Traffic accidents and deaths are rising because of phones. I think we actually "won" the war on drunk driving, only to have a new more vicious war set upon us.
Collision energy and thus damage increases with the square of speed (or ~speed^4 for head-on) so there is still an interest in controlling speed.
Most drivers (especially those over 35yo) will auto-regulate their speed to the optimal (safety vs throughput) for the road design. The problem is the ones who don't. Speed limits are set lower than this optimal speed, partly to make it easier to stop and charge drivers that can't auto-regulate well. Most of the time you will be ignored for going 5-10mph over. If you are over that, it is seen as deliberate defiance and "you are asking to be pulled over".
Automatic enforcement turns this de facto road law on it's head however.
During the 1970's oil crisis, highway speeds were capped at 55 mph nationwide. It took several decades for this to reverse and only after safety studies showed that differential speeds (those obeying and those going the optimal natural speed for the road) is a significant contributing factor in crashes. Unfortunately, speeds limits are still often below optimal because of an assumption that every driver will always go at least 5mph over the limit (which is incorrect).
On 70 mph interstates away from urban/commuter traffic (where time pressures often affect driving), It's not unusual to see some cars going 5mph below the limit. That is a sign that these Interstate segments have the optimal natural speed.
Every other nation has cell phones so I fail to see how the cell phone argument holds water.
Also the safety of speed for a given environment should include pedestrians. Many advocates for urban areas rightfully push for 25 mph limits for exactly that reason. If you want to successfully convert in town urban roads that are wide and have high speeds to 25mph there are two good options: speed calming measures or speed cameras.
I live in NZ and they introduced laws here where you can be fined and potentially lose your license for using your phone while driving citing it as being dangerous.
A lot of rose-tinted glasses come out with respect to Radio Shack. They were the least bad source of local cables etc. and they did have some history in ham and some electronics components. But for a lot of their history they had a bunch of crap stereo and toys and latterly cell phone offers.
Go outside and touch grass every day. Go for a walk if you can. It will improve your mental and physical health, and can even help you solve problems. If it also keeps your eyes healthy, that is a bonus.
"When I taught at Princeton five years ago, I asked my old college roommate to get to John Conway and ask. To my surprise it took 3, not 2, degrees of separation to get to him. He said he wanted the name to end in "-day" and "Dooms" popped into his head."
Likely that sprung to mind because of the "Domesday Book":
"Domesday Book (/ˈduːmzdeɪ/ DOOMZ-day; the Middle English spelling of "Doomsday Book") is a manuscript record of the Great Survey of much of England and parts of Wales completed in 1086 at the behest of King William the Conqueror."
Yes, they would tolerate it. Both because of the Government's monopoly on violence, and because citizens always rally to support a war when under direct attack. The latter effect was popularized by Randolph Bourne in an essay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randolph_Bourne
> the phrase "war is the health of the state" that laments the success of governments in arrogating authority and resources during conflicts.
The problem the US might have in full war mobilization today would be due to cronyism. Remember all of the exceptions to Covid lockdowns for "essential" employees? Some of that is of course necessary but I suspect it would be very widespread if it happened today. This would stoke resentment from people/companies not so privileged.
> I don't understand why people have such a big privacy issue with this. It all happens on your device.
It's not hard to imagine situations where this complete and total information package can be exfiltrated or otherwise abused. Roommates, stalkers, one night stands, domestic govt, foreign govt, domestic hackers, foreign hackers, computer repair techs, employers (seizing a personal device), etc, etc etc.
There is no scenario in a free society where this should be allowed or tolerated.
> There is no scenario in a free society where this should be allowed or tolerated.
yes there is, I think you're lacking imagination. such a vision does require re-imagining a lot of what society is, and even of how we undertand ourselves relative to our many groups and super-groups which we belong to
Or a surge of competition from open source operating systems (to which I, for my part, have permanently migrated -- years before this new stride toward dystopia). :D
Does an open source OS have an AI watchman? You can check! If yes, you can fork and remove it.
All that's happening here is the lack of control over your hardware and software is being emphasized a little further. Put another way, you already live in totalitarianism. Microsoft or Apple have de facto totalitarian control over your computer. They always did.
> Should I not be allowed to use a password manager because it would be problematic if my roommate or one night stand copied it?
You are free to use or not a password manager. What ms is doing is shoving things by force. It's not an opt in feature, their OS is becoming something ugly fast
This just pushes the question, what else should be opt-in because it could be abused by someone given full access to your laptop? Saving browser history? Persistent logins? Shell history? Document recovery? Spotify listening history?
This is why Windows has the "airtight hatchway" beyond which security against the user accessing their own data stops applying. Inside your login is by construction where your private data goes. Adding more of it shouldn't matter as it's all protected as the same. Like I agree that this feature is annoying but it's not a security risk, Windows promises no security against yourself.
I picked up on the context of all the human experiences we perceive as wrapped up in those items - as sorts of resiviors for human emotion and symbols of self actualization. I think a more apt analogy would be: you wouldn't host an estate sale at the site of that person's funeral.
This article largely ignores the fact that there are common data center designs that use closed-loop cooling, and consume no more water on a daily basis than a barber shop.
