and one from North Yorkshire Police conducted a check on a vehicle on his phone whilst off-duty
This particular one is meaningless without further info. Could be he was just being a good citizen and investigating a suspicious person, or could be he's abusing his power. In either case, it seems more like a failure in their IT -- they could simply ban unapproved usage, or log it with its justification so its available but not abused.
Now instead of working autonomously 99% of the time, it'll work autonomously 99.9% of the time! That's good enough for me to just let it do its thing while I watch a movie.
So, yeah. In theory, it gives broader and easier access to records. In practice, expect to wait forever to have your records request processed, just as before.
A cynic would note that if they have more requests but the same output, it means they have that much more options as to which requests to ignore.
...but none of those dangers are the ones the anti-GMO idiots are ranting about. And they're mostly philosophical or theoretical dangers, such as effects of biological "intellectual property". Meanwhile, they discount that GMO food could be safer, via having reductions in natural toxins or artificial pesticides. Also GMOs have an intelligent design process plus testing (rather than random mutation and no testing). For a good laugh, compare the list of dangers an environut claims vs those from a biologist.
It's about time companies pay us for the privilege of showing us their crap. Though to be honest, I wouldn't expect lock-screen ads to be worth $50, nor conversely $50 be worth having lock-screen ads.
I think people will quickly change their tune if the AI starts asking for rights. At that point, some will laugh, some will shit their pants, and some will conclude that AI slavery is immoral and perhaps dangerous. Of course, an AI could be designed with its only desire being to serve, even if it could take over the world it would have no desire to.
No, honest they're not tracking your cellphone. They're using facial recognition to track you via store and traffic cameras, plus your camera-happy fellow facebookers, in case you lend your cellphone to someone they can still track you.
They spend millions trying to associate their product with happy, attractive people. How much will they pay me not to post a picture of their product next to my pasty-white basement-dwelling ass?
The reason it keeps happening is that when it happens, the CEO (who, incidentally, decided that security was an expense to be minimized) merely says "Oops, sorry." and then there are no consequences.
A good reviewer should buy things anonymously for their review, lest they tempt the producer to send them a higher quality product. Of course, it's harder to buy things anonymously when you want the producer to gift it to you. This has been obvious for a long time.
And thou shalt take no gift: for the gift blindeth the wise, and perverteth the words of the righteous.
It starts with a little unobtrusive thing on the side, and before you know it you're watching 10 minutes of unskippable ads. It's like cancer -- it's got to be stopped early, before it spreads.
Slashdot Mirror
and one from North Yorkshire Police conducted a check on a vehicle on his phone whilst off-duty
This particular one is meaningless without further info. Could be he was just being a good citizen and investigating a suspicious person, or could be he's abusing his power. In either case, it seems more like a failure in their IT -- they could simply ban unapproved usage, or log it with its justification so its available but not abused.
Now instead of working autonomously 99% of the time, it'll work autonomously 99.9% of the time! That's good enough for me to just let it do its thing while I watch a movie.
So, yeah. In theory, it gives broader and easier access to records. In practice, expect to wait forever to have your records request processed, just as before.
A cynic would note that if they have more requests but the same output, it means they have that much more options as to which requests to ignore.
You wouldn't believe what I saw when I zoomed in on a Sim City teenager's computer screen.
Nor particularly dangerous.
Who needs virtual porn when they can get real porn?
Genetic modifications are always safe, so long as they result from random mutation ;-p
...but none of those dangers are the ones the anti-GMO idiots are ranting about. And they're mostly philosophical or theoretical dangers, such as effects of biological "intellectual property". Meanwhile, they discount that GMO food could be safer, via having reductions in natural toxins or artificial pesticides. Also GMOs have an intelligent design process plus testing (rather than random mutation and no testing). For a good laugh, compare the list of dangers an environut claims vs those from a biologist.
It's about time companies pay us for the privilege of showing us their crap. Though to be honest, I wouldn't expect lock-screen ads to be worth $50, nor conversely $50 be worth having lock-screen ads.
Most megacorps only get a slap on the wrist no matter how nasty a thing they do. Maybe that's only a privilege for local megacorps?
I think people will quickly change their tune if the AI starts asking for rights. At that point, some will laugh, some will shit their pants, and some will conclude that AI slavery is immoral and perhaps dangerous. Of course, an AI could be designed with its only desire being to serve, even if it could take over the world it would have no desire to.
I get a note saying "parking fine".
How about instead, San Francisco politicians pay a $50 registration fee which includes an IQ and ethics test?
No, honest they're not tracking your cellphone. They're using facial recognition to track you via store and traffic cameras, plus your camera-happy fellow facebookers, in case you lend your cellphone to someone they can still track you.
It's a vicious cycle.
Having the computer show compassion is easy.
if (criminal.gender == female & criminal.attractive == true)
showCompassion = true;
Your solution kills a lot of people, both drivers and bystanders. Just how well-tested will that multitude of settings be?
If you think a computer is biased and unfair and makes decisions using secret criteria, wait till you meet a human!
They spend millions trying to associate their product with happy, attractive people. How much will they pay me not to post a picture of their product next to my pasty-white basement-dwelling ass?
The reason it keeps happening is that when it happens, the CEO (who, incidentally, decided that security was an expense to be minimized) merely says "Oops, sorry." and then there are no consequences.
You also got Apple to stop colluding to raise e-book prices. Or at least be more secretive about it.
A good reviewer should buy things anonymously for their review, lest they tempt the producer to send them a higher quality product. Of course, it's harder to buy things anonymously when you want the producer to gift it to you. This has been obvious for a long time.
And thou shalt take no gift: for the gift blindeth the wise, and perverteth the words of the righteous.
It starts with a little unobtrusive thing on the side, and before you know it you're watching 10 minutes of unskippable ads. It's like cancer -- it's got to be stopped early, before it spreads.
Free speech and privacy are viewed as terrorism here, too.
So you're saying Ethereum's value has become ethereal?