and hore is rot13 for uber, so? let's do numerology next
and hore is rot13 for uber, so? let's do numerology next
They're transporting people in bulk, that means some oversight from a public safety perspective is warranted
In some places, taxis are actually subject to some oversight from a public safety perspective. In those places, it's reasonable to be upset about Uber not doing those things well. In other places, they really aren't. There's really no oversight occurring. In those places, it is not reasonable to be upset at Uber, because they at least do minimal background checks in at least most places where they do business. Taxis are not as safe as you imagine, nor are taxi drivers (in any sense.) Taxi drivers who have been reported repeatedly as rapists continue to work, and rape again. With Uber, those people would get poor ratings and eventually be worked out of the system. It's terrible that it takes such a cold, impersonal, and capitalistic system to remove rapists from the transportation system, but that is still an improvement over at least some licensed taxi services.
Uber (as a corporation) is, drivers aside, no doubt made up primarily of sleazebags. But the situation is far more complex than "Uber is dangerous and irresponsible1!!!11!ones!" and complaining about it without acknowledging that seems sophomoric at best.
We'll see if taxis survive self-driving cars.
Of course they will. They will be self-driving taxis. The difference will be your contract terms.
It seems 2 different things to me. The content producers and the content distributors are different groups with different specialties. The top producers and physical studios can rent themselves out to Netflix if the deal is right, for example. Neither is stapled to each other.
Most of the top producers today are the physical studios, and the publisher/distributor. That's what this question is about; can new media companies like Netflix and Amazon achieve dominance over the entrenched megacorporations which make the majority of the top-grossing movies today? And of course, the answer is yes. The people who actually do the technical things rarely work directly for the studio on an ongoing hourly basis; companies which make movies which are entirely CG aside, most of the employees are contractors, and it doesn't take an act of God to build a sound stage. Christ, the studios don't even own the camera equipment, everyone rents that from the same small group of businesses.
Touch the ECU and they'll void the entire warranty.
Sure, they could do that. And then you could take them to court to cover the cost of repairs. And you'd do it in small claims court, unless you were into the big big money because you bought a big expensive automobile, in which case you can afford to go to real court.
It already is an EPA regulation. Companies, by law, have to make a best effort to avoid people trying to change anything that can affect emissions regulations.
The automakers have to do that. The rest of us can sell auto hacking tools with impunity as long as they have substantial non-infringing use, and our right to develop them is actually explicitly protected by law (even through reverse engineering.) So the automakers might well be prohibited from giving us the information we need to tune the vehicle, but it's legal for us to sniff the bus while they do it.
I've got a $5 bet that says automobile manufacturers file for an injuction against them and/or sue them and/or file for a DMCA takedown because they're violating copyright.
How long do we have to wait to collect our five dollars from you? They're not getting sued. There's already a ton of devices which do this.
One has to question the integrity of one or two disgruntled employee's.
Does one? One does not, because we're not seeing reports about Uber by just one or two disgruntled employees. Also, you don't know how to use apostrophes. Someone should take those away from you.
Lets remember that we need to treat all news from the entertainment industry with a grain of salt. There's big money in cabs and it's not outside the realm of possibility that this is part of a concerted attack on Uber.
It's not outside the realm of possibility that you have something valid worth saying, but I scanned your comment, and nope. You're just using FUD against victims.
I have a LED lamp and I hate it. Just like I hate my LED flashlight. LED sucks, it's very bright, I guess it would work well in a surgery room but for home it's awful.
You know, ye olde 7W Cree lamps which are just a few bucks now that they're brought out better ones have none of these problems. They are dimmable, they don't flicker, and they put out a nice warm light in a reasonable quantity. There's lots of lamps put out since which are even better.
And a cheaper one, you might add. These Macchina guys are anticipating $55 just for the interface board. But then they claim they made it as small as possible, which is bullshit because it's multiprotocol. They say they made it small so that you could fit it under the dash or hood, but then they went and put an OBD-II connector on it which just takes up a lot of space. If I'm permanently installing it, I can splice into the wires I need. I also don't need protocols I'm not going to use. Then they added an xbee module slot. xbee modules are primarily used for long-range communications. Up close, you use bluetooth or wifi. You can get an esp8266 module which goes into an xbee slot, but the module they specifically talk about is the new cellular xbee module. There's no reason to give the device a cellular uplink unless your plan is to use it remotely.
Which brings us full circle: this device was designed first and foremost to be used as a weapon. It's designed to be installed into a target's vehicle, and to be used to attack the vehicle remotely. We know this because of their choice of wireless interface module standard, which is oriented towards long-range communications, and because the broad multiprotocol support is otherwise at odds with the desire to make the device as small as possible. So is the addition of a soldered OBD-II connector, which is not desirable in many installation types. It is useful, however, if your goal is to connect as rapidly as possible.
There are 400,000 users of Google+?
It's still a better platform for following people you don't know than Facebook is. For one, it shows you all posts by someone (or by some circle) by default.
You're rural life requires the cities just as much as vice versa, always has - that's why there have always been cities - indeed no society in at least 8000 years failed to build cities, they are not optional.
New Horizons is also the name of the satellite that sent those pretty pix of Pluto last year.
Since this would require 2 copies of the OS and firmware to be stored in the unit (which will have to be stored somewhere that won't be overwritten accidentally), this will just bump the price up.
You know, it's pretty typical to have a restore-to-factory function on a phone. It's not an arduous requirement for a game console. And for the record, Microsoft consoles already have multiple copies of the BIOS, and always have.
What's happened for a very long time is third party manuals. My Grandmother's copy of "Book of The Ford" was a guide to repairing the Model T and was not written by the Ford Motor Company. That was in the early 1920s and was nowhere near the first edition.
Back then, it was reasonable to make repairs to a vehicle with nothing but basic mechanical knowledge. Today, it isn't. You need torque specs (which aren't just based on bolt sizes no matter how much people want that to be true) and the codes to instruct the computers as to what to do. Those codes are in the official documentation most of the time, for recoding the PCM and such. The only way they get into the Haynes or Chilton's (etc.) is if someone gets them out of the official book. Those codes are facts, and you can't copyright a fact, so it's legal to do so in just the same way that it's legal to OCR the phone book, re-layout the numbers, and print your own. But if the manufacturer weren't forced to publish them then we would be at the mercy of dealers for that information. If the manufacturer then stopped giving them to the dealers, and ran all that information through the software, then getting it would depend on a friendly dealer willing to let someone hook up a protocol sniffer, while actually performing the procedure.
It is not enough to "allow" a third party to create a repair manual.
You're probably also under the false impression that a warrantor has to somehow "prove" a user modification caused an otherwise warranted issue in order to deny coverage. Nope - if they want to say your engine warranty is voided if you hang fuzzy dice on the mirror, they can. They just have to state so clearly.
Right, if you want protection under the act, you'll have to bring a lawsuit. It's not automatic, since district attorneys are useless fucks 99% of the time, chasing office and not justice.
Karl's version of Parkinson's Law: Work expands to exceed the time alloted it.