Aren't Apple the company that has 150+B in the bank.

How much do you have in the bank? The fact you're accessing Slashdot probably puts you in the top 10% globally, very possibly the top 1 or 2%

So, given that you're probably already incredibly wealthy compared with most other humans, why do *you* want more money? Why do you go to work? Why do you make the salary or hourly rate that you do - why not do it for 10% less - is it because you're greedy?

In my mind, that's creating a fake profile, and pretending to be someone else. In my opinion, a specious use of the phrase "Man in the Middle" because at no point has party A or party C confirmed their identities.

How hard can this be... when you request a pickup, the self-driving car begins driving to you, and a pin is placed on the map where it *thinks* it should pick you up. You review the pin, and move it to whatever door / street corner you want. The self-driving car then re-routes to pick you up where you placed the pin.

On future visits through the same provider, it will remember where you dropped the map pin and default to picking you up there. If you choose to move the pin again (say, you're coming out of a door the other side of the building) it then obeys that, and the app prompts you to give "friendly" names to those two points. Next time you choose to be picked up from the same vicinity, you are presented with a simple dropdown that offers you three options:
"The Green Door"
"The Other Side With The Cafe"
"Choose Another Location"


Am I missing something that makes this problem unsolvable with today's tech?

Yeah, their OS is never going to take off ...

But looking at how people disrespect other people propriety, there's no way in hell any sane person would allow total strangers to use their cars, unsupervised.

That's not how it will work, most of the cars will be centrally owned as a fleet, not by individuals. The better the service get, the less sense it makes for individuals to own cars in the first place.

Guy killed me, Mal. He killed me with a sword.

If the US is allowed to seize assets located in country D, of person A, from country B living in country C, who has never been to the US, it means that Saudia Arabia could introduce civil forfeiture laws for the offence of "Driving While Female", and then seize all assets of all women in the US with a driving license (proof of the crime) including those who don't even own a passport. This is clearly morally wrong, and as such we must hope for calmer heads to prevail. I feel that taking Dotcoms assets *inside the US* is not a stretch - but internationally is a joke.

No, you won't have a damned clue how much it'll cost until you get the bill.

It might not be "obvious" but a little modelling and some small-scale trials will let you know roughly what you're going to have to pay for production workloads.

AWS is very cheap - so if your projects are so small that costs like research / trials are too expensive, chances are it's cheapest just to pop it on AWS anyway.

The point of this app was to generate profit for the company developing it, not to do anything useful. To expect it to be useful is naive in the extreme.

If this grows, this is great, it will do two possible things: 1] Make people more aware of paid product placement (educational, good). 2] Democratize paid product placement - instead of one account with a hundred million followers being paid ALL the ad money, instead a hundred DIFFERENT accounts with a million viewers each will split that money. And eventually a million small accounts with a hundred followers could - I'm sure there's a floor, but it's probably quite low, lower than YouTube videos. This empowers your average person, and decreases the power of huge celebrities - looks like a win-win to me.

Put the pitchfork back, bubba, it's opt-in

While security experts think the zero-day may be overpriced, they think the hacker will find a buyer regardless.

So by definition they do not think it's overpriced.

The "cash" they hold isn't held as actual cash, it's just very liquid investments. Even if they did hold it in "cash" it wouldn't be cash, it would be a current account balance with a bank. That bank is VERY busy investing that money elsewhere - so the fact that they hold "cash" (liquid investments) is utterly irrelevant to whether or not that money is ACTUALLY being invested somewhere.

Yeah errrr.... never because that's not remotely realistic. Calm down.

Wow how wrong could I be? On a second look, it appears that his entire range is pretty good satire/parody across the range of the political spectrum. This will teach me not to look at one page and post just after waking up ill and grumpy!