Damn it! See icon--->
We all owe Greenspan and FamilyTreeDNA a debt of gratitude for his ethical and moral stance.
The worst part is it's bourbon o'clock!
4662 publicly visible posts • joined 27 Apr 2007
I was going to suggest the Goliath birdeater but it seems it only occasionally eats birds. Wait, can they spare a few pelicans from the park?
It's creepy because I had an Amazon Fire tablet right up until it decided to slip Alexa in during an automatic update and there was no way to remove it. Like Cortana in Windows 10, I was given a spy feature I didn't ask for and don't use that was near impossible to neuter. What's not creepy about a bunch of Big Brother wannabes shoving spy shit down your throat?
That's kind of why I'm hopeful. Once all the deep fakes and meddling are known common practices I think people will become more skeptical of everything they see and hear and less prone to the knee jerk bloviating that so saturates anti-social media. I'm also hopeful that people will see the blatant political hyperbole for theatrical histrionics it is.
Then again, I'm hopeful I'll find a valid winning lottery ticket in my jacket pocket even though I haven't bought one for years.
A large number of American's don't think of ourselves as "world police" and would be happy to be out of that role. Unfortunately there is a very vocal minority who insists we need to either "help" certain other countries or "protect ourselves" from largely those same countries. Inevitably as a result of the ensuing marketing campaign we wind up in yet another clusterfsck where we don't belong trying to bring a form of democracy we don't use to countries that only a few pols and celebrities pretend to care about. All so they can be seen as doing something to save the great unwashed1, most of whom don't need saving in the first place.
1. The great unwashed being either here for the "protect ourselves" group or there for the "helping" group.
That's just it, it's not very forgiving for anyone to have a "toasty afterlife". The old testament is different with the jealous, vengeful, grapes of wrath, fire, brimstone, etc. has a reason for a hell but the kinder, gentler, and most importantly forgiving new testament absolutely doesn't.
No matter, I agree the goat's head thing is a bit odd unless a game of buzkashi went a bit awry.
Christians enjoy reminding the heathens, atheists and sinners who share this world that they're all going to Hell.
I've noticed that. Here they're supposed to be all new testament, forgiving, etc. yet they still have a need for hell. Why would a forgiving deity maintain a place for eternal damnation? It just doesn't jibe.
Domestic banana plants, specifically the current Cavendish and the former Gros Michel are triploid cultivars having been bred to be seedless and that leaves propagation by asexual vegetative reproduction which rules out cross breeding and largely means they can't evolve. Many wild species of bananas do have seeds and can reproduce sexually allowing them to adapt or be cross bred to become resistant. The problem then becomes one of marketing in that the perception is that people largely won't accept bananas with seeds.
Coffee is different since seedless coffee would be pointless as it's the seeds/beans that we're after so they are fully capable of evolving and adapting and cross breeding is easily possible. The problem is that coffee plants typically take several years to mature before they produce a significant crop so it takes time.
... but with larger gaps during the plays/tackles.
I don't remember where I saw it but there was a study, if you can call it that, which determined that the average NFL game contained roughly 12 minutes of action even though it is officially 1 hour long and takes over 3 hours to play. Of course that means that folks willing to splash over $8k on super bowl tickets are paying nearly $700 per minute of action not counting the time and money spent on ancillaries like plane tickets, hotel rooms, and stadium priced beer.
Perhaps I wasn't clear. There are two aspects, there is 1) the storage box and 2) the encryption. A safe is just a storage box that is difficult to open. That difficulty is the only security it provides. Any documents inside that are not encrypted rely on the security of a difficult to open ~500 kg box that is bolted to the floor. If it isn't secured in place then it offers no protection at all, except maybe to fire, which is the main difference from a mobile electronic device. An additional layer of security can be obtained by encrypting the documents inside. The key/combination to the safe is protected by the 5th amendment as is the encryption key to the documents so there are potentially two layers of security.
Mobile electronic devices don't have two layers. They rely only on access to the encryption key provided by the password, finger, etc. Yes, for the pedants, one could employ a separate lock to see the file system and encrypt the individual documents on the device or lockout the i/o or other contrived method to more closely match the safe paradigm but then it quickly becomes impractical since the device gets so difficult to access it then offers no benefit to it being mobile. After all, safes are largely safe because they aren't mobile.
Besides, at some point it becomes pixies on the head of a pin supported by encryption turtles all the way down and where do you draw the 5A line? It only makes sense to draw the line at the beginning or not have a line at all because an arbitrary line will always be arbitrary.
but she made clear that she believes device owners should not have to testify against themselvesI don't think the safe analogy is correct. If you don't open a safe the police will just get a safe cracker to open it anyway but you won't have to cough up an encryption key should all the documents in the safe be encrypted. The big difference is that electronic devices make it easy to encrypt/decrypt your documents and access to the encryption key is via your password, finger, face, etc.
We need to stop looking at the $device as a safe and see it for what it is, an encryption tool that also happens to have document storage. It's no different than having an encrypted note in your pocket so when the police asks "what does that say?" you're free to plead the fifth.
The bigger problem is there is nothing codified in the law just agency rules which are at the whim of the figurehead. If the congresscritters were serious they'd be pushing for legislation which actually has teeth and not finger wagging at the particular burrocrat acting as figurehead for not tweaking the agency rules to their liking.
Note - this applies to all agencies not just the FCC and it's a broader symptom of congresscritters shirking their own responsibilities and being too busy tweeting insults back and forth instead of getting on with their real job. It doesn't matter if we're talking about net neutrality or the war powers act, congress largely just sits aside inciting division, outrage, and hate while drumming up support from their base because all that's really important is keeping their cushy job.
From the study
We randomly selected 3,000 images per animal for training.
There's a problem. Where are the spy monkeys going to get anywhere near that many facial images of everyone to train their facial recognition? Oh that's right, they aren't so concerned with accuracy when it comes to upending the lives of we plebs.
Ah, I notice the linked article does mention accuracy albeit in a fuzzy way:
Support for using the technology that way increases depending on its accuracy: If the software is right 80 percent of the time, then 39 percent agree with using it and 32 percent disagree. If the software is right 90 percent of the time, then 47 percent of respondents agree with using it and 25 percent disagree. And if the software is right 100 percent of the time, then 59 percent agree with using it, while 16 percent disagree.The problem is saying the software is correct 80% of the time is such a weasel worded thing. Say it another way, one in five innocent people will be tagged by the software incorrectly and potentially shot by the police while one in five criminals will get a pass. Would they still get 39% to agree supporting it?
Astonishingly it only gets 59% support even when it's perfect.
This particular survey is horrid. Just look at the questions and notice the ambiguity and stress of the fear factor.
I can see a lot of people not really having a problem using facial rec to unlock their mobile especially if they just bought one just for that feature. To stop shoplifting? That sounds like a good application. At airports? For public safety? Oh hell yes, that's all good stuff!
Notice it doesn't ask, "what if it screws up N% of the time?" or "what if it wrongly identifies you?" or "would you support strict limits if facial rec. wrongly identified and caused X people per day to be detained for Y minutes/hours?" and "what if one of those wrongly identified and detained caused a delay to your flight?"
My guess is that if they pointed out the negatives it would quickly swing the other way as the fear factor would shift to 'I could be one of the N%'. I'd also guess that they would say they accept a much larger percentage of mistakes, N, than they realize since the actual number of X they would accept would likely wind up as 0.01% if not much less.
Think of the wall as, hopefully, the final curtain to the many years of security theater we've been having. Soon we won't be groped at the airports, our communications will be secure, none of our private information will be sucked into the malevolent void that is the NSA, bureaucrats will stop trying to backdoor encryption, and we'll all be happy and peaceful.
What? Why is everyone laughing?
Add to that it looks like the "skills gap" was all part of the gaming as Vox explains some current research.
Louisiana is actually one of the better ones on braiding. You only need 500 hours of training to get a braider's license where other states like Rhode Island require a full cosmetology license to the tune of 1,500 hours of training.
Full IJ report link on this page for anyone interested in how silly it can get.
Yes, the vast majority of occupational licensing is about limiting competition. It's little different from cab drivers trying to reign in Uber & Lyft. In the case of many "professional" licenses there is also a lot of cronyism and tradition so it becomes more a "brotherhood". It's also why so many are willing to cover for the ineptitude of their peers which is why bad doctors, teachers, lawyers, etc. are often so hard to purge.
Hmm... those huntsman spiders look a bit like king crab. Surely it just needs to be marketed properly. Perhaps we could call it the soft shelled Oz desert crab or something, fry it up, serve the legs on a toasted hot dog bun with butter and the rest in a nice bisque spiced with just a hint of cayenne.
I don't know, I noticed my brother got one and I think at this point you could start a company called Ingsoc and build a speaker that responded to "big brother" or "the party" and it would likely fly off the shelves.
I can see it now, "big brother, how long until two minutes hate?"
I get the feeling any success will depend on three factors; hipsters, price, and hang on...
Two weeks, as in 14 days, for 5 litres?!? That isn't even one beer per day! Are they saying we need to buy 2 of these things just to have one single lousy beer each day?
because in a democracy there are at least mechanisms for checks and balances. In the dictatorships of the World what the dictator declares goes...
A true democracy doesn't have any such mechanisms, it's largely just mob rule and in its pure form is little different from any other oppressive regime. Democracy's only fortune, or failure, is that it tends to be less consistent in its oppression.