Strange â" though low in comparison with a gasoline- or (especially) diesel-powered car, the distance seems quite sufficient for a city's police car. Do they really ever need to exceed 50 miles in a day?
While I am not a police officer, I have performed similar duties in city a bit smaller than Los Angeles. I racked up about 280 miles a day.
... and he flat out lied about closing the torture camp in Cuba.
Look, I did NOT like Obama and have no wish to give ANY endorsement of the Nobel Peace Prize (although I thought it was more of an insult to Bush than praise of Obama)... but, Obama did NOT lie about closing the torture camp in Cuba (no air quotes because it really is a torture camp).
Congress prevented him from closing it. Unless you want your "administration" to ignore the lawmakers, you will have to accept that Obama simply did not have the authority to close it.
I suppose you could whine about him making a promise he could not keep, but even then, it did appear that he actually put effort into closing it.
Be fair. Always. Do not be a Trump (Obama) supporter or hater. Evaluate the facts yourself and build a more coherent reality.
If one twin stayed in the same state of motion the whole time, while the other got sped away, turned around, and then stopped when he got back, then the one who stayed behind is older, and everybody agrees.
So... erm, uh... why does everyone seem to think that the Universe is 13.75 billion years old when various parts of it have been moving at various speeds for various amounts of time. Shouldn't some things be 13.75 TRILLION years old and shouldn't some things be 13.75 seconds old?
Depending on their "velocity" in various frames of reference. Of course.
Gravity is easy to explain. It is just time differentials causing the acceleration. The further you move away from a mass, the faster time flows in relation to something nearer to the mass.
Wow, your comment was pretty deep. I would mod it up, but I thought of this instead (and it is modded up already):
Yes, people should have to deal with their choices, but they should also use their God-given brains and technology to do just that - deal with their choices in the best way for them.
I feel the need to modify a standard quote:
If god had meant us to fly, he would have given us wings... or enough intelligence to build a machine that can fly.
I more or less agree with your stance; however, this caught my eye:
The only way you can logically deviate from this argument, is if you somehow assign 'specialness' to a human fetus.
Well, a human fetus *IS* special in that we are humans; therefore, a human fetus(why does Firefox tell me fetus is not a word? Ah, it wants the English spelling of 'foetus'.) is the same species we are. In "modern" society, we are trained not to kill our own.
I think we need to get over that 'specialness'. An unwanted baby will likely experience abuse. Physical abuse is very likely but emotional abuse is guaranteed. I would rather not be born into a world like that. Life is brutal enough as it is when you are loved and well-adjusted.
He was clearly asked to write it by people within Google. You are quibbling over whether management had asked him to write it.
Are you saying that as long as corporate policy favours women that everyone should just shut up or should everyone be encouraged to speak out only when corporate policy favours men?
I would go so far as to say that Google's current policies are less than ideal for all genders. This opinion is based on the contents of James Damore's missive.
Honestly, there should just be policies prohibiting discrimination based on gender and drop the rest of the policies relating to gender. There is nothing that can be fair, in relation to gender, otherwise.
This being slashdot, there are plenty of commentators trying to make killing Net Neutrality the fault of both parties. But the evidence shows clearly that Republicans are overwhelmingly in favor of gutting it, and the Democrats are overwhelmingly in favor of preserving it.
Is this supposed to be an argument FOR partisan voting? If so, shall I start listing all of the nasty things the Democrats (DMCA, Copyright Extension, etc) have done and are planning to do?
Partisan voting is how we got here. It is worse than useless, even counterproductive, to point out party lines. Both parties are utterly suborned. The part of the historical cycle where heads get chopped off is arriving, and I think it will be particularly ugly this time around.
That Another is Congress. You know, the guys who are supposed to make laws?
You are correct, but there is absolutely no faith by anyone that Congress will do anything. They are quite happy to sit on their hands while receiving money from the monopoly ISPs.
It is a perfect storm, all bought and paid for. The municipalities have granted monopoly status locally, Ajit Pai rolled back consumer protections, and Congress just has to do nothing and access to the Internet becomes the golden goose that keeps on giving... to a select few.
I am thoroughly amused at the juxtaposition of your positive outlook on self driving cars and your negative outlook on software as mentioned in your.sig.:)
Compare and contrast:
The real game changer here is convenient car rentals. As in: book a car when you need it, have it pull up by itself 30 minutes later, use it, and send it on its way when you are done with it...
with
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
I wonder how long it will be until Cisco caves to NSA pressure
I assume you are young. The NSA already examines all traffic. This "offering" from Cisco has no potential to be of use to the NSA.
It will also not be of interest to Russia, China, or any other state actor.
At best, this might of interest to medium sized or smaller businesses looking to "spy" on their competition. Any major corporation has better methods for spying available than revealing their intentions to Cisco. Medium sized businesses can not bully Cisco into doing something unethical and illegal.
That is a great story. I can see why you are convinced that driverless cars should happen sooner than later. When everything works, they are awesome.
I am convinced that driverless cars should happen later rather than sooner. Driverless cars are a bit like nuclear power in that both are potentially awesome but both have a high potential for large scale catastrophe if something goes wrong.
My concerns lie with the software and hardware providers.
Remember the capacitor situation over a decade ago where some company filled the market with "bad" capacitors that would regularly fail? What would happen if those capacitors had made it into the logic boards of hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of, driverless cars? Would the system be "smart" enough to recognize that its logic circuits may not be behaving within spec?
Humans generally know when they are impaired and generally have a survival instinct. Even when impaired (drunk) driving was at its worst, it did not affect large classes of people. In fact, impaired driving does not care about any classes whatsoever. We just can not know who will drive impaired before they do it. Even still, considering how large the downsides are (death!), it is relatively rare. Many highways/sections have millions of cars going through them every day... and how many people die each day?
The software scares the hell out of me. The software providers will insist on immunity from liability and then hire H1bs at low cost without anyone performing any actual design or oversight of that design. It will be agile, so they will write a function to increase fuel flow, apply brakes, etc. and then someone will be tasked with tying all of those functions together. If this sounds like an actual design process to you, then you would be wrong. You can not retrofit design philosophy afterwards any more than you can retrofit security afterwards. I would go so far as to claim that security is full subset of design philosophy.
Anyways, why I am "afraid" of autonomous vehicles is because the system as a whole will be something that nobody planned for and nobody will take responsibility for. And I (you) will be left suffering in a worse state than we are in now.
White people have enslaved other races for centuries and enjoyed the benefits of doing so. Simply removing slavery doesn't magically undo the centuries of subjugation and abuse, white people today are still benefiting from past slavery and there is also the important issue of justice: white people never truly paid for what they did
Assigning collective guilt is one of those bulletproof ways of showing what an asshole you are.
What is even more hilarious about Anonymous Coward's position is that it takes no account of history overall. Africans were some of the original slave "owners". White people being held in slavery has been a thing for most of, including recent, history; especially in the middle east where white women were in great demand as concubines (still are but the market is not public anymore)... but let's forget about all that and insist that white men must submit to slavery again to "pay" for "their" recent sins... Even though no white man that is alive today had any part of what previous generations have done.
Tech Businesses are concerned that women and minorities don't enter tech because of a hostile work environment. Having worked in lots of all male tech shops yeah, they're right. There's a lot of casual sexual harassment that turns women off. What we men call 'locker room talk'.
Don't worry, it is all balanced out. Have you ever had a chance to hear the chat in a mostly-female office? Yeah, many males would feel offended in that environment just as much as women would feel offended listening to the "locker room" talk many males engage in.
You have brains. I have seen you here for a very long time. I just can not quite figure out why you refuse to use those brains when it comes to women/gender issues.
You know very well that he was asked to write that "controversial" paper in response to some training he participated in. You know very well that someone leaked it outside of its intended audience.
And yet you mischaracterize it as an unsolicited paper he insisted everyone read. WTF dude? How do you selectively shut your brain down like that?
I do not think I have ever responded to any of your crap before but for some reason, today, I feel compelled. It is so weird, you seem so intelligent and rational in all other areas... except when it comes to gender issues.
This whole thing confuses me though. Any rational person can see what Damore was talking about and understand it. Even if they disagree with his conclusions, there are no indications that the paper is misogynistic or even insulting to anyone of either gender.
So how is this "paper" a huge firestorm? Anyone can read it. It says what is says. It does not say what some people think it says.
I suspect there is some sort of mental illness going on here and I can not quite identify it. Some sort of "mob mentality" thing? Bad programming? I do not know. The ultimate solution is to relax, read it, watch it trigger any biases inside of yourself, address those biases, and read it again.
This is all just so weird to me. Kind of like presidential elections in America. It is like so many people lose their minds when politics is involved.
Marine bunks are 4 high whereas Navy bunks on the same gator are only 3 high. I assume you are a Marine because of:
Semper Fi.
Essentially Marines are packed in like sardines in a gator (compared to Navy). You guys absolutely MUST keep VERY clean or else the smell would just about kill you. Even with all of the cleanliness, Marine berthings in active use on a gator (USS Peleliu LHA 5 (you know you are getting old when they decom your ship)) still have a recognizable "stench" to them.
E.g. here's President Jacob Zuma singing 'Kill the Boer[white people]'. Bonus - the sign language interpreter obviously doesn't know sign language and is just bluffing
I am guessing South Africa will be teaching the feminists that going for revenge only results in worse place to live. Not that anyone will learn the lesson or anything useful like that... as long as revenge is had, life is working the way it is supposed to and the world will ultimately be a "fair" place.
You MUST NOT use computers for voting purposes. Even if every bit used is open source, even if you open source hardware, software and everything can be audited and everyone can verify that the hash of the binary is the same that a binary you compiled from the source is the same, even if you do EVERYTHING to make sure that anyone is able to audit it, it's a VERY VERY BAD idea.
Relax. Computers CAN be used without any of the issues you talk about it: You merely have the computer print out the completed ballot and the person voting validates that the ballot actually indicates their votes were cast how they intended. They then fold that piece of paper and take it to a box outside of the voting booth (but still on premises in plain view of everyone) and then deposit that folded piece of paper into a box.
The official voting results would not be complete until a hand count of all ballots is done. You could just count randomized samples of the paper ballots in random and heavily contested districts, but I am concerned that skipping a full hand count has a chance of being gamed at some point.
The reason to use computers in a situation like this is to reduce manual errors (hanging chad, X in an ambiguous location, etc) and provide assistance to people with various disabilities.
I do feel as strongly about computers in voting as you do; however, my ideas slightly differ. Perhaps you might see things in a different light now too.
If you don't know how it works, here you go: An approval voting ballot has all of the candidates listed. You mark all of those that are acceptable to you. The candidate with the most marks wins.
A good idea, but the problems are deeper than Approval Voting can fix. There has not ever been a candidate I felt I could approve of in the last 3 decades.
I guess what I am saying is the process for getting candidates needs to be reformed more than the actual voting in elections. Approval Voting only takes care of part of the problem.
Additionally, both those options would likely bankrupt the company entirely, meaning people *still* wouldn't get replacements, and you'd have 100K freshly unemployed.
Isn't this what should happen in a capitalist system? Those who are unfit to survive, die. General Motors should have been allowed to fail; instead, nothing changed and we keep getting crappy vehicles from them. The same will happen here with Intel.
Privatize gains and socialize losses is a winning strategy!
Someone needs to make processors. Those 100k employees will not stay unemployed forever. Besides, they have unemployment to rely on, right? (lol)
What you are suggesting is that Intel willingly incorporated a security violating bug in order to gain some performance... How the hell would that work out?
I am thinking that the engineers probably pointed out to management that skipping the ring check showed higher performance than performing the check but could be a security issue if timings were "just right". Management likely thought, "these CPUs are doing billions of things each second so there is a better chance of winning the lottery than being able to get at privileged data in the cache. Ship with higher performance."
Odds for winning some lotteries is about 500 million to 1. Well, for an object doing billions of things a second, hitting a 1 in 500 million will not actually take all that long... and now, here we are.
Slashdot Mirror
The real question should be, "Why doesn't Slashdot handle the unicode more gracefully?"
I generally agree with your assessment; however, I should point out that SOME strangers opinions will matter to you:
Police
Loan Officers
Car dealerships (I have some stories to tell with that!)
Hell, just anyone behind a counter.
You can not always know ahead of time when you will have to deal with these people.
For myself, and likely for you too, it just does not matter anymore. For others who need more out of society, these kinds of things just might matter.
Strange â" though low in comparison with a gasoline- or (especially) diesel-powered car, the distance seems quite sufficient for a city's police car. Do they really ever need to exceed 50 miles in a day?
While I am not a police officer, I have performed similar duties in city a bit smaller than Los Angeles. I racked up about 280 miles a day.
... and he flat out lied about closing the torture camp in Cuba.
Look, I did NOT like Obama and have no wish to give ANY endorsement of the Nobel Peace Prize (although I thought it was more of an insult to Bush than praise of Obama)... but, Obama did NOT lie about closing the torture camp in Cuba (no air quotes because it really is a torture camp).
Congress prevented him from closing it. Unless you want your "administration" to ignore the lawmakers, you will have to accept that Obama simply did not have the authority to close it.
I suppose you could whine about him making a promise he could not keep, but even then, it did appear that he actually put effort into closing it.
Be fair. Always. Do not be a Trump (Obama) supporter or hater. Evaluate the facts yourself and build a more coherent reality.
If one twin stayed in the same state of motion the whole time, while the other got sped away, turned around, and then stopped when he got back, then the one who stayed behind is older, and everybody agrees.
So... erm, uh... why does everyone seem to think that the Universe is 13.75 billion years old when various parts of it have been moving at various speeds for various amounts of time. Shouldn't some things be 13.75 TRILLION years old and shouldn't some things be 13.75 seconds old?
Depending on their "velocity" in various frames of reference. Of course.
Gravity is easy to explain. It is just time differentials causing the acceleration. The further you move away from a mass, the faster time flows in relation to something nearer to the mass.
Hurray! You deconstructed one point in my argument. Does that mean the rest of the argument is invalid?
I knew you took this approach because now, the conversation is supposed to just stop and none of the hard "questions" get addressed. But meh.
Wow, your comment was pretty deep. I would mod it up, but I thought of this instead (and it is modded up already):
Yes, people should have to deal with their choices, but they should also use their God-given brains and technology to do just that - deal with their choices in the best way for them.
I feel the need to modify a standard quote:
If god had meant us to fly, he would have given us wings... or enough intelligence to build a machine that can fly.
I more or less agree with your stance; however, this caught my eye:
The only way you can logically deviate from this argument, is if you somehow assign 'specialness' to a human fetus.
Well, a human fetus *IS* special in that we are humans; therefore, a human fetus(why does Firefox tell me fetus is not a word? Ah, it wants the English spelling of 'foetus'.) is the same species we are. In "modern" society, we are trained not to kill our own.
I think we need to get over that 'specialness'. An unwanted baby will likely experience abuse. Physical abuse is very likely but emotional abuse is guaranteed. I would rather not be born into a world like that. Life is brutal enough as it is when you are loved and well-adjusted.
He was clearly asked to write it by people within Google. You are quibbling over whether management had asked him to write it.
Are you saying that as long as corporate policy favours women that everyone should just shut up or should everyone be encouraged to speak out only when corporate policy favours men?
I would go so far as to say that Google's current policies are less than ideal for all genders. This opinion is based on the contents of James Damore's missive.
Honestly, there should just be policies prohibiting discrimination based on gender and drop the rest of the policies relating to gender. There is nothing that can be fair, in relation to gender, otherwise.
This being slashdot, there are plenty of commentators trying to make killing Net Neutrality the fault of both parties. But the evidence shows clearly that Republicans are overwhelmingly in favor of gutting it, and the Democrats are overwhelmingly in favor of preserving it.
Is this supposed to be an argument FOR partisan voting? If so, shall I start listing all of the nasty things the Democrats (DMCA, Copyright Extension, etc) have done and are planning to do?
Partisan voting is how we got here. It is worse than useless, even counterproductive, to point out party lines. Both parties are utterly suborned. The part of the historical cycle where heads get chopped off is arriving, and I think it will be particularly ugly this time around.
As Yoda would tell you - there is another.
That Another is Congress. You know, the guys who are supposed to make laws?
You are correct, but there is absolutely no faith by anyone that Congress will do anything. They are quite happy to sit on their hands while receiving money from the monopoly ISPs.
It is a perfect storm, all bought and paid for. The municipalities have granted monopoly status locally, Ajit Pai rolled back consumer protections, and Congress just has to do nothing and access to the Internet becomes the golden goose that keeps on giving... to a select few.
The dystopian sci-fi future is being built right now. "Right to Read" https://www.gnu.org/philosophy... indeed.
http://www.businessinsider.com...
At the end of the article.
I am thoroughly amused at the juxtaposition of your positive outlook on self driving cars and your negative outlook on software as mentioned in your .sig. :)
Compare and contrast:
The real game changer here is convenient car rentals. As in: book a car when you need it, have it pull up by itself 30 minutes later, use it, and send it on its way when you are done with it...
with
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Cognitive dissonance? ;)
I wonder how long it will be until Cisco caves to NSA pressure
I assume you are young. The NSA already examines all traffic. This "offering" from Cisco has no potential to be of use to the NSA.
It will also not be of interest to Russia, China, or any other state actor.
At best, this might of interest to medium sized or smaller businesses looking to "spy" on their competition. Any major corporation has better methods for spying available than revealing their intentions to Cisco. Medium sized businesses can not bully Cisco into doing something unethical and illegal.
That is a great story. I can see why you are convinced that driverless cars should happen sooner than later. When everything works, they are awesome.
I am convinced that driverless cars should happen later rather than sooner. Driverless cars are a bit like nuclear power in that both are potentially awesome but both have a high potential for large scale catastrophe if something goes wrong.
My concerns lie with the software and hardware providers.
Remember the capacitor situation over a decade ago where some company filled the market with "bad" capacitors that would regularly fail? What would happen if those capacitors had made it into the logic boards of hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of, driverless cars? Would the system be "smart" enough to recognize that its logic circuits may not be behaving within spec?
Humans generally know when they are impaired and generally have a survival instinct. Even when impaired (drunk) driving was at its worst, it did not affect large classes of people. In fact, impaired driving does not care about any classes whatsoever. We just can not know who will drive impaired before they do it. Even still, considering how large the downsides are (death!), it is relatively rare. Many highways/sections have millions of cars going through them every day... and how many people die each day?
The software scares the hell out of me. The software providers will insist on immunity from liability and then hire H1bs at low cost without anyone performing any actual design or oversight of that design. It will be agile, so they will write a function to increase fuel flow, apply brakes, etc. and then someone will be tasked with tying all of those functions together. If this sounds like an actual design process to you, then you would be wrong. You can not retrofit design philosophy afterwards any more than you can retrofit security afterwards. I would go so far as to claim that security is full subset of design philosophy.
Anyways, why I am "afraid" of autonomous vehicles is because the system as a whole will be something that nobody planned for and nobody will take responsibility for. And I (you) will be left suffering in a worse state than we are in now.
White people have enslaved other races for centuries and enjoyed the benefits of doing so. Simply removing slavery doesn't magically undo the centuries of subjugation and abuse, white people today are still benefiting from past slavery and there is also the important issue of justice: white people never truly paid for what they did
Assigning collective guilt is one of those bulletproof ways of showing what an asshole you are.
What is even more hilarious about Anonymous Coward's position is that it takes no account of history overall. Africans were some of the original slave "owners". White people being held in slavery has been a thing for most of, including recent, history; especially in the middle east where white women were in great demand as concubines (still are but the market is not public anymore)... but let's forget about all that and insist that white men must submit to slavery again to "pay" for "their" recent sins... Even though no white man that is alive today had any part of what previous generations have done.
Tech Businesses are concerned that women and minorities don't enter tech because of a hostile work environment. Having worked in lots of all male tech shops yeah, they're right. There's a lot of casual sexual harassment that turns women off. What we men call 'locker room talk'.
Don't worry, it is all balanced out. Have you ever had a chance to hear the chat in a mostly-female office? Yeah, many males would feel offended in that environment just as much as women would feel offended listening to the "locker room" talk many males engage in.
That's all it is.
Except it is not.
You have brains. I have seen you here for a very long time. I just can not quite figure out why you refuse to use those brains when it comes to women/gender issues.
You know very well that he was asked to write that "controversial" paper in response to some training he participated in. You know very well that someone leaked it outside of its intended audience.
And yet you mischaracterize it as an unsolicited paper he insisted everyone read. WTF dude? How do you selectively shut your brain down like that?
I do not think I have ever responded to any of your crap before but for some reason, today, I feel compelled. It is so weird, you seem so intelligent and rational in all other areas... except when it comes to gender issues.
A very good analysis/rebuttal.
This whole thing confuses me though. Any rational person can see what Damore was talking about and understand it. Even if they disagree with his conclusions, there are no indications that the paper is misogynistic or even insulting to anyone of either gender.
So how is this "paper" a huge firestorm? Anyone can read it. It says what is says. It does not say what some people think it says.
I suspect there is some sort of mental illness going on here and I can not quite identify it. Some sort of "mob mentality" thing? Bad programming? I do not know. The ultimate solution is to relax, read it, watch it trigger any biases inside of yourself, address those biases, and read it again.
This is all just so weird to me. Kind of like presidential elections in America. It is like so many people lose their minds when politics is involved.
Everything you say is true except this:
5. Wait a week for your next shower rotation.
Marine bunks are 4 high whereas Navy bunks on the same gator are only 3 high. I assume you are a Marine because of:
Semper Fi.
Essentially Marines are packed in like sardines in a gator (compared to Navy). You guys absolutely MUST keep VERY clean or else the smell would just about kill you. Even with all of the cleanliness, Marine berthings in active use on a gator (USS Peleliu LHA 5 (you know you are getting old when they decom your ship)) still have a recognizable "stench" to them.
E.g. here's President Jacob Zuma singing 'Kill the Boer[white people]'. Bonus - the sign language interpreter obviously doesn't know sign language and is just bluffing
I am guessing South Africa will be teaching the feminists that going for revenge only results in worse place to live. Not that anyone will learn the lesson or anything useful like that... as long as revenge is had, life is working the way it is supposed to and the world will ultimately be a "fair" place.
You MUST NOT use computers for voting purposes. Even if every bit used is open source, even if you open source hardware, software and everything can be audited and everyone can verify that the hash of the binary is the same that a binary you compiled from the source is the same, even if you do EVERYTHING to make sure that anyone is able to audit it, it's a VERY VERY BAD idea.
Relax. Computers CAN be used without any of the issues you talk about it: You merely have the computer print out the completed ballot and the person voting validates that the ballot actually indicates their votes were cast how they intended. They then fold that piece of paper and take it to a box outside of the voting booth (but still on premises in plain view of everyone) and then deposit that folded piece of paper into a box.
The official voting results would not be complete until a hand count of all ballots is done. You could just count randomized samples of the paper ballots in random and heavily contested districts, but I am concerned that skipping a full hand count has a chance of being gamed at some point.
The reason to use computers in a situation like this is to reduce manual errors (hanging chad, X in an ambiguous location, etc) and provide assistance to people with various disabilities.
I do feel as strongly about computers in voting as you do; however, my ideas slightly differ. Perhaps you might see things in a different light now too.
If you don't know how it works, here you go: An approval voting ballot has all of the candidates listed. You mark all of those that are acceptable to you. The candidate with the most marks wins.
A good idea, but the problems are deeper than Approval Voting can fix. There has not ever been a candidate I felt I could approve of in the last 3 decades.
I guess what I am saying is the process for getting candidates needs to be reformed more than the actual voting in elections. Approval Voting only takes care of part of the problem.
Additionally, both those options would likely bankrupt the company entirely, meaning people *still* wouldn't get replacements, and you'd have 100K freshly unemployed.
Isn't this what should happen in a capitalist system? Those who are unfit to survive, die. General Motors should have been allowed to fail; instead, nothing changed and we keep getting crappy vehicles from them. The same will happen here with Intel.
Privatize gains and socialize losses is a winning strategy!
Someone needs to make processors. Those 100k employees will not stay unemployed forever. Besides, they have unemployment to rely on, right? (lol)
What you are suggesting is that Intel willingly incorporated a security violating bug in order to gain some performance... How the hell would that work out?
I am thinking that the engineers probably pointed out to management that skipping the ring check showed higher performance than performing the check but could be a security issue if timings were "just right". Management likely thought, "these CPUs are doing billions of things each second so there is a better chance of winning the lottery than being able to get at privileged data in the cache. Ship with higher performance."
Odds for winning some lotteries is about 500 million to 1. Well, for an object doing billions of things a second, hitting a 1 in 500 million will not actually take all that long... and now, here we are.