Elevators have a mechanical safety that you as a passenger have no control over, so it doesn't address neoritter's demand for a human fall back. And that mechanical safety only protects you from a cable failure. It does nothing to protect you from out of control elevator computers bouncing you up and down the shaft.
Re:If there's no human fall back, I'll never trust
on
Toyota's Killer Firmware
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
There was a time after automated elevators first came out when people refused to use them because they didn't trust them without a "human fall back or ability to overthrow the computer's control". Today, when nearly all the elevators we've ever seen were automated, this seems crazy.
In 50 years, when most people have never seen a manually operated car, we'll seem just as crazy for not trusting them.
In these models, there are always individuals or clusters of individuals who are unreachable. These people never receive the information and make up a kind of underclass who eke out an information-poor existence in a few dark corners of the network.
Like the cluster of sites on each extreme of the political spectrum that become completely detatched from reality because they only ever get information from each other.
I just don't trust our government enough to administer it properly in practice. Or criminal justice system isn't about actually determining guilty or innocence, it's about railroading people so some DA can pad his resume on the way to becoming a judge or a governor. Hopefully the guy they railroaded actually did it, but if not, meh, they're not gonna lose sleep over the innocent lives they destroyed on their way to the top.
No, I assume it's a material object bound by deterministic laws, as all current evidence suggests. As a deterministic object it will ultimately behave deterministically, even if in an extremely complicated fasion.
Anything beyond that is trying to pass off "BAM, a wizard did it" as science.
Humans don't have free will. There's no reason to believe the answer to question #4 is no. The neurons composing our brain deterministically (given a specieid set of stimuli, they had a calculatable response). With sufficient knowledge on the layout and state of someone's brain, you could calculate what their response to a given stimuli would be.
1.) Governments don't have rights, they have powers. Only individuals have rights. 2.) Whether a particular power is tyrannical or not is often not in the power itself, but how it is exercised. Securing the border for the purpose of preventing people with malicious intent from entering the country is a valid use of that power, interfering with free association for people coming here for peacable purposes is not. 3.) Unenforced laws are a problem, but the solution is not to enforce unjust laws merely for the law's sake. Enforcement of unjust laws encourages disrespect of the citzenry for the rule of law, which is just as much a threat to social stability as inconsistent enforcement.
To have extensive laws on the books that are enforced at the whim of a government official is an invitation for tyranny.
Indeed. But the solution is not to participate in enforcing tyrannical laws anyways. Would you have returned escaped slaves to bondage? It was the law after all. Would you have helped send Jews to the camps? It was the law after all.
Except the very fact you were in the catalog to begin with indicates price is your primary concern. If you were primarily concerned about flight experience, you'd have started by selecting an airline and then order the tickets directly on their site. The only reason to pull up a huge list of every airline that could possibly satisfy your requirements is if you really don't care which airline is providing the flight.
There are limits to how low people will go for the right price and I think the airline industry has already hit that mark.
Sure people all say that, but all the data on their actual purchasing patterns says exactly the opposite. The vast majority of people buying airline tickets care about price, price, and price.
Oddly, budget and midscale hotel chains are more likely to offer free Wi-Fi, while luxurious hotels — already costing the traveler more — regularly ding us.'"
This isn't odd at all. People staying at budget and midscale hotel chains are more price sensitive, so they're going to not come to your hotel if you don't have free wifi. The people staying a luxury hotels are not as price sensitive and are more likely to be worried about other things beside a charge for internet access when selecting a hotel.
Months later, it would become obvious to us that Putin had had the KGB assassinate Clancy as the first move in a complicated plot to restore the Soviet Union. But by the time we realized that it was already to late to stop it. Will it be up to one agent to save a planet teetering on the brink of world war?
If the questions were presented in random order, you could look for a regression linked to how far into the test a particular subject was when they got to that question.
But this extraordinary power raises a troubling question: How will we know whether a quantum computer's results are true if there is no way to check them?
Verifying that a particular answer is correct is often far less complicated than calculating what that answer is to begin with (indeed the entire P vs. NP distinction hinges on this).
Yes, but what exactly are you getting for assuming this risk? If the game fails, you're out the money, but the developer still got his living expenses paid for a number of months. If the game succeeds, he makes a ton of money and you get squat. Kickstarter funders are basically assuming all of the risk and getting none of the oppurtunities.
You have to wonder if Microsoft's recent history of walking away from every hardware platform after a few months is starting to take it's toll. Even if you thought their new tablet was a good product, are you going to risk hundreds of dollars on a product that will be unsupported a year later because its manufacturer can't seem to stick behind anything?
So first you blame the plant's design "plain cruddy designs that any newly graduated nuclear engineering student could have designed better". And then when someone points out there's dozens of plants in the US using the exact same design, suddenly the design has nothing to do with it?
Slashdot Mirror
Elevators have a mechanical safety that you as a passenger have no control over, so it doesn't address neoritter's demand for a human fall back. And that mechanical safety only protects you from a cable failure. It does nothing to protect you from out of control elevator computers bouncing you up and down the shaft.
There was a time after automated elevators first came out when people refused to use them because they didn't trust them without a "human fall back or ability to overthrow the computer's control". Today, when nearly all the elevators we've ever seen were automated, this seems crazy.
In 50 years, when most people have never seen a manually operated car, we'll seem just as crazy for not trusting them.
Like the cluster of sites on each extreme of the political spectrum that become completely detatched from reality because they only ever get information from each other.
Except he was also a Clinton official and an Obama official.
I'm in favor of the death penalty in theory.
I just don't trust our government enough to administer it properly in practice. Or criminal justice system isn't about actually determining guilty or innocence, it's about railroading people so some DA can pad his resume on the way to becoming a judge or a governor. Hopefully the guy they railroaded actually did it, but if not, meh, they're not gonna lose sleep over the innocent lives they destroyed on their way to the top.
No, I assume it's a material object bound by deterministic laws, as all current evidence suggests. As a deterministic object it will ultimately behave deterministically, even if in an extremely complicated fasion.
Anything beyond that is trying to pass off "BAM, a wizard did it" as science.
There's no actual evidence that macroscopically observable quantum effects are involved in the function of our neurons.
Humans don't have free will. There's no reason to believe the answer to question #4 is no. The neurons composing our brain deterministically (given a specieid set of stimuli, they had a calculatable response). With sufficient knowledge on the layout and state of someone's brain, you could calculate what their response to a given stimuli would be.
1.) Governments don't have rights, they have powers. Only individuals have rights.
2.) Whether a particular power is tyrannical or not is often not in the power itself, but how it is exercised. Securing the border for the purpose of preventing people with malicious intent from entering the country is a valid use of that power, interfering with free association for people coming here for peacable purposes is not.
3.) Unenforced laws are a problem, but the solution is not to enforce unjust laws merely for the law's sake. Enforcement of unjust laws encourages disrespect of the citzenry for the rule of law, which is just as much a threat to social stability as inconsistent enforcement.
Indeed. But the solution is not to participate in enforcing tyrannical laws anyways. Would you have returned escaped slaves to bondage? It was the law after all. Would you have helped send Jews to the camps? It was the law after all.
"Lex iniusta non est lex"
Except the very fact you were in the catalog to begin with indicates price is your primary concern. If you were primarily concerned about flight experience, you'd have started by selecting an airline and then order the tickets directly on their site. The only reason to pull up a huge list of every airline that could possibly satisfy your requirements is if you really don't care which airline is providing the flight.
Sure people all say that, but all the data on their actual purchasing patterns says exactly the opposite. The vast majority of people buying airline tickets care about price, price, and price.
People who fetishize the term "open source" almost to the point of religion.
This isn't odd at all. People staying at budget and midscale hotel chains are more price sensitive, so they're going to not come to your hotel if you don't have free wifi. The people staying a luxury hotels are not as price sensitive and are more likely to be worried about other things beside a charge for internet access when selecting a hotel.
We witnessed a space-sponge spontaneously move more than six feet!
Months later, it would become obvious to us that Putin had had the KGB assassinate Clancy as the first move in a complicated plot to restore the Soviet Union. But by the time we realized that it was already to late to stop it. Will it be up to one agent to save a planet teetering on the brink of world war?
If the questions were presented in random order, you could look for a regression linked to how far into the test a particular subject was when they got to that question.
Verifying that a particular answer is correct is often far less complicated than calculating what that answer is to begin with (indeed the entire P vs. NP distinction hinges on this).
If you call a steer a bull, he is thankful for the honor, but would much rather have restored what was rightfully his.
If the game suceeds, I'll be able to get the game anyways, even though I haven't contributed a dime to the kickstarter.
Yes, but what exactly are you getting for assuming this risk? If the game fails, you're out the money, but the developer still got his living expenses paid for a number of months. If the game succeeds, he makes a ton of money and you get squat. Kickstarter funders are basically assuming all of the risk and getting none of the oppurtunities.
Max: The two cardinal rules of producing. One: Never put your own money in the show.
Leo: And two?
Max: NEVER PUT YOUR OWN MONEY IN THE SHOW!
Oh great, so people on their way to work are going to miss their train/bus because the lot is full of people texting.
You have to wonder if Microsoft's recent history of walking away from every hardware platform after a few months is starting to take it's toll. Even if you thought their new tablet was a good product, are you going to risk hundreds of dollars on a product that will be unsupported a year later because its manufacturer can't seem to stick behind anything?
So first you blame the plant's design "plain cruddy designs that any newly graduated nuclear engineering student could have designed better". And then when someone points out there's dozens of plants in the US using the exact same design, suddenly the design has nothing to do with it?