it strikes me as almost surreal that they are floating the idea that consumers should 'trust them' in their ability to produce this technology safely and bug-free.
No, the really terrifying thing is that even a bug-ridden GM auto-driver is probably far more reliable than a human driver. And yet we have zero GM auto-drivers on the road and millions of the even more bug-ridden humans.
But it only kills 30,000 per year in the US, so I'm probably over-reacting.
I think you are on to something. There may be no scientific evidence that Big History is any better, but there is no scientific basis to the current teaching of history, either.
I'm in the semiconductor industry, and a large part of my job right now is converting from gold conductors to copper. It is a lot harder to work with, but as you made plain- as long as people like to wear it around their necks and investors/governments like to hoard it, it will keep increasing in value to the exclusion of industrial uses.
ISIS would be a no-brainer, since we have already seem to have enough reasons to attack them... destroying the pyramids would just be added to the list.
Had Mohammad Morsi decided to destroy the pyramids after winning a democratic election, well that would be different.
Nah, I'm going to go uncharacteristically Ron Paul here and say that I'd rather not blow up people to save ancient tombs. It would be a tragedy, but human life is more important.
I'm with linuxguy on this one - what good are nuclear weapons if you don't show people what they can do from time to time? In the 50s we had bomb shelters and duck and cover drills... now we are soft. Sitting on the sidelines applying gentle pressure isn't the American we love - Obama needs to make Mad Max happen NOW.
You have a good point - especially at the college level where you have calluses on your fingers from all the high-school calculator work. But at the end of the day, there is still value in getting the final answer because you can give it a quick "stink" test - if the velocity of the rocket is 299,792,458 m/s, then you probably need to check your work:)
For simple calculations like SQRT, I have a desktop calculator application running all the time. Since I like RPN, I tend to install my own - but every OS these days comes with a competent scientific calculator.
On Windows I like XCALC, which runs minimized in a bar at the top of the screen. For Mac, I run an RPN Dashboard widget. I don't recall the Linux app that I use - just some RPN thing from the repository.
I don't disagree in principle, but the reality is that the schools would never, ever require the computation step and the skills would atrophy. In the real world, the result is the only thing that matters - so this discrepancy would be bad.
Besides, it is hard to "smell" a bad answer unless you get a computed result.
Because the goal isn't how to teach kids how to pass a test, it is how to solve problems.
Since schools seem to teach to the tests, removing the evaluation step from the test would have the practical effect of removing the evaluation step from the instruction as well.
If you are measuring sea level from the same spot every year, and then later you find out that the spot you are on has been rising slowly over the years, you would be perfectly scientific in trying to account for the rise when using the now known-to-be-flawed data. The important thing is that you be open about what you did with the raw numbers so that others can see what you did.
Wow, things sure have changed in NYC if a building that large is no longer hiring doormen, or at least someone manning the reception area. I left in 2009.
I agree with your analysis based on the (Kremlin-provided) transcript. The statement certainly sounds innocuous in context.
But, he is a smart man, and a very savvy politician. He knows that when he says something, it will be snipped up and reported in the most dramatic way possible. He can make threats without being overt. I look at his statement and I see no reason for him to mention nuclear weapons. It's a throwaway sentence stuffed into an otherwise boring politician non-answer.
I have to conclude that he knew exactly what he was doing. He was waiting for an opportunity to mention nukes, and he worked them into an answer when he had the opportunity. He also let his own media run with that angle.
For reference, here is the part of the transcript with the quote in question:
ROMAN SMAGIN: Good afternoon, Mr President.
I am Roman Smagin from Novosibirsk Teacher Training University.
It’s no secret to anyone that history tends to repeat itself. Historical events seem to unfold according to a cyclical theory. Over these last two years we have remembered and celebrated the historic choices that Russia made at important moments for our country’s destiny, such as in 1612, 1812, and 1914.
In this context, I want to ask you what view you take of the cyclical nature of history as we can see it in Russia. Also, I want to ask you about your view of historical memory, how it helps us, how it can help to preserve Russia’s political influence on the international stage, contribute to our society’s development, and not let Russia be drawn into a new open global conflict.
Thank you.
VLADIMIR PUTIN: Historical memory is a very important part of our culture, history and present. Of course, we must draw on our historical experience and historical memory as we look towards the future. I can therefore say straight away that Russia is certainly not about to let itself be drawn into any large-scale conflicts. We do not want this and will not let this happen.
Naturally, we need to be ready to respond to any aggression against Russia. Our partners, no matter what the situation in their countries and the foreign policy ideas they follow, always need to be aware that it is better not to enter into any potential armed conflict against us. Fortunately though, I don’t think anyone has the intention today of trying to start a large-scale conflict against Russia.
Let me remind you that Russia is one of the world’s biggest nuclear powers. These are not just words – this is the reality. What’s more, we are strengthening our nuclear deterrent capability and developing our armed forces. They have become more compact and effective and are becoming more modern in terms of the weapons at their disposal. We are continuing this work to build up our potential and will keep doing so, not in order to threaten anyone, but so as to be able to feel safe, ensure our security and be able to carry out our economic and social development plans.
As far as cycles are concerned, yes, I think that the world’s development does go in cycles. This has pretty much been proven as far as the economy is concerned. There are economists here and they can no doubt explain it better than I can, but there are various cycles in the economy, small waves, large waves and so on, and any country’s development depends on the state of the economy. This is why economic growth and the transition from one technological level to another always have an impact on people’s lives and prosperity and on the social and political situation.
Just look, for example, at the way demand is growing in the European countries, and how hard it is to keep up with this constantly growing demand even at today’s level of technological development. This is a sign that there is a need for something else, that we must compensate somewhere for what we are not managing to achieve with the help of foreign policy and defence policy.
I wasn't defending the practical aspect of the technology, just the noise non-issue.
But to answer your question, if you live in a 56-floor building you have a doorman. The same guy who takes deliveries of bulk items all day for 1000s of residents could handle the miniature drone deliveries as well.
Ultimately, your property "rights" are granted rights, not inalienable or natural rights. You don't own air rights or mineral rights for simple, pragmatic reasons.
Hell, by international convention "conquest" is the most sure-fire way to get more real estate.
As for noise pollution - people have been suing over that since the dawn of aviation. Sometimes they win, and sometimes they lose (hard to prove harm if you bought a house near an existing airport...). Over the years, we've made jets quieter, we've restricted the operating hours, and we've limited flight to sub-sonic over land. People fight over industrial plant emissions, sewer plant location, and yes - fracking locations - all the time.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that drone use will be regulated through the democratic process and not (solely) by some quaint notion of property rights.
Slashdot Mirror
it strikes me as almost surreal that they are floating the idea that consumers should 'trust them' in their ability to produce this technology safely and bug-free.
No, the really terrifying thing is that even a bug-ridden GM auto-driver is probably far more reliable than a human driver. And yet we have zero GM auto-drivers on the road and millions of the even more bug-ridden humans.
But it only kills 30,000 per year in the US, so I'm probably over-reacting.
I think you are on to something. There may be no scientific evidence that Big History is any better, but there is no scientific basis to the current teaching of history, either.
Common core was adopted at the state level. Your history is backwards.
Depends. I would probably not have a good idea of what will happen when I push the "cosh" button unless I was doing it regularly.
Sorry, I didn't mean to accidentally defend PHP :)
My approach is generally to always use "===" and explicitly cast things. It makes your errors more explicit.
I'm in the semiconductor industry, and a large part of my job right now is converting from gold conductors to copper. It is a lot harder to work with, but as you made plain- as long as people like to wear it around their necks and investors/governments like to hoard it, it will keep increasing in value to the exclusion of industrial uses.
ISIS would be a no-brainer, since we have already seem to have enough reasons to attack them... destroying the pyramids would just be added to the list.
Had Mohammad Morsi decided to destroy the pyramids after winning a democratic election, well that would be different.
Nah, I'm going to go uncharacteristically Ron Paul here and say that I'd rather not blow up people to save ancient tombs. It would be a tragedy, but human life is more important.
I'm with linuxguy on this one - what good are nuclear weapons if you don't show people what they can do from time to time? In the 50s we had bomb shelters and duck and cover drills... now we are soft. Sitting on the sidelines applying gentle pressure isn't the American we love - Obama needs to make Mad Max happen NOW.
You have a good point - especially at the college level where you have calluses on your fingers from all the high-school calculator work. But at the end of the day, there is still value in getting the final answer because you can give it a quick "stink" test - if the velocity of the rocket is 299,792,458 m/s, then you probably need to check your work :)
students were using them to cheat.
That is some feat! The exam is open-book and the calculator only has IR communications.
For simple calculations like SQRT, I have a desktop calculator application running all the time. Since I like RPN, I tend to install my own - but every OS these days comes with a competent scientific calculator.
On Windows I like XCALC, which runs minimized in a bar at the top of the screen. For Mac, I run an RPN Dashboard widget. I don't recall the Linux app that I use - just some RPN thing from the repository.
I don't disagree in principle, but the reality is that the schools would never, ever require the computation step and the skills would atrophy. In the real world, the result is the only thing that matters - so this discrepancy would be bad.
Besides, it is hard to "smell" a bad answer unless you get a computed result.
My apologies, I didn't see the GUI requirement. For those who like trying to enter algebraic equations on a small keypad, I don't have anything.
Pyzo on Linux, Mac, or Windows should have you covered - and then some.
Because the goal isn't how to teach kids how to pass a test, it is how to solve problems.
Since schools seem to teach to the tests, removing the evaluation step from the test would have the practical effect of removing the evaluation step from the instruction as well.
Did something change? I took the EIT back in the 90s and the very programmable HP-48G was allowed.
If you are measuring sea level from the same spot every year, and then later you find out that the spot you are on has been rising slowly over the years, you would be perfectly scientific in trying to account for the rise when using the now known-to-be-flawed data. The important thing is that you be open about what you did with the raw numbers so that others can see what you did.
Or, deniers were simply pissing off the researchers.
Wow, things sure have changed in NYC if a building that large is no longer hiring doormen, or at least someone manning the reception area. I left in 2009.
I agree with your analysis based on the (Kremlin-provided) transcript. The statement certainly sounds innocuous in context.
But, he is a smart man, and a very savvy politician. He knows that when he says something, it will be snipped up and reported in the most dramatic way possible. He can make threats without being overt. I look at his statement and I see no reason for him to mention nuclear weapons. It's a throwaway sentence stuffed into an otherwise boring politician non-answer.
I have to conclude that he knew exactly what he was doing. He was waiting for an opportunity to mention nukes, and he worked them into an answer when he had the opportunity. He also let his own media run with that angle.
For reference, here is the part of the transcript with the quote in question:
You mean, just like all so-called "rights"?
All of the rights except for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I'm a True Believer, but even I have to admit that "pursuit of happiness" is a weasel-phrase, open to plenty of interpretation :)
I wasn't defending the practical aspect of the technology, just the noise non-issue.
But to answer your question, if you live in a 56-floor building you have a doorman. The same guy who takes deliveries of bulk items all day for 1000s of residents could handle the miniature drone deliveries as well.
Ultimately, your property "rights" are granted rights, not inalienable or natural rights. You don't own air rights or mineral rights for simple, pragmatic reasons.
Hell, by international convention "conquest" is the most sure-fire way to get more real estate.
As for noise pollution - people have been suing over that since the dawn of aviation. Sometimes they win, and sometimes they lose (hard to prove harm if you bought a house near an existing airport...). Over the years, we've made jets quieter, we've restricted the operating hours, and we've limited flight to sub-sonic over land. People fight over industrial plant emissions, sewer plant location, and yes - fracking locations - all the time.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that drone use will be regulated through the democratic process and not (solely) by some quaint notion of property rights.