They provided her a tracking device that *also* worked as a phone. It was the companies phone.

They only tracked her because they could - even though she told them it was illegal, and her boss told her basically "so what?"

If a sales rep told me something that my lawyers signed off on was illegal, that would be my response as well. I'm not saying she was wrong, what I'm saying is she has no credibility about the law.

Cool. I now have a legal justification for what I would do anyway.

I just hope whomever programs robot cars knows as much as you.

No. When I'm on a plane, my taxes pay for a government agency that reviews the code on my behalf. Very seriously. And follows all variants and versions and signs off on it. Autonomous cars don't have all their code reviewed by an agency before they drive. Nor do non-autonomous cars. (See, Prius and braking).

Compare planes to slot machines, and cars to voting machines. And then be scared, about both our cars and our voting machines.

Who cares why you didn't pick up the phone. You're a sales rep, you get paid if and only if you sell product.

What does "earned" mean in this context? If a hunter kills a deer, and 5 hunters all drove the deer to him, how much did the killer "earn"? What if there's only one deer in the entire forest, already claimed as owned, but unkilled by somebody.

It's human nature to want the best meat and to get fed first regardless.

And, in historic fact, the leader of the tribe probably gets the choice pieces off the top, before the hunter and his family. But beyond that, hunter-gatherer is practically synonymous with a "gift economy", far closer to communism than capitalism.

Is there even a conceptual way that something like Tor could be run that would prevent it from being detected.

Also, regardless of whether they were legally at fault, could the AI have avoided the accident/mitigated the damage? I don't really care if I'm not legally responsible for the head on collision I had at 60mph, if it could have been avoided by a lane change. I don't even care if the lane change was improper and illegal, unless it also causes an accident.

I know they won against Seattle. In my example, they had to use only 19 of their cheating methods (all successfully), since one was already uncovered earlier.

Testing your cheating before the Superbowl seems smart. They may retroactively take away your victory, but they cannot re-play the Superbowl. So if you get caught cheating in the Superbowl, you may end up having to give the rings back. But if you get caught cheating in the playoffs, who would they declare the victor? The other team in the Superbowl? The team you cheated against? Replay the thing? Logistically, they'll just fine you, maybe slap an asterisk next to the win... but probably not.

It would be super confusing to the defense if the Patriots used smoke grenades! And that's why they're banned.

Look, you want a balance between offense and defense. If the rules are making it too hard on the defense, you modify them. Just like when the uprights were on the goal line, it made it too hard on the offense to be in a scoring position and not run into them.

An RFID chip. Found in the ring. But you can also tape it to the outside of the machine, and it should work.

Well, if that's the case, I don't see a reason not to take it down. It really doesn't add much to a conversation, and clearly causes a lot of pain. There's no good reason, other than being a dick, to leave it up.

The robes, which are probably only used within the sorority house during rituals.

Also because politeness is usually reciprocated. If an officer is polite to me, I'll be polite to him. And that helps sort me from the crazies he has to deal with.

If there's any irony, it's that the Pats cheat so hard when, frankly, they don't have to. They really are that good

Or maybe they cheat 20 different ways, and they only got caught on one. Maybe they really suck when they stop cheating entirely.