1461 posts • joined Monday 18th August 2008 17:08 GMT
Re: Rubin's Robots
> Plus the singing / dancing routine every couple of minutes as they deliver an advert
Hah, that's a scary prospect :D
So you want you bathroom washed out or your garbage collected? Just watch this 2 minute advert before I perform this menial function...
Re: Hastening French Revolution 2.0, I see
Of course the ideal is that if all the jobs that no-one wants to do are being done by machines, then we instantly don't need jobs or money. Robots doing all the non-interesting stuff is the fast path to a post-scarcity society.
Question is, as a race would we be able to live in that kind of society?
I honestly think that robotics, and in particular, robotics in the field of "doing all those shit jobs that we don't want to do, but are still hard for robots" are going to be a big field in the future.
This market is going to be enormous and the Japanese realise this, even if it is also "cool".
This guy with Google realise this and the have the wonga to get into it. I feel that now is a good time to getting into this field.
Re: @Richard... Throw the book at her.
> Think of it like having an open bottle of whiskey (top on) sitting on the floor on the passenger side front seat.
You're confusing things. The open bottle would be sufficient to raise suspicion.
A quick blow in the breathalyzer would settle it.
The objections to your point above are pointing out that opportunity to commit a crime is not the same as actually committing a crime. Some of the laws that are brought in to tackle some of the anti-social issues lately have become rather unreasonably over bearing.
Here in BC, Canada we have recently had new laws about using handheld devices while driving. Well I've never used a device while driving, since I believe it is an unnecessary distraction. However, the law has not been framed in that way. The law here says that you can be booked if the car is "under your control". Which basically means if the engine is on and you are in the driving seat. So no pulling over the the side of the road and parking up to take a call then which is what I might have done previously. Now doing the "right thing" can get you a ticket just as easily as behaving like a twat and all good will from the driving public is sucked right out of the legislation.
Sometimes, I have to wonder if the people making these laws has even half a brain.
Re: "nothing illegal to be wearing Google Glass"... yet.
> As an aside I often wonder if the USA's addiction to 4-way stops goes some way to explainng their ridiculously high urban fuel consumption levels.
Nah, that's because their cars are shit.
Actually, the 4-way (or all-way) junctions are a better alternative to the mini-roundabout as fairness is enforced by the 4-way rules, i.e. the first to arrive is the first to leave, with additional rulings for when vehicles arrive simultaneously. Busy mini-roundabouts have an alarming and annoying tendency to lock up with no-one quite sure who can go.
> True. We are fortunate however to live in a society where the police need evidence to charge you with an offence, and until using a mobile while driving was explicitly in the books as a no no, people got away with it unless they were caught having a whoopsie with another car or the kerb etc.
Yes, but you're unfortunately falling into the common trap of forgetting what the law is trying to address.
The problem is accidents, not distraction. If that were the case, the the police would not be allowed to used laptops and radios lest they crash into someone.
In days gone by, your evidence would be given by a police officer detailing what he saw and how, in his opinion, you were not paying proper attention. Even if we did have a law about using a mobile phone, we have to have a police officer testifying to seeing you using it, or catch it on a camera.
The current situation now involves a ton of people getting booked for using a mobile phone while driving without ever being involved in an accident. So banning mobile phone use feels intuitively like you're doing something worthy about the problem, in actual fact all it does is criminalise a lot of people that aren't doing any harm whatsoever without making any difference to the accident rate.
It would still be a crime to use a mobile phone while driving if it caused an accident without making it explicitly so.
Personally, I think it is disgraceful for elected representatives to be suggesting a boycott of ANY business.
What next? Telling us we shouldn't support *certain* charities?
Have these people not got anything better to be doing?
Re: Fancy Kim Kardashian's ... nose?
A cardassian nose would be cooler.
Or a forehead.
Re: Agree with most comments here...
> Sorry, Amazon does not pay the UK Govt any VAT whatsoever, that money is paid by consumers as a tax on all goods that they choose to procure from Amazon.
I think you'll find that everything Amazon pays ultimately comes from the customer.
Your differentiations are accounting in nature only.
Yet another attempt to make watching "free" content as painfully awful as the legitimate channels.
You know, the content vendors could make their efforts as pain free and as compelling as the Netflix model.
Give the people what they want at a reasonable price, not stuffed with ads, convenient, without cramming it full of messages telling you that you're a fucking criminal, and able to watch it whenever and wherever they want and people will pay for it. Most of the pirating would just dry up.
> Baroness of Soho
Her stage name surely?
> Prime Minister David Cameron gushed that MLF's efforts were nothing short of a "revolution".
Sorry, my gutter mind read that as MiLF.
Ah yes, Friday morning lunacy.
Evidently crime doesn't pay all that well.
Re: Compensating for something?
Jesus, did someone really vote me down for being happy?
What kind of saddo would do that?
Re: @skelband Here's an idea
> Why do you assume that a presumption of innocence is a democratic right?
Alas you are right.
I should have said a free society.
<sigh> I do remember that we did at least pretend to have one at some point.
Not really sure why Minecraft wouldn't work for you.
It's written in JAVA and runs OK for my son on our Linux Mint/Ubuntu machine.
Download it, make sure you have JAVA installed and off you go.
There aren't really an issues unless the machine is just too pedestrian on the graphical front to cope.
What were the particular issues that you had?
Re: Here's an idea
> My thoughts are that (1) Should an ISP be required to block a site on the grounds of accusation alone, then such a block should only stand for a limited period, during which the petitioner should be required to prove, in a court, the offence.
Well here's another thought: Perhaps it could be blocked *after* the accusation has been proved in court. You know, like we do in a democracy.
Re: As if security theatre were *about* security.
It's just like 1984. In fact it is disturbingly like 1984.
Re: As a PS3 owner
> DVDs are far from enough. If you can't see the huge quality difference between a BluRay and a DVD then you are blind or under drugs.
Depends what you're looking for.
DVDs have been phenomenally successful, but look what they were taking over from: VHS, a truly awful and inconsistent experience. Like the difference between tape and CD.
Sure, Bluray is cleaner and better, but the motivation to move to it is far less than what we saw for DVD and the slow take up backs that up. Notwithstanding the cost of Bluray players, DVD players were dear when they first came out as well. There has not been the same scale of increase of production with Bluray as we saw with DVD.
> Please, detail your cold logic for the world, skelband. I await your wisdom, in awe of your profound humanity.
Firstly, I'm not quite sure if you with me or against me here. Your post is a bit ambiguous.
>I'm so very deeply sorry that I don't view human being as commodities to be bartered and discarded.
You pose a false dichotomy. Realising that it is pointless trying to put an economic value on a person doesn't mean that you don't care, it means that you prefer to use other, more useful measures.
I value human life. However, having a conceptual scale with a pot of bodies on one side and a pile of money on the other seems to me to be futile and meaningless.
Ask a father what his daughter is worth and he'll probably say he would die for her: he would not trade all the money in the world for her, her intrinsic value is not something that you can put into sterling. The question is meaningless and facile.
Problem with a lot of these laws, where they try to proscribe what is allowed and what is not is that it creates inconsistency. Is fiddling with the car radio distraction?
What we really need is a reason to trust the judgment of cops again and have them book people for driving while distracted, a statute which we have had for a *long* time.
Picking out a long list of official things that are distracting is a road to nowhere good and it will just make the ensuing litigation all the more complex (e.g. banning phone use, but what about this iPad?)
I usually switch off a debate when I see a question like "What is the monetary value of a human life?"
It's a stupid question and has no real meaning. How can you possible put a value on a human life?
Like when someone tries to justify some stupid, far-reaching legislation with "think of the children" or "isn't it worth it to save lives". It might well be, but using a human cost monetary justification is stupid and pointless.
You can only frame the question as "Is the cost equitable to the benefit we see from it" and even that is an entirely subjective question.
> I am having trouble distinguishing these NSA guys from the "Hackers" and other "Miscreants" on the internet.
The difference is in the size of their budget and the number of weapons that they have.
Re: Compensating for something?
You guys bring joy to a boring Monday morning.
Re: As a PS3 owner
The problem with PS4 and XBone is that their playing to the technologically diminishing returns game.
We have a guy here that got a PS4 on launch night. He says that the games look clearer and sharper in 1080p but really it's like comparing Bluray to DVD. For most people, DVD is good enough. I just don't think there are *that* many people ready to give up on their PS3 and XBOX 360 just yet in just the same way that the Bluray players are nice but for most people too expensive to make it worthwhile for the difference in quality.
Large screens might make a difference for some people but if you have a standard box, the difference is more marginal.
Erm, dairy products, I mean :D
Although fairy products do have a bit of a rough ride here.
I'm not a big lover of governments messing with free trade. Any attempt at restricting trade or imposing tariffs/duty always has side effects.
Look at the enormous duty on fairy products into Canada. Hopelessly inefficient dairy farms and ridiculously expensive, yet shit cheese in the shops.
> I'm assuming you consider yourself to be an intelligent being who requires evidence in order to make decisions.
It has been well documented that world religions are pretty self-sustaining once they get going.
They require only that their participants suspend logic and that they indoctrinate their children. The indoctrination helps with the logic suspension as it happens.
Someone must have kicked them off in the first place.
1) they emerge spontaneously by people "having a laugh" or
2) they naturally occur through superstition and grow from there, or
3) someone with influence (read money/power) was on drugs and persuaded people in their power that sky fairies exist with the threat of stabbing to death.
But 3) would never happen would it?
Oh wait, that's exactly what happened.
Certainly in England and many other places. Either be a Christian or die. Your choice.
Re: Keep calm...
> in which Google used its might to simply brush aside the objections of the Author's Guild ?
Well in all fairness, it was a US court that did the brushing.
> We will be commercializing the advanced printing platform beyond smartphone manufacturing use and anticipate it being useful as a fab-grade manufacturing to a variety of products and industries, but Motorola will have an exclusive on the use of it for smartphone manufacturing in the beginning. New materials will be developed and used but there is nothing specific to announce on this front right now. As we develop the new materials they will also become commercially available for other markets.
So, erm, no then.
But probably not the first instance of "open-washing" then.
Can I claim first use of the term?
> The wine was flavoured with honey, mint, cinnamon bark, juniper berries and even mysterious "psychotropic resins", which might explain why people in the biblical era spent so much time spouting prophesies and wearing technicolor dreamcoats.
.. and believing in fairies that live in the sky.
> Whatever the Chinese impose on others in terms of trade tariffs, impose on them. They will soon get the point.
If the trade balance between China and their trading partners was balanced, you'd have a good point.
However, since China is a net exporter of practically everything, reciprocity is not a realistic proposition.
Re: > so bright ... because it was so close to Earth
Indeed. And the actual event happened over 3 billion years ago :D
Re: Yes, a "solution looking for a problem"
> The etch is slow as hell; it took an hour or two, but other than the hydrogen peroxide ... no dangerous chemicals (and at 2-5% the peroxide ain't that dangerous)
Heh, I didn't know that worked. I will give it a try next time.
Re: "scrolling and bouncing" is patentable?
> If no one "gives a monkey's", as you suggest, why did Samsung copy it,...
The point is that it is far too trivial to be patentable. Samsung wouldn't have to copy anything at all. It's pretty intuitive.
Just because someone was the first to do something, doesn't necessarily make it patentable. It has to be fairly revolutionary and not an obvious extension to something that already exists. This kind of thing is clearly not in that bracket.
Over here in Canada (I'm a Brit living abroad at the moment), it still amuses me to see clothes shop signs saying such things as "Black Pant". I imagine a dog sitting there with its tongue hanging out.
Yeah, I know it's technically correct, but my native lingo puts me mostly in mind of the under- variety.
Next time they will just decide to quietly remove it and hope nobody notices.
There's a good reason that you get a lesser sentence if you 'fess up.
They want people to do it.
Re: Yes, a "solution looking for a problem"
> Circuit board prototyping may be a killer app for 3d printing.
I agree with this.
Etching is such a pain and requires hazardous chemicals.
Plain board/etch resist/etching/rinsing/cleaning. A right pain in the arse.
Unless you do a lot of it though I can't see it being worthwhile to have a machine yourself.
Could make it cheap to get a small shop to do it for you though.
And better for the environment. If the copper/silver is applied rather than being removed, would be a lot more economical since copper and silver are pretty dear all told.
Re: Yes, a "solution looking for a problem"
> Plus all the lasers the doctors and attendees of a medical-type seminar use for serious procedures to zapping a stray Kardashian nose hair.
Not only that, we have local business promising to help with giving up smoking with lasers.
I hate think how that works. Something like this I imagine:
"Do you want a fag?"
"Yes" Zzzzap! "Ow!!"
"Do you want a fag?"
"Yes" Zzzzap! "Ow!!"
Rinse and repeat.
It's interesting that the real story of the advert is the incredible accessibility to information that we have now.
If you can look past the blatant pushing of Google's services, it serves as a refreshing relief from the vapourware ads for Microsoft's future technology dreams. This is the technology that is available now, not sometime in the future.
Man, we do live in interesting times.
Re: A view from the other side
Censorship is never the right answer to anything.
Re: Off-topic: Electric cars?!?
> Unless one has aeroelectric or hydroelectric (and what percentage of us might that be?) one only displaces the emissions, from the tail-pipe to the fossil-fueled generator station smokestack. So, still, toxic emissions mount while stocks of fossil fuels decline. The environment still is damaged and, thus, we and our children still are in danger.
The point is to prepare us for the longer term advances in power generation.
Electricity is ultimately a clean form of energy.
If we are to move to cleaner forms of grid generation in the future, solving the problem of powering cars has to be part of that process either way. It's just one piece of the puzzle.
Another aspect is that if some of the future possible developments in grid generation like fusion and cleaner nuclear become possible, they will likely be economic only on a grand scale. You will not be able to put a fusion generator in your car (at least initially).
You could argue that hydrogen is a better option, and it might be true. However, ultimately our cars will have to be propelled by something that is zero or low emission and fueled by something that we can cleanly generate.
So wait a minute. Salesforce isn't a recruitment company then?
Yeah, I think that a lot of people are coming to the conclusion that dead tree books are declining because people are buying electronic instead. All the evidence is that people are buying *more* publications both electronic and otherwise with the advent of e-books.
It turns out that people are reading more, and that's got to be a good thing.
We just need the publishers to get their heads out of their arses and realise that if you have something that people want, they will pay for it despite whatever godawful DRM schemes they come up with.
Why lock them anyway?
If you're locked into contract, you're going to be paying for it anyway.
Any if you bought it outright, there's even less excuse for it.
Re: Talking with passengers
> What is it about libertarians that they come out with obtuse and ill-thought-out either-or responses to any idea of state intervention to protect human beings from themselves or others?
We've just got used to the idea that governments, or at least vocal idiots within them, are hell bent on removing all of our freedoms that we naturally resist all such attempts.
The big problem with the modern approach to this kind of problem is failing to tackle the problem itself and trying to fudge it with over-reaching legislation that doesn't really tackle the problem.
The problem is not concentration, it is accidents because people are not concentrating. If there were no accidents, there would be no problem. It's like alcohol prohibition because some people can't hold their drink. With proper training, it *is* possible to use a communications device while driving. The police do it all the time, and they're usually in a hurry.
In Norway, they had the right idea. When holidaying there a few years ago, we were walking through a village and paused to try to decide where to go when we noticed that the traffic was stopping. There was a pedestrian crossing nearby, but we were not particularly close to it or looking like we wanted to cross. They stopped nevertheless. Later on I mentioned this to the tour guide and they told us that the consequences of knocking over a pedestrian on a crossing were extremely severe. No-one dare take the risk so they play it safe.
I'm one of those libertarians of which you speak. We're not against strong punishments for transgressors. But don't punish everyone for the failings of others. If you cause an accident and it's your fault and you were found to be doing x, y or z, you lose your license for a year, automatically, no questions. No excuses that you need it to earn a crust. If you were that dependent on it, you should be more careful. To get it back, you pass a more stringent driving test.
> Of course, it would be remiss of us not to mention at this point that Google makes a living by harvesting data and then using this information to show its users targeted adverts.
Of course, but at least they are up-front about it.
Sounds like they just need a copy of Wireshark on a really fast PC.
- On the matter of shooting down Amazon delivery drones with shotguns
- OHM MY GOD! Move over graphene, here comes '100% PERFECT' stanene
- Lightning strikes USB bosses: Next-gen jacks will be REVERSIBLE
- Google's new cloud CRUSHES Amazon in RAM battle
- Beijing leans on Microsoft to maintain Windows XP support