Why does stuff like this require an operating system update? It seems like that is the case for everything in Android: Bluetooth low-energy, usb on-the-go, MIDI,...
I'm using the Windows 7 media center player version of Netflix, which was been abandoned about 5 minutes after it was released. Apparently Windows 7 is an ancient operating system that no one uses any more.
Just to clarify: I probably wasn't clear what I meant by "slippery slope." I mean that if we say it is okay to blame the manufacturer for not providing pedestrian detection, then we open up manufacturers to all sorts of law suits as more autonomous features are added. Eventually, every error could be traced back to something the device could have known but didn't. "Oh, it should have known that grandpa took that pill already." You bring up another angle. What if grandpa really did need another pill and the bottle refused to open?
Answer: Another commenter stated that you have to be pushing the gas pedal for the car to move. It isn't really autonomous at all. So this is definitely the drivers fault.
Oooh, you just brought up an interesting angle. What if you get used to a car that has this feature, and come to expect it, then drive one that does not? That's risky. This makes me me never want to purchase this feature. Or if I get it, never trust it.
This is a slippery slope. We must hold the driver accountable.
*All* cars today will confidently drive into a people. Most of them only do so by moving forward or backward in whatever direction they are pointed. The fact that this car has a button that backs up, does a little turn, then pulls forward does NOT change the chain of responsibility. Ex: Suppose my car has a button that drives forward 10 feet, honks, spins around, then drives backward 10 feet. Can I blame the manufacturer when I hit the button and run someone over? We can't let that become the standard.
Oh, did my drone just gun down a bunch of children? Blame Boeing, their bid for the child detection feature was too expensive! -- I DON'T THINK SO FOLKS!
Question: Does the brake still work in self-park mode?
In their defense, it is because eEconomics perfectly follows t his Douglas Adams quote:
There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
As soon as an algorithm is created that can accurately predict the market, investors will start using it, thus altering the market so the algorithm no longer works.
This kind of economic theory is really attaching a name and a measurement system to a phenomena that is already understood. To say the Q-value predicts bubbles is a bit backwards since the Q-value is defined in terms of bubbles. So it really isn't a predictor of anything, any more than a ruler is a predictor of the length of an object or a scale is a predictor of the weight of an object.
I'm reading... but it is like reading a patch file for a language I don't understand, when I don't have the file that is being patched.
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking “an order” and inserting “an order or emergency production”; and
That might as well be:
Go to line 57 and insert "else break;"
It looks like they are trying to say that, in order to bulk collect data, they must have a specific search they are running that involves a specific telephone line. See SEC 201.
Can someone define "tangible things" as in "SEC. 103. Prohibition on bulk collection of tangible things" or "“(i) Emergency authority for production of tangible things."
I would come here more often if orasio wrote the summaries.
The problem with the summary is that it assumes the reader is already familiar with the device. Your summary does not suffer from that problem. For instance "prototype eight-terminal device consisting of a magnetic matrix with micro-antennas to excite and detect the spin waves." WHAT spin waves? What is a terminal in this context and why is the a key thing in the summary? The summary already presupposes too much, even for a technical news site.
On the flip side, it would be nice if you didn't also insult the person who asked for clarification. The summary is indeed confusing.
+1 for insightful explanation. -1 for being an asshat about it.
If DRM was merely encryption that would be great. Then we could save the encrypted streams to our hard disk, then play them while on vacation. Or we could copy those encrypted streams for time shifting. We could decrypt them, then re-encode them into another format for playing on another device. Or take fair-use protected clips from them.
The goal of DRM is to prevent the the end-user from doing the things listed above. But encryption alone isn't enough to do that. You need a way to give the key to the user, but obfuscate the key so that they can only use it limited circumstances. It's infuriating to the user.
Before getting alarmed about numbers with no context, take a look at Charity Navigator. Compare The Wikimedia foundation with your favorite charity and see how they look.
Charity navigator rates the Wikimedia foundation as 4/4 stars. The system they use is quite fascinating: the site is generates the numbers mathematically from non-profit tax filings. What the site doesn't tell you is if the charity is actually doing good work. If a charity's goal is to feed babies to demons, and they do it efficiently, they will get good marks.
Code can be a weapon (stuxnet, et al.). It isn't, in this case, of course - but it can be.
Yeah, that is a good counterexample. It's interesting because in both cases you need something else to actually make it work. With stuxnet: a computer to run it on. With the gun design: a 3d printer, plastic, a bullet, and a human to pull the trigger. The stuxnet example is much closer to the code being an actual thing.
It varies based on your electricity source. That isn't the best article, but the chart makes it very clear how much this varies. Be aware that in many states in the US, you can choose your power provider. So if you really care, pick a power provider who uses mostly renewables.
typically get explanation-of-benefits that runs like, "X-Ray radiology 800$, Paid by insurance company 100$, discount to insurance 685$, you owe them 15$
I used to get that. But as of a few years ago, every line item on the EOB says "Medical Procedure $800, Paid by insurance company $100,..."
They did, but it took years to figure out the dynamics of the matrix.
NICHOLS: Transparent aluminum? SCOTT: That's the ticket, laddie. NICHOLS: It would take years just to figure out the dynamics of this matrix. McCOY: Yes, but you'd be rich beyond the dreams of avarice.
Before everyone gets upset about data collection: This Supreme Court case is not about Spokeo's data collection. It is about who has the right to sue and under what circumstances. Even if the Supreme Court rules in favor of this individual, all it means is that the individual can continue their suit. It is not a ruling for or against Spokeo's data.
According to John Oliver most people think Edward Snowden is Julian Assange. Oliver did "man-on-the-street" style interviews in New York, asking people who Snowden was. Most people, if they knew the name at all, thought he was "the guy who sold government secrets to Wikileaks."
The report doesn't mention this at all, so I'm not sure what to make of the statistics. If you asked people "Which color is brighter: green or brown" but they had never heard of brown before, you wouldn't be able to draw many meaningful conclusions from it. The report itself doesn't even mention what questions they asked people. There's really just no information here at all.
I was under the false impression that hybrids also had lower maintenance, because of things like regenerative braking. The second article points out that as an advantage, but says it is offset by other things.
Slashdot Mirror
Why does stuff like this require an operating system update? It seems like that is the case for everything in Android: Bluetooth low-energy, usb on-the-go, MIDI, ...
I'm using the Windows 7 media center player version of Netflix, which was been abandoned about 5 minutes after it was released. Apparently Windows 7 is an ancient operating system that no one uses any more.
This is potentially good for Netflix since Windows users have been limited to stereo from Netflix for some time now since Netflix uses Silverlight.
Everything about the web is like that. We are in the process of doing "on the web" everything we have already been doing locally for decades,
Just to clarify: I probably wasn't clear what I meant by "slippery slope." I mean that if we say it is okay to blame the manufacturer for not providing pedestrian detection, then we open up manufacturers to all sorts of law suits as more autonomous features are added. Eventually, every error could be traced back to something the device could have known but didn't. "Oh, it should have known that grandpa took that pill already." You bring up another angle. What if grandpa really did need another pill and the bottle refused to open?
Answer: Another commenter stated that you have to be pushing the gas pedal for the car to move. It isn't really autonomous at all. So this is definitely the drivers fault.
Oooh, you just brought up an interesting angle. What if you get used to a car that has this feature, and come to expect it, then drive one that does not? That's risky. This makes me me never want to purchase this feature. Or if I get it, never trust it.
This is a slippery slope. We must hold the driver accountable.
*All* cars today will confidently drive into a people. Most of them only do so by moving forward or backward in whatever direction they are pointed. The fact that this car has a button that backs up, does a little turn, then pulls forward does NOT change the chain of responsibility. Ex: Suppose my car has a button that drives forward 10 feet, honks, spins around, then drives backward 10 feet. Can I blame the manufacturer when I hit the button and run someone over? We can't let that become the standard.
Oh, did my drone just gun down a bunch of children? Blame Boeing, their bid for the child detection feature was too expensive! -- I DON'T THINK SO FOLKS!
Question: Does the brake still work in self-park mode?
Which one hurts more when dropped on you: a pound of iron, or a pound of feathers?
In their defense, it is because eEconomics perfectly follows t his Douglas Adams quote:
There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened.
As soon as an algorithm is created that can accurately predict the market, investors will start using it, thus altering the market so the algorithm no longer works.
This kind of economic theory is really attaching a name and a measurement system to a phenomena that is already understood. To say the Q-value predicts bubbles is a bit backwards since the Q-value is defined in terms of bubbles. So it really isn't a predictor of anything, any more than a ruler is a predictor of the length of an object or a scale is a predictor of the weight of an object.
I'm reading... but it is like reading a patch file for a language I don't understand, when I don't have the file that is being patched.
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking “an order” and inserting “an order or emergency production”; and
That might as well be:
Go to line 57 and insert "else break;"
It looks like they are trying to say that, in order to bulk collect data, they must have a specific search they are running that involves a specific telephone line. See SEC 201.
Can someone define "tangible things" as in "SEC. 103. Prohibition on bulk collection of tangible things" or "“(i) Emergency authority for production of tangible things."
I would come here more often if orasio wrote the summaries.
The problem with the summary is that it assumes the reader is already familiar with the device. Your summary does not suffer from that problem. For instance "prototype eight-terminal device consisting of a magnetic matrix with micro-antennas to excite and detect the spin waves." WHAT spin waves? What is a terminal in this context and why is the a key thing in the summary? The summary already presupposes too much, even for a technical news site.
On the flip side, it would be nice if you didn't also insult the person who asked for clarification. The summary is indeed confusing.
+1 for insightful explanation.
-1 for being an asshat about it.
Before this new version of Firefox, the DRM was delivered via Silverlight. Either way, you are running a closed-source binary blob that handles DRM.
DRM = encryption + key obfuscation.
If DRM was merely encryption that would be great. Then we could save the encrypted streams to our hard disk, then play them while on vacation. Or we could copy those encrypted streams for time shifting. We could decrypt them, then re-encode them into another format for playing on another device. Or take fair-use protected clips from them.
The goal of DRM is to prevent the the end-user from doing the things listed above. But encryption alone isn't enough to do that. You need a way to give the key to the user, but obfuscate the key so that they can only use it limited circumstances. It's infuriating to the user.
Before getting alarmed about numbers with no context, take a look at Charity Navigator. Compare The Wikimedia foundation with your favorite charity and see how they look.
Charity navigator rates the Wikimedia foundation as 4/4 stars. The system they use is quite fascinating: the site is generates the numbers mathematically from non-profit tax filings. What the site doesn't tell you is if the charity is actually doing good work. If a charity's goal is to feed babies to demons, and they do it efficiently, they will get good marks.
Code can be a weapon (stuxnet, et al.). It isn't, in this case, of course - but it can be.
Yeah, that is a good counterexample. It's interesting because in both cases you need something else to actually make it work. With stuxnet: a computer to run it on. With the gun design: a 3d printer, plastic, a bullet, and a human to pull the trigger. The stuxnet example is much closer to the code being an actual thing.
It varies based on your electricity source.
That isn't the best article, but the chart makes it very clear how much this varies. Be aware that in many states in the US, you can choose your power provider. So if you really care, pick a power provider who uses mostly renewables.
The article makes the very same mistake that Code Wilson is trying to correct via the law suit. The article says:
Only this time the fight isn’t over code erroneously labeled as a weapon. The code in question actually is a weapon.
No! The code is not a weapon. A blueprint is not a weapon. A drawing is not a weapon.
typically get explanation-of-benefits that runs like, "X-Ray radiology 800$, Paid by insurance company 100$, discount to insurance 685$, you owe them 15$
I used to get that. But as of a few years ago, every line item on the EOB says "Medical Procedure $800, Paid by insurance company $100, ..."
Why didn't she bank unfertilized eggs? Why pre-fertilize them?
They did, but it took years to figure out the dynamics of the matrix.
NICHOLS: Transparent aluminum?
SCOTT: That's the ticket, laddie.
NICHOLS: It would take years just to figure out the dynamics of this matrix.
McCOY: Yes, but you'd be rich beyond the dreams of avarice.
Before everyone gets upset about data collection: This Supreme Court case is not about Spokeo's data collection. It is about who has the right to sue and under what circumstances. Even if the Supreme Court rules in favor of this individual, all it means is that the individual can continue their suit. It is not a ruling for or against Spokeo's data.
How are they painting them? Is that why it takes 2 weeks?
According to John Oliver most people think Edward Snowden is Julian Assange. Oliver did "man-on-the-street" style interviews in New York, asking people who Snowden was. Most people, if they knew the name at all, thought he was "the guy who sold government secrets to Wikileaks."
The report doesn't mention this at all, so I'm not sure what to make of the statistics. If you asked people "Which color is brighter: green or brown" but they had never heard of brown before, you wouldn't be able to draw many meaningful conclusions from it. The report itself doesn't even mention what questions they asked people. There's really just no information here at all.
Electric vehicles have lower maintenance cost as gas vehicles. Hybrid vehicles have the same maintenance cost as gas vehicles.
https://www.cars.com/articles/...
http://www.carsdirect.com/car-...
I was under the false impression that hybrids also had lower maintenance, because of things like regenerative braking. The second article points out that as an advantage, but says it is offset by other things.