"How Does It Work?
NexDock is a laptop that runs on your smartphone, tablet or mini PC. Use NexDock with the latest Windows 10 mobile devices (such as the Lumia 950) and take advantage of the new Continuum feature, which allows smartphones and tablets to switch between touch and desktop modes. iPhone and Android users can utilize of the mini HDMI port or wireless adapter for a substantial screen size and productivity upgrad
Likewise. I used to live in Reading, west of Heathrow, and twice a day they'd be this crackling roar and the windows would rattle, unlike anything else that flew; and you'd look up, and there would be that glorious arrowhead silhouette, sliding through the sky.
I don't care if Concorde was uneconomic. Some things you should do just because they're beautiful.
Saw a Vulcan doing aerobatics fairly low over the wee Scottish village where I grew up probably late 70s - an absolutely unforgettable sight and the NOISE - like a thousand tormented demons howling at once.
Not sure if the Vulcan was supposed to deter the Soviets with its nukes or simply scare them to death.
Edit: The Vulcan wasn't just loud in the "strategic bomber" sense of loud - it also sometimes generated a completely unearthly howl that it is famous for. Combine the engine noise and the howl and it really was quite a monster.
I think awareness of the Vulcan's purpose coupled with that howling was the big thing for me when I saw it fly after they restored one. What an incredible machine.
Just a shame it was originally built to kill millions of Russians. I know military investment produces all kinds of awesome technology, but... we could be better than that. And that's something Concorde felt like it represented.
No idea about research, but my youngest first started playing with a smart phone at about 9 months. Yes, really.
After about a month he could unlock it and launch games. Soon progressed to finding YouTube videos of preschool songs for the alphabet, colours, shapes, etc. He is now 5, and can happily search google for things like mine craft hacks, which he can easily apply, and his current hobby is installing old skool operating systems on Oracle VM. His current favorite sound is the Win 95 start up sound....
He has now got a reading age of about 13, so for example he can read a broadsheet newspaper with out help, he can type anything, but is only just learning to write with a pen. But even that is now happening super quick. He started learning to write 9 months ago and had caught up with his class.
Just by my experience, I'd give them devices as soon as possible, but perhaps remember to get them writing as well.
Why didnt we take care of making sure he could also write? Frankly piss poor parenting on our part.
Thanks for the feedback. I imagine an ipad pro with the stylus could probably catch him up on that. What caused the advanced reading age in your opinion?
- Human rights are governed by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which is a separate organization and treaty than the EU. It's unlikely the UK will leave the Council of Europe too.
- Safety regulations on products are part of the single market treaties, just as free movement of people is. If the UK wants to remain in the EEA (e.g. through membership of the EFTA), it will still have to accept those.
And this coming from a politician that, for most of the Brexit campaign, kept on the sidelines because she was undecided about which side to choose? From a minister that introduced the Snooper's Charter, massively expanding the scope of their intelligence services? Yeah, those pesky human rights could well interfere with her method of governing.
But her statement really shows her (willful) ignorance:
"The ECHR can bind the hands of parliament, adds nothing to our prosperity, makes us less secure by preventing the deportation of dangerous foreign nationals – and does nothing to change the attitudes of governments like Russia’s when it comes to human rights"
As the home office minister, she should know damn well that the ECHR has no teeth except for EU regulation. Leave the EU, and there is no enforcement mechanism left for ECHR rulings. Not to mention the inconsistency of her own statement: how come the ECHR binds the hands of the UK government, but not Russia's? (The answer is above: it's EU regulation, not ECHR that bound her hands).
If that were to happen, I would suggest that an artificial "soul" could or would be created. Once you have that on your hands, things being to get interesting. Ethics, religion law, and so on will have one hell of a job on their hands. Especially when you consider that there would be immediate and obvious military applications.
What does that have to do with a soul, whether one exists, or whether we care?
A powerful and incensed President could order a nuclear strike that could end civilization as we know it. Why the concern over a theoretical intelligence that could theoretically have emotion and theoretically have so much power it could theoretically do the same?
It's hard work to become president. It is much easier to build software that can be hacked to cause far greater devastation than things can be built. Presumably an AI can hack better than humans.
It doesn't matter what we define as a soul, it is the relationship humanity will have with artificial intelligences that matters. If we don't ask these questions, our children will wish we had...if they're still around.
No. You are comparing something that we know is possible, to something where we have no idea if/when it will be possible. So for all we know, it's infinitely easier to become a president. There have been 43 individuals in history who have become US president. There are 0 individuals in history who have built devastating AI.
We can't know whether animals have a soul any more conclusively than we can know that about ourselves. But it's arguable that one is not less probable than the other.
That's how perceive things. It's judged by us as the best way to secure our own interests. It can be seen as a pact between intelligent creatures to shown each other mutual respect.
You are right. But I'm not saying that only viewpoint that I believe in should be presented: both should be presented side-by-side, at least.
Imagine the same article with Third Reich, Mao or Cuban Castro regime. Would reading the thoughts and commentary by wermacht photographers, praising the fuhrer and describing the Normandy landing as "foreign invasion", without any neutral commentary, at least, not raise any questions or issues with you?
>You are right. But I'm not saying that only viewpoint that I believe in should be presented: both should be presented side-by-side, at least.
I'm pretty sure most everyone is well aware of the "other side" while looking at this one. Humans aren't so stupid that they can't compare what they already know to new information.
But the captions in the article don't actually praise the Viet Cong leadership, and even the Nazi leadership didn't believe that Normandy was German territory. It's not like there's anything remotely untrue about the observations that the ARVN wasn't much of a fighting force without US support and Agent Orange wasn't particularly friendly on the local wildlife.
I've seen coverage of the war from a skewed pro-Viet Cong propaganda perspective. This isn't that.
> I've seen coverage of the war from a skewed pro-Viet Cong propaganda perspective. This isn't that.
After reading several replies like this one I finally understand why I'm being downvoted.
See, you assume that the article is in english, the audience is supposed to be from US, and the context is US culture. This is no longer true in modern world.
Personally, most of the information I was fed about Vietnam war throughout my life was the bullshit of Soviet and post-Soviet anti-US propaganda, so seeing this shit once again without any context seems sick. I guess a person from US, who have been mostly subjected to the other perspective, wouldn't understand it.
> After reading several replies like this one I finally understand why I'm being downvoted...See, you assume that the article is in english, the audience is supposed to be from US, and the context is US culture
I'm not American, and I downvoted you for taking away from the discussion. What were you expecting from a link that reads "Unseen images of the war from the winning side"? Did you expect the Viet Cong to lack conviction in their beliefs?
> Personally, most of the information I was fed about Vietnam war throughout my life was the bullshit of Soviet and post-Soviet anti-US propaganda, so seeing this shit once again without any context seems sick.I guess a person from US, who have been mostly subjected to the other perspective, wouldn't understand it.
Speaking as a person born in a former colony, what I find sick is the pro-imperialist mindset that assumes being a western/american puppet state is better than getting communist benefactors in the fight for self-determination. Liberty or Death.
> Speaking as a person born in a former colony, what I find sick is the pro-imperialist mindset that assumes being a western/american puppet state is better than getting communist benefactors in the fight for self-determination. Liberty or Death.
So, you would prefer to live in a North Korea to the South?
> So, you would prefer to live in a North Korea to the South?
1. That's a false dichotomy -those are not the only options. The unstated implication (western-style democracy = success, communism = failure) is also wrong because there are many other orthogonal dimensions at play
2. Is South Korea a puppet state or a colony?
3. I think what you are really asking me is if I would rather be Fed or Free. There is no correct answer, but I would prefer both. How about you; would you rather be oppressed and flourishing or free and impoverished?
> 1. That's a false dichotomy -those are not the only options. The unstated implication (western-style democracy = success, communism = failure) is also wrong because there are many other orthogonal dimensions at play
These are typical options though. A lot of historical examples show this pattern throughout 20th century.
Remember, how originally, words "1st world" and "2nd world" were supposed to mean "capitalist" and "communist", and ended up meaning "great places to live" and "not so good"?
> 2. Is South Korea a puppet state or a colony?
It may not have been formally a colony, but it's certainly a country under enormous political influence of western world in US in particular — just like post-WWII Japan and Western Germany. I don't think that formal status matters as much.
> 3. I think what you are really asking me is if I would rather be Fed or Free. There is no correct answer, but I would prefer both. How about you; would you rather be oppressed and flourishing or free and impoverished?
This is a false dichotomy, because "freedom" is good first and foremost because free societies are fed. Freedom is just a more effective society organization.
But a lot of former colonies never actually had this choice; instead, their struggle for "freedom" from western capitalism typically ended up in communist dictatorships in the USSR's sphere of influence. It's like the "free Palestine" guys, who know really well what they're fighting against, but refuse to open their eyes on what are they're fighting for.
However, in the vast majority of cases, only the US perspective is given, and no one complains then.
There is a lot more documentation about the Vietnam war that is from the US' perspective than from Viet Cong. Which is precisely what makes this article interesting. And it's just one article, and pretty short too.
(Also compare with the US wars in Afghanistan or Iraq, or, more recently, the war on ISIL? How many articles tell ISIS' perspective?)
Why? Its an angry comment, but its what very many think. Don't we listen in order to understand that which we don't understand? Is only one view allowed?
15 years of this war on terror, and we have this. Something isn't working, something needs to change. I'd suggest that flagging people we don't like the sound of is one of those things we need to change.
> Why? Its an angry comment, but its what very many think.
Personal attacks on other posters of the type NoCulturalFit has been engaging in (repeatedly) on this subthread are never acceptable on HN.
> Don't we listen in order to understand that which we don't understand? Is only one view allowed?
There are many views visible in this thread that haven't been flagged. One thing that they share is that people aren't attacking each other, they are discussing ideas.
Is specifically against HN guidelines for commenting.
Otherwise we're in violent agreement, that whole 'war on terror' thing is bankrupt and it's high time that that was acknowledged in the places where it matters but that will take a lot of time and a very different approach to problem solving.
