...If it is much safer overall than a human driver, it would be wrong to not release the software, even if it has obvious limitations that will eventually result in a accident.
Of course. And being much safer than a human driver, manufacturers should not have a problem with being liable for when errors do occur, right?
People unemployed by technical innovations don't suddenly remain unemployed for life, we have this thing called supply and demand that says their labor is reallocated towards the next-best end.
Just because it worked this way before, it doesn't mean it will work that way forever.
It can be argued that technological innovations that luddites feared and denounced used to take decades to be implemented, giving enough time for worker populations to adapt and "reallocate". A generation in their formative years could assess the situation and make sure they don't learn an obsolete set of skills.
Nowadays innovation seems to take place at a much faster pace. It's possible that by the time you finish learning something, it becomes obsolete, and you remain unemployable. I'm not saying this is the situation NOW, but it could happen, especially with so many advances in AI, robotics and automatization.
Nobody who is trying to do things right, is going to use anything like that.
Oh, you're such a nerd. Not that's anything wrong with that! But the world doesn't work like that. Most of the people don't make app usage decisions based whether or not they're based on open standards / protocols, but on what kind of User Experience they get from the apps. In that sense, Whatsapp was FAR FAR better than the SMS they were competing with they started, back in 2009-10. The rest is history.
Yes and no. It's not like we air-dropped 4 trillion dollar bills over Iraq and Afghanistan; that money got spend on the salaries of Americans and contracting companies. Sure, there was a lot wasted, but a lot of that money was recycled back into the economy.
...I myself was always FOR net neutrality, but I'm aware this kind of initiatives (which by the way is mandated by the ISP regulation in my country) would suffer if N.N. is fully enforced.
It should read:
"...I'm aware this kind of initiatives would suffer if N.N. (which by the way is mandated by the ISP regulation in my country) is fully enforced..."
Is "data against cap" the same as net neutrality? I don't see the relationship.
I live in one of the two countries where a pilot program from Internet.org was tested, namely, that traffic to and from Facebook (later also extended to WhatsApp) doesn't add to your data cap. The way it works is that the mobile operator inspects the traffic (nothing too deep, just checks whether the connected endpoint IPs belong to a whitelist) and if the traffic comes from FB or WhatsApp, it's "free" (as it does not use your quota). This is of course discrimination by origin, and it goes against net neutrality. I myself was always FOR net neutrality, but I'm aware this kind of initiatives (which by the way is mandated by the ISP regulation in my country) would suffer if N.N. is fully enforced.
There is ZERO evidence that a trial would not be fair. Like it or not, our criminal legal system works just fine and generally produces the right results. If anything, our system favors the accused and we let a lot more people walk who did it than punish those who didn't. Snowden would be fairly tried.
There cannot be "evidence" of something that hasn't happened yet.
There are hints though, and opinions from knowledgeable people, that he wouldn't have a fair trial, for he'd be tried using a law intended to deal with spies, not whistlebowers.
These days, the common model is that the employee is paid a miserable wage, but would make up the rest in tips.
Sure, but WHY is that? Why is the employee's compensation not included in the cost of the service, like (say) a retail associate's in a department store?
Its not "evidence" until after the law case begins. That is, if you destroy something that MIGHT incriminate you should the government ever finds out, and said destruction takes place BEFORE they find out, it's not punishable. Source: teh interwebs.
Until someone starts offering a flat fee for payment processing somewhere close to cost of the transaction, which is microscopic
So you'd want a company to float you the money during the transaction for up to thousands of dollars, cover all the real costs of the transactions, and handle any fraud prevention and losses all by charging a few pennies? That sounds like a sweet investment deal to be had!
It would be interesting, if somehow the exchange functionality were built into the protocol and entirely P2P. Getting rid of these centralized exchanges seems like it would really stabilize the currency. I don't know how remotely feasible that would be, it is far too early in the morning without coffee.
Effectively, what you describe is the protocol(which is p2p as well), except that the protocol does not address the issue of matching prospective buyers and prospective sellers (a protocol that does this, without a central market-operator, would be neat; but bodging one into a protocol for transferring virtual coins without double-spending would probably be unwieldy, though clients that implement both would be logical).
Uhm... isn't Ripple supposed to be that decentralized exchange?
...Poland had a huge military, which is why Germany had to take them out before tackling France.
This statement doesn't make any sense, and unfortunately nullifies your entire argument. Invading Poland was the plan all along (to reach the USSR eventually). Why would Hitler start by invading France if the lebensraum was on the East?
He was using a video recording device (i.e. wearing it with the camera pointed at the screen) in a cinema.
What does this have to do with the FBI!? Are you idiots seriously saying the FBI should get involved with this trivial garbage? This is why copyright law needs to be scrapped.
If they don't like it, kick him out.
Actually yeah, since copyright laws are federal matter, it's the FBI who should be involved. Yes, it IS absurd, but it is the law. If you don't like it, fight to change it.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course there is, but it's in the context menu for text selection. Quite useful for looking up name or specific phrases from a page you're reading.
...If it is much safer overall than a human driver, it would be wrong to not release the software, even if it has obvious limitations that will eventually result in a accident.
Of course. And being much safer than a human driver, manufacturers should not have a problem with being liable for when errors do occur, right?
People unemployed by technical innovations don't suddenly remain unemployed for life, we have this thing called supply and demand that says their labor is reallocated towards the next-best end.
Just because it worked this way before, it doesn't mean it will work that way forever.
It can be argued that technological innovations that luddites feared and denounced used to take decades to be implemented, giving enough time for worker populations to adapt and "reallocate". A generation in their formative years could assess the situation and make sure they don't learn an obsolete set of skills.
Nowadays innovation seems to take place at a much faster pace. It's possible that by the time you finish learning something, it becomes obsolete, and you remain unemployable. I'm not saying this is the situation NOW, but it could happen, especially with so many advances in AI, robotics and automatization.
Nobody who is trying to do things right, is going to use anything like that.
Oh, you're such a nerd. Not that's anything wrong with that! But the world doesn't work like that. Most of the people don't make app usage decisions based whether or not they're based on open standards / protocols, but on what kind of User Experience they get from the apps. In that sense, Whatsapp was FAR FAR better than the SMS they were competing with they started, back in 2009-10. The rest is history.
Yes, thank you! I though it only happened to me.
Is the XBox as hostile to non-US gamers as it used to be? That was basically what made me purchase a PS4 to begin with.
Yes and no. It's not like we air-dropped 4 trillion dollar bills over Iraq and Afghanistan; that money got spend on the salaries of Americans and contracting companies. Sure, there was a lot wasted, but a lot of that money was recycled back into the economy.
Broken Window phallacy
Either we're all safe, or we all get destroyed.
Because police departments have all this budget and military gear and they're itching to use it?
What about Stuxnet? Is that an act of war that merits a "response" from Iran?
...I myself was always FOR net neutrality, but I'm aware this kind of initiatives (which by the way is mandated by the ISP regulation in my country) would suffer if N.N. is fully enforced.
It should read:
"...I'm aware this kind of initiatives would suffer if N.N. (which by the way is mandated by the ISP regulation in my country) is fully enforced..."
Is "data against cap" the same as net neutrality? I don't see the relationship.
I live in one of the two countries where a pilot program from Internet.org was tested, namely, that traffic to and from Facebook (later also extended to WhatsApp) doesn't add to your data cap. The way it works is that the mobile operator inspects the traffic (nothing too deep, just checks whether the connected endpoint IPs belong to a whitelist) and if the traffic comes from FB or WhatsApp, it's "free" (as it does not use your quota). This is of course discrimination by origin, and it goes against net neutrality. I myself was always FOR net neutrality, but I'm aware this kind of initiatives (which by the way is mandated by the ISP regulation in my country) would suffer if N.N. is fully enforced.
$ is just an alias for the jQuery function, which is the "selector" at the heart of the jQuery philosophy.
THIS is a streaming service.
I see what dun deere.
There is ZERO evidence that a trial would not be fair. Like it or not, our criminal legal system works just fine and generally produces the right results. If anything, our system favors the accused and we let a lot more people walk who did it than punish those who didn't. Snowden would be fairly tried.
There cannot be "evidence" of something that hasn't happened yet.
There are hints though, and opinions from knowledgeable people, that he wouldn't have a fair trial, for he'd be tried using a law intended to deal with spies, not whistlebowers.
These days, the common model is that the employee is paid a miserable wage, but would make up the rest in tips.
Sure, but WHY is that? Why is the employee's compensation not included in the cost of the service, like (say) a retail associate's in a department store?
Its not "evidence" until after the law case begins. That is, if you destroy something that MIGHT incriminate you should the government ever finds out, and said destruction takes place BEFORE they find out, it's not punishable. Source: teh interwebs.
So you'd want a company to float you the money during the transaction for up to thousands of dollars, cover all the real costs of the transactions, and handle any fraud prevention and losses all by charging a few pennies? That sounds like a sweet investment deal to be had!
You mean like Dwolla?
It would be interesting, if somehow the exchange functionality were built into the protocol and entirely P2P. Getting rid of these centralized exchanges seems like it would really stabilize the currency. I don't know how remotely feasible that would be, it is far too early in the morning without coffee.
Effectively, what you describe is the protocol(which is p2p as well), except that the protocol does not address the issue of matching prospective buyers and prospective sellers (a protocol that does this, without a central market-operator, would be neat; but bodging one into a protocol for transferring virtual coins without double-spending would probably be unwieldy, though clients that implement both would be logical).
Uhm... isn't Ripple supposed to be that decentralized exchange?
...Poland had a huge military, which is why Germany had to take them out before tackling France.
This statement doesn't make any sense, and unfortunately nullifies your entire argument. Invading Poland was the plan all along (to reach the USSR eventually). Why would Hitler start by invading France if the lebensraum was on the East?
What about US of A? Last time I checked, they invaded 2 countries in the last decade, causing more than 500k human deaths.
When will the UN indict Bush, Blair and Cheney for that?
Nope, just once, in 2004. In 2000 a majority voted for Al Gore.
That stupid "we're a republic, not a democracy" meme is annoying and it must die.Seriously.
democracy noun \di-mä-kr-s\
: a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting.
He was using a video recording device (i.e. wearing it with the camera pointed at the screen) in a cinema.
What does this have to do with the FBI!? Are you idiots seriously saying the FBI should get involved with this trivial garbage? This is why copyright law needs to be scrapped.
If they don't like it, kick him out.
Actually yeah, since copyright laws are federal matter, it's the FBI who should be involved. Yes, it IS absurd, but it is the law. If you don't like it, fight to change it.
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos