From what I've read, drones are already an important part of the blow distribution infrastructure.

As far as hookers go, well, I'll be by the time they're delivered via drone, the drone will actually be the hooker...

I think the caring (more) for women is at least partially biologically hardwired, but of course, the advantage of being human is that we don't have to obey our hard wiring when it conflicts with a reasoned ethical position.

Treating men and women when they're on the down and out could happen if we applied ourselves. But currently, as a society, we're more concerned with treating men and women equally in boardrooms, and as there are fewer women on the bottom, well... it's not an area I see getting a high priority in the near future.

Oh, I understand it very well, and was active in a rare non-judgemental forum for a long time. The actual act itself is often triggered due to short term events, but people contemplating suicide have often lived with depression a long time, and among them, interest in methods is so high that most 'help' forums will outright ban any discussion of suicide or methods and/or threaten to call police on anyone discussing it. Most will have had suicidal thoughts for months or years, and looking at how to do it is a normal component of that. Many will prepare for and have a method that is at least realizable within a few days to a week.

Most are smart enough not to actually admit to it to healthcare or family, as nothing good for them, personally, will come from that, so I think it looks a lot more sudden and unresearched in many cases than it actually is.

I doubt masculinity has much to do with it; the human body is simply quite durable. If you want to be certain, it all comes down to one thing; destroying the brain, physically or by oxygen starvation. Most effective ways to do that are by necessity quite violent, and the ones that aren't are technically complicated or highly uncertain. As both men and women contemplating suicide will find that out quite quickly, the disparity must be explained by something else. And like I said, personally I think it's largely due to men being quite sure that they're not going to get any long term help, so they'd better make sure they're off permanently.

"Which is not to say I'm unsympathetic, but the issue isn't the disparity, it's the things that drive people to suicide."

That's saying that women are incompetent at suicide. It's not like it's a big secret that pills and cutting aren't very likely to actually kill you and getting information of easily accessible methods that will actually get the job done isn't more than a search away (automotive assisted decapitation ftw!). Being capable of researching options isn't a gendered thing (or we should re-evaluate a lot of things).

I suspect the reality is that the disparity is largely based on the rational projections of future life chances. There's a large difference in the likely development of a life for those who aren't completely capable of dealing with it for men and women. Women make an ultimately rational choice to keep chances high to get help, because they have a significant chance of actually getting help, and even women who can never support themselves will often be able to life a somewhat decent life, get support from parents, attract a mate, etc. While men... well, a failed suicide attempt isn't exactly CV improving material.

So, whether a fully conscious choice or not, the disparity is sociologically and probably biologically rational. Men have better reasons to be serious about it if they decide to check out.

And I really don't see any tendencies that it will change. Rather, I think our care for women is biologically hardwired, and the way society is progressing for the moment, being unsympathetic to men is more popular than ever. I mean, fuck, look at something like BLM; even if, in reality, the black men are mainly getting shot due to being male rather than being black, would you try launching a 'mens lives matter' movement? I think not.

Then again, there are others who regard polite disagreement as disrespect. I have friends, or, well, 'friends' who I don't discuss politics with as they just can't handle it. I still sometimes listen to their rants, as I personally find all opinions interesting, but they're not likely to convince me of anything. Their arguments are simply pathetically blunt and filled with errors as they never engage in real debate, but rather hang around in an echo chamber.

People with androgen insensitivity syndrome are XY but will develop externally as completely female.

Of course, if the system actually uses a resolution that accurate, it's quite likely you won't even be your own doppelganger. Retaining water would be enough to throw it off.

I'd wager that evolution and neural net learning has struck a pretty optimal balance between false positives and false negatives for this in the human brain.

Oh, and the human system definitely uses measures the researchers didn't take in this study; ever failed to recognize someone because they're not in the same context you usually see them? Heck, I once spent 2 hours on a train talking to someone I thought I sort of recognized. A day later I realized I'd been talking to a (former) CEO of one of the biggest companies in the country, but of course, I wasn't exactly used to seeing him outside TV or newspapers. Ah, well, at least he got an early insight into free software.

The commission is the only entity that can propose legislation. Usually, you do elect the people who can propose legislation.

The power of the actual elected body, the European Parliament, is still quite limited. They don't even have enough power to prevent their forced relocation from Brussles to Strassbourgh every month, rather being caught in a perpetual schoolyard bully 'stop hitting yourself' moment. They've managed to block legislation, what, once in history?

There are good and bad things about the EU, but democratic credibility isn't one of the good ones.

Yeah, I think it's quite common in most places for the same reasons you mention. And a human or an autonomous car with more situational awareness can deal with those situations by being extra alert and careful and keeping a pre-planned problem resolution at hand (ie, ensuring there's space behind/at the side to emergency break while passing).

But the Tesla just drives right into it, keeps a speed that might as well have been planned to make it invisible to the truck, while closing the distance to the car in front in a place where the road layout makes it look like it's intentionally cutting people from the merging road off from being able to take the exit. It's really bad behaviour.

I can't even say that it's good that it's collision avoidance managed to avoid the collision, because it that's how it works, there's a high chance that people will start to figure 'oh, look, I'm being cut off by a Tesla being a dick. No problem, it's fast enough to deal with me forcing myself into its lane.'.

In the near miss video the Tesla is engaged in behaviour that is so dangerous that it's illegal in many countries, as it's overtaking the truck in the outside lane. The legality might be a bit mitigated due to what seems to be a road merge right before, so the lane speeds might not have gotten sorted out, but considering the off-ramp or whatever it is that the truck is heading for, it's a traffic situation where exactly what happened is highly likely to happen. A situation where most human drivers would be very, very careful about exactly what that truck was doing if they intended to pass it. And where any real autonomous car should absolutely not be moving faster than the cars in the lanes to the left at anywhere near highway speeds.

Everything is being tied back to real identity and it's becoming more and more difficult to publish anything without leaving a trail back to yourself.

Reading the actual article (sorry...) the actual reason is that 'computer programmer' in this case means (more or less) 'mainframe programmer'.

The study also includes the titles we would normally be including in 'computer programmer', and they have slightly different statistics...:
Software Engineer – $0.94
Mobile Developer – $0.97

Well, it's hardly surprising if the bot used Twitter to build its responses, Twitter seems to excel in dragging it's users mental capacity down into the gutters. Exposing it to Tumblr would probably have resulted in something more stereotypically 'teen girl', and putting it in a class on critical theory and you'd get a random generator of meaningless words.

Neo-Nazi Sex Robot has a better sales potential than windows mobile though, maybe Microsoft should see if it can aquire Boston Dynamics from Google and combine these revolutionary technologies into a truly spectacular future for humankind.

Are they actually serious? I assumed this was the way that it was always done; for as long as I can remember it's always been pointed out that self-destruct traps are essentially pointless as no serious attacker would be so grossly incompetent that they'd try to break into the original.

For things like rubber hose protection you'd use plausible deniability material instead where the 'wrong' password reveals something somewhat embarrassing but fairly innocent, so they basically can't tell if there's anything more available. Destroying the contents instead merely means you gave them the wrong code and they know there's a right one and they still have the next copy and can beat you with the rubber hose until you give them one that unlocks it.

If the FBI is actually working with the original there needs to be some serious firing done...

Quotas we barely ever use anymore, to the extent they exist they tend to be integrated into applications if there's a point to them. Wasting employee time is extremely expensive compared to disk. Most systems support snapshots on multiple levels already, from OS/LVM and virtualization layers down to the SAN/NAS. ACL's, after 30 years, managing probably about 10k unix systems, I have run across a handful of situations where it would have been useful, and exactly zero cases where the cost benefit ratio would have made it economically viable. Most modern filesystems support them, but for applications that need that access granularity, the functionality tends to end up in application or database layers. Minor cache improvements pale in comparison to simply throwing the entire performance demanding application on flash-only, FusionIO or NVME disks.

Boot environments like that have been done in various ways for as long as I can remember, where the earliest were basically the diskless NFS based clients where you could simply copy the filesystem and run the update on that. After that, any simple disk mirror could be split off and cloned for a snapshot system to work with. Thankfully, such functionality is approaching irrelevance as well, as application design is growing up enough to actually build redundancy into the application layer so you can take any number of servers offline at any time. Snapping a root filesystem isn't exactly necessary when the application is built to live on a server instance that will disappear and be replaced with a fresh disposable instantiated image on next reboot...

And yes, most features mean pretty much raid, compression, caching, deduplication, snapshots, etc.

It's not that it's a bad filesystem, it's a quite good one. But the problems it solves are becoming legacy issues of less relevance in an industry where the discussion is shifting toward whether there will be an OS as we know it underpinning the application infrastructure at all.