Which can't see things that don't reflect infra-red. Her clothing was black, at least to visible light. If they have data from the dashcam then I'll bet they have the data from the LIDAR too, so hopefully we'll know more soon.
LIDAR could easily have trouble with dark clothing in the same way that headlights do. Yes, it's infra-red, and dark for visible light is not necessarily the same as dark in IR, but LIDAR is not magic.
People can barely handle cars safely and we're going to allow them to fly?
Nope. If you RTFA you'd know that these things are autonomous. Yes, unsurprisingly, they've planned an end-run around this most obvious show-stopper; no pilots' licences are required.
Are we saying that there's no longer a way to get the full URL to the clipboard? That would be intensely annoying in many situations. Is this a feature on mobile only?
And how do they know what they can safely trim? It they only do this for sites they understand then this should mostly work well but you can bet on annoying issues elsewhere. I guess understanding some of the common platforms like WordPress, Drupal, etc. could help but there are so many versions of those with constant updates that it's bound to trip up sometimes.
So this feature will mostly work and provide some convenience for the masses but the price is going to be confusion and annoyance for those who know their way around a URL, plus random breakage.
Maybe this is a sign that websites are using URLs in the wrong way. Can't they just move all that stuff Google is trying to hide into cookies and/or form fields instead so the URLs are kept vaguely human readable and not crazily long?
On IOS I think "Send from my iThing" is just the default email signature, trivially changed from the obvious place in the settings. At least, I can remember getting rid of it as the first thing I did on my new device many years ago and now the signature setting is the only place I can see where it might have been. Mind you, I'm talking IOS 7.1.2 (the most up to date for my very old device) but I doubt the situation has changed much.
The cloud is a way to force customers into a subscription model for software. A subscription model is really needed for software but customers have been very resistant to going that way. Purchasing software without maintenance is not tenable in the long term because it means vendors have to concentrate on adding new features to encourage upgrades to maintain their cash flow. This causes bloat and adds bugs and makes for many different versions of a product which then all need maintenance. Customers would rather much more time be spent by vendors fixing bugs and having reliable software. Today's security environment means that all software in use needs to be maintained by vendors with security patches and they can't afford to do this for ten-plus-year-old software that people paid for once.
The judgement is based on the law, not on whether the judges care about civil liberties. In this case it's the EU law that's protecting civil liberties; without that law and the outcome would have been very different, however pro-civil-liberties any judges were. In other words, the EU cares more about civil liberties than does the UK.
You buffoons elected Trump. LOL
You buffoons voted for Brexit. The consequences of that are going to be much more nasty for you, immediate, and definitely attributable to your vote than the Trump presidency will be for Americans. One of the consequences will be that the UK will be able to legislate away the civil liberties mandated by the EU.
Total lunar eclipses during blue moons occurred over Australia on December 30, 1982 and December 30, 1963.
Most people in Australia don't see a blue moon eclipse this year either because the populous states are on summer time (UTC+11) so it's on February for us too.
South Australia is the weirdest with their UTC+10:30 timezone. For them, the full moon is in January (with only 3 minutes to spare) and so it is blue but the eclipse is in February.
Which is the worse outcome? Falsely declaring a real emergency, or delaying a real emergency notice when minutes count?
The answer is by no means clear cut. The more false alerts there are, the less people will pay attention to alerts, meaning that more people will die during a real attack. A balance between speed and caution is required.
You have to include the phrase "This is not a drill" to get people to take the drill seriously.
Well then you can't complain when this guy did take it seriously and sent out an alert. Do you think it would have been OK to send out the exact same alert to the population if it had also contained the text "exercise, exercise, exercise"?
"This is not a drill" is five words. It is the result of decades of experience of people who do this for a living and have done exercises on a regular basis.
Citation required. Who is conducting drills with alert messages that contain the phrase "this is not a drill"?
You want the recipient to hear the message he'd actually hear if there was an emergency.
No. A message that is part of a drill (AKA an excercise) should on no account include anything like "this is not a drill". That makes the message a lie and devalues the phrase. The real emergency message needs to be different so that people take notice. That was the whole point of adding "this is not a drill" in the first place. Even if the message also includes "exercise, exercise, exercise" at the beginning and/or end, that doesn't help because: "Order, counter-order, disorder".
There is something to be said for human involvement.
Involvement like you see in all those youtube videos of drivers flinging parcels? Sure there are some good drivers and some bad. Whatever automated solution arises may lack the human touch but it should greatly improve the consistency of the service. Whether it's consistently good or consistently remains to be seen.
Right now rail should be more cost-effective than road but much of this is because you need more truck drivers than train drivers. Driverless vehicles actually reduce rail's advantage over road. Yes, rail should still be more energy efficient but it loses out in flexibility and the double handling required to move goods from stations to their final destinations. Rail is also slower because trains have to wait around for all the goods before setting off, usually to some fixed timetable.
With the transition from teams of horses to trucks, they were still the "driver." Now they are fighting the elimination of the "driver."
The drivers might have been OK, though I suspect the numbers required went down fairly quickly since motorised trucks were so much more capable than horse-drawn waggons. But there must have been a huge number of jobs lost in related roles supporting horses: breeding, feeding, shoeing, veterinary, etc.
I think you're confusing quantity with quality. A $350 surround sound system with 7 crappy speakers could probably make a loud noise but quality, not so much.
That's OK; there's no need for them to understand what aircraft autopilots do. It's very clear in the Tesla manual that you can't just let the car drive itself. These incidents will just help publicise that fact more. It will be very interesting to see if this driver tries to claim that he didn't know that he had to continue to pay attention with autopilot.
Also, looking at the pictures of the crash, there's no way that Tesla hit at 65mph. It will be interesting also to hear how much it had slowed and whether it was the driver or the autopilot that hit the brakes.
Even if people understand that they have to maintain attention to driving with Autopilot, you know that many people won't all the time. People know they shouldn't use their mobile phone driving too but the temptation is just too strong so it's outlawed. We don't need new laws for this with Autopilot because driving without due care and attention is already illegal.
I meant, imagine you are an Irish citizen who has never left Ireland but you have documents in your bank's safety deposit boxes in Ireland. Do you think a US court should be able to force that bank to produce copies of those documents without even telling you about it? It doesn't even need to be a US bank, just a bank with a legal presence in the US so the courts have access to company officers in the US. See how this is different from the court requiring access to bank documents stored in Ireland?
And then turn it around. You're in the US and an Irish court compels your bank to produce copies of your documents. Surely you don't think that's acceptable.
Protection from malware is an advantage of the cloud. Cloud services are much more likely to have proper, secure backups that are much less vulnerable to attack than some random organisation with a small IT department. Yes, client devices will get infected with ransomware and encrypted files will replace the originals in the cloud. Who's more likely to have good backups: underfunded IT in the next building or a cloud provider?
Not saying I don't have serious reservations about putting personal data in foreign clouds, but malware is the wrong argument against it.
The difference is that the bad company has a legal presence in the US, so US courts can demand company documents in some circumstances. Wherever the company has stored the documents, if the company is able to retrieved the documents itself then it can be compelled to retrieve them for a court. In this case the documents don't belong to a US company, they belong to an entity with no presence in the US.
What if the this case was about a US bank which operated safety deposit boxes in Ireland? Can a US court require that bank to open a customer's box in Ireland, without notice to the customer, and provide copies of the contents? This is likely to violate the bank's contract with the customer and probably Irish and European law as well.
Taking this example further, what if that US bank has a legal presence in Russia, China, Venezuela, or wherever. Can a court in one of those places require the bank to send them copies of material in your safety deposit box located in the US?
The key difference here is that they're not after Microsoft's data; they're after data belonging to a Microsoft customer who is not a US citizen who has probably never physically been on US territory.
There should no way that a person would get charged for an item they didn't leave the store with.
What if they drop and break the item? There are many stores that make people pay for breakages, though supermarkets tend to be very lenient in this respect. This is because their goods are of relatively low value and it's worth the loss to maintain goodwill.
Leaving frozen and refrigerated goods randomly on the wrong shelves destroys their value. It's worse than accidental breakage because it's mostly intentional, lazy, selfish behaviour. Stores mostly have to discard such items due to regulations and for fear of customers suffering food poisoning.
Slashdot Mirror
something active like LIDAR should have had no troubles spotting this
Unless her clothing doesn't reflect infra-red well.
The car had lidar.
Which can't see things that don't reflect infra-red. Her clothing was black, at least to visible light. If they have data from the dashcam then I'll bet they have the data from the LIDAR too, so hopefully we'll know more soon.
LIDAR should always see pedestrians, easy.
Even if they're wearing black? If her clothing isn't reflective to the infra-red laser then she'll just show up as out of range of the system.
LIDAR could easily have trouble with dark clothing in the same way that headlights do. Yes, it's infra-red, and dark for visible light is not necessarily the same as dark in IR, but LIDAR is not magic.
People can barely handle cars safely and we're going to allow them to fly?
Nope. If you RTFA you'd know that these things are autonomous. Yes, unsurprisingly, they've planned an end-run around this most obvious show-stopper; no pilots' licences are required.
I have a fully calibrated plasma projector system. Nothing beats the warmth and the dynamic range.
Warmth? You mean it lowers the colour temperature? How is that good?
Dynamic range? So it can handle more than 8-bits per channel?
Are we saying that there's no longer a way to get the full URL to the clipboard? That would be intensely annoying in many situations. Is this a feature on mobile only?
And how do they know what they can safely trim? It they only do this for sites they understand then this should mostly work well but you can bet on annoying issues elsewhere. I guess understanding some of the common platforms like WordPress, Drupal, etc. could help but there are so many versions of those with constant updates that it's bound to trip up sometimes.
So this feature will mostly work and provide some convenience for the masses but the price is going to be confusion and annoyance for those who know their way around a URL, plus random breakage.
Maybe this is a sign that websites are using URLs in the wrong way. Can't they just move all that stuff Google is trying to hide into cookies and/or form fields instead so the URLs are kept vaguely human readable and not crazily long?
On IOS I think "Send from my iThing" is just the default email signature, trivially changed from the obvious place in the settings. At least, I can remember getting rid of it as the first thing I did on my new device many years ago and now the signature setting is the only place I can see where it might have been. Mind you, I'm talking IOS 7.1.2 (the most up to date for my very old device) but I doubt the situation has changed much.
The cloud is a way to force customers into a subscription model for software. A subscription model is really needed for software but customers have been very resistant to going that way. Purchasing software without maintenance is not tenable in the long term because it means vendors have to concentrate on adding new features to encourage upgrades to maintain their cash flow. This causes bloat and adds bugs and makes for many different versions of a product which then all need maintenance. Customers would rather much more time be spent by vendors fixing bugs and having reliable software. Today's security environment means that all software in use needs to be maintained by vendors with security patches and they can't afford to do this for ten-plus-year-old software that people paid for once.
Our judges actually care about civil liberties.
The judgement is based on the law, not on whether the judges care about civil liberties. In this case it's the EU law that's protecting civil liberties; without that law and the outcome would have been very different, however pro-civil-liberties any judges were. In other words, the EU cares more about civil liberties than does the UK.
You buffoons elected Trump. LOL
You buffoons voted for Brexit. The consequences of that are going to be much more nasty for you, immediate, and definitely attributable to your vote than the Trump presidency will be for Americans. One of the consequences will be that the UK will be able to legislate away the civil liberties mandated by the EU.
Total lunar eclipses during blue moons occurred over Australia on December 30, 1982 and December 30, 1963.
Most people in Australia don't see a blue moon eclipse this year either because the populous states are on summer time (UTC+11) so it's on February for us too.
South Australia is the weirdest with their UTC+10:30 timezone. For them, the full moon is in January (with only 3 minutes to spare) and so it is blue but the eclipse is in February.
Which is the worse outcome? Falsely declaring a real emergency, or delaying a real emergency notice when minutes count?
The answer is by no means clear cut. The more false alerts there are, the less people will pay attention to alerts, meaning that more people will die during a real attack. A balance between speed and caution is required.
You have to include the phrase "This is not a drill" to get people to take the drill seriously.
Well then you can't complain when this guy did take it seriously and sent out an alert. Do you think it would have been OK to send out the exact same alert to the population if it had also contained the text "exercise, exercise, exercise"?
"This is not a drill" is five words. It is the result of decades of experience of people who do this for a living and have done exercises on a regular basis.
Citation required. Who is conducting drills with alert messages that contain the phrase "this is not a drill"?
You want the recipient to hear the message he'd actually hear if there was an emergency.
No. A message that is part of a drill (AKA an excercise) should on no account include anything like "this is not a drill". That makes the message a lie and devalues the phrase. The real emergency message needs to be different so that people take notice. That was the whole point of adding "this is not a drill" in the first place. Even if the message also includes "exercise, exercise, exercise" at the beginning and/or end, that doesn't help because: "Order, counter-order, disorder".
There is something to be said for human involvement.
Involvement like you see in all those youtube videos of drivers flinging parcels? Sure there are some good drivers and some bad. Whatever automated solution arises may lack the human touch but it should greatly improve the consistency of the service. Whether it's consistently good or consistently remains to be seen.
Right now rail should be more cost-effective than road but much of this is because you need more truck drivers than train drivers. Driverless vehicles actually reduce rail's advantage over road. Yes, rail should still be more energy efficient but it loses out in flexibility and the double handling required to move goods from stations to their final destinations. Rail is also slower because trains have to wait around for all the goods before setting off, usually to some fixed timetable.
With the transition from teams of horses to trucks, they were still the "driver." Now they are fighting the elimination of the "driver."
The drivers might have been OK, though I suspect the numbers required went down fairly quickly since motorised trucks were so much more capable than horse-drawn waggons. But there must have been a huge number of jobs lost in related roles supporting horses: breeding, feeding, shoeing, veterinary, etc.
I think you're confusing quantity with quality. A $350 surround sound system with 7 crappy speakers could probably make a loud noise but quality, not so much.
That's OK; there's no need for them to understand what aircraft autopilots do. It's very clear in the Tesla manual that you can't just let the car drive itself. These incidents will just help publicise that fact more. It will be very interesting to see if this driver tries to claim that he didn't know that he had to continue to pay attention with autopilot.
Also, looking at the pictures of the crash, there's no way that Tesla hit at 65mph. It will be interesting also to hear how much it had slowed and whether it was the driver or the autopilot that hit the brakes.
Even if people understand that they have to maintain attention to driving with Autopilot, you know that many people won't all the time. People know they shouldn't use their mobile phone driving too but the temptation is just too strong so it's outlawed. We don't need new laws for this with Autopilot because driving without due care and attention is already illegal.
I meant, imagine you are an Irish citizen who has never left Ireland but you have documents in your bank's safety deposit boxes in Ireland. Do you think a US court should be able to force that bank to produce copies of those documents without even telling you about it? It doesn't even need to be a US bank, just a bank with a legal presence in the US so the courts have access to company officers in the US. See how this is different from the court requiring access to bank documents stored in Ireland?
And then turn it around. You're in the US and an Irish court compels your bank to produce copies of your documents. Surely you don't think that's acceptable.
Protection from malware is an advantage of the cloud. Cloud services are much more likely to have proper, secure backups that are much less vulnerable to attack than some random organisation with a small IT department. Yes, client devices will get infected with ransomware and encrypted files will replace the originals in the cloud. Who's more likely to have good backups: underfunded IT in the next building or a cloud provider?
Not saying I don't have serious reservations about putting personal data in foreign clouds, but malware is the wrong argument against it.
The difference is that the bad company has a legal presence in the US, so US courts can demand company documents in some circumstances. Wherever the company has stored the documents, if the company is able to retrieved the documents itself then it can be compelled to retrieve them for a court. In this case the documents don't belong to a US company, they belong to an entity with no presence in the US.
What if the this case was about a US bank which operated safety deposit boxes in Ireland? Can a US court require that bank to open a customer's box in Ireland, without notice to the customer, and provide copies of the contents? This is likely to violate the bank's contract with the customer and probably Irish and European law as well.
Taking this example further, what if that US bank has a legal presence in Russia, China, Venezuela, or wherever. Can a court in one of those places require the bank to send them copies of material in your safety deposit box located in the US?
The key difference here is that they're not after Microsoft's data; they're after data belonging to a Microsoft customer who is not a US citizen who has probably never physically been on US territory.
There should no way that a person would get charged for an item they didn't leave the store with.
What if they drop and break the item? There are many stores that make people pay for breakages, though supermarkets tend to be very lenient in this respect. This is because their goods are of relatively low value and it's worth the loss to maintain goodwill.
Leaving frozen and refrigerated goods randomly on the wrong shelves destroys their value. It's worse than accidental breakage because it's mostly intentional, lazy, selfish behaviour. Stores mostly have to discard such items due to regulations and for fear of customers suffering food poisoning.