Re: Oh no!
What's a "Honey-BooBoo"? If it's not a whale or a shark.... it sounds like a rather irritating bumblebee. Or maybe a reality show....
12884 publicly visible posts • joined 22 Nov 2012
I think you've defined the threat. AI by itself isn't much of a threat at this point. However, it's in control of many things, it might deem that say.... North America is a waste of resources and should be cleansed. However, the one thing that's missing is emotion and self-awareness unless things develop to include them. Those are the real threats and always have been, not just from AI but humans.
Logic can lead to many decisions and mostly the correct one for a given situation. Toss in emotion and self-awareness and you're no longer dealing with just a machine but something more than machine and more than human. And we've all seen through history how humans have screwed things up with emotions like greed, power, and all the ones that radiate from and into those. A truly AI machine with sentience would be a very dangerous thing indeed.
With all the weasel words and add-ons like "exercise and a healthy diet", I smell a rat. Or more like someone got a grant by a company to find some great thing for their product. That last paragraph infers a lot but let's face it, going out into the sun is done by those that are not couch potatoes.
Top boffins? or Paid Shills?
I could see it being used in a mobile platform, if the railgun and the power system could be compact enough for an MBT. But the Bradley is more for personnel movement, fighting light armor, scouting, etc. It's not a heavy hitter like an MBT. There is a TOW missile launcher on it for use against armor and structures. The gun system isn't a heavy hitter but again, light armor, personnel, etc. Maybe that's the goal or specialized air defence?
But... given it's BAE, I wonder how much this thing would cost and if it would ever work.
Railguns in the Naval world are not just for air defense as they're looking at ship-to-ship also. Not sure where this will lead there.
Good points, but let's face it, in this day and age it's all about the bottom line and risk management.
1) Do these bits of nastiness cause the company to lose money or spend money? Only if they get hit. Months later, customers forget and resume doing what they've always done.
2) Are they preventable? Mostly but it costs money. Risk management may say: don't spend the money until we get hit. If you spend the money in prevention, you may still get hit and have to spend more to remove it.
3) Can anyone, any more be that stupid? Yes, when blinded by the bottom line... see 1) & 2).
They should be using a secure OS and not have their POS devices open to the 'Net. They should be patched, use secure passwords, etc., etc., etc. But they don't. And nor will they until some entity forces them into it where the fines are larger than the cost to fix the problem.
Can we bring back firing squads for scum like this? Preferably staffed with shooter with myopia and maybe an astigmatism so that it'll take more than one shot?
Instead of that, we get a variation of telling them to go stand in the corner and promise never to do that again.
Realtors deal in Real Estate in the States. I suppose there's a Not Real Estate or maybe a Fictional Real Estate. The term has always made wonder. I guess it's time for me to learn something....
Hmm... per the 'Net... first used in 1666. It's a legal term used in used in jurisdictions such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Nigeria, Australia, and New Zealand.
But nothing is telling me 'why' it's called that other than the legal "real property" vs. "personal property".
So if I read this correctly, it's late where I am and I'm probably not grasping this correctly.... the latency will come from shipping the container to the destination? I guess it would be faster than the US Mail.
Ok.. so just set me straight if I'm wrong. I have my idiot moments with this quantum stuff.
<rant>
Two companies get fined because the 3rd party service they used wasn't secure. At the least, the 3rd party service should have been fined. I'm truly puzzled... banks, stores, etc. never take a hit from any watchdog in this country. They get some negative media attention and that's about it and in the meantime, way too many people have had their personal info compromised.
At least in healthcare, Medicare <rolls eyes> can punish insurance and providers if personal info is compromised. Or they at least threaten to. But what the hell about all the non-healthcare?
Maybe I'm naïve, but I wonder if the threat of large fines would cause these companies to take data security seriously?
</rant>
And no, I don't feel better because of the rant. I'm just wondering what it's going to take before any company that has an 'Net connection will take security seriously.
It does make me wonder about the coincidence (if there is such a thing) of all the delays for the auction, the cable mergers, and the net neutrality ruling. Looks to me like it's more than incompetence in making decisions which is the norm for any governmental group.
It couldn't be that if they push this stuff off until after the Presidential Election next year, they won't take blame one way or the other? Maybe be able to land a great income as a lobbyist? Maybe... maybe... maybe....?
Exactly. The less the company pays the labor, the more the execs can take home and the more the stock market loves the execs and company which translates to more money for the execs with stock options.
I find it very suspect that they "overlooked" the labor law since they flew in the employees from India office rather than having the local office employees do the work or even contracting out the work.
They traded their home regime slurping but gave the 5-eyes easier slurping. Or maybe... gave everyone the gruel for slurping? Or...the data gets sent home for "safekeeping" and the home slurp? Lately it's a question not of who's slurping but who's not slurping.
Seems the FCC is dragging its collective feet on these two subjects. I realize they are complex in nature but the longer this drags on, the more people might get interested. But I think they're hoping the furor dies down and any decision will get buried (pardon the non-internet reference) back on page 37 of the daily rag.
As for the networks, I can see where they're up a creek on this one. Merge the giants and the networks will probably have to take less money per customer while the giants will most likely charge the customer's more.
As for the Net Neutrality... same situation. The FCC will make the unpopular decision but the news will probably be overlooked the longer they drag it on. And again, the giants make more dosh if they win.
I don't believe for a minute that the FCC will the do the right thing for the people but will do the right thing for the companies who will be the governing members new employers in due time.
I'm going to be a devil's advocate here for a moment... Will this mean that if you don't own a smartphone, you're screwed? There's still a lot of people (in spite of what Apple, Nokia, Samsung, etc.would have us believe) that don't have smartphones. Will this mean that having one will become a condition of employment? A condition to use their home computer? Every "solution" always begats more headaches.
While it's nice to hear that Congress "probably" wouldn't go along with the FBI, it's too late. I think we
Americans have lost all faith in Congress or the 3-letter agencies to do the right thing. Hell... Congress has a pissing contest just on passing a budget and any other legislation. What makes us think that they wouldn't have one on this and then give into the FBI?
Yahoo! has been working to get itself back on the right side with more of a focus on ads and acquiring startups to boost its appeal with marketers.
If they boosted their appeal to users, it would seem the marketers (and stock prices and profit) would follow. Or did I sleep through Business 101 when they were discussing customers, etc.?