ericsson is mostly profitable. they've hit some bumps recently because in a recession companies don't spend on hardware, they make do with what they have. services / support on the other hand are relatively recession proof as they are (relatively) long term contracts. hence their interest in expanding there.
so, when a laptop is malfunctioning or just needs to be reset, they restore an arbitrary backup copy from some random child from the previous school session?
the iphone 4 antenna debacle. the current maps issue. the fact that iOS has no OTA update feature until recently.
and finally, the fact that they dropped flash support. somehow apple was able to convince users that it was in their best interest to drop support for massive amount of web content. this still bites me and requires me to keep an old windows netbook around to access certain web sites.
In the OSS world, I can file a bug ticket, email a developer and get a new feature request or bug taken care of.
that's pretty much crap in most cases, and telling people that aren't familiar with OSS is really misleading. common sense tells you that there isn't an army of software devs out there working for free waiting to fix your specific problems.
you can get your bug fixed in the OSS world if the project owner / contributors can take time from their paying jobs, if the project if actually still supported, and if the project owner cares about your bug.
If the product is not ready then fine, we'll figure out something
you sure that's what Cook would have said? or was it more like "can you make this date? if not, don't let the door hit you on the way out." i think you are assuming a lot more rational thinking at the corporate level.
the guy's thinking was probably more like "hey, i can try to make this work or i can leave now." i probably would have given it a shot as well. would you rather be the guy that was fired for quality issues in apple maps, or the guy that quit because he didn't think he could build apple maps?
i worked at another larger mobile device manufacturer at one point in my life. they were generally pissed that apple got away with shipping such crap. the sort of things apple gets away with because they are apple are the same things that would be a disaster for other companies.
Android had built-in turn by turn for years; not only could Apple not provide it in iOS, but developers could not write apps that provided turn-by-turn directions on top of the built in iOS mapping framework (it was against Google's TOS). So the whole platform was limited for years by Google restrictions on not just what Apple could do, but what any developer could do.
do you think a company should get paid for the software they develop and the services they offer? apple didn't have turn-by-turn navigation because google refused to offer it, it's because apple wouldn't meet the licensing requirements. as far as any of us know and has been reported, the main sticking point was apple refused to have (more prominent) google branding on the app.
They had no control over the maps app from google, nor on google's terms for use of google's maps API. There was no way to get key features (turn-by-turn directions) without meeting google's demands (for more user data).
uh, no. the sticking point was that apple didn't want any google branding on the app.
it's naive to think apple was going to go from 0-60 on a maps app / navigation app that will compete with google maps, when google has been a leader in maps for a decade and has been producing mobile map applications (both web and native) for many years.
i've used apple maps a few times now, and while it's not as good as google, i thought it's pretty well done for a 1.0 release.
it doesn't say much for apple however that they are sacrificing employees in an attempt to fix the problem. like many other folks have said, apple maps had massive exposure internally before it was released. no one noticed?
perhaps you should. i can't think of a hard sci-fi book that doesn't brush on artificial intelligence, and i can think of many that have it as a main theme.
what separates us from animals? the ability to think abstractly. the ability to conceive of potentially harmful situations and avoid them. we're not limited to thinking about what you can observe. many of the greatest thinkers of our time have postulated on AI,
problems, like countries nuking each other over limited resources? it's not the climate change itself that's directly threatening mankind, it's the side effects.
The topic at hand, Rogue AI, is not likely. Weapons manufacturers will never go for full autonomy because it exposes them to liability when something goes wrong.
i see you slept in history class. liability means jack in full scale war. full scale war is about killing your enemy in way possible no matter what. governments will ask the weapons builders to give them whatever will kill fastest. and they'll do it.
Armed robots are basically SciFi, unless you are aware of some being used or developed?
the drones we have today are practically capable of autonomous operations. the humans are still there and required to press the "attack" button, but that's just a line we haven't crossed. there will be a time when the lure of fast reaction times and personel issues will become too great to not let the robots perform autonomously.
"The U.S. military (and presumably others) have been making steady progress developing drones that operate with little, if any, human oversight. For the time being, developers in the U.S. military insist that when it comes to lethal operations, the new generation of drones will remain under human supervision. Nevertheless, unmanned vehicles will no longer be the “dumb” drones in use today; instead, they will have the ability to “reason” and will be far more autonomous, with humans acting more as supervisors than controllers."
compared to what? the next most successful branch of life we know of, the dinosaurs? or compared to some hypothetical alien you saw in a movie? for all we know, humans might the pinnacle of intelligence in the universe.
I find it more likely that, from the point in time that a computer achieved sentience to the time we were outmatched, we'd have time to realize we were screwed.
it will be a battle between the good that AI provides and the potential damage. there will be people wanting to spread AI because it's going to be more efficient at managing the economy, military tactics, etc.
the military is already contemplating drone-type armaments that can execute kill orders autonomously. they aren't AI, but when AI does exist, it sure seems likely that such drones would be the first implementation.
Look at the execution-style murder of Oscar Grant, where a police "officer" shot him in the back while he lay helpless on the ground after being instructed to do so.
obviously you didn't look at it, or you'd see that is was clearly an accident. the officer and his colleagues looked at each other in horror after it happened. that, and common sense prevails. if they wanted to execute someone, they'd take him off in the car and stop in some dark alley on oakland. claim he got our of his cuffs. whatever.
Let this be a lesson to all. The police can and will MURDER people in plain sight of the public and not receive any punishment for it.
no, they'll murder you in a dark alley or back room in the police station, but not in plain sight.
Or losing $8.8 billion isn't that big of a deal to a company with revenues of $127 billion
i always have to smile a little at this sort of rational. $8.8b is a lot of money, period. it's a HUGE deal to have such a loss for any company. people with that attitude never acquire wealth in the first place.
To be fair, they can only make an assessment based upon what they are told by the company itself.
no. for that amount of scratch, you have your army of lawyers and accountants go over their financial records - people are trained to look for things that don't add up.
is it possible that HP did this, but was still fooled? anything is possible, but it's quite unlikely.
Slashdot Mirror
let me guess ... former, bitter employ?
ericsson is mostly profitable. they've hit some bumps recently because in a recession companies don't spend on hardware, they make do with what they have. services / support on the other hand are relatively recession proof as they are (relatively) long term contracts. hence their interest in expanding there.
I disagree that anything in this story makes the FBI look bad.
it makes them look bad because it can come across as fishing. with no probably cause, the FBI is planting software on laptops on spying on civilians.
i'm not saying that's what happened, but it certainly could be spun that way.
so, when a laptop is malfunctioning or just needs to be reset, they restore an arbitrary backup copy from some random child from the previous school session?
ya, sounds plausible.
the dollar bill? how about the penny!?!?
the bugs that in major functionality that affect all users are the easy ones.
the bugs that affect specific deployments / users, are not easily reproducible, and are in little used parts of the software are a different story.
welcome to the real world. e.g., on my HP laptop, the soft media buttons don't work on linux. think i could get that fixed? no way.
sure.
the iphone 4 antenna debacle. the current maps issue. the fact that iOS has no OTA update feature until recently.
and finally, the fact that they dropped flash support. somehow apple was able to convince users that it was in their best interest to drop support for massive amount of web content. this still bites me and requires me to keep an old windows netbook around to access certain web sites.
you forget that windows has amazing backwards compatibility. i can grab a .exe file from tens years ago and run it on windows 7.
In the OSS world, I can file a bug ticket, email a developer and get a new feature request or bug taken care of.
that's pretty much crap in most cases, and telling people that aren't familiar with OSS is really misleading. common sense tells you that there isn't an army of software devs out there working for free waiting to fix your specific problems.
you can get your bug fixed in the OSS world if the project owner / contributors can take time from their paying jobs, if the project if actually still supported, and if the project owner cares about your bug.
If the product is not ready then fine, we'll figure out something
you sure that's what Cook would have said? or was it more like "can you make this date? if not, don't let the door hit you on the way out." i think you are assuming a lot more rational thinking at the corporate level.
the guy's thinking was probably more like "hey, i can try to make this work or i can leave now." i probably would have given it a shot as well. would you rather be the guy that was fired for quality issues in apple maps, or the guy that quit because he didn't think he could build apple maps?
i worked at another larger mobile device manufacturer at one point in my life. they were generally pissed that apple got away with shipping such crap. the sort of things apple gets away with because they are apple are the same things that would be a disaster for other companies.
Android had built-in turn by turn for years; not only could Apple not provide it in iOS, but developers could not write apps that provided turn-by-turn directions on top of the built in iOS mapping framework (it was against Google's TOS). So the whole platform was limited for years by Google restrictions on not just what Apple could do, but what any developer could do.
do you think a company should get paid for the software they develop and the services they offer? apple didn't have turn-by-turn navigation because google refused to offer it, it's because apple wouldn't meet the licensing requirements. as far as any of us know and has been reported, the main sticking point was apple refused to have (more prominent) google branding on the app.
They had no control over the maps app from google, nor on google's terms for use of google's maps API. There was no way to get key features (turn-by-turn directions) without meeting google's demands (for more user data).
uh, no. the sticking point was that apple didn't want any google branding on the app.
it's naive to think apple was going to go from 0-60 on a maps app / navigation app that will compete with google maps, when google has been a leader in maps for a decade and has been producing mobile map applications (both web and native) for many years.
i've used apple maps a few times now, and while it's not as good as google, i thought it's pretty well done for a 1.0 release.
it doesn't say much for apple however that they are sacrificing employees in an attempt to fix the problem. like many other folks have said, apple maps had massive exposure internally before it was released. no one noticed?
i was thinking that it looked like a pretty nice nintendo game until i saw in the video it's for the xbox 360.
Go read a book.
perhaps you should. i can't think of a hard sci-fi book that doesn't brush on artificial intelligence, and i can think of many that have it as a main theme.
what separates us from animals? the ability to think abstractly. the ability to conceive of potentially harmful situations and avoid them.
we're not limited to thinking about what you can observe. many of the greatest thinkers of our time have postulated on AI,
e.g,
http://www.zdnet.com/news/stephen-hawking-humans-will-fall-behind-ai/116616
he should really just go read a book though, right?
It might cause us severe problems
problems, like countries nuking each other over limited resources? it's not the climate change itself that's directly threatening mankind, it's the side effects.
The topic at hand, Rogue AI, is not likely. Weapons manufacturers will never go for full autonomy because it exposes them to liability when something goes wrong.
i see you slept in history class. liability means jack in full scale war. full scale war is about killing your enemy in way possible no matter what. governments will ask the weapons builders to give them whatever will kill fastest. and they'll do it.
Armed robots are basically SciFi, unless you are aware of some being used or developed?
the drones we have today are practically capable of autonomous operations. the humans are still there and required to press the "attack" button, but that's just a line we haven't crossed. there will be a time when the lure of fast reaction times and personel issues will become too great to not let the robots perform autonomously.
"The U.S. military (and presumably others) have been making steady progress developing drones that operate with little, if any, human oversight. For the time being, developers in the U.S. military insist that when it comes to lethal operations, the new generation of drones will remain under human supervision. Nevertheless, unmanned vehicles will no longer be the “dumb” drones in use today; instead, they will have the ability to “reason” and will be far more autonomous, with humans acting more as supervisors than controllers."
Humans sucks at change.
compared to what? the next most successful branch of life we know of, the dinosaurs? or compared to some hypothetical alien you saw in a movie? for all we know, humans might the pinnacle of intelligence in the universe.
I find it more likely that, from the point in time that a computer achieved sentience to the time we were outmatched, we'd have time to realize we were screwed.
it will be a battle between the good that AI provides and the potential damage. there will be people wanting to spread AI because it's going to be more efficient at managing the economy, military tactics, etc.
the military is already contemplating drone-type armaments that can execute kill orders autonomously. they aren't AI, but when AI does exist, it sure seems likely that such drones would be the first implementation.
Of the four things cited, AI is perhaps the least likely to kill us all, seeing as it doesn't exist.
that's what separates us from animals: being able to think abstractly about problems.
Look at the execution-style murder of Oscar Grant, where a police "officer" shot him in the back while he lay helpless on the ground after being instructed to do so.
obviously you didn't look at it, or you'd see that is was clearly an accident. the officer and his colleagues looked at each other in horror after it happened. that, and common sense prevails. if they wanted to execute someone, they'd take him off in the car and stop in some dark alley on oakland. claim he got our of his cuffs. whatever.
Let this be a lesson to all. The police can and will MURDER people in plain sight of the public and not receive any punishment for it.
no, they'll murder you in a dark alley or back room in the police station, but not in plain sight.
Or losing $8.8 billion isn't that big of a deal to a company with revenues of $127 billion
i always have to smile a little at this sort of rational. $8.8b is a lot of money, period. it's a HUGE deal to have such a loss for any company. people with that attitude never acquire wealth in the first place.
If I'm lying and show you books that say one million sales in the last year, what are you supposed to do? Contact each of the million customers?
because ... they had a product they sold at a profit of $1 each to one million customers?
the number is probably much, much smaller than that. probably in the hundreds. and yes, when it's 12 BILLION DOLLARS, you call all of them.
To be fair, they can only make an assessment based upon what they are told by the company itself.
no. for that amount of scratch, you have your army of lawyers and accountants go over their financial records - people are trained to look for things that don't add up.
is it possible that HP did this, but was still fooled? anything is possible, but it's quite unlikely.