Comment Re:China already selectively eliminates females (Score 1) 150
Of course, when you're talking half the world's population, a few hundredths of a percentage point can make a really big difference in actual numbers...
Of course, when you're talking half the world's population, a few hundredths of a percentage point can make a really big difference in actual numbers...
Your Mom isn't much of a "Cyber Criminal" then. I guess she should stick with baking cookies.
Of course, the obvious solution to this is to ban open-source software.
Agreed. After all, why try to display advertising when you can just make the person walk into the store?
While this is true, frankly I would argue that "Mother Nature" does more damage to the road than semis. And we can't really tax her.
Roads are a community resource that we all use in one way or another. The guy on the bike who says, "I don't damage the road so I shouldn't have to pay" neglects to consider the fact that his fancy super-light carbon-fiber bike showed up at his local bike shop on the back of semi. He whines about how crappy the road is along the right-hand side due to frost heaves but isn't willing to pony-up any money to actually get it fixed because, why should he have to pay? He didn't do the damage.
...and what if the cyclist was really fat and out of shape, thus breathing more heavily and expelling more CO2? What then?! Huh?!?
it is not just a "shared platform", but the same car, build in the same factory... NOTHING different, except for the brand!
The Porsche has leather seats?
I gotta agree.
Way back when in my old mainframe days, I remember one of the most popular things was "chat programs." The people at the computer center thought this was a complete waste of resources. My argument was that it got people to use the computer as a tool to chat with other people. Once you got them thinking in that direction, it was easier to turn them on to other capabilities.
I remember my old girlfriend being surprised that she could use this computer thing to write papers far more conveniently than using the typewriter.
So to me, the answer is "tools." I'm not into the whole "Computer Aided Education" thing--I'm not sure it's any better than a book or film-strip or anything like that. So the idea would be to teach people the tools--it really doesn't matter which ones--that they can use to be more efficient students. Back in the olden days, that would be things like text-processors (anyone else remember RUNOFF?). Today, it would be things like word-processors, maybe some simple spreadsheets and graphics programs, and techniques for searching the web.
Well, close...
FTFA:
For example, the space plane is carrying a type of ion engine called a Hall thruster on OTV-4, Air Force officials said. [...] “A more efficient on-orbit thruster capability is huge,” Maj. Gen. Tom Masiello, commander of the Air Force Research Laboratory in Ohio, said in a statement. “Less fuel burn lowers the cost to get up there, plus it enhances spacecraft operational flexibility, survivability and longevity.”
I gotta admit, I'm curious why the NASA mission flying on there couldn't have been done on ISS...
Have you looked here?
And I assume there are a couple of pilots on the flight who could easily verify if this was the case.
I'm getting the fastest internet service in the country for $59 a month. [...] Too bad about all these state legislators who seem to feel the need to protect their constituents from super-fast internet speeds at affordable rates that the private companies never seem to feel the need to deliver.
Well, the issue would be is that $59 that you're paying at least "revenue neutral" (i.e., the city government isn't losing money).
The complaint about having the government be an ISP is that they can afford to operate at a loss because they can use your tax dollars to fill in the gaps. I can understand the argument--remember the Space Shuttle and the effect it had on commercial launches in the US? That said, private businesses are not providing service because they claim they can't do it profitably (even with government subsidies to build out infrastructure). So if they're not interested, find someone else who is.
In my opinion, I have no problem with the city owning the wires that connect to my house and go to the central office. I'm a little leery about having them be a full-blown ISP, providing the service, though. I think it's better for them to open up those wires to any company that wants to provide that service on the city owned wires.
The South rises again!
"The South's Gonna Do It Again!!"
"Do what? Lose?"
I wouldn't say it's worse than useless. But it may not be the panacea that we expect.
First, I have my doubts about the whole "A.I. Can Handle Anything" theory. Weather, accidents, and construction can create very creative roadways where you will want a driver behind the wheel who'll be able to figure out and work with human beings on the scene (for example, a cop doing traffic control around an accident).
So you'll still want drivers. The question is, how many drivers will you need?
Consider long-haul trucks, which are the ones that are really ripe for automation. They usually have two drivers so that they can run 24 hours at a stretch. I believe--and I may be off--that the rules for these people require that they drive no more than 12 hours. It might be 10 hours, I don't remember. But in any event, the reason you have two drivers is so that you don't have a truck spending 12-14 hours sitting by the side of the road while the single driver sleeps.
You could get rid of one driver right there. A long haul truck with one driver who can sleep for 12 hours and will only be woken up if something weird is going on that the truck can't handle so it pulled off to the side of the road. That's still saving money versus having two drivers and is certainly not "worse than useless."
Scientists will study your brain to learn more about your distant cousin, Man.
