> Should these robots be taught to break the law in order to conform with the behavior of their more chaotic human counterparts???
No, but they should be taught to break the law in order to maximize safety. If you need to go off-road to avoid killing someone, you do. If you need to turn right on a red where that's prohibitied because somebody's zooming up behind you, you do it.
And then there are instances where it's better for everyone if you speed a bit to find a place to move over rather than slow down a lot to avoid an obstacle - I'd rather a car speed for a minute than cause a traffic jam for an hour.
We also need to work on a system to calculate the value of a human life - how much injury should my car risk for me to save the life of another? What if it's a child? I'd say in instances where everything is equal, my life should take priority over someone else's. Even moreso if the problem is the fault of the other person... now sit down and code that into the car AI. I wouldn't want to be the one doing it.
Most WAPs let you set the channel, but they also usually have a pretty good 'auto' setting that gets the job done.
I wouldn't put them right next to each other, though. You'll get interference. Instead, set them equidistant from the center of the area you want to cover, in opposite directions and as far apart as you can while getting good coverage in the area you want.
I have mine at opposite ends of my house and on different floors.
But in terms of cabling, there just isn't much difference between daisy chaining them and having them independently cabled back to your primary switch or router... except you're passing the second WAP through what is likely a simple hub on the first WAP. This of course kills the second device if the first fails.
To start: Fun. Then ease of use with the Silk Road. Now greed and willful ignorance.
Because honestly, Bitcoin doesn't work on any useful scale (3 transactions per second, maximum, globally!). And it doesn't do anything that needs doing - we have gift cards and wiring money. And what it does do, it does in such a difficult manner the average person could never use it, so it's easy to send your bitcoins to the wrong address and never see them again, or lose your 'wallet' and never see them again, or put them in an exchange and never see them again (non reversible transactions)...
But if you're stupid (or at least greedier than you are smart), or you're a scam artist looking to take advantage of those who are... it's still a pretty neat tool.
And your answer to 'what if people wanted to give every advantage to their children so they're strong, healthy, smart, and pretty' is to prevent that.
Like being weak, sickly, stupid, or ugly is some kind of noble thing.
We should go into germline genetic engineering eye-open, preventing a dangerous loss of genetic variation in the population, preventing the application of untested modifications... but after that, we should be doing our best to make sure everyone has access to the technology.
Because if we don't, or if we try to ban it, only the rich and influential will get it.
An excellent fan theory that covers all of Superman's abilities with a single physics-defying concept is that he can alter the kinetic energy of himself or anything that touches him, and can extend that effect around fairly solid objects.
It's still silly, but at least it's only *one* bit of silly to have to overlook.
Well, that and the yellow Sun thing, and how shards of his home planet seem to have inexplicably crossed the void at FTL speeds *and* magically found their way to Earth. And nobody ever mentions the likelihood of Kryptonite dust contaminating the pod he arrived in, and all those data crystals.
The problem is implementation - once a community gets past a certain size, you have enough people that the marginal nutcases can band together and be a signficant force.
Because most people don't want to spend half their time fighting to maintain a sane community, they just want to participate in the community.
It's not just online forums, I've run into this with fan volunteer organizations and condo associations - there's always someone with more time than you who wants to enforce their overly restrictive moral code on everyone else.
Usually one tiny little semi-reasonable step at a time.
Err... isn't it standard procedure to extract and physically clone the HDD prior to examination, then attempt to crack encryption via rainbow tables?
If you've used a sufficiently long passphrase and sufficiently well written encryption software, they just throw you in jail (assuming we're talking about law enforcement) until you give up the keys.
It's much easier to just use a standard image and use remote access tools to work on a virtual computer that's not within the jurisdiciton/reach of the people you're worried about.
>My favorite example was "Gravity" where orbital dynamics where simply ignored wholesale, mainly because what would take weeks/months/years to develop in reality, needed to happen on much shorter time frames for the sake of the story. If you liked the movie, I'll bet you didn't notice this the first time you watched it.
I gotta tell you, my grasp of orbital mechanics is at Kerbal levels, but that was enough that it ruined major portions of Gravity for me.
It would have been better if the movie (like Interstellar) hadn't been promoted as scientifically accurate when there was obviously no real intention to make it so.
Your previous comment is the same as this one. SHA-2 has nothing to do with it - you could simply encrypt your altered photo. If you wanted to do it the (physically) hard way (assuming you're talking about a camera with internal encryption hardware), you could wire something up to the CCD inputs so the camera doesn't realize it's being fed a pre-made image instead of a view of the real world.
If you can use an algorithm to detect tampering, you can use that same algorithm to alter your image so the algorithm no longer detects the manipulation.
The gov't might as well waste their time regulating Beanie Baby bartering. Bitcoin is incapable of growth. 7 tps max? Massive cost of easily disrupted network support? Same regulations as anything else when exchanging for currency?
Yet we keep seeing these posts as if Bitcoin has any real significance.
Because the frauds committed aren't even big enough to be a line item in their budget. Why invest in security now when you might not need to fix the problem for a budget year or two?
I recall, prior to the launch of BB10, a spokeman doing a presentation on a stage in Toronto.
"We're being careful, we're not going to screw this up, we're not going to promise anything we don't deliver and deliver on schedule. We know if we do, we're done."
Then they cancelled BB10 for the Playbook, broke the BlackBerry Bridge, failed to make the Blackberry server component more administrator-friendly, and modified their phone interface to make it less useful than it could have been.
They lied, and they have no credibility as a result.
One thing I've learned in the business is that once a slick enough sales rep gets in the Director's ear, you're going to implement the tech regardless of whether or not it's a good idea.
And you'll also catch heat from the users when it fails.
Slashdot Mirror
> A camera for a quad shouldn't have its own battery. There's no real benefit to that.
Unless connected to the UAV so the camera battery increases the drone's flight time.
> Should these robots be taught to break the law in order to conform with the behavior of their more chaotic human counterparts???
No, but they should be taught to break the law in order to maximize safety. If you need to go off-road to avoid killing someone, you do. If you need to turn right on a red where that's prohibitied because somebody's zooming up behind you, you do it.
And then there are instances where it's better for everyone if you speed a bit to find a place to move over rather than slow down a lot to avoid an obstacle - I'd rather a car speed for a minute than cause a traffic jam for an hour.
We also need to work on a system to calculate the value of a human life - how much injury should my car risk for me to save the life of another? What if it's a child? I'd say in instances where everything is equal, my life should take priority over someone else's. Even moreso if the problem is the fault of the other person... now sit down and code that into the car AI. I wouldn't want to be the one doing it.
Most WAPs let you set the channel, but they also usually have a pretty good 'auto' setting that gets the job done.
I wouldn't put them right next to each other, though. You'll get interference. Instead, set them equidistant from the center of the area you want to cover, in opposite directions and as far apart as you can while getting good coverage in the area you want.
I have mine at opposite ends of my house and on different floors.
But in terms of cabling, there just isn't much difference between daisy chaining them and having them independently cabled back to your primary switch or router... except you're passing the second WAP through what is likely a simple hub on the first WAP. This of course kills the second device if the first fails.
To start: Fun. Then ease of use with the Silk Road. Now greed and willful ignorance.
Because honestly, Bitcoin doesn't work on any useful scale (3 transactions per second, maximum, globally!). And it doesn't do anything that needs doing - we have gift cards and wiring money. And what it does do, it does in such a difficult manner the average person could never use it, so it's easy to send your bitcoins to the wrong address and never see them again, or lose your 'wallet' and never see them again, or put them in an exchange and never see them again (non reversible transactions)...
But if you're stupid (or at least greedier than you are smart), or you're a scam artist looking to take advantage of those who are... it's still a pretty neat tool.
I know, right? My only non-redundant point of failure is the DSL modem, and I have a couple of cold standbys configured.
I kind of wish I was kidding about that, honestly.
And your answer to 'what if people wanted to give every advantage to their children so they're strong, healthy, smart, and pretty' is to prevent that.
Like being weak, sickly, stupid, or ugly is some kind of noble thing.
We should go into germline genetic engineering eye-open, preventing a dangerous loss of genetic variation in the population, preventing the application of untested modifications... but after that, we should be doing our best to make sure everyone has access to the technology.
Because if we don't, or if we try to ban it, only the rich and influential will get it.
You (perhaps) jest, but I'd love to be able to target the follicles that were affected by puberty.
Imagine a pill that would cause those follicles and only those follicles to revert to a pre-puberty state.
No beard to shave, no armpit hair to bother with, no genital hair to manscape or shave.
I imagine women would be particularly pleased with not having to shave their legs or wax their lips or bikini line.
Sure, it's a silly fashion choice in the grand scheme of things, but so what? If it were available and inexpensive, it'd be awesome.
An excellent fan theory that covers all of Superman's abilities with a single physics-defying concept is that he can alter the kinetic energy of himself or anything that touches him, and can extend that effect around fairly solid objects.
It's still silly, but at least it's only *one* bit of silly to have to overlook.
Well, that and the yellow Sun thing, and how shards of his home planet seem to have inexplicably crossed the void at FTL speeds *and* magically found their way to Earth. And nobody ever mentions the likelihood of Kryptonite dust contaminating the pod he arrived in, and all those data crystals.
Ahh. So cloud = virtualized server with on-demand redundancy.
OK. I get so sick of new buzzwords for old things, I tend to tune them out. It's nice to know this one actually has a useful difference behind it.
> companies should implement a private cloud for their own internal applications
So, a new word for the client-server architecture that's been around since the first terminal accessed the first mainframe?
The problem is implementation - once a community gets past a certain size, you have enough people that the marginal nutcases can band together and be a signficant force.
Because most people don't want to spend half their time fighting to maintain a sane community, they just want to participate in the community.
It's not just online forums, I've run into this with fan volunteer organizations and condo associations - there's always someone with more time than you who wants to enforce their overly restrictive moral code on everyone else.
Usually one tiny little semi-reasonable step at a time.
It's not just the wormhole.
It was the tidal planet, the time dilation, the shuttle with infinite fuel that could apparently travel at high fractions of c...
Err... isn't it standard procedure to extract and physically clone the HDD prior to examination, then attempt to crack encryption via rainbow tables?
If you've used a sufficiently long passphrase and sufficiently well written encryption software, they just throw you in jail (assuming we're talking about law enforcement) until you give up the keys.
It's much easier to just use a standard image and use remote access tools to work on a virtual computer that's not within the jurisdiciton/reach of the people you're worried about.
>My favorite example was "Gravity" where orbital dynamics where simply ignored wholesale, mainly because what would take weeks/months/years to develop in reality, needed to happen on much shorter time frames for the sake of the story. If you liked the movie, I'll bet you didn't notice this the first time you watched it.
I gotta tell you, my grasp of orbital mechanics is at Kerbal levels, but that was enough that it ruined major portions of Gravity for me.
It would have been better if the movie (like Interstellar) hadn't been promoted as scientifically accurate when there was obviously no real intention to make it so.
You need to find a torrent of SMythBusters.
Fans edit out the repetitious crap and you get a very watchable (though much shorter) show.
Wind and PV are intermittent, controlled fusion (should it ever reach financially viable over-unity energy production) is on demand.
Still, I think at this point I'd rather see work go into a space-based PV system beaming power down to rectenna farms.
His surname isn't his fault, but putting Roman numerals after it is.
If you're not a king or queen, that's a strong indicator you have more ego than brains.
Your previous comment is the same as this one. SHA-2 has nothing to do with it - you could simply encrypt your altered photo. If you wanted to do it the (physically) hard way (assuming you're talking about a camera with internal encryption hardware), you could wire something up to the CCD inputs so the camera doesn't realize it's being fed a pre-made image instead of a view of the real world.
If you can use an algorithm to detect tampering, you can use that same algorithm to alter your image so the algorithm no longer detects the manipulation.
The gov't might as well waste their time regulating Beanie Baby bartering. Bitcoin is incapable of growth. 7 tps max? Massive cost of easily disrupted network support? Same regulations as anything else when exchanging for currency?
Yet we keep seeing these posts as if Bitcoin has any real significance.
Because the frauds committed aren't even big enough to be a line item in their budget. Why invest in security now when you might not need to fix the problem for a budget year or two?
It's a coldly calculated financial decision.
Teens and the few adults who found a good job or career where it didn't matter will tell you how wrong you are.
Most of those teens will not join the ranks of those few adults.
I recall, prior to the launch of BB10, a spokeman doing a presentation on a stage in Toronto.
"We're being careful, we're not going to screw this up, we're not going to promise anything we don't deliver and deliver on schedule. We know if we do, we're done."
Then they cancelled BB10 for the Playbook, broke the BlackBerry Bridge, failed to make the Blackberry server component more administrator-friendly, and modified their phone interface to make it less useful than it could have been.
They lied, and they have no credibility as a result.
>Did you not see it with Gravity?
And Interstellar. And I wish I hadn't, because both those movies screwed up physics badly enough that I noticed it and cringed.
If a movie promotes itself as 'scientifically accurate' or 'realistic and plausible' or whatever, I expect it to be as advertised.
One thing I've learned in the business is that once a slick enough sales rep gets in the Director's ear, you're going to implement the tech regardless of whether or not it's a good idea.
And you'll also catch heat from the users when it fails.