He's such a genius, why would he look for additional help? All these claims are such shit. Remember when Tesla would be fully self driving and we would all whizzing around in tunnels? Fuck this guy.
Tesla is a load of shit for sure but SpaceX and this Neuralink of it really does what its supposed to, actually contribute to humanity. Especially this.
Brain machine interface development has been around for a lot longer than nueralink. Musk is just better at getting his stuff into the headlines. Yes, the idea is good and beneficial to humanity, but then so are electric cars. That's part of Musk's grift. He latches onto something genuinely good and turns it into his pet project so that any criticism of how he does it can easily be deflected, because he's automatically the good guy just for being there at all.
Using Apple AirTags he had hidden in the vehicle, Andrew tracked the 2022 GMC Yukon XL to a nearby rail yard, then to the Port of Montreal, and ultimately to a used car lot in the United Arab Emirates.
CBC News has agreed to conceal Andrew's full name and identifying details, as his family fears reprisals for fighting back against the thieves.
Andrew's extraordinary efforts provide a rare glimpse into an overseas shipping route used by criminals amid Canada's auto theft epidemic.
Parked in the driveway, their SUV's steering wheel was bent inward — the anti-theft lock still secured — and the driver's seat was set further back than usual.
CPKC spokesperson Terry Cunha declined to discuss the incident, but said in a statement the railway "works with federal, provincial and local law enforcement agencies executing a number of strategies to identify and recover stolen vehicles."
Wade said in an interview it's "alarmingly common" for criminals to move stolen vehicles in containers on trains or trucks, then to export them to the Middle East, Europe or northern Africa.
The original article contains 1,132 words, the summary contains 177 words. Saved 84%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I enjoy these threads. I have noticed people really hate two themes here: (1) internet censorship, and (2) people screwing with their porn :)
(I'm not a pornhub user, nor advocating for the internet censorship nonsense, just a devils advocate question for fun)
Pretend for a second it was reasonably feasible to enforce this, so I'm asking you to forget how the internet/VPNs/tons of options work :)
If a site like pornhub 'PROMISED' to not log any user data under threat of death, but all they did was run a query against some government database that verifies age >= 18, would you do it?
Also, the government database 'PROMISES' to not log the source of the age only verification queries, would you do it?
So, if you say no, is it because you believe there's no way each of those organizations would keep their word or something else?
I don't trust them first off, but even trusting them to not voluntarily disclose it doesn't mean they won't have a security breach and disclose it involuntarily. Also, the database has to be created and queried somehow; some employees and govt workers will be able to see what queries are made. Even trusting the business and the govt and the security of both, I don't trust those random people having access to that info.
What evidence do you have to give the website that you are person X that they're running the database query against? If that's an ID there's going to be some available online, or a kid can just sneak it from the parent. Everything I've heard proposed for the identification strategy is either grossly invasive or quite easy to step over.
I don't believe that Canada will actually enforce this across all websites. If they do it on only the large/main ones, it makes it harder for kids to access the relatively safe and legal porn hosted on sites making effort to follow the law, and pushes them towards sites that aren't making such an effort and therefore probably have more objectionable content.
If they enforced it on the big sites it would push many users (not just the kids) to other sites.
This could work toward breaking up the monopoly held by just a few big porn companies, and could be a good thing for the consumers.
Not all smaller sites are inherently nefarious. Maybe we'll see some competition start to rise. And maybe that competition won't be entirely full of "I fucked my sister/brother and/or my mom/dad" type porn like all the big companies keep cranking out.
Yeah, I agree with not liking people having that info, but ISPs do, unless you use VPN, and then the VPN does.
We just usually don't hear of that getting leaked from VPN providers since their reputation is on the line.
Data breach would also be a bummer. If a criminal group takes the time to breach a government database, I think it would be wasted effort to try black mailing people over porn access. Unless you're a priest. Then uh oh.
The way you get positive ID that can't be skirted is with government issues ID card with PKI. All US federal employees have ID cards issued by their department. It has certs that let you sign into computers, sign documents, etc. It's 2FA, card and a PIN.
Every driver in the US is supposed to have a driver's license. They just need to add PKI to them. Then you sign into a website with your DL and PIN. You'd never need a million accounts anymore. Caveats apply.
Surprised they haven't tried to train a neural network to find a compression algorithm specifically for their sort of data.
There's a ridiculous irony in the fact they haven't, and it's still ironic even if they have and have thrown the idea out as a failure. Or a dystopian nightmare.
But if it is the latter, they might help save time and effort by telling "the public" what avenues have already failed, or that they don't want purely AI-generated solutions. Someone's bound to try it otherwise.
I’m in the market for a new car in Canada. I don’t want a gas car. Environmental reasons aside, they just cost too much and have too many moving parts that can wear out.
I can afford most any gas car I want. The moment it becomes electric I cannot afford it. A $10k BYD looks nice, but my government decides I actually need to pay $45k starting instead.
The reason the US and Canadian governments are doing this is to stop that $10k car from destroying the auto motive industry in North America resulting in layoffs that make the recent tech layoffs look like peanuts.
I agree we need cheaper EVs in North America, I want one too... There's an Ars Technica article where Ford basically goes "we thought everyone wanted expensive trucks ... we made those electric ... we realize we missed the mark, we're going to work on smaller, cheaper, EVs." So, they are coming hopefully within the next couple of years.
I'm not sure how important manufacturing still is to the Canadian economy, but for the US economy ... trying to protect domestic production is important (and we should've done it years ago instead of letting cheap Chinese imports destroy a large amount of the factories in North America).
These NA car companies always get bailed out. They should've been making kei trucks, and small electric cars for ages, but they don't need to because they'll just get bailed out if they fail.
These tariffs are another form of a bailout. Maybe instead of bailing these guys out we should nationalize them.
That reduces a lot of relevant context, like why they needed the 08 bailouts in the first place, how many times they've been bailed out, and the fact that China has heavily subsidized these cars to the point that even if they were making the same vehicle, it would be significantly more expensive.
The US manufacturers get bailed out every 30 years or so, so why there's a specific reason the most recent time becomes less relevant.
What makes BYD specifically so cheap isn't the government subsidies, which NA manufacturers also get, but it's vertical integration. BYD is a battery company that started to make cars. They can sell the batteries to the car side of the businesd below cost as long as the final product makes the larger corporation a profit.
Tesla for example buys it's batteries from Panasonic. Panasonic has to make a profit. That makes the Tesla much more expensive than it should be.
Transportation is a necessity, and I believe every inelastic market deserves a nationalized alternative to prevent price gouging. Like how the USPS keeps UPS and FEDEX in line. With that being said, nationalization doesn't fix this particular problem.
China is run like a giant capitalist cartel (in all but name), and appropriately, their ultimate weapon in their hunt for global monopolies is the provision of slave labor. The number of slaves in Xinjiang alone is estimated in the hundreds of thousands, and their labor has been credibly linked to the production of cotton (face masks), polysilicon (solar panels), and aluminum and lithium (EVs).
It's no coincidence that these are the industries being slapped with tariffs. No amount of subsidization or nationalization can level a playing field that's been tilted by slavery. You don't outcompete slavery, you either penalize goods suspected of involving it, or you go full John Brown.
I get there’s protectionism of local industry, but clearly the market doesn’t want what the industry is making. We are held captive to whatever the industry thinks we want. It’s not a real free market. We are prescribed options to bail out the fledgling automotive industry (whatever is left of it after outsourcing everything to Mexico and SEA)
From the article, the cop laments that telecoms are no longer handing over IP addresses when requested. Now police are being forced to obtain search warrants, like they would need to in order to tap your phone or read your mail. This seems like a consistent application of privacy law and a safeguard against law enforcement abuse of power. Seems like an absolute win to me.
This isn't the police reading your mail. It's you receiving a package with a dead rat and a threat in it and not being allowed to give it to the police until they get a warrant.
The people they asked for an IP were directly affected by the crime. They were victims. The idea that they need permission from the court to turn over evidence of a fraud against them is completely fucking insane.
They weren't asking some random third party for information. The payment processor is a clear and direct victim of the fraud. Fraud costs them a lot of money every year.
It is impossible for the victim of a crime to ever not be entitled to turn over every bit of information that they have about the crime. There is no scenario where you have an expectation of privacy from the person you're actively committing a crime against.
You don’t. The external system needs to run an approximation of the internal system, which the internal system will also run and only transmit differences.
There you go. Solved it. (By delegating to a new problem.)
cbc.ca
Top