Indeed. I didn't owe my mother and father anything.
It wasn't concern for a non-existing me that made them fuck - it was pure lust on their part.

Now they don't exist, and I'm good with that.

It's worse than that. Mother's Day has turned into a day where every adult woman, whether a mother or not, expects to be treated as if it were their birthday.
There's already March 8 for women.

You don't understand statistics. It's not one specific unanticipated event that is the problem, it's that there are millions of them, all the time. You cannot focus one one particular one and scoff at that one, because that does nothing to any of the other millions of unanticipated events that occur. Just on my short drive to work today, I must have encountered at least a dozen unanticipated events.
- Pollen blocked a small part of my backing camera.
- A neighbor had blown a big pile of leaves onto the street. I had to drive around it.
- It started drizzling lightly. Too lightly for my car's auto-rain sensor to kick in.
- A police car without sirens, just blinking lights came in the opposite direction.
- A crow was pecking on roadkill.
- Children were "dancing" around on the sidewalk on their way to school. It's a 50 zone, but prudence told me 20 was plenty when driving past them.
- On an unmarked section of road, another driver didn't know the yield-to-right rule, and almost t-boned a car coming out on the road, swerving into the lane in front of me while (rather incorrectly) tooting his horn.
- Pollen and leaves covered exit lanes, lane markers and double yellow lines. Sometimes severely so. ... and probably lots of other things that I don't remember, because to me, the decisions are ones I just make without remembering them. Focusing on any one of these things is not useful, because there are so many of them. Every day. Every drive.

That any one of them is very low likelihood is irrelevant - it's the sheer number of very low likelihood events that occur that makes it a certainty that unexpected events will happen. And expert systems cannot deal with unexpected events the way humans can. Or, for that matter, even detecting that there is something unusual. Even a small detection failure rate multiplied with the number of possibilities makes for a staggering high number.

That they have thought of them doesn't imply they have any good answers.

The problem is that even if you can anticipate 90% of the things that can happen out there, there will always be a 10% you can't anticipate. You don't anticipate them as a driver either. There's no way for "the incredibly smart people" to make decisions ahead of time for things they cannot think of.

For humans, it takes a couple of decades of learning how to be a human, so you understand that if a policeman with a gun walks up to your car, you do not move, but if a shady looking person does the same, you gun it out of there. Or any other of unanticipated things that drivers encounter. Millions of them every day.

I think the war will be how fast and reliable they are. A system that's safer but takes longer to get people from A to B, or gives up and stops for any little thing in order to increase safety won't be too popular.

My life has only so many minutes. I don't want to spend more of them than I have to being slow cargo.

You are not considering the speed they're going at and which roads they are going on. It's easy to avoid accidents when going sub-25 speeds on a predefines subset of roads. Whether you're human or not.

Until we see some data on how autonomous cars do on all kinds of roads and driving speeds and conditions, I don't think we should extol their safety. Going 55 mph over a hilltop on a country road, or avoiding a deer is a bit different. Or a busy bumper-to-bumper city street where no-one will let you over in the next line unless you force the issue.

I'd also ask how long it took for the car to get from A to B, and how it compares to a human driver. Time is important to people; enough so that we're willing to deal with risks to save time.

You put too much faith in the accuracy of the geographical guess of where the IP is. My static IP address is listed being in a shed around two blocks away from where my ISP is, and around 40 miles away from where I actually am. My dynamic IP address is listed around 5 miles away from where I am.

(But thanks for the correction of the IP address to .30 instead of .20)

% nslookup -type=PTR 20.202.111.74.in-addr.arpa. ::
Server: ::
Address: ::#53

Non-authoritative answer:
20.202.111.74.in-addr.arpa name = static-74-111-202-20.lsanca.fios.verizon.net.

And the check is in the mail.

No, this is just plain irresponsible behavior by those who share infomation to PillPack and others.

Recently, I noticed that when I picked up a prescription for a (for me new) medication that's mostly used for one purpose, I suddenly got dozens of spam e-mails wanting to "help" me with a particular diagnosis I don't have. And that's the few that went through the double layer spam filter. It was way too pervasive to be a coincidence.

It's clear that the US prescription system leaks like a sieve, and that even spammers have access to people's prescription history.
Can we go back to paper prescriptions that don't enter a database, please?

Why would anyone need to reverse engineer open source libraries from Android?

Yes, Agile (if done correctly)

That's like saying "buggery (if done correctly)".

The ones who might take pleasure from it will rarely be on the receiving end.
Even the performers may feel dirty afterwards.

No one does Agile "correctly". The customer doesn't have the time to invest in micro-managing decisions.
The developer side does not have enough time left over to investigate the big picture and have detailed specs before producing code.
And management never gives the dev side enough time to revisit the code. It's always going to be "move on" instead of "move on when ready and move back when required". Things will get handed over the wall just as much as before.

In theory, Agile is fine. But it never survives first impact with customers and management, who invariably wants the benefits of Agile without paying the costs.

In practice, it's running lemming sprints.

I could be wrong, but I think that high level management are more used to settings where face-to-face communication is the driving force, and that paperwork is something secretaries and lawyers do.
I don't think they really appreciate the need for precision, lack of ambiguity and a verifiable record that exists within engineering and development, and think that face time can replace precise types of communication.

I'm sure the phone companies are happy, though.

Here's the cliff notes version:
EPR = ER is true if Podolsky equals 1.

A bunch of us who actually manage systems tend to disagree.
Hundreds of DOS ini files, having to compile things instead of just modding a script, and not being able to step through a startup or shutdown process is not what we all consider easily manageable.

If it really were easily manageable, it would not have caught so much flak.

Sometimes you're the octopus, sometimes you're the girl.