Although the chance of a disaster to planet Earth in a given year may be quite low, it adds up over time, and becomes a near certainty in the next thousand or ten thousand years," said Hawking...
Pretty sure "the planet" will be fine no matter. Humans on the other hand... It would also be disappointing for the huge, wonderful variety of plants and animals that share this planet with us to suffer because of our carelessness or apathy.
What I don't understand is how none of these politicians who want backdoors into all encryption fail to understand that it would be just as easy for IS or Al-Qaeda or any other group that considers themselves enemies of the United States (North Korea, Iran, etc) to find and use the same backdoors against them.
They know all this, but, like most things, are thinking that most of us are too stupid / uneducated to know better. Seems to be true; case in point: Trump: "I'll build a wall and get Mexico to pay for it." (crowd goes wild) No one gets a serious answer to the follow up question: Um, okay. How?
She can't be trusted, full stop. A vote for Hillary is a vote against your interests because the only interests Hillary has is in what is good for her.
And to think that isn't true for any politician (or corporation) is naive.
The story is current because Obama just mentioned teaching code in the SOTU.
And it's News because it's something the Republicans will say "no" to (because "Obama") and that Congress in general (R+D) won't do anything about - oh wait...:-)
... because someone has a PhD. or a fancy degree from an Ivy league college, does NOT mean they are smart or talented.
Not necessarily smart or talented anyway. They are, however, by definition, fairly educated, but this doesn't always help. Some of the worst code I've seen has been written by people with PhDs, often because they over thought things and made the code unnecessarily complicated or thought too narrowly about the implementation. In the long run, experience is often, but not always, more valuable than education.
[ Speaking as someone with only a BSCS, but 30+ years experience, doing applications and systems programming in 20+ languages, on just about every version of *nix (and Windows), on just about everything from PCs to Cray supercomputers, in commercial application and government research environments... I know I'm not the best and/or brightest, but I'm fairly high up on the learning curve and generally get assigned the hard problems because I can pull from a broad experience base, think unconventionally and get them solved. What I like doing most now is passing on what I've learned along the way and helping others get their work done. ]
Really? Humans can improvise and adapt? So the human is supposed to build a mass spectrometer out of duct tape and discarded food pouches?
Don't be obtuse and/or an ass. If you send people, you'd probably *also* send the same/similar equipment you'd send for a robotic mission. By "improvise and adapt" I meant things like people could select samples that might outside the operational parameters for a robot - too big, out of reach, etc... Humans can explore places a robot isn't designed to go.
The rest of your argument is, of course valid, but it ignores my statement that agrees sending humans would provide: "Perhaps not as much science for the money spent,".
I agreed with your points before you made them, but offered that having humans onsite offers more that what robots alone can provide. I didn't discount the value of robotic-only missions.
So, stop jerking your knee and actually read what someone writes.
Perhaps you don't get as much science by sending a human,...
Perhaps not as much science for the money spent, but perhaps more flexible science. With robotics, you have to decide *all* the science up front and bundle it with the machine. Humans can do all that and improvise and adapt. We can go places, see and do things robots cannot. Of course the reverse is true for really human-hostile places - for example, I do not want to be the first man to land on the Sun.
4) The assemblyman buys a phone without the backdoor. Assemblyman's opponent in the next election finds out and gets a target to use to accuse assemblyman of hypocrisy.
Hypocritical... politician? Don't the just high-five each other for that?
This is as brilliant as their gun control agendas, which now want to include prohibition on buying enough ammunition to go target shooting for longer than 15 minutes per year.
I'm sure their logic is sound: Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people. Ergo: Fewer bullets == fewer dead/wounded people.
And now a company will patent her genes, and every insurance company will call this a pre-existing condition and deny treatment for anything related to this or its treatment.
Actually in the USA the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) specifically prevents insurance companies from denying coverage because something is a "pre-existing condition".
And I hope that all the people who want to repeal the ACA remember that... Though -- to be fair -- sometimes (usually?) proof of continuous insurance coverage satisfies the waiting period for pre-existing conditions, so it may be a wash. I imagine that there are other things in the ACA that people will actually miss, once they're gone (like dependents using their parent's insurance until age 26)...
Or here's a more general objection: should adults also be required to be vaccinated against HPV?
Adults have (most likely) already been exposed. The trick with this is to get vaccinated before any possible exposure, which for HPV generally means while still a child and/or before becoming sexually active.
If an adult can be tested for HPV and determined to be unexposed, then getting vaccinated would be a benefit.
Slashdot Mirror
Although the chance of a disaster to planet Earth in a given year may be quite low, it adds up over time, and becomes a near certainty in the next thousand or ten thousand years," said Hawking ...
Pretty sure "the planet" will be fine no matter. Humans on the other hand ... It would also be disappointing for the huge, wonderful variety of plants and animals that share this planet with us to suffer because of our carelessness or apathy.
as soon as there is a hint of flexibility or laxity in the oversight, will slip through lower quality where ever they think they can get away with
That's my understanding. It's an East versus West thing - Eastern mindset is "if you don't catch me cheating I'm a clever businessman"
I think Wall Street thinks that too.
What I don't understand is how none of these politicians who want backdoors into all encryption fail to understand that it would be just as easy for IS or Al-Qaeda or any other group that considers themselves enemies of the United States (North Korea, Iran, etc) to find and use the same backdoors against them.
They know all this, but, like most things, are thinking that most of us are too stupid / uneducated to know better. Seems to be true; case in point: Trump: "I'll build a wall and get Mexico to pay for it." (crowd goes wild) No one gets a serious answer to the follow up question: Um, okay. How?
She can't be trusted, full stop. A vote for Hillary is a vote against your interests because the only interests Hillary has is in what is good for her.
And to think that isn't true for any politician (or corporation) is naive.
If you call programming creating Wordpress sites, then fine, everyone can code.
You jest, but I've seen people list HTML under Programming Languages on resumes.
Ya, but coding in space, no one can hear your compile.
The story is current because Obama just mentioned teaching code in the SOTU.
And it's News because it's something the Republicans will say "no" to (because "Obama") and that Congress in general (R+D) won't do anything about - oh wait... :-)
[ Knee-jerkers, notice the smiley. ]
Has anyone else been having problems with pootube recently?
Never heard of it. Is that a German porn site?
... because someone has a PhD. or a fancy degree from an Ivy league college, does NOT mean they are smart or talented.
Not necessarily smart or talented anyway. They are, however, by definition, fairly educated, but this doesn't always help. Some of the worst code I've seen has been written by people with PhDs, often because they over thought things and made the code unnecessarily complicated or thought too narrowly about the implementation. In the long run, experience is often, but not always, more valuable than education.
[ Speaking as someone with only a BSCS, but 30+ years experience, doing applications and systems programming in 20+ languages, on just about every version of *nix (and Windows), on just about everything from PCs to Cray supercomputers, in commercial application and government research environments... I know I'm not the best and/or brightest, but I'm fairly high up on the learning curve and generally get assigned the hard problems because I can pull from a broad experience base, think unconventionally and get them solved. What I like doing most now is passing on what I've learned along the way and helping others get their work done. ]
Contrary to several reports in the French news media, the drug was not a cannabis-based painkiller, Ms. Touraine said.
+4 insightful? Is everyone with moderation points 14 year old?
Apparently, and it ignores the simple fact that Dice probably sucks small and medium dicks as well.
So, in keeping with the thread topic, I'll simplify the original statement: Dice.com sucks dicks.
Really? Humans can improvise and adapt? So the human is supposed to build a mass spectrometer out of duct tape and discarded food pouches?
Don't be obtuse and/or an ass. If you send people, you'd probably *also* send the same/similar equipment you'd send for a robotic mission. By "improvise and adapt" I meant things like people could select samples that might outside the operational parameters for a robot - too big, out of reach, etc... Humans can explore places a robot isn't designed to go.
The rest of your argument is, of course valid, but it ignores my statement that agrees sending humans would provide: "Perhaps not as much science for the money spent,".
I agreed with your points before you made them, but offered that having humans onsite offers more that what robots alone can provide. I didn't discount the value of robotic-only missions.
So, stop jerking your knee and actually read what someone writes.
Perhaps you don't get as much science by sending a human, ...
Perhaps not as much science for the money spent, but perhaps more flexible science. With robotics, you have to decide *all* the science up front and bundle it with the machine. Humans can do all that and improvise and adapt. We can go places, see and do things robots cannot. Of course the reverse is true for really human-hostile places - for example, I do not want to be the first man to land on the Sun.
4) The assemblyman buys a phone without the backdoor. Assemblyman's opponent in the next election finds out and gets a target to use to accuse assemblyman of hypocrisy.
Hypocritical ... politician? Don't the just high-five each other for that?
This is as brilliant as their gun control agendas, which now want to include prohibition on buying enough ammunition to go target shooting for longer than 15 minutes per year.
I'm sure their logic is sound: Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people. Ergo: Fewer bullets == fewer dead/wounded people.
That's just science.
So there's this rumor and the article neither confirms or denies it. What's the point of the article
Clickity-click-click.
... BlackBerry devices that are being marketed as having "military-grade security."
To be fair, Blackberry / RIM never said whose military.
We could return to fixing a computer problem for a bottle of whiskey or three chickens.
Don't let drunk chickens use your computer. Problem solved.
as a girl she really needs to walk with a buddy
Why?
Because her father is sexist. A more appropriate answer would be: because she's 9.
And now a company will patent her genes, and every insurance company will call this a pre-existing condition and deny treatment for anything related to this or its treatment.
Actually in the USA the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) specifically prevents insurance companies from denying coverage because something is a "pre-existing condition".
And I hope that all the people who want to repeal the ACA remember that ... Though -- to be fair -- sometimes (usually?) proof of continuous insurance coverage satisfies the waiting period for pre-existing conditions, so it may be a wash. I imagine that there are other things in the ACA that people will actually miss, once they're gone (like dependents using their parent's insurance until age 26) ...
Clear Linux is a rolling-release-inspired distribution that issues new versions a few times a day and is up to version 5700.
Big deal. Firefox will catch up with that shortly.
seriously are you retarded? your argument for not doing it is that it would be doing something other sane countries have already done?
Slippery slope my friend. Lots of other sane countries have universal healthcare and gun control ...
... Donald Trump, the mercurial businessman who is running for president ...
Or, in comic book form: Calvin, of "... and Hobbes", channeling Donald Trump.
Clearly the end game involves a mixture of hiring one half of the population to spy on the other half, ...
We don't have the parking for that.
Or here's a more general objection: should adults also be required to be vaccinated against HPV?
Adults have (most likely) already been exposed. The trick with this is to get vaccinated before any possible exposure, which for HPV generally means while still a child and/or before becoming sexually active.
If an adult can be tested for HPV and determined to be unexposed, then getting vaccinated would be a benefit.