An entertainment device does not need and has no business being integrated into the driving computer.
Doing so is a HUGE security risk.
Any device designed to entertain/inform/communicate with the humans inside the vehicle should be air-gapped away from the controls of the driverless car.
We do not want to let a bug/feature of the entertainment system be used to hack the driving software.
Nor do we want the human's downloading of 25 movies for their cross country trip to someway use up resources/bandwith that the driving device.
Anything else just constitutes a totally un-necessary security risk for minimals saving in weight/money.
The idea that we can stop aging in 5 years is just ridiculous.
But let's assume we do it.
1) Effective life span now is only about 40% longer. Yes, only 40% longer. People don't die of old age, they die of diabetes, heart attacks, strokes, car accidents, etc.
2) Social Security on the other hands GOES AWAY. If we no longer die of old age, then we don't have to pay people for being too old to work. Same goes for Medicare.
3) Those currently on Social Security get moved to Disability - with their disability being their aging was stopped at a weakened state. They continue to get paid until they die.
4) Birth Rate sky ROCKETS. Much more than 40%, because while you might live to 120 on average, at the age of 100 you will still be just as interested in sex, as your body is still young AND you will not be worrying about being unable to put children through college at 120.
5) Divorce rate goes up. When you hit 60, it won't be "eh, I can't do better", but instead "Yeah, I can do better".
6) But as men take to take more risks and less care for their health, their will be more older women than older men. Similarly, the older population will likely be more white, more wealthy, and more risk adverse.
7) Politics will become more conservative Not because older people become conservative, but because liberal ideas advance. So a person that was a huge liberal 100 years ago has the same ideas, but those ideas are considered conservative. Example: Consider a man like Abraham Lincoln. The Great Emancipator who freed the slaves. One of the shining lights of liberalism of his time. Who on at least one occasion said that whites were superior to blacks, didn't think blacks should serve on juries, nor allowed to marry whites. Would his views have evolved if he were still alive today? Perhaps. But not all of his contemporaries would have evolved at the same rate.
Frankly, I don't think we are ready to stop aging, even if we could (which we can't).
Live in an unincorporated area, with no community board, no community center, etc.
Because almost all of the problems come from LOCAL governments doing stupid things.
The federal government has more important stuff to do, it only gets involved in things that need regulation. They might make BAD regulations, but they don't waist time on things that don't need to be regulated.
States do some stupid things, cities/towns do a LOT of stupid things. When you hear about a silly California law, it's almost always something a town/city has done, not the state.
But the absolute worst regulations are those put out by home owners associations or co-ops. Pets, noise, paint color, fees for having overnight guests/street parking, pool rules. SATELITE SURVEILANCE in order to ensure compliance Garage sale rules, dress code rules, home business rules, gardening rules, the list is endless.
HOAs basically demonstrate what communism was like. In fact, that's how communism got so bad, they based their entire government on an HOA.
While percentages are down, it's not always the case for raw numbers. Some of them are. Not just for violence, but also for diseases, poverty, etc.
Clearly we are getting better at stuff, but for certain things, raw numbers are more important than percentages.
Suppose there was a just a single serial killer out there that killed one person every year for the past 25 years. Population doubles every 23 years or so. So it looks like he has cut his death rate in half, when it has actually stayed the same.
Ignore the politicians that talk about how bad things are. That is a straight out lie. But are things really getting better or are we simply adding more people that don't have the same problems that the oldsters had? That's a different story.
Personally, I think we are actually doing better. But it's not as cut and dried as the story seems to think it is.
1) They won't lock you in a rubber room, that's s silly idea. People take home amputated body parts all the time. Usually small ones, such as teeth.
2) But they might arrest you for improper disposal of human remains. There is a difference between the government telling what you can and can not do, and a company telling you.
If I buy something I OWN it. That means I get to do with it what I want, barring government restrictions. The shcmuck that sold it to me does not have the right to say "HEY! You can't DO THAT!"
They gave up that right when they sold it to me.
When I sell you a house, I can't then complain and say "Now wait a second, I may have sold you that house, but it's still mine and I don't like that new garage you are building!"
If they want to offer a lease (with the right of the customer to return the leased object to the legal owner at no cost to the leasee), that's one thing.
But if you own something, you have all legal rights to not just repair but to modify as well. The most the manufacturers should be able to do is cancel the warranty on modification.
1) The internet is a global phenomena and needs some kind of global policing to stop this. They don't need huge powers - merely being able to cut off internet service and accounts
2) Some of it comes from companies acting really stupidly. The cable, power, Twitter etc. really did a BAD job handling the attacks and should have done a lot more to fix the situation. In particular, the 'services for the deaf' loopholes need to be fixedas this is a common abuse.
3)We need to admit that recently, there are a multitude of ways to steal/borrow people's Identity and we change government laws to account for this. Offer name/ID change services from the government, that require the participants to give DNA, fingerprint, photo, and signature (to avoid criminals abusing it), then issue new names and ID numbers linked to duplicates of the real data with certain key facts removed so it can't be back traced. You lose your old fair-weather friends, but can give you real family/best friends the new bio data, on the condition they give it out to nobody.
Someone in accounting wants a promotion. His job has nothing to do with the sales, all he does is control costs. The better a job he does, the better his bonus. So he tries to cut everything to the bone.
Which means the real problem is his boss. His boss has put saving money above getting the best employees and cares less about retention/hiring costs/PR then he does about his budget.
I wonder did some Russian get early access to the US TV show Madam Secretary and think "Do that to fictional Russia? Screw them, we will do it for REAL in Crimea!"
Or (more paranoid-ly) did Madam Secretary's script writers get early intel on what Russia planned?
The two factor capablility makes it more secure, not less. Short passwords are easier to remember than longer passwords, assuming you are not doing something stupid.
The other factor does not have to be your phone, it can be a token. More importantly, if it is done correctly on your phone, they don't get your phone number - that would be stupid for reasons you mentioned and has NOTHING to do with what I was describing.
For token, think of a small USB device you plug in to your PC that has a very long password.
Everything should be two factor password system with one being a token/phone/pc, the second one should be a short, (no more than 6 symobls - including every key on a standard keyboard - and you should not have to change anything more often than twice a year.
1) It is very, very, hard to stop a decentralized terrorist agency.
2) The CIA etc. are very, very good at identifying leadership, money, and top players. That is what their intel does.
3) When they do stop an attack, they do NOT broadcast it. Instead they try to backtrack it the higher ups, taking them out. They can't do this if they tell the news.
4) We are sacrificing many rights for false security. Airline crap is a prime example. Not only does it not work, but it is costly. Similarly, they are unconstitionaly taking way too much information about American citizens and sharing it with other agencies. But that doesn't mean the security agencies are doing nothing. They are more effective than people realize.
I would agree that we have given them too much importance and made too many sacrifices. But when you denigrate their real, effective, efforts, you hurt your own argument.
Slashdot Mirror
Doing so is a HUGE security risk.
Any device designed to entertain/inform/communicate with the humans inside the vehicle should be air-gapped away from the controls of the driverless car.
We do not want to let a bug/feature of the entertainment system be used to hack the driving software.
Nor do we want the human's downloading of 25 movies for their cross country trip to someway use up resources/bandwith that the driving device.
Anything else just constitutes a totally un-necessary security risk for minimals saving in weight/money.
All the rest are signs of normal, intelligent, nerd behavior.
Basically, the UK hates nerds and wants to make sure that no British kid ever grows up to start or get anywhere in an e-business.
Because I don't like it when people delete incriminating/vicious things they said to em.
It's kind of like taking an airplane and calling it a "Starship".
It's fraud. No ifs, ands or buts about it.
1) Effective life span now is only about 40% longer. Yes, only 40% longer. People don't die of old age, they die of diabetes, heart attacks, strokes, car accidents, etc.
2) Social Security on the other hands GOES AWAY. If we no longer die of old age, then we don't have to pay people for being too old to work. Same goes for Medicare.
3) Those currently on Social Security get moved to Disability - with their disability being their aging was stopped at a weakened state. They continue to get paid until they die.
4) Birth Rate sky ROCKETS. Much more than 40%, because while you might live to 120 on average, at the age of 100 you will still be just as interested in sex, as your body is still young AND you will not be worrying about being unable to put children through college at 120.
5) Divorce rate goes up. When you hit 60, it won't be "eh, I can't do better", but instead "Yeah, I can do better".
6) But as men take to take more risks and less care for their health, their will be more older women than older men. Similarly, the older population will likely be more white, more wealthy, and more risk adverse.
7) Politics will become more conservative Not because older people become conservative, but because liberal ideas advance. So a person that was a huge liberal 100 years ago has the same ideas, but those ideas are considered conservative. Example: Consider a man like Abraham Lincoln. The Great Emancipator who freed the slaves. One of the shining lights of liberalism of his time. Who on at least one occasion said that whites were superior to blacks, didn't think blacks should serve on juries, nor allowed to marry whites. Would his views have evolved if he were still alive today? Perhaps. But not all of his contemporaries would have evolved at the same rate.
Frankly, I don't think we are ready to stop aging, even if we could (which we can't).
If you say you can't pay the monetary charges, you get hit with community service. Suddenly I bet those fees vanish into thin air.
Because it's third party, you know they can't put any special back doors allowing their company access to your equiptment.
http://techcrunch.com/2015/11/...
Live in an unincorporated area, with no community board, no community center, etc.
Because almost all of the problems come from LOCAL governments doing stupid things.
The federal government has more important stuff to do, it only gets involved in things that need regulation. They might make BAD regulations, but they don't waist time on things that don't need to be regulated.
States do some stupid things, cities/towns do a LOT of stupid things. When you hear about a silly California law, it's almost always something a town/city has done, not the state.
But the absolute worst regulations are those put out by home owners associations or co-ops. Pets, noise, paint color, fees for having overnight guests/street parking, pool rules. SATELITE SURVEILANCE in order to ensure compliance Garage sale rules, dress code rules, home business rules, gardening rules, the list is endless.
HOAs basically demonstrate what communism was like. In fact, that's how communism got so bad, they based their entire government on an HOA.
Clearly we are getting better at stuff, but for certain things, raw numbers are more important than percentages.
Suppose there was a just a single serial killer out there that killed one person every year for the past 25 years. Population doubles every 23 years or so. So it looks like he has cut his death rate in half, when it has actually stayed the same.
Ignore the politicians that talk about how bad things are. That is a straight out lie. But are things really getting better or are we simply adding more people that don't have the same problems that the oldsters had? That's a different story.
Personally, I think we are actually doing better. But it's not as cut and dried as the story seems to think it is.
2) Will you enjoy building it? Then chances are you should build it yourself. Screw the money, go for the XP!
3) Is your time valuable? Because if you won't enjoy it and want to save the money, then chances are any cash you do save will not be worth your time.
Basically, if this sounds like a fun time, then do it. But don't expect to make a monetary profit.
If they let civilians use the weapons, they could probably eliminate the deficit.
Why would you tip someone that is going out of their way to give you bad service?
2) But they might arrest you for improper disposal of human remains. There is a difference between the government telling what you can and can not do, and a company telling you.
If I buy something I OWN it. That means I get to do with it what I want, barring government restrictions. The shcmuck that sold it to me does not have the right to say "HEY! You can't DO THAT!"
They gave up that right when they sold it to me.
When I sell you a house, I can't then complain and say "Now wait a second, I may have sold you that house, but it's still mine and I don't like that new garage you are building!"
But if you own something, you have all legal rights to not just repair but to modify as well. The most the manufacturers should be able to do is cancel the warranty on modification.
1) Respect our privacy
2) Ignore/Fight NSA warrants to let them use the Nest to look into your home with the light turned off.
3) Write perfect code so that crackers/hackers will never get in and play with it.
On second thought, these things should be sold with camera covers.
2) Some of it comes from companies acting really stupidly. The cable, power, Twitter etc. really did a BAD job handling the attacks and should have done a lot more to fix the situation. In particular, the 'services for the deaf' loopholes need to be fixedas this is a common abuse.
3)We need to admit that recently, there are a multitude of ways to steal/borrow people's Identity and we change government laws to account for this. Offer name/ID change services from the government, that require the participants to give DNA, fingerprint, photo, and signature (to avoid criminals abusing it), then issue new names and ID numbers linked to duplicates of the real data with certain key facts removed so it can't be back traced. You lose your old fair-weather friends, but can give you real family/best friends the new bio data, on the condition they give it out to nobody.
Cut off my cable because some stranger told you to do so? Better give me a free month or be sued for breach of contract.
Which means the real problem is his boss. His boss has put saving money above getting the best employees and cares less about retention/hiring costs/PR then he does about his budget.
Or (more paranoid-ly) did Madam Secretary's script writers get early intel on what Russia planned?
The other factor does not have to be your phone, it can be a token. More importantly, if it is done correctly on your phone, they don't get your phone number - that would be stupid for reasons you mentioned and has NOTHING to do with what I was describing.
For token, think of a small USB device you plug in to your PC that has a very long password.
The first option was a token, not a phone. Use that..
Everything should be two factor password system with one being a token/phone/pc, the second one should be a short, (no more than 6 symobls - including every key on a standard keyboard - and you should not have to change anything more often than twice a year.
1) Launching spy satellites.
2) Launching communication/GPS satellites.
The first is entirely government based, the second is something the governments wants to keep a very close eye/ear on/in.
2) The CIA etc. are very, very good at identifying leadership, money, and top players. That is what their intel does.
3) When they do stop an attack, they do NOT broadcast it. Instead they try to backtrack it the higher ups, taking them out. They can't do this if they tell the news.
4) We are sacrificing many rights for false security. Airline crap is a prime example. Not only does it not work, but it is costly. Similarly, they are unconstitionaly taking way too much information about American citizens and sharing it with other agencies. But that doesn't mean the security agencies are doing nothing. They are more effective than people realize.
I would agree that we have given them too much importance and made too many sacrifices. But when you denigrate their real, effective, efforts, you hurt your own argument.