GPS doesn't drive and it doesn't cause people to stay alive. In terms of car navigation, all it does is tell poeple how to get from point A to point B. If you find yourself dead when this disappears, then you're doing the gene pool a favor.
No. There is a civilan signal and a military signal. The military signal always remains and expensive/classified equipment is used to decode the signals for the use by the armed forces.
You're just a moron, aren't you? ASIMO is REVOLUTIONARY and BREAKTHROUGH technology. It isn't a toy and it certainly isn't anything less than amazing. Open your eyes, jackass.
I call bullshit. Software runs on programs that guide missiles and have since the 50's, and hey, they seem to work quite well. What he said was that software can never be free of error, which is not the same as software not being compatible with a missile defense.
That doesn't mean we need more technology to make already irresponsble drivers even more so. Speaking on cell phones is dangerous enough while driving. Do we really need them watching TV at the same time? If you insist that they won't watch it when driving, when will they? At home? No. They will most likely do it while driving.
No offense to Jackie Stewart, but that statement - if true - shows what a moron he is. Schumacher is the best of the best: period. He is not the best because he drives the best car. Before F1, he was also the best in his respective type of racing. To make such sweeping statements about the best paid athlete - and arguably the best driver on the face of this earth - is moronic, at best.
But to give it leadership, vision, direction, etc., well, it'll end up being another corporate structure. Even if the product IS open source, what would keep driving such an entity? Profits. So you end up with the Microsoft of the OSS. It's inevitable, and w/o it, it'll remain as it is: stagnant.
Which just goes to show that the rest of the world isn't advanced enough to realize progress when it sees it. You're missing the point of technology offshoots, derivative products, and the acclimation of such futuristic products to the population. This is why the rest of the world is lacking in technology.
Why focus on any one thing? This is the problem with the thinking of those in the U.S.
Focusing on one problem leaves many other possibilities without a chance of ever reaching fruition. The Japanese look at problems from every point of view, even if they may appear to be impractical. Compare the state of robotics in the U.S. with that of Japan. Outside of a few top universities, mainly MIT, such coolness is only taking place in Japan.
I mean, really. Their engineers have this unique way of looking at problems and their solutions to those problems always leave me in awe. Not only does their population have access to the latest and greatest technology, but they are also very receptive to products that may be interpreted by the rest of the world as, "what the f***?" Keep up the great work, Japan! Only with your help will our future be realized.
I think the actual logical conclusion is that it will decrease shootings. That's all. Rich people aren't gonna move to Compton because a few dozen perps have been caught.
The complexity could probably be solved by taking elevation, temperature, humidity, and other such factors into consideration. Regardless, since the ratios of the delays would still be the same (i.e., relative), I don't think it would matter.
As for the second part, identification may be a problem, but the fact that the criminals can be found and tracked is a big plus. Meanwhile, cops will receive instructions from the video operators to track the perps. Even without the cops, available helicopters might begin tracking from miles away, without the knowledge of the perpetrators.
I don't think that matters. If there is a gunfight, maybe the cameras can coordinate which to track. Besides, by that time, the police will be notified and cops would rush to the scene.
WITHIN A 2 BLOCK RADIUS. I don't know if they have some sort of a zoom lens or what, but it does not seem like these cameras are actively used in a 1984-esque fashion. Rather, when the system detects a gunshot, it relays live video to the police, who can then extend its use to find or track the culprit until the police reach the scene. I don't see anything wrong with that.
When you use a gun to kill a person, that is illegal. Given that you're willing to kill or injure another human being, I'm pretty sure the fact that silencers are illegal does not impose.
C'mon, these books are idiotic. These authors are clearly trying to ride the wave of iPod's popularity and make money in the process. If you want to read a book on the iPod, read the friggin' manual, not some half-assed "book" about an MP3 player.
Slashdot Mirror
I wasn't referring to ICBMs, but SAMs, like the Nike.
GPS doesn't drive and it doesn't cause people to stay alive. In terms of car navigation, all it does is tell poeple how to get from point A to point B. If you find yourself dead when this disappears, then you're doing the gene pool a favor.
No. There is a civilan signal and a military signal. The military signal always remains and expensive/classified equipment is used to decode the signals for the use by the armed forces.
You're just a moron, aren't you? ASIMO is REVOLUTIONARY and BREAKTHROUGH technology. It isn't a toy and it certainly isn't anything less than amazing. Open your eyes, jackass.
I call bullshit. Software runs on programs that guide missiles and have since the 50's, and hey, they seem to work quite well. What he said was that software can never be free of error, which is not the same as software not being compatible with a missile defense.
That doesn't mean we need more technology to make already irresponsble drivers even more so. Speaking on cell phones is dangerous enough while driving. Do we really need them watching TV at the same time? If you insist that they won't watch it when driving, when will they? At home? No. They will most likely do it while driving.
No offense to Jackie Stewart, but that statement - if true - shows what a moron he is. Schumacher is the best of the best: period. He is not the best because he drives the best car. Before F1, he was also the best in his respective type of racing. To make such sweeping statements about the best paid athlete - and arguably the best driver on the face of this earth - is moronic, at best.
Schumacher wouldn't be the world's best paid athlete if he didn't contribute whatever amount of importance to the process of winning. Consistently.
Sure, technology is important in that sport, but don't discount the importance of world-class drivers like Schumacher, et al.
You listed almost every language other than Armenian. Shame on you!
But to give it leadership, vision, direction, etc., well, it'll end up being another corporate structure. Even if the product IS open source, what would keep driving such an entity? Profits. So you end up with the Microsoft of the OSS. It's inevitable, and w/o it, it'll remain as it is: stagnant.
Oh, here we go with the obligatory anti-MS BS. I say kudos to MS for using his genius to promote an equally awesome product. No one is forcing him.
You have to understand ocean currents to understand the report on which that stupid movie was loosely based. Read up on it: I won't Google for you!
Can't you produce helium in the lab? If not, from where do we get helium that is used in industry, etc.?
Which just goes to show that the rest of the world isn't advanced enough to realize progress when it sees it. You're missing the point of technology offshoots, derivative products, and the acclimation of such futuristic products to the population. This is why the rest of the world is lacking in technology.
Why focus on any one thing? This is the problem with the thinking of those in the U.S.
Focusing on one problem leaves many other possibilities without a chance of ever reaching fruition. The Japanese look at problems from every point of view, even if they may appear to be impractical. Compare the state of robotics in the U.S. with that of Japan. Outside of a few top universities, mainly MIT, such coolness is only taking place in Japan.
I mean, really. Their engineers have this unique way of looking at problems and their solutions to those problems always leave me in awe. Not only does their population have access to the latest and greatest technology, but they are also very receptive to products that may be interpreted by the rest of the world as, "what the f***?" Keep up the great work, Japan! Only with your help will our future be realized.
WTF are you talking about? These were developed by a company, not by the government. RTFA.
These are not robots. If they were free to act on their own, then I'd agree with you, but they're glorified R/C cars.
I think the actual logical conclusion is that it will decrease shootings. That's all. Rich people aren't gonna move to Compton because a few dozen perps have been caught.
The complexity could probably be solved by taking elevation, temperature, humidity, and other such factors into consideration. Regardless, since the ratios of the delays would still be the same (i.e., relative), I don't think it would matter. As for the second part, identification may be a problem, but the fact that the criminals can be found and tracked is a big plus. Meanwhile, cops will receive instructions from the video operators to track the perps. Even without the cops, available helicopters might begin tracking from miles away, without the knowledge of the perpetrators.
I don't think that matters. If there is a gunfight, maybe the cameras can coordinate which to track. Besides, by that time, the police will be notified and cops would rush to the scene.
WITHIN A 2 BLOCK RADIUS. I don't know if they have some sort of a zoom lens or what, but it does not seem like these cameras are actively used in a 1984-esque fashion. Rather, when the system detects a gunshot, it relays live video to the police, who can then extend its use to find or track the culprit until the police reach the scene. I don't see anything wrong with that.
When you use a gun to kill a person, that is illegal. Given that you're willing to kill or injure another human being, I'm pretty sure the fact that silencers are illegal does not impose.
C'mon, these books are idiotic. These authors are clearly trying to ride the wave of iPod's popularity and make money in the process. If you want to read a book on the iPod, read the friggin' manual, not some half-assed "book" about an MP3 player.