{Insert every internet meme in the spirit of 'The Stupid, it burns!' here}
I know that my GPS saves me a lot of aggravation on the roads. It is a Garmin, and updates two to three times a second in terms of position. In street-dense neighborhoods this frequent updating makes it fairly easy to turn on the right road without under-or-overshooting my target. While the screen is information-dense, I look for what I need. The overview lets me know the way the road ahead of me is going, this is very handy at night, as I have much more warning of sharp turns than your average sign gives.
The upper left corner has a button graphic that tells me the distance to my next turn and the direction I'll be going in. When I get with 2 or 3 miles, it changes to show which lane I need to be in. This gives me time to change lanes without risking cutting anyone off.
The whole thing can be voice-operated, once you get past the power-on-PIN. I can ask it to find things like hotels, gas and food without having to touch it.
I find that having a GPS beats the daylights out of the old AAA Triptik strip-map system and the bulky tour books. Those were very useful in their day, but that day is past. For information while traveling, having a GPS is like having AAA in a very small box.
Real-time traffic information is handy, I've been diverted around tie-ups a number of times, and if I hit a traffic problem in areas not covered by traffic service, I can ask the device for a detour instead of trying to guess my way around or just sit in the jam and fume.
From my perspective, a GPS is an anti-distraction, and those who argue against the usability of them are demonstrating that they themselves really do not belong on the road.
I don't really have any clue what TV is like these days. I went off of it thereabouts of 15 years ago. My reasons are different than most, however. I can't stand those idiotic logos that now infest nearly every channel. (This gleaned from what I see when I visit friends, or am wandering near a TV for whatever reason.)
I find the things so intolerable that there is no content good enough for me to watch if those ugly little "bugs" as some call them are present. If I am going to watch anything from TV, I basically have to get opinions from people whose TV tastes I trust, then wait for the show in question to hit DVD.
The only reason I still have broadcast receiving gear (old TV and a digital-to-analog converter) is for things like weather emergencies.
Just because the existing entities have declared that no new entities are allowed does not mean much. In the end, sovereignty is determined by having sufficient weaponry to defend your position, pretty much like all human arguments. Sometimes the weaponry is guns and bombs, other times building-sized packets of money. If someone can manage to get into space with enough of either, or better, both, they can be a sovereign power.
If anything, the gravity well makes for a great force multiplier. A space-dwelling entity has the ultimate high ground in a battle. They don't even need much in the way of explosives. As Robert Heinlein speculated, they can just drop rocks on their chosen targets.
When humanity is wiped out by a virulent plague that could have been stopped with a drug that nobody could afford, the pharmaceutical executives will be smugly counting their beans and congratulating themselves.
Or, we could create the new job classification of Telephone Sanitizer, and be safe from virulent plagues that manage to evade all that expensive research.
Actually, that is true. Everything with lungs on Earth breathes nitrogen, it just isn't used. The oxygen that is mixed in to all that nitrogen is another matter. That small percentage of the gas mix is vital.
Much the same could be said of the file mix on digital lockers, much may be of dubious legality, but the clearly legal stuff is much more important to the "intellectual respiration" of civilization.
Well, making a TARDIS requires considerable amounts of multidimensional mathematics, whereas ??AA logic involves non-rational hyperbolics.
Can you imagine how ugly it would get just trying to patent the mechanisms of a TARDIS? Can you file patent lawsuits across the entirety of time? Then, oh, the software. How many patents would be infringed on software that has to produce results before the program is started, let alone given data? Is there a patent on progression testing software that runs backwards? How do you even describe a program that may have to end, then start, and come to the middle where it's done with its job? East Texas might collapse into a black hole trying to sort that one out.
Dwolla, for one, Venmo is concentrating on person-to-person at the moment, but has plans to expand. Personally, I think that having a variety of players is a good idea, it might just push existing poorly-behaved incumbents to clean up their acts.
I am getting involved in a number of these alternative systems so that I have options. I am also encouraging merchants to look at these alternatives by letting them know that I do not regard PayPal as an option, and routing credit cards through them counts.
The major point here is that for alternatives to get going, people have to be willing to try them. My Android phone is accumulating all manner of money-transfer apps. Look into the options, and use them when you can. If you mention your options to others, they may look into these other systems. I'm making the effort to open things up. How about some of you join me?
Though I'm careful about it. I'll put some comment I find amusing in a QR Code and either print it on a sticky note or on a plain bit of paper and leave it somewhere. Using various bits of paper means that they can be tossed or recycled when someone decides to get rid of them, no permanent marking like regular graffiti leaves.
On the issue of automatic adding of information to your phone, I disabled all automatic actions in my scanner, it presents me with the results of the scan, and I decide what, if anything, gets done with it.
I've been looking to ditch AT&T over the insane price I'm being charged for just voice, this whole data thing is just Twilight-Zone stuff.
I'm looking into Republic Wireless. Apart from downloading apps, my data footprint is so small that none of the normal plans from the big carriers is justifiable.
For the people whose phone is the only computer they use, this whole situation looks too out-suck a black hole.
Since the time I first got a cell phone, I've used whatever handsfree abilities were available. My current phone in concert with my current GPS means that the only thing I can't do by voice command is answer the phone when a call comes in. And that is at least down to reaching out and tapping the answer button on the GPS screen. I can place calls without any use of hands by voice control. The GPS (a Garmin Nüvi) does all the voice processing for call handling. I can give it contacts from the phone book by name, and even dial arbitrary numbers just by speaking them into the unit. This makes it much easier to keep eyes on the road and still be able to handle calls.
And on the navigation front, apart from having to touch in the security code when I turn it on, the major navigation features are also voice controlled. A common use of this is requesting a detour when I can see a jam ahead, another is locating a gas station by means other than watching for signs.
Used with good sense (not common sense, common sense is codified stupidity, common sense gets people killed) these gadgets are actually safer than not having them around.
As for distraction, I actually cultivate a small amount of distraction when driving, it keeps my mind more focussed on the road, as odd as that sounds. This makes more sense when you allow for driving fugue. In the absence of distractions, I can lose awareness and start paying attention again in a different state than I started out in. The intervening time is just gone. I therefore tend to load my CD player (car is too old for MP3 hookup) with audio books and radio shows of various types to hold enough of my attention that there is some available for the road. This is only an issue on long drives, and when possible, I keep talking to my passenger when I have one or more.
I suspect that people who claim to pay full attention to the road at all times actually have no clue about how much their mind is doing. Remember that the human brain has this habit of creating dedicated systems to handle things you do repeatedly to "take the load off" of your mind. Driving is no different. Once the systems are in place, your conscious mind can be at loose ends while the dedicated system does its job. If you doubt this, try to imagine the incredibly complex chain of events that is walking. You have to start by tilting your body mass forward so your balance center shifts, then you swing a leg forward (a series of actions all by itself) to that it hits a place on the ground ahead of you such that your mass will be lifted by the lever action in concert with muscles to add force, then you have to repeat this action with the other leg, all while you have to shift your mass side-to-side because of your changing balance point, a process that usually involves your arms, but if they are full you have the additional complexity of adjusting your stride and swing to allow for not having the arms available as counterweights. And this incredibly complex chain of events is handled by most people while talking, eating, photographing, and a range of other tasks that in themselves are complex. And they give almost no thought to walking while doing it.
As a practical matter, I suspect that only humans with certain varieties of cognitive disorder can actually pay full attention to an extremely repetitive task indefinitely. The rest of us go on autopilot, and there is no way to change this, as it is part and parcel of being human. Trying to ban all distractions is pointless, as if nothing else, the mind will either wander off into mental processing to keep itself occupied, or it will go on hold and wait for a signal from a subsystem that something needs attention that the subsystem cannot supply.
When that major failure in the Northeast happened several years back, I remember early cries of terrorism. My reaction: "It has to be an accident, no government could have coordinated something this big without 50 years lead time and a staff large enough to populate a small nation. Forget about a group of terrorists doing it."
About the only way I could see a really large induced failure would be coordinated physical attacks on the major switching points. And even then the failure-to-take-out ratio would be so high that the results would be limited.
The film did not use a specific story adaptation, but the plot of the central computer system taking the first law to extremes was an adaptation of things that Dr. Asimov raised once in an early story, and increasingly in his later robot stories/novels. To that degree, they did explore a question that Asimov himself raised, except that the movie brought the thread to a conclusion, wheres Asimov himself had left the options open in the last work of his that I am aware of.
Also the police detective with a distrust of robots was taken from The Caves of Steel and later novels in the series, although the distrust was not as extreme in the books. Susan Calvins attitude towards robots was also reasonably consistent with her portrayal in print.
I know, off-topic, but credit where it's due. I'll even say nice things about Microsoft on those rare occasions when they deserve it.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Look at it from their (uneducated) viewpoint
I tend to take the position that is is wrong to hide the underpinnings so thoroughly that the slightest variation from the usual paralyses people into helplessness.
There have been any number of times I've made myself bleed by having to bite my tongue over being called in to solve a problem that only existed because the user of the system treats it as a magic box, simple problems that would have been easily solved if the user had even the faintest clue of how computers work.
In an era where people take pride in ignorance (how else could you explain books with titles like "X for Dummies" or "The Complete Idiots Guide to X"?) bad regulation of technology is pretty much the only way things can go.
While I'm generally against the idea of law as a way to solve a problem, perhaps we need a law that says no one is allowed to regulate some subject until they can converse about that subject with subject matter experts without those experts laughing, crying, screaming or vomiting.
The only time I purchase deliberately sabotaged software is when I am paid to do so. (Yes, people pay me to work with Windows.)
Other than that, I don't buy anything that has lockdowns, activation codes, or other such garbage.
Software that is designed to fail gracefully when things go wrong is not merely acceptable, but expected.
Software that is deliberately designed to fail, regardless of the reason, is unfit to exist. If the programmer(s) logic is so distorted that engineered failure is considered acceptable behavior, can you really trust the program with your data? Of for that matter, on your machine at all?
(Virtual machines, a cage for potentially feral software.)
Censorship would be removing the comments completely so that no one could get at them. All the hiding does is say to anyone passing by "Here there be idiots." People can simply choose to lift the sign and see the stupidity if they either don't trust the group judgement or think it might be funny stupid instead of burning stupid.
On the post: National Highway Transportation Safety Agency Says You Can Keep Your GPS -- As Long As It's Completely Useless
I just have to do this now...
D.A.R.R.Y.L.
Distressing
Aggravating
Really
Revolting
Yowling
Loser
On the post: National Highway Transportation Safety Agency Says You Can Keep Your GPS -- As Long As It's Completely Useless
Brain fried, core dumped.
I know that my GPS saves me a lot of aggravation on the roads. It is a Garmin, and updates two to three times a second in terms of position. In street-dense neighborhoods this frequent updating makes it fairly easy to turn on the right road without under-or-overshooting my target. While the screen is information-dense, I look for what I need. The overview lets me know the way the road ahead of me is going, this is very handy at night, as I have much more warning of sharp turns than your average sign gives.
The upper left corner has a button graphic that tells me the distance to my next turn and the direction I'll be going in. When I get with 2 or 3 miles, it changes to show which lane I need to be in. This gives me time to change lanes without risking cutting anyone off.
The whole thing can be voice-operated, once you get past the power-on-PIN. I can ask it to find things like hotels, gas and food without having to touch it.
I find that having a GPS beats the daylights out of the old AAA Triptik strip-map system and the bulky tour books. Those were very useful in their day, but that day is past. For information while traveling, having a GPS is like having AAA in a very small box.
Real-time traffic information is handy, I've been diverted around tie-ups a number of times, and if I hit a traffic problem in areas not covered by traffic service, I can ask the device for a detour instead of trying to guess my way around or just sit in the jam and fume.
From my perspective, a GPS is an anti-distraction, and those who argue against the usability of them are demonstrating that they themselves really do not belong on the road.
On the post: UK Entertainment Industry: Fair Use Hurts Economic Growth
Re: Abandoning TV
I find the things so intolerable that there is no content good enough for me to watch if those ugly little "bugs" as some call them are present. If I am going to watch anything from TV, I basically have to get opinions from people whose TV tastes I trust, then wait for the show in question to hit DVD.
The only reason I still have broadcast receiving gear (old TV and a digital-to-analog converter) is for things like weather emergencies.
On the post: The History Of Sealand, HavenCo And Why Protecting Your Data Needs More Than Being In International Waters
Sovereignty in space
If anything, the gravity well makes for a great force multiplier. A space-dwelling entity has the ultimate high ground in a battle. They don't even need much in the way of explosives. As Robert Heinlein speculated, they can just drop rocks on their chosen targets.
On the post: Another Boost For Generics: Brazilian Judge Annuls Patent On Key AIDS Drug
Being wiped out by a virulent plague...
Or, we could create the new job classification of Telephone Sanitizer, and be safe from virulent plagues that manage to evade all that expensive research.
On the post: Bad Idea: Internet Service Providers Should Assume Most Digital Locker Content Is 'Illegal'
Re: Air
Much the same could be said of the file mix on digital lockers, much may be of dubious legality, but the clearly legal stuff is much more important to the "intellectual respiration" of civilization.
On the post: Why It's Mathematically Impossible To Avoid Infringing On Software Patents
Re: Re: Re: A working TARDIS
On the post: Why It's Mathematically Impossible To Avoid Infringing On Software Patents
Re: A working TARDIS
Can you imagine how ugly it would get just trying to patent the mechanisms of a TARDIS? Can you file patent lawsuits across the entirety of time? Then, oh, the software. How many patents would be infringed on software that has to produce results before the program is started, let alone given data? Is there a patent on progression testing software that runs backwards? How do you even describe a program that may have to end, then start, and come to the middle where it's done with its job? East Texas might collapse into a black hole trying to sort that one out.
On the post: Tell Paypal To Stop Playing Morality Cop With Booksellers
Alternative payment systems do exist.
I am getting involved in a number of these alternative systems so that I have options. I am also encouraging merchants to look at these alternatives by letting them know that I do not regard PayPal as an option, and routing credit cards through them counts.
The major point here is that for alternatives to get going, people have to be willing to try them. My Android phone is accumulating all manner of money-transfer apps. Look into the options, and use them when you can. If you mention your options to others, they may look into these other systems. I'm making the effort to open things up. How about some of you join me?
On the post: QR Codes: Ugly, Overused and Doomed
I've gotten into QR Code graffiti
On the issue of automatic adding of information to your phone, I disabled all automatic actions in my scanner, it presents me with the results of the scan, and I decide what, if anything, gets done with it.
On the post: Chris Dodd: The Internet Developed Because Of Strict Copyright Enforcement
Re: Facts
On the post: AT&T's New Scheme To Double Charge For Data: Call It A 1-800 Number For Internet Content
Looking to dump AT&T, and this helps
I'm looking into Republic Wireless. Apart from downloading apps, my data footprint is so small that none of the normal plans from the big carriers is justifiable.
For the people whose phone is the only computer they use, this whole situation looks too out-suck a black hole.
On the post: New Rules To Block 'Distracted Driving' Will Likely Make Things Worse, Not Better
Phones in the car
And on the navigation front, apart from having to touch in the security code when I turn it on, the major navigation features are also voice controlled. A common use of this is requesting a detour when I can see a jam ahead, another is locating a gas station by means other than watching for signs.
Used with good sense (not common sense, common sense is codified stupidity, common sense gets people killed) these gadgets are actually safer than not having them around.
As for distraction, I actually cultivate a small amount of distraction when driving, it keeps my mind more focussed on the road, as odd as that sounds. This makes more sense when you allow for driving fugue. In the absence of distractions, I can lose awareness and start paying attention again in a different state than I started out in. The intervening time is just gone. I therefore tend to load my CD player (car is too old for MP3 hookup) with audio books and radio shows of various types to hold enough of my attention that there is some available for the road. This is only an issue on long drives, and when possible, I keep talking to my passenger when I have one or more.
I suspect that people who claim to pay full attention to the road at all times actually have no clue about how much their mind is doing. Remember that the human brain has this habit of creating dedicated systems to handle things you do repeatedly to "take the load off" of your mind. Driving is no different. Once the systems are in place, your conscious mind can be at loose ends while the dedicated system does its job. If you doubt this, try to imagine the incredibly complex chain of events that is walking. You have to start by tilting your body mass forward so your balance center shifts, then you swing a leg forward (a series of actions all by itself) to that it hits a place on the ground ahead of you such that your mass will be lifted by the lever action in concert with muscles to add force, then you have to repeat this action with the other leg, all while you have to shift your mass side-to-side because of your changing balance point, a process that usually involves your arms, but if they are full you have the additional complexity of adjusting your stride and swing to allow for not having the arms available as counterweights. And this incredibly complex chain of events is handled by most people while talking, eating, photographing, and a range of other tasks that in themselves are complex. And they give almost no thought to walking while doing it.
As a practical matter, I suspect that only humans with certain varieties of cognitive disorder can actually pay full attention to an extremely repetitive task indefinitely. The rest of us go on autopilot, and there is no way to change this, as it is part and parcel of being human. Trying to ban all distractions is pointless, as if nothing else, the mind will either wander off into mental processing to keep itself occupied, or it will go on hold and wait for a signal from a subsystem that something needs attention that the subsystem cannot supply.
On the post: NSA: 'Anonymous Might One Day Hack Power Grids!' Anonymous: 'Huh?!?'
Power grids - unlikely stability.
About the only way I could see a really large induced failure would be coordinated physical attacks on the major switching points. And even then the failure-to-take-out ratio would be so high that the results would be limited.
On the post: Techdirt Deemed Harmful To Minors In Germany
Filter Aggravations
On the post: How To Turn A Legitimate Buyer Into A Pirate In Five Easy Steps
Actually, there was a connection.
Also the police detective with a distrust of robots was taken from The Caves of Steel and later novels in the series, although the distrust was not as extreme in the books. Susan Calvins attitude towards robots was also reasonably consistent with her portrayal in print.
I know, off-topic, but credit where it's due. I'll even say nice things about Microsoft on those rare occasions when they deserve it.
On the post: Poland Prime Minister Suspends Any Effort To Ratify ACTA; May Kill ACTA In The EU
New Games....
On the post: MPAA Exec Admits: 'We're Not Comfortable With The Internet'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Look at it from their (uneducated) viewpoint
There have been any number of times I've made myself bleed by having to bite my tongue over being called in to solve a problem that only existed because the user of the system treats it as a magic box, simple problems that would have been easily solved if the user had even the faintest clue of how computers work.
In an era where people take pride in ignorance (how else could you explain books with titles like "X for Dummies" or "The Complete Idiots Guide to X"?) bad regulation of technology is pretty much the only way things can go.
While I'm generally against the idea of law as a way to solve a problem, perhaps we need a law that says no one is allowed to regulate some subject until they can converse about that subject with subject matter experts without those experts laughing, crying, screaming or vomiting.
On the post: Tales From Ubisoft DRM: Latest DRM Goes From Horrible To Slightly Less Horrible
Why do people put up with this stuff?
Other than that, I don't buy anything that has lockdowns, activation codes, or other such garbage.
Software that is designed to fail gracefully when things go wrong is not merely acceptable, but expected.
Software that is deliberately designed to fail, regardless of the reason, is unfit to exist. If the programmer(s) logic is so distorted that engineered failure is considered acceptable behavior, can you really trust the program with your data? Of for that matter, on your machine at all?
(Virtual machines, a cage for potentially feral software.)
On the post: Has Hollywood Hubris Awakened Silicon Valley To The Importance Of Telling DC To Knock It Off On Bad Laws?
Alerting is not censorship.
Next >>