It's the equivalent of losing a contest and then continually shouting "I want a do over!"
But that's what our politicians do all the time. Vote down a bond issue and they just keep pitching it until people get tired and vote for it.
I think the people should vote again. But only after some time has passed. Let the UK run on its own for 5 or 10 years and then let the people decide whether they made a mistake. Some damage may be irreversible. Multi nationals are moving to the mainland and might not come back even if the UK rejoins. You know whet they say about "Fool me once....". London may never regain ts place as Europe's financial center. It'll be like the coal mines under Thatcher.
And if the UK votes to rejoin at some future date, the EU might expect stricter terms. Say goodbye to your BS 1363 plugs.
Reporter on public radio was saying that Google UK search terms on 'what is Brexit' and 'consequences of Brexit' jumped AFTER the vote. I think a lot of people listened to the activists and voted based on emotion. Now they are thinking "What the f*** did we just get ourselves into?" Some accounts of the British vote had a primary reason for Brexit as fear of the refugee crisis in the EU. But Britain is not part of the Schengen Area and has maintained independent control of immigration and visas.
Pretty much the same thing hapens in our town. Politicians don't like something, so they scare the shit out of the public and it gets voted down. OTOH, if it's something the pols want to do, they sell it and even if it's riskier and more expensive, the public votes it up.
The use of RFID tags would work, but then you have the issue of potential theft of said tag.
The theft problem is diminished if the tags are used for facility access control. 'Lose' your tag and you've got to stop by security for a new one (and have the old one deactivated). Actual theft by miscreants attempting unauthorized access has been handled in an innovative way in at least one place. Tags gone missing are 'deactivated' but still work to open one door in a man trap. Then the holder is stuck, having to explain himself to (armed) security. Not willing to go that far? You can still get a photo of the interloper.
This is what it's all about. Someone has to pay into the system when all the meatbags retire and are replaced by robots. I don't know about the EU, but this would break the concept of social security in the USA. It is supposed to be a program you pay into with the anticipation of receiving support payments once you retire. But robots don't retire and receive a pension. It's off to the recycler for them. So in the EU you will be setting up a class of worker to pay into a system from which they derive no benefit. I'm sure the robotics union organizers will have something to say about this.
And there's another thing: My copy of Windows 7 is protesting vehemently against forced retirement and replacement by Windows 10. And my Linux system is applying for SSI disability benefits for having been infected by systemd.
Actually, some cars already have a related safety feature. Open the drivers door and they automatically shift into park.
A mechanic was complaining about backing a late model BMW onto a lift. He starts to back up and opens the door to stick his head out and line up on the lift pads. BRRRRT! as the parking pawl tries to engage.
Modern auto transmissions can't anticipate upcoming conditions that I can see. So I can always beat an auto by downshifting before reaching a downhill. Or not upshifting if I see the need to apply power coming up. The whole 'autos can shift faster' vs dual clutch paddle shifters is meaningless for daily driving anyway.
On the track, I sure as hell don't want an auto to decide to shift just as I'm at the apex of a turn and at the limits of my tires' traction. I need to shift in anticipation of applying power. Not when the computer says, "Oh boy! Throttle down! Lets jerk the car."
A lot of car enthusiasts really don't think the Tesla counts as a "real car".
But look at the alternatives. The Google car was designed with the electric golf cart paradigm in mind. Small, cramped. No room for passengers, luggage or groceries. This is the epitome of the "I hate cars" school of design. At least Tesla went for the traditional car look, and the high end of the market at that.
Sure, Tesla (and others) are computers on wheels that take away the 'fun' of driving. But then so are Jeeps. But these vehicles preserve the traditional car (or truck) amenities and don't try to push people to accept the 'car as a transportation pod but nothing more' concept. Tesla, in particular, brought some of the traditional car style and fun to electric vehicles (remember the Tesla roadster). And the 'pod people' thought the electric car platform would demonstrate the inevitability of their vision. And Tesla went and ruined it for them, so they are pissed.
1980's. And that's not the electric car enthusiasts. That's the socialist/environmentalists. Who are now butt-hurt about how electric cars were not just an interim step to eliminating personal transportation altogether.
Back when electric cars were DC traction motors jerry-rigged into compact cars with a trunk full of lead acid batteries, I got into several conversations with some greenies about what it would take to get the public into them. With some level of extraordinary prescience, I would say, "When electric cars have the comfort, performance and price of IC engine cars, we will buy them. Nobody wants to drive around in a glorified golf cart with open sides and 30 miles range."
The inevitable response was that electric cars were meant to be inconvenient, uncomfortable and uneconomic as the first step to getting people out of private vehicles and into mass transit. Which could eventually control where and when people travel. Pretty much like the Soviet Union at the time issued travel permits.
The modern electric car in general and Tesla in particular have dashed the hopes of the social control freaks to use the inevitable downfall of IC powered private vehicles to direct the population to suit their whims.
you can't boot a system without ME involvement anymore.
the whole PC will shut down after 30 minutes.
Umm, it appears you can get up and running for 30 minutes. Which should be long enough for you to fetch the firmware Intel expects and install it. So this appears to be a big 'fuck you' to anyone who tries to bypass the ME functions in that firmware.
Define rich. Is it living at a very high standard? Like having a garage full of Rolls Royces and Ferraris? Because a consumption tax will catch that. Is it having a very high income, but living in a upper middle class neighborhood and driving a Buick? Like Warren Buffett? Because he reinvests (and now gives away) the bulk of that income to support ventures that many other people derive benefit from. If it is this, then I'd rather tax him on his ranch house, Buick and occasional meals out at Burger King.
Slashdot Mirror
If we could get an AI that can kill for a parking space, I'd be fine with that.
It's the equivalent of losing a contest and then continually shouting "I want a do over!"
But that's what our politicians do all the time. Vote down a bond issue and they just keep pitching it until people get tired and vote for it.
I think the people should vote again. But only after some time has passed. Let the UK run on its own for 5 or 10 years and then let the people decide whether they made a mistake. Some damage may be irreversible. Multi nationals are moving to the mainland and might not come back even if the UK rejoins. You know whet they say about "Fool me once ....". London may never regain ts place as Europe's financial center. It'll be like the coal mines under Thatcher.
And if the UK votes to rejoin at some future date, the EU might expect stricter terms. Say goodbye to your BS 1363 plugs.
Reporter on public radio was saying that Google UK search terms on 'what is Brexit' and 'consequences of Brexit' jumped AFTER the vote. I think a lot of people listened to the activists and voted based on emotion. Now they are thinking "What the f*** did we just get ourselves into?" Some accounts of the British vote had a primary reason for Brexit as fear of the refugee crisis in the EU. But Britain is not part of the Schengen Area and has maintained independent control of immigration and visas.
Pretty much the same thing hapens in our town. Politicians don't like something, so they scare the shit out of the public and it gets voted down. OTOH, if it's something the pols want to do, they sell it and even if it's riskier and more expensive, the public votes it up.
The use of RFID tags would work, but then you have the issue of potential theft of said tag.
The theft problem is diminished if the tags are used for facility access control. 'Lose' your tag and you've got to stop by security for a new one (and have the old one deactivated). Actual theft by miscreants attempting unauthorized access has been handled in an innovative way in at least one place. Tags gone missing are 'deactivated' but still work to open one door in a man trap. Then the holder is stuck, having to explain himself to (armed) security. Not willing to go that far? You can still get a photo of the interloper.
This is what it's all about. Someone has to pay into the system when all the meatbags retire and are replaced by robots. I don't know about the EU, but this would break the concept of social security in the USA. It is supposed to be a program you pay into with the anticipation of receiving support payments once you retire. But robots don't retire and receive a pension. It's off to the recycler for them. So in the EU you will be setting up a class of worker to pay into a system from which they derive no benefit. I'm sure the robotics union organizers will have something to say about this.
And there's another thing: My copy of Windows 7 is protesting vehemently against forced retirement and replacement by Windows 10. And my Linux system is applying for SSI disability benefits for having been infected by systemd.
Actually, some cars already have a related safety feature. Open the drivers door and they automatically shift into park.
A mechanic was complaining about backing a late model BMW onto a lift. He starts to back up and opens the door to stick his head out and line up on the lift pads. BRRRRT! as the parking pawl tries to engage.
Modern auto transmissions can't anticipate upcoming conditions that I can see. So I can always beat an auto by downshifting before reaching a downhill. Or not upshifting if I see the need to apply power coming up. The whole 'autos can shift faster' vs dual clutch paddle shifters is meaningless for daily driving anyway.
On the track, I sure as hell don't want an auto to decide to shift just as I'm at the apex of a turn and at the limits of my tires' traction. I need to shift in anticipation of applying power. Not when the computer says, "Oh boy! Throttle down! Lets jerk the car."
A lot of car enthusiasts really don't think the Tesla counts as a "real car".
But look at the alternatives. The Google car was designed with the electric golf cart paradigm in mind. Small, cramped. No room for passengers, luggage or groceries. This is the epitome of the "I hate cars" school of design. At least Tesla went for the traditional car look, and the high end of the market at that.
Sure, Tesla (and others) are computers on wheels that take away the 'fun' of driving. But then so are Jeeps. But these vehicles preserve the traditional car (or truck) amenities and don't try to push people to accept the 'car as a transportation pod but nothing more' concept. Tesla, in particular, brought some of the traditional car style and fun to electric vehicles (remember the Tesla roadster). And the 'pod people' thought the electric car platform would demonstrate the inevitability of their vision. And Tesla went and ruined it for them, so they are pissed.
1980's. And that's not the electric car enthusiasts. That's the socialist/environmentalists. Who are now butt-hurt about how electric cars were not just an interim step to eliminating personal transportation altogether.
and I haven't the first idea why.
I do.
Back when electric cars were DC traction motors jerry-rigged into compact cars with a trunk full of lead acid batteries, I got into several conversations with some greenies about what it would take to get the public into them. With some level of extraordinary prescience, I would say, "When electric cars have the comfort, performance and price of IC engine cars, we will buy them. Nobody wants to drive around in a glorified golf cart with open sides and 30 miles range."
The inevitable response was that electric cars were meant to be inconvenient, uncomfortable and uneconomic as the first step to getting people out of private vehicles and into mass transit. Which could eventually control where and when people travel. Pretty much like the Soviet Union at the time issued travel permits.
The modern electric car in general and Tesla in particular have dashed the hopes of the social control freaks to use the inevitable downfall of IC powered private vehicles to direct the population to suit their whims.
Better ad here.
Oh, sorry. The ME is only for keeping an eye on our own citizens.
I don't think chickens would be bothered by the altitude. Otherwise how would they be able to fly?
-- Bill Gates
you can't boot a system without ME involvement anymore.
the whole PC will shut down after 30 minutes.
Umm, it appears you can get up and running for 30 minutes. Which should be long enough for you to fetch the firmware Intel expects and install it. So this appears to be a big 'fuck you' to anyone who tries to bypass the ME functions in that firmware.
Define rich. Is it living at a very high standard? Like having a garage full of Rolls Royces and Ferraris? Because a consumption tax will catch that. Is it having a very high income, but living in a upper middle class neighborhood and driving a Buick? Like Warren Buffett? Because he reinvests (and now gives away) the bulk of that income to support ventures that many other people derive benefit from. If it is this, then I'd rather tax him on his ranch house, Buick and occasional meals out at Burger King.
1. A portable communications device: Where said device is manufactured by child and prison labor.
and you're still using Intel.
Charmin.
Citigroup: OK. We'll see you bitches in court.
Well here's our 'rounded corners' patent back at ya!
Usenet?
"We have an ID on the suspect sir. It's Guy Fawkes. Again."