I don't have a problem with screens. It seems quite plausible that they help, both with droplets and with separating ventilation movements. I would rather have the screen than not.

But I think the same argument should certainly be applied to other solutions.

"We disinfect surfaces every day" - how does that help, when the virus only lives for about an hour in most circumstances? And fomites are not even the problem.

"Wash your hands." Again, I am not against washing hands, but it can lead to eczema, and it has been pretty well document that it does very little to stop the spread.

"There is no evidence that masks help." Ok, so why recommend perspex screens but not masks? But all logical standards, masks should work at least as well as perspex screens.

As an example of evidence lead public health policy settings, this was an absolute disaster.

Exactly. This is not a surprise: the blockchain is public, so your trades are public. Of course the wallets are pseudonyms, but they can be decoded. And you may have more than one wallet, but that gets complicated quickly.

Still better than PNaCl, or asm.js.

And this is what seems to be the main point. My math may be out by an order of magnitude, but it seems to be that there was about a 10% of killing someone with this piece of space junk, on average. 1/10 of a murder was committed here. Yes, they were lucky, but this should not be considered ok.

I think that is exactly what did happen.

Unfortunately, lying is not a good idea if you want to create public trust. Even lying for the right reason is still a bad idea.

No, it was not conservative. If you are conservative, you state that there is uncertainty, and uncertainty is a risk.

There was very little research into coronavirus at the point, and most of it was due to SARS 1. There was a predominant opinion that it would spread like the flu via droplets, but there was not much evidence to support it. There was documented anecdotal evidence that it spreads through aerosols.

The scientifically correct statement would have been that aerosol transmission is suspected but not confirmed. And it is pretty standard to mitigate suspected risks.

The CDC just got it wrong, because their statement was based on opinion, not facts. And we need to ask why they got it so spectacularly wrong.

Yes, that is probably correct.

But one juicy detail is that these were private prosecutions, conducted by private lawyers paid with private money. They were not public prosecutions, and it seems that they were not conducted with the necessary due diligence. It just reeks of withholding of evidence.

The ITU makes regular attempts to kill the internet. It always starts with saying that the Internet is too chaotic and needs to be "regulated".

Banning fast modems, charging internet by the minute, ATM and its seven layer model, and now asking individuals to register their address - the telecom industry has a long history of trying to ruin the internet. We should not give them another shot.

> My antique '85 is easy to keep in good condition.

A W123? Sometimes I really want one of those. They are classic, they are beautiful, they are overengineered. Unlike anything you can buy today.

> Statistics dont lie.

Apart from anything else, that is a rather naive view to take. Statistics often lie, sometimes deliberately so (as in this case).

Ok, they have good headphone sockets, and that may be of some value.

But their update policy was atrocious. 1 year down the line your new high end phone would turn into toxic waste, and only because LG can't be bother to provide updates. Sorry, that stuff does not fly anywhere outside of the ultra-budget segment.

And this is the core of the matter: the autopilot clearly knows how to drive, at least in principle. But it drives different from a human drive, it may surprise other traffic participants, and it may also misread intentions. Having both humans and robots on the road is going to be a source of conflict until most drivers are robots.

That being said, some of the other moves in the video are a bit questionable. Never unsafe, I agree, but it does seem to get confused if there is a longer sequence of events to plan ahead. Especially the left turns seem to need some work. Human are pretty good at that, especially with experience. Computers will get there, but maybe they are more comfortable with simple situations for now.

This. The whole industry is full of fraud and sleaze. Plus the promises are mostly lies. Something should be done about this.

Exactly. Of course it is possible to set up a credit card for further use, but unless this is authorised by the card holder, it is just an interesting case of credit card fraud.

Unfortunately, all the big ones (Apple, Google, Sony, Nintendo) do this by default, without authorisation.

As I said, it is just credit card fraud, and should be handled as such.

Android has that, and it works surprisingly well.