Enough with this shit. The "gold standard" Google cars aren't even close to being able to drive themselves autonomously today. WHY DOES EVERYONE KEEP THINKING THIS IS ACTUALLY GOING TO HAPPEN???
I would venture to bet things like lane guidance and the ability to drive a straight line on a limited access highway will be required by 2035, but if anyone thinks cars are just going to magically drive themselves everywhere in 20 years, they're out of their goddamned minds.
And I'll still be driving my manually driven car. Fuck you if you think I'm going to let Google drive for me, they can't even build a usable fucking smartphone in 2015...it'll be a cold day in hell before they're responsible for safely piloting me around in a 2 ton death machine.
If this wasn't more blatant political pandering and yet another attempt to censor the Internet by the fucking Brits, I would ask whether or not anyone is smart enough to realize that the world is a scary place. We don't let kids wander around aimlessly in real life, we have designated areas, usually our own homes, the homes of trusted friends and neighbors, schools, etc. where children are allowed to be and operate with minimal controls.
When we take children to the city, or the store, or anywhere else that Bad Things Can Happen(tm), they are closely supervised and monitored. Now, I realize that that's impossible on the Internet. So, instead of trying to get some kind of verification method, tld, or whatever not-gonna-work flavor of the week they can come up with, why not just have a ".kids" tld or something that only has approved kiddy-friendly bullshit then set up your connections so that's all the kids can get to? All the big sites could set up.kids friendly pages, so there wouldn't be a need for anyone under, say, 12, to go anywhere else. And 13+, they're practically adults anyway and can handle the unfettered internet.
It would be so much easier to set up a whitelist than any of these half-cocked identity schemes for political brownie points, but again this is all about pandering and censorship, not protecting children, so no real solution will ever be put in place as the regulators don't want their favorite bogeyman to disappear.
As someone who has been using Android since "donut", iOS since 2.0, and BlackBerry since BB OS 4.5, I can safely say Android indeed jumped the shark somewhere around the 4.0 ICS era, possibly 4.1 JB. 4.0 seemed to be the best mix of stability and functionality. While stability has increased through the 4.x series into 5.x, it seems as if functionality continues to be removed from the user while making it harder to root to do what you need it to.
I've actually been liking iOS a little more, and BB 10 a LOT more the more I've used them lately, and I've also been having less and less need for my Android phone. It's a fun toy at this point, but not much more. While I would mark the parent comment as "Troll" in general, I'm starting to get behind the sentiment of Android LOLOLOL.
The "new, shiny" of pocket computing has worn off. If I need to get real work done, I'll use a real computer. If I need a web browser/basic apps and the ability to communicate on the go, I'll use a smartphone. Web browsing and basic apps are done much better on literally every other platform. Even BB 10 and WP 8.1 are smoother, have a better look and feel, and are generally more stable, even though app selection is lacking. Android wins the "smartphone wars" in the same way VHS won the "home tape format" war. It's shotgun marketed at the lowest common denominator, performance and polish be damned.
I've always dreamed of this mode of transportation!
Imagine having a car that's never just sitting idle, depreciating in the driveway or the parking lot at work, when it could be being productive all day long!
Yes, indeed! I've always wanted a car that rather than being my own space to unwind on the drive home could be busy shuttling smelly people and their kids, smelly goods, etc. around the city all day! I could have all kinds of new coffee stains in new places because people aren't paying attention to the pothole that the automated piece of shit is about to drive straight over. I could even have new types of stains on the interior!
Imagine that, even the local corner hooker could use my car as her own personal "by-the-half-hour" motel room! More new types of puddles on the interior to examine and enjoy the aroma of. How exciting!
And nevermind the wear and tear and mileage, Uber is paying me! Another added benefit, I bet by the end of the day I wouldn't even have to decide on what to have for dinner, because there would be plenty of yummy new types of food scents in the car. And probably some garbage to clean out of it, you know how people are with "public transportation". And speaking of, why would anyone bother taking the train or bus when they can just use some other chump's car? And with that, the constant maintenance, repair and replacement of said car. Yes, that's the key! Consume MORE!
As an aside, I've actually gotten to experience this mode of transportation in my life. The kind where it smells like curry and cigar smoke, with something sticky underneath the seat. It's called a taxi. There's a reason I drive my own car and don't take taxis. They stink, they're beat up pieces of shit, they drive all day and night, and they're operated by someone other than me. And I don't want my car to be a bunch of random people's own private subway car for the day. Fuck that.
Robocars (along with fully autonomous cars in general), are never going to happen, will never be practical, and are a stupid idea from stupid people who are too lazy, self-absorbed, and deluded to see why they don't work and will never work regardless of how much technology we throw at them.
This is called an ad-hominem attack. You are no better than the people you are insinuating that you are better than.
You are attacking a person's search engine based on something that has nothing to do with their search engine. Why? Also, while they may be an "anti-vaxxer", I can't seem to find any evidence that this person wears tin foil hats. Source?
I honestly don't care what people do in their personal lives, vaccinate, don't vaccinate, wear hats made of foil, don't wear hats made of foil. How do people have so much energy to spend on hating each other based on the media's divide and conquer strategies? Either add something useful to the conversation (relevant to the discussion, which headwear and vaccination status most certainly aren't) or go post on your blog about how you hate everything not like yourself.
Wrong, it's not a conspiracy if it's false. A conspiracy is two or more parties working together for an illegal, unethical, or otherwise undesirable means. A conspiracy is NOT the incoherent ramblings of a wild-eyed mental patient. That's what we call a crackpot theory.
However, the powerful elites and controlled media outlets have worked tirelessly for decades to further the narrative that anyone who accuses someone else of a conspiracy is a wild-eyed mental patient. When, based on the simple definition of the word conspiracy, everyone can admit that they surely happen every single day in every country on Earth.
Hence, the "conspiracy theory" becoming a label that can be easily applied to anyone who is calling out a group of two or more people who are up to no good and immediately discredit them. For the sociopaths that run the world, this is the best thing that could have ever happened to them. Anyone who can see that 5+5=10 is now a nutter! How convenient for them!
Admittedly, I did. I just Googled the school and saw a picture of the principal. It makes more sense now. But rest assured, nanny-statists come in all sexes, races, colors, and creeds.
Oh, everyone's noticed. That doesn't make it OK, there, Champ. If everyone walking down the street for the past few days has been kicking you in the nuts, does that make it perfectly fine if it just continues to happen?
Re:Could you tell a difference at distance?
on
Stormtrooper Arrested
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Would you be able to be sure the black gun shaped thing was a toy from that distance?
This guy's a moron, and maybe it's OK that they ran him in just to make sure he wasn't up to no good, but fuck pressing charges. And the principal? A pussy who has no business being in charge of anyone, let alone our children. And we wonder why kids are growing up so soft...look at these "role models" they see in schools! Nanny-state limp-wrists who soil themselves at the sight of a plastic gun.
Insightful? Are you fucking kidding me? Even the dumbest boxes of rocks I've ever met realize that there is more than one country on this planet. Now, if it was a lame attempt at the tired, old, worn the fuck out *hurr, durr USAians dumb hehe* humor, then at least fucking mod it as such.
I don't recall anyone, ever, claiming that Martha Stewart wasn't a story. People were pissed about her case then, just like people are pissed about Hastert's case now. Yes, what Hastert allegedly did is egregious and vile, much more so than a stock tip. But why try and inject the "liberal women" card where it didn't need to exist. Why does every single fucking story have to turn into a goddamned story of oppression? Can you fucking people NEVER give it a goddamned rest?
Stop smoking the anti-religion defeatist crack and get up and do something. Or is it too hot outside and mommy's basement is so nice and cool and dark?
They don't know exactly who I am at all. That would take an IMEI number and a database that they don't have.
Completely untrue. When you sign in to Facebook on your device, they have access to your phone number (if you haven't already voluntarily given it to them) and device ID (not IMEI, but a unique identifier). They also get to have access to your contact list. All of your friends have also given them their contact lists. It isn't hard to correlate all those lists and numbers, combined with messaging histories and usage patterns, to know exactly who *everyone* is, even if you DON'T have a Facebook account.
That's the part that bothers me the most, is that even if I've never used their services, they still have a profile on me.
Zuckerberg was absolutely right when he called his users dumb fucks
I think you're absolutely correct. Why the fuck should I give up the only cookie I have (or anyone else has) left to some lazy, union slob (or the CEO or anyone else for that matter) without a fight? I wouldn't expect the union worker to give me his cookie. But yeah, fuck the middle class or something right?
This gubernatorial race is really just a ploy for attention to get someone, anyone, to go back to Fark after the pro-censorship PC police took it over.
Funny, because it used to be a decent place when it wasn't rife with PC nanny-staters.
You censor speech, you get routed around, end of story.
This is why I always try to purchase the "Low Tox" antifreeze for my vehicles. Should I ever be stranded in a remote location without water, I could survive for days just by cracking the draincock on the radiator. Plus, I don't have to feel as bad about parking my car over the storm sewer and emptying out the cooling system when I do a flush!
I saw this yesterday: It proves to me that people really are getting stupider at an alarming rate and that the internet as we once knew it is done for. We might as well just pack it all up and go home, boys.
Does anyone else notice that in every article where there is someone lecturing us in a denigrating fashion for something "bad" we do or have done, they have to refer to people in the third person as "humans". They never say "we", or even "humanity", no. It's always "humans", like the person doing the lecturing is above the level of us filthy "humans".
Is it nanny-talk 101 to speak of us in such a manner, or are the people doing this of another species?
Slashdot Mirror
Why did I spend all my mod points yesterday? This is the whole truth, right here.
Enough with this shit. The "gold standard" Google cars aren't even close to being able to drive themselves autonomously today. WHY DOES EVERYONE KEEP THINKING THIS IS ACTUALLY GOING TO HAPPEN???
I would venture to bet things like lane guidance and the ability to drive a straight line on a limited access highway will be required by 2035, but if anyone thinks cars are just going to magically drive themselves everywhere in 20 years, they're out of their goddamned minds.
And I'll still be driving my manually driven car. Fuck you if you think I'm going to let Google drive for me, they can't even build a usable fucking smartphone in 2015...it'll be a cold day in hell before they're responsible for safely piloting me around in a 2 ton death machine.
If this wasn't more blatant political pandering and yet another attempt to censor the Internet by the fucking Brits, I would ask whether or not anyone is smart enough to realize that the world is a scary place. We don't let kids wander around aimlessly in real life, we have designated areas, usually our own homes, the homes of trusted friends and neighbors, schools, etc. where children are allowed to be and operate with minimal controls.
When we take children to the city, or the store, or anywhere else that Bad Things Can Happen(tm), they are closely supervised and monitored. Now, I realize that that's impossible on the Internet. So, instead of trying to get some kind of verification method, tld, or whatever not-gonna-work flavor of the week they can come up with, why not just have a ".kids" tld or something that only has approved kiddy-friendly bullshit then set up your connections so that's all the kids can get to? All the big sites could set up .kids friendly pages, so there wouldn't be a need for anyone under, say, 12, to go anywhere else. And 13+, they're practically adults anyway and can handle the unfettered internet.
It would be so much easier to set up a whitelist than any of these half-cocked identity schemes for political brownie points, but again this is all about pandering and censorship, not protecting children, so no real solution will ever be put in place as the regulators don't want their favorite bogeyman to disappear.
As someone who has been using Android since "donut", iOS since 2.0, and BlackBerry since BB OS 4.5, I can safely say Android indeed jumped the shark somewhere around the 4.0 ICS era, possibly 4.1 JB. 4.0 seemed to be the best mix of stability and functionality. While stability has increased through the 4.x series into 5.x, it seems as if functionality continues to be removed from the user while making it harder to root to do what you need it to.
I've actually been liking iOS a little more, and BB 10 a LOT more the more I've used them lately, and I've also been having less and less need for my Android phone. It's a fun toy at this point, but not much more. While I would mark the parent comment as "Troll" in general, I'm starting to get behind the sentiment of Android LOLOLOL.
The "new, shiny" of pocket computing has worn off. If I need to get real work done, I'll use a real computer. If I need a web browser/basic apps and the ability to communicate on the go, I'll use a smartphone. Web browsing and basic apps are done much better on literally every other platform. Even BB 10 and WP 8.1 are smoother, have a better look and feel, and are generally more stable, even though app selection is lacking. Android wins the "smartphone wars" in the same way VHS won the "home tape format" war. It's shotgun marketed at the lowest common denominator, performance and polish be damned.
I've always dreamed of this mode of transportation!
Imagine having a car that's never just sitting idle, depreciating in the driveway or the parking lot at work, when it could be being productive all day long!
Yes, indeed! I've always wanted a car that rather than being my own space to unwind on the drive home could be busy shuttling smelly people and their kids, smelly goods, etc. around the city all day! I could have all kinds of new coffee stains in new places because people aren't paying attention to the pothole that the automated piece of shit is about to drive straight over. I could even have new types of stains on the interior!
Imagine that, even the local corner hooker could use my car as her own personal "by-the-half-hour" motel room! More new types of puddles on the interior to examine and enjoy the aroma of. How exciting!
And nevermind the wear and tear and mileage, Uber is paying me! Another added benefit, I bet by the end of the day I wouldn't even have to decide on what to have for dinner, because there would be plenty of yummy new types of food scents in the car. And probably some garbage to clean out of it, you know how people are with "public transportation". And speaking of, why would anyone bother taking the train or bus when they can just use some other chump's car? And with that, the constant maintenance, repair and replacement of said car. Yes, that's the key! Consume MORE!
As an aside, I've actually gotten to experience this mode of transportation in my life. The kind where it smells like curry and cigar smoke, with something sticky underneath the seat. It's called a taxi. There's a reason I drive my own car and don't take taxis. They stink, they're beat up pieces of shit, they drive all day and night, and they're operated by someone other than me. And I don't want my car to be a bunch of random people's own private subway car for the day. Fuck that.
Robocars (along with fully autonomous cars in general), are never going to happen, will never be practical, and are a stupid idea from stupid people who are too lazy, self-absorbed, and deluded to see why they don't work and will never work regardless of how much technology we throw at them.
*When the two humans driving the car feel safe enough to let the computer take over, which according to Google's own data is about half the time.
So sick of hearing about this driverless car bullshit, when it isn't anywhere near that.
Does anyone even beta test this shit?
Dice, Inc. thanks you for your service.
There's no 75% tax rate
You're absolutely correct!
From TFL: "The overall rate of social security and tax on the average wage in 2005 was 71.3% of gross salary"
And that was in 2005. I'm sure taxes have dropped dramatically in France in the last decade, as they have across the globe. (/sarcasm)
tin foil hat wearing anti-vaxxer.
This is called an ad-hominem attack. You are no better than the people you are insinuating that you are better than.
You are attacking a person's search engine based on something that has nothing to do with their search engine. Why? Also, while they may be an "anti-vaxxer", I can't seem to find any evidence that this person wears tin foil hats. Source?
I honestly don't care what people do in their personal lives, vaccinate, don't vaccinate, wear hats made of foil, don't wear hats made of foil. How do people have so much energy to spend on hating each other based on the media's divide and conquer strategies? Either add something useful to the conversation (relevant to the discussion, which headwear and vaccination status most certainly aren't) or go post on your blog about how you hate everything not like yourself.
Wrong, it's not a conspiracy if it's false. A conspiracy is two or more parties working together for an illegal, unethical, or otherwise undesirable means. A conspiracy is NOT the incoherent ramblings of a wild-eyed mental patient. That's what we call a crackpot theory.
However, the powerful elites and controlled media outlets have worked tirelessly for decades to further the narrative that anyone who accuses someone else of a conspiracy is a wild-eyed mental patient. When, based on the simple definition of the word conspiracy, everyone can admit that they surely happen every single day in every country on Earth.
Hence, the "conspiracy theory" becoming a label that can be easily applied to anyone who is calling out a group of two or more people who are up to no good and immediately discredit them. For the sociopaths that run the world, this is the best thing that could have ever happened to them. Anyone who can see that 5+5=10 is now a nutter! How convenient for them!
Dorothy, Toto's on the phone, and he wants to know how to get back to Kansas. It ain't Canada in 1982 anymore, friend.
Admittedly, I did. I just Googled the school and saw a picture of the principal. It makes more sense now. But rest assured, nanny-statists come in all sexes, races, colors, and creeds.
Oh, everyone's noticed. That doesn't make it OK, there, Champ. If everyone walking down the street for the past few days has been kicking you in the nuts, does that make it perfectly fine if it just continues to happen?
Would you be able to be sure the black gun shaped thing was a toy from that distance?
Guns. Aren't. Fucking. Illegal.
So tired of light-loafered nanny-statists piddling themselves at the mere sight of a firearm. Go live in North Korea.
would you be able to distinguish it from a real gun from 100 feet away?
No, and does it even fucking matter? Guns aren't illegal.
This guy's a moron, and maybe it's OK that they ran him in just to make sure he wasn't up to no good, but fuck pressing charges. And the principal? A pussy who has no business being in charge of anyone, let alone our children. And we wonder why kids are growing up so soft...look at these "role models" they see in schools! Nanny-state limp-wrists who soil themselves at the sight of a plastic gun.
Insightful? Are you fucking kidding me? Even the dumbest boxes of rocks I've ever met realize that there is more than one country on this planet. Now, if it was a lame attempt at the tired, old, worn the fuck out *hurr, durr USAians dumb hehe* humor, then at least fucking mod it as such.
I don't recall anyone, ever, claiming that Martha Stewart wasn't a story. People were pissed about her case then, just like people are pissed about Hastert's case now. Yes, what Hastert allegedly did is egregious and vile, much more so than a stock tip. But why try and inject the "liberal women" card where it didn't need to exist. Why does every single fucking story have to turn into a goddamned story of oppression? Can you fucking people NEVER give it a goddamned rest?
Hastert is a piece of shit, and so are you.
Uhm, wat?
Stop smoking the anti-religion defeatist crack and get up and do something. Or is it too hot outside and mommy's basement is so nice and cool and dark?
They don't know exactly who I am at all. That would take an IMEI number and a database that they don't have.
Completely untrue. When you sign in to Facebook on your device, they have access to your phone number (if you haven't already voluntarily given it to them) and device ID (not IMEI, but a unique identifier). They also get to have access to your contact list. All of your friends have also given them their contact lists. It isn't hard to correlate all those lists and numbers, combined with messaging histories and usage patterns, to know exactly who *everyone* is, even if you DON'T have a Facebook account.
That's the part that bothers me the most, is that even if I've never used their services, they still have a profile on me.
Zuckerberg was absolutely right when he called his users dumb fucks
I think you're absolutely correct. Why the fuck should I give up the only cookie I have (or anyone else has) left to some lazy, union slob (or the CEO or anyone else for that matter) without a fight? I wouldn't expect the union worker to give me his cookie. But yeah, fuck the middle class or something right?
This gubernatorial race is really just a ploy for attention to get someone, anyone, to go back to Fark after the pro-censorship PC police took it over.
Funny, because it used to be a decent place when it wasn't rife with PC nanny-staters.
You censor speech, you get routed around, end of story.
This is why I always try to purchase the "Low Tox" antifreeze for my vehicles. Should I ever be stranded in a remote location without water, I could survive for days just by cracking the draincock on the radiator. Plus, I don't have to feel as bad about parking my car over the storm sewer and emptying out the cooling system when I do a flush!
"We need to find a way quash free speech on our network while maintaining the illusion to our users that we are not quashing free speech."
Just like 'old Zuck said, most of their users are dumb fucks, too.
I saw this yesterday: It proves to me that people really are getting stupider at an alarming rate and that the internet as we once knew it is done for. We might as well just pack it all up and go home, boys.
Does anyone else notice that in every article where there is someone lecturing us in a denigrating fashion for something "bad" we do or have done, they have to refer to people in the third person as "humans". They never say "we", or even "humanity", no. It's always "humans", like the person doing the lecturing is above the level of us filthy "humans".
Is it nanny-talk 101 to speak of us in such a manner, or are the people doing this of another species?