Unfortunately the newest moral panic is the representation of women in video games leading to rape culture, misogyny, and what ever else the moral crusaders have within their sights.
Will we ever learn?
And suppose there was a clear link between videogames and violence, exactly what is to be done? There were riots when the Rites of Spring was first performed, yet it is not damnatio memoriae, almost as if these relationships aren't quite as static as we are lead to believe, which is why there is so much conflicting data.
Most of these "studies" make for a nice pseudo-science justification for a particular set of biases, only a few steps removed from "it is witchcraft" and as luck would have it, nothing of the moral crusaders' most cherished is placed under the same scrutiny.
I have had about enough, thank you, whether it is hate-speech, "radicalization", or whatever mores of the age; surprise! people are influenced from the environment, but that is hardly just cause for the morally indignant to lord over all of creation.
there isn't a problem. The tenor of college campuses has changed dramatically over the past 25 years, and if you are a comedian why would you risk a roll of the dice on a media circus? Safe space wasn't a natural part of the lexicon even 5 years ago...
One of the more pernicious affects of censorship is you are never completely aware of the scope and degree what is being censored. Memory hole is apt as if you didn't have direct knowledge, you'd have no reason to suspect anything was missing at all.
As far as I know, no one forces you to buy a vehicle (especially if you can't afford it). You also have a few options for motorized transportation (30cc moped, public transport, etc.) that don't require insurance. State I lived in even had the option for you to put up a bond with the state (helpful if you have a large car collection) instead of buying insurance to cover damages.
With the present US healthcare, quite a few people still can't afford insurance, even with government subsidizes, and worse are penalized for it. It's like a tax on being alive. Not to mention the numerous database hacks of health companies, it's not only your health that you are worried about. It's not like you have the option not to do business with them because their security sucks.
All that taken into consideration, it's hard to say if the ACA really saved any money at all.
Admins do themselves no favors by making ludicrous demand from lusers like "the password must contain a special character, but may not begin or end with a special character, have two numbers, and can only be be 8 characters long... you got that?".
Or requiring password changes every 60 days, especial for accounts I use maybe bi-yearly. Or refuse recycling passwords. And the list goes on.
Anymore more it is easier just to bang my head against the keyboard as my password and have them email me a new one.
Two step authentication, and One Password to Rule Them All.
Supposedly the USSR had copy machines etched so that it was possible to track down the source of aberrant materials. A means of tracking is also done with consumer copiers in the name of reducing fraud, but there is no law restricting it solely to that use.The Federalist Papers would be an anathema today.
Exactly how much further down this rabbit hole do we want to go? Yes, it is fine and good that these measures will only be used with the best of intentions, but if the difference between a police state and your liberal democracy is intentions, you are already fucked.
Once we are at the point of self-driving cars, ownership becomes moot (for a lot of people anyway). You now have a taxi service that can eliminate one of the most expensive components, the driver, and allow me to nap gently without having to worry why we are taking the extreme scenic route. Parking structures can be reduced significantly as well as road congestion. I have little need for a personal car once public transport is on-demand and cheap. That will require Big Data to coordinate all of those demands, so they are kinda correct.
Until then, besides status mongers, what several want out of a vehicle is reduced cost. Any time there is a ripple in fuel prices, people gnash their teeth at owning behemoth overlord, and it starts becoming a cost per mile calculation. Not to mention upkeep and reliability.
I mean having the latest golly-gee-whiz gadgetry is nice and all, but manufactures still haven't really solved the transportation issue. Someone builds a $400 car that can get me around, and we'll see how important infotainment really is.
To be fair, most people are idiots and are as likely to cause harm as good when trying to help. At least we've gotten past the Kitty Genovese effect (mostly) and at least someone in the crowd will call 911.
Not to mention Good Samaritan laws won't really shield you from a soul-crushing investigation of second-guessing against a backdrop of what would a "reasonable" person do when faced with blood everywhere, body parts, and chaos. I'm reminded of an investigation of the medical staff accused of killing patients during Katrina. Even amid horrendous conditions that defy imagination, someone will asses that you should have always done more. I'm not surprised that more people don't attempt to offer aid.
Anyway, the law of unintended consequences comes to play here, and instead of people documenting or rendering help, I'm sure several will just walk away.
Will he stop people from making phone calls as well? Exactly how broad of a definition of social media is he using?
To be clear, are there any professions out there that don't suck in some fashion? Is there some magical career that is reasonably compensated, where the management isn't evil, and it is possible to have some semblance of a life outside of work?
The smart money sez that if IT is so awful, maybe it is time to jump ship and look into careers of being plumbers or country doctors.
Or maybe the notion of work culture needs to change, and that is certainly not going to come from above.
Um, no. There is actually a great deal of libertarian thought given to the most effective compromises that can be made since not everyone is on-board with ubermen-against the-world archetype that seems to be in vogue now. In fact, New Hampshire already fits within the geolibertarian model (no sales or income tax, high property tax), which is an anathema to the "taxation is theft" crowd. You can't even set up your corporate structure in the Cayman islands to be rid of it.
Hayek and Friedman already championed the ideas behind basic income as the least destructive way to have social services, and curiously is now being championed by the left. And then there is that whole other left-libertarianism as well.
There has been very considered thought on how to move society in a more libertarian direction without letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. The hardline libertarian types are simply ignorant beyond sloganeering, which is a shame really. Libertarianism has some rather nuanced insights beyond "government is bad, m'kay".
The problem here is that corporate officer jobs have been gaining upwards of 4,000% compared to the plebes. Are they not also subject to the same market forces? I wonder what between these two extremes is different (if you think corporate boards don't operate as protection for the wealthiest, you haven't been paying attention)?
While certainly no one owes you a job, no one owes any business a market either. The fact of the matter is that laws have been bought and sold against labor (the TPP being the latest round) while at the same time workers have been told they don't need to organize when they have labor laws. And here we are.
Slash and burn economics isn't viable either, and eventually those chickens will come to to roost as well, often with bloody results.
Better- once you get tagged as mentally ill, do you ever have a chance to make it off the list again?
I'm sure putting people in the position of giving up their right to self-protection or seeking treatment will do wonders for reducing the stigma on mental illness. Does Obama have any clue how many SSRIs are prescribed monthly?
As it is, restricting weapons from felons has been a dismal failure, often stripping entire families of their constitutional rights due to one bad actor, or making reintegration strained even more with the lack of social support.
Adding to that clusterfuck with the mentally ill, and possibly reducing social support to them is just plain fucked-up. The mentally ill make up less than 5% of perpetrators, and are 2.5 times more likely to be victims of violent crime.
So then logically you are Christian and Anonymous, since there is no membership process. Or no one is Christian since there is no membership process.
Part of the difficulty here is that Anonymous is less a group than a branding exercise. Any of these activities could also come from a group identifying themselves as the People's Front of Judea, yet they don't, as Anonymous has achieved a certain degree of celebrity and others seek to attach their pet cause to that celebrity.
It is interesting to note how Anonymous' evolution on free speech has mirrored that on college campuses. As Anonymous used to antagonize those who would restrict speech online; those people have moved on and the current incarnation is increasingly okay with necessary restrictions, as long as it isn't their speech being restricted.
It's understood that there are going to be differences between what management wants and what the employee wants, and at some shifting point in the middle everyone is at least not miserable.
And money quite honestly is the bare minimum that a job can offer. A co-worker was given two months off so he could fulfill his dream of back-packing through Europe. That type of consideration builds gratitude that will see a business through a rough patch. Most people tend to reciprocate in kind. That aspect of flexibility on the part of the employer is sorely lacking in most labor arrangements.
And for employees that may not be able (or willing) to offer more in times of FUBAR, competent management is able to take this into account and either fire (kidding) those people or at a minimum take pains to reduce the stress load.
The real problems are when management pays lip service to work-life balance, and there is no accommodation coming from their end. That shit won't fly for long.
I think it is more in line with commensurate compensation, and by large extent that is set by the culture of management.
I too have worked long hours to a point my paycheck was 1/3 of total labor costs (no joke) for a few months, but that was done with the expressed understanding that it would be temporary, and that management would do (and had the capability to make happen) everything in their power to correct the situation.
I've also worked in places where any demand for anything not specified in my agreement, well, they could fuck right off. Management had done everything in their power to earn my contempt, and I could hardly hold back my smile when I was let go.
The difference being I know when I'm being exploited, and I know when management is taking my needs into account. The "flexible' aspect doesn't reside exclusively with the employee. It also resides with management.
Oh, really? What powers of prognostication you must have to derive that from a simple deconstruction. Do tell.
What you heard when you were young was conspiracy to commit battery. You could have reported it then, without speech codes, so that seems to be a rather far reach.
Or how about this: wanna go down to the gay bar and beat up some fags?
Am I treating others with respect when I infantilize people through speech; am I treating them as equal? Why are only skin color and identity only taboo when criticizing others? People are routinely regarded as stupid, even though IQ is mostly genetic, i.e. beyond their control.
Can you name a single instance where hatred and bigotry were reduced through the adoption of speech codes? I can point to several instances of the opposite, where free and open dialogue brought people to a better understanding of each other.
The biggest problem with speech codes is it masks the symptoms, but does nothing towards a cure, not to mention it supposes only very ridged framework of interaction monitored by more enlightened moral enforcers, which is patronizing in the extreme.
I've actually used them off and on since they first started, and now probably go there more than any other music site. The information is very comprehensive, and it is easy to find specific releases
Compare them to let's say Allmusic, who had a better start, more funding, and have tried through various means to monetize the information... they have floundered heavily, and Discogs has seemed wise enough to learn from their mistakes (i.e.- not pissing off your contributors). It is a mutual arrangement where having the information available makes purchasing easier. If they lock it down, they lose that.
The big question will be as more and more music is released as downloads only how Discogs will adjust to keep the information relevant. If they start adding in general artist information, reviews, etc., they are on track to be one of the premier knowledge bases for music.
Unfortunately the inertia of current system combined with the ability to score political points by tailoring the morass of regulations to benefit specific groups pretty much kills seeing BI in the near future. It's not like the power brokers want to give up their position to pick winners and losers either.
The same arguments can be used for Land Value Tax: liberals get essentially a progressive tax of the rich while conservatives get a vastly simplified tax code.
And that too will most likely never come to pass except for some smaller countries that don't have the luxury of inefficiency in the name of politics.
We are only about a generation away from anyone remembering a time before paranoia spilled out into the streets. After that, it is never coming back short of revolt
The War on Drugs may have been the prelude to a police state, but there is no denying we are in the embryonic stages of one now. And the irony being the US will be just as locked-down as any caliphate.
Eh, everyone is a perfectly competent driver until right before a crash. To demand not only perfect identification of road conditions (you've never been taken by surprised by a patch of black ice?), but near perfect responses to vehicle dynamics isn't realistic regardless of exemplary or poor driving skills. Even race car drivers still crash.
Adding to the information a driver has beyond autonomous cars can only be a good thing.
One of the things that struck me in the vid is the relative speed of the cars that crash to the cars that proceed safely isn't that much. Way too easy to misjudge.
I see you missed the part about the Moroccan restaurant being firebombed. Somehow that wasn't labeled terrorism.
And so does your victim-blaming narrative fit there too?
Let's not forget that ISIL is a very, very recent development. I wonder if anyone can point to any recent events in that part of the world?
Or do you really want me to believe that for over 200 years Islamic people have had little beef with the US, but over the course of the last 30 have developed a hard-on of epic proportions.
And it was just out of nowhere, and not reactionary to US foreign policy.
Really?
As I said, just a rehash of discussions after 9/11. Thank you for playing your part.
This is just a rehash of the discussions that happened shortly after 9/11 (nevar forget), and the major events I recall from that was the collective assholes of the nation puckered up (really, the nation was nearly sane just prior), and the local Moroccan restaurant got firebombed (because they were obviously evil in trying to feed you).
So after the last wave of security theater, what will be different this time?
Certainly not our foreign policy. Certainly not adopting procedures from countries that do deal with terrorism successfully. Certainly not the need to throw even more money to departments that accomplish next to nothing.
I would imagine they have this nearly sorted out by now, no?
Or is this like fusion power and personal jet packs, always a decade away (it doesn't matter which decade. Pick one. I liked the 1980s).
Since then, I've tried to find if different bananas were available to North America. Not really, so obviously bananas aren't important enough to save (you know there would be a national outrage if BSE were ready to wipe out beef production).
It's not like many Americans actually eat fruit anyway.
While true enough autonomous cars to public transport makes a degree of sense, the author suffers from thinking most people are urbanites like them.
Unless you want the cost and upkeep of laying rail to the sticks, public transportation only works with a high enough degree of population density or in-between routes from major cities. Everyone else is left behemoth vehicles to carry supplies twice a month where public transport falls short. Not to mention you haven't solved congestion issues like the author suggests, but have merely moved them to different roads.
Nor have they considered that with sufficiently advanced autonomous vehicles, several people will probably forgo purchasing private vehicles altogether as taxi services drop in price and have the convenience of a private vehicle. That is less vehicles on the road, which helps in every measure.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately the newest moral panic is the representation of women in video games leading to rape culture, misogyny, and what ever else the moral crusaders have within their sights.
Will we ever learn?
And suppose there was a clear link between videogames and violence, exactly what is to be done? There were riots when the Rites of Spring was first performed, yet it is not damnatio memoriae, almost as if these relationships aren't quite as static as we are lead to believe, which is why there is so much conflicting data.
Most of these "studies" make for a nice pseudo-science justification for a particular set of biases, only a few steps removed from "it is witchcraft" and as luck would have it, nothing of the moral crusaders' most cherished is placed under the same scrutiny.
I have had about enough, thank you, whether it is hate-speech, "radicalization", or whatever mores of the age; surprise! people are influenced from the environment, but that is hardly just cause for the morally indignant to lord over all of creation.
funny how "unfair billing practices" is know as fraud when you aren't a corporation.
there isn't a problem. The tenor of college campuses has changed dramatically over the past 25 years, and if you are a comedian why would you risk a roll of the dice on a media circus? Safe space wasn't a natural part of the lexicon even 5 years ago...
One of the more pernicious affects of censorship is you are never completely aware of the scope and degree what is being censored. Memory hole is apt as if you didn't have direct knowledge, you'd have no reason to suspect anything was missing at all.
As far as I know, no one forces you to buy a vehicle (especially if you can't afford it). You also have a few options for motorized transportation (30cc moped, public transport, etc.) that don't require insurance. State I lived in even had the option for you to put up a bond with the state (helpful if you have a large car collection) instead of buying insurance to cover damages.
With the present US healthcare, quite a few people still can't afford insurance, even with government subsidizes, and worse are penalized for it. It's like a tax on being alive. Not to mention the numerous database hacks of health companies, it's not only your health that you are worried about. It's not like you have the option not to do business with them because their security sucks.
All that taken into consideration, it's hard to say if the ACA really saved any money at all.
Adding-
Admins do themselves no favors by making ludicrous demand from lusers like "the password must contain a special character, but may not begin or end with a special character, have two numbers, and can only be be 8 characters long... you got that?".
Or requiring password changes every 60 days, especial for accounts I use maybe bi-yearly. Or refuse recycling passwords. And the list goes on.
Anymore more it is easier just to bang my head against the keyboard as my password and have them email me a new one.
Two step authentication, and One Password to Rule Them All.
Supposedly the USSR had copy machines etched so that it was possible to track down the source of aberrant materials. A means of tracking is also done with consumer copiers in the name of reducing fraud, but there is no law restricting it solely to that use.The Federalist Papers would be an anathema today.
Exactly how much further down this rabbit hole do we want to go? Yes, it is fine and good that these measures will only be used with the best of intentions, but if the difference between a police state and your liberal democracy is intentions, you are already fucked.
Once we are at the point of self-driving cars, ownership becomes moot (for a lot of people anyway). You now have a taxi service that can eliminate one of the most expensive components, the driver, and allow me to nap gently without having to worry why we are taking the extreme scenic route. Parking structures can be reduced significantly as well as road congestion. I have little need for a personal car once public transport is on-demand and cheap. That will require Big Data to coordinate all of those demands, so they are kinda correct.
Until then, besides status mongers, what several want out of a vehicle is reduced cost. Any time there is a ripple in fuel prices, people gnash their teeth at owning behemoth overlord, and it starts becoming a cost per mile calculation. Not to mention upkeep and reliability.
I mean having the latest golly-gee-whiz gadgetry is nice and all, but manufactures still haven't really solved the transportation issue. Someone builds a $400 car that can get me around, and we'll see how important infotainment really is.
To be fair, most people are idiots and are as likely to cause harm as good when trying to help. At least we've gotten past the Kitty Genovese effect (mostly) and at least someone in the crowd will call 911.
Not to mention Good Samaritan laws won't really shield you from a soul-crushing investigation of second-guessing against a backdrop of what would a "reasonable" person do when faced with blood everywhere, body parts, and chaos. I'm reminded of an investigation of the medical staff accused of killing patients during Katrina. Even amid horrendous conditions that defy imagination, someone will asses that you should have always done more. I'm not surprised that more people don't attempt to offer aid.
Anyway, the law of unintended consequences comes to play here, and instead of people documenting or rendering help, I'm sure several will just walk away.
Will he stop people from making phone calls as well? Exactly how broad of a definition of social media is he using?
To be clear, are there any professions out there that don't suck in some fashion? Is there some magical career that is reasonably compensated, where the management isn't evil, and it is possible to have some semblance of a life outside of work?
The smart money sez that if IT is so awful, maybe it is time to jump ship and look into careers of being plumbers or country doctors.
Or maybe the notion of work culture needs to change, and that is certainly not going to come from above.
Um, no. There is actually a great deal of libertarian thought given to the most effective compromises that can be made since not everyone is on-board with ubermen-against the-world archetype that seems to be in vogue now. In fact, New Hampshire already fits within the geolibertarian model (no sales or income tax, high property tax), which is an anathema to the "taxation is theft" crowd. You can't even set up your corporate structure in the Cayman islands to be rid of it.
Hayek and Friedman already championed the ideas behind basic income as the least destructive way to have social services, and curiously is now being championed by the left. And then there is that whole other left-libertarianism as well.
There has been very considered thought on how to move society in a more libertarian direction without letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. The hardline libertarian types are simply ignorant beyond sloganeering, which is a shame really. Libertarianism has some rather nuanced insights beyond "government is bad, m'kay".
The problem here is that corporate officer jobs have been gaining upwards of 4,000% compared to the plebes. Are they not also subject to the same market forces? I wonder what between these two extremes is different (if you think corporate boards don't operate as protection for the wealthiest, you haven't been paying attention)?
While certainly no one owes you a job, no one owes any business a market either. The fact of the matter is that laws have been bought and sold against labor (the TPP being the latest round) while at the same time workers have been told they don't need to organize when they have labor laws. And here we are.
Slash and burn economics isn't viable either, and eventually those chickens will come to to roost as well, often with bloody results.
Better- once you get tagged as mentally ill, do you ever have a chance to make it off the list again?
I'm sure putting people in the position of giving up their right to self-protection or seeking treatment will do wonders for reducing the stigma on mental illness. Does Obama have any clue how many SSRIs are prescribed monthly?
As it is, restricting weapons from felons has been a dismal failure, often stripping entire families of their constitutional rights due to one bad actor, or making reintegration strained even more with the lack of social support.
Adding to that clusterfuck with the mentally ill, and possibly reducing social support to them is just plain fucked-up. The mentally ill make up less than 5% of perpetrators, and are 2.5 times more likely to be victims of violent crime.
Way to go.
So then logically you are Christian and Anonymous, since there is no membership process. Or no one is Christian since there is no membership process.
Part of the difficulty here is that Anonymous is less a group than a branding exercise. Any of these activities could also come from a group identifying themselves as the People's Front of Judea, yet they don't, as Anonymous has achieved a certain degree of celebrity and others seek to attach their pet cause to that celebrity.
It is interesting to note how Anonymous' evolution on free speech has mirrored that on college campuses. As Anonymous used to antagonize those who would restrict speech online; those people have moved on and the current incarnation is increasingly okay with necessary restrictions, as long as it isn't their speech being restricted.
It's understood that there are going to be differences between what management wants and what the employee wants, and at some shifting point in the middle everyone is at least not miserable.
And money quite honestly is the bare minimum that a job can offer. A co-worker was given two months off so he could fulfill his dream of back-packing through Europe. That type of consideration builds gratitude that will see a business through a rough patch. Most people tend to reciprocate in kind. That aspect of flexibility on the part of the employer is sorely lacking in most labor arrangements.
And for employees that may not be able (or willing) to offer more in times of FUBAR, competent management is able to take this into account and either fire (kidding) those people or at a minimum take pains to reduce the stress load.
The real problems are when management pays lip service to work-life balance, and there is no accommodation coming from their end. That shit won't fly for long.
I think it is more in line with commensurate compensation, and by large extent that is set by the culture of management.
I too have worked long hours to a point my paycheck was 1/3 of total labor costs (no joke) for a few months, but that was done with the expressed understanding that it would be temporary, and that management would do (and had the capability to make happen) everything in their power to correct the situation.
I've also worked in places where any demand for anything not specified in my agreement, well, they could fuck right off. Management had done everything in their power to earn my contempt, and I could hardly hold back my smile when I was let go.
The difference being I know when I'm being exploited, and I know when management is taking my needs into account. The "flexible' aspect doesn't reside exclusively with the employee. It also resides with management.
Oh, really? What powers of prognostication you must have to derive that from a simple deconstruction. Do tell.
What you heard when you were young was conspiracy to commit battery. You could have reported it then, without speech codes, so that seems to be a rather far reach.
Or how about this: wanna go down to the gay bar and beat up some fags?
There. I said it.
And I should be arrested for that?
Tell me...
Am I treating others with respect when I infantilize people through speech; am I treating them as equal? Why are only skin color and identity only taboo when criticizing others? People are routinely regarded as stupid, even though IQ is mostly genetic, i.e. beyond their control.
Can you name a single instance where hatred and bigotry were reduced through the adoption of speech codes? I can point to several instances of the opposite, where free and open dialogue brought people to a better understanding of each other.
The biggest problem with speech codes is it masks the symptoms, but does nothing towards a cure, not to mention it supposes only very ridged framework of interaction monitored by more enlightened moral enforcers, which is patronizing in the extreme.
That's a pretty far cry from "equality".
I've actually used them off and on since they first started, and now probably go there more than any other music site. The information is very comprehensive, and it is easy to find specific releases
Compare them to let's say Allmusic, who had a better start, more funding, and have tried through various means to monetize the information... they have floundered heavily, and Discogs has seemed wise enough to learn from their mistakes (i.e.- not pissing off your contributors). It is a mutual arrangement where having the information available makes purchasing easier. If they lock it down, they lose that.
The big question will be as more and more music is released as downloads only how Discogs will adjust to keep the information relevant. If they start adding in general artist information, reviews, etc., they are on track to be one of the premier knowledge bases for music.
Unfortunately the inertia of current system combined with the ability to score political points by tailoring the morass of regulations to benefit specific groups pretty much kills seeing BI in the near future. It's not like the power brokers want to give up their position to pick winners and losers either.
The same arguments can be used for Land Value Tax: liberals get essentially a progressive tax of the rich while conservatives get a vastly simplified tax code.
And that too will most likely never come to pass except for some smaller countries that don't have the luxury of inefficiency in the name of politics.
Winning? They've won!
We are only about a generation away from anyone remembering a time before paranoia spilled out into the streets. After that, it is never coming back short of revolt
The War on Drugs may have been the prelude to a police state, but there is no denying we are in the embryonic stages of one now. And the irony being the US will be just as locked-down as any caliphate.
Eh, everyone is a perfectly competent driver until right before a crash. To demand not only perfect identification of road conditions (you've never been taken by surprised by a patch of black ice?), but near perfect responses to vehicle dynamics isn't realistic regardless of exemplary or poor driving skills. Even race car drivers still crash.
Adding to the information a driver has beyond autonomous cars can only be a good thing.
http://icyroadsafety.com/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
One of the things that struck me in the vid is the relative speed of the cars that crash to the cars that proceed safely isn't that much. Way too easy to misjudge.
I see you missed the part about the Moroccan restaurant being firebombed. Somehow that wasn't labeled terrorism.
And so does your victim-blaming narrative fit there too?
Let's not forget that ISIL is a very, very recent development. I wonder if anyone can point to any recent events in that part of the world?
Or do you really want me to believe that for over 200 years Islamic people have had little beef with the US, but over the course of the last 30 have developed a hard-on of epic proportions.
And it was just out of nowhere, and not reactionary to US foreign policy.
Really?
As I said, just a rehash of discussions after 9/11. Thank you for playing your part.
This is just a rehash of the discussions that happened shortly after 9/11 (nevar forget), and the major events I recall from that was the collective assholes of the nation puckered up (really, the nation was nearly sane just prior), and the local Moroccan restaurant got firebombed (because they were obviously evil in trying to feed you).
So after the last wave of security theater, what will be different this time?
Certainly not our foreign policy. Certainly not adopting procedures from countries that do deal with terrorism successfully. Certainly not the need to throw even more money to departments that accomplish next to nothing.
But kiss even more of your civil rights goodbye.
Well, considering it has been almost a decade since this story last appeared here
http://science.slashdot.org/st...
I would imagine they have this nearly sorted out by now, no?
Or is this like fusion power and personal jet packs, always a decade away (it doesn't matter which decade. Pick one. I liked the 1980s).
Since then, I've tried to find if different bananas were available to North America. Not really, so obviously bananas aren't important enough to save (you know there would be a national outrage if BSE were ready to wipe out beef production).
It's not like many Americans actually eat fruit anyway.
While true enough autonomous cars to public transport makes a degree of sense, the author suffers from thinking most people are urbanites like them.
Unless you want the cost and upkeep of laying rail to the sticks, public transportation only works with a high enough degree of population density or in-between routes from major cities. Everyone else is left behemoth vehicles to carry supplies twice a month where public transport falls short. Not to mention you haven't solved congestion issues like the author suggests, but have merely moved them to different roads.
Nor have they considered that with sufficiently advanced autonomous vehicles, several people will probably forgo purchasing private vehicles altogether as taxi services drop in price and have the convenience of a private vehicle. That is less vehicles on the road, which helps in every measure.