For example, if I bought an 8GB phone, I might have been told I could easily fit a movie or a couple of TV shows on it. Now, after updating to the latest version of the system software, I can no longer fit a movie on it. I updated my phone and now it won't do what I was told it could do and it never warned me that this might be an issue before I updated it.
Not that I necessarily agree with the lawsuit, but it might be worthwhile if Apple says to those people with 8GB phones, "Hey, you might NOT want to update your system software because you won't have much room afterwards."
I'm not sure it would be that big a deal. Figure it's, what, about 2 or 3 seconds? Yeah, I don't think you'll be ducking and weaving things that are coming at you. But a humanoid robot could probably walk around (slowly) and pick up stuff.
Heck, the old Soviet lunokhod rovers were remote controlled.
For the most part, I have no problem with the theory of "targeted advertising." The problem I have is that with all this data that is supposedly being soaked up, it does a pretty crappy job of delivering ads for things I might actually be interested in. Yeah, I suppose it does a good job of filtering ads that I absolutely have no interest in--I haven't seen a "Pampers" ad or something like that.
I'm somewhat in the market for a new car. I like small convertibles/roadsters. I went and checked out the Mini Cooper Roadster on Mini's website and then checked a bunch of the dealer websites to see if they had the options that I wanted in stock (none did). And for the next few weeks, I was seeing ads for the Mini Cooper Roadster from various local dealers whose websites I've already visited!
Yes, I've been there and seen it. I would think it would be showing me ads for the Mazda Miata or Audi TT--similar roadster-type cars. I would think it would showing me ads for dealers a bit further afield.
I'm sure the Congressmen from Boeing had something to do with this. After all, if they're sending a rocket to Europa, how's it going to get to get there without the Senate Launch System? "See? We have to spend that money now! We've got a bunch of science missions that we've already spent money on waiting for it!"
I think it was joke vis-a-vis Apple making "phablet" phones after spending years insisting that people wouldn't like them because they can't use them with only one hand. Add to the fact that the iPhone 6 Plus looks kind of like a Galaxy S5 with less-rounded corners and there you go.
I would say the number for whom driving is a passion is a significantly smaller number than those who drive because they have to.
That said, the quote I thought was interesting, from the summary:
Buying sexy, fast cars for garages could evolve into buying seat-miles in appliance-like pods, piloted by robots, parked in public stalls.
This is an intriguing point. What you might end up seeing is the death of economy car.
I have a fast and sexy car in my garage (okay, it's not THAT fast but it is kind of sexy, or so I've been told). One reason I bought it is that I liked how it looked, it had decent performance, was comfortable, and still got good gas mileage. But I'll be the first to agree that, at least out here in Southern California, what kind of car you drive generates a certain image about you. And I'm not sure that renting a self-driving "pod" for a date would give the same message as showing in a gorgeous Mercedes, Bentley, or Maserati.
Those who buy a Toyota or Honda because they're solid, dependable, economical cars would be the first people to trade in their cars for a rental pods. But the people who buy "aspirational" brands--Lexus, Cadillac, Mercedes, etc.--wouldn't be so quick to trade these in because they'd be giving themselves a poorer image. Arguably, if I pull up in front of a club in a self-driving rental "pod" versus pulling up in front of a club in self-driving Mercedes or a non-self-driving Lamborghini, I'm getting a heck of a lot less attention from potential sexual partners.
The mistake, of course, is to think that it must be one or the other. The reality is that, here in America, there is room for all of them. Like I said, I could see people who live in dense urban areas renting a nondescript pod for a trip to the grocery store where it would be inconvenient to carry all the groceries home in your arms. I could also see people owning their own slightly nicer pods because it's more convenient to go out to the garage and hop in every morning and be able to leave stuff in your pod. Heck, you might even defer some of the cost by renting out your slightly nicer pod when you're not using it. You might see luxury pods with bars and hot tubs.
You might even see non-self-driving cars! Like you said, I think there will continue to be demand from those who like to drive and those who don't feel comfortable entrusting someone/something else to transport them. What I think will be interesting is what form those cars will take? I mean, a self-driving sports car would be like a Harley with training-wheels. But sports cars can be expensive. Would it be worth it to produce inexpensive sports cars--like Kias? Are there enough people who would buy these to drive? Or will it become only the province of the wealthy to be able to drive themselves?
Or, conversely, the politicians that ban guns in all federal buildings yet believe wholeheartedly that anyone should be able to carry semi-automatic assault rifles into their local Walmart.
Just in case you're not up on this, I believe he's talking about a Camelbak. It's basically a backpack with a bladder for holding water and a hose that you can drink from. They're handy for bicyclists and runners who want to keep moving and not fiddle with bottles.
I assume (RTFA? Pfft!) that the idea was that I was offered the choice of zapping someone else or zapping myself and getting money (ie, if I chose to zap someone else, I merely got the satisfaction/revulsion of zapping them but if I zapped myself, cha-ching!)
So it now becomes a question of how much money does it take for me to not inflict pain on another person. Did they actually know who the other person was? I don't necessarily mean names, but could they see the other person and see them getting shocked? Because that introduces a bunch of biases and how much money would it take to overcome them? That might be a neat study...
It'd also be interesting to see what happens over time. Would the amount of money change? "I didn't zap that person for $5, but after zapping a few people, you're gonna have to pay me more to stop..."
Slashdot Mirror
For example, if I bought an 8GB phone, I might have been told I could easily fit a movie or a couple of TV shows on it. Now, after updating to the latest version of the system software, I can no longer fit a movie on it. I updated my phone and now it won't do what I was told it could do and it never warned me that this might be an issue before I updated it.
Not that I necessarily agree with the lawsuit, but it might be worthwhile if Apple says to those people with 8GB phones, "Hey, you might NOT want to update your system software because you won't have much room afterwards."
I'm not sure it would be that big a deal. Figure it's, what, about 2 or 3 seconds? Yeah, I don't think you'll be ducking and weaving things that are coming at you. But a humanoid robot could probably walk around (slowly) and pick up stuff.
Heck, the old Soviet lunokhod rovers were remote controlled.
I gotta admit that's one that surprises me.
For the most part, I have no problem with the theory of "targeted advertising." The problem I have is that with all this data that is supposedly being soaked up, it does a pretty crappy job of delivering ads for things I might actually be interested in. Yeah, I suppose it does a good job of filtering ads that I absolutely have no interest in--I haven't seen a "Pampers" ad or something like that.
I'm somewhat in the market for a new car. I like small convertibles/roadsters. I went and checked out the Mini Cooper Roadster on Mini's website and then checked a bunch of the dealer websites to see if they had the options that I wanted in stock (none did). And for the next few weeks, I was seeing ads for the Mini Cooper Roadster from various local dealers whose websites I've already visited!
Yes, I've been there and seen it. I would think it would be showing me ads for the Mazda Miata or Audi TT--similar roadster-type cars. I would think it would showing me ads for dealers a bit further afield.
Hey at the least you could end up being a completely crippled , but awfully handsome [...]
Live fast, die old, leave a good-lookin' corpse.
it's just an engineering challenge. in the late 19th century [...]
So what you're saying is that in a couple hundred years, we'll have cracked it.
Yeah! I don't have any A-pillars in my convertible.
As drivers in LA never use their turn signals [...]>
Hey! They don't need to know my business!
Both of these are good ideas, so I rotated mine 630 degrees!
I'm sure the Congressmen from Boeing had something to do with this. After all, if they're sending a rocket to Europa, how's it going to get to get there without the Senate Launch System? "See? We have to spend that money now! We've got a bunch of science missions that we've already spent money on waiting for it!"
[...] geese and other dumb animals cannot understand us when we tell them this [...]
But has anybody really tried?
While I agree about the Xserve, you don't really need all that for Profile Manager.
I gotta admit, that struck me. On the other hand, it's possible that the controllers received confirmation at 9:30pm CST.
So "selling your soul" is preferred to buying a $499 Mac mini and a $30 OS X Server app on the App Store [...]
FTFY.
In fact, the modern air traffic control system exists precisely because people DID die.
Yes, I agree with what you're saying. But, for a laugh, you should listen to an old comedy bit by a guy named David Gunson. I remember laughing at this when I was kid.
Samsung makes the Galaxy line, not Apple.
I think it was joke vis-a-vis Apple making "phablet" phones after spending years insisting that people wouldn't like them because they can't use them with only one hand. Add to the fact that the iPhone 6 Plus looks kind of like a Galaxy S5 with less-rounded corners and there you go.
Or, to put it another way, "woosh."
There's no doubt there will be plenty of catwalks with no guard rails [...]
The imperial senate decided that there was no need for OSHA.
I'm sure if you put a diamond to it you'd scratch it, but short of that, I can't see why more scratch resistance is needed.
Well, if you can afford an iPhone, you may have diamonds in your pocket at times...
I would say the number for whom driving is a passion is a significantly smaller number than those who drive because they have to.
That said, the quote I thought was interesting, from the summary:
Buying sexy, fast cars for garages could evolve into buying seat-miles in appliance-like pods, piloted by robots, parked in public stalls.
This is an intriguing point. What you might end up seeing is the death of economy car.
I have a fast and sexy car in my garage (okay, it's not THAT fast but it is kind of sexy, or so I've been told). One reason I bought it is that I liked how it looked, it had decent performance, was comfortable, and still got good gas mileage. But I'll be the first to agree that, at least out here in Southern California, what kind of car you drive generates a certain image about you. And I'm not sure that renting a self-driving "pod" for a date would give the same message as showing in a gorgeous Mercedes, Bentley, or Maserati.
Those who buy a Toyota or Honda because they're solid, dependable, economical cars would be the first people to trade in their cars for a rental pods. But the people who buy "aspirational" brands--Lexus, Cadillac, Mercedes, etc.--wouldn't be so quick to trade these in because they'd be giving themselves a poorer image. Arguably, if I pull up in front of a club in a self-driving rental "pod" versus pulling up in front of a club in self-driving Mercedes or a non-self-driving Lamborghini, I'm getting a heck of a lot less attention from potential sexual partners.
The mistake, of course, is to think that it must be one or the other. The reality is that, here in America, there is room for all of them. Like I said, I could see people who live in dense urban areas renting a nondescript pod for a trip to the grocery store where it would be inconvenient to carry all the groceries home in your arms. I could also see people owning their own slightly nicer pods because it's more convenient to go out to the garage and hop in every morning and be able to leave stuff in your pod. Heck, you might even defer some of the cost by renting out your slightly nicer pod when you're not using it. You might see luxury pods with bars and hot tubs.
You might even see non-self-driving cars! Like you said, I think there will continue to be demand from those who like to drive and those who don't feel comfortable entrusting someone/something else to transport them. What I think will be interesting is what form those cars will take? I mean, a self-driving sports car would be like a Harley with training-wheels. But sports cars can be expensive. Would it be worth it to produce inexpensive sports cars--like Kias? Are there enough people who would buy these to drive? Or will it become only the province of the wealthy to be able to drive themselves?
Or, conversely, the politicians that ban guns in all federal buildings yet believe wholeheartedly that anyone should be able to carry semi-automatic assault rifles into their local Walmart.
Good point. And if you have all those cyclists breathing hard, they'll produce more CO2 which is a greenhouse gas.
Just in case you're not up on this, I believe he's talking about a Camelbak. It's basically a backpack with a bladder for holding water and a hose that you can drink from. They're handy for bicyclists and runners who want to keep moving and not fiddle with bottles.
I assume (RTFA? Pfft!) that the idea was that I was offered the choice of zapping someone else or zapping myself and getting money (ie, if I chose to zap someone else, I merely got the satisfaction/revulsion of zapping them but if I zapped myself, cha-ching!)
So it now becomes a question of how much money does it take for me to not inflict pain on another person. Did they actually know who the other person was? I don't necessarily mean names, but could they see the other person and see them getting shocked? Because that introduces a bunch of biases and how much money would it take to overcome them? That might be a neat study...
It'd also be interesting to see what happens over time. Would the amount of money change? "I didn't zap that person for $5, but after zapping a few people, you're gonna have to pay me more to stop..."
I'd also add that it's easier if the city runs them to shut them down in the event that it becomes necessary "for public safety."
lasers require line of sight because unless you have very special optics going on light *ONLY* travels in straight lines.
Maybe if you pointed the laser into some sort of optical cable...
there is one fuelling station in the country, out in the toolies [...]
Yeah, it's not like there aren't any Toyota dealerships in America where they could put in some kind of fueling station...
I suppose this is an advantage to having a dealership network...