The question is, will self driving be reliable enough for them? What will happen when it turns the wrong way down a one way street and pulls over and turns off?
I know people 40+ that say they will never trust them. One person I know has adaptive cruise control in their car and won't use it.
Also, I think it depends a lot on whether they get you to your destination 99.999% of the time, or tend to stop by the side of the road confused about something.
I won't let my kids use self driving cars until they are at least twice as safe as a human driver in any condition including ice-rutted roads in blowing snow. I don't think that's going to happen in my lifetime. Maybe not theirs.
Normal job growth is only absorbing job losses if job growth *increases* by the amount of people losing their jobs beyond what it is today. If job growth stays around the same, then there is just a greater number of people looking for the same number of jobs and nothing is being absorbed.
What is the point of having a society that produces more and more things if the bulk of that society falls behind in terms of quality of living. I think there is a general assumption that a society with high productivity will be generally wealthy, but we have already seen that it won't be true as long as the wealthy are given first pick over the spoils.
You are assuming, almost certainly incorrectly, that the replaced workers will not be able to find jobs elsewhere.
Until you can point to the cornucopia of jobs that will suddenly open up in 2018 to accommodate 200,000 displaced fast food workers, it's more than an assumption.
Because I bought them a phone so they would have a phone to contact me. It was a gift and I want them to enjoy it as a full-fledged smart device when they're allowed, but I'd like it still be a phone when they're not.
I was thinking more along of the lines of reducing speed of driving when you are running out of gas to make it to the next gas station, because cars are more fuel efficient at a slower speed.
We're not talking about what apple 'will do'. Who cares what they do, now that they got their hand caught in the cookie jar. Anyway, if a user can't answer the simple question, they certainly won't be able to correctly interpret battery statistics.
You don't have to be an expert to say 'Allow my phone to reduce speed to extend battery life' or 'Always run at full speed'. You could even add a car analogy.
A longer warranty will not motivate them to make the device less fragile. If anything, the device will become more fragile because if people break their phones for non-warranty reasons, Apple won't have to support them longer.
The problem with Apple is that they always feel they should make these decisions FOR people instead of telling them it is happening and letting them make the choice.
They aren't being called addictive because kids use them a lot. They are addictive because kids can't stop using them once they start. My kids can pause a TV show or movie and walk away, but once they are on their phones it is almost impossible to divert their attention.
Clearly you don't have teenagers. That's pretty much the definition of one. Nor are you fully appreciating how addicted these kids become to their phones or what addiction really means.
I'm still not clear on why I have to go to Amazon for this and not the phone's vendor. Using a proprietary app to lock down a child's device could be like robbing peter to pay paul; sure they won't go to Instagram any more but they will see 'Amazon' advertising all over the place.
If this is something I can install on my kid's phone that will block their access to Instagram when I want it blocked and they don't have to see anything 'Amazon' I will use it. When I look at the link for this on Amazon it seems like a full Amazon store and that's not what I want either.
Slashdot Mirror
The question is, will self driving be reliable enough for them? What will happen when it turns the wrong way down a one way street and pulls over and turns off?
Why would anyone buy a house when they can just rent one??
I know people 40+ that say they will never trust them. One person I know has adaptive cruise control in their car and won't use it.
Also, I think it depends a lot on whether they get you to your destination 99.999% of the time, or tend to stop by the side of the road confused about something.
I won't let my kids use self driving cars until they are at least twice as safe as a human driver in any condition including ice-rutted roads in blowing snow. I don't think that's going to happen in my lifetime. Maybe not theirs.
Sure, that person is 'safe' because it will always be someone else trying to get around them.
Normal job growth is only absorbing job losses if job growth *increases* by the amount of people losing their jobs beyond what it is today. If job growth stays around the same, then there is just a greater number of people looking for the same number of jobs and nothing is being absorbed.
Excuse me?? "Let's put in machines as soon as they are cheaper than humans" is thinking creatively?
What is the point of having a society that produces more and more things if the bulk of that society falls behind in terms of quality of living. I think there is a general assumption that a society with high productivity will be generally wealthy, but we have already seen that it won't be true as long as the wealthy are given first pick over the spoils.
Oh don't worry, the rich will maintain the places they want to go. They simply won't go to the places where they can see the repercussions.
Funny how when the people at the bottom make more, that has to filter up. But when the people at the top make more, it never filters down.
Productivity is pointless if it's not rewarding the society for being productive.
You are assuming, almost certainly incorrectly, that the replaced workers will not be able to find jobs elsewhere.
Until you can point to the cornucopia of jobs that will suddenly open up in 2018 to accommodate 200,000 displaced fast food workers, it's more than an assumption.
Because I bought them a phone so they would have a phone to contact me. It was a gift and I want them to enjoy it as a full-fledged smart device when they're allowed, but I'd like it still be a phone when they're not.
I was thinking more along of the lines of reducing speed of driving when you are running out of gas to make it to the next gas station, because cars are more fuel efficient at a slower speed.
We're not talking about what apple 'will do'. Who cares what they do, now that they got their hand caught in the cookie jar. Anyway, if a user can't answer the simple question, they certainly won't be able to correctly interpret battery statistics.
You don't have to be an expert to say 'Allow my phone to reduce speed to extend battery life' or 'Always run at full speed'. You could even add a car analogy.
Vantablack has already been invented, move on!
A longer warranty will not motivate them to make the device less fragile. If anything, the device will become more fragile because if people break their phones for non-warranty reasons, Apple won't have to support them longer.
The problem with Apple is that they always feel they should make these decisions FOR people instead of telling them it is happening and letting them make the choice.
Another win for consumer choice! Thanks capitalism!
So basically what you're saying is, make my kid live like it's 1998.
They aren't being called addictive because kids use them a lot. They are addictive because kids can't stop using them once they start. My kids can pause a TV show or movie and walk away, but once they are on their phones it is almost impossible to divert their attention.
Clearly you don't have teenagers. That's pretty much the definition of one. Nor are you fully appreciating how addicted these kids become to their phones or what addiction really means.
I just want to be able to pick what apps I limit, by individual app. It really isn't that complicated.
I'm still not clear on why I have to go to Amazon for this and not the phone's vendor. Using a proprietary app to lock down a child's device could be like robbing peter to pay paul; sure they won't go to Instagram any more but they will see 'Amazon' advertising all over the place.
If this is something I can install on my kid's phone that will block their access to Instagram when I want it blocked and they don't have to see anything 'Amazon' I will use it. When I look at the link for this on Amazon it seems like a full Amazon store and that's not what I want either.