That restricting the pilot will lead to disaster, or that not restricting the pilot will let them cause a disaster?
I would say that being able to track there position is most unlikely to either cause a disaster or prevent one. But it would make it much cheaper to find the bits left over from a disaster.
Why use expensive Lidar when stereo vision will also provide good depth perception. Two cameras pointing in the same direction. Line up the dots and do the Trig.
That is a genuine question. I wonder why the focus on Lidar.
Trump wants to stop Mexicans taking our jobs and the bleeding heart Democrats refuse to let him do his job. Everyone knows that, just ask any of my friends.
Your nit picking about details is irrelevant. Politics is simple. Just like Trump.
The whole point of Let's Encrypt. It authenticates via several methods that the holder of the certificate also controls the domain. It is better that what other certifiers do.
You do not need any certificate to just encrypt.
The big issue is that any professionally managed websites should be renewing there certificates a good 90 days before expiry to ensure it stays live if issues arise. So a site going down after just 20 days of inattention shows incompetence.
I am surprised that on Slash Dot people are so consumed with Anti-Trump feelings that they did not see that straight away.
Geese and other birds actually tend not to fly away from airplanes. Which is very odd because they are excellent fliers and it is not hard to spot a 100 ton noisy airliner coming at you.
But as for drones, you are dealing with human mass hysteria about insignificant threats. The geese are far more sensible.
The likelihood of a 500g consumer drone destroying a 100 ton airliner is as close zero as makes no difference. Just look at an airliner. It is big, and solid. And it has two engines, and even losing both of them is unlikely to result in a fatal crash.
NOBODY in the media has picked up on this. Actually thought for a minute about how ridiculous the assertion is.
Sure, a 500kg military drone might do some damage if well aimed. But nobody is talking about one of those. There was an experiment in which somebody fired a fairly large drone out of a cannon at a very light aircraft wing and did major damage (but still did not destroy it), hardly relevant.
Where is the risk assessment? There is about 0.6 fatal accidents for every million airline flights. So a 1 in 100 million additional risk is something to be avoided, but you do not close an airport because of it.
It is a very light and fast aircraft. Not a 100 ton airliner. You could dent a moneys wing with your fist (it would hurt). The leading edge of an airliner is much, much thicker. It is like comparing a rowing boat to an ocean liner.
And that drone in the experiment was not a 500g consumer drone but something weighing over 1kg. Shot out of a cannon. And it still failed to destroy the wing -- the pilot would probably have limped home.
In all of this, NOBODY had questioned the size of the drones spotted. Sure, a well aimed 500kg military drone could do some real damage, but not the 500g drones that people are talking about.
It is bizzare. Just look at a tiny consumer drone, and an airliner, and it is completely obvious that no serious damage could done.
And even if a drone managed to knock out an engine (extremely unlikely), the plane will fly quite happily on one.
DDG does a great job on about 90% of the queries I search. And the other 10% are difficult ones, where Google might be a bit better. But then I do not know when DFG is better than Google.
Overall, Google is probably a bit better, but DDG is fine.
But, as the Tortoise points out to Archilies, if the play back device is of sufficiently high fidelity then a cassette could be constructed that will produce resonances that will cause it to self destruct. And no matter how hard Archilies tries to fix his machine, the Tortoise can always produce a new machine destroying tape.
Has something to do with Godel. And possibly Bach and Escher.
To keep their game this long. They used to add real value, by moving paper about.
But I suspect that they have overplayed their hand. They could have become the curator of all this open access papers, maybe charging for submissions to cover costs. Instead they look like going the way of newspaper classified advertisements.
So planes have to be built fairly lightly, but windmills can be much more solid. More like the propeller, which on a 172 is near supersonic at the tips.
The windmills simply feather their blades much like the variable pitch prop on the plane you move to after you have mastered the 172.
There are issues, mainly that the wind does not blow steadily from one direction.
For small wind systems, the tower itself is typically hinged so that it can be dropped in a storm. Probably not practical for the bigger systems.
I am not sure what they have hacked, but it is more complex than the summary suggests. And it would be an amazing achievement to be able to improve a system perfected by 4 billion years of evolution without any down side. I suspect there is a downside, maybe a need for more water etc.
Machines traditionally only replaced very repetitive jobs. But over the next 50 years they are going to become much smarter.
Sure, over the next 20 years most of the truck drivers etc. will find some sort of underpaid work elsewhere. But over the next 50 there will be very little unskilled work.
But, as per Parkinson, bureaucracies will grow and grow to take up the slack from those with mediocre intelligence.
And then, maybe in 200 years, computers will be able to program themselves, and will no longer need hungry humans to help them.
An object weighing gigatons has gigatons of weight on its wheels to help it stop, assuming that it has decent brakes on each axel. It is not harder or easier for a big object to stop than a small one.
Now, a faster object is quite a different matter. Ships are a bit different due to the nature of their friction.
We obviously do use symbolic reasoning at the higher level. There is just a lot more to it than Cyc could do.
While the current fashion (especially in the press) is Artificial Neural Networks, I believe that the worm will turn again and more focus will be put on symbolic reasoning. But very hard to build a theorem prover using ANNs. Eventually the two will merge, and then we will have true intelligence.
(That said, I am surprised we have not heard more from Cyc.)
When? Next year? Certainly not. 200 years? Probably. Not long to wait for the end of human supremacy, and probably the end to biological life.
My Sony Bravia just stopped being a monitor. Will only run through its internal an weak applications or a propert DVD player.
Could just be some very weird hidden setting, or some very weird hardware bug. But I strongly suspect a DRM like issue with the automated software updates.
Slashdot Mirror
Would be even cheaper. And the Chinese don't worry about space junk.
On a relatively cheap rocket, one way. And hopefully the Web has been designed so that it can be serviced by a robot, with easy to undo bolts etc.
That restricting the pilot will lead to disaster, or that not restricting the pilot will let them cause a disaster?
I would say that being able to track there position is most unlikely to either cause a disaster or prevent one. But it would make it much cheaper to find the bits left over from a disaster.
Come tax time, the thermal printed paper ones are just blank.
Why use expensive Lidar when stereo vision will also provide good depth perception. Two cameras pointing in the same direction. Line up the dots and do the Trig.
That is a genuine question. I wonder why the focus on Lidar.
Your full of bluster.
Trump wants to stop Mexicans taking our jobs and the bleeding heart Democrats refuse to let him do his job. Everyone knows that, just ask any of my friends.
Your nit picking about details is irrelevant. Politics is simple. Just like Trump.
The whole point of Let's Encrypt. It authenticates via several methods that the holder of the certificate also controls the domain. It is better that what other certifiers do.
You do not need any certificate to just encrypt.
The big issue is that any professionally managed websites should be renewing there certificates a good 90 days before expiry to ensure it stays live if issues arise. So a site going down after just 20 days of inattention shows incompetence.
I am surprised that on Slash Dot people are so consumed with Anti-Trump feelings that they did not see that straight away.
Geese and other birds actually tend not to fly away from airplanes. Which is very odd because they are excellent fliers and it is not hard to spot a 100 ton noisy airliner coming at you.
But as for drones, you are dealing with human mass hysteria about insignificant threats. The geese are far more sensible.
I made the kids watch this recently. Must have been a different country named Britain that the one we know today.
(Most Australian kids are taught zero 20th century history at school. Zero. Due to a National Curriculum.)
Why use GPS? Dead reckoning will get you close enough.
The likelihood of a 500g consumer drone destroying a 100 ton airliner is as close zero as makes no difference. Just look at an airliner. It is big, and solid. And it has two engines, and even losing both of them is unlikely to result in a fatal crash.
NOBODY in the media has picked up on this. Actually thought for a minute about how ridiculous the assertion is.
Sure, a 500kg military drone might do some damage if well aimed. But nobody is talking about one of those. There was an experiment in which somebody fired a fairly large drone out of a cannon at a very light aircraft wing and did major damage (but still did not destroy it), hardly relevant.
Where is the risk assessment? There is about 0.6 fatal accidents for every million airline flights. So a 1 in 100 million additional risk is something to be avoided, but you do not close an airport because of it.
It is a very light and fast aircraft. Not a 100 ton airliner. You could dent a moneys wing with your fist (it would hurt). The leading edge of an airliner is much, much thicker. It is like comparing a rowing boat to an ocean liner.
And that drone in the experiment was not a 500g consumer drone but something weighing over 1kg. Shot out of a cannon. And it still failed to destroy the wing -- the pilot would probably have limped home.
In all of this, NOBODY had questioned the size of the drones spotted. Sure, a well aimed 500kg military drone could do some real damage, but not the 500g drones that people are talking about.
It is bizzare. Just look at a tiny consumer drone, and an airliner, and it is completely obvious that no serious damage could done.
And even if a drone managed to knock out an engine (extremely unlikely), the plane will fly quite happily on one.
Indeed.
DDG does a great job on about 90% of the queries I search. And the other 10% are difficult ones, where Google might be a bit better. But then I do not know when DFG is better than Google.
Overall, Google is probably a bit better, but DDG is fine.
But, as the Tortoise points out to Archilies, if the play back device is of sufficiently high fidelity then a cassette could be constructed that will produce resonances that will cause it to self destruct. And no matter how hard Archilies tries to fix his machine, the Tortoise can always produce a new machine destroying tape.
Has something to do with Godel. And possibly Bach and Escher.
To keep their game this long. They used to add real value, by moving paper about.
But I suspect that they have overplayed their hand. They could have become the curator of all this open access papers, maybe charging for submissions to cover costs. Instead they look like going the way of newspaper classified advertisements.
So did I. But I am not sure that it is a good thing. Two 20 minute rides every day was good for both my health and state of mind.
Planes fly. Windmills do not.
So planes have to be built fairly lightly, but windmills can be much more solid. More like the propeller, which on a 172 is near supersonic at the tips.
The windmills simply feather their blades much like the variable pitch prop on the plane you move to after you have mastered the 172.
There are issues, mainly that the wind does not blow steadily from one direction.
For small wind systems, the tower itself is typically hinged so that it can be dropped in a storm. Probably not practical for the bigger systems.
There is a light dependent reaction that creates ATP, which is the energy source for the light independent Calvin cycle which actually reduces CO2.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I am not sure what they have hacked, but it is more complex than the summary suggests. And it would be an amazing achievement to be able to improve a system perfected by 4 billion years of evolution without any down side. I suspect there is a downside, maybe a need for more water etc.
Well done anyway, if true.
Machines traditionally only replaced very repetitive jobs. But over the next 50 years they are going to become much smarter.
Sure, over the next 20 years most of the truck drivers etc. will find some sort of underpaid work elsewhere. But over the next 50 there will be very little unskilled work.
But, as per Parkinson, bureaucracies will grow and grow to take up the slack from those with mediocre intelligence.
And then, maybe in 200 years, computers will be able to program themselves, and will no longer need hungry humans to help them.
An object weighing gigatons has gigatons of weight on its wheels to help it stop, assuming that it has decent brakes on each axel. It is not harder or easier for a big object to stop than a small one.
Now, a faster object is quite a different matter. Ships are a bit different due to the nature of their friction.
can destroy a 100 ton airliner, why wouldn't you believe that it can also destroy a bridge?
When instead you can pay $100,000,000s for a software security surveillance department within the military?
Paint.net has layers, and several good adjustments.
Paint can print properly, unlike Paint.net. No layers is a killer limitation.
Kritta supports a pressure sensitive stylus which Paint.net does not. And layers etc.
Paint 3D is junkware.
I have not used Gimp for years but it was generally horrible.
Inkscape is vector based, quite different from the above.
We obviously do use symbolic reasoning at the higher level. There is just a lot more to it than Cyc could do.
While the current fashion (especially in the press) is Artificial Neural Networks, I believe that the worm will turn again and more focus will be put on symbolic reasoning. But very hard to build a theorem prover using ANNs. Eventually the two will merge, and then we will have true intelligence.
(That said, I am surprised we have not heard more from Cyc.)
When? Next year? Certainly not. 200 years? Probably. Not long to wait for the end of human supremacy, and probably the end to biological life.
My Sony Bravia just stopped being a monitor. Will only run through its internal an weak applications or a propert DVD player.
Could just be some very weird hidden setting, or some very weird hardware bug. But I strongly suspect a DRM like issue with the automated software updates.
So, Samsung want to own all computing?