 3D touch (which it looks to be), that is... well, at best 3D touch is a useless feature that doesn't work reliably and you can ignore. At worst, it's yet another overloaded function on an interface that gets in the way and causes problems.
It's a pity that phone / OS manufacturers are too busy focusing on silly gimmicks, instead of rock solid reliability, responsive UIs that don't require a ton of CPU / GPU power and longer battery life.
I bought a Kindle Voyage. It was quite expensive, but at the time, the front light and higher resolution was somewhat justifiable. But that's now been eroded by the Paperwhie, and if I was buying now, there isn't much point in the Voyage.
Now they bring out a device that's nearly twice the price of the Voyage. While I appreciate e-ink for reading, that's an awful lot for a one trick pony. And for what added value? An unnecessarily long battery life?
I hate April Fools. I don't like the idea the Google did this, and I think there are things they could have done differently in implementing it.
But, it still was an unusual looking send button, in an unusual position. I get that people don't fully understand what the mic drop button is going to do - but still, that's as good a reason to just not use it. And it wasn't that hard to choose not to use it.
This is all rather symptomatic of a larger problem in society - that people just don't pay attention to what they are doing. Whether it's walking into you while they are chatting or texting on a mobile, or walking into and falling down a lift shaft without looking to see if the lift is there.
We all need to slow down a bit, take a breath, and pay attention to what we are doing.
There is a fair bit of misunderstanding in the original post.
At the end of the day, IFTTT provide a service. And they provide a means to provide content to / access content from the service. And from time to time they update it.
If you want to participate, then you need to implement the service, and if you want it to keep working, then you keep it up to date.
It's got nothing to do with anybody else "owing" IFTTT anything - IFTTT are just defining what it takes to provide their service.
Nobody is being forced to support IFTTT, it's a choice. Things don't work by magic - somewhere, somebody has to choose whether they want to work with the other.
Lets cut to the chase - the market for tablets will always be smaller than phones. For many people, the phone will do enough, and for others they will have a laptop that the tablet can not completely replace.
But that's not really a problem - tablets are viable as long as they are profitable. They don't have to break sales records. And as they are essentially phones with larger screens and batteries, as long as you are producing phones as well, the marginal cost of developing tablets as well is relatively small.
Ultimately though, we're just doing the wrong thing comparing tablet sales with phone sales, just because they are considered "gadgets". The key difference is the way we purchase them.
So many phones are purchased on contract, with subsidized prices. People aren't faced with a high ticket price, and the contracts are encouraging us to change our phones every 12 - 24 months.
With tablets, we are generally paying that high ticket price, and the performance of the devices and complexity of apps are not increasing quickly enough to drive fast upgrades.
Tablets have a naturally lower sales rate than the devices we are comparing them to, and not making unrealistic sales expectations is not the death knell.
The biggest threat to the iPad may be the success - or lack of - the iPhone 7. Due to the nature of the ecosystems, we're far more likely to own a tablet with an OS that matches our phone, As long as we keep consuming iPhones, the iPad will still take it's share of the tablet market. If people move away from iPhones - maybe because of a possible headphone jack removal - then the tablet sales will likely drift away too.
It might be difficult to charge for the enterprise platform - which is part of what funds the availability of GitHub in the first place.
I am an open source developer - I work on an open source platform - but I'm not a zealot. I *like* the principles of open source, but pragmatically it can't always provide a means to have supported software in all cases. Having an organisation that can keep the lights on at GitHub is more important than the whole of their code being open source - but maybe there is an opportunity to open up parts of it, like the issues.
You can say that people using a free service have no right to complain - but ultimately, you would think that the people paying for a hosted repository, or paying for the enterprise edition, might share similar concerns. So it is a little surprising that the issue tracking features have been as neglected.
What a mess - Beijing Summer and Sochi Winter Olympics despite all the human rights problems with China and Russia. Preparations for Athens were a joke.
And now all these problems surrounding Brazil. I don't want to "ban" countries from bidding, but the IOC (FIFA, etc) really need to get their acts together in only awarding major sporting events to countries that have proven how they will host, not just fantasies.
The Shine stats show that 99% of the traffic consists of ads, not content. How realistic / consistent that is is up for debate, but clearly when advertisers are intent on pushing intrusive, bandwidth hungry auto-playing videos, it's clearly going to have a major impact on bandwidth.
Every mobile provider really should be fighting back against that, as it has a massive impact on mobile performance, for no user benefit (apart from paying for the content).
If content providers want to deliver to a mobile space, and advertisers want to reach a mobile audience, then they should work together with the mobile industry on better solutions - not simply burden users and networks with a bad experience.
It says ensure that there are published BIOS update tools, not that it will be forced via Windows Update.
But even if BIOSes can be upgraded by Windows Update, they can't force vendors to supply the BIOS. More than likely anyone that does provide a BIOS, will ensure that they do so for hardware that can update safely (e.g. has dual BIOS capability). After all, it won't be MS on the hook, but the vendors.
Given that CPUs have bugs - see Intel Skylake freezing issue - and fixes are applied via BIOS, ensuring these fixes get distributed to people (safely) without them having to hunt out the problems / solutions, and apply them manually, is actually a good thing.
If this is the reason why you want to move to Linux, then good luck. There are plenty of reasons to choose to use Linux, but support of new architectures without being forced to upgrade the OS isn't one.
There is nothing you can do about people using VPNs, but you could easily make other changes, and not care about the IP address - acknowledging and recognising the people go on holiday.
That's a bigger bugbear with some of these services than the content restrictions - take Mubi. I can download content onto my tablet for offline viewing. But if I happen to turn the network, it realises I'm not in the region that I downloaded the content, and suddenly i can't watch it. Hey, it happens to be that I'm on holiday - let me watch the god damn content that I have paid for and am legally entitled to watch.
Whilst I don't like the body scanner, and prefer the old fashioned metal detectors, I would happily take either in preference to a pat down.
Part of the reason that I don't like the body scanner is it is much more likely to "find" a false positive requiring a partial pat down by the officers than the metal detector is.
If an autonomous car can completely avoid accidents by taking corrective action that keeps it's behaviour within the law, then it should do.
But there will always be occasions that occur out of the ordinary. Take the obvious example of someone stepping out into the road - if you do nothing, then you are certainly going to crash into the person (and likely kill them).
Slamming on the brakes might cause a car behind to run into you, and it may not even be possible to stop in time.
Swerving may be the only option to avoid the person, but that takes you into oncoming traffic. You might hit a car head on. Or catch part of one, and spin and still hit the person in the road.
There are lots of permutations and possible outcomes, and staying entirely within the law may not always give the best outcome.
Predominantly, autonomous cars should keep to being within the law as much as possible, and if they do have to take some form of evasive action that stretches the law, they should be looking to get back to being within the law as quickly as the safely can.
But it doesn't make sense to completely shut off the option of going outside the normal limits, if the sensors are good enough and it is deemed to be the only way to avoid a collision.
I've had numerous Android devices in the past - they've all had worse battery life than the 6 plus, and not had the convenience of a wide selection of good quality headphones with volume control support.
If it comes down to it, I'll switch to a different device, based on the comparative functionality at the time. In all likelihood, I'll probably just stick with the 6 plus for as long as possible.
In every generation there are drivers at the front of the grid that are more aggressive than their competitors - Senna, Schumacher, etc. That they aren't constantly crashing, that they are winning multiple titles, shows that they aren't reckless.
At the same time, you have the likes of Prost, who became multiple world champion through consistency rather than outright performance.
No, AIs don't inately have a sense of self preservation - they function as they have been programmed to do. But the people that write them and the people that run the teams will care how the AI performs. Especially if you are invested in providing AIs for road cars - you're not going to make many sales of an AI that continually crashes spectacularly.
It says the cars will be of the same specification. Theroretically, you can save some weight by not having a driver - more interestingly, you can save space by not providing room for a driver. Maybe that means smaller, more stream lined cars? Maybe it means adding more batteries so they can run longer - adding weight.
And true, you aren't G restricted on the basis of what a driver can withstand - but the driver isn't the limit of the amount of G cars can currently pull; the rules and restrictions of car design, the limit of grip of the tyres are.
So it will all depend on the design of car that they mandate for everybody as to how fast they ultimately run.
More reckless? Maybe. You don't have to worry about driver safety, only stewards and spectators. So there is less of a risk of someone being injured from a crash.
But the old saying is "in order to finish first, first you must finish". It will be interesting to see how aggressive different algorithms are, and how they respond to different circumstances. There is always a possibility of an "error in calculation", but the algorithms are unlikely to be out and out reckless, because they won't achieve anything by not finishing.
If the 3.5mm jack is restricting you from making the device thinner, then use the "unnecessary" space for high battery capacity.
Hell, just make the device a tiny bit thicker and increase the battery life anyway.
Just because Jony Ive is a twat that craves how things look over how they function, a substantial part of your user base (and potential user base), actually give a shit about having a device that can be used consistently without dying in under 24 hours, and might even last more than a day without charging.
To an extent we will trade battery life for increased functionality, but an even thinner device isn't more functional. We want more battery life.
Slashdot Mirror
More people care about havingt a headphone jack, than a barometer.
that require registration for no reason, and don't provide or make use of shared identity services.
If people didn't have so many accounts all over the place, there wouldn't be the password reuse, or so many attack vectors.
Users are also capable of not telling the truth. The logs are almost certainly accurate.
That doesn't entirely rule out a fault - if the system erroneously reads a 100% accelerator pedal depression, then it will record that and act on it; the error then being in the sensor, not the logging or action taken by the car.
But when somebody is parking, they are going to press the brake to stop - and if they find they are not stopping, or accelerating, they'll press it harder. So a 100% depression is also consistent with someone mistakenly pressing the accelerator instead of the brake.
When you make it possible to the blame the car, some people are going to do so instead of taking responsibility. On balance, I'm inclined to believe this was user error.
The immediate reaction is to say it is silly that they are not offering a 64-bit version.
But many developers are likely using a number of extensions - which will currently be 32-bit because that's what Visual Studio is, and 64-bit would require all the extensions provide new versions as well.
It probably wouldn't take a huge effort to offer Visual Studio as both 32-bit and 64-bit versions (just like Office). But a more useful - although much longer - use of engineering effort would be to take the full Visual Studio experience on to the CLR.
My initial thought was to worry about the safety of the flight - more so than a car, where it's easier for you to get cold feet about the car or driver and change your mind.
And I suppose you can't do much about a lunatic thinking they can book it and then hijack it / blow it up.
But actually, in terms of airworthiness of the plane / pilot - well, you kind of hope that the pilot has a vested interest in making it to their destination safely too.
The UX is *horrible*
- random jumps of categories, when all you want to do is go to "my list".
- "my list" on the TV app is frequently out of date
- the TV app often shows the wrong image for the entry
- the TV app crashes too frequently
- apps don't always remember that you are logged in / they change the log in procedures
- expiry dates are now completely hidden (used to be easily visible on the "My list" of the website
Add to that, it has always been difficult / impossible to accurately see what has been added recently (thank god for "New on Netflix" - without that site, the service would be completely unusable).
Every single change they've made to the website / apps since I signed up for the service a couple of years ago has made it worse. And there is no sign that they are actually listening to what people need from the service.
None. There are none.
Assuming that this is the same as 3D touch (which it looks to be), that is... well, at best 3D touch is a useless feature that doesn't work reliably and you can ignore. At worst, it's yet another overloaded function on an interface that gets in the way and causes problems.
It's a pity that phone / OS manufacturers are too busy focusing on silly gimmicks, instead of rock solid reliability, responsive UIs that don't require a ton of CPU / GPU power and longer battery life.
I bought a Kindle Voyage. It was quite expensive, but at the time, the front light and higher resolution was somewhat justifiable. But that's now been eroded by the Paperwhie, and if I was buying now, there isn't much point in the Voyage.
Now they bring out a device that's nearly twice the price of the Voyage. While I appreciate e-ink for reading, that's an awful lot for a one trick pony. And for what added value? An unnecessarily long battery life?
I sure hope they weren't expecting any sales.
I hate April Fools. I don't like the idea the Google did this, and I think there are things they could have done differently in implementing it.
But, it still was an unusual looking send button, in an unusual position. I get that people don't fully understand what the mic drop button is going to do - but still, that's as good a reason to just not use it. And it wasn't that hard to choose not to use it.
This is all rather symptomatic of a larger problem in society - that people just don't pay attention to what they are doing. Whether it's walking into you while they are chatting or texting on a mobile, or walking into and falling down a lift shaft without looking to see if the lift is there.
We all need to slow down a bit, take a breath, and pay attention to what we are doing.
There is a fair bit of misunderstanding in the original post.
At the end of the day, IFTTT provide a service. And they provide a means to provide content to / access content from the service. And from time to time they update it.
If you want to participate, then you need to implement the service, and if you want it to keep working, then you keep it up to date.
It's got nothing to do with anybody else "owing" IFTTT anything - IFTTT are just defining what it takes to provide their service.
Nobody is being forced to support IFTTT, it's a choice. Things don't work by magic - somewhere, somebody has to choose whether they want to work with the other.
Lets cut to the chase - the market for tablets will always be smaller than phones. For many people, the phone will do enough, and for others they will have a laptop that the tablet can not completely replace.
But that's not really a problem - tablets are viable as long as they are profitable. They don't have to break sales records. And as they are essentially phones with larger screens and batteries, as long as you are producing phones as well, the marginal cost of developing tablets as well is relatively small.
Ultimately though, we're just doing the wrong thing comparing tablet sales with phone sales, just because they are considered "gadgets". The key difference is the way we purchase them.
So many phones are purchased on contract, with subsidized prices. People aren't faced with a high ticket price, and the contracts are encouraging us to change our phones every 12 - 24 months.
With tablets, we are generally paying that high ticket price, and the performance of the devices and complexity of apps are not increasing quickly enough to drive fast upgrades.
Tablets have a naturally lower sales rate than the devices we are comparing them to, and not making unrealistic sales expectations is not the death knell.
The biggest threat to the iPad may be the success - or lack of - the iPhone 7. Due to the nature of the ecosystems, we're far more likely to own a tablet with an OS that matches our phone, As long as we keep consuming iPhones, the iPad will still take it's share of the tablet market. If people move away from iPhones - maybe because of a possible headphone jack removal - then the tablet sales will likely drift away too.
It might be difficult to charge for the enterprise platform - which is part of what funds the availability of GitHub in the first place.
I am an open source developer - I work on an open source platform - but I'm not a zealot. I *like* the principles of open source, but pragmatically it can't always provide a means to have supported software in all cases. Having an organisation that can keep the lights on at GitHub is more important than the whole of their code being open source - but maybe there is an opportunity to open up parts of it, like the issues.
You can say that people using a free service have no right to complain - but ultimately, you would think that the people paying for a hosted repository, or paying for the enterprise edition, might share similar concerns. So it is a little surprising that the issue tracking features have been as neglected.
What a mess - Beijing Summer and Sochi Winter Olympics despite all the human rights problems with China and Russia. Preparations for Athens were a joke.
And now all these problems surrounding Brazil. I don't want to "ban" countries from bidding, but the IOC (FIFA, etc) really need to get their acts together in only awarding major sporting events to countries that have proven how they will host, not just fantasies.
The Shine stats show that 99% of the traffic consists of ads, not content. How realistic / consistent that is is up for debate, but clearly when advertisers are intent on pushing intrusive, bandwidth hungry auto-playing videos, it's clearly going to have a major impact on bandwidth.
Every mobile provider really should be fighting back against that, as it has a massive impact on mobile performance, for no user benefit (apart from paying for the content).
If content providers want to deliver to a mobile space, and advertisers want to reach a mobile audience, then they should work together with the mobile industry on better solutions - not simply burden users and networks with a bad experience.
Do you have any idea of how expensive beer is in Finland?
What has been requested more - video streaming, or lossless compression for audio?
I suspect the latter.
It says ensure that there are published BIOS update tools, not that it will be forced via Windows Update.
But even if BIOSes can be upgraded by Windows Update, they can't force vendors to supply the BIOS. More than likely anyone that does provide a BIOS, will ensure that they do so for hardware that can update safely (e.g. has dual BIOS capability). After all, it won't be MS on the hook, but the vendors.
Given that CPUs have bugs - see Intel Skylake freezing issue - and fixes are applied via BIOS, ensuring these fixes get distributed to people (safely) without them having to hunt out the problems / solutions, and apply them manually, is actually a good thing.
If this is the reason why you want to move to Linux, then good luck. There are plenty of reasons to choose to use Linux, but support of new architectures without being forced to upgrade the OS isn't one.
There is nothing you can do about people using VPNs, but you could easily make other changes, and not care about the IP address - acknowledging and recognising the people go on holiday.
That's a bigger bugbear with some of these services than the content restrictions - take Mubi. I can download content onto my tablet for offline viewing. But if I happen to turn the network, it realises I'm not in the region that I downloaded the content, and suddenly i can't watch it. Hey, it happens to be that I'm on holiday - let me watch the god damn content that I have paid for and am legally entitled to watch.
Whilst I don't like the body scanner, and prefer the old fashioned metal detectors, I would happily take either in preference to a pat down.
Part of the reason that I don't like the body scanner is it is much more likely to "find" a false positive requiring a partial pat down by the officers than the metal detector is.
If an autonomous car can completely avoid accidents by taking corrective action that keeps it's behaviour within the law, then it should do.
But there will always be occasions that occur out of the ordinary. Take the obvious example of someone stepping out into the road - if you do nothing, then you are certainly going to crash into the person (and likely kill them).
Slamming on the brakes might cause a car behind to run into you, and it may not even be possible to stop in time.
Swerving may be the only option to avoid the person, but that takes you into oncoming traffic. You might hit a car head on. Or catch part of one, and spin and still hit the person in the road.
There are lots of permutations and possible outcomes, and staying entirely within the law may not always give the best outcome.
Predominantly, autonomous cars should keep to being within the law as much as possible, and if they do have to take some form of evasive action that stretches the law, they should be looking to get back to being within the law as quickly as the safely can.
But it doesn't make sense to completely shut off the option of going outside the normal limits, if the sensors are good enough and it is deemed to be the only way to avoid a collision.
I've had numerous Android devices in the past - they've all had worse battery life than the 6 plus, and not had the convenience of a wide selection of good quality headphones with volume control support.
If it comes down to it, I'll switch to a different device, based on the comparative functionality at the time. In all likelihood, I'll probably just stick with the 6 plus for as long as possible.
Aggressive does not equal reckless.
In every generation there are drivers at the front of the grid that are more aggressive than their competitors - Senna, Schumacher, etc. That they aren't constantly crashing, that they are winning multiple titles, shows that they aren't reckless.
At the same time, you have the likes of Prost, who became multiple world champion through consistency rather than outright performance.
No, AIs don't inately have a sense of self preservation - they function as they have been programmed to do. But the people that write them and the people that run the teams will care how the AI performs. Especially if you are invested in providing AIs for road cars - you're not going to make many sales of an AI that continually crashes spectacularly.
It says the cars will be of the same specification. Theroretically, you can save some weight by not having a driver - more interestingly, you can save space by not providing room for a driver. Maybe that means smaller, more stream lined cars? Maybe it means adding more batteries so they can run longer - adding weight.
And true, you aren't G restricted on the basis of what a driver can withstand - but the driver isn't the limit of the amount of G cars can currently pull; the rules and restrictions of car design, the limit of grip of the tyres are.
So it will all depend on the design of car that they mandate for everybody as to how fast they ultimately run.
More reckless? Maybe. You don't have to worry about driver safety, only stewards and spectators. So there is less of a risk of someone being injured from a crash.
But the old saying is "in order to finish first, first you must finish". It will be interesting to see how aggressive different algorithms are, and how they respond to different circumstances. There is always a possibility of an "error in calculation", but the algorithms are unlikely to be out and out reckless, because they won't achieve anything by not finishing.
If the 3.5mm jack is restricting you from making the device thinner, then use the "unnecessary" space for high battery capacity.
Hell, just make the device a tiny bit thicker and increase the battery life anyway.
Just because Jony Ive is a twat that craves how things look over how they function, a substantial part of your user base (and potential user base), actually give a shit about having a device that can be used consistently without dying in under 24 hours, and might even last more than a day without charging.
To an extent we will trade battery life for increased functionality, but an even thinner device isn't more functional. We want more battery life.