Self repairing machines maybe science fiction now, but so were cell phones with internet browsers in 1995

The EU also has spent billions of dollars on a brain mapping/simulation project as well.

If that ever gets significant progress it wouldn't be too far fetched for machines to self diagnose and self repair.

The difference between the buggy and whip and auto makers is the automakers still required people to work.

I think the question should be asked when will automation be good enough to exclude any human input. Even the engineers and artists will be out of job.

I heard a VR software developer say "People overestimate technological change for a year, but under estimate change when you talk about a decade."

Something to that effect...

So its worth to give a bit of thinking on what happens when machine learning is good enough to eliminate current jobs and all possible jobs after that.

Besides who is going to foot the bill to retrain all 14 million truck drivers when Google self driving cars are good enough? I highly doubt they are all going to be robot repairmen.

Hrm... I take it you haven't tried the product yet or watched the reaction of people who have used it.

I'm a child of the 90's so I used to play those VR games for a dollar for 5 minutes in the arcades and have to agree those were pretty shitty.

However, the Oculus Rift is something else to behold.

I own a dev kit and I actually get "Oh shit" moments in the Rift playing the roller coaster demos. Regular games don't do that for me. I get vertigo playing Minecraft in the Rift when I am high up building something. Regular Minecraft doesn't do that.

When I play Euro Truck Simulator 2 in the Rift I find myself looking left and right and checking my mirrors just like I drive a car in real life. I even look out the window to look at the scenery. Without the Rift I don't do that.

And this is a low rez version without positional tracking.

Its not a gimmick and its not going away. 2 billion dollars says its not going away. Even if you hate Facebook you can invest in one of the other kickstarters like AntVR and use their product.

I've been participating in the RiftMax shows and it reminds me of the scene in Ghost in the Shell Stand Alone Complex where they are in a virtual chat room on the net.

This is going to be big.

One a side note. If your significant other doesn't allow you 30 minutes of me time uninterrupted then you are going to have a rocky relationship.

When my special something is reading a book. I leave her alone unless its an emergency. (Also she has a bad habit of watching TV shows ahead of me on hulu so if I bother her she will start saying spoilers).

When I'm on the computer she does the same.

I just make sure at a certain time I turn the computer off and spend some time with her before we go to bed.

We generally watch the Daily Show and Colbert Report and then head to bed.

Actually... I have an Oculus Rift and have to say I don't use it more than 30 minutes to an hour at a time.

Mostly because a lack of a killer app at this point (Skyrim with special drivers comes close, but I think Star Citizen will be the app everyone has to get VR because its amazing just sitting in the hanger looking at the 3d screens sitting in your ship's hanger that pop out at you).

Anyways... If you can't find 30 minutes to an hour a day to enjoy some me time then I would argue that there is something wrong with your life.

I don't have kids personally but I have dealt with families that do and basically unless you go to bed when the kid does, you should have at least 30 minutes to enjoy the experience.

Basically I spend 30 minutes alone playing games. Then maybe an hour watching TV with the significant other and then to bed to get 8 hours of sleep.

If not, then I would argue, you are going to have stress management issues in your life and no one wants that.

So yeah... The Oculus Rift is amazing. Most of the demos are short games so I haven't spent six hour with it in a sitting, but demos like Titans of Space really take my breath away.

Also the rollercoaster demo made me go "Oh shit!" out loud. Only happened once since successive rides had me knowing I would be ok, but no non-Oculus Rift game has ever made me fear for my safety.

Its something that even non-video game players can get a kick of it.

Anyways, I own one and its amazing. The only problem with it is that I'm going to have to buy an expensive computer to play the 1080p and the lack of games for it right now.

Once both of those issues are resolved. I think we are seeing a revolution.

In Japan it is.

If you go to Japan and notice a bunch of old ladies reading comics, chances are you seeing the Yaoi section. (I went holy shit and started l started laughing when I realized it was true what they said when I walked through a store in Akihabara once)

Truth be told, not all Yaoi is pornographic. I'd wager the majority of it isn't in Japan. They have a weird sense of things. Like maid cafes and host clubs, they get off on subtle things like "dead Japanese parent syndrome" (where the plot of the story is the kids parents have died releasing them from their obligations... strange how so many Anime and Manga's have that plot line)

Anyways, my point is, that the stuff English speakers google is probably pornographic because that is what they expect from Japan while in reality Japan isn't all about sex.

PRO:TIP

Poor credit ratings can hurt a person far worse than a IRS audit can these days. Why?

Because employers, apartments, housing, cars, and to some regard school is now determined by your credit.

(not that its harder to hire people with good credit these days, but its still considered a black mark)

And credit is purely a three corporation deal not handled by the government.

So if they wanted to for some unknown reason, they could blackball you from ever getting a good job again unless you play by their rules.

So yes, they seem to have reserved a special right in that regard when it comes to your well being.

Also health insurance... Companies have been leveraging the threat of going without health insurance for some time. Its one of the reasons many people put up with employee abuse when it comes to forcing them to do things beyond the scope of the original agreement.

Its not said, but it weighs on everyone's mind when they think about saying "no" to unreasonable demands of an employer or when thinking about taking a new job from a non-corporate who doesn't give benefits.

If there was universal healthcare in the states like France or Canada, then employers would have a harder time forcing employees into doing things they'd unethical things or simply the fear of not being able to pay medical bills.

Simply keeping everything in house at one location does not protect from acts of god or bad luck.

Fires, floods, and theft happen.

A really good backup system includes off site backup somewhere in the loop.

This doesn't mean you have to use the cloud to do it.

You could have a simple system with someone taking backup tapes to a different office or something, or even taking encrypted hard drives to a safety deposit box.

Pointless. A simple 40mm bofors (cheap as hell) or a properly set up AA Gatling will do the job far, FAR better against boat swarms. At the same time they are far cheaper, integrate into system with self-auto corrective targeting based on radar signature of gun's own shells, do not require a heavy supply of energy and have significantly fewer points of failure.

Technically, using wooden hull ships with broadsides iron cast muzzle loaded cannons are cheaper even still, but you don't see modern navies using them.

The key threat the US navy is thinking about is either:

A. Missiles
B. Suicide boats

AND

All while in "friendly" harbors.

Using a Gatling gun in such an environment would cause problems so to say if someone fired a missile and they had to shoot it down over civilians because not all the bullets hit the target.

A laser would be far much more accurate without worrying about hitting anything else that happens to be nearby.

The Chinese don't think so.

Well.... They shot him rather than hanged, but I suppose its close enough.

One of the funny stories in Egypt was the ones where a can of spray paint could defeat a multi-million dollar tank.

Actually it was a WW2 tactic where you would just throw smoke bombs at a tank and force them to unbutton, but the tactic remains the same. If a tank can't out their optic ports, they are basically blind and the only way to see where they are going is to open a hatch.

Thats when you get them.

What?! What?! What?!

Are you saying all those right winged religious persons saying its women to blame for rape don't exist? (Islam and Christian)

(Google "women to blame for rape" for your sources)

*whoosh*

Laws of intent seem rather dubious to me simply because one can craft any intention out of anything innocent.

"If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." -Cardinal Richelieu (disputed tho)

The point of this quote is that authoritarian figures can simply take anything you do or say and make a crime out of it with intent:

You bought a gun. Well, maybe you are planning to kill a politician with it?

You have a chemistry set in your house. Well, maybe you were planning to make drugs with it?

You have encryption on your computer. Well, maybe you were planning on hiding illegal activity?

See where I'm going with this. It is simply your word against theirs. No one can read your mind to see if you are telling the truth, so they are simply accusing you of something that you haven't done but could possibly do. How can you defend against that?

Crimes should be things that actually happened after the fact or in progress. Yes the cops should stop a person who is trying to commit a crime and yes they should prosecute them for the action itself, but if you can convict a person on the intent to commit a crime are basically condemning the good majority of citizens who would never in their life commit such a crime.

I wouldn't but, if you think about it, even local civil courts are an extension of the federal government (indirectly) and one could construe that when a court finds someone guilty of libel, they are in fact restricting someone freedom of speech (even if it is lies).

I mean take this phrase for example:

"The president is an idiot!"

Which you and I know is covered under the first amendment even though its not really quantifiable true (I think he's quit a smart man actually but anways...)

Whats the difference between that and:

"My neighbor is an idiot"

Why would that be wrong to publish in a newspaper and not the president one? This is more of an ethics debate I guess, but you can call someone a pedophile and believe it to be true even though there is no empirical truth to the matter. I mean people said, Micheal Jackson was a pedo, and it actually seemed socially acceptable to say this in public even though there was no truth to the mater.

Where do you draw the line? And do you want government involved especially when there is groups out there that would love to sue the pants off anyone who dare criticize them? (say Scientology libel and slander cases)

No. Which is why rich persons or corporations have been known to force people to settle out of court because they know they couldn't afford a protracted legal battle even if they won the case.