which part of the 73 page absurdly boring John Galt monologue do you want me to quote to prove you wrong?
also, I don't care if you don't believe me. if you were really randian you would know that reality exists regardless of your belief in it, or to quote her quote of Socrates, "A is A."
I've also read and own literally every book she published, and a few published posthumously by leonard peikoff. I've considered her views extensively to see if they can coexist with mine.
You clearly misunderstood moron, I said I don't believe you because reading that book once is a painful exercise why the hell would someone that didn't like it read it multiple times? Keep your lies in check and maybe you will be convincing.
Hard? Where did I say hard? Reading for challenge is understandable, reading a bad book multiple times is just retarded. And Atlas Shrugged isn't a hard book.
That's the thing, its not a conspiracy theory. Everybody already believe, even secular turks like me, that Gulen was behind many things in Turkey like: The imprisonment of more than 1000 "secular" officers in the army since 2007 with the Ergenekon Operation, and later with the Balyoz operation. The irony is when we accused Gulen of being behind those operations, AKP and Erdogan were accusing the seculars for being conspiracy theorist.
Realistically, you handle such things via deterrence. When an accident happens, the car's software can be dumped (in some cases), and criminal/civil liability can be assessed based on the results. The risk of heavy fines or jail will probably keep most people from hacking their self-driving cars to be more aggressive.
Because that threat today keeps people from modifying their cars by cutting springs, installing lift kits, putting on ridiculous wheel/tire packages, and changing to poorly "engineered" HID retrofit lighting kits.
I see unsafe modified cars almost every week right now.
Realistically, the simple fact that it will be hard to modify in fashion that doesn't break the car completely is a huge deterrent. Of course it is possible for a single individual or small group to hack the software and then distribute it like consoles hacking
The economic case for hacking them is much different, the hacker risks prenablently bricking their device, in fact it might be nessacary to destroy a couple to learn about them. It is going to be harder to do this to a $20,000 device you rely on to go to work/school. Secondly the varsity of car models is going to dwarf the number of console versions.
These two factor combine to make the hacking much more expensive and riskier.
It feels more prudent to wait and see if this becomes a problem and from that poin look at how/if to solve it. After all if a hack modifies a car's software to dive faster, accelerate faster, or something similar. You can do as the OP suggested and set up cammeras to record traffic and see who is driving a car that behaves out of spec and go arrest them.
Those kinds of modifications are of a completely different category than modifications to an autonomous driving system. There aren't serious civil or criminal penalties to deter "ridiculous wheel/tire packages" because they don't really have the same potential to cause serious problems.
That's actually way cheaper than I expected it to be. Though I supposed an actual spaceflight-worthy camera with that sensor would cost far more than the one you linked.
That's a lot. Vitamin D tests are easy to get, so I just took a few over a few months to find a dose that would keep me at ~50ng/ml. Previous to that, I had taken 5000+ IU/day for some time and the test showed my levels were very high.
> I believe you're required to keep something like 30-45 minutes worth of fuel beyond what you need to get to your destination.
> I've noticed that people who work on electric aircraft express some annoyance with this.
As someone who was just on a plane who was recently on a plane that was diverted to another airport due to dangerously bad weather, I'm glad those requirements are there. There's all kind of things that can go wrong that could delay a landing for a half hour or more.
I'm not so sure. Wouldn't leaving the bootloader/root filesystem unencrypted make the device more vulnerable to physical tampering by a non-Apple party that could compromise user data?
I'm assuming that these things were previously encrypted/signed with a key that only Apple controls. I could be wrong.
There's also a bias against the currently unemployed. It took 6 months of hard work for a friend of mine to find a job after he quit one after 3 months without anything lined up, because it was such a bad fit that it was making him depressed. Up to that point, he had zero problems finding a job, the only difference was his employment status while job hunting.
Yes, I think that has contributed to it as well. In retrospect I should have started lining up interviews when I saw the company might fold, but I had never had any issue finding employment in the past so I didn't prioritize it over trying to right the ship.
2 years ago I moved to SF from a shithole city. I had taken off like 3 years to work on my own projects. It was more difficult than I expected to find a job without any connections. Took about 3 months after moving here.
I think there's at least some bias against people who have taken time off because they appear comfortable not having a job and therefore the company has less leverage over them.
I think the bigger bias at play is the just-world fallacy. Employers assume that everyone who is unemployed must be unemployed justly because something is wrong with them (e.g. they're incompetent, slackers, toxic, etc.). That's the problem my friend had: the company that eventually hired him admitted they spent a long time trying to figure out what was wrong with him, even though they liked him.
From what I've read, the shooter was contained and did not have hostages. They didn't need to bomb him to death because "negotiations failed," they could have kept him under siege until he was forced to surrender due to lack of supplies. The fact that they had to drive in a bomb is a strong indication that the shooter was not an immediate threat. If he was, a sniper could have got him.
I think the police should never use lethal violence if there are any passive options available to them. This guy was obviously guilty of murder, but I'm more worried about other cases where the police might decided to use techniques like this in the name of safety, such as a "drug bust" against "armed and dangerous criminals" that happens to be carried out against innocents at the wrong address.
I've read a report that a factor in the decision was the suspect had put IED's around the area. So they can't approach and can't clear the area of potential IED's due to his presence...
I think we are owed more explanation for this precedent.
http://theexplanationproject.wikia.com/wiki/Directive_10-289
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Shrugged:_Part_II
https://www.cliffsnotes.com/literature/a/atlas-shrugged/summ...