Export control information usually involves technology that can be used to create missiles or others armaments. NASA works with rockets, so some of that material may have information involving missiles. It's a good idea to have some control over where that information goes so it doesn't help a hostile entity and come back to us.
In addition, she published a review a few years earlier claiming that the flame retardant should be banned. She had a strong opinion before being appointed to the committee, thus she was biased, and so should have never been appointed. In this case the industry was right. She didn't have an open mind coming in.
There's always malware on any operating system, including IOS. While Apple does a good job at preventing it, they can't prevent it 100% of the time. Here are a few articles talking about malware on iOS for those who think it doesn't exist.
Inviting lots of opinions to a complicated issues is an excellent idea and creates additional insight into the implementation and practical problems that may occur with the laws. There's no reason to ignore an opinion just because it's an opposing opinion. Rather, opposing opinions can bring the most insight information from people that think differently. Europe doesn't have to agree with the US, but the opinions and insight of the US can be very useful.
As an engineer, I use math for field work all the time. I usually have a laptop with me that I use matlab on. Though I wouldn't use a graphing calculator now, it was a good middle point in building up to using matlab when I was in school.
Perhaps rather than make powerful calculators, TI and HP should make powerful apps for tablets. Much more useful for buyers, and cheaper to make for TI and HP. It should make everyone happy.
which has exceeded 3 trillion dollars. I'd gladly trade the money spent on war for a stable power grid that doesn't go down at the drop of a leaf
... and you'd have a lot more bombs going off at home, which would probably exceed the cost of fighting it. When someone is shooting at you, sitting and taking it isn't an option. You may not like the war on terror, but ignoring it isn't an option. There isn't a single politician who claims that ignoring it is a good idea.
As far as energy goes, the cost of defending myself from getting blown up by someone that hates me isn't comparable to energy costs.
Research data should be made available to the public for the sake of peer review. Emails and other communication should not be because that would that create a biased opinion for those that read the emails, and emails need freedom to make conjecture without being held to those conjectures for final theories.
There's always someone on Slashdot that wants to ignore the facts... perhaps we should stop immunizations because "We were made this way for very good reasons"
Even more common than fact checking on web is "incorrectly" fact checking. I don't know how many times I've read one fact on an article just to read another article that claims the opposite is true. Think about reading forums on Slashdot, how many times is a statement corrected, to then be corrected by someone else, to then be corrected, and so on... which one is true?? Most of the time there's no citations! If there were citations, who actually checks them? From time to time I check citations only to find that the truth is being stretched, or downright reversed from the citation! It's hard to know where truth is, what's being exaggerated, what's only partially true, or more importantly, what's being left out. Everyone has a bias, and everyone manipulates data to prove that bias valid. The only way to get an unbiased opinion is to look at raw data, and very few people have time and ability for that.
Let companies serve who they want to serve. Those who cater to everyone will probably do better. It's the basis of freedom and market competition.
There are endless numbers of companies who can process credit cards, and many of them will pay Wikileaks. Use the companies you like and don't use the companies you don't like. It's much more effective then taking them to court to force them to take your money.
Bill Gates main focus has been philanthropy and education for a long time. That includes research on how to best improve education. You may not like it, but his opinion is informed and should be taken into account when buying educational technology.
They see everything, they're aware of our position, our relationship to other human beings and other robots, they mediate an information stream about us, which allows other people to predict and know our conduct and intentions and capabilities better than we can predict them ourselves.
The author makes a distinct error, that these devices are aware. They have information about us, they can process information based on specific instructions, and they can send information to transducers, such as a display or network interface. We can't give a computer the instruction "do not harm humans" without specific instructions on identifying a human and what harm entails. There's an enormous amount on interpretation the Asimov ignores because he assumes robots are aware of their environment and can reason. Our smart devices can do neither. No one has yet made electronics that can be outside their initial environment and learn to function in a reasonable way. Awareness and reasoning are required for Asimov's Laws.
My point is best with an example. Let's say that I have a cell phone that follows Asimov's three laws because the OS has somehow identified what is reasonable to do on cell phones based on current apps. Now a terrorist makes a bomb controlled from that cell phone. As far as the phone can see, it's just a new app that doesn't send personally identifiable information, so it must be ok. Unless the OS knows to specifically look for bomb programs, just as we would by reasoning, then it won't stop it. There's just too many possibilities for harm to avoid without a reasoning entity. Reasoning is essential for Asimov's Laws. Our smart phones do not have the capability of reasoning, therefore they cannot implement the laws as Asimov intended.
We saw the comet Shoemaker-Levy-9 hit Jupiter in 1994. Being such a gravity giant, it's likely to have been hit by many comets. Since comets are full of water, there's no question about water present on Jupiter. The problem is the large size, gravitational pull, pressure, extreme weather, regular asteroid impacts, and, I can't stress this enough, it's a big ball of gas. I'm as interested in Jupiter as any nerd, but it's not as likely a source of life as other places in the solar system.
I lived in Russia for years, got asked for my papers all the time. It didn't bother me. Just about any other country requires foreigners to carry their papers 100% of the time, regardless of color. If I became a citizen of Russia, I'd still be asked for papers just because I look and sound American. There's no way to get around that and still allow Russia to have orderly immigration.
I don't think skin color is a strong motivator for the Arizona law. I think if everyone in Mexico were white, the same laws would be passed. Similar things happened in the 19th century when Europeans immigrated to the US for jobs. Foreigners took jobs and make citizens mad. Hence there was a hatred of white immigrants from Ireland or Scotland. If Canadians started crossing the border in the millions, you'd see Montana getting scared and passing immigration laws. Now there's a flood of immigrants from Mexico, who also happen to have different skin color, taking jobs and possibly increasing crime. It's historically repeated reaction to resist mass immigration. There's always some racism, but race in this reguard is almost irrelevant.
Can someone please remind me why people should be unable to examine the software in their medical devices, software that their lives may depend on? Why these programs are not open to public review?
That's a good idea! We really need people changing the code on their medical devices, that will fix all the problems...
No matter how much you love your mother, money is still required. Before I get my mother a hearing aid, I will make sure my family eats, has a home, has utilities, and all other needs are met. If there's money left over, then buying mother a hearing aid is possible. Loving your mother is great, but it doesn't pay for goods and services.
I work in the drone industry and I'm involved in the communication systems they use. Hence, I know that the government has standards for interoperability of drones. Not only that, but NATO has standards for drones (e.g. STANAG 4586). There are companies that make ground stations for use with all military drones (DreamHammer is one of many), only possible because of the standards. The standards keep chaos at bay when dealing with the large numbers of drones. Contrary to popular belief on Slashdot, the military does a good job with standards across contractors.
The law states that you have to be wearing a mask AND rioting. Sitting on the grass and singing "Kumbaya My Lord" isn't enough. Hence, the problem with the law is just unwarranted arrests and harsh sentences as the article states, not convictions from wearing masks sending innocent people to jail for 10 years. The only thing bad cops can do to good people from this law is detain people unnecessarily.
It's always been to up cops to determine the borderline between rioting and protesting. And it should be. If a riot occurs, I sure as hell don't want to wait for a judge to reply to an arrest request before they do something. And we can't put everything to a mass vote before action occurs. Most cops have good intentions, and it's the best system so far. We have to deal with it's shortfalls.
Slashdot Mirror
Reporter: Why did you drive on the airport runway?
Driver: My iPhone said it was the fastest path to the airport
Reporter: If your phone said to drive off a cliff, would you?
Driver: Well duh, it's the fastest way to the bottom of the cliff
If you're a citizen, you can have access to it.
Export control information usually involves technology that can be used to create missiles or others armaments. NASA works with rockets, so some of that material may have information involving missiles. It's a good idea to have some control over where that information goes so it doesn't help a hostile entity and come back to us.
Here I am working, when I could be playing. Thanks Slashdot, now I'm going to have to kill my productivity and go home and kill some zerg!
In addition, she published a review a few years earlier claiming that the flame retardant should be banned. She had a strong opinion before being appointed to the committee, thus she was biased, and so should have never been appointed. In this case the industry was right. She didn't have an open mind coming in.
There's always malware on any operating system, including IOS. While Apple does a good job at preventing it, they can't prevent it 100% of the time. Here are a few articles talking about malware on iOS for those who think it doesn't exist.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adriankingsleyhughes/2012/07/06/first-ios-malware-hits-app-store/
http://thenextweb.com/mobile/2012/08/29/finfisher-malware-goes-mobile-infects-android-iphone-blackberry/
http://www.redmondpie.com/another-malware-app-sneaks-into-ios-app-store/
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/238101/scitech/hacker-reveals-ios-malware-vulnerability-gets-punished
http://www.techpluto.com/ios-malware/
Inviting lots of opinions to a complicated issues is an excellent idea and creates additional insight into the implementation and practical problems that may occur with the laws. There's no reason to ignore an opinion just because it's an opposing opinion. Rather, opposing opinions can bring the most insight information from people that think differently. Europe doesn't have to agree with the US, but the opinions and insight of the US can be very useful.
Just cut his internet connection ... a perfect incentive for the internet gaming addict to move out and find a job
As an engineer, I use math for field work all the time. I usually have a laptop with me that I use matlab on. Though I wouldn't use a graphing calculator now, it was a good middle point in building up to using matlab when I was in school.
Perhaps rather than make powerful calculators, TI and HP should make powerful apps for tablets. Much more useful for buyers, and cheaper to make for TI and HP. It should make everyone happy.
which has exceeded 3 trillion dollars. I'd gladly trade the money spent on war for a stable power grid that doesn't go down at the drop of a leaf
... and you'd have a lot more bombs going off at home, which would probably exceed the cost of fighting it. When someone is shooting at you, sitting and taking it isn't an option. You may not like the war on terror, but ignoring it isn't an option. There isn't a single politician who claims that ignoring it is a good idea.
As far as energy goes, the cost of defending myself from getting blown up by someone that hates me isn't comparable to energy costs.
Research data should be made available to the public for the sake of peer review. Emails and other communication should not be because that would that create a biased opinion for those that read the emails, and emails need freedom to make conjecture without being held to those conjectures for final theories.
There's always someone on Slashdot that wants to ignore the facts ... perhaps we should stop immunizations because "We were made this way for very good reasons"
It is completely inappropriate to WANT a hurricane to devastate a state just to delay a few people you don't like. Grow up.
Even more common than fact checking on web is "incorrectly" fact checking. I don't know how many times I've read one fact on an article just to read another article that claims the opposite is true. Think about reading forums on Slashdot, how many times is a statement corrected, to then be corrected by someone else, to then be corrected, and so on ... which one is true?? Most of the time there's no citations! If there were citations, who actually checks them? From time to time I check citations only to find that the truth is being stretched, or downright reversed from the citation! It's hard to know where truth is, what's being exaggerated, what's only partially true, or more importantly, what's being left out. Everyone has a bias, and everyone manipulates data to prove that bias valid. The only way to get an unbiased opinion is to look at raw data, and very few people have time and ability for that.
Capitalism does not preclude altruism. Charity work has always flourished in capitalistic societies.
Let companies serve who they want to serve. Those who cater to everyone will probably do better. It's the basis of freedom and market competition.
There are endless numbers of companies who can process credit cards, and many of them will pay Wikileaks. Use the companies you like and don't use the companies you don't like. It's much more effective then taking them to court to force them to take your money.
Bill Gates main focus has been philanthropy and education for a long time. That includes research on how to best improve education. You may not like it, but his opinion is informed and should be taken into account when buying educational technology.
They see everything, they're aware of our position, our relationship to other human beings and other robots, they mediate an information stream about us, which allows other people to predict and know our conduct and intentions and capabilities better than we can predict them ourselves.
The author makes a distinct error, that these devices are aware. They have information about us, they can process information based on specific instructions, and they can send information to transducers, such as a display or network interface. We can't give a computer the instruction "do not harm humans" without specific instructions on identifying a human and what harm entails. There's an enormous amount on interpretation the Asimov ignores because he assumes robots are aware of their environment and can reason. Our smart devices can do neither. No one has yet made electronics that can be outside their initial environment and learn to function in a reasonable way. Awareness and reasoning are required for Asimov's Laws.
My point is best with an example. Let's say that I have a cell phone that follows Asimov's three laws because the OS has somehow identified what is reasonable to do on cell phones based on current apps. Now a terrorist makes a bomb controlled from that cell phone. As far as the phone can see, it's just a new app that doesn't send personally identifiable information, so it must be ok. Unless the OS knows to specifically look for bomb programs, just as we would by reasoning, then it won't stop it. There's just too many possibilities for harm to avoid without a reasoning entity. Reasoning is essential for Asimov's Laws. Our smart phones do not have the capability of reasoning, therefore they cannot implement the laws as Asimov intended.
We saw the comet Shoemaker-Levy-9 hit Jupiter in 1994. Being such a gravity giant, it's likely to have been hit by many comets. Since comets are full of water, there's no question about water present on Jupiter. The problem is the large size, gravitational pull, pressure, extreme weather, regular asteroid impacts, and, I can't stress this enough, it's a big ball of gas. I'm as interested in Jupiter as any nerd, but it's not as likely a source of life as other places in the solar system.
I lived in Russia for years, got asked for my papers all the time. It didn't bother me. Just about any other country requires foreigners to carry their papers 100% of the time, regardless of color. If I became a citizen of Russia, I'd still be asked for papers just because I look and sound American. There's no way to get around that and still allow Russia to have orderly immigration.
I don't think skin color is a strong motivator for the Arizona law. I think if everyone in Mexico were white, the same laws would be passed. Similar things happened in the 19th century when Europeans immigrated to the US for jobs. Foreigners took jobs and make citizens mad. Hence there was a hatred of white immigrants from Ireland or Scotland. If Canadians started crossing the border in the millions, you'd see Montana getting scared and passing immigration laws. Now there's a flood of immigrants from Mexico, who also happen to have different skin color, taking jobs and possibly increasing crime. It's historically repeated reaction to resist mass immigration. There's always some racism, but race in this reguard is almost irrelevant.
Can someone please remind me why people should be unable to examine the software in their medical devices, software that their lives may depend on? Why these programs are not open to public review?
That's a good idea! We really need people changing the code on their medical devices, that will fix all the problems ...
No matter how much you love your mother, money is still required. Before I get my mother a hearing aid, I will make sure my family eats, has a home, has utilities, and all other needs are met. If there's money left over, then buying mother a hearing aid is possible. Loving your mother is great, but it doesn't pay for goods and services.
I work in the drone industry and I'm involved in the communication systems they use. Hence, I know that the government has standards for interoperability of drones. Not only that, but NATO has standards for drones (e.g. STANAG 4586). There are companies that make ground stations for use with all military drones (DreamHammer is one of many), only possible because of the standards. The standards keep chaos at bay when dealing with the large numbers of drones. Contrary to popular belief on Slashdot, the military does a good job with standards across contractors.
This is a problem with asking people to find a purpose for a pile of money rather than having a purpose and asking for funds.
The law states that you have to be wearing a mask AND rioting. Sitting on the grass and singing "Kumbaya My Lord" isn't enough. Hence, the problem with the law is just unwarranted arrests and harsh sentences as the article states, not convictions from wearing masks sending innocent people to jail for 10 years. The only thing bad cops can do to good people from this law is detain people unnecessarily.
It's always been to up cops to determine the borderline between rioting and protesting. And it should be. If a riot occurs, I sure as hell don't want to wait for a judge to reply to an arrest request before they do something. And we can't put everything to a mass vote before action occurs. Most cops have good intentions, and it's the best system so far. We have to deal with it's shortfalls.