First came the R/C devices used, then the semi-autonomous devices with minimal ability to deviate from a pre-planned route. Then came the more-or-less fully autonomous devices, where you give it a map and a target and a 'go' order. Right now, the machines return video or other data and a human gives the final OK.
That's fine (for the US and allies) while they're the only ones who can deploy that level of tech in the field, but as everyone else catches up, it'll be the ones that take the humans out of the loop that respond faster and win the engagements. And the US won't sit by and watch as that happens, they'll remove their human oversight.
The next step will be false flag ops, blaming the enemy's bad software. And, eventually, there will be a bad map update or a malicious instruction and you'll have a drone swarm committing genocide for you.
This is inevitable, and rather than try and prevent it (which is futile) we ought to be worrying more about counter-strategies. Maybe we need to say that we can't be as free as we'd like to be, and drones have to go - that anything over a certain size (big enough to carry a dangerous payload a significant distance) will be shot down on sight unless it's a registered, transponder-carrying device.
I can honestly see the day when densely populated areas are protected by automated anti-drone systems. It's just too easy to launch hundreds of moderate-sized devices at an urban center to sow chaos and fear.
And just wait until the first self-driving car bomb...
In fact, context and having even a limited understanding of the animal's instincts combined with personal experience with the specific pet in question would have to be better than reasonable expectations of the accuracy of any such device... by orders of magnitude.
Every time I'm tempted to hate millennials, I think about it and realize that (with minor changes due to technology) I was just like them. Then I confidently go ahead and hate them with the kind of confident loathing that comes from self-knowledge.
I don't have the patience to wait 20 years for them to catch up with me.
It's not a 6 second attention span for ads before they get bored and move on, it's a 6 second tolerance of ads before the annoyance is worth the effort of avoiding the ad.
But they already know that, which is why they play games with making the ads harder to avoid or skip instead of making short and clever attention-getting spots. They want to burn that brand into your head before you can press or click anything.
Its why we have fights over commercial-skipping DVRs, why we have banners across the bottom of the screen, and why we have product placement.
Why are you Trumping? (Telling an easily falsified lie)
The meeting has been confirmed by the participants (with documentation), its legality is questionable enough it should end up a court case, and the Trump team has only revealed details one at a time as the press forced them to do so.
They conspired to violate American law by attempting to meet with agents of a foreign power to meddle in a domestic election. They covered their tracks. Now That they are exposed they're actually claiming it's OK because they failed at it.
If you're defending that with the official "nothingburger" line, you're so partisan as to be brain damaged.
Well, fellowships and internships are open only to US citizens who do not hold dual citizenship with another nation. (I just checked the Whitehouse web site)
Also, Trump got elected on fear of immigrants and outsourcing so even if there's no written policy, I'd bet they're not hiring non-Americans (except at Trump family private businesses, of course).
As a Canadian I have to say... I'd probably seriously consider working for Trump just to work in the White House if the opportunity presented itself, though I would have to be in some position where I didn't feel directly complicit in advancing his agenda. Then again, since I'm an IT guy I doubt that condition would be a problem.
Try to stop being butthurt that this is news that makes Dems happy instead of news that makes Republicans happy. Maybe if you hadn't elected Trump the news would go your way more frequently.
Anyway, continuing to stand solidly behind Trump as he constantly shows himself to be inept and corrupt is just going to hurt your party in the next election cycle. At some point, you're going to have to admit you were wrong.
Which, by the way, doesn't mean you're turning into a Democrat, or that you're calling for the destruction of the Republican party or its fundamental policies. It means you recognize you screwed up and put the wrong figurehead on your organization.
Kind of like the Democrats screwed up by trying to build a Clinton dynasty with Hillary and condescendingly brushed off the disenfranchised voters who ultimately flocked to Trump.
Every second you dig in your heels instead of correcting your mistake is hurting your party AND your country further.
>I'd love to see Spicer get a job as a commentator on CNN so he can say what he really thinks of Trump.
His job was to cover for Trump, and he can't undermine his past work or nobody will ever trust him. Unless there's a massive change in the wind and the entire US population turns on Trump, he's got to keep his mouth shut unless compelled to testify under oath.
Integrity in communications is defined as reliably covering your boss or client's ass with 'spin'.
There are people out there who will respect Spicer for essentially shredding his own credibility and being willing to look like a fool in service to Trump.
It'd take a mix of balls and stupidity to put him in front of a camera again, but I can see him getting any number of good offers for work 'behind the curtain'.
Oh come on, what qualified individual wouldn't jump at the chance to work for someone who is impossible to please and will blame you (in public, shouting to basically the entire English-speaking world and reaching well beyond that) for failing to do the impossible?
I don't respect him for lying - he should have resigned as soon as given orders about the mall crowd crap - but you can't lay the ultimate blame for the lies themselves at his feet.
Well, probably for the Hitler one, that sounds like a really, really stupid ad lib.
Now that he doesn't have to spin (which is a really, really generous way to put it since it was more like bald-faced lying) to cover the outburst of five minutes ago knowing he'll be undermined by the ill-considered revelation of five minutes hence.
I also find it difficult to believe Spicer will find a less respectful, less loyal boss wherever he goes next, given how often he got thrown under the bus.
>Maybe it's different in the US, but this is pretty much already done. I do most of my banking through the financial services arm of what used to be a grocer.
1st: I am in Canada, so I can't speak to the US.
2nd: I know the car companies have had their own finance divisions handling car loans for at least my entire life.
3rd: Oh yeah. I haven't seen one in a while, but I do recall at least one my the local grocery chains starting to offer banking services.
It's unlikely I'll be trying that soon enough to be able to post a success/fail report (left mom's basement, got wife and kids... have no life of my own left!) so I'll just thank you for the advice and file it away for when I have some time to actually use it.
In the short term or for a 'normal' extinction event? Yes, absolutely.
A big enough rock (though unlikely at this point in the Solar system's life) could reliquefy the entire planet. It's happened before. Digging under the surface won't help when the entire surface is molten.
On a long enough time scale - ~700 million years - the planet will be too hot, there will be very little life left, the carbon cycle will have stalled. Mars will look pretty damn good long before that.
And that's just the 'eggs in one basket' argument. There's still expansion and exploration for its own sake.
It has a non-Terrestrial surface, possibly with sufficient mass to provide enough gravity for a human to be healthy, possibly with sufficient resources to create a long term self-sustaining colony.
It's a place to start a second instance of human habitation, just on the off chance something bad enough happens on Earth to wipe out all higher life (including, more specifically... us).
It's a place to learn about how to survive off Earth. Sure, it's rough (for really excessive values of 'rough'), but it's a lot easier than floating in the void in a small tin can, so it's not a bad place to start.
It's a new place to explore. To stand on just because we can.
I've thought about it. You buy the right motherboard and the right video card and you can pass through your KVM functions and have your host be your PC even through your PC is a VM on your host.
Unfortunately, my current hardware isn't 100% compatible with that functionality under VMware and all I get is blue screens.
It would make life a lot easier though... just taking a snapshot before any new software is tried out or you go somewhere 'risky' on that nasty old Internet. I know Windows has some of that built in, but I've never seen it actually WORK when I needed it to.
Personally, I do not. I set the service to disabled just to be fairly sure.
I'd rather reimage a compromised machine (and I've never had a machine infected on my network, though I recently got burned by a cheap IoT device from China I was playing with...) than deal with issues introduced by a patch. I manually add things I need to support new software as the need arises.
However, when I'm at work... "best practice". We get patches, deploy to test groups, then roll out to everyone. And sometimes shortly thereafter we start trying to figure out which patch just broke something.
I'd prefer a network of locked down switches and computers that do only what they are required to do for the business, slap on a decent but low market share AV solution, and never upgrade or patch anything until there is a compelling business need to do it. But I'm not the CIO, so we do it the other way.
They're blocking patches to older OSes if you run them on newer hardware. (http://www.pcworld.com/article/3181814/windows/microsoft-says-its-blocking-windows-7-8-patches-on-latest-amd-intel-chips.html)
The pretext is to ensure better compatibility but it seems a lot more likely this is to ensure that if you're in a Windows environment, you're on an upgrade treadmill.
Update your hardware? Now you have to update your OS. And the hardware update cycle tends to be 3-5 years, whereas keeping an OS for over a decade isn't that uncommon.
>Worst I've heard about him that has any evidence whatsoever is "His jewfro [wisegeek.com] was fake, he did it just for TV".
I'd just assumed it was... given that was kind of a style at the time he rose to prominence, but still rare enough to make him iconic. A quick googling prior to this post produced a picture of him in the military, and post-military but pre-fro. The fro was a good choice.
Slashdot Mirror
First came the R/C devices used, then the semi-autonomous devices with minimal ability to deviate from a pre-planned route. Then came the more-or-less fully autonomous devices, where you give it a map and a target and a 'go' order. Right now, the machines return video or other data and a human gives the final OK.
That's fine (for the US and allies) while they're the only ones who can deploy that level of tech in the field, but as everyone else catches up, it'll be the ones that take the humans out of the loop that respond faster and win the engagements. And the US won't sit by and watch as that happens, they'll remove their human oversight.
The next step will be false flag ops, blaming the enemy's bad software. And, eventually, there will be a bad map update or a malicious instruction and you'll have a drone swarm committing genocide for you.
This is inevitable, and rather than try and prevent it (which is futile) we ought to be worrying more about counter-strategies. Maybe we need to say that we can't be as free as we'd like to be, and drones have to go - that anything over a certain size (big enough to carry a dangerous payload a significant distance) will be shot down on sight unless it's a registered, transponder-carrying device.
I can honestly see the day when densely populated areas are protected by automated anti-drone systems. It's just too easy to launch hundreds of moderate-sized devices at an urban center to sow chaos and fear.
And just wait until the first self-driving car bomb...
Then it's no Death Star; the trench run was not done in the equatorial trench, but rather a smaller 'north-south' trench.
In fact, context and having even a limited understanding of the animal's instincts combined with personal experience with the specific pet in question would have to be better than reasonable expectations of the accuracy of any such device... by orders of magnitude.
Every time I'm tempted to hate millennials, I think about it and realize that (with minor changes due to technology) I was just like them. Then I confidently go ahead and hate them with the kind of confident loathing that comes from self-knowledge.
I don't have the patience to wait 20 years for them to catch up with me.
It's not a 6 second attention span for ads before they get bored and move on, it's a 6 second tolerance of ads before the annoyance is worth the effort of avoiding the ad.
But they already know that, which is why they play games with making the ads harder to avoid or skip instead of making short and clever attention-getting spots. They want to burn that brand into your head before you can press or click anything.
Its why we have fights over commercial-skipping DVRs, why we have banners across the bottom of the screen, and why we have product placement.
Why are you Trumping? (Telling an easily falsified lie)
The meeting has been confirmed by the participants (with documentation), its legality is questionable enough it should end up a court case, and the Trump team has only revealed details one at a time as the press forced them to do so.
They conspired to violate American law by attempting to meet with agents of a foreign power to meddle in a domestic election. They covered their tracks. Now That they are exposed they're actually claiming it's OK because they failed at it.
If you're defending that with the official "nothingburger" line, you're so partisan as to be brain damaged.
If this revelation isn't stolen by a late-night show, the world will be a sadder place.
Well, fellowships and internships are open only to US citizens who do not hold dual citizenship with another nation. (I just checked the Whitehouse web site)
Also, Trump got elected on fear of immigrants and outsourcing so even if there's no written policy, I'd bet they're not hiring non-Americans (except at Trump family private businesses, of course).
As a Canadian I have to say... I'd probably seriously consider working for Trump just to work in the White House if the opportunity presented itself, though I would have to be in some position where I didn't feel directly complicit in advancing his agenda. Then again, since I'm an IT guy I doubt that condition would be a problem.
Try to stop being butthurt that this is news that makes Dems happy instead of news that makes Republicans happy. Maybe if you hadn't elected Trump the news would go your way more frequently.
Anyway, continuing to stand solidly behind Trump as he constantly shows himself to be inept and corrupt is just going to hurt your party in the next election cycle. At some point, you're going to have to admit you were wrong.
Which, by the way, doesn't mean you're turning into a Democrat, or that you're calling for the destruction of the Republican party or its fundamental policies. It means you recognize you screwed up and put the wrong figurehead on your organization.
Kind of like the Democrats screwed up by trying to build a Clinton dynasty with Hillary and condescendingly brushed off the disenfranchised voters who ultimately flocked to Trump.
Every second you dig in your heels instead of correcting your mistake is hurting your party AND your country further.
>I'd love to see Spicer get a job as a commentator on CNN so he can say what he really thinks of Trump.
His job was to cover for Trump, and he can't undermine his past work or nobody will ever trust him. Unless there's a massive change in the wind and the entire US population turns on Trump, he's got to keep his mouth shut unless compelled to testify under oath.
Integrity in communications is defined as reliably covering your boss or client's ass with 'spin'.
There are people out there who will respect Spicer for essentially shredding his own credibility and being willing to look like a fool in service to Trump.
It'd take a mix of balls and stupidity to put him in front of a camera again, but I can see him getting any number of good offers for work 'behind the curtain'.
Oh come on, what qualified individual wouldn't jump at the chance to work for someone who is impossible to please and will blame you (in public, shouting to basically the entire English-speaking world and reaching well beyond that) for failing to do the impossible?
The pay must be great.
I don't respect him for lying - he should have resigned as soon as given orders about the mall crowd crap - but you can't lay the ultimate blame for the lies themselves at his feet.
Well, probably for the Hitler one, that sounds like a really, really stupid ad lib.
Now that he doesn't have to spin (which is a really, really generous way to put it since it was more like bald-faced lying) to cover the outburst of five minutes ago knowing he'll be undermined by the ill-considered revelation of five minutes hence.
I also find it difficult to believe Spicer will find a less respectful, less loyal boss wherever he goes next, given how often he got thrown under the bus.
>Maybe it's different in the US, but this is pretty much already done. I do most of my banking through the financial services arm of what used to be a grocer.
1st: I am in Canada, so I can't speak to the US.
2nd: I know the car companies have had their own finance divisions handling car loans for at least my entire life.
3rd: Oh yeah. I haven't seen one in a while, but I do recall at least one my the local grocery chains starting to offer banking services.
It's unlikely I'll be trying that soon enough to be able to post a success/fail report (left mom's basement, got wife and kids... have no life of my own left!) so I'll just thank you for the advice and file it away for when I have some time to actually use it.
Honestly, by the time you have these kind of cash reserves, you should set up a new corporate division as a bank, cut out all the middlemen.
Can you imagine having a Google Mortgage? And they'd already know everything about you to help them set your credit limit and interest rate!
In the short term or for a 'normal' extinction event? Yes, absolutely.
A big enough rock (though unlikely at this point in the Solar system's life) could reliquefy the entire planet. It's happened before. Digging under the surface won't help when the entire surface is molten.
On a long enough time scale - ~700 million years - the planet will be too hot, there will be very little life left, the carbon cycle will have stalled. Mars will look pretty damn good long before that.
And that's just the 'eggs in one basket' argument. There's still expansion and exploration for its own sake.
>It's money that's "Not being put to work". Just rotting in a bank account.
Not quite. To be removed from the economy, you'd have to have cash or some other deflationary instrument in storage.
Cash 'in the bank' isn''t really in the bank, but is being invested by the bank.
>There is nothing on Mars we want or need.
It has a non-Terrestrial surface, possibly with sufficient mass to provide enough gravity for a human to be healthy, possibly with sufficient resources to create a long term self-sustaining colony.
It's a place to start a second instance of human habitation, just on the off chance something bad enough happens on Earth to wipe out all higher life (including, more specifically... us).
It's a place to learn about how to survive off Earth. Sure, it's rough (for really excessive values of 'rough'), but it's a lot easier than floating in the void in a small tin can, so it's not a bad place to start.
It's a new place to explore. To stand on just because we can.
I've thought about it. You buy the right motherboard and the right video card and you can pass through your KVM functions and have your host be your PC even through your PC is a VM on your host.
Unfortunately, my current hardware isn't 100% compatible with that functionality under VMware and all I get is blue screens.
It would make life a lot easier though... just taking a snapshot before any new software is tried out or you go somewhere 'risky' on that nasty old Internet. I know Windows has some of that built in, but I've never seen it actually WORK when I needed it to.
Personally, I do not. I set the service to disabled just to be fairly sure.
I'd rather reimage a compromised machine (and I've never had a machine infected on my network, though I recently got burned by a cheap IoT device from China I was playing with...) than deal with issues introduced by a patch. I manually add things I need to support new software as the need arises.
However, when I'm at work... "best practice". We get patches, deploy to test groups, then roll out to everyone. And sometimes shortly thereafter we start trying to figure out which patch just broke something.
I'd prefer a network of locked down switches and computers that do only what they are required to do for the business, slap on a decent but low market share AV solution, and never upgrade or patch anything until there is a compelling business need to do it. But I'm not the CIO, so we do it the other way.
They're blocking patches to older OSes if you run them on newer hardware. (http://www.pcworld.com/article/3181814/windows/microsoft-says-its-blocking-windows-7-8-patches-on-latest-amd-intel-chips.html)
The pretext is to ensure better compatibility but it seems a lot more likely this is to ensure that if you're in a Windows environment, you're on an upgrade treadmill.
Update your hardware? Now you have to update your OS. And the hardware update cycle tends to be 3-5 years, whereas keeping an OS for over a decade isn't that uncommon.
>Worst I've heard about him that has any evidence whatsoever is "His jewfro [wisegeek.com] was fake, he did it just for TV".
I'd just assumed it was... given that was kind of a style at the time he rose to prominence, but still rare enough to make him iconic. A quick googling prior to this post produced a picture of him in the military, and post-military but pre-fro. The fro was a good choice.
> So far, I have yet to hear anything terrible about him.
Nothing TRUE, anyway.