Any voter who doesn't already know all about the lying sack of garbage that is Hillary is WAY beyond stupid. This is as lame as the idea that we didn't all know in 2008 what a putz the Nigerian leftist was.
You are confused. Libel and slander are civil, not criminal, infractions. Hate speech has only been criminalized in certain jurisdictions in application to certain protected racial and other classes. You are perfectly free to express hate of specific individuals or of unprotected classes such as people with decorative body piercings, or people who dye their hair pink. Threats of bodily or other harm, and incitement to violence are a different thing than expressions of strong dislike.
Attempting to ban or prohibit the use of symbols, or call their use an expression of hate or derision, is a slippery slope. A picture of a frog is a picture of a frog. You end up with such absurdities as ruling the display of the national flag as an "incitement".
Contrary to most of the morons posting here (I'm not talking about you), the 15 points make eminent sense to me. Presumably, here is what the twits think: 1) Documented process for data collection and sharing. Hell no, let's have a lackadaisical process and not share anything. 2) Maintenance of privacy. Nope, leak everything all over the place. 3) Systematic design for safety. Why? Duct tape it together. 4) Cybersecurity. Why should it be any more secure than crappy mobile, desktop, and server security are now? 5) Human machine interface standards. Are you kidding? 6) Crash worthiness. But we got the Ford Pinto engineers cheap. 7) Proper user education and training. Naw, let 'em figure it all out themselves. 8) Registration and certification. Don't interfere with free reign for selfish robber barons. 9) Post crash behavior. Just have it self-incinerate as quickly and quietly as possible; hush things up. 10) Adherence to federal, state, and local laws. To hell with all that interference. 11) Ethical considerations. What are ethics? 12) Operational design domain. What do you mean? Anything we build can tackle any possible conditions. 13) Object detection and response. A loud horn sounded more or less constantly should be enough. 14) Transition to fallback mode in case of a problem. Just open the throttle wide, lock the steering, and disable the brakes. 15) Validation of methods. We don't think we need to validate anything or account for any of our design decisions.
They're right. This regulation shit is all unfair and anti-free-enterprise. Get out of my way.
He hasn't actually once changed who he is supporting
What part of QUOTE "But recently I switched my endorsement to Trump" UNQUOTE, and QUOTE "Why I Endorse Gary Johnson" UNQUOTE do you not understand, chump?
Adams is a quite witty comic strip creator, and that is about the end of his intellect. Anyone with such a vacuum between his ears as to need Adams' input to decide where he stands on issues that matter, or put any stock in that input, is a fool. But the majority of citizens are fools.
Adams and Johnson are both spectacularly, colossally stupid bastards. Anyone who would put any stock whatever in what either of them says or "believes" (if either of them can be said to have any true beliefs at all) is a useless waste of oxygen. So the two primary candidates are an evil, hateful bitch intent on destroying the country and a slow-witted self-destructive bastard who can't construct coherent sentences. And neither of the snowball's-chance-in-hell alternative candidates (Johnson and Stein) has as much qualification and suitability for the job as any of the squirrels in my back yard.
I don't wish either Adams or Johnson any personal harm, but the world would be a less awful place if they both STFU.
Yeah, there is a lower density of predators at sea, but there is also no cover whatsoever; nowhere to hide. And boats require drydocking for maintenance, or they eventually sink. Your idea of a fixed platform is even worse. It doesn't even have the defense of mobility/running away.
California and Massachusetts have some very good qualities as places to live. But you have to be prepared to accept some loony tunes politics and other downsides (taxes, cost of living). They are a lot like New York City in that way.
Wrong. Many of the laws of the state of California ARE irrational, ridiculous, and reasoned defectively. In fact the people of the state of California are irrational, ridiculous, etc. They voted for Governor Moonbeam. They don't call it la la land for nothing.
But it would be a serious mistake to install an automatic transmission in a freight locomotive or heavy truck.
Locomotives are practically all either electric (no variable transmission at all) or diesel-electric (the ultimate "automatic" transmission; one with infinite ratio selection). Really heavy equipment almost always has an automatic transmission of some sort. The Caterpillar 797 400-ton mining truck (4000 hp) has an automatic transmission with 7 forward speeds and a torque converter.
...Humans have understood how to interpret human language, it is high time we taught our machines to do the same.
I agree. This language is already written. COmmon Business Oriented Language, by the grace of Admiral Grace
I was waiting for someone to bring up this UTTER FALLACY.
COBOL is chatty/wordy, and resembles english, but it is not at all structured like english. It has very precise structural rules. You tell it "ADD X TO Y GIVING ANS", but you can't (productively) tell it "ANS IS X ADDED TO Y" or "ADD X AND Y TOGETHER TO GIVE ANS".
Natural language computer instruction is a tantalizing goal. It would be very convenient for the human to employ, but singularly challenging for the computer to interpret. How the hell is it supposed to divine that a water pistol is not something made of water (nor does it shoot projectiles), and a wood stove is not made of wood. Is a wood table something intended to support wood?
The reason Siri works is because it is presented with stupidly simplistic queries, and we accept crazily imprecise answers from it. I was struck by how cool and desirable the Star Trek computer was; how it instantly gave good usable responses to any kind of imprecise questions. But I quickly realized that the scenarios were unrealistic.
"Captain, the ship is weirdly fucking up".
"Computer, what is wrong?"
How come the computer never replied "Imprecise query.", perhaps following up with "What do you mean, "wrong'? Do you mean 'mistaken', 'dishonest', 'immoral', 'unjust', 'incorrect', or 'unsuitable'?" Consider how ambiguous it is to ask "What's wrong with you?" It could mean "In what way do you feel ill?" Or it could mean "Why do you accept abuse?" or "why do you behave irrationally?" (usually with the word 'wrong' heavily emphasized). If you say "I feel badly", that actually means "the mechanism by which you experience physical contact is impaired".
Anyone discussing the concept of natural language computer instruction had damn well better have read The Number of the Beast (Heinlein, 1980), and clearly understand the pitfalls it outlines.
'meeting a drone' would have constituted extra-judicial killing. It's appalling that people here seem to condone that.
Cut the shit, clown. If you engage in warfare against the people of my country, you're can be god damned sure my country is going to engage you in return. Hopefully with 1000 times the force.
Most people listening to a TV through the TV's speakers use less than one watt average. Only the pricks hooked up with high power 5.1 amps who are rattling every goddam window in the fucking neighborhood watching Mr. Robot are using very much audio power, and even those are probably averaging only a handful of watts most of the time.
You can IMAGINE whatever you want. As to voting out their legislators, consider that this is one single issue, and not one that is very prominent on the radar of most of the state's voters. As far as I can see, it only affects a very small number of citizens in one single town.
It's the same principle as the US Congress. Anyone with two brain cells to connect together knows that on the whole they are a bunch of rat bastards, but hardly anyone has a problem with HIS OWN PARTICULAR representative.
Slashdot Mirror
Any voter who doesn't already know all about the lying sack of garbage that is Hillary is WAY beyond stupid. This is as lame as the idea that we didn't all know in 2008 what a putz the Nigerian leftist was.
You are confused. Libel and slander are civil, not criminal, infractions. Hate speech has only been criminalized in certain jurisdictions in application to certain protected racial and other classes. You are perfectly free to express hate of specific individuals or of unprotected classes such as people with decorative body piercings, or people who dye their hair pink. Threats of bodily or other harm, and incitement to violence are a different thing than expressions of strong dislike.
Attempting to ban or prohibit the use of symbols, or call their use an expression of hate or derision, is a slippery slope. A picture of a frog is a picture of a frog. You end up with such absurdities as ruling the display of the national flag as an "incitement".
Contrary to most of the morons posting here (I'm not talking about you), the 15 points make eminent sense to me. Presumably, here is what the twits think:
1) Documented process for data collection and sharing. Hell no, let's have a lackadaisical process and not share anything.
2) Maintenance of privacy. Nope, leak everything all over the place.
3) Systematic design for safety. Why? Duct tape it together.
4) Cybersecurity. Why should it be any more secure than crappy mobile, desktop, and server security are now?
5) Human machine interface standards. Are you kidding?
6) Crash worthiness. But we got the Ford Pinto engineers cheap.
7) Proper user education and training. Naw, let 'em figure it all out themselves.
8) Registration and certification. Don't interfere with free reign for selfish robber barons.
9) Post crash behavior. Just have it self-incinerate as quickly and quietly as possible; hush things up.
10) Adherence to federal, state, and local laws. To hell with all that interference.
11) Ethical considerations. What are ethics?
12) Operational design domain. What do you mean? Anything we build can tackle any possible conditions.
13) Object detection and response. A loud horn sounded more or less constantly should be enough.
14) Transition to fallback mode in case of a problem. Just open the throttle wide, lock the steering, and disable the brakes.
15) Validation of methods. We don't think we need to validate anything or account for any of our design decisions.
They're right. This regulation shit is all unfair and anti-free-enterprise. Get out of my way.
The plural of spacecraft is spacecraft, chump.
What part of QUOTE "But recently I switched my endorsement to Trump" UNQUOTE, and QUOTE "Why I Endorse Gary Johnson" UNQUOTE do you not understand, chump?
Best wait a few weeks to make sure it's really released for real this time. This has been an embarrassing episode.
Adams is a quite witty comic strip creator, and that is about the end of his intellect. Anyone with such a vacuum between his ears as to need Adams' input to decide where he stands on issues that matter, or put any stock in that input, is a fool. But the majority of citizens are fools.
Adams and Johnson are both spectacularly, colossally stupid bastards. Anyone who would put any stock whatever in what either of them says or "believes" (if either of them can be said to have any true beliefs at all) is a useless waste of oxygen. So the two primary candidates are an evil, hateful bitch intent on destroying the country and a slow-witted self-destructive bastard who can't construct coherent sentences. And neither of the snowball's-chance-in-hell alternative candidates (Johnson and Stein) has as much qualification and suitability for the job as any of the squirrels in my back yard.
I don't wish either Adams or Johnson any personal harm, but the world would be a less awful place if they both STFU.
CHUMP.
When the regulatory authorities get off their incompetent asses and REQUIRE it.
How old will Harrison Ford be in 2049?
Yeah, there is a lower density of predators at sea, but there is also no cover whatsoever; nowhere to hide. And boats require drydocking for maintenance, or they eventually sink. Your idea of a fixed platform is even worse. It doesn't even have the defense of mobility/running away.
California and Massachusetts have some very good qualities as places to live. But you have to be prepared to accept some loony tunes politics and other downsides (taxes, cost of living). They are a lot like New York City in that way.
Yeah, poor Meryl Streep sure does have terrible problems getting roles, huh?
Wrong. Many of the laws of the state of California ARE irrational, ridiculous, and reasoned defectively. In fact the people of the state of California are irrational, ridiculous, etc. They voted for Governor Moonbeam. They don't call it la la land for nothing.
Locomotives are practically all either electric (no variable transmission at all) or diesel-electric (the ultimate "automatic" transmission; one with infinite ratio selection). Really heavy equipment almost always has an automatic transmission of some sort. The Caterpillar 797 400-ton mining truck (4000 hp) has an automatic transmission with 7 forward speeds and a torque converter.
I was waiting for someone to bring up this UTTER FALLACY.
COBOL is chatty/wordy, and resembles english, but it is not at all structured like english. It has very precise structural rules. You tell it "ADD X TO Y GIVING ANS", but you can't (productively) tell it "ANS IS X ADDED TO Y" or "ADD X AND Y TOGETHER TO GIVE ANS".
Natural language computer instruction is a tantalizing goal. It would be very convenient for the human to employ, but singularly challenging for the computer to interpret. How the hell is it supposed to divine that a water pistol is not something made of water (nor does it shoot projectiles), and a wood stove is not made of wood. Is a wood table something intended to support wood?
The reason Siri works is because it is presented with stupidly simplistic queries, and we accept crazily imprecise answers from it. I was struck by how cool and desirable the Star Trek computer was; how it instantly gave good usable responses to any kind of imprecise questions. But I quickly realized that the scenarios were unrealistic.
"Captain, the ship is weirdly fucking up".
"Computer, what is wrong?"
How come the computer never replied "Imprecise query.", perhaps following up with "What do you mean, "wrong'? Do you mean 'mistaken', 'dishonest', 'immoral', 'unjust', 'incorrect', or 'unsuitable'?" Consider how ambiguous it is to ask "What's wrong with you?" It could mean "In what way do you feel ill?" Or it could mean "Why do you accept abuse?" or "why do you behave irrationally?" (usually with the word 'wrong' heavily emphasized). If you say "I feel badly", that actually means "the mechanism by which you experience physical contact is impaired".
Anyone discussing the concept of natural language computer instruction had damn well better have read The Number of the Beast (Heinlein, 1980), and clearly understand the pitfalls it outlines.
Bullshit.
Cut the shit, clown. If you engage in warfare against the people of my country, you're can be god damned sure my country is going to engage you in return. Hopefully with 1000 times the force.
Actually he was right if you come right down to it. 1000 watts is more than 40 watts. I mean, he did say POWER, not ENERGY.
Sorry; this got attached to the wrong comment.
Actually he was right, if you parse his words. 1000 watts is more than 40 watts. I mean, he did say POWER, not ENERGY.
Most people listening to a TV through the TV's speakers use less than one watt average. Only the pricks hooked up with high power 5.1 amps who are rattling every goddam window in the fucking neighborhood watching Mr. Robot are using very much audio power, and even those are probably averaging only a handful of watts most of the time.
You can IMAGINE whatever you want. As to voting out their legislators, consider that this is one single issue, and not one that is very prominent on the radar of most of the state's voters. As far as I can see, it only affects a very small number of citizens in one single town.
It's the same principle as the US Congress. Anyone with two brain cells to connect together knows that on the whole they are a bunch of rat bastards, but hardly anyone has a problem with HIS OWN PARTICULAR representative.