In what way does that magically gift the driver the ability to see through a car?
PLEASE LEARN TO READ.
Did you read the part about rear sensors? e.g. "The rear reversing sensors that come standard on many cars seem pretty good at detecting stuff. So why cameras for all cars? How many more would these cameras save compared to those sensors?"
As for your insults I can think and understand far better than you can read.
Your education system failed you or you failed it. Not going to bother trying to teach you anything since you're rude.
I've seen a video where a toddler stands in FRONT of a parked car and the front of the car is taller than the toddler so the driver couldn't see the toddler and ran over the toddler. The toddler's parents/guardians are mostly to be blamed in that incident. It was a moderately busy street not suitable for unsupervised toddlers.
The rear reversing sensors that come standard on many cars seem pretty good at detecting stuff. So why cameras for all cars? How many more would these cameras save compared to those sensors?
"In terms of absolute numbers of lives saved, it certainly isn't the highest," Mr. Ditlow said. "But in terms of emotional tragedy, backover deaths are some of the worst imaginable. When you have a parent that kills a child in an incident that's utterly avoidable, they don't ever forget it."
The Darwinists would be pretty happy:
And more than two-thirds of the time, a parent or other close relative is behind the wheel.
Maybe it's cheaper and just as effective to have these people and their victims appear in an ad telling parents and drivers to be more careful? e.g. "You don't want to be like me - someone who squished his own daughter".
The USA isn't as rich as it used to be, so it should seriously consider spending the money in more bang for buck stuff For instance fixing its education system - that would save more lives than these cameras.
Sure looks like you CAN sleep without sleeping pills:
Or that you argue with yourself at a stop light, "no, don't close your eyes, I know it would feel really really good but if you do that you'll miss the green and might not wake up until somebody knocks on your window"?
What did happen is that management decided there SHOULD BE such cross-engineering,which meant we had to stop hand-crafting our CPU designs and switch to an SoC design style. This results in giving up a lot of performance, chip area, and efficiency. The reason DEC Alphas were always much faster than anything else is they designed each transistor by hand. Intel and AMD had always done so at least for the critical parts of the chip. That changed before I left - they started to rely on synthesis tools, automatic place and route tools, etc. I had been in charge of our design flow in the years before I left, and I had tested these tools by asking the companies who sold them to design blocks (adders, multipliers, etc.) using their tools. I let them take as long as they wanted. They always came back to me with designs that were 20% bigger, and 20% slower than our hand-crafted designs, and which suffered from electromigration and other problems.
That is now how AMD designs chips. I'm sure it will turn out well for them [/sarcasm]
And that comment was back in 2010. No surprise now Bulldozer is slower and uses more power, and the only advantage is it has more cores (meh, any idiot can add more cores, at worst case you just add another computer[1]).
[1] The same embarrassingly parallel tasks that do well on multiple cores will do well on multiple computers.
Guess who hurts first if someone owes you (China) 2 trillion and you sold that loan to others for 1.5 trillion.
As long as most countries keep using the US dollar for everything (trading oil, grain, CPUs etc), the USA has it easy.
So many don't seem to understand that it's rather different when you owe someone a lot of money in a currency you can create on demand (and have already created trillions of - google for Federal Reserve trillions).
It's not the same as you owing the Bank a lot of US dollars. It's more like you owing the Bank a lot of "sqldr" dollars that you can create cheaply in a computer under your control.
So who really is more screwed here? The one who is owed 2 trillion, or the one who can magically loan himself and friends 9 trillion out of thin-air.
That was a dead/zombie format even back when it was launched - go ask the photographers and those who knew about Moore's Law.
Kodak survived many more years, but they sure didn't do a good job avoiding the iceberg that was already clearly visible then. Digital cameras were clearly the future, barring a cataclysmic event.
if a train had come while they were running along the line to the branch they'd have been seriously injured at best.
People die and get seriously injured in rock climbing/mountain biking/horse riding/hiking/racing accidents all the time. So what's the big deal? They were aware of the risks, and as far as I know they took measures to reduce them.
The only problem I see is if they screwed up the train would be delayed, and someone would have to clean up the mess. I doubt they'd derail the train with their bodies so easily.
Fine them if you want. But the proposed ASBO is ridiculous. If you want a better arbitrary ASBO, give them a warning that if they get crippled/maimed while exploring the prohibited areas they'd no longer be covered by the NHS.
Sure, just like the way the government can't easily conduct certain forms of surveillance because that would run afoul of the 4th Amendment... but they can contract that out, purchasing the same information from companies conducting the same surveillance, and that's perfectly cromulent.
Of course, because big governments are bad.
That's why many very clever US people would rather have a small government, and let the corporations and individuals be more free to do what they want.
Why should it be surprising? 1) The USA is the most powerful country in the world, has nukes, aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, etc. 2) Of the world's total military spending the USA is 43%, China at second place is 7.3%[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures 3) The USA is one of the few countries in the world that regularly exerts significant military, covert and political influence on other countries, including countries far from its borders. Sometimes for good reasons, but too often for bad reasons. 4) The USA still is one of the biggest producers and consumers of stuff, if not the biggest.
So naturally the rest of the world should care who the US people puts into power. To make matters worse, the USA has long lost its reputation of being "generally the good guys".
Fact is Saddam was not as big a danger to most other countries as George Bush was. Iraq's missiles didn't and don't have that much reach (same goes for Iran). Can't say the same about the USA's military, CIA (and even their **AA - think SOPA, etc).
George Bush is likely to have been a greater danger to the US citizens than Saddam ever was. And arguably caused more damage to the USA than Saddam ever would have.
So of course it matters a lot who the US people vote into power.
[1] And yet people in the US ask why China spends so much on defence - much may actually be for defence! Go see it from their point of view. In contrast aircraft carriers are mostly about projecting power, not defence.
I vaguely recalled some commentary about how some Soviet/USSR military technology was crappy. But when you looked at it from a defence perspective, the technology made more sense.
If those induced pregnancies weren't that much more dangerous than normal pregnancies, then it may not be so dangerous for older mothers and their babies if the eggs and sperm are good quality (whether donated or via some new-fangled stemcell thing) and the fertilization process is improved.
The ASBO stuff seem very arbitrary. Like going back to the bad old days of having an all powerful king. I thought the English did that Magna Carta thing?
What's the big problem on them exploring the station? It was an abandoned station (as per the link).
Of course this was done for scientific purposes... to see about future human reproduction...
I would think that it would be a far better idea to build space stations with artificial gravity[1] and radiation shielding before trying human reproduction.
These two items should be NASAs main priorities[2] if they really want humans in space. Otherwise they should pack-up and stop wasting time and resources.
[1] Can be done by spinning stuff. The station does not have to be huge if tethers are used. [2] Figuring out a really cheap way to get into orbit would be nice too, but as long as we do not have the first two prerequisites there are few technical reasons to have humans in space. You might as well use autonomous robots first. It's mainly political and PR crap.
Slashdot Mirror
With the popular Desktop Linux security models would you have enough power to pwn the system if you had the power to add a printer?
Yes it's not the same. The camera only works if the driver looks at the video screen before reversing.
Whereas when the sensors do their job properly, the driver will hear the beeping whether or not the driver looks.
So if you give them 12 months notice, do they sack you or are you still on their payroll for 12 months?
Noscript blocks it for me. I have to click on the placeholder to get it to load.
If you're trying to reduce bandwidth usage you should use stuff like noscript and adblock plus.
B) No one is happy about it.
Oh yes some people are happy. Google for cleaning the gene pool. See also: http://www.darwinawards.com/ .
In what way does that magically gift the driver the ability to see through a car?
PLEASE LEARN TO READ.
Did you read the part about rear sensors? e.g. "The rear reversing sensors that come standard on many cars seem pretty good at detecting stuff. So why cameras for all cars? How many more would these cameras save compared to those sensors?"
As for your insults I can think and understand far better than you can read.
Your education system failed you or you failed it. Not going to bother trying to teach you anything since you're rude.
Have a nice day.
I'd think it's the Dad with an extensive firearm collection. He can play executioner as well as judge ;).
I've seen a video where a toddler stands in FRONT of a parked car and the front of the car is taller than the toddler so the driver couldn't see the toddler and ran over the toddler. The toddler's parents/guardians are mostly to be blamed in that incident. It was a moderately busy street not suitable for unsupervised toddlers.
The rear reversing sensors that come standard on many cars seem pretty good at detecting stuff. So why cameras for all cars? How many more would these cameras save compared to those sensors?
"In terms of absolute numbers of lives saved, it certainly isn't the highest," Mr. Ditlow said. "But in terms of emotional tragedy, backover deaths are some of the worst imaginable. When you have a parent that kills a child in an incident that's utterly avoidable, they don't ever forget it."
The Darwinists would be pretty happy:
And more than two-thirds of the time, a parent or other close relative is behind the wheel.
Maybe it's cheaper and just as effective to have these people and their victims appear in an ad telling parents and drivers to be more careful? e.g. "You don't want to be like me - someone who squished his own daughter".
The USA isn't as rich as it used to be, so it should seriously consider spending the money in more bang for buck stuff For instance fixing its education system - that would save more lives than these cameras.
Real men have slower reaction times? Or Real Men are Rh+ too? ;)
Toxoplasma and reaction time: role of toxoplasmosis in the origin, preservation and geographical distribution of Rh blood group polymorphism.:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18752708
Increased incidence of traffic accidents in Toxoplasma-infected military drivers and protective effect RhD molecule revealed by a large-scale prospective cohort study:
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/9/72
Toxoplasma gondii: from animals to humans.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez/11113252?dopt=Abstract&holding=f1000,f1000m,isrctn
Regular flossing reduces cardiac events too.
Maybe one day they might find that certain bacteria infections increase your chance of getting heart disease.
Just like the link between h.pylori and stomach ulcers.
Sure looks like you CAN sleep without sleeping pills:
Or that you argue with yourself at a stop light, "no, don't close your eyes, I know it would feel really really good but if you do that you'll miss the green and might not wake up until somebody knocks on your window"?
So maybe you're a nocturnal person?
This might be enlightening: http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1037482638&postcount=88
What did happen is that management decided there SHOULD BE such cross-engineering ,which meant we had to stop hand-crafting our CPU designs and switch to an SoC design style. This results in giving up a lot of performance, chip area, and efficiency. The reason DEC Alphas were always much faster than anything else is they designed each transistor by hand. Intel and AMD had always done so at least for the critical parts of the chip. That changed before I left - they started to rely on synthesis tools, automatic place and route tools, etc. I had been in charge of our design flow in the years before I left, and I had tested these tools by asking the companies who sold them to design blocks (adders, multipliers, etc.) using their tools. I let them take as long as they wanted. They always came back to me with designs that were 20% bigger, and 20% slower than our hand-crafted designs, and which suffered from electromigration and other problems.
That is now how AMD designs chips. I'm sure it will turn out well for them [/sarcasm]
And that comment was back in 2010. No surprise now Bulldozer is slower and uses more power, and the only advantage is it has more cores (meh, any idiot can add more cores, at worst case you just add another computer[1]).
[1] The same embarrassingly parallel tasks that do well on multiple cores will do well on multiple computers.
Guess who hurts first if someone owes you (China) 2 trillion and you sold that loan to others for 1.5 trillion.
As long as most countries keep using the US dollar for everything (trading oil, grain, CPUs etc), the USA has it easy.
So many don't seem to understand that it's rather different when you owe someone a lot of money in a currency you can create on demand (and have already created trillions of - google for Federal Reserve trillions).
It's not the same as you owing the Bank a lot of US dollars. It's more like you owing the Bank a lot of "sqldr" dollars that you can create cheaply in a computer under your control.
So who really is more screwed here? The one who is owed 2 trillion, or the one who can magically loan himself and friends 9 trillion out of thin-air.
My point is that they adapted but they were encumbered by huge branches they were not able to axe.
Kodak had about 20 years to do something, but the Kodak bosses were too busy creating new dead branches: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Photo_System
That was a dead/zombie format even back when it was launched - go ask the photographers and those who knew about Moore's Law.
Kodak survived many more years, but they sure didn't do a good job avoiding the iceberg that was already clearly visible then. Digital cameras were clearly the future, barring a cataclysmic event.
And the "Americans" park on the driveway and drive on the parkway...
if a train had come while they were running along the line to the branch they'd have been seriously injured at best.
People die and get seriously injured in rock climbing/mountain biking/horse riding/hiking/racing accidents all the time. So what's the big deal? They were aware of the risks, and as far as I know they took measures to reduce them.
The only problem I see is if they screwed up the train would be delayed, and someone would have to clean up the mess. I doubt they'd derail the train with their bodies so easily.
Fine them if you want. But the proposed ASBO is ridiculous. If you want a better arbitrary ASBO, give them a warning that if they get crippled/maimed while exploring the prohibited areas they'd no longer be covered by the NHS.
They'd be wrong then. The Germans drive on the right side of the road.
The British drive on the right side of the car.
Yeah, imagine if Tolkien were alive to create more material for such a site and maybe delegate some work to others.
Poor image and brand management? ;)
Sure, just like the way the government can't easily conduct certain forms of surveillance because that would run afoul of the 4th Amendment... but they can contract that out, purchasing the same information from companies conducting the same surveillance, and that's perfectly cromulent.
Of course, because big governments are bad.
That's why many very clever US people would rather have a small government, and let the corporations and individuals be more free to do what they want.
Why should it be surprising?
1) The USA is the most powerful country in the world, has nukes, aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, etc.
2) Of the world's total military spending the USA is 43%, China at second place is 7.3%[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
3) The USA is one of the few countries in the world that regularly exerts significant military, covert and political influence on other countries, including countries far from its borders. Sometimes for good reasons, but too often for bad reasons.
4) The USA still is one of the biggest producers and consumers of stuff, if not the biggest.
So naturally the rest of the world should care who the US people puts into power. To make matters worse, the USA has long lost its reputation of being "generally the good guys".
Fact is Saddam was not as big a danger to most other countries as George Bush was. Iraq's missiles didn't and don't have that much reach (same goes for Iran). Can't say the same about the USA's military, CIA (and even their **AA - think SOPA, etc).
George Bush is likely to have been a greater danger to the US citizens than Saddam ever was. And arguably caused more damage to the USA than Saddam ever would have.
So of course it matters a lot who the US people vote into power.
[1] And yet people in the US ask why China spends so much on defence - much may actually be for defence! Go see it from their point of view. In contrast aircraft carriers are mostly about projecting power, not defence.
I vaguely recalled some commentary about how some Soviet/USSR military technology was crappy. But when you looked at it from a defence perspective, the technology made more sense.
It seems as if they do about as well as younger women that undergo induced pregnancies: http://www.livescience.com/18289-pregnant-women-age-50-complications.html
But since those younger women are going for induced pregnancies they might not be that healthy either...
If those induced pregnancies weren't that much more dangerous than normal pregnancies, then it may not be so dangerous for older mothers and their babies if the eggs and sperm are good quality (whether donated or via some new-fangled stemcell thing) and the fertilization process is improved.
The ASBO stuff seem very arbitrary. Like going back to the bad old days of having an all powerful king. I thought the English did that Magna Carta thing?
What's the big problem on them exploring the station? It was an abandoned station (as per the link).
By the way the french seem to have maps of the underground: http://carto.metro.free.fr/cartes/metro-tram-london/index.php?gpslat=51.513962&gpslon=-0.114629&zoom=4
Not that surprised though: http://www.wired.com/magazine/2012/01/ff_ux/all/1
No, they should run away and seek asylum in a country that would treat them better.
Or appeal. Or both if possible (IANAL, so not sure how the appeals court considers people who run away and try to appeal).
Why should the law or the government get to mandate good manners?
If enough voters want it then the government should. Voters want a lot of stupid things and have screwed up priorities but then again so do Dictators.
I suspect many companies do treat assholes differently. My guess poor assholes get crappy treatment, while filthy rich assholes get good treatment.
Of course this was done for scientific purposes... to see about future human reproduction...
I would think that it would be a far better idea to build space stations with artificial gravity[1] and radiation shielding before trying human reproduction.
These two items should be NASAs main priorities[2] if they really want humans in space. Otherwise they should pack-up and stop wasting time and resources.
[1] Can be done by spinning stuff. The station does not have to be huge if tethers are used.
[2] Figuring out a really cheap way to get into orbit would be nice too, but as long as we do not have the first two prerequisites there are few technical reasons to have humans in space. You might as well use autonomous robots first. It's mainly political and PR crap.