Due to the facetious tone of your response, I'll guess you think I'm an idiot for raising a legitimate question that has to do with safety requirements of autonomous vehicles. I know that previous versions of such vehicles basically used enhanced autopilot mode with collision avoidance and some traffic optimization routines -- which doesn't take ER into account. I was assuming from the tone of the article etc. that someone must have found a solution for ER handling.
If spoke out like you did here, we'd end up ignoring the people considering looking at these problems and just push to get the cars on the road, whatever the cost.
Or were you really being doubly facetious, and pointing out the idiocy of some people's knee-jerk responses to those who want to understand how things work and not just go full-throttle-damn-the-torpedoes?
In that case, I think you probably obfuscated your point a little too much.
This makes things even more interesting... the vehicle would have to know the local rules of the road. Where I live, vehicles are required to pull to the side and leave the center of the road open. And who do the police ticket when the AV gets it wrong?
This raises a good point... autonomous vehicles need to be programmed to safely pull off to the side of the road when an emergency vehicle has its lights flashing and siren on. It then has to wait there until it is safe to rejoin traffic. Do the current ones do that?
Using another DNS won't matter if your ISP is going to block you. Even using secure VPN connections and Proxies will be useless. The only other solution would be either a Wireless Mesh Network, but the FCC might put a stop to that, or back to the old Dialup BBS.
There's no going back to the old Dialup BBS. Why? Because we no longer have analog copper wires... voice uses the same OC ATM trunks that TCP traffic does... which means it can have the same restrictions applied to it.
The only good thing about being poor in the US is that if you have your wits about you, innate skill, know how to play the system, and have a bit of luck, you can become rich in the US instead. Liberty, Equality, and the "pursuit" of happiness. (unlike France: Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity)
Of course, in Europe, you have a social system to fall back on, even if you have certain liberties limited. Pick your poison, nothing's perfect.
That's actually very likely... however, it's also likely it was added to the margin from a supplemental text, as the original was fragmented to begin with. The intent was fairly obvious from the writing in the sand bit, but does not translate well.
You know what? I wonder if any of these politicians has ever stopped to ponder lobby money.
Who is the lobby going to lob more cash at? Someone who does their every bidding today, or someone who needs a lot of convincing?
Seems to me that they'd get MORE money by just sitting on the proposals from the lobbies, and putting forward their own "sanitized" versions to the floor for markup/debate. Then the lobby has to donate more often just to keep them "in line". Come election time, they might ponder a lobby's proposal without modification... or they might not.
Why is it that none of these politicians have thought of that yet? Do the lobbies have some other power over them that will prevent them from getting re-elected? This method should also result in voters having a higher opinion of them, whether merited or not.
Ok, but my response was to "It's easy to reduce piracy...just put the copyright terms back to the length thought fair by our founding fathers: 28 years after publication.". The GP was postulating that piracy somehow is related to the length of copyright. I don't think the two relate.
I do. The reason we're seeing a steady increase in piracy is that there is increasingly less culturally applicable material in the public domain.
If we could at least freely share and build upon the intellectual property of the previous generation, there would be less demand from people for megacorps producing "the biggest and best ever" blockbuster flop over and over again. Culture would thrive, and the stuff that made it to the big screen or to audio production would be the stuff that rose to the top and was re-produced as a squeaky-clean version of something that already existed with bells and whistles added.
Right now we have the opposite: artists who have signed all generative content away for the rest of the foreseeable future, in the hope of being heard and making a buck.
Of course, we'll still have *some* piracy. But that type will be culturally unacceptable, which means society will put a damper on it even without legislation. Nobody will want to be accused of ripping off the latest song, as that will be a shameful thing to do (no need, as there's lots of other good stuff available for the using). This kind of piracy will be taken care of by a) exposing the infringer and b) reparation to the victim (possibly by helping produce something new?).
To fix copyright infringement in its current expanding state, what we need is to reintroduce society into the equation, instead of leaving it all in the control of the stock market elite like we do today.
From your message title, I thought you had something completely different in mind... rewriting SOPA to actively prevent legislators from a) shoehorning legislation into bills with a misleading title or summary (the equivalent of labelling laws for Senate/Congress) and b) making corporate funding of politicians illegal.
These two things would probably fix the piracy problem overnight.
The third would be to change corporate copyright terms to 15 years and personal copyright to 25 years. Suddenly, piracy's not as much of an issue, is it?
The only cloud service I use does encryption in the client software, using standard AES libraries. So, unless they somehow smuggled in a back door that passes casual perusal of code analysis, the worst that can happen is that my backup gets made unavailable to me.
It was Jesus who, when confronted with an adulterous woman and asked whether she should be stoned as per JEWISH law, wrote in the dust and said "he who is blameless should cast the first stone."
You'll find that Judaism has moved on quite a way from firm adherence to the Torah and Talmud too... and that there were actually very few points in history when the Jewish nation even adhered to the core parts of the Mosaic law. This doesn't mean it didn't exist.
Jesus also pointed out the fact that these laws were laws to govern the people (like our current legal system), and not strictly religious laws. He also pointed out that when there is a conflict between religious law and local law, religious law should win.
AND, you're missing the entire point about Christianity... the entire concept is that God didn't change his mind, but mere mortals are unable to live up to the standard. So he created a situation that met all the previous requirements, but then provided a "sacrificial lamb" to stand in for us come punishment time. Supposedly this is what all the Jewish animal sacrifice had been leading up to in the first place.
Poking fun is fine, pointing out the hypocrisy of people's actions vs what they say is fine, mockery tends to just make the mocker look ill-informed and foolish. It's still fine, though. Just not worthwhile.
This was exactly what I was suggesting... including the conclusion. Guns have uses, even in an urban environment... but blanket statistics, even assuming a poisson distribution analysis, throws in a straw man.
That said, the restaurant owner wouldn't really benefit from a gun; he'd do better renting an armed pickup service. A known gun is no defence against an unknown attack. It just increases the risk of the attacker shooting first instead of only threatening and then taking the (insured) money. A bullet-proof vest, on the other hand, may be a good investment.
Great... so does that mean that if I've experienced a violent crime, I'm good for life?
Statistics don't work that way.
I think you'll find that 95% of the people exposed to a violent crime will be 80% more likely to experience a violent crime than those who haven't.
Whether we like to admit it or not, most violent crimes are domestic (or at least involve people you know), and can be avoided based on who you associate with or are born to.
The ones that can happen to anyone? Well, they could happen to anyone. You're better off investing in something to protect you against traffic accidents and bathroom accidents, as you're much more likely to be impacted by those.
Sure it will be abused. What about the flipside, though? If the scanner is reliable, the cop won't be able to do a Terry patdown search because its no longer reasonable (because the cop can use the less intrusive scanner). So much for the patdown yielding drugs cases . ... Something to think about.
That was my thought... but then I began to wonder what the tool could be used to sweep for: is it just for guns, or can it flag other items too?
The felony issue isn't to do with your country so much as it is to do with the country where Yahoo hosts is mail servers... as shown by the NZ and UK arrests by the US recently, they don't really care what country you live in anymore if they can link it back to a local server.
As long as you never plan to visit the US (or have an airplane stopover in the US) or any of its allied nations with extradition treaties though, you should be fine.
You can wonder all you want in the courtroom of speculation and hearsay. I wonder where it came from too... because I don't know. Maybe he's just good at business?
As far as using it for file storage goes, I've done that too... and the files I've uploaded there have mostly been stuff I wanted to make publicly available, or stuff I'd AES encrypted prior to uploading. He'd be unlikely to try and crack it, as there are better ways for him to make a buck that are available to him and perfectly legal.
From the hearsay and documented evidence I've seen about him, he sounds like the standard "upstanding citizen" who dabbled in shady deals to make his first million and then played by the rules to multiply that into multi-millions -- kind of like most of the founding families of the US (and for that matter, AU, UK, and many other countries).
I'm not saying he's a golden child -- I'm also not saying he's an evil scammer. He did however produce a useful service that benefited me in squeaky clean legal ways... kind of like Google.
Wait until the DOJ realizes that the most popular use for Google Images is for downloading copyrighted images....
Sounds logical to me... He believes in only getting involved when it's necessary, and that most things, in the long run, aren't worth dredging up just to make a mess of current circumstances. This applies to his ex-gf AND his wife.
However, I'd suggest that he leave off monitoring the ex's email, as it's both a felony and at odds with his projected morality.
I fail to see your point. Leaving two books open is not the same as linking in a text... writing a page ref to somewhere in the other book in the margin is the same as linking. And it takes longer. Leaving two books open is the same as having two eBooks open in different display panes. And that's just as easy, and has the advantage of being portable without losing your places.
A lot of MPAA/RIAA problem is that a small group of record labels have gotten used to being payed insane amounts for not doing very much and they want more of it. Money for every blank CD found because some might contain their content. What about where I bought their CD and made a copy of it for my own use only as a back-up? I still got to pay extra?
FTFY.
Personally, I don't mind the blank CD tariff; as a result, copying music (under certain circumstances) is free for me... and since I only buy DVD-Rs and MP3 players rarely, I don't mind paying the $12 or so extra per decade there. I just wish the motion picture industry had backed that one as well....
For people who never listen to new music, I can see how this could suck. For artists who plan to make a profit, I can see how this can suck (they lose out on the CD sales AND never see the tariff revenue).
Actually, you make a good point. The majority of common English nursery rhymes were actually written to lambaste specific English politicians and gentry. We need to start writing such memorable ditties about the *people* actively in support of such legislation and post them to youtube and the like. Some of those songs will easily outlast their political careers, and the legislation they've pushed.
Any takers? All it takes is a satirist, a poet and a musician....
Slashdot Mirror
Due to the facetious tone of your response, I'll guess you think I'm an idiot for raising a legitimate question that has to do with safety requirements of autonomous vehicles. I know that previous versions of such vehicles basically used enhanced autopilot mode with collision avoidance and some traffic optimization routines -- which doesn't take ER into account. I was assuming from the tone of the article etc. that someone must have found a solution for ER handling.
If spoke out like you did here, we'd end up ignoring the people considering looking at these problems and just push to get the cars on the road, whatever the cost.
Or were you really being doubly facetious, and pointing out the idiocy of some people's knee-jerk responses to those who want to understand how things work and not just go full-throttle-damn-the-torpedoes?
In that case, I think you probably obfuscated your point a little too much.
This makes things even more interesting... the vehicle would have to know the local rules of the road. Where I live, vehicles are required to pull to the side and leave the center of the road open. And who do the police ticket when the AV gets it wrong?
This raises a good point... autonomous vehicles need to be programmed to safely pull off to the side of the road when an emergency vehicle has its lights flashing and siren on. It then has to wait there until it is safe to rejoin traffic. Do the current ones do that?
Using another DNS won't matter if your ISP is going to block you. Even using secure VPN connections and Proxies will be useless. The only other solution would be either a Wireless Mesh Network, but the FCC might put a stop to that, or back to the old Dialup BBS.
There's no going back to the old Dialup BBS. Why? Because we no longer have analog copper wires... voice uses the same OC ATM trunks that TCP traffic does... which means it can have the same restrictions applied to it.
The only good thing about being poor in the US is that if you have your wits about you, innate skill, know how to play the system, and have a bit of luck, you can become rich in the US instead.
Liberty, Equality, and the "pursuit" of happiness.
(unlike France: Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity)
Of course, in Europe, you have a social system to fall back on, even if you have certain liberties limited. Pick your poison, nothing's perfect.
That's actually very likely... however, it's also likely it was added to the margin from a supplemental text, as the original was fragmented to begin with. The intent was fairly obvious from the writing in the sand bit, but does not translate well.
You know what? I wonder if any of these politicians has ever stopped to ponder lobby money.
Who is the lobby going to lob more cash at? Someone who does their every bidding today, or someone who needs a lot of convincing?
Seems to me that they'd get MORE money by just sitting on the proposals from the lobbies, and putting forward their own "sanitized" versions to the floor for markup/debate. Then the lobby has to donate more often just to keep them "in line". Come election time, they might ponder a lobby's proposal without modification... or they might not.
Why is it that none of these politicians have thought of that yet? Do the lobbies have some other power over them that will prevent them from getting re-elected? This method should also result in voters having a higher opinion of them, whether merited or not.
I've got it! Let's call it H.R. 1981!
Ok, but my response was to "It's easy to reduce piracy...just put the copyright terms back to the length thought fair by our founding fathers: 28 years after publication.". The GP was postulating that piracy somehow is related to the length of copyright. I don't think the two relate.
I do. The reason we're seeing a steady increase in piracy is that there is increasingly less culturally applicable material in the public domain.
If we could at least freely share and build upon the intellectual property of the previous generation, there would be less demand from people for megacorps producing "the biggest and best ever" blockbuster flop over and over again. Culture would thrive, and the stuff that made it to the big screen or to audio production would be the stuff that rose to the top and was re-produced as a squeaky-clean version of something that already existed with bells and whistles added.
Right now we have the opposite: artists who have signed all generative content away for the rest of the foreseeable future, in the hope of being heard and making a buck.
Of course, we'll still have *some* piracy. But that type will be culturally unacceptable, which means society will put a damper on it even without legislation. Nobody will want to be accused of ripping off the latest song, as that will be a shameful thing to do (no need, as there's lots of other good stuff available for the using). This kind of piracy will be taken care of by a) exposing the infringer and b) reparation to the victim (possibly by helping produce something new?).
To fix copyright infringement in its current expanding state, what we need is to reintroduce society into the equation, instead of leaving it all in the control of the stock market elite like we do today.
From your message title, I thought you had something completely different in mind... rewriting SOPA to actively prevent legislators from a) shoehorning legislation into bills with a misleading title or summary (the equivalent of labelling laws for Senate/Congress) and b) making corporate funding of politicians illegal.
These two things would probably fix the piracy problem overnight.
The third would be to change corporate copyright terms to 15 years and personal copyright to 25 years. Suddenly, piracy's not as much of an issue, is it?
Legislators who already decided that only US Citizens are "people" and that you can only be a US Citizen if you don't violate certain US laws?
The only cloud service I use does encryption in the client software, using standard AES libraries. So, unless they somehow smuggled in a back door that passes casual perusal of code analysis, the worst that can happen is that my backup gets made unavailable to me.
It was Jesus who, when confronted with an adulterous woman and asked whether she should be stoned as per JEWISH law, wrote in the dust and said "he who is blameless should cast the first stone."
You'll find that Judaism has moved on quite a way from firm adherence to the Torah and Talmud too... and that there were actually very few points in history when the Jewish nation even adhered to the core parts of the Mosaic law. This doesn't mean it didn't exist.
Jesus also pointed out the fact that these laws were laws to govern the people (like our current legal system), and not strictly religious laws. He also pointed out that when there is a conflict between religious law and local law, religious law should win.
AND, you're missing the entire point about Christianity... the entire concept is that God didn't change his mind, but mere mortals are unable to live up to the standard. So he created a situation that met all the previous requirements, but then provided a "sacrificial lamb" to stand in for us come punishment time. Supposedly this is what all the Jewish animal sacrifice had been leading up to in the first place.
Poking fun is fine, pointing out the hypocrisy of people's actions vs what they say is fine, mockery tends to just make the mocker look ill-informed and foolish. It's still fine, though. Just not worthwhile.
This was exactly what I was suggesting... including the conclusion. Guns have uses, even in an urban environment... but blanket statistics, even assuming a poisson distribution analysis, throws in a straw man.
That said, the restaurant owner wouldn't really benefit from a gun; he'd do better renting an armed pickup service. A known gun is no defence against an unknown attack. It just increases the risk of the attacker shooting first instead of only threatening and then taking the (insured) money. A bullet-proof vest, on the other hand, may be a good investment.
I believe the pilgrims left the Magna Carta in England when they emigrated. Habeus Corpus, on the other hand, was only abandoned last year.
Great... so does that mean that if I've experienced a violent crime, I'm good for life?
Statistics don't work that way.
I think you'll find that 95% of the people exposed to a violent crime will be 80% more likely to experience a violent crime than those who haven't.
Whether we like to admit it or not, most violent crimes are domestic (or at least involve people you know), and can be avoided based on who you associate with or are born to.
The ones that can happen to anyone? Well, they could happen to anyone. You're better off investing in something to protect you against traffic accidents and bathroom accidents, as you're much more likely to be impacted by those.
I'm generally in favor of an educated and armed population....
...and here we see the problem.
Fix the first, and the second becomes acceptable.
Guns don't kill people... ignorance kills people.
Sure it will be abused. What about the flipside, though? If the scanner is reliable, the cop won't be able to do a Terry patdown search because its no longer reasonable (because the cop can use the less intrusive scanner). So much for the patdown yielding drugs cases . . ..
Something to think about.
That was my thought... but then I began to wonder what the tool could be used to sweep for: is it just for guns, or can it flag other items too?
The felony issue isn't to do with your country so much as it is to do with the country where Yahoo hosts is mail servers... as shown by the NZ and UK arrests by the US recently, they don't really care what country you live in anymore if they can link it back to a local server.
As long as you never plan to visit the US (or have an airplane stopover in the US) or any of its allied nations with extradition treaties though, you should be fine.
You can wonder all you want in the courtroom of speculation and hearsay. I wonder where it came from too... because I don't know. Maybe he's just good at business?
As far as using it for file storage goes, I've done that too... and the files I've uploaded there have mostly been stuff I wanted to make publicly available, or stuff I'd AES encrypted prior to uploading. He'd be unlikely to try and crack it, as there are better ways for him to make a buck that are available to him and perfectly legal.
From the hearsay and documented evidence I've seen about him, he sounds like the standard "upstanding citizen" who dabbled in shady deals to make his first million and then played by the rules to multiply that into multi-millions -- kind of like most of the founding families of the US (and for that matter, AU, UK, and many other countries).
I'm not saying he's a golden child -- I'm also not saying he's an evil scammer. He did however produce a useful service that benefited me in squeaky clean legal ways... kind of like Google.
Wait until the DOJ realizes that the most popular use for Google Images is for downloading copyrighted images....
Sounds logical to me... He believes in only getting involved when it's necessary, and that most things, in the long run, aren't worth dredging up just to make a mess of current circumstances. This applies to his ex-gf AND his wife.
However, I'd suggest that he leave off monitoring the ex's email, as it's both a felony and at odds with his projected morality.
I fail to see your point. Leaving two books open is not the same as linking in a text... writing a page ref to somewhere in the other book in the margin is the same as linking. And it takes longer. Leaving two books open is the same as having two eBooks open in different display panes. And that's just as easy, and has the advantage of being portable without losing your places.
You could also get around it by following the link on Wikipedia's mainpage and following the instructions ;)
A lot of MPAA/RIAA problem is that a small group of record labels have gotten used to being payed insane amounts for not doing very much and they want more of it. Money for every blank CD found because some might contain their content. What about where I bought their CD and made a copy of it for my own use only as a back-up? I still got to pay extra?
FTFY.
Personally, I don't mind the blank CD tariff; as a result, copying music (under certain circumstances) is free for me... and since I only buy DVD-Rs and MP3 players rarely, I don't mind paying the $12 or so extra per decade there. I just wish the motion picture industry had backed that one as well....
For people who never listen to new music, I can see how this could suck. For artists who plan to make a profit, I can see how this can suck (they lose out on the CD sales AND never see the tariff revenue).
Actually, you make a good point. The majority of common English nursery rhymes were actually written to lambaste specific English politicians and gentry. We need to start writing such memorable ditties about the *people* actively in support of such legislation and post them to youtube and the like. Some of those songs will easily outlast their political careers, and the legislation they've pushed.
Any takers? All it takes is a satirist, a poet and a musician....