Having a company hire someone solely based on race is a terrible way to fight discrimination, in fact it is counterproductive because not you have many workers with resentment towards people who have been perceived to receive a 'free ride'. The only way to really tackle it is to look at the societal forces that prevent a person from being as tell trained or applicable for a job due to their background. I have no doubt that some companies turn away people based on race and this should be stopped. But if a company only has 1% of minority applications they shouldn't be expected to tip the scales. Once that happens it is too late. Sadly, I fear things are going the other way. Decent job opportunities seem to be fewer and far between for everyone, and this will only exacerbate the situation.
I really don't understand why people keep saying this. Sdcs are highly restricted in how they can drive. It doesn't even compare to what a human does, so there is really no way to know how much safer they are.
But taking a drug and not knowing what the active ingredients are is an example of negligence. You should always know exactly what you are taking. If you combine vicodin and nyquil and overdose, you are not going by the documented use of acetaminophen.
If you own a mac you quickly realize it will always be the platform software works the worst on, especially open source stuff, and even when compared to linux. It gets annoying. Would I blame Apple for any specific software? No, but obviously there is something wrong with their ecosystem that it consistently doesn't get as much developer attention.
If you tax a rich person you are assured that they will still have a house, they will still eat, they will still be mobile and they will have money to enrich themselves and their children to create opportunities for themselves. When you tax a poor person, not so much.
There are documented cases of running red lights, and going down a one way road the wrong way. They are getting into accidents despite being highly limited in speed. Yes in this recent case the human driver was at fault but what remains to be seen is if the uber car even tried to stop or not. It is important to know whether it saw the other car in the split second fashion that it should have.
We allow self driving cars on the road that may kill people and look the other way every time there is an accident, yet nail Microsoft to the wall for making a bad software design choice.
We're not talking about comparing one driver to another. That doesn't matter, the insurance evens it out. We're talking about proving a new technology that may or may not be safe enough to be used on public roads right now.
What are you talking about? That's exactly what the FDA does. There is a very strict clinical trial consisting of many phases before a drug makes it to market, and drugs are routinely followed up all the time. If car companies used a similar approach to testing SDCs we would have nothing to worry about.
Well I know the Uber SDCs don't have perfect driving records. They were running a lot of red lights in California and remember that there are 2-3 humans in each one. There was recently an article on Slashdot that covered the fact that they have to take over very frequently. Google is probably better but recently one was in a right turn lane which was actually a parking lane. It had to vacate the lane because there was a sand bag on the road and it turned into a bus in the next lane. So I'm not sure where you are going with this whole perfect driving record thing. Do they even take them out when its raining?
But you started comparing to *current performance*. So if we are talking current performance you have to take into account the fact that the conditions these cars drive in right now are highly restricted, so it is actually quite bad that they are getting into accidents at all.
You're talking very low risk there. First of all, you can't include situations where the meds are being taken for a diease what would have killed anyway. So yes if SDCs get into an accident 0.000001% of a human that would be fine.
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of Slashdot?
Where I am they treat contractors exactly the same as employees, except they get a bit extra money rather then health benefits.
If I wasn't so discriminated against by lack of mod points I would mod you up. The world isn't fair.
Having a company hire someone solely based on race is a terrible way to fight discrimination, in fact it is counterproductive because not you have many workers with resentment towards people who have been perceived to receive a 'free ride'. The only way to really tackle it is to look at the societal forces that prevent a person from being as tell trained or applicable for a job due to their background. I have no doubt that some companies turn away people based on race and this should be stopped. But if a company only has 1% of minority applications they shouldn't be expected to tip the scales. Once that happens it is too late. Sadly, I fear things are going the other way. Decent job opportunities seem to be fewer and far between for everyone, and this will only exacerbate the situation.
I'd like to be on the female side of the wall please. You know, so I can help figure out what's going on.
It depends. How much bitcoin is your cat worth to you?
The constant updates drove me insane! That's definitely what killed Adobe Flash, I mean it's just like Java that way!
The dude couldn't pass a law with full control of the house. If that was strategy it was the worst play ever.
I really don't understand why people keep saying this. Sdcs are highly restricted in how they can drive. It doesn't even compare to what a human does, so there is really no way to know how much safer they are.
But taking a drug and not knowing what the active ingredients are is an example of negligence. You should always know exactly what you are taking. If you combine vicodin and nyquil and overdose, you are not going by the documented use of acetaminophen.
If you own a mac you quickly realize it will always be the platform software works the worst on, especially open source stuff, and even when compared to linux. It gets annoying. Would I blame Apple for any specific software? No, but obviously there is something wrong with their ecosystem that it consistently doesn't get as much developer attention.
Gee I sure hope this isn't regulated either!
If you tax a rich person you are assured that they will still have a house, they will still eat, they will still be mobile and they will have money to enrich themselves and their children to create opportunities for themselves. When you tax a poor person, not so much.
Going after pirates is like starting another drug war, but against something that doesn't really destroy lives or kill anyone.
Sure let's find out. Just not by exposing the public.
Except one is a proven technology where the risks are well known, and the other is a new technology with risks totally unknown.
There are documented cases of running red lights, and going down a one way road the wrong way. They are getting into accidents despite being highly limited in speed. Yes in this recent case the human driver was at fault but what remains to be seen is if the uber car even tried to stop or not. It is important to know whether it saw the other car in the split second fashion that it should have.
They're being forced to use the same streets as them though.
We allow self driving cars on the road that may kill people and look the other way every time there is an accident, yet nail Microsoft to the wall for making a bad software design choice.
We're not talking about comparing one driver to another. That doesn't matter, the insurance evens it out. We're talking about proving a new technology that may or may not be safe enough to be used on public roads right now.
What are you talking about? That's exactly what the FDA does. There is a very strict clinical trial consisting of many phases before a drug makes it to market, and drugs are routinely followed up all the time. If car companies used a similar approach to testing SDCs we would have nothing to worry about.
Well I know the Uber SDCs don't have perfect driving records. They were running a lot of red lights in California and remember that there are 2-3 humans in each one. There was recently an article on Slashdot that covered the fact that they have to take over very frequently. Google is probably better but recently one was in a right turn lane which was actually a parking lane. It had to vacate the lane because there was a sand bag on the road and it turned into a bus in the next lane. So I'm not sure where you are going with this whole perfect driving record thing. Do they even take them out when its raining?
But you started comparing to *current performance*. So if we are talking current performance you have to take into account the fact that the conditions these cars drive in right now are highly restricted, so it is actually quite bad that they are getting into accidents at all.
You're talking very low risk there. First of all, you can't include situations where the meds are being taken for a diease what would have killed anyway. So yes if SDCs get into an accident 0.000001% of a human that would be fine.
In fact now that I think about it, it is fairly concerning that they got into such an accident despite their restrictions.