"While on autopilot the planes are utterly unable to respond to emergencies without manual control." completely false. In fact t detect and responds faster then a human pilot would even realize a light had gone red.
Actually, the risk is less in an autonomous car. It is constantly watching 360 degrees out to 200 meters. So it is more likely to detect the oncoming car and take appropriate action.
Correct. This is why when you start to factor in density and miles flown, the safety difference(when you use death toll) is not better then cars. Imagines if you only look at auto fatalities that happened while alone on a straight highway, or while pulling into the drive way.
CAT III landing require autopilot, as per guidelines.
CAT III weather minima do not provide sufficient visual references to allow a manual landing to be made. CAT III minima depend on roll-out control and redundancy of the autopilot. because they give only enough time for the pilot to decide whether the aircraft will land in the touchdown zone (basically CAT IIIa) and to ensure safety during rollout (basically CAT IIIb). Therefore an automatic landing system is mandatory to perform Category III operations.
Maybe you should read it again? His real criticizm is that spreadsheet software is horrible for any high end work, or with anything you want to share, and he is correct.
"so he probably doesn't know how to use the interface of a spreadsheet very well, which makes the act of checking a formula tedious..." it is tedious, even if you are an expert and even if the user uses goof practices.
"P-hacking is the problem in social science/economics research, not using 'spreadsheets'" I don't think you know what P-Hacking is.
"...fact carpet bombing has minimal effectiveness." you seem to be ignoring all the cruise missiles it carries. Fact is, its a large capacity vehicle; weather to fill it's capacity with drop and forget, or self guided bombs, or missiles is a tactical decisions.
"fine but the current fleet wont last six months against Russia or China if it is used." based on..what, exactly?
haha, I LOLed when I read that. I speak as some whose budget is being cut.
in short: You are a liar. " as not doing so will mean that the money will not be available the next budget cycle." false. An urban myth based on people ingnorance of accounting practices... mostly. It gets complected at certial levels becasue the budge it cut for the amount not used, but the funds they didn't use are still available. So you get 100 bucks, you spend 50. Next you your budget is 50 bucks, but you still get the 50 bucks you didn't spend. If this happens for a number of years, then the budget is cut. Again, it depends on why. For example a project that will happen, gets a delay start.
In march 2013 they cut 80 billion dollars.
The rest of your post is just ignorance, so I won't bother.
You also asume writing is and indicator of great human intellect, it is not. You should know that since you site Stephen King.*
"I don't want a computer driving my car, because I enjoy driving my car. I like to keep it in third gear and hear the engine roar for a bit when I'm driving on the highway before I put in fourth. I just don't think I would get the same pleasure if a computer was driving my car." me too, but it won't matter. They will be far safer and mandatory.
But computers outperform the human mind all the time, right now. Lets ee any human star at a wall, 24/7 for weeks on in and let me know when someone is trying to enter? Realistically you will need 7*, vs one low end computer.
"Education, starting young enough that people learn critical thinking skills at a young age. irrelevant to driving response time. " Culturally we would need media to stop glamorizing entertainment figures and glamorize thinkers" I agree, still irrelevant to the topic.
"where the computer system would detect an obstacle and react differently." why? hmm? why cant the system make the same decision? it's only a few parameters.
Why do you think detection range is so limited? Why aren't the vehicle communicating in your little world?
". There are surely some computers that can beat a human in chess, but the computers processing power is dedicated 100% to playing chess. The human can notice it's surroundings, contemplate what they are going to have for dinner, and breath and regulate their heartbeat all while playing that game of chess."
Oh? You are talking about 1 computer against the best chess players ever. i.e. about 2 of them. My PC can kick almost everyone else's ass at chess. And alert me when I get a new message, and check for intrusions, and multitask, ans so on. I would think a "Senior System Engineer/Architect" would be aware of all the thing a computer does at any given moment. A lot more then regulating a heart beat.
Also, serious chess players playing a serious game of chess aren't contemplating dinner, and ar eonly aware of their immediate surrounding.
I have a system that while beating me at chess, it also lets me know if someone comes to the front door. If I wanted to, I could have it be monitoring all the surrounding of my house inside and out. Oh, and that computer "100% dedicated to chess"* could beat 7,236,081,200 humans. so..yeah better then humans.
*it actually does a few other things as well, but those are low level computer stuff I would expect you to understand.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is no different then now.
"While on autopilot the planes are utterly unable to respond to emergencies without manual control."
completely false. In fact t detect and responds faster then a human pilot would even realize a light had gone red.
Actually, the risk is less in an autonomous car. It is constantly watching 360 degrees out to 200 meters. So it is more likely to detect the oncoming car and take appropriate action.
Correct. This is why when you start to factor in density and miles flown, the safety difference(when you use death toll) is not better then cars.
Imagines if you only look at auto fatalities that happened while alone on a straight highway, or while pulling into the drive way.
CAT III landing require autopilot, as per guidelines.
CAT III weather minima do not provide sufficient visual references to allow a manual landing to be made. CAT III minima depend on roll-out control and redundancy of the autopilot. because they give only enough time for the pilot to decide whether the aircraft will land in the touchdown zone (basically CAT IIIa) and to ensure safety during rollout (basically CAT IIIb). Therefore an automatic landing system is mandatory to perform Category III operations.
" It's Lufthansa policy
to land manually whenever possible, as to not lose manual flying proficiency."
And by possible they mean when it's clear.
Once visibility degrades to a certain degree, it's all autopilot.
Think about that.
No they weren't. A few futurist talked about flying cars in a magazine.
"Again, I don't give a damn about "10 years from now"."
so selfish, short sighted,, and not a heavy thinker.
Got it.
If the lively hood of someone depends solely on the kindness of strangers, then the system is broken.
Frankly,. I would like to see min. wage doubled and tipping ended.
And I am a generous tipper to wait staff.
A) With any work, having colleagues try to tear it apart is a good thing. And one little decimal can be expensive.
I don't know why 'neo-libral' economist would attack him.
"When you hear of character attacks against Piketty or some other diversionary tactic, you'll know his data is correct."
Logic fail.
YOU can have character attacks AND the data can also be wrong. "That dumb ass didn't put the decimal in the right place" for one example
It needs restating because people forget it all the time.
For non programmers modern spread sheet give the user rope, with a noose already premade and a map on where to put your head.
Maybe you should read it again?
His real criticizm is that spreadsheet software is horrible for any high end work, or with anything you want to share, and he is correct.
"so he probably doesn't know how to use the interface of a spreadsheet very well, which makes the act of checking a formula tedious..."
it is tedious, even if you are an expert and even if the user uses goof practices.
"P-hacking is the problem in social science/economics research, not using 'spreadsheets'"
I don't think you know what P-Hacking is.
Fortran. If you laugh, then you don't know much about advanced computing.
what ideology is that?
BTW the hammer and sickle predated Lenin.
A short sighted man thinks "there is no software I use for this". A wise man thinks "can this accomplish the tasks need."
Do you need software, or do you need what the software does?
Uhg. That episode made no sense in the ST universe. ALL language uses metaphor.
ahhh.
All I took away from that is the poor sucker works in Access.
"...fact carpet bombing has minimal effectiveness."
you seem to be ignoring all the cruise missiles it carries.
Fact is, its a large capacity vehicle; weather to fill it's capacity with drop and forget, or self guided bombs, or missiles is a tactical decisions.
"fine but the current fleet wont last six months against Russia or China if it is used." based on..what, exactly?
High speed drone are easier to design and build then piloted craft. We have mach 10 and 20 craft in experimental phase right now.
" They are NEVER cut. "
haha, I LOLed when I read that. I speak as some whose budget is being cut.
in short: You are a liar.
" as not doing so will mean that the money will not be available the next budget cycle."
false. An urban myth based on people ingnorance of accounting practices... mostly. It gets complected at certial levels becasue the budge it cut for the amount not used, but the funds they didn't use are still available.
So you get 100 bucks, you spend 50. Next you your budget is 50 bucks, but you still get the 50 bucks you didn't spend. If this happens for a number of years, then the budget is cut. Again, it depends on why. For example a project that will happen, gets a delay start.
In march 2013 they cut 80 billion dollars.
The rest of your post is just ignorance, so I won't bother.
Proof that reading Ayn Rand can literally ruin people.
"The real question is: is driving more like composing a symphony or like playing chess?"
neither. It's a lot like operating a vehicle.
First off, you presume Romeo and Juliet is a great novel, it is not.
Yeah, i'd say it's write around the corner.
http://singularityhub.com/2012...
You also asume writing is and indicator of great human intellect, it is not. You should know that since you site Stephen King.*
"I don't want a computer driving my car, because I enjoy driving my car. I like to keep it in third gear and hear the engine roar for a bit when I'm driving on the highway before I put in fourth. I just don't think I would get the same pleasure if a computer was driving my car."
me too, but it won't matter. They will be far safer and mandatory.
*ZING!
But computers outperform the human mind all the time, right now.
Lets ee any human star at a wall, 24/7 for weeks on in and let me know when someone is trying to enter?
Realistically you will need 7*, vs one low end computer.
*3 shifts, vacations, breaks, weekends, etc..
"Education, starting young enough that people learn critical thinking skills at a young age.
irrelevant to driving response time.
" Culturally we would need media to stop glamorizing entertainment figures and glamorize thinkers"
I agree, still irrelevant to the topic.
"where the computer system would detect an obstacle and react differently."
why? hmm? why cant the system make the same decision? it's only a few parameters.
Why do you think detection range is so limited? Why aren't the vehicle communicating in your little world?
". There are surely some computers that can beat a human in chess, but the computers processing power is dedicated 100% to playing chess. The human can notice it's surroundings, contemplate what they are going to have for dinner, and breath and regulate their heartbeat all while playing that game of chess."
Oh? You are talking about 1 computer against the best chess players ever. i.e. about 2 of them.
My PC can kick almost everyone else's ass at chess. And alert me when I get a new message, and check for intrusions, and multitask, ans so on. I would think a "Senior System Engineer/Architect" would be aware of all the thing a computer does at any given moment. A lot more then regulating a heart beat.
Also, serious chess players playing a serious game of chess aren't contemplating dinner, and ar eonly aware of their immediate surrounding.
I have a system that while beating me at chess, it also lets me know if someone comes to the front door. If I wanted to, I could have it be monitoring all the surrounding of my house inside and out.
Oh, and that computer "100% dedicated to chess"* could beat 7,236,081,200 humans. so..yeah better then humans.
*it actually does a few other things as well, but those are low level computer stuff I would expect you to understand.