Utterly fascinating that someone would moderate MY posting as "redundant" when it was the very first comment! Perhaps I don't understand what it means.
>"it found people who report using seven to 11 social media platforms had more than three times the risk of depression or anxiety than millennials who use zero to two platforms"
Oooh, an opportunity for one of my favorite sayings...
Wasn't the article posted just 4 days ago about this good enough? And as I said there....
I am extremely worried about this.
1) It will be abused. Period. You know it will contain the VIN or other unique ID. So readers on the side of the road will be monitoring everyone everywhere- where you go, how fast you were going, etc. Endless tickets in the mail.
2) It will be hacked. Period. And once it is, it could cause chaos and devastation on the roads- causing other vehicles to panic and brake, others to swerve, etc. It would be one thing if this data were read-only, but we all know it will be linked into active controls. Road rage weapon. Stupid teenager prank. Whatever.
3) It will be hijacked. With active controls tie-ins, police cars could use spoofed info as one way to kinda remotely-control other cars. And, of course, if they can do it, so can criminals. It will give a new meaning to the word "carjacking"....
4) It will often be non-upgradable. Car manufacturers have a proven dismal track record on keeping ANYTHING updated on their cars. Once it is sold, they couldn't care less about the vehicle, unless they can somehow turn it into an endless stream of revenue.
Like any technology, there are good things and bad things with each "improvement". This is no exception. It can advance safety and improve self-driving options. But, ultimately, such outside/transmitted information should always be untrusted AND able to be overridden by the driver (and/or AI) in ALL cases. But will systems be designed that way? And even if so, hacking into them and presenting false information can still be dangerous, distracting, and very annoying.
There is an easier and better solution to this. The chargers talk to each other. There should be no need to move your car if there are still several available chargers. If they are down to just one (or two) free charger left, THEN notify the others they have to move in 5 min and assess the fees.
Charging can take a long time, and if you are dining or shopping, stopping to run and move your car will be a pain. What if you are in a checkout line? What if you haven't paid for lunch? The method I describes can make more people happy, no?
>"The key would be to construct the system so that information coming from another vehicle is never trusted. The information might still be useful, but only in terms of refining estimates gathered from the car's own sensors."
Bingo, +1 to you
Ultimately, such outside information should always be untrusted AND able to be overridden by the driver in ALL cases. But will systems be designed that way? And even if so, hacking into them and presenting false information can still be dangerous, distracting, and very annoying.
Of course you can. But those are higher risk of being discovered than doing it electronically. And they all require a physical presence to do such stuff. Hacking into systems can be done remotely and can affect far more people at once.
1) It will be abused. Period. You know it will contain the VIN or other unique ID. So readers on the side of the road will be monitoring everyone everywhere- where you go, how fast you were going, etc. Endless tickets in the mail.
2) It will be hacked. Period. And once it is, it could cause chaos and devastation on the roads- causing other vehicles to panic and brake, others to swerve, etc. It would be one thing if this data were read-only, but we all know it will be linked into active controls. Road rage weapon. Stupid teenager prank. Whatever.
3) It will be hijacked. With active controls tieins, police cars could use spoofed info as one way to kinda remotely-control other cars. And, of course, if they can do it, so can criminals. It will give a new meaning to the word "carjacking"....
4) It will often be non-upgradable. Car manufacturers have a proven dismal track record on keeping ANYTHING updated on their cars. Once it is sold, they couldn't care less about the vehicle, unless they can somehow turn it into an endless stream of revenue.
Like any technology, there are good things and bad things with each "improvement".
>"This is such a bizarre and staunchly American attitude."
So you think it is not at all unfair that people who choose to have children get 20 weeks of paid off-time while people who choose to not have children get nothing? Even though those non-children people might have, in their minds, equally important family or life things they might have to deal with? Those same people who choose to not have children might have a new pet and get no time off to care for it, train it, bond with it. They might have a crisis that causes them to lose their home. They might need to take care of a dear friend for a month. What about having children automatically makes employees more valuable than those who don't?
Flip it around some and think about it- what if an employer PAID employees with children more money than those without? Would that be fair? What if an employer gave employees with children more paid sick days than those who don't? Or gave only them flexible hours?
I am not saying it is wrong for parents to get time off for having children. I am saying it isn't necessarily fair to those who don't have children and that people who can't at all understand this fascinate me. If I put your work department in a room and give everyone there $100, except you, is your being upset about it bizarre? Is my rewarding everyone else actually punishing you, even a little?
>"Slashdot Asks: Would You Like Early Access To Movies And Stop Going To Theatres?"
No, not really. Doesn't matter all that much to me. I rarely go to see movies in a theater, but there are also few movies I want to see sooner than I already can at home. Yeah, it might be nice if things got to DVD/BluRay/Streaming sooner, but they already are now. But I won't pay a premium for getting it sooner either.... and I am guessing the vast majority of people out there won't, either.
I am replying to myself in lieu of one of the other replies.
Indeed "de-evolving" isn't scientific, it is just a word I am throwing at the issue. My point was that we, as a species, are more physically fragile than ever because we have become dependent on medical science to survive now. Any children I would have are more likely to have life-long health problems because I had the same problems and lived due to medications and medical interventions. And it is compounded over and over again through each generation. Natural selection has not just halted, but been REVERSED- a kind of "unnatural selection" remains....
We have been de-evolving for a long time now. Lots and lots of "defective" people are living to reproduce who would have died without medical science (I am one of them). This ends up making the species genetically more poor each time.
>"I tried a Android Wear watch but grew dissatisfied with it as the battery on both those and Apple watches in most cases do not even last a full day and are not *always on* display like ePaper watches are."
You didn't try the Motorola 360.2. It is always-on, and battery lasts almost 2 days with light use. Inductive charging, nice round design, lots of apps, nice looking, full touchscreen, swappable bands. Just saying. Not cheap nor terribly thin, though. Of course, now we read that there are no plans for a 360.3 anytime soon and Android Wear 2.0 has been delayed until perhaps mid 2017 (waiting a year now for 2.0).
It is a complete guess based on total laws and powers I have seen. Want more examples of things the Fed has gotten into which are clearly reserved for the States?
EEOC HUD Gun controls Internal spying Speed limits Marriage Medicare Social Security Parks Retirement DEA Farming supports Education Student loans Food stamps
The list is just endless of direct and indirect control. Through just the IRS, alone, the Fed creates what is effectively legislation about hundreds of things that it shouldn't- from child-rearing, to buying houses, to gambling, to what type of windows you installed in your house.
You might think the Fed SHOULD be doing all those things, and even the SCOTUS might think it should, but that is NOT what the Constitution says. It is not what the founders wanted. It is not how the system was supposed to work. We are free to amend the Constitution to take those powers away from the States, but we haven't.
>" I am hopeful that this language may translate into support for funding K-12 computer science at a federal level."
The Constitution does not grant the Fed power or authority over education in any way and so those rights/powers/responsibilities belong solely to the States. Of course, 3/4 of what the Fed does is unconstitutional so why even point this out?
>"it doesn't really matter if it was a lithium explosion or lithium fire that burned off your cock, if your cock is still burned off."
While that is true, the loaded, sensational, and inaccurate use of word of "explosion" for these rare fires sends much more fear and panic through people than just the word "fire"... which is exactly why they used the word. An "explosion" would blow your hand off, it doesn't just burn it... far more damage and from a distance too.
>"...what may have caused some devices to overheat and explode,..."
To my knowledge, NONE of them "exploded". Those that had actual problems had overheating which led to a fire. That is not an "explosion". That word was used by the media to stir up tons of inaccurate hype.
>"...causing them to touch, heat up, and eventually in some cases, catch fire."
>"Hulu wasn't bad when it was possible to adblock that for 3 minutes of silence and didn't charge. Or you can pitch 'em $10/mo and get it commercial free. Their current model's the worst of both worlds."
Yep, and that is one of the most major problems with "streaming", it gives the content provider 100% control over the delivery. At least with cable and DVR, it doesn't matter what they throw into the program, you can at least fast forward through it. Providers are VERY VERY tempted to use their power to control us. Look at what happened with DVD/BluRay! It was bad enough when they added unskippable anti-pirate warnings (yeah, I bought this disc and now you are going to PUNISH me for it!) But then they started adding unskippable previews, commercials, and PSA's!
OMG, they are just determined to destroy as many engines as possible, aren't they? Ethanol has been such an utter failure it is unreal. And yes, I had a motorcycle engine pretty much destroyed due to ethanol. And my current one has constant issues with the gas cap corroding due to ethanol. It attracts water, it gives LOWER miles per gallon, it costs more, it eats up the fuel system in many vehicles, it currently pushes up food prices, actually doesn't reduce dependence on fossil fuels (fertilizer and processing), and on top of it all, it doesn't reduce emissions AT ALL. It has to be one of the worst blunders ever.
FAIL FAIL FAIL
Take the wasted resources from ethanol and please invest that money in battery technology so we can get closer to viable electric vehicles.
>" Like its over-the-top rivals, DirecTV Now will let customers stream live programming on smartphones, tablets, and PCs -- no cable box necessary"
Are they kidding?
Sorry, but we don't want forced streaming of channels which include commercials and other crap with no DVR and no time shifting. If streaming, we want to stream SHOWS and ONLY shows.
Haven't they learned anything from the relative failure of things like HULU?
Slashdot Mirror
>"I hate to break this to you, but causation is not implied in the sentence you quoted. It simply indicates correlation."
I should have quoted the headline with it.
Reply to self...
Utterly fascinating that someone would moderate MY posting as "redundant" when it was the very first comment! Perhaps I don't understand what it means.
>"it found people who report using seven to 11 social media platforms had more than three times the risk of depression or anxiety than millennials who use zero to two platforms"
Oooh, an opportunity for one of my favorite sayings...
Correlation does not imply causation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Perhaps people who are depressed and anxious seek out more social media.
I am not saying it shouldn't still notify them when the charging is done.... just saying it should not fine them if there is no need.
https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
Wasn't the article posted just 4 days ago about this good enough? And as I said there....
I am extremely worried about this.
1) It will be abused. Period. You know it will contain the VIN or other unique ID. So readers on the side of the road will be monitoring everyone everywhere- where you go, how fast you were going, etc. Endless tickets in the mail.
2) It will be hacked. Period. And once it is, it could cause chaos and devastation on the roads- causing other vehicles to panic and brake, others to swerve, etc. It would be one thing if this data were read-only, but we all know it will be linked into active controls. Road rage weapon. Stupid teenager prank. Whatever.
3) It will be hijacked. With active controls tie-ins, police cars could use spoofed info as one way to kinda remotely-control other cars. And, of course, if they can do it, so can criminals. It will give a new meaning to the word "carjacking"....
4) It will often be non-upgradable. Car manufacturers have a proven dismal track record on keeping ANYTHING updated on their cars. Once it is sold, they couldn't care less about the vehicle, unless they can somehow turn it into an endless stream of revenue.
Like any technology, there are good things and bad things with each "improvement". This is no exception. It can advance safety and improve self-driving options. But, ultimately, such outside/transmitted information should always be untrusted AND able to be overridden by the driver (and/or AI) in ALL cases. But will systems be designed that way? And even if so, hacking into them and presenting false information can still be dangerous, distracting, and very annoying.
There is an easier and better solution to this. The chargers talk to each other. There should be no need to move your car if there are still several available chargers. If they are down to just one (or two) free charger left, THEN notify the others they have to move in 5 min and assess the fees.
Charging can take a long time, and if you are dining or shopping, stopping to run and move your car will be a pain. What if you are in a checkout line? What if you haven't paid for lunch? The method I describes can make more people happy, no?
>"The key would be to construct the system so that information coming from another vehicle is never trusted. The information might still be useful, but only in terms of refining estimates gathered from the car's own sensors."
Bingo, +1 to you
Ultimately, such outside information should always be untrusted AND able to be overridden by the driver in ALL cases. But will systems be designed that way? And even if so, hacking into them and presenting false information can still be dangerous, distracting, and very annoying.
Of course you can. But those are higher risk of being discovered than doing it electronically. And they all require a physical presence to do such stuff. Hacking into systems can be done remotely and can affect far more people at once.
I am extremely worried about this.
1) It will be abused. Period. You know it will contain the VIN or other unique ID. So readers on the side of the road will be monitoring everyone everywhere- where you go, how fast you were going, etc. Endless tickets in the mail.
2) It will be hacked. Period. And once it is, it could cause chaos and devastation on the roads- causing other vehicles to panic and brake, others to swerve, etc. It would be one thing if this data were read-only, but we all know it will be linked into active controls. Road rage weapon. Stupid teenager prank. Whatever.
3) It will be hijacked. With active controls tieins, police cars could use spoofed info as one way to kinda remotely-control other cars. And, of course, if they can do it, so can criminals. It will give a new meaning to the word "carjacking"....
4) It will often be non-upgradable. Car manufacturers have a proven dismal track record on keeping ANYTHING updated on their cars. Once it is sold, they couldn't care less about the vehicle, unless they can somehow turn it into an endless stream of revenue.
Like any technology, there are good things and bad things with each "improvement".
>"This is such a bizarre and staunchly American attitude."
So you think it is not at all unfair that people who choose to have children get 20 weeks of paid off-time while people who choose to not have children get nothing? Even though those non-children people might have, in their minds, equally important family or life things they might have to deal with? Those same people who choose to not have children might have a new pet and get no time off to care for it, train it, bond with it. They might have a crisis that causes them to lose their home. They might need to take care of a dear friend for a month. What about having children automatically makes employees more valuable than those who don't?
Flip it around some and think about it- what if an employer PAID employees with children more money than those without? Would that be fair? What if an employer gave employees with children more paid sick days than those who don't? Or gave only them flexible hours?
I am not saying it is wrong for parents to get time off for having children. I am saying it isn't necessarily fair to those who don't have children and that people who can't at all understand this fascinate me. If I put your work department in a room and give everyone there $100, except you, is your being upset about it bizarre? Is my rewarding everyone else actually punishing you, even a little?
>"Slashdot Asks: Would You Like Early Access To Movies And Stop Going To Theatres?"
No, not really. Doesn't matter all that much to me. I rarely go to see movies in a theater, but there are also few movies I want to see sooner than I already can at home. Yeah, it might be nice if things got to DVD/BluRay/Streaming sooner, but they already are now. But I won't pay a premium for getting it sooner either.... and I am guessing the vast majority of people out there won't, either.
I am replying to myself in lieu of one of the other replies.
Indeed "de-evolving" isn't scientific, it is just a word I am throwing at the issue. My point was that we, as a species, are more physically fragile than ever because we have become dependent on medical science to survive now. Any children I would have are more likely to have life-long health problems because I had the same problems and lived due to medications and medical interventions. And it is compounded over and over again through each generation. Natural selection has not just halted, but been REVERSED- a kind of "unnatural selection" remains....
We have been de-evolving for a long time now. Lots and lots of "defective" people are living to reproduce who would have died without medical science (I am one of them). This ends up making the species genetically more poor each time.
>"In other words, the battery life is abysmal? "Almost" 2 days of light use from a charge is not a selling point."
So you never sleep? Do you have a phone with a 7 day battery???
It takes about 30 minutes to charge the Moto 360.2. I think anyone can spare that once every day or two...
>"I tried a Android Wear watch but grew dissatisfied with it as the battery on both those and Apple watches in most cases do not even last a full day and are not *always on* display like ePaper watches are."
You didn't try the Motorola 360.2. It is always-on, and battery lasts almost 2 days with light use. Inductive charging, nice round design, lots of apps, nice looking, full touchscreen, swappable bands. Just saying. Not cheap nor terribly thin, though. Of course, now we read that there are no plans for a 360.3 anytime soon and Android Wear 2.0 has been delayed until perhaps mid 2017 (waiting a year now for 2.0).
It is a complete guess based on total laws and powers I have seen. Want more examples of things the Fed has gotten into which are clearly reserved for the States?
EEOC
HUD
Gun controls
Internal spying
Speed limits
Marriage
Medicare
Social Security
Parks
Retirement
DEA
Farming supports
Education
Student loans
Food stamps
The list is just endless of direct and indirect control. Through just the IRS, alone, the Fed creates what is effectively legislation about hundreds of things that it shouldn't- from child-rearing, to buying houses, to gambling, to what type of windows you installed in your house.
You might think the Fed SHOULD be doing all those things, and even the SCOTUS might think it should, but that is NOT what the Constitution says. It is not what the founders wanted. It is not how the system was supposed to work. We are free to amend the Constitution to take those powers away from the States, but we haven't.
>" I am hopeful that this language may translate into support for funding K-12 computer science at a federal level."
The Constitution does not grant the Fed power or authority over education in any way and so those rights/powers/responsibilities belong solely to the States. Of course, 3/4 of what the Fed does is unconstitutional so why even point this out?
>"it doesn't really matter if it was a lithium explosion or lithium fire that burned off your cock, if your cock is still burned off."
While that is true, the loaded, sensational, and inaccurate use of word of "explosion" for these rare fires sends much more fear and panic through people than just the word "fire"... which is exactly why they used the word. An "explosion" would blow your hand off, it doesn't just burn it... far more damage and from a distance too.
>"...what may have caused some devices to overheat and explode,..."
To my knowledge, NONE of them "exploded". Those that had actual problems had overheating which led to a fire. That is not an "explosion". That word was used by the media to stir up tons of inaccurate hype.
>"...causing them to touch, heat up, and eventually in some cases, catch fire."
Exactly.
>"Hulu wasn't bad when it was possible to adblock that for 3 minutes of silence and didn't charge. Or you can pitch 'em $10/mo and get it commercial free. Their current model's the worst of both worlds."
Yep, and that is one of the most major problems with "streaming", it gives the content provider 100% control over the delivery. At least with cable and DVR, it doesn't matter what they throw into the program, you can at least fast forward through it. Providers are VERY VERY tempted to use their power to control us. Look at what happened with DVD/BluRay! It was bad enough when they added unskippable anti-pirate warnings (yeah, I bought this disc and now you are going to PUNISH me for it!) But then they started adding unskippable previews, commercials, and PSA's!
OMG, they are just determined to destroy as many engines as possible, aren't they? Ethanol has been such an utter failure it is unreal. And yes, I had a motorcycle engine pretty much destroyed due to ethanol. And my current one has constant issues with the gas cap corroding due to ethanol. It attracts water, it gives LOWER miles per gallon, it costs more, it eats up the fuel system in many vehicles, it currently pushes up food prices, actually doesn't reduce dependence on fossil fuels (fertilizer and processing), and on top of it all, it doesn't reduce emissions AT ALL. It has to be one of the worst blunders ever.
FAIL FAIL FAIL
Take the wasted resources from ethanol and please invest that money in battery technology so we can get closer to viable electric vehicles.
>" Like its over-the-top rivals, DirecTV Now will let customers stream live programming on smartphones, tablets, and PCs -- no cable box necessary"
Are they kidding?
Sorry, but we don't want forced streaming of channels which include commercials and other crap with no DVR and no time shifting. If streaming, we want to stream SHOWS and ONLY shows.
Haven't they learned anything from the relative failure of things like HULU?
>"all without losing the advantages of Windows 10. "
Such as? Malware? Single-platform browsers? Spyware? Thanks but no thanks, happy with Linux native!
You are probably right in that the test would be better to show them the video one at a time rather than than simultaneously.
Yeah, but we are talking about Netflix video, not text and stills.