I think the point was some kids walk home from school. Though banning phones in classrooms and allowing them in lockers would let kids walk to/from school with them.

The guy was protecting her from an alien invasion. The aliens are clothing-mimicking creatures which when worn, take over a person's body.

FYI, you can be kidnapped by someone you know.

Some dogs are really stupid and others eat your face after you die.

Here I am just wishing my Ubuntu Mate laptop would lock the screen before going to sleep. The OS some versions ago would do that. Now I've got to write a custom systemd script to look for sleep events and lock the system prior to that. Though that doesn't solve the issue of the desktop being fully visible on wakeup prior to the lock screen blocking it and visible while locked when plugging in or unplugging an external display. I'm glad linux is progressing. I just wish its "user experience" was also progressing. I can't recommend it to computer layman anymore due to issues like these. Though I can't recommend Windows 11 to them either. Macs are too big a switch. Hopefully something improves before October.

If you had fun it wasn't a complete waste. After you've done enough to stay alive, what else is there other than fun and more survival security?

That article is poorly written and is talking about different robots being hacked in different ways. It was not "verbally tell a robot a few commands and it wirelessly hacks another robot." What it was was a robot that takes verbal commands could be told to do things it's owners didn't want. Thus it was 'hacked' verbally. (If I'm wrong about that please provide a better link. I'd love to read it.) In addition to that, you could also hack it though it's network connection giving you direct and full control over that robot. With that full control, you could then use it's network connection to apply the same or a different hack to another robot. It's got nothing to do with voice control nor much to do with the AI itself. Just that the network-visible LLM code had security bugs. Well, not really bugs but overall insecure system design as a feature:

https://www.yicaiglobal.com/news/chinese-cybersecurity-expert-hacks-control-system-of-unitrees-humanoid-robot-in-one-minute

So the source of the story is a developer backdoor being left in and the article summary is you can talk a robot into hacking another robot... I hope I'm never qualified to be a journalist?

That link says Versa was discounted due to Trump's tariffs. It makes no mention of safety systems...

As for all the smart systems, I'm not buying it that they're making cars excessively expensive. Most of those systems are software features that only need to be developed once then tweaked for each model. There's FOSS solutions which get you much of the way there using common cameras that work fine in a car's environment. It's also something they already have in their higher-end models. It stays in their higher-end models solely because they know people will pay more for features which help keep them alive.

I'd say the costs come from improving crash protection (vs crash avoidance), efficiency targets, and the efforts to constantly redesign the looks of the car. You can walk away from some 60mph crashes. That's simply FUCKING AMAZING.

Wow. Just wow. You believe a fully constructed vehicle made out of parts that need to be mined and melted into metal and which burns fuel that is being introduced into the active environment after being kept out of it for millions of years (also mined from all over the planet and shipped everywhere) contributes less than raising and killing animals that are mainly using resources already active in the current environment and which get recycled over and over again?

Transportation is 28% of USA's climate impact (excludes vehicle production). Food production is 25% (includes related transportation). Nearly all the gas each vehicle burns is new damage being introduced into the environment. A lot of our food production recycles what's already active in the ecosystem. Further, you can reduce the transportation impact far more than you can reduce the food impact. Everyone needs to eat. No one needs to fly to the latest board member meeting at a vacation resort.

It does take more engineering time to be efficient. Significantly so. It's far, far easier to write a mostly single-threaded application with all related logic being performed in button callbacks than it is to break that logic into non-UI threads and have the UI and backend update each other when once side changes.

There's tons of other examples too. I'm posting on firefox which seems to dump it's entire session state to a file when you do things like close/open a tab. When you have tons of tabs open and close 400 at once, the browser freezes while it dumps the same data over and over again. A far more efficient algorithm would have been to only save state changes from the previous session snapshot and better binning of recent actions. That takes far more work to design, implement, test, and maintain.

I don't know any software which checks to see if there's enough disk space prior to saving a file. That would be being efficient, so the user has a chance to free up space prior to saving rather than having the software go into an error state that nearly everyone overlooks when writing code.

It's more than that. We've been building bridges for tens of thousands of years. We've been writing software for less than 200 years. We're in a quickly advancing field and 'safety' is often neglected in such fields. I think we're doing pretty good all things considered.

Further, anyone can open a text editor and write code for a year and release software indistinguishable from any other software. You can't do the same with a bridge. Well actually you kind of can (a landlord fixing their apartments is a better example), but you'd need to get it inspected before you could open it up for commercial use. I guess we could do the same for software once analytic tools get a little better and once someone defines all the standards public software needs to follow. Good fucking luck with that. None of the larger tech companies are going to allow UIs to be legally restricted to a specific set of components used in specific ways nor risk having dark patterns made illegal. X would never have passed inspection with their logo in the top-right of their web pop-ups looking exactly like a X-click-to-close button.

I hear people making this claim but they never offer any examples. Please, post an example of what you're doing or a link to a blog showing such an example. Not a trivial one, a real world example. It would help a lot of people if you did.

Thanks.

I guess you can read "this fraud" as either "this specific fraud" or "this type of fraud". I took it as she helped setup the Arizona laptop prior to getting arrested.

Protection against abusive doctors or for creating real-world training videos (USA has students finger anesthetized patients without their knowledge for training, so why not simple training vids?). Find the person smearing shit or leaving trash in the breastfeeding rooms. Handling abuse claims. Etc... It's easy to come up with a bunch of useful reasons for having the cameras. Easy to come up with a bunch of reasons for not having them too.

Everyone knows Amazon is very metrics driven. They must be doing a fuckton of employee data mining to have these types of data points to look at.

No one has skimmed the article. There was a US-based women fronting for them.