I will take that bet. The GOP is currently pushing privacy for american citizens, claiming Obama is evil.
For that reason, Congress will not rule against a pro-american privacy ruling by the SCOTUS.
Now, if terrorists were somehow involved, the GOP would say "Rights? Foreigners don't got no rights!"
The FBI locks people up, but they don't control the prisons. The prison system is very obedient to the courts. So if the court says the FBI screwed up, we have to let them go, the prisons lets them go.
When speaking about the NSA on the other hand, you have a better argument. The NSA does not lock people up where the US courts can release them. In fact, they are more likely to just kill someone.
The data could be an imminent threat. If you suspect someone of being one of two kidnappers, who threatened to kill their victim, and was arrested with the phone in hand.
Then there would be an imminent threat of death for the victim, allowing cops to search the phone for recent calls.
You can't sell something you don't own.
But what you could do is sell information, which you do own.
In exchange for a set fee of $1, you can state the exact location you just vacated.
No 'guarantee' of getting the spot, so you are not selling the spot. Instead you are selling the location data that is time sensitive.
Specifically that means, if someone else comes along and takes the spot before your buyer arrives, the buyer is out of luck.
Look, the main issue everyone has with exoskeletons is the same issue we have with jetpacks - power limitations.
Batteries are heavy. It takes an awful lot of energy to even give someone human strength, not counting the additional costs to carry the battery and the exoskeleton itself.
As such, all exoskeletons suits currently in development either are tethered to a wall plug or have a ridiculously low battery capacity.
A couple of people tried to make it work using fuel powered engines (gasoline, etc.) to power the , but those are also heavy once again resulting in shortened times between re-fueling.
Even if you eliminate the dead weight of human limbs, (ie. small pack bots) the operating time is too short for things
Anyone that makes a significant improvement in this area would not portray it as "working exoskeleton", but instead as "INCREDIBLY LONG LIFE BATTERY/GENERATOR".
Informational: This is what most people think advertising is all about. It provides you with information about a product. It might be telling you a new product exists, or just a new flavor/kind of an existing product. It might tell you about what it does, or the price, at heart it is simple and easy to understand - people can't buy it if they don't know about it.
Branding: This type of advertisement is not about information, it is about a feeling. It's what most of those 'cool' superbowl ads are trying to do. It's why Coca-cola and Apple keeps advertising (everybody already knows about Coca-Cola and they rarely talk about price/new products). This is about creating the feeling that this product is the kind of product that people like you buy. It also makes people believe the product is higher quality, because look, they can afford to advertise. (which also implies they have insurance to pay out if they accidentally put lead pain in your toothpaste, as opposed to that store brand you never see on TV).
Because lay people don't understand branding, they routinely underestimate the value of advertising.
Which is why we need net neutrality, as opposed to simply trusting that the ISP will abide by their ADVERTISED service, as opposed to sneaking fine print into the contract like you discussed.
The debate about net neutrality is not really about 'equal' speeds. That concept is a ridiculous over-simplification. People in NYC get faster internet access, particularly to things like stock trades that are hosted in NYC, than those in Nome, Alaska. Similarly, when the USA's Constitution says all people are created equal, we don't mean that they all have the same IQ, or are all entitled to the same retirement plan (Sad to say we don't even mean they are all entitled to the same healthcare).
No. Net neutrality is about ISP's not violating their contracts with their customers.
My ISP works for ME. I pay them to provide X amount of service. As such they are legally required to provide me with X amount of service, even if take full advantage of their service and use X amount of service every single second of the day. They can't promise me 10gb/second, and then only give me 10gb/second for ten minutes a day, switching to 5 gb/second after those ten minutes.
They are perfectly allowed to give me MORE than 10gbs a second, if someone else - like say Google - offers to pay for it.
But they can decide to not give me 10gbs because netflix refuses to bow down to extortion from them, even if I am using all 10gbs every second of every day of every month. Nothing netflix or other companies do gives them permission to break their contract with me.
Not that I included that as something PHYSICAL, not something not thrown away.
That is, if Barack Obama want's his great grandchild to have a physical copy of your first love letter, to put in a museum, or sell to avoid bankruptcy, then you send a real letter.
As in why anyone would want a smartphone from Amazon.
I can easily see why amazon would like to add to it's monopoly.
The real question is can it offer ANY advantage to us for using it's hardware? If it can't, then they should give away an app, not try to sell us hardware.
For me, I can't think of anything they can do for me with hardware that they can't do with software.
Yes. Because the right to be forgotten is not designed to destroy the evidence.
Instead it is designed to make it just a little bit harder to destroy someone's life.
If for example your ex-wife or girlfriend falsely accuses you of being a pedophile, then flees the country and keeps posting new blogs about how you had sex with her non-existent daughter, you still deserve the right to get a job.
If google blocks you from just you countrie's version of google, then you can get a job. Some companies may check multiple versions of google, and reject you based on the slander, but not all will do it.
The right to be forgotten is not designed to prevent anyone from finding out stuff, just to make it a little bit harder.
If the patents work, then reverse engineering is worthless. If they don't, then you absolutely need reverse engineering.
For this reason, the test of a patent system is are companies willing to reverse engineer. If they are, then the patents don't work. If they don't think it's worthwhile then it is working.
Does Amazon offer you:
1) Stores where you can pick up your purchase instantly - for no addtional money
2) Free wifi in the store.
3) The ability to read books for free - both physical and on your nook in the store.
4) Free, instant servicing for your kindle in that store?
Actually, the real problem is not the skill in gerrymandering, but their political decisions..
Republicans have ceased to be a 'conservative' party and instead become a RURAL party. In large part because government works much better in cities (easier to provide government services there), but also because of minority concentration.
This leaves the cities full (80%+) of liberals.
When it comes to gerrymandering, your best bet is to concentrate all your enemey in one district - anything over 60% is worthless to the party that has the majority - those 61+ % voters could have been moved to a district where you are in doubt.
It is a lot harder to justify gerrymandering a combination district that contains some of those inner city votes and also the outer rural votes - in part because the city voters can easily change districts without having to change jobs as well as home.
Turnign test is NOT supposed to be limited to 15 minutes, nor is it supposed to be conducted by someone that does not understand the main language claimed to be used by the computer.
Similarly, the computer must convince the judge it is a human with it's full mental capacity, not child, nor a mentally defective person, nor someone in a coma.
The test is whether a computer can, in an extended conversation, fool a competent human into thinking it is a competent human being speaking the same language,at least 50% of the time.
Slashdot Mirror
I will take that bet. The GOP is currently pushing privacy for american citizens, claiming Obama is evil. For that reason, Congress will not rule against a pro-american privacy ruling by the SCOTUS. Now, if terrorists were somehow involved, the GOP would say "Rights? Foreigners don't got no rights!"
No. The TSA does not care about imminent threat.
The FBI locks people up, but they don't control the prisons. The prison system is very obedient to the courts. So if the court says the FBI screwed up, we have to let them go, the prisons lets them go.
When speaking about the NSA on the other hand, you have a better argument. The NSA does not lock people up where the US courts can release them. In fact, they are more likely to just kill someone.
Then there would be an imminent threat of death for the victim, allowing cops to search the phone for recent calls.
Let them put together a way to spy on all drone package delivery data, and boom, the FAA will suddenly approve Drone Package Delivery.
You can't sell something you don't own. But what you could do is sell information, which you do own. In exchange for a set fee of $1, you can state the exact location you just vacated. No 'guarantee' of getting the spot, so you are not selling the spot. Instead you are selling the location data that is time sensitive. Specifically that means, if someone else comes along and takes the spot before your buyer arrives, the buyer is out of luck.
Batteries are heavy. It takes an awful lot of energy to even give someone human strength, not counting the additional costs to carry the battery and the exoskeleton itself.
As such, all exoskeletons suits currently in development either are tethered to a wall plug or have a ridiculously low battery capacity.
A couple of people tried to make it work using fuel powered engines (gasoline, etc.) to power the , but those are also heavy once again resulting in shortened times between re-fueling.
Even if you eliminate the dead weight of human limbs, (ie. small pack bots) the operating time is too short for things
Anyone that makes a significant improvement in this area would not portray it as "working exoskeleton", but instead as "INCREDIBLY LONG LIFE BATTERY/GENERATOR".
Informational: This is what most people think advertising is all about. It provides you with information about a product. It might be telling you a new product exists, or just a new flavor/kind of an existing product. It might tell you about what it does, or the price, at heart it is simple and easy to understand - people can't buy it if they don't know about it.
Branding: This type of advertisement is not about information, it is about a feeling. It's what most of those 'cool' superbowl ads are trying to do. It's why Coca-cola and Apple keeps advertising (everybody already knows about Coca-Cola and they rarely talk about price/new products). This is about creating the feeling that this product is the kind of product that people like you buy. It also makes people believe the product is higher quality, because look, they can afford to advertise. (which also implies they have insurance to pay out if they accidentally put lead pain in your toothpaste, as opposed to that store brand you never see on TV).
Because lay people don't understand branding, they routinely underestimate the value of advertising.
Which is why we need net neutrality, as opposed to simply trusting that the ISP will abide by their ADVERTISED service, as opposed to sneaking fine print into the contract like you discussed.
No. Net neutrality is about ISP's not violating their contracts with their customers.
My ISP works for ME. I pay them to provide X amount of service. As such they are legally required to provide me with X amount of service, even if take full advantage of their service and use X amount of service every single second of the day. They can't promise me 10gb/second, and then only give me 10gb/second for ten minutes a day, switching to 5 gb/second after those ten minutes.
They are perfectly allowed to give me MORE than 10gbs a second, if someone else - like say Google - offers to pay for it.
But they can decide to not give me 10gbs because netflix refuses to bow down to extortion from them, even if I am using all 10gbs every second of every day of every month. Nothing netflix or other companies do gives them permission to break their contract with me.
Not that I included that as something PHYSICAL, not something not thrown away. That is, if Barack Obama want's his great grandchild to have a physical copy of your first love letter, to put in a museum, or sell to avoid bankruptcy, then you send a real letter.
2) Want to send something physical, such as a key. This also includes any letter you think your great grandchildren might want to read some day.
3) Want to send something that you don't want copied/replied/forwarded/subpoenaed in a law suit (A lot more important than you might think).
4) You don't know the recipient's email address.
5) The law says you must (important for financial papers, etc.)
More importantly, even if it is true, that does not meant he world has the right to hear about it.
For example, my sex life is none of your business, even if it is accurately reported.
And it's not just gay people that deserve the right to privacy.
I can easily see why amazon would like to add to it's monopoly.
The real question is can it offer ANY advantage to us for using it's hardware? If it can't, then they should give away an app, not try to sell us hardware.
For me, I can't think of anything they can do for me with hardware that they can't do with software.
Yes. Because the right to be forgotten is not designed to destroy the evidence. Instead it is designed to make it just a little bit harder to destroy someone's life. If for example your ex-wife or girlfriend falsely accuses you of being a pedophile, then flees the country and keeps posting new blogs about how you had sex with her non-existent daughter, you still deserve the right to get a job. If google blocks you from just you countrie's version of google, then you can get a job. Some companies may check multiple versions of google, and reject you based on the slander, but not all will do it. The right to be forgotten is not designed to prevent anyone from finding out stuff, just to make it a little bit harder.
Ada Lovelace Which I got courtesy of Zen Pencil's wonderful chart
when the US demands Canada comply with 'international norms'.
If a woman programs the machine, then this version of the Turing test should be no less difficult than the accepted version.
For this reason, the test of a patent system is are companies willing to reverse engineer. If they are, then the patents don't work. If they don't think it's worthwhile then it is working.
Amazing how current patent law is so useless it can't stop blatant reverse engineering, yet it can stifle so much real innovation.
Does Amazon offer you: 1) Stores where you can pick up your purchase instantly - for no addtional money 2) Free wifi in the store. 3) The ability to read books for free - both physical and on your nook in the store. 4) Free, instant servicing for your kindle in that store?
So you are saying "Fight the Power, Buy a Nook"?
Just saying....
;-)
Republicans have ceased to be a 'conservative' party and instead become a RURAL party. In large part because government works much better in cities (easier to provide government services there), but also because of minority concentration.
This leaves the cities full (80%+) of liberals.
When it comes to gerrymandering, your best bet is to concentrate all your enemey in one district - anything over 60% is worthless to the party that has the majority - those 61+ % voters could have been moved to a district where you are in doubt.
It is a lot harder to justify gerrymandering a combination district that contains some of those inner city votes and also the outer rural votes - in part because the city voters can easily change districts without having to change jobs as well as home.
Similarly, the computer must convince the judge it is a human with it's full mental capacity, not child, nor a mentally defective person, nor someone in a coma.
The test is whether a computer can, in an extended conversation, fool a competent human into thinking it is a competent human being speaking the same language,at least 50% of the time.