So, you don't consider cancer or diabetes to be diseases? Non-communicable diseases cause far more deaths worldwide than communicable ones.
First of all I NEVER said any of that. Second, a phone is not a biological entity. It can't get a disease. It suffers from a defect.
Oh, please. Use of the word "disease" in describing a fairly widespread issue with a non-biological entity is an example of a class of very commonly used metaphorical devices; see, for example, the term "bit rot" for a situation in which ones and zeros clearly do not suffer biological decomposition, and "virus" for a hunk of software that "infects" a computer. Get it?
What you said was, "Seriously why call it a disease? That implies that an iPhone could get it from another iPhone, you not washing your hands, etc." That pretty clearly says "A disease is something communicated from an outside source."
Apple is not responsible for damage caused by individuals that bent their phone. This isn't a flaw in engineering, it is user caused damage.
From TFA: “It’s absolutely a problem in the design. End users are not doing anything to cause this besides using the phone normally,” Mark Shaffer of independent repair company iPad Rehab told me.
Somebody makes a phone with an 8" screen? Can you cite the make/model? According to this, the largest smartphone on the planet has a 7" screen, but then the list is over a year old.
There also are places where smartphones are prohibited for security reasons or where they might prove socially problematic but where smartwatches would be acceptable.
Any place a smartphone is a security issue, a smartwatch is probably a security issue as well, unless you're referring to a generic non-DoD "no cameras allowed" policy and the watch doesn't have a camera. It's the ability to communicate wirelessly that's the problem, not just the camera. The DoD made my company remove a clock from one of our SCIFs because it used WiFi to get time sync.
*However*, have you noticed that only mid range and low end Android tablets are getting updates? The latest to get an update is the Galaxy Tab A 10 inch. It's not just Android Wear that's struggling, Android is too.
My 3 year old 8.4" Tab S surprised me a couple of days ago with an update to Marshmallow. I really didn't think that was ever going to happen.
I thought that self-driving cars still had to have a "driver" in them, ready to take control in the event of of an incident. Are these Uber cars going to come with an Uber "driver", or is the passenger expected to take over when* that incident happens?
What if that passenger does not hold a licence, or is not fit to drive through intoxication? Does the passenger get some sort of discount because they might be expected to step in and do a bit of driving?
* note 'when', not 'if'
RTFA. The passenger will never be expected to take control.
The cars have two Uber engineers in the front seat. The one in the driver's seat has his hands and feet hovering above the steering wheel and pedals, ready to take control as quickly as humanly possible. "Whenever a stopped vehicle blocked an entire lane, he toggled back into manual mode to switch lanes and drive around — an action Uber’s self driving cars will not yet take." The article didn't elaborate, so I'll have to guess that under autonomous control the response to a stopped vehicle blocking an entire lane will be to stop and wait for the stopped vehicle to move on, rather than attempting to change lanes and pass.
Also, from TFA: "You don’t notice how many unexpected incidents occur during a routine drive until you ask a robot to take the wheel." Really? I don't know about you, but I notice a lot of unexpected incidents pretty much every time I get behind the wheel.
It would appear so, unless by a slim-to-none the editors of the submission stuffed up and it should be 1.1 million as given in the summary itself. </sarcasm> My kingdom for a good Slashdot editor.
I thought so as well, until I looked at TFA. Its title is identical to the summary's, and the 1.14 million figure appears there in the same context (actually, TFS is a direct quote from TFA). Anyway, whether they're on track for a billion or they've already got a billion, they've barely made a start (the Milky Way is estimated to include roughly 100 billion stars).
There should be the "internet" and then there should be private networks on the side for prioritization. They should physically be different networks. Implemented kind of like how local and long distance were 10 years ago.
You mean, implemented like AOL, Prodigy, and CompUServe networks. There are reasons why those aren't around anymore.
Google Play Services claims to provide the location API for all apps, so of course if you turn off location permissions for Play you're going to turn it off for all apps. And if Maps is constantly reporting my position to Mother Google, why is it always pestering me to turn on location tracking?
Personally, I have never been prompted by my phone to download an app just because of my location. Maybe that's because I don't leave Play (or Maps either) running in the background.
I followed the instructions to turn off google play's permission to use my location, but this was already turned off. Am I missing something? The article only says the "latest Android build".
Are you positive that "Location" wasn't already turned off in Settings when you went to look at Google Play Services permissions? On my phone (6.0.1), if Location is turned on and I try to set Google Play Services location permission to "off", I get a popup informing me that Google Play Services is the source of location services for all other applications, and that if I want to deny location privileges to Google Play, I have to turn off Location (in Settings). If Location is turned off, the location permission is off in Google Play Services.
Please don't lump us 1-5% people with those 1%ers. I know it's convenient when talking about fair taxation.
So, most of the top 5% is made up of "little people" now? That's the only way the comment about paying taxes being only for the little people makes sense.
Didn't you get the memo? Only little people pay taxes.
I think a lot of people didn't get the memo. From 1980 to 2013, the share of total income tax revenue paid by the top 5% of earners increased from 37% to 59%, while the share paid by the bottom 50% decreased from 7% to under 3%. More details here.
The ATSB also found that the aircraft was not fitted with an upgraded flight management system that would have prevented the data entry error via either automated initialisation or automatic correction of manual errors.
Yeah, I saw that. "Not fitted with an upgraded flight management system..." is a rather understated description, as every INS and FMS designed in the last 20 years features automated initialization. I wonder if they were having GPS issues.
Navigation grade inertial nav systems need to know their initial position in order to perform accurately. According to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau report, an erroneous longitude value was entered prior to takeoff. This is very curious, as initial position is supplied automatically from GPS, unless (1) GPS is not available; or (2) the system is very old and doesn't have that feature. If the latitude is correct but the longitude is wrong, the INS will probably align properly, but it really won't know where the heck it is.
Haven't you heard? FBI and APPS are for cows. FBI, say the cows. APPS, say the cows. FBI! APPS! You're all a bunch of FBI APPing cows. Or something like that, anyway.
Windows 10 Home - no (easy) options to suppress automatic updates.
I haven't seen an update since I disabled the "Windows Update" service and set its "Action on failure" property to "No action". (note: not sure of the exact wording regarding action on failure, but you'll see it if you go to Computer Management, select Services, scroll down to Windows Update, right-click and select Properties; I believe it's in the right-most tab.)
Okay, head out of the sand time for you buddy. You're just flaunting your ignorance in public here. They already exist. They've logged thousands of hours on the road without drivers. They're coming whether you believe in them or not.
I'd like to see a citation for that claim. As far as I can tell, the Google fleet still operates with human drivers along for the ride.
Then there's this, from the Wikipedia article on the Google self-driving car: "As of August 28, 2014* the latest prototype has not been tested in heavy rain or snow due to safety concerns. Because the cars rely primarily on pre-programmed route data, they do not obey temporary traffic lights and, in some situations, revert to a slower "extra cautious" mode in complex unmapped intersections. The vehicle has difficulty identifying when objects, such as trash and light debris, are harmless, causing the vehicle to veer unnecessarily. Additionally, the lidar technology cannot spot some potholes or discern when humans, such as a police officer, are signaling the car to stop. Google projects having these issues fixed by 2020."
And that lidar technology that can't spot some potholes or tell when a human is signalling for the car to stop? From the same Wikipedia article: "Google's robotic cars have about $150,000 in equipment including a $70,000 LIDAR system". So, very expensive and severely limited in real-world situations.
* The article has been updated on a fairly continuous basis since that time; I would guess that if any substantial improvement had been made, it would be included in the write-up.
Yes, especially if they manage to trigger some cascade effect in the van-hallen belts.
I really hope that's a typo. Anyway, "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea", called; they want their plot device back. Or "Voyage to See What's On The Bottom", if you prefer the Mad Magazine version.
White, Western European Christians crushed those who said things they found unpleasant and many cultures have standards of free speech from the longhouse to the forum.
He was talking about where the concept of free speech originated (Athens, ca. 5th century BC). He didn't say it was a concept exclusive to white western Europe,
Slashdot Mirror
So, you don't consider cancer or diabetes to be diseases? Non-communicable diseases cause far more deaths worldwide than communicable ones.
First of all I NEVER said any of that. Second, a phone is not a biological entity. It can't get a disease. It suffers from a defect.
Oh, please. Use of the word "disease" in describing a fairly widespread issue with a non-biological entity is an example of a class of very commonly used metaphorical devices; see, for example, the term "bit rot" for a situation in which ones and zeros clearly do not suffer biological decomposition, and "virus" for a hunk of software that "infects" a computer. Get it?
What you said was, "Seriously why call it a disease? That implies that an iPhone could get it from another iPhone, you not washing your hands, etc." That pretty clearly says "A disease is something communicated from an outside source."
Apple is not responsible for damage caused by individuals that bent their phone. This isn't a flaw in engineering, it is user caused damage.
From TFA: “It’s absolutely a problem in the design. End users are not doing anything to cause this besides using the phone normally,” Mark Shaffer of independent repair company iPad Rehab told me.
Seriously why call it a disease? That implies that an iPhone could get it from another iPhone, you not washing your hands, etc.
So, you don't consider cancer or diabetes to be diseases? Non-communicable diseases cause far more deaths worldwide than communicable ones.
wah wah I must have my 8" screen!
Somebody makes a phone with an 8" screen? Can you cite the make/model? According to this, the largest smartphone on the planet has a 7" screen, but then the list is over a year old.
There also are places where smartphones are prohibited for security reasons or where they might prove socially problematic but where smartwatches would be acceptable.
Any place a smartphone is a security issue, a smartwatch is probably a security issue as well, unless you're referring to a generic non-DoD "no cameras allowed" policy and the watch doesn't have a camera. It's the ability to communicate wirelessly that's the problem, not just the camera. The DoD made my company remove a clock from one of our SCIFs because it used WiFi to get time sync.
*However*, have you noticed that only mid range and low end Android tablets are getting updates? The latest to get an update is the Galaxy Tab A 10 inch. It's not just Android Wear that's struggling, Android is too.
My 3 year old 8.4" Tab S surprised me a couple of days ago with an update to Marshmallow. I really didn't think that was ever going to happen.
I thought that self-driving cars still had to have a "driver" in them, ready to take control in the event of of an incident. Are these Uber cars going to come with an Uber "driver", or is the passenger expected to take over when* that incident happens?
What if that passenger does not hold a licence, or is not fit to drive through intoxication? Does the passenger get some sort of discount because they might be expected to step in and do a bit of driving?
* note 'when', not 'if'
RTFA. The passenger will never be expected to take control.
The cars have two Uber engineers in the front seat. The one in the driver's seat has his hands and feet hovering above the steering wheel and pedals, ready to take control as quickly as humanly possible. "Whenever a stopped vehicle blocked an entire lane, he toggled back into manual mode to switch lanes and drive around — an action Uber’s self driving cars will not yet take." The article didn't elaborate, so I'll have to guess that under autonomous control the response to a stopped vehicle blocking an entire lane will be to stop and wait for the stopped vehicle to move on, rather than attempting to change lanes and pass.
Also, from TFA: "You don’t notice how many unexpected incidents occur during a routine drive until you ask a robot to take the wheel." Really? I don't know about you, but I notice a lot of unexpected incidents pretty much every time I get behind the wheel.
It would appear so, unless by a slim-to-none the editors of the submission stuffed up and it should be 1.1 million as given in the summary itself. </sarcasm> My kingdom for a good Slashdot editor.
I thought so as well, until I looked at TFA. Its title is identical to the summary's, and the 1.14 million figure appears there in the same context (actually, TFS is a direct quote from TFA). Anyway, whether they're on track for a billion or they've already got a billion, they've barely made a start (the Milky Way is estimated to include roughly 100 billion stars).
There should be the "internet" and then there should be private networks on the side for prioritization. They should physically be different networks. Implemented kind of like how local and long distance were 10 years ago.
You mean, implemented like AOL, Prodigy, and CompUServe networks. There are reasons why those aren't around anymore.
Google Play Services claims to provide the location API for all apps, so of course if you turn off location permissions for Play you're going to turn it off for all apps. And if Maps is constantly reporting my position to Mother Google, why is it always pestering me to turn on location tracking?
Personally, I have never been prompted by my phone to download an app just because of my location. Maybe that's because I don't leave Play (or Maps either) running in the background.
I followed the instructions to turn off google play's permission to use my location, but this was already turned off. Am I missing something? The article only says the "latest Android build".
Are you positive that "Location" wasn't already turned off in Settings when you went to look at Google Play Services permissions? On my phone (6.0.1), if Location is turned on and I try to set Google Play Services location permission to "off", I get a popup informing me that Google Play Services is the source of location services for all other applications, and that if I want to deny location privileges to Google Play, I have to turn off Location (in Settings). If Location is turned off, the location permission is off in Google Play Services.
I hear they're planning on supplying a home button adapter with the phone.
Please don't lump us 1-5% people with those 1%ers. I know it's convenient when talking about fair taxation.
So, most of the top 5% is made up of "little people" now? That's the only way the comment about paying taxes being only for the little people makes sense.
Didn't you get the memo? Only little people pay taxes.
I think a lot of people didn't get the memo. From 1980 to 2013, the share of total income tax revenue paid by the top 5% of earners increased from 37% to 59%, while the share paid by the bottom 50% decreased from 7% to under 3%. More details here.
Sounds reasonable.
Care to try for why it can't fly on instruments?
Sure, I'll give that a try. How about: you can't fly on instruments if your instruments don't know where the airplane is.
From the investigation report :
The ATSB also found that the aircraft was not fitted with an upgraded flight management system that would have prevented the data entry error via either automated initialisation or automatic correction of manual errors.
Yeah, I saw that. "Not fitted with an upgraded flight management system..." is a rather understated description, as every INS and FMS designed in the last 20 years features automated initialization. I wonder if they were having GPS issues.
And ffs if they could fly the stick why didn't they just fly the stick to Malaysia?
Right. They should have just followed the railroad tracks.
Sydney to Kuala Lumpur is over 6600 km, lots of it over water. Sydney to Melbourne is about 700 km, all over land.
Navigation grade inertial nav systems need to know their initial position in order to perform accurately. According to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau report, an erroneous longitude value was entered prior to takeoff. This is very curious, as initial position is supplied automatically from GPS, unless (1) GPS is not available; or (2) the system is very old and doesn't have that feature. If the latitude is correct but the longitude is wrong, the INS will probably align properly, but it really won't know where the heck it is.
That was two years ago. Where do you think we'll be five years from now?
My reply was to the person who said, "They've logged thousands of hours on the road without drivers." No one knows where we'll be five years from now.
is this FBI stuff the new Moo, or apps?
Haven't you heard? FBI and APPS are for cows. FBI, say the cows. APPS, say the cows. FBI! APPS! You're all a bunch of FBI APPing cows. Or something like that, anyway.
Windows 10 Home - no (easy) options to suppress automatic updates.
I haven't seen an update since I disabled the "Windows Update" service and set its "Action on failure" property to "No action". (note: not sure of the exact wording regarding action on failure, but you'll see it if you go to Computer Management, select Services, scroll down to Windows Update, right-click and select Properties; I believe it's in the right-most tab.)
Okay, head out of the sand time for you buddy. You're just flaunting your ignorance in public here. They already exist. They've logged thousands of hours on the road without drivers. They're coming whether you believe in them or not.
I'd like to see a citation for that claim. As far as I can tell, the Google fleet still operates with human drivers along for the ride.
Then there's this, from the Wikipedia article on the Google self-driving car: "As of August 28, 2014* the latest prototype has not been tested in heavy rain or snow due to safety concerns. Because the cars rely primarily on pre-programmed route data, they do not obey temporary traffic lights and, in some situations, revert to a slower "extra cautious" mode in complex unmapped intersections. The vehicle has difficulty identifying when objects, such as trash and light debris, are harmless, causing the vehicle to veer unnecessarily. Additionally, the lidar technology cannot spot some potholes or discern when humans, such as a police officer, are signaling the car to stop. Google projects having these issues fixed by 2020."
And that lidar technology that can't spot some potholes or tell when a human is signalling for the car to stop? From the same Wikipedia article: "Google's robotic cars have about $150,000 in equipment including a $70,000 LIDAR system". So, very expensive and severely limited in real-world situations.
* The article has been updated on a fairly continuous basis since that time; I would guess that if any substantial improvement had been made, it would be included in the write-up.
>Hurry up and die.
Humans still have value. Hasn't anyone ever told you that you could have a bright future in biofuel?
Hey, a bunch of former buggy whip makers called; they'd like you to send your waaaambulance around to pick them up.
Yes, especially if they manage to trigger some cascade effect in the van-hallen belts.
I really hope that's a typo. Anyway, "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea", called; they want their plot device back. Or "Voyage to See What's On The Bottom", if you prefer the Mad Magazine version.
White, Western European Christians crushed those who said things they found unpleasant and many cultures have standards of free speech from the longhouse to the forum.
He was talking about where the concept of free speech originated (Athens, ca. 5th century BC). He didn't say it was a concept exclusive to white western Europe,