sorry, but traffic is much safer today than it used to be. It's just that society's way too over sensitized now. You talk like machines are infallible. They're not. They're designed and programmed by humans after all. No, the only thing this grants is external control for the more panicky and control freakish humans so they can 'feel' safe and 'empowered' at the expense of others' sanity/rights/happiness/control/other things that make life worth living.
No, I don't think everyone's equal, nor do I think they're static variables, but all skillsets do regress over time, with unused skills diving faster than often used ones. This is biological reality. Someone with natural kinesthetic ability might take longer to forget how to ride, or not lose as much as someone who had to practice for a year to get it right, but they both do regress, if not from lack of practice, then from age. There's a reason olympic athletes retire by their mid 30s. No matter how good they are relative to us, and how much they practice, they'll never be able to recapture their late teens/20s performance. The same goes for intellectual pursuits as well, though there is more variance, per individual here.
Judging from your UID, you're probably in your mid 20s at most.. If this is true, you haven't learned the lesson yet. Don't challenge others' perceptions until you are sure you are challenging yours first.
Well, what we have now is reasonable and far better than in the past. The cars are about as safe as the laws of physics will allow, as are the roads, over reasonable cost. If anything, they're too safe and insulating, causing the driver to relax too much/get sleepy. Allowing more road noise into the cabin would also go a long way to fixing any inattention issues.
So what's the solution? handing off control to computers programmed to obey the will of some transportation authority run by minimum wage slaves and self-important politicrats? Frankly, I don't care what they think as they're not the ones behind the wheel.
yes, since humans are so stupid and helpless, we must preempt the problem by locking them away from the terrible secret of space. space has a terrible power after all, and so the humans should go down the stairs..and if they do not go willingly, they must be pushed/shoved...
One path to totalitarianism is the might of the fist, another is the suffocation of the mind by shrinking its choices and involvement in life. Control over physical movement is a large part of this.
Unfortunately, this is because insecurity runs rampant in today's society. It's a natural instinct, of course, as most animals spend large parts of their lives feeling insecure about some aspect of their existence. Will there be food here? Will the herd reject me? Will I be killed by a predator? These questions are a constant instinctive tussle for them, and for humans as well. Thus it is easy to trigger it in people with half assed/manipulated stats and fallacious reasoning. Today, we have a society that is so concerned with feelings and beliefs, it actually encourages dependence and submission in its youth so that these are not challenged often. From preschool teachers to college professors, they are all pushing this, not just because it's what they were taught, or even because their institutions benefit from it, but because it jives with this instinctual fear.
Most people want to 'feel' protected from the terrible secret of space, so they have no problem being pushed/shoved down the stairs. It's a recursive loop that is hard to break and keep broken, but it is imperative to do in order to defend liberties.
well duh, we shouldn't get x-ray'd for doing that either. That's a terrible justification. Your stats suck too because driving is one of the most common things we all do...and equating that with supporting murderers is extremely disingenuous and fallacious.
If our society was mature enough to handle such power centralization without running roughshod over people's rights, you might have a point. Since that's not ever going to happen, I'd rather have the higher risk and keep the control I have over my equipment. Your safety is not more important than my freedom (or yours, or anyone else's)
..and my point is that your robin hood technique does not maximize the potential of the maximum number of people. It ensures mediocrity at best, and discrimination of certain groups based on assumed-true grievances at worst...all in the name of 'equality' or anti-discrimination of course.
Guaranteeing that those born with a silver spoon in their mouth get all the sugar is only of benefit to those born that way.
I never said they get 'all the sugar.' I said they get to eat some of the sugar they (or their parents in this case) have earned.
Oh, and it's precisely because life isn't fair that we need to even things up a bit, or you just get the libertarian/fascist dream scenario of a few people controlling all the money. power, resources and happiness
My point is that life cannot be made fair. There's always someone getting the short end. Libertarians are not fascists. Like socialism, fascism requires a large central government, bored out from the back end by corporates. Libertarians would not support this. Sounds to me like you are the one preferring the 'fascist' dream.. both fascism and socialism have very similiar final goals, and the USA is a prime example of how that hybrid can exist. People who support this are just ignorant or insecure, so they cheer on the big tyrant to stick it to the other guy who managed to do better than him.
Well I'm sure, but what about the algorithms? that's where this gets tricky.. I guarantee there's no way for even the brightest engineers to account for everything that can happen on the street. The technology is far away from the 'infinite safety' the safetards around here assume for anything driven by computers. The fact we can't even get network security right in sensitive equipment driven by them (eg SCADA) does not make me hopeful for future developments.
If safety, and not control, is the real motivator here, just remove the cell towers covering most highways. It'll do far more for safety than robotic cars with strings attached.
This is why we can't seem to maintain free societies. Insecure people start demanding that safety take precedence over freedom over what if's and maybes, quick derail other's abilities to have a say in their fates before all of civilization falls. While there are instances where safety concerns are legitimate, in cases like this, the only people concerned with the what ifs and maybes are those who are control freaks or have some other agenda driven by unbelievable personal insecurity.
..and of course machines will be perfect right? where have I heard this before? With computer driven cars, you're one blocked/failed sensor away from a computer that will happily drive you and everyone else in that area off a cliff with no ability to override because 'computers never lie.'..and of course the state and corporates won't want to use that power to dictate when and where you may travel, right??
Why is it little cowards like you can't see that your insecurity does not justify others giving up their rights/privacy/self-reliance? This hurts free society at fundamental levels.
Wake up.. The powers that be, whether they be government or corporates, don't care about your safety.. They want you dependent. None of us lead boring enough lives that such entities, given sufficient power and resource, won't take interest in them. They'll micromanage us from cradle to grave while they preach about 'safety' if you let them, so I hope to see a new resurgence of individuality and freedom in humanity before I die. The alternative is too depressing to contemplate.
just seems like every day there are fewer and fewer acceptable discipline methods available besides passive aggressive manipulation. I consider the latter far more damaging and becoming far more pervasive in today's society than it should. A hammer with a felt cover is still a hammer.
knock it off with your disingenuous rubbish. Your pantywaist bullshit has created, now, several generations of overly sensitive cowards who can't handle direct confrontation. lack of this basic skill is what's causing americans to lose their liberties for the sake of $GROUP_X's feelings.
We already have laws for that.. What you complain about is covered by property rights. Such machines 'might' require licensing (though I'm not a fan of this because license fees quickly become expensive taxes), but otherwise, law enforcement stripping your 'robot' is no different than stripping your laptop or any other digital device. This would only be yet another example of a much larger problem that exists right now in reality-land.
Bottom line: We don't need idiotic 'machine rights' to soothe people who never outgrew their walt disney trained childhood anthropomorphism. Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with academic culture at MIT? Are their marxists running out of people-groups to target with their divisive insertion tactics? Are they full of people who want their 'real dolls' treated as humans by people who think they're nuts?
so that means the kids who have a shot at maximizing their potential because their parents did well in life shouldn't have such an advantage?
protip: life isn't fair.. it's anything but equal. A society that embraces this childish single dimensional definition of the term is doomed to failure.
children driving a tractor or whatever is NOT abuse.. While I did not grow up on a farm, I was driving the family 12hp workhorse to mow lawns and haul wood and such.. I was around 6 or 7.
Riding a bike is not the same kind of skill as solving algebra equations.. Biking is kinesthetic and math is intellectual. The brain treats these skills very very differently. Nevertheless, ALL skills regress over time. It's a drawback to neurology that can adapt. Old cruft gets thrown out.
Perhaps the real problem is that some large percentage of what's taught in school is cruft. How it's taught can also be 'cruft' as well.
Slashdot Mirror
sorry, but traffic is much safer today than it used to be. It's just that society's way too over sensitized now. You talk like machines are infallible. They're not. They're designed and programmed by humans after all. No, the only thing this grants is external control for the more panicky and control freakish humans so they can 'feel' safe and 'empowered' at the expense of others' sanity/rights/happiness/control/other things that make life worth living.
No, I don't think everyone's equal, nor do I think they're static variables, but all skillsets do regress over time, with unused skills diving faster than often used ones. This is biological reality. Someone with natural kinesthetic ability might take longer to forget how to ride, or not lose as much as someone who had to practice for a year to get it right, but they both do regress, if not from lack of practice, then from age. There's a reason olympic athletes retire by their mid 30s. No matter how good they are relative to us, and how much they practice, they'll never be able to recapture their late teens/20s performance. The same goes for intellectual pursuits as well, though there is more variance, per individual here.
Judging from your UID, you're probably in your mid 20s at most.. If this is true, you haven't learned the lesson yet. Don't challenge others' perceptions until you are sure you are challenging yours first.
Well, what we have now is reasonable and far better than in the past. The cars are about as safe as the laws of physics will allow, as are the roads, over reasonable cost. If anything, they're too safe and insulating, causing the driver to relax too much/get sleepy. Allowing more road noise into the cabin would also go a long way to fixing any inattention issues.
So what's the solution? handing off control to computers programmed to obey the will of some transportation authority run by minimum wage slaves and self-important politicrats? Frankly, I don't care what they think as they're not the ones behind the wheel.
yes, since humans are so stupid and helpless, we must preempt the problem by locking them away from the terrible secret of space. space has a terrible power after all, and so the humans should go down the stairs..and if they do not go willingly, they must be pushed/shoved...
One path to totalitarianism is the might of the fist, another is the suffocation of the mind by shrinking its choices and involvement in life. Control over physical movement is a large part of this.
Unfortunately, this is because insecurity runs rampant in today's society. It's a natural instinct, of course, as most animals spend large parts of their lives feeling insecure about some aspect of their existence. Will there be food here? Will the herd reject me? Will I be killed by a predator? These questions are a constant instinctive tussle for them, and for humans as well. Thus it is easy to trigger it in people with half assed/manipulated stats and fallacious reasoning. Today, we have a society that is so concerned with feelings and beliefs, it actually encourages dependence and submission in its youth so that these are not challenged often. From preschool teachers to college professors, they are all pushing this, not just because it's what they were taught, or even because their institutions benefit from it, but because it jives with this instinctual fear.
Most people want to 'feel' protected from the terrible secret of space, so they have no problem being pushed/shoved down the stairs. It's a recursive loop that is hard to break and keep broken, but it is imperative to do in order to defend liberties.
well duh, we shouldn't get x-ray'd for doing that either. That's a terrible justification. Your stats suck too because driving is one of the most common things we all do...and equating that with supporting murderers is extremely disingenuous and fallacious.
If our society was mature enough to handle such power centralization without running roughshod over people's rights, you might have a point. Since that's not ever going to happen, I'd rather have the higher risk and keep the control I have over my equipment. Your safety is not more important than my freedom (or yours, or anyone else's)
..and my point is that your robin hood technique does not maximize the potential of the maximum number of people. It ensures mediocrity at best, and discrimination of certain groups based on assumed-true grievances at worst...all in the name of 'equality' or anti-discrimination of course.
Guaranteeing that those born with a silver spoon in their mouth get all the sugar is only of benefit to those born that way.
I never said they get 'all the sugar.' I said they get to eat some of the sugar they (or their parents in this case) have earned.
Oh, and it's precisely because life isn't fair that we need to even things up a bit, or you just get the libertarian/fascist dream scenario of a few people controlling all the money. power, resources and happiness
My point is that life cannot be made fair. There's always someone getting the short end. Libertarians are not fascists. Like socialism, fascism requires a large central government, bored out from the back end by corporates. Libertarians would not support this. Sounds to me like you are the one preferring the 'fascist' dream.. both fascism and socialism have very similiar final goals, and the USA is a prime example of how that hybrid can exist. People who support this are just ignorant or insecure, so they cheer on the big tyrant to stick it to the other guy who managed to do better than him.
Well I'm sure, but what about the algorithms? that's where this gets tricky.. I guarantee there's no way for even the brightest engineers to account for everything that can happen on the street. The technology is far away from the 'infinite safety' the safetards around here assume for anything driven by computers. The fact we can't even get network security right in sensitive equipment driven by them (eg SCADA) does not make me hopeful for future developments.
If safety, and not control, is the real motivator here, just remove the cell towers covering most highways. It'll do far more for safety than robotic cars with strings attached.
This is why we can't seem to maintain free societies. Insecure people start demanding that safety take precedence over freedom over what if's and maybes, quick derail other's abilities to have a say in their fates before all of civilization falls. While there are instances where safety concerns are legitimate, in cases like this, the only people concerned with the what ifs and maybes are those who are control freaks or have some other agenda driven by unbelievable personal insecurity.
it doesn't 'have' to, but you can be the government (and marketers) will want it to..and they'll want remote control as well.
..and of course machines will be perfect right? where have I heard this before? With computer driven cars, you're one blocked/failed sensor away from a computer that will happily drive you and everyone else in that area off a cliff with no ability to override because 'computers never lie.' ..and of course the state and corporates won't want to use that power to dictate when and where you may travel, right??
Why is it little cowards like you can't see that your insecurity does not justify others giving up their rights/privacy/self-reliance? This hurts free society at fundamental levels.
Wake up.. The powers that be, whether they be government or corporates, don't care about your safety.. They want you dependent. None of us lead boring enough lives that such entities, given sufficient power and resource, won't take interest in them. They'll micromanage us from cradle to grave while they preach about 'safety' if you let them, so I hope to see a new resurgence of individuality and freedom in humanity before I die. The alternative is too depressing to contemplate.
just seems like every day there are fewer and fewer acceptable discipline methods available besides passive aggressive manipulation. I consider the latter far more damaging and becoming far more pervasive in today's society than it should. A hammer with a felt cover is still a hammer.
knock it off with your disingenuous rubbish. Your pantywaist bullshit has created, now, several generations of overly sensitive cowards who can't handle direct confrontation. lack of this basic skill is what's causing americans to lose their liberties for the sake of $GROUP_X's feelings.
oh please.. give me a break. a spanking is not a beating.
We already have laws for that.. What you complain about is covered by property rights. Such machines 'might' require licensing (though I'm not a fan of this because license fees quickly become expensive taxes), but otherwise, law enforcement stripping your 'robot' is no different than stripping your laptop or any other digital device. This would only be yet another example of a much larger problem that exists right now in reality-land.
Bottom line: We don't need idiotic 'machine rights' to soothe people who never outgrew their walt disney trained childhood anthropomorphism. Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with academic culture at MIT? Are their marxists running out of people-groups to target with their divisive insertion tactics? Are they full of people who want their 'real dolls' treated as humans by people who think they're nuts?
I could be a socialist and still make that comment, AND still be truthful.
so that means the kids who have a shot at maximizing their potential because their parents did well in life shouldn't have such an advantage?
protip: life isn't fair.. it's anything but equal. A society that embraces this childish single dimensional definition of the term is doomed to failure.
*edit* I meant mow 'the' lawn.. which was around 3.5acres.
children driving a tractor or whatever is NOT abuse.. While I did not grow up on a farm, I was driving the family 12hp workhorse to mow lawns and haul wood and such.. I was around 6 or 7.
Fine.. fix the QUALITY of the education first.. When that's done, we can talk about whether increasing the school year is worth it.
Sorry, but socialism isn't the answer to everything.
Not about the quantity, it's about the quality..
Riding a bike is not the same kind of skill as solving algebra equations.. Biking is kinesthetic and math is intellectual. The brain treats these skills very very differently. Nevertheless, ALL skills regress over time. It's a drawback to neurology that can adapt. Old cruft gets thrown out.
Perhaps the real problem is that some large percentage of what's taught in school is cruft. How it's taught can also be 'cruft' as well.