1 Like
3 Likes
UK Digital IDs Are Worse Than You Thought
7 Likes
@neo … I didn’t even know this was approved here yet. Interesting.
1 Like
Who knows, he is in the driver’s seat and prob has he google warning turned on to alert him when he should put his hands on the wheel (where there are police on the highway). The hands on the wheel is hard for police to see unless you have both hands up high and visible. If you are driving in a proper manner then having your hands on the bottom of the steering wheel is not an offence, and hard to see from outside if that is the case.
2 Likes
I did a very small amount of searching and found these two perspectives, but some say the issue of hands on the wheel is unclear with some states giving the okay and others not.:
"Under current Australian legislation, autonomous vehicles are prohibited by approximately 700 rules, but Tesla insists FSD is a Level 2 function according to the SAE Levels of Driving Automation scale.
Vehicles categorised as Level 2 are considered at the pointy end of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) but are compliant with Australian law, whereas Level 3 and above is regarded as ‘automated driving’ and is not compliant with local regulations."
And this:
" traffic lawyer Hayder Shkara, said while no law in Australia says “you must keep both hands on the wheel”, liability ultimately lies with the driver.
“What the law does say is that a driver must have ‘proper control’ of their vehicle at all times,” he said.
"The reality is that if you take your hands off and something goes wrong, police can fine you, insurers can refuse to cover you, and ultimately, you, as the driver, remain legally responsible for any damage caused.
"There is no excuse called “but it was the car driving, not me”.
“The law in Australia doesn’t recognise the car as the driver; it recognises the person behind the wheel. Until that changes, liability for crashes, offences, or negligent driving remains with you.”"
3 Likes
Also remember we have had fully self driving vehicle trials in two states for over 5 years. Just the public roads were limited to federal roads in limited areas. WA and Sydney from memory.
So the laws may very well have been amended recently, very recently. And the driver being fully responsible will be one of the last things to be removed here.
2 Likes
Perhaps people will be ready for a return to sanity soon? 
3 Likes
Well worth a watch. Many details I wasn’t aware of.
“John Kiriakou is a former CIA counter-terrorism officer and the first U.S. official to confirm the agency’s torture of detainees. Punished for being a whistleblower, he served nearly 2 years in a federal prison.”
study out of Beijing shows that gene-edited human stem cells—specifically FOXO3-enhanced senescence-resistant mesenchymal progenitor cells (SRCs)—can reverse biological aging in elderly monkeys, restoring youthful brain structure, bone density, immune strength, and even ovarian function. By upgrading the FOXO3 longevity gene, scientists created stem cells that resist cellular senescence, DNA damage, and oxidative stress, effectively making the monkeys younger from the inside out. MRI scans revealed increased cortical thickness and improved memory-related connectivity, while biological age clocks showed a 3–5 year reversal across 54% of tissues—equivalent to 9–15 years of human rejuvenation.
2 Likes
This law should be enforced strictly in all countries, not just Australia, because it is simply an attack on citizens’ freedom by big tech companies tech companies, which are illegally testing technology for which there is no legal framework, with drivers, passengers and other road users (drivers, cyclists and pedestrians) serving as guinea pigs.
Let us hope that they will never be changed, Tesla and other corporations can build test tracks and conduct work on autonomous driving technology there, and later convince the public that the technology is absolutely safe and try to persuade the authorities to change the legislation regarding the admission of FSD to road traffic. Unfortunately, this is the nail in the coffin for the automotive industry and the replacement of car ownership with so-called on-demand transport.
I’d suggest that it will never be absolutely safe, not much is in this world.
I’d think the measure of safety will be if the technology is safer than than humans that are not impaired with drink or substances. How much safer will be the topic for debate.
The insurance companies will lead the law in determining how safe is good enough. Once it is much safer to use self driving then the premiums will quickly rise for people not driving with self driving capabilities. Few years and insurance (compulsory 3rd party) will more than double for non-self-driving.
That is precisely why I wrote that, because I believe that this fact will indefinitely delay the possibility of using FSD on public roads 
Technology cannot replace humans due to ethical and moral factors, i.e. emergency situations that AI cannot predict and in which it will have to choose between hitting a child or an elderly person, for example.
I believe that this will not work because there will be a huge market for fraudsters using autonomous vehicles to extort compensation, and moreover, robotaxis will be destroyed by opponents of AVs. We must remember that we are heading towards anarchy, and machines that take away jobs will be subject to attacks of sabotage and vandalism. Vehicle ownership will guarantee lower compensation costs than corporate robotaxis (for similar reasons, car-sharing companies are already going bankrupt today).
Short answer is, to some degree, yes, but there is a workaround.
I won’t add any clever comments, just watch the video if you’ve the time …
1 Like
Notice how the left monkey starts banging his crypto coin against the wall to figure out why it’s not as valuable as he thinks it should be.
I’ve set the time stamp to t=3978s
2 Likes
Linus Tech Tips on their LAN show talking about the recent outages by the cloud providers.
I have timestamped the video where he repeats what i have tried to tell people about attackers. That the attackers attack for relatively short time. And that they (have been for years) renting botnets and can only afford to attack for a few days.
In relation to the leech resetting his nodes in the belief he profits from it (increased emissions from increasing his nodes numbers) doing this now for months is not an attacker. Nope just someone profiting.
4 Likes
Torrent sites get attacked all the time. One I use, itself uses cloudflare, and it frequently disappears for hours at a time.
I imagine this is due to paid attacks from major copyright holders like film studio’s - trying to make the sites less reliable and so frustrating downloaders. Perhaps there are other actors who want to attack such sites, but I don’t know what their motivation would be.