Ah, effects of architecture - long story short: my house doesn't have a suitable location for a screen > 44", so we are blessed to live in the luxury of the past with a 42" screen and have no temptation from the 65" beasts.
How did anyone think this was a good idea? it wasn't just that some lone hacker snuck this in.... there were committees, marketing buy in, engineers who did the work, management who OK'd the budgets..... and no one stood up and said "this is not a good ioea"? no one?
Obviously no one who counts. Kinda like the NASA engineer who warned about the O-rings before Challenger went poof.
I think in the cell phone scenario, the justification is battery life. Plus, it doesn't hurt to have the raw speech sent to the cloud for machine learning purposes, but they'll stress the battery life aspect during PR events.
What is so fucking difficult about local voice recognition?
Your wallet. The device is already cloud connected for other reasons, a sunk cost. Upgrading the local processor and memory to do local voice recognition might cost an extra $3 per copy, hurting either profit margins, or sales- neither of which is acceptable.
In the early 1990s I raged about in-car CD players that had like 5 seconds of buffering - that didn't improve until MP3 decoding got added and there was already a strong processor with lots of memory onboard for that, suddenly in-car CD players didn't skip anymore due to 30+ seconds of buffer being available. Cost to buffer 30 seconds of 44.1kHz stereo audio in 1993 - maybe $2 per device, and not a single manufacturer did it.
Although this is bad I would be more concerned with that internet connected recording device your pocket, that you install random software on.
If I hadn't already posted, I'd mod Insightful. If I could, I'd give all my mod points to this ^^^.
I remain hopeful that the truly bad stuff is being mostly identified quickly and sort of auto-scrubbed from the soup that is the Appiverse, but I'm sure that nefarious villains can still replace your common apps with modified versions that do all kinds of bad stuff, starting with recording all available audio from the mic, compressing it and sneaking it out when you transfer data for other reasons. Geo-tracking and random snapshots also uploaded clandestinely come a close second.
Personally, I'm starting to prefer computer monitors to Televisions. "Smart TVs" aren't nearly smart, nor configurable enough, for my taste - why not just get a simple monitor and hook up a real computer that you have some measure of control over?
I have a Google Nexus 5 phone - guess what happens when I tap on the little microphone icon?
Actually, I count Google as one of the good guys in this scenario. The voice recognition obviously breaks down when network connectivity is flaky (which is often in a Nexus 5), and they also get in your face with reminders about things they've read in your e-mails - almost always helpful things, but I think the most helpful part is the reminder that your mail _is_ being read by people (or at least machines) other than you.
So in the real present, who is suppressing our free will? We are free to quit our jobs at any time, of course actually doing that would be risking career suicide loss of healthcare insurance, etc. We are free to do as we will in our private homes, unless such activities might show up on a urinalysis or hair sample. We are free to shop, consume, purchase to our credit capacity - even encouraged to do so, but only from a selection of increasingly meaningless trinkets. We are free to use tools of communication, but only if they can be monitored. We (in the US) are free to purchase assault rifles, life is weird like that.
Well, that's the rub, isn't it? The TV is not supposed to be a recording device.
It is if you buy this one. Personally, I think this type of product perversion should include a mandatory easy-access hardware disable feature (user accessible jumper on the mic wire?)
They have been telling Hollywood to get bent, and venue shopped their base of operations to be able to do that.
Hollywood is trying to do what they can through international legal maneuvering. It should be a different kind of entertaining to see how this turns out.
I'd go out on a limb and take a bet that a modern plastic grocery bag can hold 5,000x its weight... they hold (on the order of) 10lbs, so 1/500 lb - how many grams do you think a single bag weighs (without the printer's ink on it)? If it's less than 1 gram per bag, we've got 5000:1 performance there.
B. because of plausible deniability, it is widespread in the environment and might mutate on its own.
Most people causing mass death or terror don't have plausible deniability high on their list. Quite the opposite actually, they pretty much fall over themselves taking credit for acts of terror. That's kind of the point of such a display of power.
Thus my last point: Are you sure this hasn't happened already? Maybe not as an open act of terror, but as state sponsored research, or covert ops?
For me, a compiler would be a higher level language where you edit one character of code and change the number of digits per hand from 5 to 6, or 4, as desired.
There are plenty of infectious agents that we don't have treatments against, so why would anybody go through the trouble of modifying bubonic plague, instead of just picking one of those? Why bubonic plague, an organism that is transmitted by fleas?
A. because it sounds scary, most people know something about the Black Death.
B. because of plausible deniability, it is widespread in the environment and might mutate on its own.
C. because of limited scope and speed of spread (flea vector), what's the point in killing _everyone_ when you can just kill mostly your enemies?
And why haven't terrorists used biological weapons successfully before if there is such a risk from them?
The numbers work nicely starting at 1, but I see no reason to have people process the paperwork (even when no actual paper is involved) until a significant sum is changing hands. Similar logic for 5 year extensions instead of 1 year extensions.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, effects of architecture - long story short: my house doesn't have a suitable location for a screen > 44", so we are blessed to live in the luxury of the past with a 42" screen and have no temptation from the 65" beasts.
How did anyone think this was a good idea? it wasn't just that some lone hacker snuck this in .... there were committees, marketing buy in, engineers who did the work, management who OK'd the budgets ..... and no one stood up and said "this is not a good ioea"? no one?
Obviously no one who counts. Kinda like the NASA engineer who warned about the O-rings before Challenger went poof.
I think in the cell phone scenario, the justification is battery life. Plus, it doesn't hurt to have the raw speech sent to the cloud for machine learning purposes, but they'll stress the battery life aspect during PR events.
What is so fucking difficult about local voice recognition?
Your wallet. The device is already cloud connected for other reasons, a sunk cost. Upgrading the local processor and memory to do local voice recognition might cost an extra $3 per copy, hurting either profit margins, or sales- neither of which is acceptable.
In the early 1990s I raged about in-car CD players that had like 5 seconds of buffering - that didn't improve until MP3 decoding got added and there was already a strong processor with lots of memory onboard for that, suddenly in-car CD players didn't skip anymore due to 30+ seconds of buffer being available. Cost to buffer 30 seconds of 44.1kHz stereo audio in 1993 - maybe $2 per device, and not a single manufacturer did it.
Although this is bad I would be more concerned with that internet connected recording device your pocket, that you install random software on.
If I hadn't already posted, I'd mod Insightful. If I could, I'd give all my mod points to this ^^^.
I remain hopeful that the truly bad stuff is being mostly identified quickly and sort of auto-scrubbed from the soup that is the Appiverse, but I'm sure that nefarious villains can still replace your common apps with modified versions that do all kinds of bad stuff, starting with recording all available audio from the mic, compressing it and sneaking it out when you transfer data for other reasons. Geo-tracking and random snapshots also uploaded clandestinely come a close second.
Personally, I'm starting to prefer computer monitors to Televisions. "Smart TVs" aren't nearly smart, nor configurable enough, for my taste - why not just get a simple monitor and hook up a real computer that you have some measure of control over?
I have a Google Nexus 5 phone - guess what happens when I tap on the little microphone icon?
Actually, I count Google as one of the good guys in this scenario. The voice recognition obviously breaks down when network connectivity is flaky (which is often in a Nexus 5), and they also get in your face with reminders about things they've read in your e-mails - almost always helpful things, but I think the most helpful part is the reminder that your mail _is_ being read by people (or at least machines) other than you.
So in the real present, who is suppressing our free will? We are free to quit our jobs at any time, of course actually doing that would be risking career suicide loss of healthcare insurance, etc. We are free to do as we will in our private homes, unless such activities might show up on a urinalysis or hair sample. We are free to shop, consume, purchase to our credit capacity - even encouraged to do so, but only from a selection of increasingly meaningless trinkets. We are free to use tools of communication, but only if they can be monitored. We (in the US) are free to purchase assault rifles, life is weird like that.
Thank the influence of Atlas Shrugged type thinking for influencing Orwell to paint the government as the only spy in your bedroom.
Plot twist: the psychopaths running things are not elected officials, nor even in the public sector or military.
Well, that's the rub, isn't it? The TV is not supposed to be a recording device.
It is if you buy this one. Personally, I think this type of product perversion should include a mandatory easy-access hardware disable feature (user accessible jumper on the mic wire?)
Antiguan?
They have been telling Hollywood to get bent, and venue shopped their base of operations to be able to do that.
Hollywood is trying to do what they can through international legal maneuvering. It should be a different kind of entertaining to see how this turns out.
And, for people who only want to rent the physical disc: http://www.redbox.com/
Time to get serious about strong encryption for military Command and Control links... oh, wait....
I'd go out on a limb and take a bet that a modern plastic grocery bag can hold 5,000x its weight... they hold (on the order of) 10lbs, so 1/500 lb - how many grams do you think a single bag weighs (without the printer's ink on it)? If it's less than 1 gram per bag, we've got 5000:1 performance there.
Because: politics.
B. because of plausible deniability, it is widespread in the environment and might mutate on its own.
Most people causing mass death or terror don't have plausible deniability high on their list.
Quite the opposite actually, they pretty much fall over themselves taking credit for acts of terror. That's kind of the point of such a display of power.
Thus my last point: Are you sure this hasn't happened already? Maybe not as an open act of terror, but as state sponsored research, or covert ops?
not all value is subjective, that's libertard nonsense
True, but if you're talking about money, be it bitcoin, USD, or rupees - that's all subjective value.
Somebody has to build, fuel and maintain the boat - or build and maintain the robots that do those jobs.
When the robots start building robots, then we're really screwed.
For me, a compiler would be a higher level language where you edit one character of code and change the number of digits per hand from 5 to 6, or 4, as desired.
We've got the assembler / disassembler, but are clueless as to how 99.9% of the code works and thus can't even begin to make a meaningful compiler.
There are plenty of infectious agents that we don't have treatments against, so why would anybody go through the trouble of modifying bubonic plague, instead of just picking one of those? Why bubonic plague, an organism that is transmitted by fleas?
A. because it sounds scary, most people know something about the Black Death.
B. because of plausible deniability, it is widespread in the environment and might mutate on its own.
C. because of limited scope and speed of spread (flea vector), what's the point in killing _everyone_ when you can just kill mostly your enemies?
And why haven't terrorists used biological weapons successfully before if there is such a risk from them?
Are you sure they haven't?
The numbers work nicely starting at 1, but I see no reason to have people process the paperwork (even when no actual paper is involved) until a significant sum is changing hands. Similar logic for 5 year extensions instead of 1 year extensions.
One Devil is in the Delaware laws of incorporation, there are many others.