The worst aspect about this is accountability. I've noticed a trend in corporate America where decisions are made less and less by one person, and are now more often made collectively (or at least are given the appearance of having been made collectively). The advantage of this is that, if the decision is made by multiple people, then no single person can be blamed if the decision is a bad one. It's a safe way to manage. If several people can agree to do something, then no one has to take the heat if there is a failure somewhere down the line. "Passing the buck" is, of course, as old as civilization itself, and Harry S. Truman had a sign made for his desk in the oval office that read, "The buck stops here." But in this new method of decision making, the buck isn't passed, and it never lands anywhere, it simply does not exist.
This concept applies to the use of robots. No single person wields the weapon. Many people are involved in the operation of the robot. Therefore, no single person can be held accountable if anything goes wrong. I worry that, in the future, more and more policing will be done remotely. No single person will be making the decisions, so that it will be easier to make poor decisions and get away with it.
I agree completely. I think it will be short-lived. Look at applications like Skype and Facetime. They are certainly useful, and when people first get them, they use them a lot, but the novelty wears off pretty fast. There are occasions where video apps make sense, but no one wants to do video all the time -- whether they are the sender or receiver.
The live video thing will be short lived. If Skype and Facetime haven't really taken off, live video on Facebook won't either. Of course, there will be special occasions from time to time when it will make sense, and people will use it -- just like Skype and Facetime -- but once the novelty wears off, most people are going to be like, "Meh".
You would think that WHO would have something better to do. I mean, considering the billions of people who regularly drink hot coffee and tea, and the very low rate of esophageal cancer, the risk hardly seems worthy of discussion.
I agree. Everyone says my dog is "smart", but he still can't do laundry. He keeps mixing the colors with the whites and washing the delecates on warm. Bad dog! Bad!
Not it my city. Get caught without a permit to hold a garage sale, and you'll pay a fine. Neglect to pay sales taxes on the garage sale you got a permit for, and you're in even bigger trouble.
Surely they're not just relying on video alone. Maybe RFIDs play a role too. Otherwise, this seems like a really expensive and error-prone way of managing warehouse space. Other warehouse inventory systems would seem to be more accurate and cheaper (things like pick-to-light; put-to-light, etc).
These things work both ways. For instance, if you are planning to commit a crime, then leave your phone somewhere else, or with a friend. Voila! Now you have an alibi. "I was at such-and-such. I was with so-and-so. The location history on my phone proves it."
It took awhile, but I finally caught the typo. It says their success was "limited to", but what they meant was "limited by". The sentence makes sense after you swap in the correct word.
"On the other hand, Motherboard likened the stress level for programmers to 'a coding interview that never ends where you also happen to be naked. '"
Really? I'm surprised by this. I almost never feel like this. To be sure, occasionally I get a little stressed out when something isn't working right, but for the most part I am quite relaxed and content while coding. And it's not like everything I do is easy either. I'm often the only guy in the shop who is willing to try something new.
It does seem like there are some coders who have no idea what is going on (and their work reflects that), but it surprises me that this would be a widespread feeling.
Yes, setting the alarm works most of the time for me too, but it didn't that particular day, and there is no explanation for it. My point was that the only thing I've found any use for Siri is setting an alarm, and even that doesn't always work well.
Because I'm American and the 24hr clock is not the default here. In the U.S. people often refer to 24hr time as "military time", because that is virtually the only place in the U.S. where it is regularly used.
Thank you. I think that is an excellent point. Sometimes, even if you DO want the feature; even if the feature works fine; you decide it's not something you really want. That does happen with technology. An example, for me, would be Facetime. When we first got iPhones, my daughter and I used to Facetime frequently, but it didn't take long before we decided there wasn't much point in it, and now we just talk on the phone the traditional way, except for those few occasions when we want to show each other something.
Does anyone actually use this crap? When I got my iPhone I was excited about having Siri, but I have found the app to be virtually useless. The only time it seems to come in handy is when I say something very, very specific, such as, "Set an alarm for 630." Even then, it manages to screw things up. Here's a conversation from a few months ago: Me: Siri, set an alarm for 1630. Siri: What time do you want me to set the alarm? Me: 1630. Siri. What time do you want me to set the 1630 alarm? Me: (what th-?) 1630! Siri: What time do you want me to set the 1630 alarm? Me: 440 PM! Siri: All right, I've set the alarm for 1630. Me: AAAARRRRGGGHHHH!
Sure, metal is recyclable. That is not what I was saying. If there was any profit in it, it wouldn't be allowed to sit around. But the article describes piles of plastic and metal that isn't being recycled. That tells me there's no profit in it. It's not easy to get people to do something if there is no incentive to do it.
Let's be real. This stuff is not being "recycled". Oh, there might be some places pulling some precious metals out of the mix, but most of it is just plastic and metals that no one has any interest in recycling. There would be a lot less waste if devices were more modular, and standards were not constantly changing, but I don't know how you get companies to build stuff like that.
Somebody help me out here. Since pgp is, essentially, open-sourced, how do government agencies expect to regulate encryption? Even if they force this company or that company to give them a "back door", what is there to prevent someone from running their own app? Do they not realize that criminal and terrorist organizations are capable of easily building their own encryption applications?
Slashdot Mirror
The worst aspect about this is accountability. I've noticed a trend in corporate America where decisions are made less and less by one person, and are now more often made collectively (or at least are given the appearance of having been made collectively). The advantage of this is that, if the decision is made by multiple people, then no single person can be blamed if the decision is a bad one. It's a safe way to manage. If several people can agree to do something, then no one has to take the heat if there is a failure somewhere down the line. "Passing the buck" is, of course, as old as civilization itself, and Harry S. Truman had a sign made for his desk in the oval office that read, "The buck stops here." But in this new method of decision making, the buck isn't passed, and it never lands anywhere, it simply does not exist.
This concept applies to the use of robots. No single person wields the weapon. Many people are involved in the operation of the robot. Therefore, no single person can be held accountable if anything goes wrong. I worry that, in the future, more and more policing will be done remotely. No single person will be making the decisions, so that it will be easier to make poor decisions and get away with it.
I agree completely. I think it will be short-lived. Look at applications like Skype and Facetime. They are certainly useful, and when people first get them, they use them a lot, but the novelty wears off pretty fast. There are occasions where video apps make sense, but no one wants to do video all the time -- whether they are the sender or receiver.
The live video thing will be short lived. If Skype and Facetime haven't really taken off, live video on Facebook won't either. Of course, there will be special occasions from time to time when it will make sense, and people will use it -- just like Skype and Facetime -- but once the novelty wears off, most people are going to be like, "Meh".
You would think that WHO would have something better to do. I mean, considering the billions of people who regularly drink hot coffee and tea, and the very low rate of esophageal cancer, the risk hardly seems worthy of discussion.
I agree. Everyone says my dog is "smart", but he still can't do laundry. He keeps mixing the colors with the whites and washing the delecates on warm. Bad dog! Bad!
I was issued ear plugs back in the early 80's. Do they not do that any more?
Additionally, I think suppressors eventually wear out, do they not?
I'm not talking about income taxes. I'm talking about sales taxes.
Not it my city. Get caught without a permit to hold a garage sale, and you'll pay a fine. Neglect to pay sales taxes on the garage sale you got a permit for, and you're in even bigger trouble.
Oh, the naivete of people who think that clicking on a little picture somewhere that changes from "ON" to "OFF" actually does what it says it does.
Surely they're not just relying on video alone. Maybe RFIDs play a role too. Otherwise, this seems like a really expensive and error-prone way of managing warehouse space. Other warehouse inventory systems would seem to be more accurate and cheaper (things like pick-to-light; put-to-light, etc).
This reminds me of an old SNL skit. Johnny Canal.
These things work both ways. For instance, if you are planning to commit a crime, then leave your phone somewhere else, or with a friend. Voila! Now you have an alibi. "I was at such-and-such. I was with so-and-so. The location history on my phone proves it."
It took awhile, but I finally caught the typo. It says their success was "limited to", but what they meant was "limited by". The sentence makes sense after you swap in the correct word.
Hold on. This is the tech sector. Perhaps they ment "cache". The tech sector is holding a lot of cache.
"On the other hand, Motherboard likened the stress level for programmers to 'a coding interview that never ends where you also happen to be naked. '"
Really? I'm surprised by this. I almost never feel like this. To be sure, occasionally I get a little stressed out when something isn't working right, but for the most part I am quite relaxed and content while coding. And it's not like everything I do is easy either. I'm often the only guy in the shop who is willing to try something new.
It does seem like there are some coders who have no idea what is going on (and their work reflects that), but it surprises me that this would be a widespread feeling.
Yes, setting the alarm works most of the time for me too, but it didn't that particular day, and there is no explanation for it. My point was that the only thing I've found any use for Siri is setting an alarm, and even that doesn't always work well.
Because I'm American and the 24hr clock is not the default here. In the U.S. people often refer to 24hr time as "military time", because that is virtually the only place in the U.S. where it is regularly used.
It was not contrary to the settings. I had it set to 24 hour time.
Thank you. I think that is an excellent point. Sometimes, even if you DO want the feature; even if the feature works fine; you decide it's not something you really want. That does happen with technology. An example, for me, would be Facetime. When we first got iPhones, my daughter and I used to Facetime frequently, but it didn't take long before we decided there wasn't much point in it, and now we just talk on the phone the traditional way, except for those few occasions when we want to show each other something.
No. I am not stupid. My phone is set to military time, and always has been from the day I bought it.
Does anyone actually use this crap? When I got my iPhone I was excited about having Siri, but I have found the app to be virtually useless. The only time it seems to come in handy is when I say something very, very specific, such as, "Set an alarm for 630." Even then, it manages to screw things up. Here's a conversation from a few months ago:
Me: Siri, set an alarm for 1630.
Siri: What time do you want me to set the alarm?
Me: 1630.
Siri. What time do you want me to set the 1630 alarm?
Me: (what th-?) 1630!
Siri: What time do you want me to set the 1630 alarm?
Me: 440 PM!
Siri: All right, I've set the alarm for 1630.
Me: AAAARRRRGGGHHHH!
"My hovercraft is full of eels..."
Sure, metal is recyclable. That is not what I was saying. If there was any profit in it, it wouldn't be allowed to sit around. But the article describes piles of plastic and metal that isn't being recycled. That tells me there's no profit in it. It's not easy to get people to do something if there is no incentive to do it.
Let's be real. This stuff is not being "recycled". Oh, there might be some places pulling some precious metals out of the mix, but most of it is just plastic and metals that no one has any interest in recycling. There would be a lot less waste if devices were more modular, and standards were not constantly changing, but I don't know how you get companies to build stuff like that.
Somebody help me out here. Since pgp is, essentially, open-sourced, how do government agencies expect to regulate encryption? Even if they force this company or that company to give them a "back door", what is there to prevent someone from running their own app? Do they not realize that criminal and terrorist organizations are capable of easily building their own encryption applications?