Self driving seems to be all about shifting the goalposts. It's all about being better than a human until you point out a flaw in this sensor or that, then it becomes about being "at least as good as" a human.
You're saying no one who listens to music other than in their house ever cares about sound quality, simply based on the fact that mobile sound is not the *best* sound available? Hm.
Soon most people who care about sound quality at even a basic level will have to go to stand alone music players since phones are losing headphone jacks.
I had a Palm IIIxe and loved it, but it of course got outdated. I bought an iPod hoping that smartphones would be the next generation, but have yet to find any app that can function across all my devices without going to the cloud, so I mostly use my smartphone as a cellphone and mp3 player.
There are two different things, valuing privacy and valuing ownership. I think people are starting to come around to privacy, but now they lack alternatives.
If I was an owner of a business there is no way in heck that I would want to belong to a 'scheduling service' that results in a computerized voice calling my employees constantly. What a time waster for the person taking calls.
Normally I'm all about the big bad corporation but quite frankly, it's possible that the material from the women just wasn't all that compelling or revolutionary enough to be in an hour long news show.
I just wish the self-driving advocates would decide whether we want it to be better than a human or not. So many "but a human does it too" comments are way off base. In self driving you have the opportunity to be better than a human, why would you not take every opportunity to eliminate every flaw?
If there is some obscure study that sheds light on what these other large studies are getting wrong, by all means, I expect that scientist to raise a bloody fuss, come to terms with the community, and change the common opinion. Until they do their duty, I have no time for crackpots with degrees.
The old adage if you think your application is fool proof, set a fool in front of it and they will prove you wrong.
If that's true then automated cars shouldn't be at the public testing point yet. They will need to be as reliable as airplanes, doing things on their own more complex than an airplane. And look at all the rigorous testing and oversight that goes into that. A whole government department with regulations and many eyes to watch over a single plane's movement. That's what we will need from self driving cars.
The pedestrian was not a fast moving "surprise". The pedestrian was crossing at a highly visible spot and was not seen and the pedestrian always gets the right of way. Pedestrian had a right to assume the car would see them.
Right, but if I want to drive an EV through that land I still need charging stations every 200 miles or so, on every highway. There are also ice roads only open in winter to consider. the longest one in Canada is 467m/752km.
You totally miss the point. It's not the consumer's problem that the non-cloud one would cost too much and that the cloud one is "a bargain" by comparison. If consumers don't feel comfortable buying it, then it isn't a bargain in a commercial sense.
I compare this to the invention of the washing machine. Back when it was a manual roller, it was your fault if it mangled your clothes. But if you're clothes get mangled in an automatic machine and maintenance isn't a factor, then the responsibility is the manufacturer. The current laws are set up to blame the person who presses the button on the washing machine because the job once used to be manual.
Slashdot Mirror
But the $35K Tesla is now available!
Self driving seems to be all about shifting the goalposts. It's all about being better than a human until you point out a flaw in this sensor or that, then it becomes about being "at least as good as" a human.
So then what happens if he runs out the door? If there is no debt than he hasen't stolen anything.
Is this where EVs start to make sense on a 600+ KM ice road or mountain pass in Canada?
So then how does it work with my gas can??
Why is this even up to individual states? This is federal currency.
I care about how productive my employees are. A phone call is a terribly time consuming way of communication.
You're saying no one who listens to music other than in their house ever cares about sound quality, simply based on the fact that mobile sound is not the *best* sound available? Hm.
Soon most people who care about sound quality at even a basic level will have to go to stand alone music players since phones are losing headphone jacks.
I had a Palm IIIxe and loved it, but it of course got outdated. I bought an iPod hoping that smartphones would be the next generation, but have yet to find any app that can function across all my devices without going to the cloud, so I mostly use my smartphone as a cellphone and mp3 player.
There are two different things, valuing privacy and valuing ownership. I think people are starting to come around to privacy, but now they lack alternatives.
I think the fact that 'Google' is the first word in the headline has more to do with it.
If I was an owner of a business there is no way in heck that I would want to belong to a 'scheduling service' that results in a computerized voice calling my employees constantly. What a time waster for the person taking calls.
Normally I'm all about the big bad corporation but quite frankly, it's possible that the material from the women just wasn't all that compelling or revolutionary enough to be in an hour long news show.
You really shouldn't refer to women as ugly and repulsive, that's sexist.
I just wish the self-driving advocates would decide whether we want it to be better than a human or not. So many "but a human does it too" comments are way off base. In self driving you have the opportunity to be better than a human, why would you not take every opportunity to eliminate every flaw?
If there is some obscure study that sheds light on what these other large studies are getting wrong, by all means, I expect that scientist to raise a bloody fuss, come to terms with the community, and change the common opinion. Until they do their duty, I have no time for crackpots with degrees.
Will this convince anyone? It seems anti-vaxxers have already decided to make up their mind independent of scientific studies.
The old adage if you think your application is fool proof, set a fool in front of it and they will prove you wrong.
If that's true then automated cars shouldn't be at the public testing point yet. They will need to be as reliable as airplanes, doing things on their own more complex than an airplane. And look at all the rigorous testing and oversight that goes into that. A whole government department with regulations and many eyes to watch over a single plane's movement. That's what we will need from self driving cars.
The pedestrian was not a fast moving "surprise". The pedestrian was crossing at a highly visible spot and was not seen and the pedestrian always gets the right of way. Pedestrian had a right to assume the car would see them.
This will bode well for Skynet.
Right, but if I want to drive an EV through that land I still need charging stations every 200 miles or so, on every highway. There are also ice roads only open in winter to consider. the longest one in Canada is 467m/752km.
You totally miss the point. It's not the consumer's problem that the non-cloud one would cost too much and that the cloud one is "a bargain" by comparison. If consumers don't feel comfortable buying it, then it isn't a bargain in a commercial sense.
your* for the spelling police
I compare this to the invention of the washing machine. Back when it was a manual roller, it was your fault if it mangled your clothes. But if you're clothes get mangled in an automatic machine and maintenance isn't a factor, then the responsibility is the manufacturer. The current laws are set up to blame the person who presses the button on the washing machine because the job once used to be manual.
America, the land of the free..... to commit crimes and profit.