You misjudge the amount of money that insurance companies pay out because of PEOPLE driving.
If a self driving car has a demonstrably lower rate of accidents than the average american driver you will find that it is cheaper to insure yourself against all 3rd party accident and damage than it is for a standard car - and over 5 years probably more than the additional capital cost of the hardware. The current legislation still makes the person sitting behind the wheel responsible for accidents rather than the computer just like it currently is with cruise control.
I would be more impressed if you refuted it with even major accidents per year (or better yet per mile driven) let alone all accidents but those figures seem hard to come by. I know it must be quite high as I have personally witnessed dozens of accidents and have only been driving for around 10 years, only one of those was a serious accident that required an abulance (taxi ran a stop sign and was t-boned by a lady going the speed limit jsut in front of us).
Since the introduction of airbags and seatbelts there is a far higher number of survivable but crippling accidents involving motor vehicles, and you can bet insurance companies have quite accurate figures on this. Fatalities are measured in numbers of lower than 50 per BILLION km, whereas accidents are measured per million km.
You are creating a straw man there, 99% of similar situations with human drivers would either have not noticed the exit or not reacted in time. Additionally you likely broke the law doing what you did and if you caused an accident or ran over a pedestrian because of it you would have been 100% at fault, whereas being shunted by the guy behind you lands 100% of the resposibility on him (unless you stopped too close to a car in front of you).
I would put money on your driving record being way worse than 300k miles accident free. The actual pouplation-wide average is a LOT higher than that, and you are asking for us to give up reducing that number because we can't reduce it to 0.
That's like people saying "Don't build gas power plants to replace coal plants because they still emit CO2", sure it's not perfect but at least it BETTER.
Until you look at the amount of land you will need to grow that much algae.
I don't have the figures handy but they are less energy efficient per m^2 than the current generation photovoltaics, and that is before you take into account refining and tranportation costs. You also need mass quantities of fresh water and feedstock to sustain them, just pulling hte carbon out of water that naturally absorbs from the atmosphere is not enough for the scale you are proposing.
1) True, so what? 2) Yes there is, but most text is hidden behind tooltips because once you learn the pictograms you don't need text. Once you have made a localised application you learn that labels can not always be made to fit in the required space in every language on the planet. 3) Yes there is, Tabs -> Groups -> Buttons/splitbottons 4) See above 5) Press alt and the access keys will highlight. 6) you obviously haven't used it for a while and then tried to go back to office 2k3
The power usage of an LCD is by far dominated by the creation of light, the number of pixels will increase power consumption but not by anywhere near as much as the bigger back light.
It is also noticeably worse at understanding you when using an external headset rather than the internal microphone.
Even though voice calls on that headset are clear in quite noisy environments, I have had some decent conversations while riding my bike that had a lot less "can you hear me now" than using the built in speakerphone while driving.
Deduplication is a misunderstood feature in ZFS v21+; some users see it as a silver bullet for increasing capacity by reducing redundancies in data. Here are the author's (gcooper's) observations:
There are some resources that suggest that one needs 2GB per TB of storage with deduplication [i] (in fact this is a misinterpretation of the text). In practice with FreeBSD, based on empirical testing and additional reading, it's closer to 5GB per TB.
Using deduplication is slower than not running it.
Deduplication [on 8.x/9.x at least] lies via stat(2) / statvfs(2); it reports the theoretical used space -- not the actual used space -- which can confuse scripts that look at df output, etc (TODO: find PR that mentions this).
It is only deduplication that needs that much memory. ZFS requires 512mb of kernel memory minimum, so it will run (not necessarily blazingly fast) on afairly humble system.
I have my fileserver running on 2gb ram and an Atom with 5 1tb disks in raidZ and never have any issues.
I wonder if it works that way in Australia, because that would be considered price fixing and is horribly illegal. The only thing they could do is set a fixed $ amount for the royalty rates or rates per ticket and have the cinemas work out their minimum from there. They wouldn't be allowed to set a percentage + minimum retail price (they would be able to set a percentage + minimum royalty though which amounts to the same thing)
In fact even McDonalds can't set prices in Australia because the stores are franchised and get whinged at by the current affairs programs for having floating prices among stores. They can set a recommended retail price (or price range in their case), but the store owner has final say.
But seriously, there is no reason this won't happen. In fact as margins get tighter and tighter it is more likely to happen, just like airlines crunch numbers to extract the maximum amount of money they can out of a jet cinemas could do it with tickets.
The problem is that a jet from dallas to chicago going for fire-sale prices is not going to take business from a dubai to london flight, but a $3 ticket to some shitty Adam Sandler comedy might make some people decide not to see the blockbuster at $50 per seat. So to make it work you would definitely have to do some modelling and behaviour analysis.
Slashdot Mirror
You misjudge the amount of money that insurance companies pay out because of PEOPLE driving.
If a self driving car has a demonstrably lower rate of accidents than the average american driver you will find that it is cheaper to insure yourself against all 3rd party accident and damage than it is for a standard car - and over 5 years probably more than the additional capital cost of the hardware. The current legislation still makes the person sitting behind the wheel responsible for accidents rather than the computer just like it currently is with cruise control.
The look like prius' with a basketball sized box on the roofrack.
There is a ton of video of them, including the computer visualisation displays of what the car sees.
Perhaps you should google "google self driving car video"
I would be more impressed if you refuted it with even major accidents per year (or better yet per mile driven) let alone all accidents but those figures seem hard to come by. I know it must be quite high as I have personally witnessed dozens of accidents and have only been driving for around 10 years, only one of those was a serious accident that required an abulance (taxi ran a stop sign and was t-boned by a lady going the speed limit jsut in front of us).
Since the introduction of airbags and seatbelts there is a far higher number of survivable but crippling accidents involving motor vehicles, and you can bet insurance companies have quite accurate figures on this.
Fatalities are measured in numbers of lower than 50 per BILLION km, whereas accidents are measured per million km.
You are creating a straw man there, 99% of similar situations with human drivers would either have not noticed the exit or not reacted in time.
Additionally you likely broke the law doing what you did and if you caused an accident or ran over a pedestrian because of it you would have been 100% at fault, whereas being shunted by the guy behind you lands 100% of the resposibility on him (unless you stopped too close to a car in front of you).
I would put money on your driving record being way worse than 300k miles accident free. The actual pouplation-wide average is a LOT higher than that, and you are asking for us to give up reducing that number because we can't reduce it to 0.
That's like people saying "Don't build gas power plants to replace coal plants because they still emit CO2", sure it's not perfect but at least it BETTER.
I think he is referring to the EV you will have recharging in there?
Or maybe he uses his garage as a grow room
Until you look at the amount of land you will need to grow that much algae.
I don't have the figures handy but they are less energy efficient per m^2 than the current generation photovoltaics, and that is before you take into account refining and tranportation costs.
You also need mass quantities of fresh water and feedstock to sustain them, just pulling hte carbon out of water that naturally absorbs from the atmosphere is not enough for the scale you are proposing.
1) True, so what?
2) Yes there is, but most text is hidden behind tooltips because once you learn the pictograms you don't need text. Once you have made a localised application you learn that labels can not always be made to fit in the required space in every language on the planet.
3) Yes there is, Tabs -> Groups -> Buttons/splitbottons
4) See above
5) Press alt and the access keys will highlight.
6) you obviously haven't used it for a while and then tried to go back to office 2k3
It must be interesting living in your fantasy world.
You mean like mounting read only? You make it sound like the steps are difficult.
I wouldn't be mounting a strange partition rw anyway
Doesn't a magnet big enough to erase the data also erase the factory written tracks necessary for the operation of the drive?
The power usage of an LCD is by far dominated by the creation of light, the number of pixels will increase power consumption but not by anywhere near as much as the bigger back light.
I wish I had mod points for you, being a microsoft shop pretty much everything we use internally is running on windows including our public webserver.
Of course most of the things we serve up are SharePoint or other microsoft products that are just reverse proxied through to the internal machines.
It is also noticeably worse at understanding you when using an external headset rather than the internal microphone.
Even though voice calls on that headset are clear in quite noisy environments, I have had some decent conversations while riding my bike that had a lot less "can you hear me now" than using the built in speakerphone while driving.
Yes it did, it just didn't do it completely - and the remaining population has now been selected for resistance.
It's the exact same problem we have with antibiotics
time and gas.
YMMV.
I see what you did there!
The wiki blockout is defeated by noscript (since wikimedia.org normally doesn't serve up javascript it isn't whitelisted for me)
Or just hit escape before it redirects you.
Normally the solution to that is: "If you make a mistake please ask for a new ballot paper"
The invalid ballots are removed and accounted for and you are given a new one.
Deduplication is a misunderstood feature in ZFS v21+; some users see it as a silver bullet for increasing capacity by reducing redundancies in data. Here are the author's (gcooper's) observations:
There are some resources that suggest that one needs 2GB per TB of storage with deduplication [i] (in fact this is a misinterpretation of the text). In practice with FreeBSD, based on empirical testing and additional reading, it's closer to 5GB per TB.
Using deduplication is slower than not running it.
Deduplication [on 8.x/9.x at least] lies via stat(2) / statvfs(2); it reports the theoretical used space -- not the actual used space -- which can confuse scripts that look at df output, etc (TODO: find PR that mentions this).
It is only deduplication that needs that much memory. ZFS requires 512mb of kernel memory minimum, so it will run (not necessarily blazingly fast) on afairly humble system.
I have my fileserver running on 2gb ram and an Atom with 5 1tb disks in raidZ and never have any issues.
That gives incentive for pirates to kill successful artists.
Of course that would create bodyguard jobs!
Curtin never had "New" in it's name, that's just a joke.
You only need to patrol the higher cost movies, and only if there are vacant seats after the movie starts.
If you are making more than $10 extra because of this higher cost movie then it pays for the dweeb to stand at the door checking stubs.
I wonder if it works that way in Australia, because that would be considered price fixing and is horribly illegal. The only thing they could do is set a fixed $ amount for the royalty rates or rates per ticket and have the cinemas work out their minimum from there. They wouldn't be allowed to set a percentage + minimum retail price (they would be able to set a percentage + minimum royalty though which amounts to the same thing)
In fact even McDonalds can't set prices in Australia because the stores are franchised and get whinged at by the current affairs programs for having floating prices among stores. They can set a recommended retail price (or price range in their case), but the store owner has final say.
so patent it!
But seriously, there is no reason this won't happen. In fact as margins get tighter and tighter it is more likely to happen, just like airlines crunch numbers to extract the maximum amount of money they can out of a jet cinemas could do it with tickets.
The problem is that a jet from dallas to chicago going for fire-sale prices is not going to take business from a dubai to london flight, but a $3 ticket to some shitty Adam Sandler comedy might make some people decide not to see the blockbuster at $50 per seat. So to make it work you would definitely have to do some modelling and behaviour analysis.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss
Sorry about the broken link, here is a clickable one http://poshconsole.codeplex.com/