Regarding google, if a UI would require you to go to a google search each time you needed to figure out how to do something, would you call this intuitive or discoverable?
As it happens, every machine requires you to RTFM or risk ending up on one of those funny home video tv programs (or the emergency room). The idea that computers, which are easily the most complex machines humanity currently has, should be the exception is utterly delusional.
As it also happens, Google exists and is accessible from that very same computer you're trying to figure out. So how about just making the UI powerful and easily googlable?
You're confused. That's a leftist thing. The socialists are the ones that, given enough power, do things like wall up Berlin to prevent people from leaving their collectivist paradise, or jail people from attempting to leave the socialist paradise that is Cuba.
Or Nordic welfare countries, those hellholes with free education and public healthcare. You are the one confusing authoritarian sociopaths with socialism. And if you don't stop believing propaganda which tries to tar pretty much any attempt to improve people's lives as somehow evil, you're going to get a hands-on demonstration of what's it like to live in a right-wing dictatorship.
If you can't muster the energy necessary to understand the difference between keeping people from illegally walking INTO your country, vs. using force to prevent them from fleeing from collectivist tyranny, then please don't do anything reckless like voting.
A wall built for one purpose will work just as fine for the other. Just like surveillance systems built to catch terrorists will work perfectly fine to keep tabs on you, too.
SJWs want to believe that he said this exactly as the headline puts it. Truth and accuracy are of no concern.
And you want to believe that because that way you can always dismiss any criticism as being part of the Politically Correct Conspiracy, rather than entertaining the notion that your shit, and that of organizations and institutions, might actually stink and you're simply used to the smell.
- donating to the homeless and less privileged.
Putting cash in their cup is not necessarily the best way to help them, but a Square account would change their lives. Or donating to an organized charity. Or giving them a gift card for food. You know, being intentional.
So the less control they have, the better off they'll be? Do you, by any chance, work in Brussels?
So what if say due to a software error a small kid gets miss identified as safe to run over and car does that and keeps on going that is hit and run a felony + felony manslaughter. Will volvo pay for the owners court costs + Attorney + bail + job loss support + jail fees + inpoud / towing fees + a new car / cab fees?
What court costs? You weren't driving, but were a mere passenger in a car that had been approved by regulatory agencies to not need a driver. It's Volvo and said agencies who are responsible for any errors the autopilot might make - as long as you haven't tampered with it, of course.
Even though Volvo will be liable, however that doesn't really excuse them for taking the steering wheel away from the driver.
There is legal liability. However that isn't much condolence if you are in the car about to get into an accident which you could avoid if you could.
Except you can't, because you stopped really paying attention to the traffick the second the car began driving itself. You won't even notice you're about to get to an accident, much less have any idea what to do about it. At best you might get startlet and do something stupid, like unexpectedly slam the brakes in the middle of a highway. It's best to take direct control away from you except through some ritual which is complicated enough to ensure you're actually paying attention and have had time to think what you're doing. And yes, that will sometimes lead to accidents, but probably less often than the other way.
Besides, isn't getting rid of that whole "paying attention to the traffick and planning what to do" thing the whole point of self-driving cars? It's not like working the controls is physically tiring.
Because all good fiction is tied to the fact that there is some real elements, and the more consistent those elements are with the world you already know, the more engaged you become in the story.
No, not really. The problem with fantastic elements is that authors tend to forget about them, or invent ridiculous excuses for why they can't be used. If you make a fantasy world where resurrection magic exists, you can't then use death for dramatic suspension, since undoing it has become a mere logistial problem.
Yes, the sales reps can create bias, but they don't magically make a doctor incompetent.
Of course not. That would be silly. Instead, they use psychology, specifically the human brain's tendency to forget where it got a nugget of information from and bias against counter-evidence.
Even competent people are still just humans, in the end.
Do you accelerate from every stop by pressing the gas pedal all the way to the floor or do you match how much gas you give it to the driving conditions and who and how many people are in your car?
I'm not trying to take-off from every stop. But when I am, for example when I'm about to join the highway, I do indeed floor the pedal.
And even the ones who aren't terror-supporters now are still Muslims (mostly), which means they carry the same memetic infection that produced ISIS (and all the other Islamic radical groups).
And us Europeans carry the memetic infection that produced fascists, nazis and two world wars. The ultimate reason why EU exists in the first place is to manage that and keep it latent, least we end up destroying ourselves. ISIS is trying to get the infection to flare up again, and from what I'm seeing and hearing they're succeeding.
Sure they will, for the Islamic State is neither of those things. It's an apocalyptic death cult disguised beneath Islamic imagery who's aim is to provoke a massive war, which will deliver the blood sacrifice necessary for the magic ritual that'll open the gates to the nether realm and lets them take over the world with help from there.
Islam plays no part in any of this except as the unfortunate host for the parasite to feed on.
putting pressure on local Muslim communities by the security services
I doubt local Muslim communities are sorry to see the troublemakers go. It's their kids the ISIS recruiters are trying to turn into cannon fodder and murderers, after all. This is, of course, assuming the security services do their work properly rather than bully innocent people to make themselves look though.
These people want a war between Muslims and the rest of the world.
I wonder how many of them think that far ahead, and how many are simply drunk of ideology and do whatever it tells them to without a care for the consequences?
Best case scenario in Syria would be someone like Assad (but not necessarily him) to rule it with an iron fist and ensure that no terrorists are allowed to breed there.
So first iron-fisted tyranny gets people used to cruelty and violence as the "normal" way of life, and then the anarchy and civil war that result when enough star systems have slipped through that iron fist make for perfect conditions for terrorist recruiters to operate within them. That's pure strategic brilliance right there, sonny.
It misdirects you from the real issue, which is the 1% war profiteering in the Middle East and stealing their oil. We can't solve _anything_ until we start recognizing the real problem and start actually _rebuilding_ Iraq and Afghanistan. If you're American though this probably means giving up your SUV. I'm not trying to troll, you can't have one and have a happy/stable world.
If the real problem is the 1% taking far more than their fair share, then why would solving that result in Joe Nobody having to give up his SUV, or anything else for that matter? Are you sure you aren't simply falling for the propaganda of that 1% who are trying to fool you into thinking their interests are your interests?
Yes, they did abolish religions as threats, but the abolition of religion was also a central facet of the Marxist program. Marxism required the end of religion to come about.
No, it didn't. Turning the state into a god anything could and should be sacrificed to demanded removing all others. But that has nothing to do with Marxism, and is simply a dictator's - Lenin's first, Stalin's later - thirst for unlimited power hidden under the banner of ideology.
But the Catholic church did make deals with Hitler to preserve their power and legitimacy which are shameful in retrospect.
"Shameful in retrospect" is an appropriate concept for people who got drunk on Nazism and only later realized what they had done. That's not applicable to the Church, at least based on what you're saying here. Selling out to save your skin might be understandable, and some victims might choose to forgive out of pity, but it's also shameful right from the start.
The difference is that Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao didn't do the things they did because they were atheists, whereas religious fanatics do horrific things precisely because they're religious fanatics.
Doesn't that kinda prove that religion - or lack of it - is an irrelevant detail to the issue of people doing horrible things to other people they consider expendable in the name of their cause?
When you have a rabid dog, generally you should call the ASPCA and have it put down.
Not out of hate, but because it is the right thing to do.
Unfortunately, being homicidal is a lot harder to spot than being rabid, at least before it's far too late. So unless you're willing to accept a lot of collateral damage you can't use the same means to combat it. And if you are willing to accept that damage you're on your way of becoming ISIS by adapting their values, which makes it easier for them to infiltrate our culture and subvert it from within. Which is the only way they could possibly win, and thus likely their goal with these attacks.
Rabies is a good analogy, actually. Extremism is a kind of memetic disease. The problem is it doesn't spread through bites but by making its carriers act in ways (terrorism) that provokes responses that replicate the meme in new hosts. And beyond current issues, Information Age keeps making it easier for memes to spread, so we'll need to develop an effective way of combatting destructive ones without sacrificing our cultural values or our freedom.
Swords stopped being effective weapons when someone invented guns. Guns are quickly becoming ineffective in an era where a single madman can kill a hundred people and be replaced by new cannon fodder as soon as he goes down. At the risk of sounding superstitious, the real enemy isn't ISIS members or even the organization itself, but rather the spirit behind it, which lets people do absolutely disgusting crimes - not just terrorism but also kidnapping schoolgirls for sex slaves, mutilating people, etc - and feel proud and pious about it. And sadly, spirits can't be killed by bullets. Islamic terrorism didn't die with bin Laden, it didn't die with Jihad John, and it won't die no matter how many of their ilk are killed.
tl;dr We need to figure out how to inoculate potential recruits against being recruited, so ISIS and other terror groups run out of cannon fodder and bleed away.
You are correct, but black people shouldn't be shocked when the cops give them a hard time because of the old white lady's fears.
Actually, everyone should be shocked and outraged by someone being mistreated because someone else's prejudices.
If black people want to avoid that perception, then they need to clean up their own house and shame their own population into stopping the violence and reason for that old white lady's fears.
Except that won't help because that old white lady didn't carefully examine crime statistics to determine the correlation between skin color and criminal tendencies. Her fears are caused by racist baggage she's carrying around from her youth, from around or preceding the Civil Rights movement. That, in turn, is leftover from attempts to justify slavery.
The old lady needs help with her issues, but nobody else should be made to suffer for them.
Could you open your eyes and see you're being used? ISIS can't defeat the West militarily. It's unlikely they can defeat even Middle East militarily. So they're going for spiritual victory - conversion - instead. And the first step for that is supplanting our value system with their own.
The purpose of these attacks is to provoke anger, because anger leads to the dark side. They're hoping we'll react like ISIS would and, in our anger, end up destroying our cherished freedom, after which we'll be receptible for the message of authoritarian religion. You're falling right into that trap. Stop being a weak link ruled by your emotions, we can't afford those now.
I've enough of the stupidity of you liberals ! The shooters are yelling "Allahu Akhbar" and you goddamn liberals are blaming the French !!
If your enemies are recruiting from amongst you, it's hardly stupid to try and analyze how they're managing that and how you might stop them and at what cost. We're at war. Think strategically, not emotionally.
Slashdot Mirror
As it happens, every machine requires you to RTFM or risk ending up on one of those funny home video tv programs (or the emergency room). The idea that computers, which are easily the most complex machines humanity currently has, should be the exception is utterly delusional.
As it also happens, Google exists and is accessible from that very same computer you're trying to figure out. So how about just making the UI powerful and easily googlable?
Then you'll get hauled to jail for running over a kid while you were home sleeping in your bed.
Or Nordic welfare countries, those hellholes with free education and public healthcare. You are the one confusing authoritarian sociopaths with socialism. And if you don't stop believing propaganda which tries to tar pretty much any attempt to improve people's lives as somehow evil, you're going to get a hands-on demonstration of what's it like to live in a right-wing dictatorship.
A wall built for one purpose will work just as fine for the other. Just like surveillance systems built to catch terrorists will work perfectly fine to keep tabs on you, too.
And you want to believe that because that way you can always dismiss any criticism as being part of the Politically Correct Conspiracy, rather than entertaining the notion that your shit, and that of organizations and institutions, might actually stink and you're simply used to the smell.
So the less control they have, the better off they'll be? Do you, by any chance, work in Brussels?
Show me *one* place where the updated UI/UX was actually better. They almost universally sacrifice usability for looks.
The subroutines are written as AD&D adventure modules ?-o
What court costs? You weren't driving, but were a mere passenger in a car that had been approved by regulatory agencies to not need a driver. It's Volvo and said agencies who are responsible for any errors the autopilot might make - as long as you haven't tampered with it, of course.
Except you can't, because you stopped really paying attention to the traffick the second the car began driving itself. You won't even notice you're about to get to an accident, much less have any idea what to do about it. At best you might get startlet and do something stupid, like unexpectedly slam the brakes in the middle of a highway. It's best to take direct control away from you except through some ritual which is complicated enough to ensure you're actually paying attention and have had time to think what you're doing. And yes, that will sometimes lead to accidents, but probably less often than the other way.
Besides, isn't getting rid of that whole "paying attention to the traffick and planning what to do" thing the whole point of self-driving cars? It's not like working the controls is physically tiring.
Of course not. That would be silly. Instead, they use psychology, specifically the human brain's tendency to forget where it got a nugget of information from and bias against counter-evidence.
Even competent people are still just humans, in the end.
Indeed, this is just regular bribery.
I'm not trying to take-off from every stop. But when I am, for example when I'm about to join the highway, I do indeed floor the pedal.
And us Europeans carry the memetic infection that produced fascists, nazis and two world wars. The ultimate reason why EU exists in the first place is to manage that and keep it latent, least we end up destroying ourselves. ISIS is trying to get the infection to flare up again, and from what I'm seeing and hearing they're succeeding.
It's an interesting strategic situation.
Sure they will, for the Islamic State is neither of those things. It's an apocalyptic death cult disguised beneath Islamic imagery who's aim is to provoke a massive war, which will deliver the blood sacrifice necessary for the magic ritual that'll open the gates to the nether realm and lets them take over the world with help from there.
Islam plays no part in any of this except as the unfortunate host for the parasite to feed on.
I doubt local Muslim communities are sorry to see the troublemakers go. It's their kids the ISIS recruiters are trying to turn into cannon fodder and murderers, after all. This is, of course, assuming the security services do their work properly rather than bully innocent people to make themselves look though.
I wonder how many of them think that far ahead, and how many are simply drunk of ideology and do whatever it tells them to without a care for the consequences?
So first iron-fisted tyranny gets people used to cruelty and violence as the "normal" way of life, and then the anarchy and civil war that result when enough star systems have slipped through that iron fist make for perfect conditions for terrorist recruiters to operate within them. That's pure strategic brilliance right there, sonny.
If the real problem is the 1% taking far more than their fair share, then why would solving that result in Joe Nobody having to give up his SUV, or anything else for that matter? Are you sure you aren't simply falling for the propaganda of that 1% who are trying to fool you into thinking their interests are your interests?
No, it didn't. Turning the state into a god anything could and should be sacrificed to demanded removing all others. But that has nothing to do with Marxism, and is simply a dictator's - Lenin's first, Stalin's later - thirst for unlimited power hidden under the banner of ideology.
"Shameful in retrospect" is an appropriate concept for people who got drunk on Nazism and only later realized what they had done. That's not applicable to the Church, at least based on what you're saying here. Selling out to save your skin might be understandable, and some victims might choose to forgive out of pity, but it's also shameful right from the start.
Doesn't that kinda prove that religion - or lack of it - is an irrelevant detail to the issue of people doing horrible things to other people they consider expendable in the name of their cause?
I'm not. Welcome to reality.
Unfortunately, being homicidal is a lot harder to spot than being rabid, at least before it's far too late. So unless you're willing to accept a lot of collateral damage you can't use the same means to combat it. And if you are willing to accept that damage you're on your way of becoming ISIS by adapting their values, which makes it easier for them to infiltrate our culture and subvert it from within. Which is the only way they could possibly win, and thus likely their goal with these attacks.
Rabies is a good analogy, actually. Extremism is a kind of memetic disease. The problem is it doesn't spread through bites but by making its carriers act in ways (terrorism) that provokes responses that replicate the meme in new hosts. And beyond current issues, Information Age keeps making it easier for memes to spread, so we'll need to develop an effective way of combatting destructive ones without sacrificing our cultural values or our freedom.
Swords stopped being effective weapons when someone invented guns. Guns are quickly becoming ineffective in an era where a single madman can kill a hundred people and be replaced by new cannon fodder as soon as he goes down. At the risk of sounding superstitious, the real enemy isn't ISIS members or even the organization itself, but rather the spirit behind it, which lets people do absolutely disgusting crimes - not just terrorism but also kidnapping schoolgirls for sex slaves, mutilating people, etc - and feel proud and pious about it. And sadly, spirits can't be killed by bullets. Islamic terrorism didn't die with bin Laden, it didn't die with Jihad John, and it won't die no matter how many of their ilk are killed.
tl;dr We need to figure out how to inoculate potential recruits against being recruited, so ISIS and other terror groups run out of cannon fodder and bleed away.
Actually, everyone should be shocked and outraged by someone being mistreated because someone else's prejudices.
Except that won't help because that old white lady didn't carefully examine crime statistics to determine the correlation between skin color and criminal tendencies. Her fears are caused by racist baggage she's carrying around from her youth, from around or preceding the Civil Rights movement. That, in turn, is leftover from attempts to justify slavery.
The old lady needs help with her issues, but nobody else should be made to suffer for them.
Could you open your eyes and see you're being used? ISIS can't defeat the West militarily. It's unlikely they can defeat even Middle East militarily. So they're going for spiritual victory - conversion - instead. And the first step for that is supplanting our value system with their own.
The purpose of these attacks is to provoke anger, because anger leads to the dark side. They're hoping we'll react like ISIS would and, in our anger, end up destroying our cherished freedom, after which we'll be receptible for the message of authoritarian religion. You're falling right into that trap. Stop being a weak link ruled by your emotions, we can't afford those now.
If your enemies are recruiting from amongst you, it's hardly stupid to try and analyze how they're managing that and how you might stop them and at what cost. We're at war. Think strategically, not emotionally.
You mean like ISIS does?