The United States has or had a tax on completed light trucks imported from Japan. The solution for the Isuzu Trooper in the eighties and early nineties was to basically leave the rear seat out such that "final assembly" was completed at the dealership. I don't know how extensive the final assembly step was over standard new-car prep (where they're supposed to basically verify that the factory torqued key fasteners down etc) but I imagine that they shipped the rear seat assembly and other parts necessary for final assembly inside of the vehicle itself, since it has a fairly voluminous interior when that rear seat isn't bolted-down and configured for passenger use.
Depending on importation laws it might well be possible to partially disassemble a car, pack all of that car's parts into the interior and trunk of the car, and then ship the rolling, packed car as parts to its destination where reassembly would take place. I don't see any reason why someone couldn't do that with computers too, depending on the law- pack all the parts inside of the case then pack the case in a box and ship all of it. I guess that the biggest question is whether the economics of the labor to do any disassembly and packing are less expensive than the import tax- for an expensive assembly like that Isuzu, that already will be essentially thoroughly checked for safety/finish on delivery, bolting-in the seats and bolting-on the spare tire doesn't really cost anything more than normal prep would anyway, especially if all of the parts come from the same factory. For a computer where the parts may come from different factories or for a used car that has to have labor expended to disassemble before packing and later reassembling it might not make as much sense, depending on the costs.
I don't think that lumping all of the disparate cultures into one 'paleo lifestyle' label really works, especially when people of the Kalahari undoubtedly live differently than people of the Amazon.
There appears to be somewhat of a connection between environment and technology. Environmental stressors such as climate and population fostering competition drive technological solutions to ease living conditions so long as there are resources that can be exploited for that technology. Europe and East Asia both have had cold climates where one couldn't simply live off the land, both have had population increases that led to conflict, and both have resources that could be exploited. Even Mesopotamia as a warm climate had population increases and resource availability (ie, farming) that helped foster the growth of society.
The bulk of traditional local lifestyle seems to be in warm climates where the population can live off the land without having to artificially cultivate it too much, or where their populations are artificially limited by the resources they can exploit. There aren't very many Inuit as they live off of hunting, there aren't very many Kalahari Bushmen as they live off of meager prospects for hunting and gathering. There has been little need for these cultures to innovate as they've reached something of an equilibrium with where they live.
I don't know... I have to get up every morning at the exact right time in order to have 45 minutes to bathe, groom, dress, pack possessions, and then operate a two-ton piece of steel through a complex and ever-changing set of conditions at speeds up to about 80mph to get to a specific destination at a specific time, then I have to resolve complex abstract problems and make long-term plans that use abstract concepts with few if any real-world analogues in order to ensure that the financial resources that I never actually physically handle are earned so that I can exchange them for other abstract things and for tangible goods and can afford to occasionally pay for others to provide services necessary for my house and its complicated sets of systems and maintenance requirements.
Now, I do not dispute that I personally have several distinct advantages in that because of my career and personal choices in my western life I do not have to particularly worry day-to-day about having the financial resources that I need to keep in the rat-race, but many of my fellow peers do financially live paycheck-to-paycheck and would have very big problems even having someplace to live if something interrupted their cashflow, so there are some things that are more stable about the hunter-gatherer's life, and the bulk of such a life is much more grounded in tangible things than in abstract things. I won't dispute that the physical effort put into hunting and gathering food is probably much greater than what I do, but I expect that it requires mastery of fewer techniques to live that lifestyle than it does to live a first-world lifestyle. I also won't dispute that a failure to carry-out those techniques successfully could have quicker negative or even fatal repercussions compared to a western lifestyle, but as far as complexity is concerned, I doubt that the hunter-gatherer's life is more complex.
P.S. I'm new to slashdot and I don't have much technical or scientific cred. What kind of ettiquette can I practice so I don't ruffle any feathers? Besides R'ingTFA. I've posted anonymously a few times and got downvoted in rather short order. I like being able to talk to people with experience in tech and science sectors, though.
Having an actual login will automatically give your posts higher default moderation than posting anonymously. Given that users are semi-randomly given the opportunity to moderate, and that users can set the default moderated-level of visible posts such that they can ignore posts below certain thresholds, posting a 1 with an account or at 2 with an account in excellent standing will mean that your posts are visible to more people and more moderators than anonymous posts at 0 or at -1.
For dealing with trolls, I find that if a troll comes out of left-field with something stupid and there's a hole in their argument, drive your metaphorical spear into that hole. Over on Bash.org there's an IRC chat log of someone attempting to disparage a straw-man by claiming to have caught the straw-man doing something; the person that built the straw-man is called-out by someone else pointing out that they too would have had to have been engaging in the same kind of behavior in order to have caught their straw man in the act. Example is here. Crude, but funny.
Otherwise, have a thick skin and don't worry about the trolls too much. Go back through your comments and reply to people that have replied to you so that it remains a discussion rather than simply a drive-by broadcast.
I suspect that the person from the modern world dropped into the jungle without notice would fare better than the hunter-gatherer dropped into the city or the suburbs without notice, especially if the modern person had experience with scouting as a kid or goes camping from time to time.
Don't get me wrong, they may still fare quite badly, but there's a much greater chance that they've been exposed to wilderness survival techniques than the hunter-gatherer has been exposed to that which is needed to integrate into a large populace.
Would this phenomenon explain why I've had a few times when amplified computer speakers have received and output radio stations? It's only happened a couple of times in the twenty years that I've played with computer speakers, but it's been really weird.
"Think of the shipping container as the Internet of thing," says Curry. "Just as your email is disassembled into discrete bundles of data the minute you hit send, then re-assembled in your recipient's inbox later, the uniform, ubiquitous boxes are designed to be interchangeable, their contents irrelevant."
This analogy is poorly constructed. Analogies are needed when an abstract concept with no tangible component needs to be explained by substituting a tangible form in place of an abstract form. Packing shipping containers, even with disparate contents that are later 'broken down' to go to individual recipients, is a tangible concept that does not need to use an abstract concept like data into packets into frames into bits back into frames back into bits back into frames back into packets (etc) to explain.
It doesn't even need something abstract to explain how the form factors of shipping containers impact goods, as one can simply state that due to standardization in three or four common shipping container sizes dictates the size and packing of goods that get packed into such containers, which in-turn dictate the dimensions of pallets on which goods may be placed, the size of railcars on which containers may ride, and even the size of tunnels for rail cars and the shapes of loading docks at distribution facilities.
One can even talk about the downsides (like how the form factors were somewhat arbitrary and work equally well and poorly for both fractional and SI units) and how there's real concern for the wastes associated with moving the mass the mass of the container itself. Again, no analogy needed.
I don't think that it's entirely inaccurate to think of this in terms of the Enigma and the various bomba/bombe machines built to break it, when thinking of complexity and cost of a simulator. The original machine has to simply function in its environment as it naturally would, while the simulator must not only provide the function of the original machine, but of the environment itself. Obviously there are tradeoffs in how much environment it will attempt to recreate, but either way, the task of designing a truly faithful simulator that works correctly with all manner of environmental variables is not an easy or inexpensive task. It is not as simple as taking an off-the-shelf video game and using different inputs from custom-built pedals, rudders, throttles, and the like.
Another thing to consider is the cost of goods based on quality or luxury. Consider an exponential curve. Assign quality to the X axis and cost to the Y axis. For the early portion of the curve, a large increase in quality is achieved through a small increase in cost. Slowly the cost rate increases relative to quality, and soon fairly significant cost increases are associated with a reduced increase in the rate of quality. Eventually massive cost increases become associated with adding the smallest iota of additional quality. That last portion of the curve described is where commercial simulators that must mimic real machines in real conditions sit. The calibration of the controls, the accounting for all conceivable environmental conditions, and all of the extensive testing, program tweaking, verification, and documentation are what make it expensive. It's not the hardware, that's relatively cheap and can be sourced from any of a number of aircraft junkyards for less than the cost of a cheap used car; it's all the work that goes into making it behave correctly.
The quality/cost curve is why I don't usually pursue luxury goods. There's not usually enough quality gains to justify the added expense to me over a very decently built utilitarian version of the same kind of product. For the few times that I do pursue the luxury item it's either because I've found a deal that is less expensive than it should be or because I've chosen to indulge.
I work an aerospace company in simulation and it's taken us $500k to build pretty much the same thing as this kid for no other reason but inefficiency. We suck so bad, why do I work here?
There are other reasons. One of them is accuracy- you need your commercial simulator to operate the faux control surfaces with the exact same positioning, speed, resisting pressure, and variations thereof in all different conditions to make the simulator worthwhile to the commercial customer.
When I was in junior high school we had a yoke thing for the Macintosh LCII that interfaced to the mouse to control the software yoke in Microsoft Flight Simulator. It was crappy and was probably about as realistic as its pricepoint could justify. It got out of calibration extremely easily.
This simulator sounds like the halfway point. Much better than the crappy toy, but not quite as realistic or accurate as the commercial product.
Why not? Isn't a large part of what constitutes criminal law proceedings based on proper procedure being followed? If we don't have procedures we have no more standing than the Salem Witch Trials.
One would think that, given Citizens United giving corporations many of the rights that natural persons are supposed to have, that corporations would enjoy 4th Amendment protections.
This is why I wonder about the 4th Amendment and if there was an expectation that it was supposed to restrict the amount of records that the Government was to keep on the citizen in addition to being intended to prevent the Government from seizing private records.
At the time the amendment was crafted there were limits on the storage capability of records simply due to the medium on which they could be stored. Now that limit is essentially gone due to electronic storage.
Maybe we need limits on what the Government is allowed to store on any given person unless there's an actual legal investigation of that person, assigned to a human investigator, where that human investigator has to commit regular individual reports on the state of such investigation back to the record for it to be maintained.
Normally I'd agree, but the whole thing with the slow-motion of the sauces from the burger gratuitously landing on the heaving bosom thing sort of takes it a little too far. It stops being about attractive people having fun while eating the product and becomes about the tits and ass. It's tacky even by today's standards.
Also if you are going to have internet access in your car, have it on a separate computer then what you are using for the core services, with the entertainment system.
You engine, steering, breaking, and lights should be on a separate computer without any form of wide area network. Just a plug for manual software updates.
Your other systems, that are not directly affecting your driving can be hooked up to the internet. Where hackers cannot harm the person.
Not everything needs to be hooked up to the internet.
Even more importantly, if there is some kind of need for powertrain or other control modules to connect to other devices, like to other cars, there needs to be mechanisms in place to ensure the integrity of the car as an uncompromised node, and for the car to verify that the information it's receiving from other sources over radio also comes from other uncompromised nodes.
I fully expect autonomous vehicles to have to have some means of receiving instructions from emergency responders and possibly even in such mundane situations as construction zones. It might also be handy for vehicles to broadcast when they're in an error-state and the nature of that error-state, so that the other vehicles can account for it and avoid it or make it safer for the occupants of that disabled vehicle. For all of this to work right though, there has to be a way to confirm the identities of the vehicles or services.
I don't think that it should run TCP/IP. I don't think that it should run on existing Wireless Ethernet. I think it should have new wireless protocols with new communications protocols that are limited to use on vehicles themselves (ie, no commodity hardware) and that identity and checksumming is thoroughly tested before it's widely deployed to make sure that it's good.
If those kinds of standards can't be met then the technology should be implemented.
Not all cars driven by humans can handle 100% of all driving circumstances, and that's with a human 'intervening' the entire time.
I predict that rural highway driving will be the first place that autos can operate autonomously. It may be only limited-access highways (freeways with no intersections, no lights, no at-grade crossings) but could probably work on traditional federal highways. Cities and rural undeveloped or underdeveloped roads will have to come later.
I'm not all that worried about atrophying driver skill. It will be a very long time before the bulk of driving can be autonomous, and I expect that until we have cars that don't need human intervention (which will mean developing protocols and procedures for handling exceptional situations) drivers will still have to drive enough to keep their skills.
And the ones that don't look ugly are either shoddy quality, or sold at stupidly high prices, way more than the price it'd take to make it with said materials, simply because said companies know they don't really have any competition.
Computers haven't been ugly for a long time. Beige mini-towers with oddly-designed front panels were pretty ugly. Modern stuff is black and silver. If one is smart one buys a 17" wide desktop case so that it stacks in the AV cabinet along with the stereo and blu-ray player.
About four years ago I bought a '95 Impala SS with 6,421 miles on it. It still has its original belt and hoses. The LT1 engine powers the water pump off of the snout of the cam, no belt. The cooling fans are electric. I'm up to about 30,000 miles on the Impala, no significant problems. Had to replace a broken antiswaybar bushing on one of the end links. It'll need a new power antenna, it's stuck. That's the bulk of it.
I expect that a Roadmaster (same car under the sheet metal) would behave much the same way.
And much cheaper to operate. You can buy a heck of a lot of gas for what I just paid for the new battery for my Prius.
I've always looked at that tradeoff. We're thinking about replacing my wife's car within the next couple of years. Saw a '95 Buick Roadmaster with 30,000 miles on it for like $7,000. I did the math and estimated high on the cost of fuel (which penalizes the Buick more than a new 300, for example) and it would take something like 140,000 miles to hit the break-even point before a more efficient car costs less.
Admittedly, there is a reduction in safety equipment in the Buick, but that Roadmaster is a very nice sedan for that kind of money.
I care about what things cost and their future investment potential.
I've seen lots of systems installed in the name of the future that were dead-ends. There had been an attempt at a proprietary metro wireless network here about fifteen years ago. There were little transceivers up on the light poles. The system went bust, but there were no thousands of these little radios bolted to poles that did nothing but help the poles rust faster as the paint was disturbed.
Everything added to a building is a tradeoff, as the more stuff added, the more room committed to it in the central plant or telecom plant, and the less space available for occupancy. Sometimes it makes sense to leave room for expansion in those mechanical spaces, but sometimes it really does not. What I think will happen is that since the Tesla name is hot right now, they can probably place these battery units in an area that isn't obscured from the tenants, basically taking some of their space in the process, without hearing much in the way of complaints from the tenants for it. As others have pointed out there are plenty of battery systems in existence already, but the Tesla one is the cool one, the Tesla one is the one that people won't recoil from. Doesn't matter if the others are actually better technology if the Telsa system is the one that people will accept intruding into their space.
So a question then... If this information was classified, why was it easy to send from a presumably-classified computer, through the public Internet, to her server-as-a-relay, through the public Internet, to a remote server?
Please do not interpret this as a snark, as I said, I am no supporter of Mrs. Clinton. I am curious as to how the system was set up that this was so easy for someone so seeming nontechnical. Are there no safeguards in place to prevent someone from contacting certain types of relays from computers with sensitive information on them?
I mean, at home I restrict my network to only reach maybe a half-dozen ports and I log connection attempts to blocked ports specifically to monitor for anything infected within my network (ie, so malware can't so easily communicate back to a command-and-control server) and SMTP and POP3 and their theoretically-secure variants are not among the allowed ports.
Einstein gave us the theory of general relativity,...
And Marie Curie pioneered our understanding of Radioactivity, and given that they were a little over eleven years apart in age, they were essentially contemporaries. Both are Nobel Laureates.
Happy birthday Ada
If only more women did X, need more women, women this women that. What were we talking about again? Oh, Ada! I'd almost forgotten.
From my own experiences in college and in the workplace I see very, very few women in applied computing. Few women in desktop support, few women in consulting, few women in network support, few women in server and application support, and few women in programming. I suspect that since boys usually end up as adolescents dabbling in these areas in significantly greater numbers than girls of the same age do, boys essentially define the culture that surrounds the hobby and later, the profession. Since this means that the conditions that define the culture predate the workplace, I don't see it radically changing unless girls are also encouraged to dabble from the same early age, such that the culture from adolescence changes.
For other forms of science, mathematics, and engineering I simply cannot say, but at the same time, there doesn't seem to be much adolescent culture in math, high-end engineering, and science as there is in computing among either gender outside of that which is school-organized, so that might explain why those professions have more women per-capita than computing.
Around here at least, the use of terms like manager, superintendent, and foreman are more meaningful in the trades and in construction in general than they are in other arenas. Either the person is an actual manager that oversees people and doesn't do labor, or the person manages a specific aspect of a job and is basically empowered to stick his nose in everyones' business on that aspect, even if he's hourly, and he's not doing a general-purpose labor job.
If neither side is telling the truth then the one thing that can probably be verified is the actual location of the incident.
If the incident with the vehicle occurred on private property, then they were trespassing, and those entrusted with the defense of the private property have at least something of a degree of latitude in protecting that property.
Slashdot Mirror
The United States has or had a tax on completed light trucks imported from Japan. The solution for the Isuzu Trooper in the eighties and early nineties was to basically leave the rear seat out such that "final assembly" was completed at the dealership. I don't know how extensive the final assembly step was over standard new-car prep (where they're supposed to basically verify that the factory torqued key fasteners down etc) but I imagine that they shipped the rear seat assembly and other parts necessary for final assembly inside of the vehicle itself, since it has a fairly voluminous interior when that rear seat isn't bolted-down and configured for passenger use.
Depending on importation laws it might well be possible to partially disassemble a car, pack all of that car's parts into the interior and trunk of the car, and then ship the rolling, packed car as parts to its destination where reassembly would take place. I don't see any reason why someone couldn't do that with computers too, depending on the law- pack all the parts inside of the case then pack the case in a box and ship all of it. I guess that the biggest question is whether the economics of the labor to do any disassembly and packing are less expensive than the import tax- for an expensive assembly like that Isuzu, that already will be essentially thoroughly checked for safety/finish on delivery, bolting-in the seats and bolting-on the spare tire doesn't really cost anything more than normal prep would anyway, especially if all of the parts come from the same factory. For a computer where the parts may come from different factories or for a used car that has to have labor expended to disassemble before packing and later reassembling it might not make as much sense, depending on the costs.
I don't think that lumping all of the disparate cultures into one 'paleo lifestyle' label really works, especially when people of the Kalahari undoubtedly live differently than people of the Amazon.
There appears to be somewhat of a connection between environment and technology. Environmental stressors such as climate and population fostering competition drive technological solutions to ease living conditions so long as there are resources that can be exploited for that technology. Europe and East Asia both have had cold climates where one couldn't simply live off the land, both have had population increases that led to conflict, and both have resources that could be exploited. Even Mesopotamia as a warm climate had population increases and resource availability (ie, farming) that helped foster the growth of society.
The bulk of traditional local lifestyle seems to be in warm climates where the population can live off the land without having to artificially cultivate it too much, or where their populations are artificially limited by the resources they can exploit. There aren't very many Inuit as they live off of hunting, there aren't very many Kalahari Bushmen as they live off of meager prospects for hunting and gathering. There has been little need for these cultures to innovate as they've reached something of an equilibrium with where they live.
I don't know... I have to get up every morning at the exact right time in order to have 45 minutes to bathe, groom, dress, pack possessions, and then operate a two-ton piece of steel through a complex and ever-changing set of conditions at speeds up to about 80mph to get to a specific destination at a specific time, then I have to resolve complex abstract problems and make long-term plans that use abstract concepts with few if any real-world analogues in order to ensure that the financial resources that I never actually physically handle are earned so that I can exchange them for other abstract things and for tangible goods and can afford to occasionally pay for others to provide services necessary for my house and its complicated sets of systems and maintenance requirements.
Now, I do not dispute that I personally have several distinct advantages in that because of my career and personal choices in my western life I do not have to particularly worry day-to-day about having the financial resources that I need to keep in the rat-race, but many of my fellow peers do financially live paycheck-to-paycheck and would have very big problems even having someplace to live if something interrupted their cashflow, so there are some things that are more stable about the hunter-gatherer's life, and the bulk of such a life is much more grounded in tangible things than in abstract things. I won't dispute that the physical effort put into hunting and gathering food is probably much greater than what I do, but I expect that it requires mastery of fewer techniques to live that lifestyle than it does to live a first-world lifestyle. I also won't dispute that a failure to carry-out those techniques successfully could have quicker negative or even fatal repercussions compared to a western lifestyle, but as far as complexity is concerned, I doubt that the hunter-gatherer's life is more complex.
P.S. I'm new to slashdot and I don't have much technical or scientific cred. What kind of ettiquette can I practice so I don't ruffle any feathers? Besides R'ingTFA. I've posted anonymously a few times and got downvoted in rather short order. I like being able to talk to people with experience in tech and science sectors, though.
Having an actual login will automatically give your posts higher default moderation than posting anonymously. Given that users are semi-randomly given the opportunity to moderate, and that users can set the default moderated-level of visible posts such that they can ignore posts below certain thresholds, posting a 1 with an account or at 2 with an account in excellent standing will mean that your posts are visible to more people and more moderators than anonymous posts at 0 or at -1.
For dealing with trolls, I find that if a troll comes out of left-field with something stupid and there's a hole in their argument, drive your metaphorical spear into that hole. Over on Bash.org there's an IRC chat log of someone attempting to disparage a straw-man by claiming to have caught the straw-man doing something; the person that built the straw-man is called-out by someone else pointing out that they too would have had to have been engaging in the same kind of behavior in order to have caught their straw man in the act. Example is here. Crude, but funny.
Otherwise, have a thick skin and don't worry about the trolls too much. Go back through your comments and reply to people that have replied to you so that it remains a discussion rather than simply a drive-by broadcast.
I suspect that the person from the modern world dropped into the jungle without notice would fare better than the hunter-gatherer dropped into the city or the suburbs without notice, especially if the modern person had experience with scouting as a kid or goes camping from time to time.
Don't get me wrong, they may still fare quite badly, but there's a much greater chance that they've been exposed to wilderness survival techniques than the hunter-gatherer has been exposed to that which is needed to integrate into a large populace.
Omnidirectional antennae probably can't generate the desired effect.
Would this phenomenon explain why I've had a few times when amplified computer speakers have received and output radio stations? It's only happened a couple of times in the twenty years that I've played with computer speakers, but it's been really weird.
"Think of the shipping container as the Internet of thing," says Curry. "Just as your email is disassembled into discrete bundles of data the minute you hit send, then re-assembled in your recipient's inbox later, the uniform, ubiquitous boxes are designed to be interchangeable, their contents irrelevant."
This analogy is poorly constructed. Analogies are needed when an abstract concept with no tangible component needs to be explained by substituting a tangible form in place of an abstract form. Packing shipping containers, even with disparate contents that are later 'broken down' to go to individual recipients, is a tangible concept that does not need to use an abstract concept like data into packets into frames into bits back into frames back into bits back into frames back into packets (etc) to explain.
It doesn't even need something abstract to explain how the form factors of shipping containers impact goods, as one can simply state that due to standardization in three or four common shipping container sizes dictates the size and packing of goods that get packed into such containers, which in-turn dictate the dimensions of pallets on which goods may be placed, the size of railcars on which containers may ride, and even the size of tunnels for rail cars and the shapes of loading docks at distribution facilities.
One can even talk about the downsides (like how the form factors were somewhat arbitrary and work equally well and poorly for both fractional and SI units) and how there's real concern for the wastes associated with moving the mass the mass of the container itself. Again, no analogy needed.
I don't think that it's entirely inaccurate to think of this in terms of the Enigma and the various bomba/bombe machines built to break it, when thinking of complexity and cost of a simulator. The original machine has to simply function in its environment as it naturally would, while the simulator must not only provide the function of the original machine, but of the environment itself. Obviously there are tradeoffs in how much environment it will attempt to recreate, but either way, the task of designing a truly faithful simulator that works correctly with all manner of environmental variables is not an easy or inexpensive task. It is not as simple as taking an off-the-shelf video game and using different inputs from custom-built pedals, rudders, throttles, and the like.
Another thing to consider is the cost of goods based on quality or luxury. Consider an exponential curve. Assign quality to the X axis and cost to the Y axis. For the early portion of the curve, a large increase in quality is achieved through a small increase in cost. Slowly the cost rate increases relative to quality, and soon fairly significant cost increases are associated with a reduced increase in the rate of quality. Eventually massive cost increases become associated with adding the smallest iota of additional quality. That last portion of the curve described is where commercial simulators that must mimic real machines in real conditions sit. The calibration of the controls, the accounting for all conceivable environmental conditions, and all of the extensive testing, program tweaking, verification, and documentation are what make it expensive. It's not the hardware, that's relatively cheap and can be sourced from any of a number of aircraft junkyards for less than the cost of a cheap used car; it's all the work that goes into making it behave correctly.
The quality/cost curve is why I don't usually pursue luxury goods. There's not usually enough quality gains to justify the added expense to me over a very decently built utilitarian version of the same kind of product. For the few times that I do pursue the luxury item it's either because I've found a deal that is less expensive than it should be or because I've chosen to indulge.
I work an aerospace company in simulation and it's taken us $500k to build pretty much the same thing as this kid for no other reason but inefficiency. We suck so bad, why do I work here?
There are other reasons. One of them is accuracy- you need your commercial simulator to operate the faux control surfaces with the exact same positioning, speed, resisting pressure, and variations thereof in all different conditions to make the simulator worthwhile to the commercial customer.
When I was in junior high school we had a yoke thing for the Macintosh LCII that interfaced to the mouse to control the software yoke in Microsoft Flight Simulator. It was crappy and was probably about as realistic as its pricepoint could justify. It got out of calibration extremely easily.
This simulator sounds like the halfway point. Much better than the crappy toy, but not quite as realistic or accurate as the commercial product.
Why not? Isn't a large part of what constitutes criminal law proceedings based on proper procedure being followed? If we don't have procedures we have no more standing than the Salem Witch Trials.
One would think that, given Citizens United giving corporations many of the rights that natural persons are supposed to have, that corporations would enjoy 4th Amendment protections.
This is why I wonder about the 4th Amendment and if there was an expectation that it was supposed to restrict the amount of records that the Government was to keep on the citizen in addition to being intended to prevent the Government from seizing private records.
At the time the amendment was crafted there were limits on the storage capability of records simply due to the medium on which they could be stored. Now that limit is essentially gone due to electronic storage.
Maybe we need limits on what the Government is allowed to store on any given person unless there's an actual legal investigation of that person, assigned to a human investigator, where that human investigator has to commit regular individual reports on the state of such investigation back to the record for it to be maintained.
Normally I'd agree, but the whole thing with the slow-motion of the sauces from the burger gratuitously landing on the heaving bosom thing sort of takes it a little too far. It stops being about attractive people having fun while eating the product and becomes about the tits and ass. It's tacky even by today's standards.
Also if you are going to have internet access in your car, have it on a separate computer then what you are using for the core services, with the entertainment system. You engine, steering, breaking, and lights should be on a separate computer without any form of wide area network. Just a plug for manual software updates.
Your other systems, that are not directly affecting your driving can be hooked up to the internet. Where hackers cannot harm the person.
Not everything needs to be hooked up to the internet.
Even more importantly, if there is some kind of need for powertrain or other control modules to connect to other devices, like to other cars, there needs to be mechanisms in place to ensure the integrity of the car as an uncompromised node, and for the car to verify that the information it's receiving from other sources over radio also comes from other uncompromised nodes.
I fully expect autonomous vehicles to have to have some means of receiving instructions from emergency responders and possibly even in such mundane situations as construction zones. It might also be handy for vehicles to broadcast when they're in an error-state and the nature of that error-state, so that the other vehicles can account for it and avoid it or make it safer for the occupants of that disabled vehicle. For all of this to work right though, there has to be a way to confirm the identities of the vehicles or services.
I don't think that it should run TCP/IP. I don't think that it should run on existing Wireless Ethernet. I think it should have new wireless protocols with new communications protocols that are limited to use on vehicles themselves (ie, no commodity hardware) and that identity and checksumming is thoroughly tested before it's widely deployed to make sure that it's good.
If those kinds of standards can't be met then the technology should be implemented.
Not all cars driven by humans can handle 100% of all driving circumstances, and that's with a human 'intervening' the entire time.
I predict that rural highway driving will be the first place that autos can operate autonomously. It may be only limited-access highways (freeways with no intersections, no lights, no at-grade crossings) but could probably work on traditional federal highways. Cities and rural undeveloped or underdeveloped roads will have to come later.
I'm not all that worried about atrophying driver skill. It will be a very long time before the bulk of driving can be autonomous, and I expect that until we have cars that don't need human intervention (which will mean developing protocols and procedures for handling exceptional situations) drivers will still have to drive enough to keep their skills.
Let's face it, PCs are ugly as high-hell.
And the ones that don't look ugly are either shoddy quality, or sold at stupidly high prices, way more than the price it'd take to make it with said materials, simply because said companies know they don't really have any competition.
Computers haven't been ugly for a long time. Beige mini-towers with oddly-designed front panels were pretty ugly. Modern stuff is black and silver. If one is smart one buys a 17" wide desktop case so that it stacks in the AV cabinet along with the stereo and blu-ray player.
What if I use a USB hub? Seeing as how I have only one USB port in this new-fangled era where apparently cables don't matter anymore...
About four years ago I bought a '95 Impala SS with 6,421 miles on it. It still has its original belt and hoses. The LT1 engine powers the water pump off of the snout of the cam, no belt. The cooling fans are electric. I'm up to about 30,000 miles on the Impala, no significant problems. Had to replace a broken antiswaybar bushing on one of the end links. It'll need a new power antenna, it's stuck. That's the bulk of it.
I expect that a Roadmaster (same car under the sheet metal) would behave much the same way.
And much cheaper to operate. You can buy a heck of a lot of gas for what I just paid for the new battery for my Prius.
I've always looked at that tradeoff. We're thinking about replacing my wife's car within the next couple of years. Saw a '95 Buick Roadmaster with 30,000 miles on it for like $7,000. I did the math and estimated high on the cost of fuel (which penalizes the Buick more than a new 300, for example) and it would take something like 140,000 miles to hit the break-even point before a more efficient car costs less.
Admittedly, there is a reduction in safety equipment in the Buick, but that Roadmaster is a very nice sedan for that kind of money.
I care about what things cost and their future investment potential.
I've seen lots of systems installed in the name of the future that were dead-ends. There had been an attempt at a proprietary metro wireless network here about fifteen years ago. There were little transceivers up on the light poles. The system went bust, but there were no thousands of these little radios bolted to poles that did nothing but help the poles rust faster as the paint was disturbed.
Everything added to a building is a tradeoff, as the more stuff added, the more room committed to it in the central plant or telecom plant, and the less space available for occupancy. Sometimes it makes sense to leave room for expansion in those mechanical spaces, but sometimes it really does not. What I think will happen is that since the Tesla name is hot right now, they can probably place these battery units in an area that isn't obscured from the tenants, basically taking some of their space in the process, without hearing much in the way of complaints from the tenants for it. As others have pointed out there are plenty of battery systems in existence already, but the Tesla one is the cool one, the Tesla one is the one that people won't recoil from. Doesn't matter if the others are actually better technology if the Telsa system is the one that people will accept intruding into their space.
So a question then... If this information was classified, why was it easy to send from a presumably-classified computer, through the public Internet, to her server-as-a-relay, through the public Internet, to a remote server?
Please do not interpret this as a snark, as I said, I am no supporter of Mrs. Clinton. I am curious as to how the system was set up that this was so easy for someone so seeming nontechnical. Are there no safeguards in place to prevent someone from contacting certain types of relays from computers with sensitive information on them?
I mean, at home I restrict my network to only reach maybe a half-dozen ports and I log connection attempts to blocked ports specifically to monitor for anything infected within my network (ie, so malware can't so easily communicate back to a command-and-control server) and SMTP and POP3 and their theoretically-secure variants are not among the allowed ports.
Happy birthday Einstein
Einstein gave us the theory of general relativity, ...
And Marie Curie pioneered our understanding of Radioactivity, and given that they were a little over eleven years apart in age, they were essentially contemporaries. Both are Nobel Laureates.
Happy birthday Ada
If only more women did X, need more women, women this women that. What were we talking about again? Oh, Ada! I'd almost forgotten.
From my own experiences in college and in the workplace I see very, very few women in applied computing. Few women in desktop support, few women in consulting, few women in network support, few women in server and application support, and few women in programming. I suspect that since boys usually end up as adolescents dabbling in these areas in significantly greater numbers than girls of the same age do, boys essentially define the culture that surrounds the hobby and later, the profession. Since this means that the conditions that define the culture predate the workplace, I don't see it radically changing unless girls are also encouraged to dabble from the same early age, such that the culture from adolescence changes.
For other forms of science, mathematics, and engineering I simply cannot say, but at the same time, there doesn't seem to be much adolescent culture in math, high-end engineering, and science as there is in computing among either gender outside of that which is school-organized, so that might explain why those professions have more women per-capita than computing.
Around here at least, the use of terms like manager, superintendent, and foreman are more meaningful in the trades and in construction in general than they are in other arenas. Either the person is an actual manager that oversees people and doesn't do labor, or the person manages a specific aspect of a job and is basically empowered to stick his nose in everyones' business on that aspect, even if he's hourly, and he's not doing a general-purpose labor job.
If neither side is telling the truth then the one thing that can probably be verified is the actual location of the incident.
If the incident with the vehicle occurred on private property, then they were trespassing, and those entrusted with the defense of the private property have at least something of a degree of latitude in protecting that property.