Getting distracted with Autopilot engaged is like removing your seatbelt because you have airbags.
I would argue that getting distracted with Autopilot engaged is a virtual certainty.
Unlike cruise control, the system completely takes control of the car from the driver. The driver is left with nothing to do but look at the scenery.
I think it would be incredibly difficult to remain completely alert, yet relaxed in this situation. I, personally, would either: 1. not trust the system and would be constantly stressed out that it was trying to kill me, or 2. would get overly comfortable, distract myself for increasing amounts of time, and then accidentally fall asleep or completely focus on a different task, like reading.
Realistically, neither of these options work for me. So I would not use autopilot unless it was functional at a level where it could actually fully drive the car and I was willing to cede it complete responsibility for my life.
Now I acknowledge that people are different and that some will be able to continuously stare at the road with complete attention while not driving. My wife for example is really good at this...
Am I the only one who thinks that the Hyperloop PR is getting a bit ahead of their actual potential?
Is it too much to ask to see a short section of Hyperloop actually built before talking about building a long section underground or the ocean?
As a child, I thought that those pneumatic tubes in the supermarket were the most awesome thing ever. (I still think that they are really cool!) And I think the hyperloop is a fantastic idea, but I would like to see concerns credibly addressed: (1) how will shifts in the tube alignment due to ground motion be addressed, (2) how will you pull a vacuum over a 1000-mile length of tubing, (3) what will it really feel like to be confined in a small windowless tube?, (4) instabilities are a big problem with aerodynamics - how much will the passenger be shaken around? (5) If there is a problem during transportation and the passenger-section of the tube gets stuck and loses pressure, the passengers will die in a vacuum right? (I know this is similar to an airplane failing, but dying underground, strapped into a dark tube seems even more unpleasant!)
My opinion is that the Hyperloop people are really doing their concept a disservice by not verifying that this concept will actually yield something usable for people at a small scale (either a short full-scale length or a sub-scale model) before proposing a huge investor-driven concept. It makes it seem like more of a boondoggle than an actual engineering concept.
I have a late model car with one of those back-up cameras, which is displayed on an LCD display mounted in the dash. On a bright sunny day, when I'm backing into, say, a shaded parking spot, the cameras display in completely useless. The glare from the dashboard, hood, etc., completely drowns out the wimpy LCD display. In those cases, there's no way in hell I'm going to want a car without mirrors.
This is why we need to get rid of windows too. They can also be replaced with LCDs!
It's useless if you don't have a data plan on your phone.
Google is actually letting you choose from several different methods including " tapping a Security Key, by entering a verification code sent to their phone or, starting today, by approving a prompt like the one below that will pop up on their phone." So they are not requiring a data connection.
I like the current setup as it does not require my phone to have a data connection. Not everywhere I have a computer connected to the internet do I have wifi available. The app generating a code seems more flexible in my opinion.
Google is actually letting you choose from several different methods including " tapping a Security Key, by entering a verification code sent to their phone or, starting today, by approving a prompt like the one below that will pop up on their phone." So they are not requiring a data connection.
. The cities become just a resort in this case, instead of what they should be: A place where people can live within an hour or two commute of their workplace affordably.
If that is the case, cities like San Francisco and New York should not try to bill themselves as a "tourist destination".
What you currently have is a city that (1) desires financial revenue from tourists, (2) has extremely high hotel rates, and (3) appears to be blocking non-corporate entities from renting out their apartments at all.
I think that most people would agree that it is OK for individuals to be able to rent out their unoccupied apartment on an incidental basis, but not OK for individuals to hoard multiple properties just for rental in such a way that it drives up prices for residents. But this law just bans all private rentals (in favor of the corporate lobby maintaining high hotel prices) and does not accommodate incidental rental incidences.
My personal opinion is that issues like this should be addressed on a building by building basis and specified in the owner's association rules for each building. Then the residents can choose what type of building environment they want. But when the law is specified by the government in such a heavyhanded way, it reeks of overreach and corporate lobbying.
Or alternatively, if paint balls prove ineffective, 4 digits.
30.06
Of course, depending on the degree of hardening of the cameras' enclosures, it's possible that two digits and two letters may suffice.
12GA
Strat
Yes. Firing a high-power rifle round or a shotgun blast in the air, with no backstop, is a fantastic idea. Especially in an urban environment.
That's the third thing they teach you not to do with guns. Right after "don't put your finger on the trigger if you don't want to fire the gun" and "don't look down the barrel."
When you miss and that round kills someone a mile away in their apartment, or all the little shotgun pellets ricochet back and blind you and other, the FBI will use that as an excuse to install more cameras, while limiting your access to firearms.
Why don't you do something even more intelligent? Dress up like a utility worker, get a ladder, and just remove the camera?
memory-hostile (the mind recalls the known better than the unfamiliar)
#4. Long. I prefer 32 characters long.
user-hostile
Thank you for explaining in just four points why normal users think that security dudes are assholes and sabotage the rules made by them wherever they can.
He forgot one: #5. Force the user to change their password every three months, with constraints #1-4, at a specified time with no option to postpone the password change.
There's lot of valid reasons for "sharing" the code, which may very well have happened. Then again, stress might've cracked the shooter (finals were starting next week, apparently).;l
Sharing code is commonplace, and expected in graduate work.
When you work as a graduate student at a university, you typically sign a clause consenting that any work performed during your tenure on university resources is property of the university.
Furthermore, such code is usually written with input from your graduate advisor. It is no uncommon for several successive students to inherit code from their predecessors for long-running research projects.
All of these concepts are usually made explicitly clear to the student during the course of their work. This isn't "professor abuse." You can't "keep" your graduate code from others because it isn't actually solely yours. It's yours and your professor's and the university's. What you can do is publish it or license it, so that you (and your professor and the university) can receive credit for it.
Obamacare just dumped 15 million people into the medical system who were not there before 2010.
Do you think that the medical system suddenly accommodated enough highly trained and new medical staff to support all those new people?
Or do you think that doctors are spending (even) less time with patients while sketchy urgent care practices are being set up to fleece these 15 million new moneycows?
I'll let you guess which outcome capitalism would favor more. Hint: It's probably the one that generates a higher death rate.
Given that they were investigating armed robberies, why on Earth didn't they just get a warrant instead of spending all that taxpayer money fighting court cases to be able to do so without getting a warrant?
Because now they will never need to do paperwork to get a warrant again.
See, they are saving YOU money through efficiency increases!
So yes, if you have been using a cell phone since before you were born, and using it for NINE HOURS A DAY, you have cause to be worried.
Also, you have to be a rat. Don't forget that key point.
Obviously, they are upping the exposure time per day because their study was only two years long. The Australian study was nice because it shows that with reasonable cell phone use there appears to be no increase in cancer incidence. But the next step is to see if it is possible to get any cancer incidence increase with extreme cell phone use.
Our understanding of how non-ionizing radiation interacts with cellular function is very limited. High voltage power lines "might" cause cancer over long periods. Strong magnetic fields "might" mess your body up over long periods. Cell phone use "might" do that too.
It's easy to be flippant and just say "non-ionizing radiation" doesn't interfere with cells, any idiot knows this, they taught me that in physics class. But a lot of incorrect things have been taught in physics class over the years, before someone proved them wrong. (Remember the scathing NYT editorial about Goddard not understanding Newton's laws?).
Usually when you get a series of inconsistent results in science, it means that the effect is very weak OR we do not yet understand all the factors controlling it so the experiments can not be done correctly. So if you want to grab on to your favorite study result and proclaim victory, good for you. But that doesn't explain why 50% of the studies give the opposite result, and ignoring them will not advance anyone's understanding of the issue.
This is cool, but could we wait for something verified like:
1. An expert actually visiting the rumored site? 2. Higher resolution pictures of the site from the ground or an airplane? Preferably in a wavelength that screens out the foliage? 2. A published (or even submitted) paper to a peer-reviewed journal?
I applaud the kid for his efforts, but you have to close the loop scientifically before declaring victory... even if you are 15.
Also, right now, there is nothing stopping some asshole with more resources from beating this kid to publication (unless there is a missing link to a report).
"Our current fire code does not allow this process; however, we are exploring a way this could be allowed with some restrictions," said Capt. Daniel Curry
What they mean:
"We will soon let you know how much we are going to tax your new business opportunity!"
My test of usefulness was a week long trip I took for business and forgot to grab it on the way out. I missed being able to figure out what phone call to ignore or answer, seeing the next meeting or the text I just got without dragging the phone out of the pocket all the time is where it's a time/effort saver for me.
Think of how much time you would have saved if you just left the phone behind too!
...I still have hipsters looking at me with disdain.
1) My paper has never experienced a fault while on the move. 2) My paper has more detail than your electronic maps. 3) My paper allows me to see more of the map at once.
Google Maps is intended as a dumbed down service. Expect it to be dumbed down.
Real drivers know where they're going and don't need any form of maps. They look upon print and electronic map users alike with disdain!
I don't think that Mayer has done a very good job with Yahoo, but that said, Yahoo was probably screwed long before she got there.
What is admirable, is that she has managed to make (at least) 10's of millions a year, and have three kids at Yahoo, with their nanny and daycare room right next to her office, while looking good doing it.
Make fun of her all you want, but I bet she had a higher salary with better parental benefits and a severance packages than any of us have gotten.
If you don't understand the meanings of the following words then you are not qualified to talk about Islam: taqiyya/muruna/tawriya/kitman; abrogation (nasik wal mansouk), al jihad al asgher versus al jihad al akhbar; the Sunna; the Sira;Reliance of the Traveller; ijtihad; Al Mahdi; takfir and fitna.
See, this is where we differ.
I only need to spend 30 seconds studying a religion to work out if it is inherently sexist.
At that point, I can immediately conclude that it is archaic and intended to be controlling of some subset of the human population.
And then I don't need to spend hours of my life delving into it's silly history and jargon.
Slashdot Mirror
Getting distracted with Autopilot engaged is like removing your seatbelt because you have airbags.
I would argue that getting distracted with Autopilot engaged is a virtual certainty.
Unlike cruise control, the system completely takes control of the car from the driver. The driver is left with nothing to do but look at the scenery.
I think it would be incredibly difficult to remain completely alert, yet relaxed in this situation. I, personally, would either:
1. not trust the system and would be constantly stressed out that it was trying to kill me, or
2. would get overly comfortable, distract myself for increasing amounts of time, and then accidentally fall asleep or completely focus on a different task, like reading.
Realistically, neither of these options work for me. So I would not use autopilot unless it was functional at a level where it could actually fully drive the car and I was willing to cede it complete responsibility for my life.
Now I acknowledge that people are different and that some will be able to continuously stare at the road with complete attention while not driving. My wife for example is really good at this...
That's exactly what I was thinking. I can't find any evidence that there has been a second fatality.
Well, the second fatality hasn't happened yet, but someone is sure going to get slaughtered in the courts over this!
If you look at the plot in the article, you can see that the gray line starts decreasing around '94.
This is clearly when Malda started thinking about creating Slashdot.
Am I the only one who thinks that the Hyperloop PR is getting a bit ahead of their actual potential?
Is it too much to ask to see a short section of Hyperloop actually built before talking about building a long section underground or the ocean?
As a child, I thought that those pneumatic tubes in the supermarket were the most awesome thing ever. (I still think that they are really cool!) And I think the hyperloop is a fantastic idea, but I would like to see concerns credibly addressed: (1) how will shifts in the tube alignment due to ground motion be addressed, (2) how will you pull a vacuum over a 1000-mile length of tubing, (3) what will it really feel like to be confined in a small windowless tube?, (4) instabilities are a big problem with aerodynamics - how much will the passenger be shaken around? (5) If there is a problem during transportation and the passenger-section of the tube gets stuck and loses pressure, the passengers will die in a vacuum right? (I know this is similar to an airplane failing, but dying underground, strapped into a dark tube seems even more unpleasant!)
My opinion is that the Hyperloop people are really doing their concept a disservice by not verifying that this concept will actually yield something usable for people at a small scale (either a short full-scale length or a sub-scale model) before proposing a huge investor-driven concept. It makes it seem like more of a boondoggle than an actual engineering concept.
I have a late model car with one of those back-up cameras, which is displayed on an LCD display mounted in the dash. On a bright sunny day, when I'm backing into, say, a shaded parking spot, the cameras display in completely useless. The glare from the dashboard, hood, etc., completely drowns out the wimpy LCD display. In those cases, there's no way in hell I'm going to want a car without mirrors.
This is why we need to get rid of windows too. They can also be replaced with LCDs!
It's useless if you don't have a data plan on your phone.
Google is actually letting you choose from several different methods including " tapping a Security Key, by entering a verification code sent to their phone or, starting today, by approving a prompt like the one below that will pop up on their phone." So they are not requiring a data connection.
Ref: http://googleappsupdates.blogs...
I like the current setup as it does not require my phone to have a data connection. Not everywhere I have a computer connected to the internet do I have wifi available. The app generating a code seems more flexible in my opinion.
Google is actually letting you choose from several different methods including " tapping a Security Key, by entering a verification code sent to their phone or, starting today, by approving a prompt like the one below that will pop up on their phone." So they are not requiring a data connection.
Ref: http://googleappsupdates.blogs...
. The cities become just a resort in this case, instead of what they should be: A place where people can live within an hour or two commute of their workplace affordably.
If that is the case, cities like San Francisco and New York should not try to bill themselves as a "tourist destination".
What you currently have is a city that (1) desires financial revenue from tourists, (2) has extremely high hotel rates, and (3) appears to be blocking non-corporate entities from renting out their apartments at all.
I think that most people would agree that it is OK for individuals to be able to rent out their unoccupied apartment on an incidental basis, but not OK for individuals to hoard multiple properties just for rental in such a way that it drives up prices for residents. But this law just bans all private rentals (in favor of the corporate lobby maintaining high hotel prices) and does not accommodate incidental rental incidences.
My personal opinion is that issues like this should be addressed on a building by building basis and specified in the owner's association rules for each building. Then the residents can choose what type of building environment they want. But when the law is specified by the government in such a heavyhanded way, it reeks of overreach and corporate lobbying.
Yet another reason to keep Location Services off other than it drains my phone battery.
Interesting. My first thought was "yet another reason to keep Facebook off my phone."
Location Services is useful to me. Facebook is not.
Paint balls.
Or alternatively, if paint balls prove ineffective, 4 digits.
30.06
Of course, depending on the degree of hardening of the cameras' enclosures, it's possible that two digits and two letters may suffice.
12GA
Strat
Yes. Firing a high-power rifle round or a shotgun blast in the air, with no backstop, is a fantastic idea. Especially in an urban environment.
That's the third thing they teach you not to do with guns. Right after "don't put your finger on the trigger if you don't want to fire the gun" and "don't look down the barrel."
When you miss and that round kills someone a mile away in their apartment, or all the little shotgun pellets ricochet back and blind you and other, the FBI will use that as an excuse to install more cameras, while limiting your access to firearms.
Why don't you do something even more intelligent? Dress up like a utility worker, get a ladder, and just remove the camera?
I think that Trump himself is still trying to figure out what his foreign policies will be!
Please let the American people know if you figure anything out!
#1. No password re-use. Ever.
user-hostile
#2. Not formulaic.
memory-hostile (the mind loves patterns)
#3. Not in a dictionary list.
memory-hostile (the mind recalls the known better than the unfamiliar)
#4. Long. I prefer 32 characters long.
user-hostile
Thank you for explaining in just four points why normal users think that security dudes are assholes and sabotage the rules made by them wherever they can.
He forgot one:
#5. Force the user to change their password every three months, with constraints #1-4, at a specified time with no option to postpone the password change.
Everyone knows that hunter2 is the best password
This is completely incorrect. They just tell you that while they are really using things like "mylucky*" or "password".
There's lot of valid reasons for "sharing" the code, which may very well have happened. Then again, stress might've cracked the shooter (finals were starting next week, apparently). ;l
Sharing code is commonplace, and expected in graduate work.
When you work as a graduate student at a university, you typically sign a clause consenting that any work performed during your tenure on university resources is property of the university.
Furthermore, such code is usually written with input from your graduate advisor. It is no uncommon for several successive students to inherit code from their predecessors for long-running research projects.
All of these concepts are usually made explicitly clear to the student during the course of their work. This isn't "professor abuse." You can't "keep" your graduate code from others because it isn't actually solely yours. It's yours and your professor's and the university's. What you can do is publish it or license it, so that you (and your professor and the university) can receive credit for it.
Obamacare just dumped 15 million people into the medical system who were not there before 2010.
Do you think that the medical system suddenly accommodated enough highly trained and new medical staff to support all those new people?
Or do you think that doctors are spending (even) less time with patients while sketchy urgent care practices are being set up to fleece these 15 million new moneycows?
I'll let you guess which outcome capitalism would favor more. Hint: It's probably the one that generates a higher death rate.
Given that they were investigating armed robberies, why on Earth didn't they just get a warrant instead of spending all that taxpayer money fighting court cases to be able to do so without getting a warrant?
Because now they will never need to do paperwork to get a warrant again.
See, they are saving YOU money through efficiency increases!
So yes, if you have been using a cell phone since before you were born, and using it for NINE HOURS A DAY, you have cause to be worried.
Also, you have to be a rat. Don't forget that key point.
Obviously, they are upping the exposure time per day because their study was only two years long. The Australian study was nice because it shows that with reasonable cell phone use there appears to be no increase in cancer incidence. But the next step is to see if it is possible to get any cancer incidence increase with extreme cell phone use.
Our understanding of how non-ionizing radiation interacts with cellular function is very limited. High voltage power lines "might" cause cancer over long periods. Strong magnetic fields "might" mess your body up over long periods. Cell phone use "might" do that too.
It's easy to be flippant and just say "non-ionizing radiation" doesn't interfere with cells, any idiot knows this, they taught me that in physics class. But a lot of incorrect things have been taught in physics class over the years, before someone proved them wrong. (Remember the scathing NYT editorial about Goddard not understanding Newton's laws?).
Usually when you get a series of inconsistent results in science, it means that the effect is very weak OR we do not yet understand all the factors controlling it so the experiments can not be done correctly. So if you want to grab on to your favorite study result and proclaim victory, good for you. But that doesn't explain why 50% of the studies give the opposite result, and ignoring them will not advance anyone's understanding of the issue.
This is cool, but could we wait for something verified like:
1. An expert actually visiting the rumored site?
2. Higher resolution pictures of the site from the ground or an airplane? Preferably in a wavelength that screens out the foliage?
2. A published (or even submitted) paper to a peer-reviewed journal?
I applaud the kid for his efforts, but you have to close the loop scientifically before declaring victory... even if you are 15.
Also, right now, there is nothing stopping some asshole with more resources from beating this kid to publication (unless there is a missing link to a report).
What they say:
"Our current fire code does not allow this process; however, we are exploring a way this could be allowed with some restrictions," said Capt. Daniel Curry
What they mean:
"We will soon let you know how much we are going to tax your new business opportunity!"
My test of usefulness was a week long trip I took for business and forgot to grab it on the way out. I missed being able to figure out what phone call to ignore or answer, seeing the next meeting or the text I just got without dragging the phone out of the pocket all the time is where it's a time/effort saver for me.
Think of how much time you would have saved if you just left the phone behind too!
...I still have hipsters looking at me with disdain.
1) My paper has never experienced a fault while on the move.
2) My paper has more detail than your electronic maps.
3) My paper allows me to see more of the map at once.
Google Maps is intended as a dumbed down service. Expect it to be dumbed down.
Real drivers know where they're going and don't need any form of maps. They look upon print and electronic map users alike with disdain!
I don't think that Mayer has done a very good job with Yahoo, but that said, Yahoo was probably screwed long before she got there.
What is admirable, is that she has managed to make (at least) 10's of millions a year, and have three kids at Yahoo, with their nanny and daycare room right next to her office, while looking good doing it.
Make fun of her all you want, but I bet she had a higher salary with better parental benefits and a severance packages than any of us have gotten.
If you don't understand the meanings of the following words then you are not qualified to talk about Islam: taqiyya/muruna/tawriya/kitman; abrogation (nasik wal mansouk), al jihad al asgher versus al jihad al akhbar; the Sunna; the Sira;Reliance of the Traveller; ijtihad; Al Mahdi; takfir and fitna.
See, this is where we differ.
I only need to spend 30 seconds studying a religion to work out if it is inherently sexist.
At that point, I can immediately conclude that it is archaic and intended to be controlling of some subset of the human population.
And then I don't need to spend hours of my life delving into it's silly history and jargon.
This is why we can't have nice things.
It's also a great way to help Telstra figure out who they need to throttle more carefully in the future.
Way to stand out John!
http://www.nasa.gov/content/on...
Why do you think they were talking about earth years? :)