So racism is OK if it only happens because it is profitable!!! I used to be against positive discrimination but with arguments like yours I'm beginning to realise that it's necessary to actively redress the equality situation because the situation clearly is not going to redress itself for centuries otherwise.
It may be able to look in every direction at once, the problem is that it barely has a clue about what it is looking at. My understanding is that to test the cars in mountain view, Google made a finely detailed 3d digital map of the whole area, why - because the algorithms are not very good at recognising things. So, will they make a similar digital map of every other road in the world they the cars might travel and how will cars deal with off-road.
Motorways are pretty simple, unlike the streets of some old cities - this is where I would expect autonomous cars to have difficulties.
Because if we fuck up playing with genetics we could wipe out the human race overnight. Or create species that we can't get rid of and end up replacing good species that we want.
I'm waiting for T-Rex island and dodos, they look cool. but no more... except triceratops.
And to whom would the phone companies send the bill?
The NSA.
Re:And Everything Just Get's More Inconvenient
on
eBay Compromised
·
· Score: 1
D.O.B. should never be used for security as it is public record.
My bank uses it as a security question!! Fucking idiots.
Normally I make up a D.O.B. and stick it in passwordsafe with other info, my pet dog 86igwsv3fmyqeu agrees that this is a good idea, so does my girlfriend who I met in Antares!
Users don't have a clue about DRM until it affects them, just looks at the reviews on PC games which have onerous DRM for users opinion - they hate DRM.
Will this 'lesser evil' have a unique ID?.. Based on your hardware?
If so, goodbye privacy, it'd be the super-cookie to end all super-cookies. Websites could demand you run ads and use the DRM to make damn sure you don't disable them. All privacy tools would go down the toilet as useless.
That is the danger of DRM, along with the potential loss of all fair (re)use, anonymous speech and even free speech.
More, better DRM is never a good thing. Long copyright terms need to die and DRM needs to die with it.
B) The robot that harms medics, engineers, road builders, gas, water, electric and comm's workers people, shop-keepers, delivery people, car mechanics, children (because they will grow to be soldiers etc)....Almost all people, robots and infrastructure.
Most Cyclists also have a much slower acceleration from a standstill, this makes stop signs really annoying in a way that doesn't apply to cars.
FTFY, unlike most cyclists I set off in the right gear and rapidly change up. I leave most things standing, I usually get 100 yards before anything other than motorbikes catches up with me./not a 12mph poodler.
The seemingly obvious answer is to have I agree/disagree as completely separated options which do not effect the mod level of a post.
I partly agree about anonymous moderation, I can't make reasoned debate about nuclear power without fearing being modded as troll, the worst part is that this appears to affect my ability to mod in the future, so effectively I am punished for putting forth my view - that's a horrible form of censorship. On the flip side, if I knew which **** was modding me as troll I might mod them as troll in the future as revenge, I'm sure I'm not the only person that would consider this.
It would be nice to be able to appeal a troll mod, Meta-modding seems to over-look this - most meta-modding is of informative/insightful posts which is a waste of time.
Would the robot shoot a US commander that is about the bomb a village of men woman and children?
The US navy don't want robots with morals, they want robots that do as they say.
Country A makes robots with morals, Country B makes robots without morals - all else being equal the robots without morals would win. Killer robots are worse than landmines and should be banned and any country making them should be completely embargoed.
What is going to prevent these plates from getting scratched and rendered useless shortly by studded tires, gravel, snow plows, etc.
If the road is going to melt the snow then why on earth would you need these?
i think solar roof tiles is a much better idea.
You say that as if the two ideas are mutually exclusive which of course they're not.
What I find distasteful is that they are asking for donations, that is not the way to run a business. FFS if you want money then get investors, don't be asking people for their hand-earned cash and giving them nothing in return when if the idea actually turned a profit then it could make you very rich. The idea is interesting but the people need some business acumen.
I don't count calories but I do watch my saturated fat intake and 1 magnum chocolate ice cream is over 50% of a days saturated fat - some pizza's have less.
I think controlling appetite is the best way to control diet and the way to do that is to eat healthily including lots of fruit and veg.
Tabs on top The inability to put the url bar where I want it The inability to put the search box where I want it The removal of the status bar. The fixing of navigation buttons so they cant be moved. Overall - they took away the ability to customise a lot and it left my browser looking a hideous mess because their forced changes didn't work with my previous customisations.
Why not, that's what most of the other experts have done!!!
I have found articles saying the sweetener industries own studies shrink organs and cause cancer in numerous organs.
I have found other studies saying that sweeteners can cause leukemia. I have also found studies that say that sweeteners can cause insulin problems, raise blood sugar level and increase the risk of obesity and diabetes.
I've looked for epidemiological studies and all I come up with is 1 study from 1985 that purely looks at bladder cancer and says that there is no increased risk, personally I would be suspicious of an epidemiological study that is so narrowly focused.
I'd love to use sweeteners to replace sugar and it may well be safer overall, but it does not look to me based on what I've read that sweeteners are safe and may in fact not be useful in a healthy diet due to the increased risk of diabetes and the fact that they can increase cravings for sweet foods.
So, I am not ignoring the experts, I have spent some time looking at the results of the search for "epidemiological study sweeteners" and what I find does not look good.
Safety, particularly as it relates to cancer risk, is on many people's mind as a result of the saccharine saga, which began in the 1970s. In 1977, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration tried to ban this sweetener as animal studies showed that it caused cancer of the bladder, uterus, ovaries, skin, and other organs. But the food industry intervened, urging Congress to keep it on the market with a warning label that (until recently) read: "Use of this product may be hazardous to your health. This product contains saccharin, which has been determined to cause cancer in laboratory animals."
In the late 1990s, the Calorie Control Council stated that the main health concern about saccharin was bladder cancer in male rats -- not people.
It seems to me the the artificial sweetener industry has done a very good job of getting a lot of people to ignore all of the studies showing problems.
"animal studies showed that it caused cancer of the bladder, uterus, ovaries, skin, and other organs."
But hey, let's just forget about those studies??????????????
If I were to see a well made study done by someone not affiliated with the sweetener industry that showed no increase of ill effects amongst sweetener users as compared to non-sweetener users then I'd accept that. But I haven't seen that.
Lets be honest, they reason they're not going ahead with this is because they are not desperate for cash, Google et al are paying Mozilla hundreds of millions literally for their search engine to be prominent (Yahoo is the top placed search engine for Android Firefox).
And if this was prominent instead, it could cost them a pretty penny.
Slashdot Mirror
So racism is OK if it only happens because it is profitable!!! I used to be against positive discrimination but with arguments like yours I'm beginning to realise that it's necessary to actively redress the equality situation because the situation clearly is not going to redress itself for centuries otherwise.
I just tried to change my password on paypal, it's the usual where you can't see the password your typing and you have to type it twice.
Now, normally this wouldn't bother me because I use a random password generator to come up with something like 9rf3-3f0g6#p6ebIn!Hg.
Except paypal says I can't paste the password in, I have to motherfukking type that long complicated shit in TWICE. FFS.
So, I didn't change my password, well done Paypal you stupid fucking idiots.
Thank fuck eBay doesn't do this.
It may be able to look in every direction at once, the problem is that it barely has a clue about what it is looking at. My understanding is that to test the cars in mountain view, Google made a finely detailed 3d digital map of the whole area, why - because the algorithms are not very good at recognising things. So, will they make a similar digital map of every other road in the world they the cars might travel and how will cars deal with off-road.
Motorways are pretty simple, unlike the streets of some old cities - this is where I would expect autonomous cars to have difficulties.
Because if we fuck up playing with genetics we could wipe out the human race overnight. Or create species that we can't get rid of and end up replacing good species that we want.
I'm waiting for T-Rex island and dodos, they look cool. but no more... except triceratops.
The NSA.
D.O.B. should never be used for security as it is public record.
My bank uses it as a security question!! Fucking idiots.
Normally I make up a D.O.B. and stick it in passwordsafe with other info, my pet dog 86igwsv3fmyqeu agrees that this is a good idea, so does my girlfriend who I met in Antares!
Why would anyone need a fast lane if the internet is working?
Video streams at a small fraction of the speed of a good internet connection.
Obvious extortion is obvious.
Every user that downloads and uses Firefox supports Mozilla financially. Why do you think google pays them hundreds of millions of dollars?
"Users want DRM"
Users don't have a clue about DRM until it affects them, just looks at the reviews on PC games which have onerous DRM for users opinion - they hate DRM.
Yeah, my understanding is people didn't like him because he bribed politicians in order to have some peoples freedom curtailed.
Will this 'lesser evil' have a unique ID?.. Based on your hardware?
If so, goodbye privacy, it'd be the super-cookie to end all super-cookies. Websites could demand you run ads and use the DRM to make damn sure you don't disable them. All privacy tools would go down the toilet as useless.
That is the danger of DRM, along with the potential loss of all fair (re)use, anonymous speech and even free speech.
More, better DRM is never a good thing. Long copyright terms need to die and DRM needs to die with it.
We don't think it is better or safer.
DRM is a huge danger to free speech and breaks fair use and public domain.
Which is going to do the 'enemy' more harm,
A) A robot that doesn't maim innocent civilians
or
B) The robot that harms medics, engineers, road builders, gas, water, electric and comm's workers people, shop-keepers, delivery people, car mechanics, children (because they will grow to be soldiers etc)....Almost all people, robots and infrastructure.
FTFY, unlike most cyclists I set off in the right gear and rapidly change up. I leave most things standing, I usually get 100 yards before anything other than motorbikes catches up with me. /not a 12mph poodler.
The seemingly obvious answer is to have I agree/disagree as completely separated options which do not effect the mod level of a post.
I partly agree about anonymous moderation, I can't make reasoned debate about nuclear power without fearing being modded as troll, the worst part is that this appears to affect my ability to mod in the future, so effectively I am punished for putting forth my view - that's a horrible form of censorship. On the flip side, if I knew which **** was modding me as troll I might mod them as troll in the future as revenge, I'm sure I'm not the only person that would consider this.
It would be nice to be able to appeal a troll mod, Meta-modding seems to over-look this - most meta-modding is of informative/insightful posts which is a waste of time.
Dream on.
Would the robot shoot a US commander that is about the bomb a village of men woman and children?
The US navy don't want robots with morals, they want robots that do as they say.
Country A makes robots with morals, Country B makes robots without morals - all else being equal the robots without morals would win. Killer robots are worse than landmines and should be banned and any country making them should be completely embargoed.
If the road is going to melt the snow then why on earth would you need these?
You say that as if the two ideas are mutually exclusive which of course they're not.
What I find distasteful is that they are asking for donations, that is not the way to run a business. FFS if you want money then get investors, don't be asking people for their hand-earned cash and giving them nothing in return when if the idea actually turned a profit then it could make you very rich. The idea is interesting but the people need some business acumen.
I don't count calories but I do watch my saturated fat intake and 1 magnum chocolate ice cream is over 50% of a days saturated fat - some pizza's have less.
I think controlling appetite is the best way to control diet and the way to do that is to eat healthily including lots of fruit and veg.
"What changed so much that you dislike?"
Tabs on top
The inability to put the url bar where I want it
The inability to put the search box where I want it
The removal of the status bar.
The fixing of navigation buttons so they cant be moved.
Overall - they took away the ability to customise a lot and it left my browser looking a hideous mess because their forced changes didn't work with my previous customisations.
"But hey, lets just ignore the experts?"
Why not, that's what most of the other experts have done!!!
I have found articles saying the sweetener industries own studies shrink organs and cause cancer in numerous organs.
I have found other studies saying that sweeteners can cause leukemia. I have also found studies that say that sweeteners can cause insulin problems, raise blood sugar level and increase the risk of obesity and diabetes.
I've looked for epidemiological studies and all I come up with is 1 study from 1985 that purely looks at bladder cancer and says that there is no increased risk, personally I would be suspicious of an epidemiological study that is so narrowly focused.
I'd love to use sweeteners to replace sugar and it may well be safer overall, but it does not look to me based on what I've read that sweeteners are safe and may in fact not be useful in a healthy diet due to the increased risk of diabetes and the fact that they can increase cravings for sweet foods.
So, I am not ignoring the experts, I have spent some time looking at the results of the search for "epidemiological study sweeteners" and what I find does not look good.
See:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/...
http://annonc.oxfordjournals.o...
http://www.mpwhi.com/consumpti...
"Diet soda has been tied to higher risk for heart attacks, strokes, cancers, osteoporosis, tooth decay, and nervous system disorders."
...Actually my advice was about healthy diet.
Skinny != healthy he said so himself and a diet like his will shorten his life if he doesn't fix it.
Call me unconvinced:
http://www.webmd.com/food-reci...
It seems to me the the artificial sweetener industry has done a very good job of getting a lot of people to ignore all of the studies showing problems.
"animal studies showed that it caused cancer of the bladder, uterus, ovaries, skin, and other organs."
But hey, let's just forget about those studies??????????????
If I were to see a well made study done by someone not affiliated with the sweetener industry that showed no increase of ill effects amongst sweetener users as compared to non-sweetener users then I'd accept that. But I haven't seen that.
Lets be honest, they reason they're not going ahead with this is because they are not desperate for cash, Google et al are paying Mozilla hundreds of millions literally for their search engine to be prominent (Yahoo is the top placed search engine for Android Firefox).
And if this was prominent instead, it could cost them a pretty penny.