Re: 3 Laws Safe?
And most of those ads will be for medical and physical rehab services.
368 posts • joined 8 Feb 2019
> ones family jewels not under ones control has always fallen into my "Bad" box.
A bad comparison from my point of view. I have kept key valuables and documents in a bank safety deposit box for decades. In that time I have had two house break-ins but the bank's vault has remained secure.
> "and an ability to withstand higher power levels, making them well-suited for use with lasers."
I designed fibre optic transmitters in the early 80s and even then we only used laser diode emitters for telco equipment. Have they been using anything else for long haul since then?
At the time, T1 (1.5 Mb/s) was commercially available with T3 (45Mb/s) as the goal for new telco products. By the time I moved on we were building specialized 50 Mb/s local fibre networks (Hubnet) and trying and compete with Token ring and 10Mb/s Ethernet.
If money was the only problem then I might agree with your sentiment, but it is not. Wars and local political corruption have a way of undoing our (usually) good intentions.
Does not mean we should not try but if we don't keep investing in our own future we will loose the ability to even try.
>Back in the day, a homestead in the USA required that the property be developed somehow, either by using it for agriculture or mining or "whatever" but you couldn't just claim it and then prevent others from doing so.
Unfortunately, in the short term, the visible side of the moon might be most valuable as a big (really big) billboard. Would that count as commercial use or whatever?
Just send up a large swarm of devices that plant themselves on the moon in an array, each one acting as an image pixel. I can see the Google, SpaceX and Amazon logos now.
I think that idea is from a short story I read many years ago.
> what else was the suggestion of drunkenness supposed to convey?
Motive. Alcohol can effect your judgment leading to misadventure. This does not in any way suggest that they deserve to die, but it might explain why an and otherwise reasonable person does something that in hindsight seems foolish.
I am lucky enough to have survived some youthful misadventures and (mostly) wiser for it.
Imagine if a car manufacturer demanded a commission from your fuel supplier (gas station) every time you fill up your car or had it modified. Just substitute phone for car and that is what Apple is doing.
>how can you make a financial transaction without giving personal details away,
By asking the customer directly, like in every other online purchase. We already pay a 2% or so commission to credit card companies for this.
Taking a one-time 30% (or whatever) cut of the initial sale or subscription may be reasonable but taking cuts of all ongoing subscription renewals and purchases is not.
Yes there are alternative access and payment means, but Apple hides the costs from the end user by forbidding the apps from promoting of alternatives or restricting the pricing of alternatives.
Make the upfront cost appear low or free to build the market dominance and then put the screws to developers and hide the cost premium from consumers.
>Now why would that be the case?!
1) They may not want existing employees realizing how much they are under paid for their skill set.
2) Other countries or states my have conflicting laws. Compulsory in one place, a privacy violation in another. I'm sure Google would like to harvest your salary range to help with targeting ads and content.
We don't know that support actually tried to stop the car. After watching the video it looks to me like:
- driver system misinterprets first traffic cones as an animal or pedestrian in or about to enter the lane.
- car yields right-of-way, waiting patently for animal or pedestrian to move out of the way.
- car gets tired of waiting (times out), decides they are stationary obstacles so goes around the first set
- approaches second set of cones and repeats the same behaviour, stop and wait, time-out, attempt to go around.
- in this situation it has to reverse to go around but traffic approaching from rear causes it to stop in the lane
- driver system finally gives up or is given the stop order.
If possible they need to train it to better distinguish between stationary and mobile objects in the middle of the road. Start adding severe weather and road debris to the situation and they have a long way to go for a true robo taxi.
> a healthy dose of scepticism
But what is the right dose? Being overly skeptical of your competitors/enemies capabilities can just leave you vulnerable when you don't invest to compete.
When it comes to science, China has just as much incentive to hide or understate their capabilities as to overstate them. When it is about internal domestic politics they have little reason to tell us the truth.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021