The characters pretty much followed the Prime Directive even thought it barely existed as an idea let alone an ingrained belief. This was supposed to be the wild west version, similar to the original Star Trek. Instead, it was the politically correct version.
Therefore, spending $1 billion to buy a company worth less than $1B HURTS the company's value. See HP for some dramatic examples.
Not always true. For one example: Company A buys company B for $2.2B, but company B is only "worth" $2B. You say company A is taking a $200M loss. Looks bad at the outset, but looks can be deceiving... read on:
But what if Company B had the potential to be a $4B value, but lacked, say for the sake of argument, $800M to ramp up production. Then Company A, that has the capital, would GAIN $1B for their investment ( 2.2B + 0.8B = $3B spent for a $4B company ). I would consider this a "good deal" on the purchase, even if it LOOKS bad at the outset.
There is also the situation where Company A is at a disadvantage in the marketplace (i.e. behind in technology, etc.) and company B has the technology that they need to compete. The 200 Million extra spend could easily be eaten up by R&D costs and lost market share. This could be a strategic purchase, not a financial one. The Forbes article below says that WD had SSD sales of around $500 million while Samsung has sales over $3 Billion in 2014. It also outlines the SSD technology companies that WD has been buying.
Nearly all ratings are voluntary, and so suffer from self-selection bias. The measured ratings for general interest movie like Shawshank Redemption are typically lower than a special interest movie like Dark Knight (or Harry Potter, or Twilight, or Lord of the Rings) which appeals to a dedicated fanbase. The latter typically have a lot of fans who rate it highly just because it appeals to their group. That is, they rate it according to more lenient standard than they rate other movies, or they flat-out stuff the ballot box to try to get others to see it, to exaggerate the size of their interest group in hopes of encouraging more such movies to be made.
I agree that there is validity in this argument but a skew based on a fan base tends to be much greater when the number of responses is low. Dark Knight has over 1.5 Million ratings. Yes, a good chunk of them could be die hard fans, but there will also be offsetting low ratings by people who hate the genre, disliked the film, and/or people who didn't even watch the film. The law of averages kicks in to reduce the amount of skew as a result. Could it be skewed towards the high side because of rabid fans, possibly. The question is then by how much? and, does it even matter?
The biggest problem that I see is how people use ratings, as you aptly point out. They work well when being used to provide suggestions based on what you have watched and rated highly. The do not work well if your are just looking at the ratings and trying to figure out whether you will like the film or not. They also do not work well in determining the "best film ever", simply because that is way too subjective and is based on more criteria than just enjoyment and popularity.
We don't need the likes of Roger Ebert to recognize us.
Yes, you kind of do. Even Bioshock (specifically the first one), a game with clever (but derivative) art, and a clever (but derivative) story, was really just a low pop confection. There is still a long way to go.
All games are art.
If only that were so.
I would argue that games are not "art" they are an experience, much in the way that movies are not true art. There is a reason why certain films are referred to as artistic pieces. They were created purely to be appreciated, not specifically for enjoyment. However, I don't think that there has every been a game created that has been built purely to be appreciated and for no other reason.
No, technically they're routers (or gateways, if you want to use the IETF term). Switches are multiport bridges. "L3 switch" is a marketing term, created when wirespeed routing in hardware became available, in order to market them as having throughput comparable to switches.
What he said...
Layer 3 switches are technically routers. The difference is that a router is purposefully built with the necessary hardware to perform in hardware routing. Most switches that can perform layer-3 functions tend to do so in software or with the general purpose CPU. There are exceptions, of course, such as Cisco Supervisor blades for the 6500 switches which can have a MSFC with route processors, the PFC for netflow, etc. and the DFC with ASICS. However, they still tend to have a lower performance limit than dedicated router hardware.
I think that's the main reason I can't watch that show, and to this date haven't watched a full episode yet. Every time I hear the laugh track I want to gag. What is this, 1965? If they're going to do it that way, at least have a live studio audience like Married with Children had that actually responds appropriately to what's happening when it's genuinely funny.
Weird to see people complaining about sugar but switching to fruit juice, though. Many if not most fruit juices have a higher sugar concentration than coke.
Now, that's only from the sugar perspective. Caffeine has its good and bad sides, so if one wants to cut down, there's that. Phosphoric acid may or may not have a negative effect on bone density (lower bone density is associated with soda consumption but there's dispute over whether it's the phosphoric acid or just the aforementioned caffeine). Fruit juices have vitamins and minerals that most colas won't. But really, the biggest health issue with colas is the sugar, and one may actually increase their sugar intake by switching to juice.
I've taken to mixing 1/3 juice with 2/3 water. Get some nutrients, hydration, and less fructose.
At what point does a group of people, perhaps thinking they're working to create something good, but that actually results in something that maybe isn't so good, become a "conspiracy"?
The moment it becomes obvious that what they are attempting is impossible and they start looking for illegal ways to circumvent a test. At that precise point they should have stopped and done something else.
There is no real grey area here where people weren't fully aware of what they were doing and at no time were they under any illusion about the legality. The people who implemented this are professional engineers who knew(or should have known) what the rules were and decided to go ahead anyway. This isn't a piece of consumer software where there are no federal laws involved. This wasn't a piece of software where what seemed like a good idea ultimately didn't work. No, they intentionally and with premeditation committed this fraud. Stop it with trying to excuse what they did.
I think that you missed the point of the previous post. It could be that many people involved thought that they were adding a performance function. For example, my Jeep has an ECO mode by default but I can change it into Sport mode for better acceleration.
Granted, at some point it clearly crossed the line. I would say that point was when the wheel spin rate, steering wheel position, etc. were added as triggers. Whoever did that had to know the conditions (i.e. emissions testing) for the trigger to be able to code it properly. But the performance function/mode itself could have started out as a valid feature that they wanted to add to the vehicles. Of course, it all depends on timing. If the triggers were developed at the same time as the performance code then it would be much harder to believe that anyone was innocent. If it was developed separately, then there might be some plausible deniability.
You sound like some sort of religious fanatic. I'm all for solar and off grid but it's not cost effective yet. It's getting better but there's no way for me to go off grid as that's a huge outlay of money and it'll take many years to recoup the investment. DC appliances cost way more than their AC alternatives. I priced a DC air conditioning system and it was prohibitively expensive. I can see this getting better but we're a decade or maybe two away from solar being more affordable than being on the grid. I plan to start small and build a system a little at a time as I can afford it and it makes sense.
They are cost effective as an alternative to the grid. Going off the grid entirely is another issue.
That being said, we go off the grid during the summer at our summer camp. The stove and fridge are propane and all of our lights are connected to portable battery packs that we charge using solar. The bathroom is an environmental toilet. We have the lake to swim in. Granted, there is no TV and internet is via cell, charging everything off of the battery packs. We do have a generator as a backup in case we need power for power tools, etc.
I bought a new 30W panel this summer and used it to keep our Dewalt batteries charged while building two new docks. I did run into one issue with the panel not charging. It turned out that the 12v plug that I was using had a fuse in it rated for 500mA and the fuse had blown. I had new un-fused 12v plugs so I simply replaced it. The charge-controller would take care of any spikes, etc. anyway. No need for the fuse.
Based on this, it doesn't sound like Jobs outfoxed HP, more like HP shot themselves in the foot.
This is no different than HP announcing the HP Touchpad and then immediately turning around and discontinuing the product, dumping them at firesale prices. Granted, they would have had a tough slog against apple, but if they had kept at it they could have carved out a nice profitable niche. WebOS was ahead of Android in so many ways....
Selling cars that cost as much as a small house is all well and good if your target market is 1%ers and boomers, but if you want to sell to the mass market you need something that's priced for a generation that will probably never be able to afford to own a home.
Tesla will eventually design and price vehicles for everyday people but this follows their strategy of appealing to the 1%ers first to get the products off the ground and to pay for R&D. It's why the first car they produced was a sports car.
Plus, range, especially for an SUV, is really important for most families. Yes, some are used as daily drivers but most families also use them for long trips (Range is 250 miles, ~4 hours highway travel). I would also argue that range would be decrease if you are towing (i.e. boat, camper, etc.). Because of this, it makes sense for them to focus on the luxury market until range is a bit better.
no, he's pretty much claiming that he'll have new battery tech that will turn 300 into 600+ DURING NEXT YEAR.
pretty sure he's just talking out of his ass on that one though - or he is going to introduce a model that has the backseat and luggage areas filled with the batteries.
Yeah, battery technology, while improving, has been improving incrementally over the last 10 years. It may seem like we have made big jumps because our toys now last longer (i.e. tablets) but what has happened is that the electronics have continued to get smaller leaving more room for the battery, which has gotten bigger. Also, electronics have become more efficient. Perhaps this is where Musk feels that they can make huge improvements, in actually making the cars and engines more efficient.
I can go 500+ miles in my car, and then do it again 2 minutes later.
You can go for a ride inside your clothes dryer too, but why would you want to do something so unpleasant? Outside of a dire emergency, I can't imagine anyone wanting to do make two 6-hour trips with only a 2-minute break in between.
Here's something to try: find out how much time the average ICE car owner spends driving to gas stations, waiting in line, waiting for his car to refuel, paying for the gas, driving back, etc. Then find out how much time the average electric car owner actually spends waiting for his car to recharge. The results may surprise you.
I would think that the average ICE owner is smart enough to choose a convenient gas station along one of their routes not to have to make a special trip to a gas station just for gas so that time would have been spent getting groceries, going to the bank, etc. Also, unless it is a tiny gas station I don't believe that I have ever had to wait in line for the pumps for very long. On the weekends during the summer and holidays along the interstates it can be a bit of a pain at times, but not during the normal work week. Pretty much the only time spent is actually at the pumps.
Um, no... WiFi is now into the Gigabit range for bandwidth and the move to 5GHz means that it's much more reliable. A properly architected dense deployment would provide a similar experience to cabled network access with the added bonus of mobility.
Curious here.....what exactly does "to jeep" mean as a verb?
Off-roading, mudding, camping, etc. Basically, going on an adventure/sporting trip. Its one of those things that some people who play in the big blue world enjoy doing.
But this is Slashdot, so it's okay if you...don't... understand... (grin)
Curious here.....what exactly does "to jeep" mean as a verb?
Off-roading, mudding, camping, etc. Basically, going on an adventure/sporting trip. Its one of those things that some people who play in the big blue world enjoy doing. But this is Slashdot, so it's okay if you understand... (grin)
You just have to see if any of the pixels are wrong.
True, but the vast majority of the public would not know what to look for or even think of zooming in to the pixel level, looking at independent colors for uniformity, etc.
Oh, and flags on the moon should hang down.
I assume that you are being sarcastic (grin)... but, just in case, the flag had a metal rod running across the top to keep the material from drooping, otherwise it would have...
People have been building their own cars for decades and decades. Go get yourself a Jegs catalog. How about a Year One Catalog too. Go buy a kitcar magazine. Get yourself a welder. Kids these days. is everyone a moron now?
Afraid of laws or insurance? Buy a cheap donor car from the junkyard and strip it to the frame.
Some of us actually like the new-fangled safety systems such as airbags. As far as I know, there is no DIY airbag system.
However, the guy below was able to retrofit ABS breaks into a '69 Camero... But it sounds like he had to do a lot of research and find equivalent parts that matched what was on the donor vehicle.
how does me wearing a seatbelt, or have airbags in my car, or a higher belt line, or taller head rests have anything to do with the safety of anyone other than myself (baring passengers in the car, who are also free to decide if they want to ride with me or not)
I might be willing to cave on ABS and traction control, but the others??? please explain how your line of reasoning fits
I'm willing to bet that if you dig deep the major proponent for this is the Insurance industry. Why? Accidents eat into the bottom line.
Very few of the rear end collisions that this type of system protects against have fatalities.
Whiplash injuries are really horrible, the damage is permanent and painful forever. They happen even in low speed collisions. You've completely neglected the fact that whiplash injuries will be greatly reduced.
According to the info below, a small percentage do have extended health issues after experiencing Whiplash. However, most people do recover from it.
That being said, I do agree that if this reduces injuries by preventing accidents then its a good idea. The problem is that it also needs to show that it doesn't end up causing other types of accidents.
For example, the car in front is breaking, you are breaking and steering off the road to miss the guy in front and to prevent the guy behind from hitting you, and then the automatic breaks kick in, causing the guy behind you to hit your car and launch it into the car in front. In this case, you could have avoided the accident by driving on to the shoulder of the road but the automatic system wouldn't let you.
Slashdot Mirror
Enterprise lost me on two fronts.
The characters pretty much followed the Prime Directive even thought it barely existed as an idea let alone an ingrained belief. This was supposed to be the wild west version, similar to the original Star Trek. Instead, it was the politically correct version.
The whole Xinidi arc...
Therefore, spending $1 billion to buy a company worth less than $1B HURTS the company's value. See HP for some dramatic examples.
Not always true. For one example: Company A buys company B for $2.2B, but company B is only "worth" $2B. You say company A is taking a $200M loss. Looks bad at the outset, but looks can be deceiving... read on:
But what if Company B had the potential to be a $4B value, but lacked, say for the sake of argument, $800M to ramp up production. Then Company A, that has the capital, would GAIN $1B for their investment ( 2.2B + 0.8B = $3B spent for a $4B company ). I would consider this a "good deal" on the purchase, even if it LOOKS bad at the outset.
There is also the situation where Company A is at a disadvantage in the marketplace (i.e. behind in technology, etc.) and company B has the technology that they need to compete. The 200 Million extra spend could easily be eaten up by R&D costs and lost market share. This could be a strategic purchase, not a financial one. The Forbes article below says that WD had SSD sales of around $500 million while Samsung has sales over $3 Billion in 2014. It also outlines the SSD technology companies that WD has been buying.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/gr...
Nearly all ratings are voluntary, and so suffer from self-selection bias. The measured ratings for general interest movie like Shawshank Redemption are typically lower than a special interest movie like Dark Knight (or Harry Potter, or Twilight, or Lord of the Rings) which appeals to a dedicated fanbase. The latter typically have a lot of fans who rate it highly just because it appeals to their group. That is, they rate it according to more lenient standard than they rate other movies, or they flat-out stuff the ballot box to try to get others to see it, to exaggerate the size of their interest group in hopes of encouraging more such movies to be made.
I agree that there is validity in this argument but a skew based on a fan base tends to be much greater when the number of responses is low. Dark Knight has over 1.5 Million ratings. Yes, a good chunk of them could be die hard fans, but there will also be offsetting low ratings by people who hate the genre, disliked the film, and/or people who didn't even watch the film. The law of averages kicks in to reduce the amount of skew as a result. Could it be skewed towards the high side because of rabid fans, possibly. The question is then by how much? and, does it even matter?
The biggest problem that I see is how people use ratings, as you aptly point out. They work well when being used to provide suggestions based on what you have watched and rated highly. The do not work well if your are just looking at the ratings and trying to figure out whether you will like the film or not. They also do not work well in determining the "best film ever", simply because that is way too subjective and is based on more criteria than just enjoyment and popularity.
Yes, you kind of do. Even Bioshock (specifically the first one), a game with clever (but derivative) art, and a clever (but derivative) story, was really just a low pop confection. There is still a long way to go.
If only that were so.
I would argue that games are not "art" they are an experience, much in the way that movies are not true art. There is a reason why certain films are referred to as artistic pieces. They were created purely to be appreciated, not specifically for enjoyment. However, I don't think that there has every been a game created that has been built purely to be appreciated and for no other reason.
"which are technically gigabit layer 3 switches"
No, technically they're routers (or gateways, if you want to use the IETF term). Switches are multiport bridges. "L3 switch" is a marketing term, created when wirespeed routing in hardware became available, in order to market them as having throughput comparable to switches.
What he said...
Layer 3 switches are technically routers. The difference is that a router is purposefully built with the necessary hardware to perform in hardware routing. Most switches that can perform layer-3 functions tend to do so in software or with the general purpose CPU. There are exceptions, of course, such as Cisco Supervisor blades for the 6500 switches which can have a MSFC with route processors, the PFC for netflow, etc. and the DFC with ASICS. However, they still tend to have a lower performance limit than dedicated router hardware.
I think that's the main reason I can't watch that show, and to this date haven't watched a full episode yet. Every time I hear the laugh track I want to gag. What is this, 1965? If they're going to do it that way, at least have a live studio audience like Married with Children had that actually responds appropriately to what's happening when it's genuinely funny.
Um, they do have a live studio audience
Doesn't stop the producers from using "Laugh now" signs. I don't know if they actually do this, but my guess is that they probably do....
Weird to see people complaining about sugar but switching to fruit juice, though. Many if not most fruit juices have a higher sugar concentration than coke.
Now, that's only from the sugar perspective. Caffeine has its good and bad sides, so if one wants to cut down, there's that. Phosphoric acid may or may not have a negative effect on bone density (lower bone density is associated with soda consumption but there's dispute over whether it's the phosphoric acid or just the aforementioned caffeine). Fruit juices have vitamins and minerals that most colas won't. But really, the biggest health issue with colas is the sugar, and one may actually increase their sugar intake by switching to juice.
I've taken to mixing 1/3 juice with 2/3 water. Get some nutrients, hydration, and less fructose.
At what point does a group of people, perhaps thinking they're working to create something good, but that actually results in something that maybe isn't so good, become a "conspiracy"?
The moment it becomes obvious that what they are attempting is impossible and they start looking for illegal ways to circumvent a test. At that precise point they should have stopped and done something else.
There is no real grey area here where people weren't fully aware of what they were doing and at no time were they under any illusion about the legality. The people who implemented this are professional engineers who knew(or should have known) what the rules were and decided to go ahead anyway. This isn't a piece of consumer software where there are no federal laws involved. This wasn't a piece of software where what seemed like a good idea ultimately didn't work. No, they intentionally and with premeditation committed this fraud. Stop it with trying to excuse what they did.
I think that you missed the point of the previous post. It could be that many people involved thought that they were adding a performance function. For example, my Jeep has an ECO mode by default but I can change it into Sport mode for better acceleration.
Granted, at some point it clearly crossed the line. I would say that point was when the wheel spin rate, steering wheel position, etc. were added as triggers. Whoever did that had to know the conditions (i.e. emissions testing) for the trigger to be able to code it properly. But the performance function/mode itself could have started out as a valid feature that they wanted to add to the vehicles. Of course, it all depends on timing. If the triggers were developed at the same time as the performance code then it would be much harder to believe that anyone was innocent. If it was developed separately, then there might be some plausible deniability.
You sound like some sort of religious fanatic. I'm all for solar and off grid but it's not cost effective yet. It's getting better but there's no way for me to go off grid as that's a huge outlay of money and it'll take many years to recoup the investment. DC appliances cost way more than their AC alternatives. I priced a DC air conditioning system and it was prohibitively expensive. I can see this getting better but we're a decade or maybe two away from solar being more affordable than being on the grid. I plan to start small and build a system a little at a time as I can afford it and it makes sense.
They are cost effective as an alternative to the grid. Going off the grid entirely is another issue.
That being said, we go off the grid during the summer at our summer camp. The stove and fridge are propane and all of our lights are connected to portable battery packs that we charge using solar. The bathroom is an environmental toilet. We have the lake to swim in. Granted, there is no TV and internet is via cell, charging everything off of the battery packs. We do have a generator as a backup in case we need power for power tools, etc.
I bought a new 30W panel this summer and used it to keep our Dewalt batteries charged while building two new docks. I did run into one issue with the panel not charging. It turned out that the 12v plug that I was using had a fuse in it rated for 500mA and the fuse had blown. I had new un-fused 12v plugs so I simply replaced it. The charge-controller would take care of any spikes, etc. anyway. No need for the fuse.
Yes, yes it is.
It depends on your diet and how much exercise.... oh, you mean tech, not your waist line....
Based on this, it doesn't sound like Jobs outfoxed HP, more like HP shot themselves in the foot.
This is no different than HP announcing the HP Touchpad and then immediately turning around and discontinuing the product, dumping them at firesale prices. Granted, they would have had a tough slog against apple, but if they had kept at it they could have carved out a nice profitable niche. WebOS was ahead of Android in so many ways....
Selling cars that cost as much as a small house is all well and good if your target market is 1%ers and boomers, but if you want to sell to the mass market you need something that's priced for a generation that will probably never be able to afford to own a home.
Tesla will eventually design and price vehicles for everyday people but this follows their strategy of appealing to the 1%ers first to get the products off the ground and to pay for R&D. It's why the first car they produced was a sports car.
Plus, range, especially for an SUV, is really important for most families. Yes, some are used as daily drivers but most families also use them for long trips (Range is 250 miles, ~4 hours highway travel). I would also argue that range would be decrease if you are towing (i.e. boat, camper, etc.). Because of this, it makes sense for them to focus on the luxury market until range is a bit better.
no, he's pretty much claiming that he'll have new battery tech that will turn 300 into 600+ DURING NEXT YEAR.
pretty sure he's just talking out of his ass on that one though - or he is going to introduce a model that has the backseat and luggage areas filled with the batteries.
Yeah, battery technology, while improving, has been improving incrementally over the last 10 years. It may seem like we have made big jumps because our toys now last longer (i.e. tablets) but what has happened is that the electronics have continued to get smaller leaving more room for the battery, which has gotten bigger. Also, electronics have become more efficient. Perhaps this is where Musk feels that they can make huge improvements, in actually making the cars and engines more efficient.
I can go 500+ miles in my car, and then do it again 2 minutes later.
You can go for a ride inside your clothes dryer too, but why would you want to do something so unpleasant? Outside of a dire emergency, I can't imagine anyone wanting to do make two 6-hour trips with only a 2-minute break in between.
Here's something to try: find out how much time the average ICE car owner spends driving to gas stations, waiting in line, waiting for his car to refuel, paying for the gas, driving back, etc. Then find out how much time the average electric car owner actually spends waiting for his car to recharge. The results may surprise you.
I would think that the average ICE owner is smart enough to choose a convenient gas station along one of their routes not to have to make a special trip to a gas station just for gas so that time would have been spent getting groceries, going to the bank, etc. Also, unless it is a tiny gas station I don't believe that I have ever had to wait in line for the pumps for very long. On the weekends during the summer and holidays along the interstates it can be a bit of a pain at times, but not during the normal work week. Pretty much the only time spent is actually at the pumps.
But would be slower and less reliable.
Um, no... WiFi is now into the Gigabit range for bandwidth and the move to 5GHz means that it's much more reliable. A properly architected dense deployment would provide a similar experience to cabled network access with the added bonus of mobility.
Curious here.....what exactly does "to jeep" mean as a verb?
Off-roading, mudding, camping, etc. Basically, going on an adventure/sporting trip. Its one of those things that some people who play in the big blue world enjoy doing.
But this is Slashdot, so it's okay if you ...don't... understand... (grin)
Curious here.....what exactly does "to jeep" mean as a verb?
Off-roading, mudding, camping, etc. Basically, going on an adventure/sporting trip. Its one of those things that some people who play in the big blue world enjoy doing. But this is Slashdot, so it's okay if you understand... (grin)
So what he is saying is that Mars is what Hell would be like if it actually froze over...
You just have to see if any of the pixels are wrong.
True, but the vast majority of the public would not know what to look for or even think of zooming in to the pixel level, looking at independent colors for uniformity, etc.
Oh, and flags on the moon should hang down.
I assume that you are being sarcastic (grin)... but, just in case, the flag had a metal rod running across the top to keep the material from drooping, otherwise it would have...
Yet here were are, with you ending your sentence with an ellipsis.
What does the moon moving into the Earth's shadow have to do with grammar.... oh... wait... ellipsis..... not the upcoming supermoon lunar eclipse...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/su...
If you're a lawyer, you launch law suits.... it's what you do....
People have been building their own cars for decades and decades. Go get yourself a Jegs catalog. How about a Year One Catalog too. Go buy a kitcar magazine. Get yourself a welder. Kids these days. is everyone a moron now?
Afraid of laws or insurance? Buy a cheap donor car from the junkyard and strip it to the frame.
Some of us actually like the new-fangled safety systems such as airbags. As far as I know, there is no DIY airbag system.
However, the guy below was able to retrofit ABS breaks into a '69 Camero... But it sounds like he had to do a lot of research and find equivalent parts that matched what was on the donor vehicle.
http://www.hotrod.com/how-to/c...
And here I thought that flats referred to a shallow area of water with a relatively even bottom.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
how does me wearing a seatbelt, or have airbags in my car, or a higher belt line, or taller head rests have anything to do with the safety of anyone other than myself (baring passengers in the car, who are also free to decide if they want to ride with me or not)
I might be willing to cave on ABS and traction control, but the others??? please explain how your line of reasoning fits
I'm willing to bet that if you dig deep the major proponent for this is the Insurance industry. Why? Accidents eat into the bottom line.
Very few of the rear end collisions that this type of system protects against have fatalities.
Whiplash injuries are really horrible, the damage is permanent and painful forever. They happen even in low speed collisions. You've completely neglected the fact that whiplash injuries will be greatly reduced.
According to the info below, a small percentage do have extended health issues after experiencing Whiplash. However, most people do recover from it.
http://www.healthline.com/heal...
http://www.bottonline.co.uk/gu...
http://www.mayoclinic.org/dise...
That being said, I do agree that if this reduces injuries by preventing accidents then its a good idea. The problem is that it also needs to show that it doesn't end up causing other types of accidents.
For example, the car in front is breaking, you are breaking and steering off the road to miss the guy in front and to prevent the guy behind from hitting you, and then the automatic breaks kick in, causing the guy behind you to hit your car and launch it into the car in front. In this case, you could have avoided the accident by driving on to the shoulder of the road but the automatic system wouldn't let you.