I'm trying not to laugh but it's starting to hurt.
Like that high school friend I had that made a hilarious joke about breast cancer, for months I had to work hard to hold it every time somebody brought up breast cancer...damn him...
Maybe not a 30% cut, but if they develop their own system you can bet there will be some sort of cut...
Too bad all these mobile payment services can't standardize on a multi-connection protocol for their transactions. You have some using QR codes, some using NFC, some using Bluetooth and some going through the Internet, all in their own little walled garden. What a sad clusterfuck this is going to be.
Radio range? I assumed these were operating autonomously. A quadcopter can certainly take off and land somewhere else autonomously. Then maybe the person on the other end takes the cargo, charges it back up, then pushes a button and puts it back on the landing pad, and 30 seconds later it takes off and returns.
Anyone who wants you to drive an electric car but doesn't want more power plants built is an idiot.
An electric car, even getting its power from a filthy coal plant, is still cleaner than an ICE car overall. Once cars are electric they're power-source-agnostic. Replace coal with nuclear and you have a non-fossil energy source with little waste and a clean source of reliable power that solar/wind can be added to, or to be more ambitious, a good transitional source of power to bridge the gap from fossil fuel to renewable energy. So tell that to the next hippie who wants you to buy an electric car and run it on fairy dust (probably won't help, but it's worth a shot).
Laptops are all using some sort of simple round connector with the same polarity at this point (I don't remember what the polarity is, but it's the same). Voltages still differ though. But you can buy a multi-charger that comes with about 10 different tips and a voltage selector that will work with any modern laptop.
True, at some point there may not even be a need for public chargers as battery capacity and charge rates improve. You can just charge up at night and drive care-free all day.
True, I wonder if maybe a fixed-wing craft might do better, but even then when it really starts pouring in a tropical region, it's going to be like trying to fly through a waterfall.
But more on-topic, this is a great idea, even first-world countries might benefit from UAVs used for delivering things like anti-venom or maybe even organs. A UAV should fire up much faster than a manned heli and cost less.
And imagine the bandwidth of a UAV loaded with MicroSDs!
On a stretch I used to take daily, I found that I could effectively go from a red wave to a green wave by driving really freaking fast. There were three sets of traffic lights on this stretch.
Often I'd be on this stretch in the early morning when the roads were empty and I could see that I was on a red wave. So as soon as the first light turned green, I'd gun it like a bat out of hell and just barely get through the next light, I often saw it turning yellow just overhead. If I kept driving fast I'd pass the next light with time to spare, eliminating a good 2-4 minutes of just waiting at stop lights, even on empty roads. After leaving the first light, my average speed would have been over 100kph in a 60kph zone, so, yeah....not legal. But if it makes you feel any better I didn't have extra money to spend on gas back then so I didn't do this often.
Yeah if you're a Gen. Y'er you pretty much have 4 options:
1. Be rich (hope you were born rich, or good luck) 2. Buy cheap used cars 3. Buy a cheapo economy new car and work your ass off to pay for it (notice that almost all of the cars targeted specifically at Gen. Y'ers are just really, REALLY cheap compacts with funky styling and some gadgets tossed in?) 4. Be financially irresponsible
I'm considering getting a Scion FR-S when it comes out, assuming it'll be around $25k, and that would be somewhere closest to option 4 for me. I'm under no illusions that it would be a good financial decision to pay $25k for a car when a $2k-$6k car works just as well, but if I have a chance to buy a light RWD compact sports car that doesn't need to be restored or built from scratch, I want one:D
Some of the features will still "trickle down" to cheaper cars, even if at a decelerating rate due to the massive wealth disparity.
When I was a kid, AC in a car was a luxury, a thing rich people had. Now it's pretty much a standard feature.
Same with airbags, when I was a kid that was the equivalent of today's crash avoidance / pre-crash systems, only found on expensive luxury cars. Now they're mandatory and even the cheapest cars have many.
Ugh I hate traction control and ESC, and this "cornering brake control" (do you mean active yaw control? that's a performance enhancement) doesn't sound good either. The only driver aid that is useful at all is ABS, and even then in some conditions it can be a bad thing.
I just don't see how the car doing something other than what I told it to (outside of perhaps a situation where a crash is inevitable or the driver is unconscious) can help. This isn't an EF2000, it's a car, a person is very much capable of controlling it without help from a computer. Maybe for people with no understanding of car handling who have always driven cars with ETC/ESC it helps, but I'm used to driving simple cars that do what I tell them, and if the car slides or the brakes lock up I know what to do. Heck if that happens when I'm driving, chances are I did it on purpose.
That said, all the rest are good things, and I would be happy to have a car that chauffeurs me around on the street.
Speed limits are more about bringing in cash than improving driver safety or aiding traffic flow. If those last two were part of the equation at all we would have much higher or even nonexistent speed limits in many places.
Wouldn't it be possible to have (assuming a country where you drive on the right side), say, a lane for straight/right and one for left turns with directional light signals (as many intersections already have), so that it's still possible for two opposing directions to operate simultaneously?
Slashdot Mirror
He also supported price and wage controls. If he was still alive the Democrats would be running him as a hard-left candidate.
Damn right. Nixon was well left of Obama, or Clinton for that matter. I bring this up every time some Glenn Beck fanboy calls Obama a socialist (LOL).
This isn't greenwashing, greenwashing is advertising a product as green when it isn't. You could call it environmentalism theater.
Oh noes you blamed Bush! He hasn't been president since 2008 you know! STOP BLAMING EVERYTHING ON BUSH! LEAVE BUSH ALOOONE! T_T
Mobile payments are like a superglobal loyalty card.
One loyalty card to rule them all.
Aw come on, you can choose between US Alliance and Team Advantage! :-P
I don't use any of this crap. Not curated computing devices, not social networking, and I don't see myself using this either.
But, not even all geeks avoid these things, and geeks are a small minority.
I hope overrated & underrated mods are no longer immune to oversight since the metamod system was overhauled.
That's because Sprint is a mom & pop provider compared to The Big Two.
I'm trying not to laugh but it's starting to hurt.
Like that high school friend I had that made a hilarious joke about breast cancer, for months I had to work hard to hold it every time somebody brought up breast cancer...damn him...
True, but how much cargo can you deliver with a UAV vs. a boat? Remember that the UAV gets much more expensive as it scales up.
Maybe not a 30% cut, but if they develop their own system you can bet there will be some sort of cut...
Too bad all these mobile payment services can't standardize on a multi-connection protocol for their transactions. You have some using QR codes, some using NFC, some using Bluetooth and some going through the Internet, all in their own little walled garden. What a sad clusterfuck this is going to be.
Radio range? I assumed these were operating autonomously. A quadcopter can certainly take off and land somewhere else autonomously. Then maybe the person on the other end takes the cargo, charges it back up, then pushes a button and puts it back on the landing pad, and 30 seconds later it takes off and returns.
Because blimps are slow (bye bye speed advantage), helium is bloody expensive (and rightly so), and people are scared of hydrogen-filled bags.
Anyone who wants you to drive an electric car but doesn't want more power plants built is an idiot.
An electric car, even getting its power from a filthy coal plant, is still cleaner than an ICE car overall. Once cars are electric they're power-source-agnostic. Replace coal with nuclear and you have a non-fossil energy source with little waste and a clean source of reliable power that solar/wind can be added to, or to be more ambitious, a good transitional source of power to bridge the gap from fossil fuel to renewable energy. So tell that to the next hippie who wants you to buy an electric car and run it on fairy dust (probably won't help, but it's worth a shot).
Laptops are all using some sort of simple round connector with the same polarity at this point (I don't remember what the polarity is, but it's the same). Voltages still differ though. But you can buy a multi-charger that comes with about 10 different tips and a voltage selector that will work with any modern laptop.
True, at some point there may not even be a need for public chargers as battery capacity and charge rates improve. You can just charge up at night and drive care-free all day.
True, I wonder if maybe a fixed-wing craft might do better, but even then when it really starts pouring in a tropical region, it's going to be like trying to fly through a waterfall.
They're already doing this with boats.
But more on-topic, this is a great idea, even first-world countries might benefit from UAVs used for delivering things like anti-venom or maybe even organs. A UAV should fire up much faster than a manned heli and cost less.
And imagine the bandwidth of a UAV loaded with MicroSDs!
Meh, same as driving around with a cell phone...
Trapster already exists...
On a stretch I used to take daily, I found that I could effectively go from a red wave to a green wave by driving really freaking fast. There were three sets of traffic lights on this stretch.
Often I'd be on this stretch in the early morning when the roads were empty and I could see that I was on a red wave. So as soon as the first light turned green, I'd gun it like a bat out of hell and just barely get through the next light, I often saw it turning yellow just overhead. If I kept driving fast I'd pass the next light with time to spare, eliminating a good 2-4 minutes of just waiting at stop lights, even on empty roads. After leaving the first light, my average speed would have been over 100kph in a 60kph zone, so, yeah....not legal. But if it makes you feel any better I didn't have extra money to spend on gas back then so I didn't do this often.
Yeah if you're a Gen. Y'er you pretty much have 4 options:
1. Be rich (hope you were born rich, or good luck)
2. Buy cheap used cars
3. Buy a cheapo economy new car and work your ass off to pay for it (notice that almost all of the cars targeted specifically at Gen. Y'ers are just really, REALLY cheap compacts with funky styling and some gadgets tossed in?)
4. Be financially irresponsible
I'm considering getting a Scion FR-S when it comes out, assuming it'll be around $25k, and that would be somewhere closest to option 4 for me. I'm under no illusions that it would be a good financial decision to pay $25k for a car when a $2k-$6k car works just as well, but if I have a chance to buy a light RWD compact sports car that doesn't need to be restored or built from scratch, I want one :D
Some of the features will still "trickle down" to cheaper cars, even if at a decelerating rate due to the massive wealth disparity.
When I was a kid, AC in a car was a luxury, a thing rich people had. Now it's pretty much a standard feature.
Same with airbags, when I was a kid that was the equivalent of today's crash avoidance / pre-crash systems, only found on expensive luxury cars. Now they're mandatory and even the cheapest cars have many.
Ugh I hate traction control and ESC, and this "cornering brake control" (do you mean active yaw control? that's a performance enhancement) doesn't sound good either. The only driver aid that is useful at all is ABS, and even then in some conditions it can be a bad thing.
I just don't see how the car doing something other than what I told it to (outside of perhaps a situation where a crash is inevitable or the driver is unconscious) can help. This isn't an EF2000, it's a car, a person is very much capable of controlling it without help from a computer. Maybe for people with no understanding of car handling who have always driven cars with ETC/ESC it helps, but I'm used to driving simple cars that do what I tell them, and if the car slides or the brakes lock up I know what to do. Heck if that happens when I'm driving, chances are I did it on purpose.
That said, all the rest are good things, and I would be happy to have a car that chauffeurs me around on the street.
Speed limits are more about bringing in cash than improving driver safety or aiding traffic flow. If those last two were part of the equation at all we would have much higher or even nonexistent speed limits in many places.
Wouldn't it be possible to have (assuming a country where you drive on the right side), say, a lane for straight/right and one for left turns with directional light signals (as many intersections already have), so that it's still possible for two opposing directions to operate simultaneously?
Well you could consider that an increase in productivity, at least...