"Society will accept" translates to "it's going to happen, and I've already got a VP in mind as a fall guy to ensure I don't lose my job over it." It's true that automated vehicles have the potential (if not currently the ability) to be safer than human-driven vehicles, but if a corporation's software is making the decisions, they should bear the financial responsibility. The current model makes much more money shifting the burden to individual policyholders, and we need to ensure that a future model doesn't make victims of a crash (e.g. pedestrians) unable to get properly compensated for their injuries... not that the current model of insurance regulations has show to be especially good at ensuring proper payout of claims....

I'm about as libertarian as most older slashdot users, but food manufacturers have made it clear that if allowed, they'll take out the good (expensive) stuff, substitute it with oils and synthetic cocktails, and pretend they're doing you a f(l)avor, while knowingly contributing to obesity and other health issues. Steak is specific to meat, and specific cuts of meat, at that. Maybe something like "cheeze" vs cheese could work for dairy products, but this is about consumer protection, not just protecting animal-based producers.

Now that's an educator worthy of the title.

SAG-AFTRA successfully argued that they were owed a portion of every blank CD-R sold as well as personal audio devices, media centers, satellite radio devices, and car audio systems that have recording capabilities, because it MIGHT be used for piracy. The US government collected the revenue it, and paid it out to the actor's union and RIAA for many years, and would have done the same based on the storage capacity of your cell phone and other digital devices if that specific issue wasn't preempted by another lawsuit. This isn't conjecture, they collect on this basis in other countries outside the US. They're a special interest group, Ãnd shouldn't be entitled to tax revenue. https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F...

Like most headlines that pose a question, the answer is no. But the planned digital television broadcasting migration from ATSC 1 to v 3.0 might be what kills OTA TV, as it's not backwards compatible, and the media lobbyists that run the standards group is pushing to require "security certificates" that increase operational costs for stations, and facilitate censorship and DRM in OTA broadcasts.

How about we let local schools and districts set appropriate policies for their students, rather than issuing broad edicts from national legislators?

> I'm thinking this technology can be adapted to process organic polymers found in wood, paper, cotton, and other natural materials from industrial waste, municipal waste, agricultural byproducts...

The first commercial thermo-depolymerization plant opened in Carthage, MO in 2003. Every day, the plant handled up to 200 tons of unused turkey parts. During the first three months of 2008, plant generated 391,000 gallons of fuel. It was shuttered after local residents complained about the smell.

In the end, CWT sold only 93,000 of the 391,000 gallons of low-grade fuel it produced and earned just 99 cents for each one. At the time, wholesale fuel oil distributors were raking in $2.50 to $3.30 per gallon. Even with the $1-per-gallon U.S. biofuels tax credit for every gallon sold, Changing World Technologies paid more for Butterball's turkey offal than it earned back in revenue.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.discovermagazine.c...

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.technologyreview.c...

How long until this "helpful" feature gets a "helpful" update allowing LEOs and national intelligence to bypass it?

YouTube set prices and their own policies on stolen and reuploaded content. Facebook just flat out declined to pay for content, even when it was posted in violation of copyright law. Why would anyone expect Meta to suddenly start respecting copyright?

This letter starts with the inaccurate assumption that the government cares about people's privacy. They already require public disclosure of your private details to file own real property and pay the associated taxes, and to vote, operate a ham radio, and plenty of other things... unless of course you're a part of the Special Class (e.g. police officers, politicians, and wealthy) and fall under a specific exemption they created for themselves to limit the mandate for sharing this information.

Not just under investigation, but already ruled (In Aug 2024) to be in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act by illegally monopolizing the search engine and search advertising markets, most notably on Android devices, as well as with Apple and mobile carriers in United States v. Google LLC (2020).

And further active court cases (final arguments were in Nov 2024) for illegally monopolizing the advertising technology market in violation of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 in United States v. Google LLC (2023).

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F...

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F...

âoeGoogle is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,â - Judge Amit P. Mehta of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said in a 277-page ruling in August 2024.

United States v. Google LLC (2020) - https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F...

And then there was United States v. Google LLC (2023), with closing arguments in late Nov 2024. https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F....

Let's be honest, there will be no enforcement in the US, and nothing will change, just as Microsoft still owns the desktop OS space, office, and more, and AT&T started re-merging the baby bells in the mid 2000s.

If the patent office is going to be self-funding (and it should), then filers should bear the actual costs of processing. If they want to set up some kind of court-style public defender system to pay for filing costs for those who are less able to cover the costs, I suppose that's fine, but there are enough problems with the patent system to consider subsidizing its fees.

But as others have said, there are already legal costs for writing patent descriptions and other expenses that dwarf the filing fees (plus enforcement after the patent is actually approved), and it's not really an effective place to focus if we're trying to address equitable access to government services.

They've had 50 years to make the joke.

Wikipedia says:
Dr. James Baker laid out the description of a speech understanding system called DRAGON in 1975. DragonDictate was first released for DOS, and Dragon Systems released NaturallySpeaking 1.0 as their first continuous dictation product in 1997.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F...

Without reading the (pre-peer review) article, why would it be strange that people without the education to know when a GPT article is factually incorrect would trust a tool that they don't know is wrong?

There's a reason for the old saying "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".

The question is, what are people supposed to do with this supposed revelation?