Participants will be encouraged to share and disseminate their approach to improve future challenge results and industrial implementations.
That doesn't sound to demanding to me. Acquiring a patent requires that you do this anyways.
The prizes are actually $20,000 for the winner, $5000 for second place and $1000 for third place. In addition each team can be awarded up to $6000 to get them and their robot to the conference so that they can participate in the challenge.
So, there is some coverage for expenses even if you don't win.
Only because that how we've chosen to run things. It's actually nonsensical, since your argument ("some other worker could have done that") applies equally well to capital by logic - if whoever owns the productive capital didn't own it, somebody else would own comparable capital to fill that niche in the economy.
In other words, Apple putting $100BN in the bank is presumed to mean Apple created $100BN of value. In some sense that is true, but had Apple never released the iPhone, for the most part other smartphone makers would just be that much richer. The same goes even for Apple shareholders, since most of them also own stock in other companies, like Blackberry, Erikson, Nokia, Samsung, which have done less well as a direct result of Apple's success. It's mainly a wash.
It is true, attribution of credit is ridiculously subjective if not arbitrary at all levels, from authorship of papers, to how much money each person makes under any given economic system. There is no real solution to this, although some systems are better than others.
But in Transcendence the end-of-movie plot twist was (SPOILER ALERT!) that, after playing the typical terrifying-and-dehumanizing AI trope throughout the film, it turned out that the AI was actually benevolent and people would be better off just going with it. At least that was my take on what it was saying.
And I have to give a movie props for going on an unconventional or outright dubious premise and conclusion. Limitless and probably Idiotocracy fall into that category for me too.
Did you see "Transcendence"? (I know, not a lot of people did). How about "Her"? (Great movie). These are both post-Terminator films, in that super-human intelligence is portrayed in a positive light.
Oh, so simple! Complex products in complex environments always pose a threat every time you roll the dice by selecting one or even applying an update. The devil is in the details. Yet, simple finger-pointing responses like this are about all you can expect from a typically commenter on the Internet, regardless of the issue at hand.
So what they are saying is that anyone outside the US can freely hack US servers without a warrant too. Surely they don't expect special treatment?
Come on, you already know the answer to this one, say it with me now... "They already were hacking us, after all they're the Bad Guys! But even though we're the Good Guys, we just can't afford to show such once-sided deference any longer!"
It should also be noted that the conundrum can also be resolved by secrecy. Our actions won't provoke a response if they aren't known! So the real problem (or at least the most pragmatic) isn't what we did, it's that broken "justice" system that dragged it out into the light to stir up trouble. Well, we can fix that can't we...
That doesn't solve Twitter's problem of people fleeing twitter because they want to communicate privately. Twitter's early growth was largely associated with protest movements.
I wonder if part of this PhD glut is a delayed effect of the recession, which decreased employment opportunities over the last 6 years or so. Given the choice between taking your bachelor's to work at Starbucks or living on a similar salary as a grad student but with the prospect of an advanced degree a few years down the road, it was a rational thing to do. Of course, the "best" available option is not necessarily a "good" option.
I was going to leap to Tesla's defense here, but as I look into it, I think Tesla needs to define the battery warranty more clearly.
On the one hand, Musk is saying all the right things:
Except in the cases of a collision, opening of the battery pack by non-Tesla personnel or intentional abuse (lighting the pack on fire with a blowtorch is not covered!), all damage is covered by warranty, including improper maintenance or unintentionally leaving the pack at a low state of charge for years on end. The battery will be replaced at no cost by a factory reconditioned unit with an energy capacity equal to or better than the original pack before the failure occurred.
The intent is to provide complete peace of mind about owning your Model S even if you never read or followed the instructions in the manual.
On the other hand, the warranty itself does not really back it up:
The Battery, like all lithium-ion batteries, will expe
rience gradual energy or power loss with time and
use. Loss of Battery energy or power over time or
due to or resulting from Battery usage, is NOT
covered under this Battery Limited Warranty.
See your owner documentation for important
information on how to maximize the
life and capacity of the Battery.
People are claiming they've received emails from Tesla assuring them the battery will be replaced if it drops below 70% within the 8-year warranty period, but as one of the comments on that page calls out, that leaves a lot un-answered:
I was interested in purchasing a model S. I tried repeatedly to find out what criteria was used for warranty replacement of the battery. But Telsa would not answer me.
I also tried to find out whether a battery replaced under warranty was new or used. But Tesla would not answer me.
I also tried to find out whether a battery replaced under warranty was replaced without charge or if there was a pro-rata charge for time used, and if so the base price of the battery. But Tesla would not answer me.
I'm not surprised Tesla failed to personally respond to emails from this car-shopper, but the point is, they shouldn't have to - it should be in writing already.
I think the word "teleportation" is being dumbed down in the same way that "cloning" was re-defined to include only what is currently possible, rather than the full sense the word had previously. See also: invisibility.
I'm getting a little tired of these lab studies, which may or may not be missing some crucial factor. Has nobody done a randomized study in which a few thousand people go without cellphone use during driving for a few months to see if they have fewer accidents than a control group that does whatever they normally do?
OK, but now google also has to hire a manager to make sure *somebody* is showing up and doing their job each day, screen candidates - etc. all the overhead stuff is still there. There is no generic answer to whether or not some function could be performed more cheaply in-house.
You could cut out the middleman on this vehicle's charging turbine by removing the electrical system altogether and running it on gas, or diesel or propane.
Which one of those supports regenerative braking? I would think regenerative braking would be the single biggest win on a garbage truck. And you only need a small battery to do it on a hybrid.
"Disagree"? Parent has provided proof. You can't disagree with what is factually correct.
I take it you and the parent haven't actually used any other operating systems? They're not all like this.
I provided a link to a Microsoft-provided process that can often delete gigabytes of garbage from these directories, if you go to the effort of making it. The whole setup is a wasteful mess.
Although I still don't agree with you, upon further searching I see that Windows 8 (which I haven't used) did add a few more layers of goo that you can optionally spend time wrangling with to manage some of the winsxs bloat, and for that Microsoft perhaps deserves some credit. Perhaps.
Then again, winsxs is only one of several directories that often have people asking, "can I delete this?" See also C:\Windows\SoftwareDistribution, System Restore, and Windows.old, and c:\windows\installer. They are a mix of necessary and junk. From end to end, Windows is designed to keep everything, forever, just in case, instead of keeping track of things properly in the first place.
It is not just applications. If nothing else, Windows does burn disk space as if it were free. Every version of every update ever applied (and what else? registry backups?) hangs around "just in case," you're not supposed to delete it, ever.
Here is the kind of answer I do not want to hear: "The typical cost of hard drives is less than.15 Cents per Gigabyte. This means that a WinSxS folder that is 6GB costs around.90 Cents, and uses slightly more than 1 Percent of the drive. That's about the same cost as a large bag of potato chips. " (cite). Yeah, so? Maybe I'm on a laptop with a small SSD? Maybe it's a VM that I have a dozen copies of? Don't waste my resources and then try to talk me out of caring.
Honeywell had suggested that airlines should be forced to install new screens only if wi-fi enabled tablets or other such equipment were used in the cockpit.
However, the FAA rejected these complaints saying it wanted to "eliminate" any risk of interference.
That said, I sort of lost interest at this: "It estimated that the replacement programme would cost about $13.8m (£8.5m) to implement." The FAA is imposing a small cost for a small increment in safety. Not much to see here.
I dunno, because openness does not actually ensure consistency and compatibility, which is what is needed here.
Linux never did (yet) conquer the enterprise; instead they found interoperability by converging on Microsoft. Similarly, Internet standards bodies are increasingly irrelevant as most users flock to proprietary solutions, e.g. using Facebook instead of email to communicate with family and friends. And mobile computing (smartphones) never found mass adoption at all until it was packed into a managed walled garden, from which it shows little sign of wanting to escape.
We can't just wave this off with "it's all just bribery!" and leave it there.
The drivers are black. It has nothing to do with speeding or infractions. Cops don't charge anyone for actually doing something wrong.
This has been proven much closer to the truth than you probably think. For example, in this study, black and white women were found to be equally likely to use drugs during pregnancy, but black were ten times more likely to be reported to police:
Among the 715 pregnant women we screened, the overall prevalence of a positive result on the toxicologic tests of urine was 14.8 percent; there was little difference in prevalence between the women seen at the public clinics (16.3 percent) and those seen at the private offices (13.1 percent). The frequency of a positive result was also similar among white women (15.4 percent) and black women (14.1 percent)...
During the six-month period in which we collected the urine samples, 133 women in Pinellas County were reported to health authorities after delivery for substance abuse during pregnancy. Despite the similar rates of substance abuse among black and white women in our study, black women were reported at approximately 10 times the rate for white women (P < 0.0001 ), and poor women were more likely than others to be reported.
(cite - note, this is the New England Journal of Medicine!)
Drug use and speeding are probably close parallels in that a tiny proportion of all violations of the law are prosecuted, so who gets punished depends more on whom society chooses to scrutinize than actual crime rates.
More fundamentally, ALL equations are only approximations. They are just models of reality that fit well enough to suit the purposes, or as well as we can currently measure. The Laws of Physics are our current understanding of the truth, not the truth itself.
Slashdot Mirror
That doesn't sound to demanding to me. Acquiring a patent requires that you do this anyways.
So, there is some coverage for expenses even if you don't win.
You are quoting FROM the summary to claim the summary is misleading? I don't get it.
Either way there either are, or are not, descendants of these particular cave artists alive today, I think that is the question.
In other words, Apple putting $100BN in the bank is presumed to mean Apple created $100BN of value. In some sense that is true, but had Apple never released the iPhone, for the most part other smartphone makers would just be that much richer. The same goes even for Apple shareholders, since most of them also own stock in other companies, like Blackberry, Erikson, Nokia, Samsung, which have done less well as a direct result of Apple's success. It's mainly a wash.
It is true, attribution of credit is ridiculously subjective if not arbitrary at all levels, from authorship of papers, to how much money each person makes under any given economic system. There is no real solution to this, although some systems are better than others.
And I have to give a movie props for going on an unconventional or outright dubious premise and conclusion. Limitless and probably Idiotocracy fall into that category for me too.
Did you see "Transcendence"? (I know, not a lot of people did). How about "Her"? (Great movie). These are both post-Terminator films, in that super-human intelligence is portrayed in a positive light.
Oh, so simple! Complex products in complex environments always pose a threat every time you roll the dice by selecting one or even applying an update. The devil is in the details. Yet, simple finger-pointing responses like this are about all you can expect from a typically commenter on the Internet, regardless of the issue at hand.
Come on, you already know the answer to this one, say it with me now... "They already were hacking us, after all they're the Bad Guys! But even though we're the Good Guys, we just can't afford to show such once-sided deference any longer!"
It should also be noted that the conundrum can also be resolved by secrecy. Our actions won't provoke a response if they aren't known! So the real problem (or at least the most pragmatic) isn't what we did, it's that broken "justice" system that dragged it out into the light to stir up trouble. Well, we can fix that can't we...
That doesn't solve Twitter's problem of people fleeing twitter because they want to communicate privately. Twitter's early growth was largely associated with protest movements.
I wonder if part of this PhD glut is a delayed effect of the recession, which decreased employment opportunities over the last 6 years or so. Given the choice between taking your bachelor's to work at Starbucks or living on a similar salary as a grad student but with the prospect of an advanced degree a few years down the road, it was a rational thing to do. Of course, the "best" available option is not necessarily a "good" option.
On the one hand, Musk is saying all the right things:
On the other hand, the warranty itself does not really back it up:
People are claiming they've received emails from Tesla assuring them the battery will be replaced if it drops below 70% within the 8-year warranty period, but as one of the comments on that page calls out, that leaves a lot un-answered:
I'm not surprised Tesla failed to personally respond to emails from this car-shopper, but the point is, they shouldn't have to - it should be in writing already.
I think the word "teleportation" is being dumbed down in the same way that "cloning" was re-defined to include only what is currently possible, rather than the full sense the word had previously. See also: invisibility.
I'm getting a little tired of these lab studies, which may or may not be missing some crucial factor. Has nobody done a randomized study in which a few thousand people go without cellphone use during driving for a few months to see if they have fewer accidents than a control group that does whatever they normally do?
It's not an assumption, he's saying they could use biased hiring practices to improve their diversity stats.
OK, but now google also has to hire a manager to make sure *somebody* is showing up and doing their job each day, screen candidates - etc. all the overhead stuff is still there. There is no generic answer to whether or not some function could be performed more cheaply in-house.
Which one of those supports regenerative braking? I would think regenerative braking would be the single biggest win on a garbage truck. And you only need a small battery to do it on a hybrid.
I take it you and the parent haven't actually used any other operating systems? They're not all like this.
I provided a link to a Microsoft-provided process that can often delete gigabytes of garbage from these directories, if you go to the effort of making it. The whole setup is a wasteful mess.
Then again, winsxs is only one of several directories that often have people asking, "can I delete this?" See also C:\Windows\SoftwareDistribution, System Restore, and Windows.old, and c:\windows\installer. They are a mix of necessary and junk. From end to end, Windows is designed to keep everything, forever, just in case, instead of keeping track of things properly in the first place.
Here is the kind of answer I do not want to hear: "The typical cost of hard drives is less than .15 Cents per Gigabyte. This means that a WinSxS folder that is 6GB costs around .90 Cents, and uses slightly more than 1 Percent of the drive. That's about the same cost as a large bag of potato chips. " (cite). Yeah, so? Maybe I'm on a laptop with a small SSD? Maybe it's a VM that I have a dozen copies of? Don't waste my resources and then try to talk me out of caring.
That said, I sort of lost interest at this: "It estimated that the replacement programme would cost about $13.8m (£8.5m) to implement." The FAA is imposing a small cost for a small increment in safety. Not much to see here.
Linux never did (yet) conquer the enterprise; instead they found interoperability by converging on Microsoft. Similarly, Internet standards bodies are increasingly irrelevant as most users flock to proprietary solutions, e.g. using Facebook instead of email to communicate with family and friends. And mobile computing (smartphones) never found mass adoption at all until it was packed into a managed walled garden, from which it shows little sign of wanting to escape.
We can't just wave this off with "it's all just bribery!" and leave it there.
This has been proven much closer to the truth than you probably think. For example, in this study, black and white women were found to be equally likely to use drugs during pregnancy, but black were ten times more likely to be reported to police:
(cite - note, this is the New England Journal of Medicine!)
Drug use and speeding are probably close parallels in that a tiny proportion of all violations of the law are prosecuted, so who gets punished depends more on whom society chooses to scrutinize than actual crime rates.
More fundamentally, ALL equations are only approximations. They are just models of reality that fit well enough to suit the purposes, or as well as we can currently measure. The Laws of Physics are our current understanding of the truth, not the truth itself.