I don't think that you're talking through your ass in this case. Human drivers, and arguably human beings in general both learn how to predict what will happen, and when to take risks if their predictions are less than certain. This doesn't mean that humans are immune to making errors as the auto accident statistics strongly demonstrate, but in this case a human driver probably would have seen the lane restriction and the reason for it from further out, and even if not (like following a large vehicle that chose to merge at the last moment) the human driver would recognize what the people in the median are actually doing and judge it reasonably safe that they're not going to walk out in front of traffic without warning.
In short, the human driver is going to call on his life experiences while driving in order to attempt to predict the behavior of his surroundings. Even a novice fifteen year old with a learner's permit has fifteen years of learning about some forms of human behavior, and would probably recognize a worker with a hardhat at a wood chipper as someone unlikely to cross into the right-of-way. A computer system doesn't learn in that fashion.
Saw a funny one a couple of weeks ago. A Waymo car (technically a Pacifica minivan) was essentially stuck. The street had a median and a maintenance crew had closed the left lane with cones, and they had a wood chipper trailer and truck, and the various workers were cutting apart trees that had tipped over and were dragging pieces over to the chipper's hopper, which faced oncoming traffic.
The Waymo car was up at the start of the cones, and it couldn't interpret what the workers were doing and couldn't figure out how to merge-right. I think it was assuming the workers were going to run out into the street, so it would begin to move right but would stop as soon as a worker moved, and the rest of the vehicle traffic that was moving-right was just thick enough that it couldn't manage to get moving in those few seconds when workers were not being interpreted as an obstruction.
It was pretty funny to watch, and the employee in the car gave it a good ten minutes before giving up and manually taking control.
Well, automakers simulate ice at the various desert proving grounds by wetting-down roads they've covered in ceramic tiles. Throw a layer of something foamed on top and you've probably got something that behaves like snow over black ice.
All that the amplifier needs is the right inputs. I tend to use digital over coax or digital over optical where I can, and good old fashioned line-level on RCA connectors, hopefully with some kind of surround sound encoding for the amplifier to make use of.
My current amplifier for my big multimedia setup doesn't even have HDMI or DVI, and I don't use it to switch video signal even though it can theoretically do S-video, Component, and Composite. The projector switches video sources and the amp/receiver handles audio.
Plus with the current litigious nature of things I would expect that exoskeleton to see quite a bit of testing and safety systems prior to widespread use.
New automobile maintenance lifts used in commercial settings are required to have automatic locking systems to prevent a hydraulic failure from lowering the load. If hydraulic pressure is lost the load will settle-down onto the mechanical lock right below it, so that the load doesn't crush the mechanic or unevenly lower the vehicle to where it falls off the lift and gets damaged.
It's not unreasonable to consider similar mechanical backups on electric, pneumatic, or hydraulic exoskeletons, for those systems designed to lift past the threshold of what a human can naturally carry. Given that there's little reason to spend money on systems that only can carry what a human can already naturally lift, that would mean that most applications would be subject to such safety mechanisms.
Yep. The point of "programming" at that age is to broaden the impressions of what computers can be made to do, beyond what normal existing programs do. It's silly to try to teach programming in the conventional sense at this age, a lot of programming requires math skills that aren't learned until at least junior high, if not high school. By contrast, because some aspects of geometry are visual and don't necessarily require understanding of the math, kids can draw patterns on the screen without needing to know what's actually going on.
For those kids that enjoy this expanded horizon, they may go on to learn more about real programming later, when their mask skills have caught-up with what real programming requires.
I'd agree with this, especially in the context of the way Microsoft has trained users into normally expecting prompts when actions have very serious, arguably permanent results. User bears some responsibility, but when the design mentality of the UI since the beginning of the company has been to use confirmation prompts then there's an expectation that this will continue.
If I were him I'd immediately boot to some utility that scans the disk for filesystem clusters marked as deleted/available to attempt to undelete them. That is still a thing, right?
Except that as infotainment systems get more complex and more heavily integrated with the vehicle's CANBUS system and with the Internet via cellular networks, suddenly the possibility that someone can sabotage your car without having ever come within a thousand miles of you becomes a real prospect. Now add drive-by-wire where the vehicle controls are just inputs and the computer more directly controls acceleration, braking, and even steering, and you've got a recipe for a disaster if someone figures out how to exploit all models of a manufacturer with the same flaw. Imagine if all Honda Accords with lane-departure and adaptive cruise control suddenly accelerate at full-speed for five seconds then suddenly turn fifteen degrees to the left. If an attack like that was successful it would probably hurt or kill thousands of people.
Most IoT systems out there are predicated on the fact that they can do this.
That's only one flaw in IoT. There are many others especially when consumer and commercial products connect to the vendor's central management instead of to the customer's central management. Those flaws include having to have an untrusted device on one's network that has to be able to communicate with the Internet, having software that might not be readily patched yet may be running on a consumer-grade OS, and any vulnerabilities affecting the vendor's central management.
Well, Android itself has proven wildly successful and it underpins the majority of cell phones sold today, so while a certain amount of bullshitting is necessary, it usually has to be backed-up with some demonstration that success isn't impossible.
And Zombo.com will be here to coach us through it.
I hope that they manage to get html5zombo.com to the main zombo.com site and get the color spinning thing working better like it did back in 2000. That's literally the only change I'd make, just to make it function like it originally did.
It's debatable if Trump is the strongest Fascist leader at the moment or not, given the issues in The Philippines and in Russia, but as far as the power of the nation he theoretically leads, definitely.
No, you can't refuse service because of race, sex, or sexual orientation.
If I went into a bakery owned by a Cambodian ex-pat and tried to order a cake glorifying Pol Pot I'd be justifiably refused. Political views and the advocacy of violence are not protected in that setting.
Why? They did more harm than if they'd left the firmware well enough alone. The aphorism, "the road the hell is paved with good intentions," comes to mind. The results dwarf any intentions.
When a friend of mine was fired, the person doing the firing was clearly not comfortable doing it and started to try to add platitudes, and the person from HR interrupted and said something to the effect of, "we are letting you go, effective immediately. Your services are no longer necessary," as she handed his final paycheck to him.
In my state an employer does not usually have to provide a reason for firing someone. The only real exceptions are when contracts exist that document terms of the employment including dates. I happen myself to have such a job, and they've usually fired coworkers by choosing to not renew their contracts when the date comes up for renewal. It's generally easier than firing mid-contract, and that's usually reserved for particularly egregious behavior rather than simple underperformance.
Sure, the CEO said he violated the Code of Conduct. Did the CEO explain chapter-and-verse?
If I were them and had to file paperwork in the employee's file about the firing at the time of firing, I'd include a copy of the code of conduct stapled to a copy of the memo. I would not include more information than that when doing the firing other than making sure the date and time of the firing was noted, and perhaps if the employee was required to sign/date paperwork acknowledging the Code of Conduct a copy of that to demonstrate that the employee was well aware of the existence of the code.
James Damore Explains Why He Thinks He Was Fired By Google
Fact of the matter is, as he was the firee, not the firer, he cannot speak authoritatively as to why he was fired by his employer. His employer is probably not going disclose the exact statements that led to the firing either, because any employer sufficiently large to have an HR department is going play its cards close to its chest to avoid creating grounds for lawsuit or to minimize those grounds.
Everyone on the planet old enough to have life experience develops one's own set of biases. Generally it's wise to take care when expressing one's biases or when acting upon them, because if someone is indiscreet then one's indiscretions may lead to consequences. Mr. Damore did not exercise discretion and it has cost him.
Fundamentally the workers in a business are not the owners of the business, and unless employees have reached sufficiently lofty positions in the company then they're to follow legal policy, not to set or otherwise determine policy. Granted, a tolerant employer can be better to work for, but there again, that kind of tolerance goes both ways, and an employer is only going to tolerate so much intolerance. In the eyes of his employer, Mr. Damore appears to have crossed that line.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think that you're talking through your ass in this case. Human drivers, and arguably human beings in general both learn how to predict what will happen, and when to take risks if their predictions are less than certain. This doesn't mean that humans are immune to making errors as the auto accident statistics strongly demonstrate, but in this case a human driver probably would have seen the lane restriction and the reason for it from further out, and even if not (like following a large vehicle that chose to merge at the last moment) the human driver would recognize what the people in the median are actually doing and judge it reasonably safe that they're not going to walk out in front of traffic without warning.
In short, the human driver is going to call on his life experiences while driving in order to attempt to predict the behavior of his surroundings. Even a novice fifteen year old with a learner's permit has fifteen years of learning about some forms of human behavior, and would probably recognize a worker with a hardhat at a wood chipper as someone unlikely to cross into the right-of-way. A computer system doesn't learn in that fashion.
Saw a funny one a couple of weeks ago. A Waymo car (technically a Pacifica minivan) was essentially stuck. The street had a median and a maintenance crew had closed the left lane with cones, and they had a wood chipper trailer and truck, and the various workers were cutting apart trees that had tipped over and were dragging pieces over to the chipper's hopper, which faced oncoming traffic.
The Waymo car was up at the start of the cones, and it couldn't interpret what the workers were doing and couldn't figure out how to merge-right. I think it was assuming the workers were going to run out into the street, so it would begin to move right but would stop as soon as a worker moved, and the rest of the vehicle traffic that was moving-right was just thick enough that it couldn't manage to get moving in those few seconds when workers were not being interpreted as an obstruction.
It was pretty funny to watch, and the employee in the car gave it a good ten minutes before giving up and manually taking control.
Well, automakers simulate ice at the various desert proving grounds by wetting-down roads they've covered in ceramic tiles. Throw a layer of something foamed on top and you've probably got something that behaves like snow over black ice.
I hope they name the autonomous forklift system "Klaus".
I wonder how many people can be impaled on the forks of a forklift while it still is used to carry the spoils of looting?
All that the amplifier needs is the right inputs. I tend to use digital over coax or digital over optical where I can, and good old fashioned line-level on RCA connectors, hopefully with some kind of surround sound encoding for the amplifier to make use of.
My current amplifier for my big multimedia setup doesn't even have HDMI or DVI, and I don't use it to switch video signal even though it can theoretically do S-video, Component, and Composite. The projector switches video sources and the amp/receiver handles audio.
The difference may be that Sonos is intentionally making a change that breaks functionality.
I am not terribly versed in their products, do they work locally or were they specifically designed to work in-concert with a remote system?
Plus with the current litigious nature of things I would expect that exoskeleton to see quite a bit of testing and safety systems prior to widespread use.
New automobile maintenance lifts used in commercial settings are required to have automatic locking systems to prevent a hydraulic failure from lowering the load. If hydraulic pressure is lost the load will settle-down onto the mechanical lock right below it, so that the load doesn't crush the mechanic or unevenly lower the vehicle to where it falls off the lift and gets damaged.
It's not unreasonable to consider similar mechanical backups on electric, pneumatic, or hydraulic exoskeletons, for those systems designed to lift past the threshold of what a human can naturally carry. Given that there's little reason to spend money on systems that only can carry what a human can already naturally lift, that would mean that most applications would be subject to such safety mechanisms.
The only machine that I know of that goes Bing is the most expensive one in the WHOOOOOLE hospital.
Isn't that that great porn search engine, where it will offer raunchier and raunchier suggestions as you keep clicking through them?
I'm asking for a friend...
Yep. The point of "programming" at that age is to broaden the impressions of what computers can be made to do, beyond what normal existing programs do. It's silly to try to teach programming in the conventional sense at this age, a lot of programming requires math skills that aren't learned until at least junior high, if not high school. By contrast, because some aspects of geometry are visual and don't necessarily require understanding of the math, kids can draw patterns on the screen without needing to know what's actually going on.
For those kids that enjoy this expanded horizon, they may go on to learn more about real programming later, when their mask skills have caught-up with what real programming requires.
I'd agree with this, especially in the context of the way Microsoft has trained users into normally expecting prompts when actions have very serious, arguably permanent results. User bears some responsibility, but when the design mentality of the UI since the beginning of the company has been to use confirmation prompts then there's an expectation that this will continue.
If I were him I'd immediately boot to some utility that scans the disk for filesystem clusters marked as deleted/available to attempt to undelete them. That is still a thing, right?
Except that as infotainment systems get more complex and more heavily integrated with the vehicle's CANBUS system and with the Internet via cellular networks, suddenly the possibility that someone can sabotage your car without having ever come within a thousand miles of you becomes a real prospect. Now add drive-by-wire where the vehicle controls are just inputs and the computer more directly controls acceleration, braking, and even steering, and you've got a recipe for a disaster if someone figures out how to exploit all models of a manufacturer with the same flaw. Imagine if all Honda Accords with lane-departure and adaptive cruise control suddenly accelerate at full-speed for five seconds then suddenly turn fifteen degrees to the left. If an attack like that was successful it would probably hurt or kill thousands of people.
Most IoT systems out there are predicated on the fact that they can do this.
That's only one flaw in IoT. There are many others especially when consumer and commercial products connect to the vendor's central management instead of to the customer's central management. Those flaws include having to have an untrusted device on one's network that has to be able to communicate with the Internet, having software that might not be readily patched yet may be running on a consumer-grade OS, and any vulnerabilities affecting the vendor's central management.
Daktronics, I'm looking at you.
Well, Android itself has proven wildly successful and it underpins the majority of cell phones sold today, so while a certain amount of bullshitting is necessary, it usually has to be backed-up with some demonstration that success isn't impossible.
And Zombo.com will be here to coach us through it.
I hope that they manage to get html5zombo.com to the main zombo.com site and get the color spinning thing working better like it did back in 2000. That's literally the only change I'd make, just to make it function like it originally did.
It's debatable if Trump is the strongest Fascist leader at the moment or not, given the issues in The Philippines and in Russia, but as far as the power of the nation he theoretically leads, definitely.
Actually as far as I am aware, they only beat fascists.
No, you can't refuse service because of race, sex, or sexual orientation.
If I went into a bakery owned by a Cambodian ex-pat and tried to order a cake glorifying Pol Pot I'd be justifiably refused. Political views and the advocacy of violence are not protected in that setting.
You do realize that "Antifa" is an abbreviation for the German word for Anti-fascist, right?
Why? They did more harm than if they'd left the firmware well enough alone. The aphorism, "the road the hell is paved with good intentions," comes to mind. The results dwarf any intentions.
An old XKCD demonstrates the problem fairly succinctly.
When a friend of mine was fired, the person doing the firing was clearly not comfortable doing it and started to try to add platitudes, and the person from HR interrupted and said something to the effect of, "we are letting you go, effective immediately. Your services are no longer necessary," as she handed his final paycheck to him.
In my state an employer does not usually have to provide a reason for firing someone. The only real exceptions are when contracts exist that document terms of the employment including dates. I happen myself to have such a job, and they've usually fired coworkers by choosing to not renew their contracts when the date comes up for renewal. It's generally easier than firing mid-contract, and that's usually reserved for particularly egregious behavior rather than simple underperformance.
Sure, the CEO said he violated the Code of Conduct. Did the CEO explain chapter-and-verse?
If I were them and had to file paperwork in the employee's file about the firing at the time of firing, I'd include a copy of the code of conduct stapled to a copy of the memo. I would not include more information than that when doing the firing other than making sure the date and time of the firing was noted, and perhaps if the employee was required to sign/date paperwork acknowledging the Code of Conduct a copy of that to demonstrate that the employee was well aware of the existence of the code.
James Damore Explains Why He Thinks He Was Fired By Google
Fact of the matter is, as he was the firee, not the firer, he cannot speak authoritatively as to why he was fired by his employer. His employer is probably not going disclose the exact statements that led to the firing either, because any employer sufficiently large to have an HR department is going play its cards close to its chest to avoid creating grounds for lawsuit or to minimize those grounds.
Everyone on the planet old enough to have life experience develops one's own set of biases. Generally it's wise to take care when expressing one's biases or when acting upon them, because if someone is indiscreet then one's indiscretions may lead to consequences. Mr. Damore did not exercise discretion and it has cost him.
Fundamentally the workers in a business are not the owners of the business, and unless employees have reached sufficiently lofty positions in the company then they're to follow legal policy, not to set or otherwise determine policy. Granted, a tolerant employer can be better to work for, but there again, that kind of tolerance goes both ways, and an employer is only going to tolerate so much intolerance. In the eyes of his employer, Mr. Damore appears to have crossed that line.