Built one almost like it, but with a 35W Core i7 4765T. It's not exactly a cheap machine though, for a HTPC it's way overkill. You can get a lot cheaper to play 1080p BluRays and probably won't be enough when 4K BluRay arrives, 3840x2160x60fps 10-bit HEVC decoding will need new, dedicated chips.
People complained about the playschool look of XP and hated all the chrome. Those same users swore by XP after Vista came out, and will adapt to metro the same.
Guilty as charged, eventually I had to move off 2k for XP. Skipped Vista (went on a Linux hiatus), got 7, skipping 8.x but Win10 looks like the next usable version. Until either WINE is just as good as the real thing or most games are cross-platform I'll probably be stuck with a box with a semi-recent version of Windows. Currently the WINE rating of the game I play the most is garbage.
Or, "Don't take life too seriously... it's not like it's permanent."
At that age it's usually not a problem, you're far more likely to do something reckless and stupid that will have consequences for the rest of your life. I'd at the very least temper it with a bit of "Enjoy today, plan for tomorrow". Sure, life might throw you a curve ball but if act like every day is your last the odds are pretty good that you're wrong and have to live with yesterday.
But let's be serious. The placebo effect is one of the most effective thing in medical problems. The problem with it is that if you don't believe in it, it no longer works. Building false theories that makes sense for most people is therefore a skill that can be much more effective than finding real cures.
And the "anti-placebo" effect if you know doctors and nurses are liars and frauds so you think the actual treatment which has a pretty good track record is just more astrology/homeopathy/placebo bullshit? I mean you have to have a rather big medical community that knows this is as good as sugar pills. And you have to quite often tell that truth to limit the resources taken away from actual medical treatment to spend on placebo. Yes, the truth can be tough to deal with. No, having our real doctors pushing snake oil and superstition won't help. Now if we were talking about better psychological care to people suffering from severe physical conditions I'd be all for that, but not this.
The question is... If you are in your own home, does the robot count as a bartender, or is it an appliance? My guess is the latter, the responsibility belongs to the operator.
Liquor licenses apply just to the sale of alcohol, if I'm at a private party and mix a round of drinks I don't need to follow any regulations except those that generally apply like serving alcohol to minors. And if a minor orders it from the robot, I shouldn't be in any more trouble than if they go to my fridge and grab one. I guess they could require "alcohol lockers" the way they do "gun lockers" around here, but we're not there yet.
Do we have alcohol vending machines now?
Actually when I studied in Germany in the school cafeteria they had beer in the soda vending machine. Good times.
Like many other administration chores, the key management needs almost an expert system to deal with the daily operations for the non-caring, lazy, or just "regular" people.
And the "expert" system most choose is simply having an account - everyting from e-mail accounts to forum accounts to social media accounts. The users keep their password safe - that's securing the endpoints - and then you trust the system to deliver the email to the recipient and not anybody else. Because if you're handing over the keys to a third party, you might as well hand over the communication too.
Crypto is hard to get right. It's hard for the average person to know what ciphers or tools to use and which are just snake oil. It's hard to implement correctly so that it is secure. New ciphers are written by people who have a lot of experience in breaking the old ones. As the old guard ages out, I don't see the same depth of interest in the next generation. With crypto, there's no quick fix, and the new hotness doesn't come overnight.
Crypto is easy. Ciphers are easy. Here's a key you can use it to sign and verify messages, open and seal envelopes.
Using crypto is hard. People lose keys, forget passwords, don't transmit keys in a secure way, don't store keys in a secure way, revoking keys, checking for revocation, using third party services like webmail and so on. Strong crypto is like losing your house key and being told that sucks, but since it's an impenetrable bunker with an unpickable lock there's nothing you can do but start from scratch.
People want recovery options. If my house burns down to the ground and I escape with no passport, no driver's license, no identification of any kind the government will get me a new one. Work will find a way to get me a new access badge and key fob. That's why all those ways to recover your account exist, they're not necessary per se and you don't have to answer the security questions seriously. But when you have fucked up big and the answer is just gibberish you're pretty screwed. That's why people answer those with actual facts.
It would probably look something like this with the tagline "Encryption? I'll break right through that defence."
The rest of the world don't want products with official US backdoors though. So you'll have a very hard time selling anything US made abroad and you'd have to ban foreign imports that don't comply with your backdoor policy. Probably also all second hand private imports like eBay. And open source. If the NSA didn't cost the US enough money already, it will after that. I remember a time when you had to fight to get non-crippled crypto out of the US, only 40 bits for us schmucks. I guess now you'll have to fight to get non-crippled crypto back in...
PewDiePie is #1 in subscribers on YouTube with 35 million and played a major role as himself in two episodes on South Park, that you've never heard of him probably means your interests don't overlap much. Just like I'm sure there's some big Bollywood celebrities that I have no idea who is, no idea who the other guy is though or if he's got any claim to fame outside his game but PewDiePie certainly qualifies, he's not a superstar but I know many celebrities with less claim to fame.
Enforcement doesn't have to be perfect to be worthwhile. If you look at things like land mines and cluster bombs they have become politically very difficult for developed nations to use, and seen as a sign that the user is evil. I'm sure in the future there will be more killer robots, but you probably won't see most countries creating squads of them or using them too openly.
Doubtful, the reason they've become politically very difficult is not their use during war it's that they last well beyond the war. That there's collateral damage might not be popular, but between enemies using civilians as human shields, bad intel, accidents, misunderstandings and simply being caught in the line of fire it happens but nobody quits, just like you don't end the justice system after putting an innocent man in jail. It's a bit harder to excuse why a 5yo playing out in a field got blown to bits 10 years after the war ended. As long as the killer robots stand down when the war is over, I don't think they'll suffer the same backlash.
My understanding of those robot turrets is that they can identify human shaped targets and lock on, but they can't tell friend or foe so their default operating mode is to wait for an operator to give a fire order by feeding the video stream back to a console. They can be left in full auto mode in case of all out attack but in that mode they a just an area denial weapon, more technology than a land mine but no less indiscriminate.
So although they are a robotic weapon system with the ability to decide whether or not to fire by itself, it's not what most people think about when they talk about a fully autonomous weapon system in which a system can make strategic decisions about how to complete an arbitrary objective.
Until you implement some kind of IFF, for example it sends a directed encrypted radio ping that you'd better send a pong back. Or you implement sensors so it will sound warnings, don't shoot you if you put your hands in the air - it works on consoles. Dynamic kill zones by remote control is also a lot more than a land mine, you can for example put it in ambush mode where you let them get close before you open fire and they'll have a helluva problem getting out of range.
Of course it still wouldn't discriminate between civilians and foes, but if you're not with us... Then you miniturize it and put it on top of one of those robot dogs. Then you put in a pack and teach it the basics of covering fire, flanking and such. Sounds to me like you soon have the basics of a robotic assult troop. You just designate a position on the map as enemy territory, accept the risks of collateral and they'll cease it and subdue any resistance for you.
The second part is the important one. Neurones in the human brain have an average of 7,000 connections to other neurones. That's basically impossible to do on a silicon die, where you only have two dimensions to play with and paths can't cross - you end up needing to build very complex networks-on-chip to get anywhere close.
We can implement that with a fairly simple grid with pass-through, say you have a grid (x,y) and (1,3) wants to pass it to (4,7), we can just pass it right to (2,3). It can do a simple compare(x=2, y=3) not for us, if x > 2 pass right else if if y > 3 pass down until we hit the right grid node. What's hairy is understanding how to program it into doing anything useful.
No, but you're doing real-time 3D vision and context-sensitive pattern recognition with an amazing degree of parallelism any time you got your eyes open. Cue the "I'm blind, you insensitive clod" jokes. Do you know what the processing speed of a neuron is? Roughly 0.2 kHz, give or take a little depending on type. The Apple I from 1976 runs circles around a neuron with a 1 MHz processing speed. The difference? We have a *lot* of neurons with a *lot* of connections.
The brain proves we can do a lot more of extremely low power massively parallel processing, we've only gotten started with GPUs. They have thousands of shaders, the brain got 100 billion neurons. And yes, a tiiiiiny processing unit is a better analogy than a transistor, they're much more than that. Individually they're not much, but we make up for them in volume.
The rate at which a disease spreads through a corn field is a precise measurement of the speed of blight.
