If the cloud provider created an encryption that even they couldn't work with they wouldn't have clients. For starters, search wouldn't work. Secondly, the average Joe would expect the cloud solution to be like someone holding something for him in a safe. Should he lose the key for the safe, he would still expect a way to prove his identity and have the owner of the safe open it for him on his behalf.
... to outlaw social engineering.
But then only criminals will have social engineering. How is a law abiding citizen supposed to protect themselves?
Will carpool lanes give way to "autodriver" lanes as a carrot to get people to use the system, or because they are ultimately more efficient than carpooling itself in relieving traffic?
I suspect that carpool lanes will still exist as an incentive for multiple commuter to pile into the same car. If every morning I whip out my phone and hit the "I need a pickup in 15 min" button, and an options pops up to pay less to carpool, I'll probably hit that, and end up in a car with a few people from my neighborhood. We'll all probably be ignoring each other, but that's okay. Then I might get inconvenienced a little bit as one or two people get dropped off at their work before mine. As long as the pick up and drop offs are in same neighborhood, I think it'll be worth it for most people to have an automated system commute for them like that.
When Google made Android, they used an incompatible version of Java
That's always been Google mantra: embrace, extend, extinguish.
The thing is, the 'boring stuff' can be made fun - with a lot of creative work by a human teacher. Technology can't do that.
Think about the actions you do when having fun with technology. If it wasn't a game, smashing the same four buttons over and over would not be fun. But the technology has made it fun. Once someone figures out how to make teaching a certain principle fun, technology can replicate that solution the world over, instead of being bottled up in a single classroom.
Going with the free email from your ISP means that you lose your email address if/when you switch to another ISP.
That wasn't my experience. Once they started putting ads in the web client, they were more than happy to keep hosting an email address for you.
Well if you had highschool chemistry you would know that chewing medical pills is bad for you because it increases the absorption and surface area of the medication.
Most everyone had highschool chemistry, and that's not the reason why they know that chewing medical pills is bad. They know it's bad because at one point some authority figure would have told them not to, and the instructions on the bottle would say to do otherwise.
Even cooking is chemistry, and a lot of that fancy-pants "molecular gastronomy" (what, other food doesn't have molecules?) stuff is applicable to more mundane foods.
True, but how many cooks do you know are also good at chemistry. I suspect that the majority of cooks, who prepare the foods you eat, if they were any good at chemistry would not be cooks, because they'd be doing something else. While some really advanced chefs will make use of things they learned in chemistry, the vast majority do not. So the schools could stop teaching chemistry, leave it for college and those who want to be chemists, and the skills of the cooks out there will not change.
But given how new programming is, and how pervasive computers are, if everyone had a little bit more understanding of programming, it could have a huge impact on society.
Using a programming language successfully means using math concepts that elementary school students usually haven't been introduced to yet and requires strict formatting control, something they're still working on in elementary school with their primary language. Assigning values to an abstract variable is first introduced in algebra, and order of operations arrives late in grade school and weeks are spent on its mastery.
Many students really struggle with the concept of variables in math for years. And after all that they think of post-arithmetic math as something that is useless because they will never use/apply it in anyway. But if a year was spent on programming - tell the kids that they get a year free of math - in between arithmetic and algebra, when it comes time to teach algebra, the kids will already get a lot of the concepts that they struggle with now, and will be able to see how to make use of it. They will probably take what they learn in algebra and *gasp* apply it to what they've been programming.
I truly believe they have misnamed the subject in question, and couldn't possibly be talking about CS, but perhaps skills, incidentally related, often attributed to CS incorrectly.
I agree that there should be a division between computer science and software engineering, but given that most Universities don't make that split, we can't expect the politicians to do so either. As ideal as teaching the science of computing without computers is, only a very select few can wrap their minds around that. I know for myself that it took a few iterations of learning the concept in the class room, tinkering around with a program, and begin dazed and confused in class again before I really started to get it. Without the tinkering step, I don't think I ever would have.
I've got a PhD in CS, and I grew up with the U.S. education system of the 1970's and 80's. I had playground time, and little formalized national testing. I'll bet few of the Turing award winners or ACM Fellows were educated in the manner advocated by today's politicians and Plutocrats.
They're not going for more Turing award winners, they're going for more people being able to understand CS and possibly do CS. Their goal isn't more genius's, their goal is just
Do you really think that not teaching a subject to kids will get more of them to learn it?
How about just don't drive at all?
That would lead to chaos as society's fabric unwound and everything broke down. How could you suggest such a thing? Why don't you think of the children?
The reforms they were not asked to perform are interesting. Greece has been asked to reduce salaries and pensions, and even to sell some territory. But when did EU "partners" did push for a tax reform so that the wealthier pay their share? When did EU "partners" asked for military budget reduction?
Greece has a military? It's possible that they weren't asked to make these changes because they may not have done much good? If they would have done good, and Greece have done them, it would have gotten the other countries off of their back. Wouldn't Greeks have liked that better; balancing their budget, and doing it in a way that wasn't advised to them?