The thing that I find with employment contracts is that they are so long the employer doesn't want to bother reading them. So if you modify the contract and sign it they just look for the signature and file it.
The article didn't say what the robot did... did it continue along it's programmed route spraying employees along the way? I think that if unsupervised robots are going to handle potentially hazardous materials they should be able to detect an issue and have a response of at least stop and send off an alert, so they do not continue to contaminate a larger area.
On the third hand, if you can't trust RSA for security, a major closed source project whose entire purpose is security, who can you trust in the OS world?
The real difference from security Between open source and closed source is attitude towards the product, In closed source there is incentives to hide issues, where in open source there are very few.
There was a car customization shop around me that had a souped up minivan that they would drag race people with sports cars (and smoke them). Then hand out business cards.
We just purchased a bunch of ms dos 6.2 licenses and installed them on brand new computers for a customer.... so there is defiantly not a hardware compatibility issue yet.
A government agency I contracted for had a committee spend years coming up with status reporting and the best they cam up with is a 3 color system (stop light) that could be rolled up.
If by highly trained you mean a 2 month boot camp that mainly consists of jogging around and carrying a fake rubber gun, yea highly trained. (I worked at the facility where all the air martials got trained).
I agree completely with the authors review of the movie. I really do not know if someone who has not read the book would even understand what was going on half the time. For example after Ender gets the dragon team there is a quick scene where Harrison Ford say something to the effect of he's pushing them hard and in the back ground you may notice that his team looks to have moved up a leader board. But the very next thing they do is his final battle... So if you missed the significance of the leader board you would assume that this is also his first battle, which makes no sense with the dialog later in the battle. So the entire movie felt like a highlight reel of the book.
In all seriousness, aren't most pop songs written by committee* before the performer gets involved?
Would you prefer the committee to sing their own songs or the average singer composing their own songs?
I don't see much advantage in having the composer and the singer being the same person. I care about the final product.
The advantage is that the singer has an emotional connection to the words they write, they then emote those feelings through singing in hopes of eliciting an emotional response from you the listener.
When one person writes and the other sings, there is a passing from the writer to the singer of the emotion, this is less good then coming from the singer them selves but some good singers can interpreter the emotion from the writer or apply their own.
When lyrics are developed by committee there is no emotion just catch phrases and even the most talented singers would be hard pressed to put any emotion into it.
But why should we give ANYONE preference, other than the contractor that we believe will do the best job and provide the most value for the money? Even if we are "only" paying.1% [citation needed] more for EVERYTHING in the government, it is extremely wasteful of taxpayer dollars.
Belief is the exact issue, many people have many different beliefs on what makes a contractor that will do just that and sadly many of those people making decisions are old white men that still believe (wrongly) that old white men are the only ones that can run a company. So in order to give other people a chance to get in the business and actually create some some competition we must make laws like this, it's sad but it is a reality.
Having worked as a government contractor and for companies that sell to the government for over 15 years this just isn't true. Some contracts (usually smaller ones) are set asides for the above an 8A contract can only be bid on by a minority owned small business, but a small business contract can be bid on by any small business. If you are bidding on a small business contract (not 8A) then the ethnicity of your owner has no factor in the decision process. A larger part of the criteria of getting a contract is having had a contract in the pas, there is a saying in the government "No one has ever been fired for hiring Lockheed".
I can program/develop for about 6 hours a day effectively the other 2 hours at work I use for emails meetings etc... I had at one time attempted 4 10 work days a week I found that often the last 2 hours I would either make a lot of mistakes or be unable to find solutions to an issue that I would find instantly when I got to work in the morning.
On the flip side although I am not at work I never actually stop working, I will even wake up out of a dead sleep and realize I have coded something wrong and have the correct way in my head for implementation in the morning.
It's ultimately the same guy on the trigger finger, regardless of whether or not the weapon is a youth fresh out of boot camp, a remotely-operated weapon, or a drone.
People should be looking harder at the people agitating for higher military spending and starting the foreign wars.
Actually it is not since this about not having anyone at the trigger and allowing the machine to decide who to kill... could be anything from a drone to a smart landmine...
In my scenario Mr Innocent is accused of downloading child porn, there is circumstantial evidence that he may have done so lets: his IP address was used to download something off of a honeypot. Mr Innocent is just that innocent he downloaded no child porn. However he does like to look at a lot anime porn where all the characters sorta look like children.
Pleading the fifth and not allowing his hard drive to be decrypted hides that he likes anime porn which prevents a prudy jury from convicting an innocent man, saves the man more embarrassment and saves the tax payers a ton of money.
This might be extreme, maybe the jury would have been reasonable and not convicted him but he is innocent why should he be forced to take that risk?
We are not all lawyers and we are not all great at speaking our point well, especially when the truth looks bad and lawyers are professionals at convincing juries that things that look bad are facts that bad things happened.
Technically I don't think it will be an issue, but socially I think the car will just evolve into self driving, it is already happening from cruise control that adjusts speed to the car in front of you, cars that break on their own to avoid hitting something and self parking cars. The more these "features" trickle into the main stream the closer to self driving cars we will get both socially legally and technologically. No one trusted cruise control when it came out either now it is standard.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing that I find with employment contracts is that they are so long the employer doesn't want to bother reading them. So if you modify the contract and sign it they just look for the signature and file it.
The article didn't say what the robot did... did it continue along it's programmed route spraying employees along the way? I think that if unsupervised robots are going to handle potentially hazardous materials they should be able to detect an issue and have a response of at least stop and send off an alert, so they do not continue to contaminate a larger area.
On the third hand, if you can't trust RSA for security, a major closed source project whose entire purpose is security, who can you trust in the OS world? The real difference from security Between open source and closed source is attitude towards the product, In closed source there is incentives to hide issues, where in open source there are very few.
There was a car customization shop around me that had a souped up minivan that they would drag race people with sports cars (and smoke them). Then hand out business cards.
We just purchased a bunch of ms dos 6.2 licenses and installed them on brand new computers for a customer.... so there is defiantly not a hardware compatibility issue yet.
A government agency I contracted for had a committee spend years coming up with status reporting and the best they cam up with is a 3 color system (stop light) that could be rolled up.
Society at large... Is one of the worse bosses out their, selfish and schizophrenic.
If by highly trained you mean a 2 month boot camp that mainly consists of jogging around and carrying a fake rubber gun, yea highly trained. (I worked at the facility where all the air martials got trained).
1.5%* Top 10% is 0.15%... which is what the title is referring to. Please read full summary before ripping title.
People who need hobbies! Someone to make comments about their breathing habits!
This appears to be a hobby so I would say they do not need one...
just a large remote control car. If it does not do its task autonomously it is not a robot.
I am under the impression that sensitive information and higher required authentication via a cac card.
They are in kindergarten.... I don't think revolt is an easy concept.
I agree completely with the authors review of the movie. I really do not know if someone who has not read the book would even understand what was going on half the time. For example after Ender gets the dragon team there is a quick scene where Harrison Ford say something to the effect of he's pushing them hard and in the back ground you may notice that his team looks to have moved up a leader board. But the very next thing they do is his final battle... So if you missed the significance of the leader board you would assume that this is also his first battle, which makes no sense with the dialog later in the battle. So the entire movie felt like a highlight reel of the book.
In all seriousness, aren't most pop songs written by committee* before the performer gets involved?
Would you prefer the committee to sing their own songs or the average singer composing their own songs?
I don't see much advantage in having the composer and the singer being the same person. I care about the final product.
The advantage is that the singer has an emotional connection to the words they write, they then emote those feelings through singing in hopes of eliciting an emotional response from you the listener.
When one person writes and the other sings, there is a passing from the writer to the singer of the emotion, this is less good then coming from the singer them selves but some good singers can interpreter the emotion from the writer or apply their own.
When lyrics are developed by committee there is no emotion just catch phrases and even the most talented singers would be hard pressed to put any emotion into it.
But why should we give ANYONE preference, other than the contractor that we believe will do the best job and provide the most value for the money? Even if we are "only" paying .1% [citation needed] more for EVERYTHING in the government, it is extremely wasteful of taxpayer dollars.
Belief is the exact issue, many people have many different beliefs on what makes a contractor that will do just that and sadly many of those people making decisions are old white men that still believe (wrongly) that old white men are the only ones that can run a company. So in order to give other people a chance to get in the business and actually create some some competition we must make laws like this, it's sad but it is a reality.
Having worked as a government contractor and for companies that sell to the government for over 15 years this just isn't true. Some contracts (usually smaller ones) are set asides for the above an 8A contract can only be bid on by a minority owned small business, but a small business contract can be bid on by any small business. If you are bidding on a small business contract (not 8A) then the ethnicity of your owner has no factor in the decision process. A larger part of the criteria of getting a contract is having had a contract in the pas, there is a saying in the government "No one has ever been fired for hiring Lockheed".
I can program/develop for about 6 hours a day effectively the other 2 hours at work I use for emails meetings etc... I had at one time attempted 4 10 work days a week I found that often the last 2 hours I would either make a lot of mistakes or be unable to find solutions to an issue that I would find instantly when I got to work in the morning.
On the flip side although I am not at work I never actually stop working, I will even wake up out of a dead sleep and realize I have coded something wrong and have the correct way in my head for implementation in the morning.
It's ultimately the same guy on the trigger finger, regardless of whether or not the weapon is a youth fresh out of boot camp, a remotely-operated weapon, or a drone.
People should be looking harder at the people agitating for higher military spending and starting the foreign wars.
Actually it is not since this about not having anyone at the trigger and allowing the machine to decide who to kill... could be anything from a drone to a smart landmine...
Where the alternative is to gamble your future in a game where other players are cheating? hey at least your in charge of how you loose your money.
How about the Electric Mercedes SLS
That's an expensive solution.
Unfortunately the diploma (especially from the right school) is worth more than the Education.
In my scenario Mr Innocent is accused of downloading child porn, there is circumstantial evidence that he may have done so lets: his IP address was used to download something off of a honeypot. Mr Innocent is just that innocent he downloaded no child porn. However he does like to look at a lot anime porn where all the characters sorta look like children.
Pleading the fifth and not allowing his hard drive to be decrypted hides that he likes anime porn which prevents a prudy jury from convicting an innocent man, saves the man more embarrassment and saves the tax payers a ton of money.
This might be extreme, maybe the jury would have been reasonable and not convicted him but he is innocent why should he be forced to take that risk?
We are not all lawyers and we are not all great at speaking our point well, especially when the truth looks bad and lawyers are professionals at convincing juries that things that look bad are facts that bad things happened.
Technically I don't think it will be an issue, but socially I think the car will just evolve into self driving, it is already happening from cruise control that adjusts speed to the car in front of you, cars that break on their own to avoid hitting something and self parking cars. The more these "features" trickle into the main stream the closer to self driving cars we will get both socially legally and technologically. No one trusted cruise control when it came out either now it is standard.