I was reading through before posting and FINALLY someone said the correct answer.
Google's systems are just returning matches from their index. Google isn't creating the content they are indexing. They are not making decisions about society, what you might want to see, or whatever value people want to try and slap on it. CHANGING that behavior is what would introduce bias.
And like it or not, there appears to be far more content on the web to index that has "black teenager" equated with mugshots than "white teenager". And that shouldn't be surprising ot anyone because facts show that to be true in reality, too... not just some bias of the web. We can try to argue WHY this is so, but that doesn't change that it is fact and Google is doing nothing wrong.
>"You'd think that as exasperated as a large portion of the American people seem to be with the Rep/Dem duopoly that they'd set up alternative political parties."
We already do. The Libertarian party is a good example. But it doesn't matter because our stupid voting system makes it nearly impossible for any third-party to ever win any important election.
There are millions of customers who don't own stock in ANYTHING. And the super-complex tax code in the USA makes having a single share of something a royal pain in the ass. Then you have to file additional forms for earnings and keep track of stuff for capital gains, what its value was when you got it, what it is when and if you sold it... etc. And you will probably get stockholder mailings multiple times a year too, to add to the pile of pseudo-junk-mail. And if you don't follow all the rules correctly, you could be fined, audited, etc.
>"Home charging or battery swap charging stations. It's not hard."
Yes it is.
Home charging is *SLOW*. Very, very, very slow. For a high-range EV at 110V/20A takes many days, 220V/60A takes probably a full day from 0% to full. Besides, this won't help with long trips because the assumption is that for a long trips you leave fully charged.
Swapping batteries is nowhere near "not hard". There is no standard for that. Battery technology changes often. Batteries are often inaccessible or complex to remove or make swappable. Swapping something that weights many, many hundreds of pounds requires some very specialized infrastructure and machines. The space needed to store all these huge, heavy batteries isn't small. And last but not least, there are ownership issues. I am sure I missed other issues, but that is a good start.
I believe that supercharge stations will get better and better, and that will be the answer for trips- when you can get an 80% charge in something like 5 or 10 minutes..... but we are a long way from that technology right now.
Trust me, I am just an anxious for electric vehicles as anyone, and hope that my next car will be one... but the technology is still lacking for many uses and the prices are still quite high.
>If they suspected him first and got a warrant, then, yeah, it's OK.
Agreed. With probable cause and a warrant, no problem. The guy "agreed" (although probably not really) to have all this tracking and information stored about him. The government, going through proper due process, can have access to it.
But the problem is that it won't stop there. The next step is they will submit a request for a list of ALL PEOPLE who have been near the point of interest they are investigating and just start making everyone a suspect until thrown out. And anyone who doesn't think this will happen is VERY naive. Even if not done on the surface through courts and police, much of it is ALREADY being done by the FBI/CIA/DHS/whatever.
Then after that it will be a switch to pre-crime, and start analyzing the data looking for patterns- where do people go, who do they interact with, what do they buy, in general, to start fishing. Again, already being done with black-ops.
Standard warnings: The only safe information is that which is not collected. Information is power. Computers don't forget. Promises made by corporations about how they use your data are meaningless.
>"You'll be stopping a[t] filling stations, getting gas, etc. just like everyone else.. the only real difference will be the type of energy being pumped in.."
Well, no, not really. With my current car, a fillup takes about 4 minutes and then I have another 380 mile range. Electrically, I would have to wait potentially an hour or more and then have something like a 200 mile range.
Sure, it will get faster and more range, but that could take many years and it might never be as convenient as gas for trips.
>You know there's a Libertarian candidate running right?
Yes, but it doesn't matter because it is nearly impossible from a third party to win in our stupid plurality voting system. What we need is IRL to fix that: http://fairvote.org/
I agree... it is not in the interest for the Republicrats to change the system, so it will likely never happen. So will we will stuck with this horrible voting system forever:(
Perhaps that is exactly WHY people want to vote for him, voters are beyond tired of the status-quo, politics-as-usual, cookie-cutter politicians, and party hard-liners. They are looking for someone to shake up things.
Is it risky? Perhaps. But without risk, there can be no real gain, either.
I think Trump is a mess. But we will be offered only two choices come November, so look at the other choice. Yeesh. The bigger problem is that we desperately need to reform the election process and bring in IRV http://fairvote.org/ but we live in the here-and-now.
Just about everyone I know, including myself, want better choices.... but that time is over now. And even if it seems reckless to vote for Trump, remember that 1) it is only the President (Congress has just as much power) 2) it is only for 4 years 3) we have a set of checks-and-balances.
As for Hawking? I have a great deal of respect for him as a scientist and physicist.... but he should stick to what he knows. America is not his country and his field is not politics, economics, sociology, or management.
>"Libertarian is the belief that I'm great, and fuck you."
Sorry, but that is just about as narrow-minded as saying Democrat is the belief that people are too stupid to manage themselves and need the government to do it for them.
Libertarianism is a leaning, just like all other political leanings... it is not an absolute. Its general belief is that people can take care of themselves better than a government can, so government should be no larger than absolutely necessary.
>" if anything could be more terrifying than the current one-party system, it's some Randian libertarian seizing the reins and... who knows what they might do? Nothing sensible."
Again, just about as ridiculous as saying "if some Republican gets the reins"... blah blah blah. Any politician or position is going to be held to a variety of pressures and compromises, checks and balances. Throwing all Libertarians into a single basket is not only unfair, it is disingenuous.
Based on the never ending increase in the size, power, expense, complexity, and corruption of the government (most specifically the Federal one), having voices arguing for and pushing for less spending, less taxation, smaller government, more civil liberty, and more freedom is quite compelling and appropriate in many ways.
I wasn't talking about just presidential elections. The President holds no more power than Congress (in theory, anyway). But your observation is still valid.
No, it is not the answer. Because no third party ever has any real chance of winning important elections. It is essentially impossible because of the way the system is designed.
The answer is to get rid of the electoral college and change the voting system. Only then can people vote how they want and only then will there be real alternatives to the "rupublicrats".
>"I'm not on Facebook but there are a lot of drawbacks in my offline world. No party invitations, no updates from my friends, people stop talking to you, because you're not on Facebook. So it has real life implications."
I know exactly what you mean. I, too, refuse to participate in Facebook for a variety of very valid reasons. And you are correct, there are repercussions... not from Facebook, but from the others who use it and try to "force" everyone around them to do so also. So far, I have been able to work around most of those repercussions.
Still, it is a shame that one company has so much potential power over the population.... and not just the obvious privacy implications, but (as we are seeing) the political and financial power too. As more and more people pour all their resources, information, advertising, support, and time into this single, proprietary company, that power and its potential for corruption and misuse increases.
>" it will connect the United States to Europe. More specifically, it will connect the State of Virginia to the country of Spain"
And even MORE specifically, it will connect the city of Virginia Beach in the *Commonwealth* of Virginia to the City of Bilbao in the province of Biscay in the country of Spain:)
>"Elderly Use More Secure Passwords Than Millennials[...]The majority of respondents ages 51 to 69 say they completely steer away from easily cracked passwords"
Under what/whose definition is a 51-year-old "elderly"??? Was this title written by a 20-year-old or something? Even 60 is hardly "elderly". And why are there only two groups- 18-34 and 51-69? They are not equal spans? What happened to 35-50?
>"There was a time when several generations of people lived with phones that had no screens at all. In fact, some of those people still walk among us,"
You must be REALLY young. Just without screens??
There are quite a few people walking around (and just fine too) who for many years had NO CELL PHONES AT ALL not just as children, but as adults. Yep. I had even graduated college before having one of those new-fangled, talk-only, screenless, pocket cell-phones.
Imagine a world where you really could be untrackable and unreachable. Where you had no constant beeping or messages. Where there were no distractions while you were thinking or reading or lounging. Where you could eat dinner out without annoying phones ringing and text tones, and people taking photos of you without your permission. Where you could have a conversation, in person, with someone... without being rudely interrupted several times yourself or by them looking at a stupid device. Where you could drive a car and reasonably expect that other drivers were paying attention to only the road. It existed.
In some ways it was bad. In others, it was quite good.
It doesn't matter how well-meaned or "in the letter of the law" the things the NSA does, as long as it flies in the face of the spirit of the Constitution they are wrong.
May I now laugh loudly, yet again, at all the people who claim they "have nothing to hide"?
I will say it over and over and over again- knowledge and data are POWER. You can't predict how or when it will be used against you, and thus the need for privacy is very IMPORTANT. People really need to wake up about this stuff. It is unacceptable how much data Google, Apple, Microsoft, web sites, phone vendors, employers, government agencies, etc, have about you.
And I will also remind everyone that just because a business or government SAYS they won't do this or that with the information they collect is absolutely no guarantee they will either now or in the future... and especially when the information is stolen, lost, shared, or hacked. The only truly safe information you have is that you don't give to anyone.
Slashdot Mirror
+1
I was reading through before posting and FINALLY someone said the correct answer.
Google's systems are just returning matches from their index. Google isn't creating the content they are indexing. They are not making decisions about society, what you might want to see, or whatever value people want to try and slap on it. CHANGING that behavior is what would introduce bias.
And like it or not, there appears to be far more content on the web to index that has "black teenager" equated with mugshots than "white teenager". And that shouldn't be surprising ot anyone because facts show that to be true in reality, too... not just some bias of the web. We can try to argue WHY this is so, but that doesn't change that it is fact and Google is doing nothing wrong.
>"You'd think that as exasperated as a large portion of the American people seem to be with the Rep/Dem duopoly that they'd set up alternative political parties."
We already do. The Libertarian party is a good example. But it doesn't matter because our stupid voting system makes it nearly impossible for any third-party to ever win any important election.
http://fairvote.org/
>"GPS interference testing(PDF) will be taking place between 9:30am and 3:30pm Pacific time."
Why the F would they pick such a time frame to intentionally disrupt the service? Wouldn't 11pm to 5am make a LITTLE more sense?
Exactly up the alley I was about to post.
There are millions of customers who don't own stock in ANYTHING. And the super-complex tax code in the USA makes having a single share of something a royal pain in the ass. Then you have to file additional forms for earnings and keep track of stuff for capital gains, what its value was when you got it, what it is when and if you sold it... etc. And you will probably get stockholder mailings multiple times a year too, to add to the pile of pseudo-junk-mail. And if you don't follow all the rules correctly, you could be fined, audited, etc.
It is the gift that keeps on giving :)
>"Maybe the Huffington post editorial staff [imgur.com] can spin it?"
Is that real? 14 20-something-year-old women (100%!!), with maybe two not being European American?
>"Home charging or battery swap charging stations. It's not hard."
Yes it is.
Home charging is *SLOW*. Very, very, very slow. For a high-range EV at 110V/20A takes many days, 220V/60A takes probably a full day from 0% to full. Besides, this won't help with long trips because the assumption is that for a long trips you leave fully charged.
Swapping batteries is nowhere near "not hard". There is no standard for that. Battery technology changes often. Batteries are often inaccessible or complex to remove or make swappable. Swapping something that weights many, many hundreds of pounds requires some very specialized infrastructure and machines. The space needed to store all these huge, heavy batteries isn't small. And last but not least, there are ownership issues. I am sure I missed other issues, but that is a good start.
I believe that supercharge stations will get better and better, and that will be the answer for trips- when you can get an 80% charge in something like 5 or 10 minutes..... but we are a long way from that technology right now.
Trust me, I am just an anxious for electric vehicles as anyone, and hope that my next car will be one... but the technology is still lacking for many uses and the prices are still quite high.
>If they suspected him first and got a warrant, then, yeah, it's OK.
Agreed. With probable cause and a warrant, no problem. The guy "agreed" (although probably not really) to have all this tracking and information stored about him. The government, going through proper due process, can have access to it.
But the problem is that it won't stop there. The next step is they will submit a request for a list of ALL PEOPLE who have been near the point of interest they are investigating and just start making everyone a suspect until thrown out. And anyone who doesn't think this will happen is VERY naive. Even if not done on the surface through courts and police, much of it is ALREADY being done by the FBI/CIA/DHS/whatever.
Then after that it will be a switch to pre-crime, and start analyzing the data looking for patterns- where do people go, who do they interact with, what do they buy, in general, to start fishing. Again, already being done with black-ops.
Standard warnings: The only safe information is that which is not collected. Information is power. Computers don't forget. Promises made by corporations about how they use your data are meaningless.
>"You'll be stopping a[t] filling stations, getting gas, etc. just like everyone else.. the only real difference will be the type of energy being pumped in.."
Well, no, not really. With my current car, a fillup takes about 4 minutes and then I have another 380 mile range. Electrically, I would have to wait potentially an hour or more and then have something like a 200 mile range.
Sure, it will get faster and more range, but that could take many years and it might never be as convenient as gas for trips.
>You know there's a Libertarian candidate running right?
Yes, but it doesn't matter because it is nearly impossible from a third party to win in our stupid plurality voting system. What we need is IRL to fix that: http://fairvote.org/
Unfortunately, it will never happen.
I agree... it is not in the interest for the Republicrats to change the system, so it will likely never happen. So will we will stuck with this horrible voting system forever :(
Perhaps that is exactly WHY people want to vote for him, voters are beyond tired of the status-quo, politics-as-usual, cookie-cutter politicians, and party hard-liners. They are looking for someone to shake up things.
Is it risky? Perhaps. But without risk, there can be no real gain, either.
I think Trump is a mess. But we will be offered only two choices come November, so look at the other choice. Yeesh. The bigger problem is that we desperately need to reform the election process and bring in IRV http://fairvote.org/ but we live in the here-and-now.
Just about everyone I know, including myself, want better choices.... but that time is over now. And even if it seems reckless to vote for Trump, remember that 1) it is only the President (Congress has just as much power) 2) it is only for 4 years 3) we have a set of checks-and-balances.
As for Hawking? I have a great deal of respect for him as a scientist and physicist.... but he should stick to what he knows. America is not his country and his field is not politics, economics, sociology, or management.
>"Libertarian is the belief that I'm great, and fuck you."
Sorry, but that is just about as narrow-minded as saying Democrat is the belief that people are too stupid to manage themselves and need the government to do it for them.
Libertarianism is a leaning, just like all other political leanings... it is not an absolute. Its general belief is that people can take care of themselves better than a government can, so government should be no larger than absolutely necessary.
>" if anything could be more terrifying than the current one-party system, it's some Randian libertarian seizing the reins and... who knows what they might do? Nothing sensible."
Again, just about as ridiculous as saying "if some Republican gets the reins"... blah blah blah. Any politician or position is going to be held to a variety of pressures and compromises, checks and balances. Throwing all Libertarians into a single basket is not only unfair, it is disingenuous.
Based on the never ending increase in the size, power, expense, complexity, and corruption of the government (most specifically the Federal one), having voices arguing for and pushing for less spending, less taxation, smaller government, more civil liberty, and more freedom is quite compelling and appropriate in many ways.
I wasn't talking about just presidential elections. The President holds no more power than Congress (in theory, anyway). But your observation is still valid.
>"Oh look, a gun nutjob "Libertarian". How original."
Troll much?
>"I still think a third party is the answer"
No, it is not the answer. Because no third party ever has any real chance of winning important elections. It is essentially impossible because of the way the system is designed.
The answer is to get rid of the electoral college and change the voting system. Only then can people vote how they want and only then will there be real alternatives to the "rupublicrats".
http://www.fairvote.org/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
>"I'm not on Facebook but there are a lot of drawbacks in my offline world. No party invitations, no updates from my friends, people stop talking to you, because you're not on Facebook. So it has real life implications."
I know exactly what you mean. I, too, refuse to participate in Facebook for a variety of very valid reasons. And you are correct, there are repercussions... not from Facebook, but from the others who use it and try to "force" everyone around them to do so also. So far, I have been able to work around most of those repercussions.
Still, it is a shame that one company has so much potential power over the population.... and not just the obvious privacy implications, but (as we are seeing) the political and financial power too. As more and more people pour all their resources, information, advertising, support, and time into this single, proprietary company, that power and its potential for corruption and misuse increases.
>" it will connect the United States to Europe. More specifically, it will connect the State of Virginia to the country of Spain"
And even MORE specifically, it will connect the city of Virginia Beach in the *Commonwealth* of Virginia to the City of Bilbao in the province of Biscay in the country of Spain :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
>"Elderly Use More Secure Passwords Than Millennials[...]The majority of respondents ages 51 to 69 say they completely steer away from easily cracked passwords"
Under what/whose definition is a 51-year-old "elderly"??? Was this title written by a 20-year-old or something? Even 60 is hardly "elderly". And why are there only two groups- 18-34 and 51-69? They are not equal spans? What happened to 35-50?
Yeesh
Oh, that is very true. But the cell phone perfected it and made it 10 times worse than all those other things combined.
OK, I see your point. I was thinking in only the context of cell phones.
Consider it admitted :)
No, I don't think I miss what he said or meant.
>"There was a time when several generations of people lived with phones that had no screens at all. In fact, some of those people still walk among us,"
You must be REALLY young. Just without screens??
There are quite a few people walking around (and just fine too) who for many years had NO CELL PHONES AT ALL not just as children, but as adults. Yep. I had even graduated college before having one of those new-fangled, talk-only, screenless, pocket cell-phones.
Imagine a world where you really could be untrackable and unreachable. Where you had no constant beeping or messages. Where there were no distractions while you were thinking or reading or lounging. Where you could eat dinner out without annoying phones ringing and text tones, and people taking photos of you without your permission. Where you could have a conversation, in person, with someone... without being rudely interrupted several times yourself or by them looking at a stupid device. Where you could drive a car and reasonably expect that other drivers were paying attention to only the road. It existed.
In some ways it was bad. In others, it was quite good.
Exactly and +1 to you.
It doesn't matter how well-meaned or "in the letter of the law" the things the NSA does, as long as it flies in the face of the spirit of the Constitution they are wrong.
May I now laugh loudly, yet again, at all the people who claim they "have nothing to hide"?
I will say it over and over and over again- knowledge and data are POWER. You can't predict how or when it will be used against you, and thus the need for privacy is very IMPORTANT. People really need to wake up about this stuff. It is unacceptable how much data Google, Apple, Microsoft, web sites, phone vendors, employers, government agencies, etc, have about you.
And I will also remind everyone that just because a business or government SAYS they won't do this or that with the information they collect is absolutely no guarantee they will either now or in the future... and especially when the information is stolen, lost, shared, or hacked. The only truly safe information you have is that you don't give to anyone.
Or perhaps just turn off all the power to the country. How insane!
Really... why are they allowing students to use any electronics during the exams? Problem solved.