Thing of it is, it's not the phone that's interpreting the voice, it's servers at the other end of a long network connection that take the recorded sound bite and convert it into text.
So no, right now it's not terribly feasible because there are not enough servers to handle more than specific requests.
Besides, how narcissistic is it to document every moment, and who's going to want to review all of that? The only use that I see for such technology is to spy on everyone Stasi-style. Think of the scenario proposed in one of the Christian Bale Batman movies, but instead of the Caped Crusader only looking for keywords and discarding the rest, it would be the government archiving everything worse than the Telescreens did in 1984, to later review for precrime or thoughtcrime prosecution.
I've actually considered this; I'm in a neighborhood that might become a Google Fiber expansion area. Wouldn't be that difficult to run wireless point-to-point to connect neighbors.
Probably won't, I'm more concerned about the liability if a neighbor does something illegal or otherwise legally challengable, but the idea appeals.
If they don't offer static addressing, then it's a waste of time.
Anything can be negotiated if the money is right.
Back when it was common to get one's DSL Line through the phone company, but to have one's service provided by a third-party ISP, I had my line through what's now Centurylink and my service through a local ISP that evolved from an old Macintosh User's Group, which provided me with a/29 so I had five usable static IP addresses with complete forward and reverse DNS resolve at my disposal. Was pretty awesome.
Residential customers probably can't expect static IP addresses unless the ISP offers an option to pay a little extra, but then again, if it's cheap residential service they might not permit the subscriber to host much in the way of services or might not want to offer static IPs. Business customers will obviously be able to get static IPs.
You mean, when altruistic visionary Elon Musk enables self-drive so that the cars now can chauffeur the passengers around and can then go self-park unassisted to make door-service really slick for the car owner, or when evil overlord Elon Musk activates the feature that makes all Teslas start attacking the population a'la The Racer?
When the license plate on the car is their ham radio callsign, they are hams.
There are three of them in the neighborhood that I work in. I think one of them took it too far, he had gone to the extent of putting large "EMERGENCY Call 911" decals on his quarter panels behind the wheel wells, a few weeks later the seal on the door, the REACT TEAM marking, the lightbar, and the EMERGENCY Call 911 logos were all removed, and "UMBRELLA CORPORATION" had replaced them, painted on the quarter panels between the tail lights and the rear door. The callsign license plate is still on the car.
I don't see that many obvious CB installations around here anymore. Most are on heavy trucks, some are on obviously offroad-used SUVs and light trucks, but never on cars or vans or crossovers. I see non-crown-vic cars with ham radio rigs, obvious because of the number of antennas for different frequencies, and usually with a callsign plate or window decal, or occasionally a simplex frequency decal, and I see a decent number of minivans and trucks with rigs, usually using the roof of the minivan as a ground-plane or a headache rack on a pickup as a mounting point, and occasionally on SUVs too. Probably more ham radio setups than CB.
I only have a tech-no-code license, and I'm only at that point because I didn't feel like learning Morse code. Now that one can go much higher with license class without code though, I suspect that a lot of people that would have been CB users that want to feel like they have some kind of authority have gone the ham route now that it's much easier without the Morse code requirement. It also seems to be quickly becoming a bastion of alternative "news" like infowars and other questionable outlets, which I find ironic given that there is a government licensing requirement in the first place, and that all transmissions are to be unencrypted and listenable to all.
You can physically look at a plane. You can touch the plane. You can even conduct real-world experiments like windtunnel tests with smoke introduced to observe with the naked eye how the machine might fly, and you can grab the wings and pull them in different directions to see if the fuselage cracks.
With computers and telecommunications equipment the bulk of what actually makes it special is in the abstract. You can see devices and cables, but what actually makes the processing and traffic flow function properly cannot be touched, and in some cases isn't well-represented even when data is captured and plotted, and worse, seemingly small changes in this abstract layer can have far-reaching consequences.
That's the problem when someone that doesn't understand the technology dictates technological decisions for IT, they have no idea what it takes, so they cannot evaluate if their IT people are honestly telling them of the minefield in front of them or if the IT people actually are lazy; they fall into MBA-whip-cracker mode to make it happen, and the IT workers are left with the stress of being between the unstoppable force and the immovable object.
Prohibitions are generally only on fairly urban limited-access freeways. There are usually no prohibitions on such transportation on rural highways, even the limited-access type. Same rules govern long-distance running on highways, bicycling on highways, and other non-automotive use.
I suspect that the prohibitions in urban areas are only enforceable because there are other avenues, pun intended, of getting around without using the limited-access freeways.
I do not like modern flat design. I actually used Windows 3.1 and old pre-faux-3d versions of Macintosh System 6 and 7 before Windows 95 came out, and the faux-3d UI that added just a little bit of depth was good for making things literally stand out in relief that were important, and for differentiating different aspects of the shell.
As for the browser logo, a rainbow "G" on a white field looks more like the logo for a superhero for the gay and lesbian community than the logo for a technology company.
I used serifed fonts with antialiasing in Windows 95 on an 800x600 display. There were no problems with them. And that computer was far less powerful than my four-plus year old smart phone.
Google changed their logo because they wanted the attention that has been given to them because of the change. That attention will eventually wane, and after doing a few other things to get attention they'll eventually change it again. That's what companies do, by and large.
i really wish they'd get around to whacking the whackers around here. I'm getting tired of hams driving retired cop cars with aftermarket lightbars and "REACT" painted on the doors with a somewhat official-looking seal and a plastic badge they bought at the security guard outfitter supply thinking they're somehow entitled to do more than use the radio.
And that's already generally against the rules. CB radios aren't supposed to be over 5W as they're for local communications, but routinely people will increase the power and use collinear arrays for increased gain.
That's what I was thinking too. Way back when I 'dreamed' of the idea I foresaw RFID or other passive-technology built into Botts Dots, or wire embedded in the roadbed that the electronics in the car could find and use to know the road, and then the car's onboard sensors could do obstacle detection, where basically the driver engages the autonomous drive like they currently engage cruise-control, except that they now don't have to steer or brake. That kind of technology would probably work on limited-access freeways where pedestrians and other non-automotive vehicles are prohibited, so long as disabled vehicles have the ability to signal that they're in an error-state so that the autonomous vehicles can give a wide-berth to the shoulder or other obstructed area. The driver still might not be free to sleep or otherwise completely ignore the road, but if the cars could learn their right-of-way from the road and didn't have to worry as much about unpredictable obstructions like humans wandering into the road then such a system should be fairly safe.
Once people got accustomed to that, I could see more inroads to rural highways where there's a greater chance of humans on the roadway or to slower turning vehicles, and from there, tech to work on suburban and later urban navigation. Basically use each density zone as a means to test navigation and avoidance tech before focusing on even denser areas.
And there are still people that love horses, maintain horses, and ride them in public areas as they're fully allowed to do in large portions of the country.
There will be no cheap conversion kits. They would require too many systems to be present in the cars to begin with, would require access to automotive computers that automakers won't provide, and would not be insurable as there would be too much question of liability.
The only car in production today that I could see being converted would be a Tesla, and that's only because they seem to have been pushing in that direction already and have built-in the necessary stuff to make it happen.
More to the point, autonomous cars are currently not the cheaper technology. Any bill that would attempt to force conventional vehicles off of the road would be stillborn, there are far too many automotive enthusiasts that have already made inroads in the other direction (ie, looser emissions testing rules on cars with collectors' insurance) that it literally can not happen. There would also be pushback from those that simply cannot afford new cars and advocacy groups for them; one can buy running cars for less than $1000 on the used market, it will take a decade for there to even be a chance for a used autonomous vehicle to be that cheap, if not even longer.
There have been lots of discussions on attempting to change driver behavior. Those are also nonstarters. People are not going to change how they drive until conditions in the field force them to do so. Hell, we still have idiots driving below the speed limit in the left lane on busy freeways where they're actually posing a safety hazard and where the law actually states that one can be cited for failing to yield and being passed on the right. Most people probably don't even know the rules for what's defined as stopping (ie, remaining still for two seconds where I live) and have no interest in bothering to learn, and the police don't seem inclined to enforce either, so this simply won't change.
The cars are going to have to learn how to adapt to these conditions.
If someone is prompted with a password prompt they may be inclined to try guessing for awhile. If they're prompted with a disk-boot error they simply turn off the computer and walk away.
It probably didn't help that you were watching in the uncertain era when Reality TV was taking over due to its extreme low cost to produce. A lot of decent shows were cancelled because the profit of even a lesser-watched reality show was higher than of a highly watched show with actual actors and writers and extensive sets.
I had a GBPVR setup running on a windows box several years ago, but I stopped using it when broadcasting went digital as it had an analog tuner. I haven't bothered to rebuild despite having considered it a few times. I just can't justify TV that much.
I used it like people use locks on their homes, I had a boot floppy with LILO and no MBR on the fixed disk, so the floppy had to be in the computer to boot as it literally booted from LILO installed on a floppy disk, then LILO found the kernel on the fixed disk and the OS loaded. Take the floppy out and the computer doesn't boot.
Obviously this wasn't going to keep out people that knew what they were doing and came prepared with their own bootable media, but it kept out roommates and their friends. I didn't even have to take the floppy disk all of the way out of the computer, simply unmounting it from the spindle and leaving it in the drive was enough. No one at the time gave that a second thought.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe we can store up some of that big wind. Some kind of special stretchy flexible container perhaps. We can call them windbags...
Thing of it is, it's not the phone that's interpreting the voice, it's servers at the other end of a long network connection that take the recorded sound bite and convert it into text.
So no, right now it's not terribly feasible because there are not enough servers to handle more than specific requests.
Besides, how narcissistic is it to document every moment, and who's going to want to review all of that? The only use that I see for such technology is to spy on everyone Stasi-style. Think of the scenario proposed in one of the Christian Bale Batman movies, but instead of the Caped Crusader only looking for keywords and discarding the rest, it would be the government archiving everything worse than the Telescreens did in 1984, to later review for precrime or thoughtcrime prosecution.
No thanks.
I've actually considered this; I'm in a neighborhood that might become a Google Fiber expansion area. Wouldn't be that difficult to run wireless point-to-point to connect neighbors.
Probably won't, I'm more concerned about the liability if a neighbor does something illegal or otherwise legally challengable, but the idea appeals.
If they don't offer static addressing, then it's a waste of time.
Anything can be negotiated if the money is right.
/29 so I had five usable static IP addresses with complete forward and reverse DNS resolve at my disposal. Was pretty awesome.
Back when it was common to get one's DSL Line through the phone company, but to have one's service provided by a third-party ISP, I had my line through what's now Centurylink and my service through a local ISP that evolved from an old Macintosh User's Group, which provided me with a
Residential customers probably can't expect static IP addresses unless the ISP offers an option to pay a little extra, but then again, if it's cheap residential service they might not permit the subscriber to host much in the way of services or might not want to offer static IPs. Business customers will obviously be able to get static IPs.
You mean, when altruistic visionary Elon Musk enables self-drive so that the cars now can chauffeur the passengers around and can then go self-park unassisted to make door-service really slick for the car owner, or when evil overlord Elon Musk activates the feature that makes all Teslas start attacking the population a'la The Racer?
When the license plate on the car is their ham radio callsign, they are hams.
There are three of them in the neighborhood that I work in. I think one of them took it too far, he had gone to the extent of putting large "EMERGENCY Call 911" decals on his quarter panels behind the wheel wells, a few weeks later the seal on the door, the REACT TEAM marking, the lightbar, and the EMERGENCY Call 911 logos were all removed, and "UMBRELLA CORPORATION" had replaced them, painted on the quarter panels between the tail lights and the rear door. The callsign license plate is still on the car.
I don't see that many obvious CB installations around here anymore. Most are on heavy trucks, some are on obviously offroad-used SUVs and light trucks, but never on cars or vans or crossovers. I see non-crown-vic cars with ham radio rigs, obvious because of the number of antennas for different frequencies, and usually with a callsign plate or window decal, or occasionally a simplex frequency decal, and I see a decent number of minivans and trucks with rigs, usually using the roof of the minivan as a ground-plane or a headache rack on a pickup as a mounting point, and occasionally on SUVs too. Probably more ham radio setups than CB.
I only have a tech-no-code license, and I'm only at that point because I didn't feel like learning Morse code. Now that one can go much higher with license class without code though, I suspect that a lot of people that would have been CB users that want to feel like they have some kind of authority have gone the ham route now that it's much easier without the Morse code requirement. It also seems to be quickly becoming a bastion of alternative "news" like infowars and other questionable outlets, which I find ironic given that there is a government licensing requirement in the first place, and that all transmissions are to be unencrypted and listenable to all.
You can physically look at a plane. You can touch the plane. You can even conduct real-world experiments like windtunnel tests with smoke introduced to observe with the naked eye how the machine might fly, and you can grab the wings and pull them in different directions to see if the fuselage cracks.
With computers and telecommunications equipment the bulk of what actually makes it special is in the abstract. You can see devices and cables, but what actually makes the processing and traffic flow function properly cannot be touched, and in some cases isn't well-represented even when data is captured and plotted, and worse, seemingly small changes in this abstract layer can have far-reaching consequences.
That's the problem when someone that doesn't understand the technology dictates technological decisions for IT, they have no idea what it takes, so they cannot evaluate if their IT people are honestly telling them of the minefield in front of them or if the IT people actually are lazy; they fall into MBA-whip-cracker mode to make it happen, and the IT workers are left with the stress of being between the unstoppable force and the immovable object.
Prohibitions are generally only on fairly urban limited-access freeways. There are usually no prohibitions on such transportation on rural highways, even the limited-access type. Same rules govern long-distance running on highways, bicycling on highways, and other non-automotive use.
I suspect that the prohibitions in urban areas are only enforceable because there are other avenues, pun intended, of getting around without using the limited-access freeways.
I do not like modern flat design. I actually used Windows 3.1 and old pre-faux-3d versions of Macintosh System 6 and 7 before Windows 95 came out, and the faux-3d UI that added just a little bit of depth was good for making things literally stand out in relief that were important, and for differentiating different aspects of the shell.
As for the browser logo, a rainbow "G" on a white field looks more like the logo for a superhero for the gay and lesbian community than the logo for a technology company.
I used serifed fonts with antialiasing in Windows 95 on an 800x600 display. There were no problems with them. And that computer was far less powerful than my four-plus year old smart phone.
Google changed their logo because they wanted the attention that has been given to them because of the change. That attention will eventually wane, and after doing a few other things to get attention they'll eventually change it again. That's what companies do, by and large.
Equip the water closet with a bidet.
Probably because the incentive to cheat would be too great.
I want the system to simply work, not to have the security defeated by the vehicle operator to kludge it to work.
i really wish they'd get around to whacking the whackers around here. I'm getting tired of hams driving retired cop cars with aftermarket lightbars and "REACT" painted on the doors with a somewhat official-looking seal and a plastic badge they bought at the security guard outfitter supply thinking they're somehow entitled to do more than use the radio.
And that's already generally against the rules. CB radios aren't supposed to be over 5W as they're for local communications, but routinely people will increase the power and use collinear arrays for increased gain.
That's what I was thinking too. Way back when I 'dreamed' of the idea I foresaw RFID or other passive-technology built into Botts Dots, or wire embedded in the roadbed that the electronics in the car could find and use to know the road, and then the car's onboard sensors could do obstacle detection, where basically the driver engages the autonomous drive like they currently engage cruise-control, except that they now don't have to steer or brake. That kind of technology would probably work on limited-access freeways where pedestrians and other non-automotive vehicles are prohibited, so long as disabled vehicles have the ability to signal that they're in an error-state so that the autonomous vehicles can give a wide-berth to the shoulder or other obstructed area. The driver still might not be free to sleep or otherwise completely ignore the road, but if the cars could learn their right-of-way from the road and didn't have to worry as much about unpredictable obstructions like humans wandering into the road then such a system should be fairly safe.
Once people got accustomed to that, I could see more inroads to rural highways where there's a greater chance of humans on the roadway or to slower turning vehicles, and from there, tech to work on suburban and later urban navigation. Basically use each density zone as a means to test navigation and avoidance tech before focusing on even denser areas.
And there are still people that love horses, maintain horses, and ride them in public areas as they're fully allowed to do in large portions of the country.
There will be no cheap conversion kits. They would require too many systems to be present in the cars to begin with, would require access to automotive computers that automakers won't provide, and would not be insurable as there would be too much question of liability.
The only car in production today that I could see being converted would be a Tesla, and that's only because they seem to have been pushing in that direction already and have built-in the necessary stuff to make it happen.
More to the point, autonomous cars are currently not the cheaper technology. Any bill that would attempt to force conventional vehicles off of the road would be stillborn, there are far too many automotive enthusiasts that have already made inroads in the other direction (ie, looser emissions testing rules on cars with collectors' insurance) that it literally can not happen. There would also be pushback from those that simply cannot afford new cars and advocacy groups for them; one can buy running cars for less than $1000 on the used market, it will take a decade for there to even be a chance for a used autonomous vehicle to be that cheap, if not even longer.
There have been lots of discussions on attempting to change driver behavior. Those are also nonstarters. People are not going to change how they drive until conditions in the field force them to do so. Hell, we still have idiots driving below the speed limit in the left lane on busy freeways where they're actually posing a safety hazard and where the law actually states that one can be cited for failing to yield and being passed on the right. Most people probably don't even know the rules for what's defined as stopping (ie, remaining still for two seconds where I live) and have no interest in bothering to learn, and the police don't seem inclined to enforce either, so this simply won't change.
The cars are going to have to learn how to adapt to these conditions.
If someone is prompted with a password prompt they may be inclined to try guessing for awhile. If they're prompted with a disk-boot error they simply turn off the computer and walk away.
And did you speed on your way into work this morning?
It probably didn't help that you were watching in the uncertain era when Reality TV was taking over due to its extreme low cost to produce. A lot of decent shows were cancelled because the profit of even a lesser-watched reality show was higher than of a highly watched show with actual actors and writers and extensive sets.
I had a GBPVR setup running on a windows box several years ago, but I stopped using it when broadcasting went digital as it had an analog tuner. I haven't bothered to rebuild despite having considered it a few times. I just can't justify TV that much.
I have better things to do than to record television shows.
No.
I used it like people use locks on their homes, I had a boot floppy with LILO and no MBR on the fixed disk, so the floppy had to be in the computer to boot as it literally booted from LILO installed on a floppy disk, then LILO found the kernel on the fixed disk and the OS loaded. Take the floppy out and the computer doesn't boot.
Obviously this wasn't going to keep out people that knew what they were doing and came prepared with their own bootable media, but it kept out roommates and their friends. I didn't even have to take the floppy disk all of the way out of the computer, simply unmounting it from the spindle and leaving it in the drive was enough. No one at the time gave that a second thought.