That's all nice and great in unicorn land. What about a society where the criminal element is already armed? If you were starting from scratch and no one was armed your silly diatribe would be acceptable. In the real world in the US you can't disarm all the criminals no matter how many laws you pass.
When you mentioned the UK as an example where gun laws 'worked'. You basically contradicted your own argument. UK is a different country with so many variables being different than the US. The fact (this can be argued) that the laws worked there has no bearing as to whether they would work in the US.
Outsource everything, cut investments in high tech, cut investments in infrastructure and science.Spend more on giant military. That's what it gets us.
States don't 'allow' you to carry a gun. It's a right. States have skirted around the right by adding all kinds of rules and regulations but if they take it too far then the supreme court can step in and slap them around
Why don't we just skip this and enforce auto-braking when reversing and an object is detected? Many cars do this today while moving forward. Cameras still rely on people to stop. The incompetent drivers that back over people will still do it. The camera won't stop them.
but, tennis is also about movement. It's not all in the swing of the racquet but if that is your game's defiency then this tool can definitely be of help.
Laws that punish the bad behaviour. They do not need to intrude any further than that. If they laws say you cannot kill or harm your fellow man through any means (one of them is pollution), then that should be sufficient. It may sound naive and simplistic but that's what it boils down to. We just need someone to protect us from the bad actors in society. That's all.Make the act(s) of harming people illegal with severe enough punishment and allow the citizens to look for bad actors.
All of these things can be taken care of WITHOUT the countless acronym agencies and insane amount of resources they consume. The government can indeed provide the same effective functionality without intruding on everyone's life and becoming a parasitic drag on the economy.
If the 'feature' is already manufactured and installed in the automobile, how would they justify charging for it later? Is the car going to come with a EULA that says you don't own it? Will the car purchase will become a car license? I hate all this sh1t. It all started with stupid iTunes.
At least as far as common sense goes she seems to always back the wrong horse. I think I disagree with her on every single issue I've ever heard her talk about.
Actually, American drivers have 2 bad habits that if eliminated, they wouldn't be so bad. Hogging the left lane is one, pulling out of stop signs even though there's oncoming traffic is the other. For the most part, American drivers are courteous and careful but of course there are exceptions.
If the amount of money being spent on the military annually was redirected to energy research we'd probably have no need to chase energy around the planet anymore.
If ALL cars were automated there should be no car to car accidents as they will all communicate with each other and at the first sign of trouble by one car all the others in the vicinity will know to slow down.
But, in a hybrid world where the auto cars have to deal with humans we will have a lot of problems.
1. The auto car will be programmed to be nervous nellies. Since they cannot predict what the crazy humans do, they will stomp on the brakes at any sign of trouble.
1.1 I expect Humans to be very confused by the behaviour of the auto cars and cause accidents. Who gets blamed then?
2. I expect Humans to maliciously mess with the auto cars, brake check them, etc.
3. Unless a unified auto car communication and behaviour protocol is created I expect many of the auto cars from different manufacturers to exhibit behaviours that will look bizarre to a human. 4-way stop sign resolution for example.
Slashdot Mirror
Have we seen an instance where they have not lied to cover any of their questionable actions in the last decade or so?
Comparable to A4 and 3? They start in the low 30s with no options..You can't get into a decent version for less than $39K
I call b.s. Unsubstantiated drivel
That's all nice and great in unicorn land. What about a society where the criminal element is already armed? If you were starting from scratch and no one was armed your silly diatribe would be acceptable. In the real world in the US you can't disarm all the criminals no matter how many laws you pass.
No, because there maybe other variables at play that you're not including in your analysis.
When you mentioned the UK as an example where gun laws 'worked'. You basically contradicted your own argument. UK is a different country with so many variables being different than the US. The fact (this can be argued) that the laws worked there has no bearing as to whether they would work in the US.
Umm, old people keep mowing people down with their cars. This lady just drove her car into a cafe in my town. Cars are way more dangerous than guns.
Outsource everything, cut investments in high tech, cut investments in infrastructure and science.Spend more on giant military. That's what it gets us.
States don't 'allow' you to carry a gun. It's a right. States have skirted around the right by adding all kinds of rules and regulations but if they take it too far then the supreme court can step in and slap them around
Perhaps we not have as many cases go to court then? Thanks
Why don't we just skip this and enforce auto-braking when reversing and an object is detected? Many cars do this today while moving forward. Cameras still rely on people to stop. The incompetent drivers that back over people will still do it. The camera won't stop them.
This is a unconstitutional law that targets their customer base.
bb guns are outlawed in my town. You can own them but you cannot use them within the town borders.
but, tennis is also about movement. It's not all in the swing of the racquet but if that is your game's defiency then this tool can definitely be of help.
Laws that punish the bad behaviour. They do not need to intrude any further than that. If they laws say you cannot kill or harm your fellow man through any means (one of them is pollution), then that should be sufficient. It may sound naive and simplistic but that's what it boils down to. We just need someone to protect us from the bad actors in society. That's all.Make the act(s) of harming people illegal with severe enough punishment and allow the citizens to look for bad actors.
All of these things can be taken care of WITHOUT the countless acronym agencies and insane amount of resources they consume. The government can indeed provide the same effective functionality without intruding on everyone's life and becoming a parasitic drag on the economy.
If the 'feature' is already manufactured and installed in the automobile, how would they justify charging for it later? Is the car going to come with a EULA that says you don't own it? Will the car purchase will become a car license? I hate all this sh1t. It all started with stupid iTunes.
At least as far as common sense goes she seems to always back the wrong horse. I think I disagree with her on every single issue I've ever heard her talk about.
Actually, American drivers have 2 bad habits that if eliminated, they wouldn't be so bad. Hogging the left lane is one, pulling out of stop signs even though there's oncoming traffic is the other. For the most part, American drivers are courteous and careful but of course there are exceptions.
But I am with you, that's how I read it too but they should voice their concerns more clearly so that the public can 'get it'....
I can have my packages withing one hour of ordering?
If the amount of money being spent on the military annually was redirected to energy research we'd probably have no need to chase energy around the planet anymore.
Plus, they probably had 'donations' from both firms so they both need to eat at the govt trough.
If ALL cars were automated there should be no car to car accidents as they will all communicate with each other and at the first sign of trouble by one car all the others in the vicinity will know to slow down. But, in a hybrid world where the auto cars have to deal with humans we will have a lot of problems. 1. The auto car will be programmed to be nervous nellies. Since they cannot predict what the crazy humans do, they will stomp on the brakes at any sign of trouble. 1.1 I expect Humans to be very confused by the behaviour of the auto cars and cause accidents. Who gets blamed then? 2. I expect Humans to maliciously mess with the auto cars, brake check them, etc. 3. Unless a unified auto car communication and behaviour protocol is created I expect many of the auto cars from different manufacturers to exhibit behaviours that will look bizarre to a human. 4-way stop sign resolution for example.
Because of the legalities, the automated cars will drive like grandmas.