I think it's comedic how people constantly try to bait Woz to say something bad about Apple. Hello, he is always gonna love Apple that's his baby. Even if your kid gets into drugs and robs a bunch of old ladies, you are still gonna say your kid is a good kid. It's possibly even rude/disrespectful to ask the guy. If you go up to a mother and ask "why is your baby ugly?" isn't that mean?
Plus it's kind of true most of the Chinese phones aren't bringing anything to the table besides cost reduction by removing features.
OK, what are you going to do after the 2 minutes of describing what a resistor does is up? Without much mathematics you can explain what each circuit element does, and that's it. You can do that in a paragraph or part of a lecture spending 2 to 5 minutes on each part -- in a book that's about 15 pages total. What are you going to do for the rest of the semester or book? Try designing something useful just by being able to parrot ohm's law. You will only be able to build circuits designed by others and pretend like you understand the circuit. There is no way around it. If you want to design a useful circuit and really know what's going on, you require the mathematical concepts they outline. It's not even that hard, just some linear algebra and basic calculus. Get over mathphobia, you can likely teach yourself that stuff in a few months if you focus on it and already know a little arithmetic.
No, that is exactly where it must start. I'm sorry but designing anything more useful than an LED chaser or blinking WS2812 lights requires mathematics.
It was loud and prone to breakdown. It's not that people were against a working automobile. People today for example are against 3D TV, VR, and fusion energy.. but not because they think seeing things in 3D is bad or that clean energy is useless. They think the technology can't do it properly or will turn out to be impossible to implement. Etienne Lenoir's automobile of 1862 was very noisy and traveled at a whopping 2 miles per hour. That's slower than a 90 year old man with a cane. A human normally walks at double that speed.
Even in 1885 the fastest speed a car could reach was 10 miles per hour, that's still slower than a world class marathon pace of today. And of course top human can sprint at twice that speed.
We need an autonomous bicycle. Hmm not electric, that's an autonomous scooter. I am talking about a bicycle you still have to pedal but it steers and brakes itself. It would need a pedal powered GPS, sensors, and a fancy gear system that can engage and disengage the pedals from the drive train so you can keep pedalling when it brakes so that you can keep the GPS and other systems powered (maybe from a backup battery).
They can afford to pay AT&T whatever fees get extorted. The smaller players won't be able to pay those fees. No individual telco would bother to make Google rivalling products especially if Google and Netflix are paying them enough. If people can't access Google on AT&T they will switch to someone else. That can't be said for podunk rivals.
Uhh you just said that they use computer algorithms to determine the neo-antigens. I read the Nature papers as well. I am familiar with most of the techniques described. Aside from the initial sample gathering. I saw nothing that can't be automated. Once the tumor is sampled there is very little (if any) human judgement needed. You will of course need robots to perform the assays and make the vaccines, but all of that is highly automatable.
The only parts of the process that are difficult (though not at all impossible even with today's technology) to automate is the surgery or biopsy -- something done routinely for cancer anyways.
I had the idea for this shit first -- I should have started a company back then and got VC money... Oh well. I even posted a comment on slashdot https://m.slashdot.org/story/6... Scroll to the bottom and click load more then search for the word steak or back slashdot.
As more self driving vehicles are on the road the more anomalous situations they will encounter to near miss and learn from.
Self driving cars are still very very rare. Self driving technology is safer than human drivers. We need self driving cars. I hope in the future whoever wants to be a human driver must pass a rigorous exam proving they are at least as safe as an autonomous machine driver. My guess is only a small percent of today's drivers would be able to pass.
That really makes no sense. What you are saying is that purchasing something is the value only a human can bring. Wellif that's true (which it isn't) a robot can be programmed to buy things randomly. It would be cheaper than factories subsidizing people for their own products to be purchased.
Wait, why can't a robot "purchase" things for itself? I am sure software can be written to mimic a person buying things. Why can't robots be participants in the economy? Of course the wealthy can store their robots' purchases somewhere.
I mean if you think an employee's value comes about from what they purchase in addition to what they make.. why can't a robot do that part too?
I think though that a person is only useful to the wealthy if they can produce something of value to them. They won't need factories to produce things for the unemployed. They factories can produce things only for the people the rich need (people who produce designs maybe artists and scientists/doctors -- I dunno).
I am still reeling from disappointment over Amazon buying the elitist Whole Foods.
Organic food requires more farmland per kilo of crop yield. Organic wastes more water and energy per kilo of crop yield. Organic food increases the cost of adequate nutrition for poor people. Organic food is no safer and no healthier than GMO.
Organic food is evil.
How can anyone support organic food? I can understand hating Monsanto for its business practice. They are evil. But GMO itself is better than organic.
Don't hate GMO because you hate the business practices of one company.
Less crew the worse it will be for pirates. Especially if the ship itself is armed with weapon systems that operate autonomously or semi autonomously with remote authorization. Pretty sure an armed cargo ship is no match for even a squadron of boats trying to take it over (a manned crew would perform even worse against that btw). Also, just because it is unmanned or lightly manned doesn't mean there can't be a team monitoring the ships remotely in case backup systems need to be activated.
If they have proof he tried to hire hitmen, why don't they convict him on that?? Obviously they have nothing solid. He is given a punishment based on something he may not even have done! His only hope now is that a future sane president issues some kind of a pardon or chance for parole. There are a lot worse people than him being given very light sentences.
Why can't wikipedia or the apartment CH e foundation make this technology?
Make this shit open source. There is no reason WikiMedia and/or a foundation like Mozilla, Raspberry Pi foundation, or Apache can't run this technology. There is no way it would be any more difficult than running Wikipedia. Find it by donations. People would donate! Companies that sell the devices would donate, businesses that get orders through it would donate!
The biggest danger is when the few who control the factories and the robots start seeing the total UBI-only folk as resource leeches rather than human.
The car is just an improvement over the wheel. We owe Benz nothing.
What are you fucking stupid? We don't need you fools who clearly haven't invented or improved on anything deciding what is an invention and what isn't.
Invent something, only then state your opinion on how stupid other people's inventions are.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it's comedic how people constantly try to bait Woz to say something bad about Apple. Hello, he is always gonna love Apple that's his baby. Even if your kid gets into drugs and robs a bunch of old ladies, you are still gonna say your kid is a good kid. It's possibly even rude/disrespectful to ask the guy. If you go up to a mother and ask "why is your baby ugly?" isn't that mean?
Plus it's kind of true most of the Chinese phones aren't bringing anything to the table besides cost reduction by removing features.
OK, what are you going to do after the 2 minutes of describing what a resistor does is up? Without much mathematics you can explain what each circuit element does, and that's it. You can do that in a paragraph or part of a lecture spending 2 to 5 minutes on each part -- in a book that's about 15 pages total. What are you going to do for the rest of the semester or book? Try designing something useful just by being able to parrot ohm's law. You will only be able to build circuits designed by others and pretend like you understand the circuit. There is no way around it. If you want to design a useful circuit and really know what's going on, you require the mathematical concepts they outline. It's not even that hard, just some linear algebra and basic calculus. Get over mathphobia, you can likely teach yourself that stuff in a few months if you focus on it and already know a little arithmetic.
No, that is exactly where it must start. I'm sorry but designing anything more useful than an LED chaser or blinking WS2812 lights requires mathematics.
It was loud and prone to breakdown. It's not that people were against a working automobile. People today for example are against 3D TV, VR, and fusion energy .. but not because they think seeing things in 3D is bad or that clean energy is useless. They think the technology can't do it properly or will turn out to be impossible to implement. Etienne Lenoir's automobile of 1862 was very noisy and traveled at a whopping 2 miles per hour. That's slower than a 90 year old man with a cane. A human normally walks at double that speed.
Even in 1885 the fastest speed a car could reach was 10 miles per hour, that's still slower than a world class marathon pace of today. And of course top human can sprint at twice that speed.
We need an autonomous bicycle. Hmm not electric, that's an autonomous scooter. I am talking about a bicycle you still have to pedal but it steers and brakes itself. It would need a pedal powered GPS, sensors, and a fancy gear system that can engage and disengage the pedals from the drive train so you can keep pedalling when it brakes so that you can keep the GPS and other systems powered (maybe from a backup battery).
They can afford to pay AT&T whatever fees get extorted. The smaller players won't be able to pay those fees. No individual telco would bother to make Google rivalling products especially if Google and Netflix are paying them enough. If people can't access Google on AT&T they will switch to someone else. That can't be said for podunk rivals.
When did they support Trump? Attending a meeting with a president is not "supporting"
Uhh you just said that they use computer algorithms to determine the neo-antigens.
I read the Nature papers as well. I am familiar with most of the techniques described. Aside from the initial sample gathering. I saw nothing that can't be automated. Once the tumor is sampled there is very little (if any) human judgement needed. You will of course need robots to perform the assays and make the vaccines, but all of that is highly automatable.
The only parts of the process that are difficult (though not at all impossible even with today's technology) to automate is the surgery or biopsy -- something done routinely for cancer anyways.
I had the idea for this shit first -- I should have started a company back then and got VC money ... Oh well. I even posted a comment on slashdot https://m.slashdot.org/story/6...
Scroll to the bottom and click load more then search for the word steak or back slashdot.
As more self driving vehicles are on the road the more anomalous situations they will encounter to near miss and learn from.
Self driving cars are still very very rare. Self driving technology is safer than human drivers. We need self driving cars. I hope in the future whoever wants to be a human driver must pass a rigorous exam proving they are at least as safe as an autonomous machine driver. My guess is only a small percent of today's drivers would be able to pass.
Someone who comments as an anonymous coward really shouldn't be condemning anybody else for not wanting to face consequences.
That really makes no sense. What you are saying is that purchasing something is the value only a human can bring. Wellif that's true (which it isn't) a robot can be programmed to buy things randomly. It would be cheaper than factories subsidizing people for their own products to be purchased.
Why is customer support still mainly done over the phone? Why not do it over instant messenger or text?
Old people need to hear a voice ?
Wait, why can't a robot "purchase" things for itself? I am sure software can be written to mimic a person buying things. Why can't robots be participants in the economy? Of course the wealthy can store their robots' purchases somewhere.
I mean if you think an employee's value comes about from what they purchase in addition to what they make .. why can't a robot do that part too?
I think though that a person is only useful to the wealthy if they can produce something of value to them. They won't need factories to produce things for the unemployed. They factories can produce things only for the people the rich need (people who produce designs maybe artists and scientists/doctors -- I dunno).
I am still reeling from disappointment over Amazon buying the elitist Whole Foods.
Organic food requires more farmland per kilo of crop yield.
Organic wastes more water and energy per kilo of crop yield.
Organic food increases the cost of adequate nutrition for poor people.
Organic food is no safer and no healthier than GMO.
Organic food is evil.
How can anyone support organic food? I can understand hating Monsanto for its business practice. They are evil. But GMO itself is better than organic.
Don't hate GMO because you hate the business practices of one company.
Actually fission scales down pretty well. Google plutonium pacemaker for an example.
Hardly anyone is doing research on breakthrough battery technology. How about pumping some dollars into increasing battery capacity 4x?
The existence of a greater wrong doesn't negate the harm of a lesser wrong.
Who said it's gonna work any more reliably?
Less crew the worse it will be for pirates. Especially if the ship itself is armed with weapon systems that operate autonomously or semi autonomously with remote authorization. Pretty sure an armed cargo ship is no match for even a squadron of boats trying to take it over (a manned crew would perform even worse against that btw). Also, just because it is unmanned or lightly manned doesn't mean there can't be a team monitoring the ships remotely in case backup systems need to be activated.
If they have proof he tried to hire hitmen, why don't they convict him on that?? Obviously they have nothing solid. He is given a punishment based on something he may not even have done! His only hope now is that a future sane president issues some kind of a pardon or chance for parole. There are a lot worse people than him being given very light sentences.
Why can't wikipedia or the apartment CH e foundation make this technology?
Make this shit open source. There is no reason WikiMedia and/or a foundation like Mozilla, Raspberry Pi foundation, or Apache can't run this technology. There is no way it would be any more difficult than running Wikipedia. Find it by donations. People would donate! Companies that sell the devices would donate, businesses that get orders through it would donate!
The biggest danger is when the few who control the factories and the robots start seeing the total UBI-only folk as resource leeches rather than human.
If you had to google how to open a terminal in Ubuntu, there are only two possibilities.
First that you installed it wrong and so you're an idiot, or second, that you couldn't figure it out in 5 seconds and so you're an idiot.
The car is just an improvement over the wheel. We owe Benz nothing.
What are you fucking stupid? We don't need you fools who clearly haven't invented or improved on anything deciding what is an invention and what isn't.
Invent something, only then state your opinion on how stupid other people's inventions are.