Not required. Just encouraged/nudged hard by Apple's lack of SD storage, USB ports on newer laptops, and crummy implementation of local sync protocols. Apple also tried to deprecate local sync entirely a few years ago, but walked back after users screamed holy murder.
I don't like any of the cloudpushing companies. Not Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, or Google. My point is that they're all crap in different ways. Apple is better as far as privacy, but worse as far as being able to escape their padded prison cell.
I'm not saying everyone isn't doing the same thing. I'm saying fuck all of them including Apple. Apple is merely slightly less bad than the competition.
Europe has similar levels of free-speech protection as the US. Possibly greater, as you can't be fired at will in many countries if you voice an unpopular opinion. True, in some countries, you can be arrested or fined for Fascist speech, but that stands to reason. Fascism caused a lot of suffering in Europe, and wanting to bring those times back is pretty close to treason.
Basically, it's a threat -- you're promoting government action to take away people's rights. The US equivalent would probably be something like burning a cross on the street in front of someone's home.
You're paying twice if you pay up, since the makers of products that you buy pay for advertising anyway -- i.e. it's baked into the price of everything you, I, and your grandpappy buy.
We'll put you in a nice padded jail where you won't have to mix with the more uncouth inmates in our prison system. Apple's ecosystem is still a panopticon, but it's like the jails where they send Wall Street criminals as opposed to the jail where they send violent inmates.
Motivation? To push people towards Apple's walled garden and cloud storage, at the expense of less-private solutions. But also at the expense of things that offer MORE privacy, like encrypted local storage or even isolated intranet-based storage.
Basically, to get his name in the headlines and make dough for Apple.
Cook yapps out of both sides of his mouth. On the one hand, he claims to support privacy. On the other hand, Apple is nudging users against local storage and to Apple's own cloud services. Cloud = someone else's computer, and it's not really private unless you implement your own key management.
If Cook were truly about privacy, Apple wouldn't be deprecating OS X Server -- i.e. support for local storage in corporate environments. They'd be building Mac OS to encrypt by default, but building their machines to allow easily upgraded LOCAL storage, for those that don't trust the cloud. They'd be including more robust local sync options in iOS devices.
Walled garden is a prison, not privacy. And the business model that Steve Jobs pioneered with iOS is a big part of the reason for loss of privacy today. Apple's attitude is paternalistic and condescending -- either trust us or go sod off.
There's more resistance in Europe than in the US. Ask the average American, and they'll say that privacy doesn't matter if you're not doing anything wrong. European countries and the EU have explicitly recognized privacy rights under law, whereas the US is stuck with the 4th Amendment, which only applies to police.
That political windbag Modi claims it will root out corruption. Maybe. Corruption in India is simply a way to work around bad government. It might remove some corruption, but it won't fix the underlying problem of a useless government and corruption at the higher levels.
Typical "meatbag" response from a techbro full of hubris and propaganda. Until the system improves to the point that it can respond to the unexpected, it shouldn't be allowed on the road without a "squishy mass of water blah-blah-blah" with a kill switch or override. The system can still improve with human guidance.
No: they need to learn to CHECK FOR TRAFFIC (car and pedestrian) before proceeding. Jaywalking and red-light running (by cars) are common enough in NYC to make checking useful, regardless of the light.
A human driver would have likely slammed on the brake. Second of all, preservation of human life shouldn't be the only argument. QUALITY of life should also be an argument. If we mandate autonomous cars, there could be other negative consequences -- like loss of privacy due to all trips being via "rented" cars tied to a credit card and trip database.
Exercise for you...
Take a thousand trips with the autopilot only programmed before takeoff. How many of those trips will allow for a flight through to landing without the pilot touching anything or entering any data? (Excluding things like raising/lowering landing gear and radio use that aren't controlled by the autopilot.)
Your argument about waiting in line everyone else comes down to: "people in cars are miserable, so everyone should be equally miserable."
As far as Sunny Isles, FL, good to know -- the moral of the story isn't to obey lights, it's to watch for cops.
ALL of the companies that want to roll out autonomous cars as a service are "steaming turds." They'll all be the same -- trips in a database, tied to an identity and bank card number for life. They may think they're doing good by saving lives through safer cars. In reality, they'll be destroying people's lives by robbing their privacy if their product becomes mandatory.
Slashdot Mirror
How long before they're hacked to display anti government slogans on every second car? Or just a nice pair of ... mammaries.
Also, if the plates have an LCD screen, there should be an option to press a button in the car to send messages to tailgaters...
A moral-panic axe to grind? Never underestimate the power of do-gooders on a mission from G-d.
The American "justice" system for you -- punishes you for daring to seek a jury trial.
Sheryl's "lean in, work yourself to death" philosophy likely killed her husband. Hope she's proud of herself.
Not required. Just encouraged/nudged hard by Apple's lack of SD storage, USB ports on newer laptops, and crummy implementation of local sync protocols. Apple also tried to deprecate local sync entirely a few years ago, but walked back after users screamed holy murder.
I don't like any of the cloudpushing companies. Not Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, or Google. My point is that they're all crap in different ways. Apple is better as far as privacy, but worse as far as being able to escape their padded prison cell.
I'm not saying everyone isn't doing the same thing. I'm saying fuck all of them including Apple. Apple is merely slightly less bad than the competition.
Europe has similar levels of free-speech protection as the US. Possibly greater, as you can't be fired at will in many countries if you voice an unpopular opinion. True, in some countries, you can be arrested or fined for Fascist speech, but that stands to reason. Fascism caused a lot of suffering in Europe, and wanting to bring those times back is pretty close to treason.
Basically, it's a threat -- you're promoting government action to take away people's rights. The US equivalent would probably be something like burning a cross on the street in front of someone's home.
You're paying twice if you pay up, since the makers of products that you buy pay for advertising anyway -- i.e. it's baked into the price of everything you, I, and your grandpappy buy.
We'll put you in a nice padded jail where you won't have to mix with the more uncouth inmates in our prison system. Apple's ecosystem is still a panopticon, but it's like the jails where they send Wall Street criminals as opposed to the jail where they send violent inmates.
Motivation? To push people towards Apple's walled garden and cloud storage, at the expense of less-private solutions. But also at the expense of things that offer MORE privacy, like encrypted local storage or even isolated intranet-based storage.
Basically, to get his name in the headlines and make dough for Apple.
Cook yapps out of both sides of his mouth. On the one hand, he claims to support privacy. On the other hand, Apple is nudging users against local storage and to Apple's own cloud services. Cloud = someone else's computer, and it's not really private unless you implement your own key management.
If Cook were truly about privacy, Apple wouldn't be deprecating OS X Server -- i.e. support for local storage in corporate environments. They'd be building Mac OS to encrypt by default, but building their machines to allow easily upgraded LOCAL storage, for those that don't trust the cloud. They'd be including more robust local sync options in iOS devices.
Walled garden is a prison, not privacy. And the business model that Steve Jobs pioneered with iOS is a big part of the reason for loss of privacy today. Apple's attitude is paternalistic and condescending -- either trust us or go sod off.
But not all cars are rental cars at present.
There's more resistance in Europe than in the US. Ask the average American, and they'll say that privacy doesn't matter if you're not doing anything wrong. European countries and the EU have explicitly recognized privacy rights under law, whereas the US is stuck with the 4th Amendment, which only applies to police.
That political windbag Modi claims it will root out corruption. Maybe. Corruption in India is simply a way to work around bad government. It might remove some corruption, but it won't fix the underlying problem of a useless government and corruption at the higher levels.
Typical "meatbag" response from a techbro full of hubris and propaganda. Until the system improves to the point that it can respond to the unexpected, it shouldn't be allowed on the road without a "squishy mass of water blah-blah-blah" with a kill switch or override. The system can still improve with human guidance.
No: they need to learn to CHECK FOR TRAFFIC (car and pedestrian) before proceeding. Jaywalking and red-light running (by cars) are common enough in NYC to make checking useful, regardless of the light.
A human driver would have likely slammed on the brake. Second of all, preservation of human life shouldn't be the only argument. QUALITY of life should also be an argument. If we mandate autonomous cars, there could be other negative consequences -- like loss of privacy due to all trips being via "rented" cars tied to a credit card and trip database.
Exercise for you... Take a thousand trips with the autopilot only programmed before takeoff. How many of those trips will allow for a flight through to landing without the pilot touching anything or entering any data? (Excluding things like raising/lowering landing gear and radio use that aren't controlled by the autopilot.)
Your argument about waiting in line everyone else comes down to: "people in cars are miserable, so everyone should be equally miserable." As far as Sunny Isles, FL, good to know -- the moral of the story isn't to obey lights, it's to watch for cops.
"Autopilot" is about right -- aircraft autopilots are designed to be used under human management.
ALL of the companies that want to roll out autonomous cars as a service are "steaming turds." They'll all be the same -- trips in a database, tied to an identity and bank card number for life. They may think they're doing good by saving lives through safer cars. In reality, they'll be destroying people's lives by robbing their privacy if their product becomes mandatory.
Except the Goober car that hit the pedestrian did not even respond as well as an attentive human driver would have.
Autonomous delivery robots... drones on wheels.
An animal for one thing. Ever had venison through your windshield?
Also children.
Heavy objects falling from trucks.