I actually like watching Dr. Michio Kaku on the science channel's SCI-Q. He seems to take abstract topics (Quantum Mechanics, String Theory) or stuff out of science-fiction (like time travel) and answer them in a easy to understand (but not Sesame Street) level. Here's 10 example questions from the show's website: http://science.discovery.com/questions/michio-kaku/michio-kaku.html
Ok, so let's say you built one of these monsters. Or you rolled your own with linux and a bunch of drives.... How would a home user, back this up? They've got every picture/movie/mp3/resume/recipe etc.. that they've ever owned on it.
Blu-Ray DVD? Those have a capacity of 50GB
An old LTO-3 drive from eBay. They have a native (no compression) of about 400GB. So you'd still need 4-5tapes for all your data. Though this will cost you over a grand. Plus you'll need to buy a LVD external SCSI adapter.
Online/internet backup? Backup and restore times would be brutal.
You have to imagine if these computers are all infected with this one trojan, they are probably infected with god only knows how much other spyware, malware, backdoors, and spambots. This might just be a GOOD thing; when my friends and family wake up to a completely wiped drive, it might be the thing that drives my 89yr old grandmother to read up on computer security a little bit, perhaps switch to a more secure browser, buy a router with a hardware firewall, etc. Not to mention, it will also wipe out all of their pictures, tax returns, email and other important documents.
There fixed that for you.
Why don't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer, more fuel efficient car.
When I was growing up not only did we have rotary phones and then touch tone phones, but there was no such thing as "speed dial", so you ended up memorizing all of the phone numbers that you needed to regularly use such as close friends and family. However, now that I have "Grandma" in the phone's memory, I never actually see her phone number.
A lot of people here have assumed you're a coder. However, without specifying what you do, or the type/size of company that you're at this can be a tough answer to accurately provide. Either way, if you want to stay technical, then I would suggest increasing your sphere of influence. Now if you enjoy banging away at the keyboard all day, there's not much in the areas of expansion for you. But let's say that you want more influence than just some aspect of a product.
Can you move from a design/task based position into a more architecture based role? I know plenty of engineers that are very technical, but have evolved their roles into a architectural position and leave the coding/designing/layout to their lieutenants. I'm at a midsize IT consulting company and while I used to handle any size engagement, I now have a team of 12 engineers in which the junior consultants handle the easy stuff, while I handle the larger datacenter-wide architectures. As they junior engineers can easily handle the "what vlan # should the customer use, or which switchports layout strategy should be used..."
My position is more of a 'hybrid' between the two that you have described. I'm more like a captain or a player/coach than a manager. I don't handle raises/promotions/reviews or the like, but I handle the training programs, lab budgeting and setting the technical roadmap for the team. I do have to assist the pre-sales efforts, but it's still technical as my role is one of convincing the customer of our value as well as the soundness of the design/architecture that has been put forth before them.
This role isn't officially in our job matrix, but I too wasn't 100% sure about going into management or remaining in the trenches.
This is no different than cable TV. I pay x dollars a month just to watch via cable. But then I still get advertisements thrown in. I get ads between "scenes", I get ads that are product placements, and then, imho the worst are those that the channel overlays some animation in the corner.
So changing "Bob goes into his local restaurant for a greasy cheeseburger" to "Bob goes into TGIFridays for their Super Texan Bacon Burger" is only one step. Most of the books I own have blank margins. Why not put a few ads in there? At the end of a chapter, if the chapter ends with a partial page, why not just put a 1/2 page ad there? I'd love to see, "STIHL Chainsaws present, Chapter 6 in Stephen King's new thriller..."
My phonebook has a section in the middle with coupons, why not inject a few pages of coupons into the next Harry Potter book? I'm sure all the teenagers reading it could benefit from the acne cream ads.
I always thought that most people today that read Stephen King's Christine had no idea what a 1958 Plymouth Fury looked like. So maybe they should update it to be a 2008 Toyota Prius. Now while the Prius doesn't evoke fear due to it's toothy chrome grille or tension with it's low rumbling demon-like engine. I'm sure someone would be scared of being sneaked up on by a hybrid.
A few years back when the macbook pro (core duo) came out, people complained that the bottom got (and still does) get too hot to use it when it's on your lap. We complained "it's a laptop, you should be able to use it on your lap!" And Apple's response was along the lines of, "you should be using it on a desk or table..."
I'm waiting for apple to come back to this and say, "Yeah it's a phone, but you shouldn't be holding it up to your head, you should be using a bluetooth headset or speakerphone."
Additionally, instant messaging. Why should I pick a platform/protocol/client that none of my friends or family use? I guess I could spend plenty of time getting them to switch, however, then they in turn have to convince their friends/family to convert as well.
Google is great at search, but beyond that.. not that much else attracts me to it from an application point of view. Someone once said, "Google is a method of getting somewhere, Yahoo is a destination."
When will websites be responsible for the content of their ads? I'm sure that most of these sites have no idea what ad at any one time will appear in a given box.
The average server is going to be much more I/O intensive than CPU intensive unless you do cluster computing or render a lot of stuff.
As someone who designs and deploys large storage environments for a living, I call BS. While the current generation of HBAs are 8Gb FibreChannel, I would say that the "average server" (as you put it) could happily live on a 1Gb HBA. Recall that almost all servers, or atleast those you care about, have DUAL HBA connections to their respective storage. So that's actually 2Gb of storage connectivity. Sure there are servers which have multiple HBAs, or use a higher utilization of the HBAs, such as database servers or backup/media servers. Most servers today are deployed with dual 4Gb HBAs as the 8Gb SFPs/optics are still quite pricey, and you cannot, in all seriousness, purchase 1 or 2Gb FC HBAs.
Even as we deploy VMware based servers, the VMware servers themselves tend to be more memory/cpu strapped than IO.
It would be very rare, or almost impossible for a server to be driving linerate HBAs, with still plenty of headroom left in the CPU. Even basic test tools like IOmeter require significant CPU usage to drive an HBA to capacity. And that is when it's writing/reading all zeros. It's doesn't actually need to do anything with the data. As would be the case if a database server was requesting 2Gb/s from a disk array, and then had to join/sort/add/whatever the tables retrieved.
It would seem that we've already greatly reduced the amount of cattle in the United States. From one estimate, there could have been upwards of 200million bison/buffalo: http://www.emporia.edu/cgps/tales/BISON.htm
I actually love seeing quotes like, "If every US dairy farmer reduced emissions by 12 per cent it would be equal to about half a million cars being taken off the road." Because it makes it seem like it would be easier to genetically breed "low emission cows" then it would be to take cars off the road. It almost implies that if we reduced enough greenhouse gasses from non-automotive sources we could go back to black smog belching cars/trucks/SUVs.
I'm of the camp that doesn't want ANY new DVD player in the house. I was one of those that bought DVDs and now probably have 50 DVDs that I haven't watched in atleast a year. However, I probably watch 1-2 HD On Demand movies a month. I know the audio/video quality isn't as good as a bluray dvd, however, I would take me almost four years> to recoup the cost of the player ALONE (when the movie's are $5 from comcast).
I'd like to know what percentage of HD movies are watched 'on demand' vs. physical media.
At work I've got an ergonomic keyboard, an ergonomic trackball, a great chair etc... However, when I travel, it's back to typing on the laptop's keyboard, and using the trackpad. While packing a trackball isn't a problem, packing an ergonomic keyboard isn't exactly a piece of cake. Coupled that with trying to type at a hotel desk using a hotel chair, neither which are ergonomic, I'm asking for wrist issues...
I bought a used car because I can buy twice the car (performance/safety/features) for half the price of the current model. Not because of CO2 emissions or the price of fuel or being "Green". I wanted a BMW M3 and couldn't afford the current model, but could afford one with 45k miles on it.
You've obviously never tried to convince someone that they should buy a used car. The most common responses I've heard: "if the car was still good, the previous owner would still be driving it." or "I don't want someone else's trash." or "Why don't you wear used clothes?" "The technology/fuel efficiency/safety/whatever in this years model is better than the previous year...."
Doesn't matter if the car has 20k miles on it and a manufacturers warranty good for up to 75k miles.
This generally doesn't equate to "as much fuel as you can use." If you read the fine print on these type of statements they often mean "1 per." When I was a kid I won a "years supply of mac n cheese." This turned out to be a coupon book with 12 coupons in it which could be used one per month. I believe Chik-fil-a did the same thing with their 'years supply' of sandwiches. They just provided 52 coupons for one sandwich per week.
So are you advocating that you should only have to pay for a movie if you like it?
If you don't want to find out if a game sucks by buying it, then wait for someone else to buy it, read their review(s) and then buy it based upon that. What gives you the privilege or right to determine that you should have the option to pay for something. Honestly, if you (or someone you are with in the case of movie/game rentals) doesn't want to pay for the game/movie then you have no right to be able to watch it.
While I'm not a fan of rewarding crap products, you should do this by not buying them. Not by not buying them but using them anyhow. How is this any different from you walking into a supermarket and saying, "this steak isn't worth $12, I'm going to shoplift it and eat it anyhow."
How many would have bought the movie/game if you could NOT download it? I know of plenty of people that download games/movies because they don't believe they are worth it to buy them. How many people avoid going to the movie in the theater because "I'd rather download it for FREE than spend $20 to see it in the movies".
So if Terminator 4 was downloaded 1million times in the US, one could say that it cost the $18million ($18 for the DVD) plus the government $1,260,000 in taxes (assuming 7% taxes).
$1.26m buys a lot of textbooks for schools.
The people that do the most complaining about this ("I should have it for free, let someone else pay for it!") are those that don't have any Intellectual Property that they would like to profit from.
'The Internet does not forget, does not forgive and cannot be stopped. Ever.'
From the movie..
That Terminator is out there. It can't be bargained with, it can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear and it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.
What's that old, but very common, expression? You get what you pay for.
Is a BMW/Benz 5x better than a Honda Civic? It may be a better performance vehicle, but more reliable? Not really. I've got 200k mi on my '97, and while it's reliable it's pricey. How about a Land Rover? Definitely not, yet they are easily twice as expensive as any other SUV.
People commonly associate price with quality. If you go into a store to buy something, and X is $2 while Y is $4, most people will buy the $4 because they assume "There's gotta be something about Y to justify the $2 increase in price.
The worst price? FREE. Why? Because psychologically when someone sees something that is FREE, they assume that it has no value. Have a yard sale? Don't mark anything FREE, otherwise people will look at it and assume it's junk. Would you "buy" FREE food from the supermarket? Doubt it, you'd probably think "there's gotta be something wrong with it."
Bottom line: without doing any research people look at two objects/services of different prices and instinctively think that the higher priced object can justify it's higher price.
Yes I'm arguing that some bureaucrat should be able to limit the speed on your vehicle. They already do. Ever see those signs on the side of the road? You know, the ones that say "SPEED LIMIT 55mph". Sure it's voluntary, but if you don't follow the sign, it is enforced by a nice police offer pulling your ass over for going "as fast as I feel like it." Have I ever driven 135mph on the streets? no Do I see a need to? no. So if they limited my car down to 85mph, I wouldn't care. I don't need to prove I'm Fast and Furious on public streets.
I see no reason why motorcycles should be allowed to go 190mph either. You want a "track car" go out and build (from scratch or modify) yourself an Audi that is track only. I've done more than my share of racing at NASA (http://www.nasaproracing.com/ events and there are more than enough cars which are not street legal. I also doubt less than 1% of the vehicles on the road will ever end up on a track. Even those that are considered sports cars.
I wouldn't consider nascar folks pussies, per se, as they've implemented quite a number of safety features in the past. Restrictor plates, popup spoilers on the roof, Hanns devices, safer barriers on the walls. If you want to call them pussies, then why don't you compare your Audi with it's dozen airbags, traction control and top speed of 135mph to their cars. How often are you on your track going "three wide" or even topping 100mph? Other than on the back straightaway? Do you draft often? Not at the distances that these "pussies" do.
You probably get paid to sit at a desk all day. They get paid to drive around a track at 180mph with 30 other cars and only inches separating them. You might come home with carpal tunnel syndrome. They might not come home.
I've got no problems with speed limiting vehicles. Some are already here, if you rent a U-Haul truck, there's a governor on the engine that won't let you above 65mph. It doesn't kill the engine, but the truck just doesn't accelerate anymore. Why not just put the same thing on cars? Do we really need cars that are able to go 100+ mph? I know what someone will say, "but I need the engine power to accelerate if I need to..." I'm not saying we should nerf the engines, but just limit the max speed of the vehicle but keep all the HP/torque so you can go from 0-60 in 2seconds, but you top out at 85mph.
Btw, NASCAR does this already on some tracks for safety reasons. You don't see any of those cars going 200+ mph. Even though they are completely capable of it.
Most cars already have a limiter, my BMW is computer limited at 135mph. Though, I could spend $50 and get that part of the computer reprogrammed.
The so-called Google Trike, which the company describes "a mechanical masterpiece comprising 3 bicycle wheels...
Mechanical masterpiece? Let's see:
Disc Brakes on the front? Not needed unless you plan on taking this thing in the rain.
Suspension: Yes in the front, but glaringly missing in the rear, which you'd want for stability.
Safety: Didn't see any reflectors on it
Convenience: Not even a water bottle holder. I guess they could hand out a Google Camelbak.
Slashdot Mirror
How can you omit Oracle? The first version was 2.0.
I actually like watching Dr. Michio Kaku on the science channel's SCI-Q. He seems to take abstract topics (Quantum Mechanics, String Theory) or stuff out of science-fiction (like time travel) and answer them in a easy to understand (but not Sesame Street) level. Here's 10 example questions from the show's website: http://science.discovery.com/questions/michio-kaku/michio-kaku.html
Ok, so let's say you built one of these monsters. Or you rolled your own with linux and a bunch of drives.... How would a home user, back this up? They've got every picture/movie/mp3/resume/recipe etc.. that they've ever owned on it.
Anybody got any reasonable ideas?
There fixed that for you.
Why don't you just wish them to total their car so that they can be forced to buy a newer, more fuel efficient car.
When I was growing up not only did we have rotary phones and then touch tone phones, but there was no such thing as "speed dial", so you ended up memorizing all of the phone numbers that you needed to regularly use such as close friends and family. However, now that I have "Grandma" in the phone's memory, I never actually see her phone number.
A lot of people here have assumed you're a coder. However, without specifying what you do, or the type/size of company that you're at this can be a tough answer to accurately provide. Either way, if you want to stay technical, then I would suggest increasing your sphere of influence. Now if you enjoy banging away at the keyboard all day, there's not much in the areas of expansion for you. But let's say that you want more influence than just some aspect of a product.
Can you move from a design/task based position into a more architecture based role? I know plenty of engineers that are very technical, but have evolved their roles into a architectural position and leave the coding/designing/layout to their lieutenants. I'm at a midsize IT consulting company and while I used to handle any size engagement, I now have a team of 12 engineers in which the junior consultants handle the easy stuff, while I handle the larger datacenter-wide architectures. As they junior engineers can easily handle the "what vlan # should the customer use, or which switchports layout strategy should be used..."
My position is more of a 'hybrid' between the two that you have described. I'm more like a captain or a player/coach than a manager. I don't handle raises/promotions/reviews or the like, but I handle the training programs, lab budgeting and setting the technical roadmap for the team. I do have to assist the pre-sales efforts, but it's still technical as my role is one of convincing the customer of our value as well as the soundness of the design/architecture that has been put forth before them.
This role isn't officially in our job matrix, but I too wasn't 100% sure about going into management or remaining in the trenches.
This is no different than cable TV. I pay x dollars a month just to watch via cable. But then I still get advertisements thrown in. I get ads between "scenes", I get ads that are product placements, and then, imho the worst are those that the channel overlays some animation in the corner.
So changing "Bob goes into his local restaurant for a greasy cheeseburger" to "Bob goes into TGIFridays for their Super Texan Bacon Burger" is only one step. Most of the books I own have blank margins. Why not put a few ads in there? At the end of a chapter, if the chapter ends with a partial page, why not just put a 1/2 page ad there? I'd love to see, "STIHL Chainsaws present, Chapter 6 in Stephen King's new thriller..."
My phonebook has a section in the middle with coupons, why not inject a few pages of coupons into the next Harry Potter book? I'm sure all the teenagers reading it could benefit from the acne cream ads.
I always thought that most people today that read Stephen King's Christine had no idea what a 1958 Plymouth Fury looked like. So maybe they should update it to be a 2008 Toyota Prius. Now while the Prius doesn't evoke fear due to it's toothy chrome grille or tension with it's low rumbling demon-like engine. I'm sure someone would be scared of being sneaked up on by a hybrid.
A few years back when the macbook pro (core duo) came out, people complained that the bottom got (and still does) get too hot to use it when it's on your lap. We complained "it's a laptop, you should be able to use it on your lap!" And Apple's response was along the lines of, "you should be using it on a desk or table..."
I'm waiting for apple to come back to this and say, "Yeah it's a phone, but you shouldn't be holding it up to your head, you should be using a bluetooth headset or speakerphone."
I personally like http://finance.yahoo.com/ much better than http://finance.google.com/. The portfolio, quote and chart information is much better with yahoo.
Additionally, instant messaging. Why should I pick a platform/protocol/client that none of my friends or family use? I guess I could spend plenty of time getting them to switch, however, then they in turn have to convince their friends/family to convert as well.
Google is great at search, but beyond that.. not that much else attracts me to it from an application point of view. Someone once said, "Google is a method of getting somewhere, Yahoo is a destination."
When will websites be responsible for the content of their ads? I'm sure that most of these sites have no idea what ad at any one time will appear in a given box.
As someone who designs and deploys large storage environments for a living, I call BS. While the current generation of HBAs are 8Gb FibreChannel, I would say that the "average server" (as you put it) could happily live on a 1Gb HBA. Recall that almost all servers, or atleast those you care about, have DUAL HBA connections to their respective storage. So that's actually 2Gb of storage connectivity. Sure there are servers which have multiple HBAs, or use a higher utilization of the HBAs, such as database servers or backup/media servers. Most servers today are deployed with dual 4Gb HBAs as the 8Gb SFPs/optics are still quite pricey, and you cannot, in all seriousness, purchase 1 or 2Gb FC HBAs.
Even as we deploy VMware based servers, the VMware servers themselves tend to be more memory/cpu strapped than IO.
It would be very rare, or almost impossible for a server to be driving linerate HBAs, with still plenty of headroom left in the CPU. Even basic test tools like IOmeter require significant CPU usage to drive an HBA to capacity. And that is when it's writing/reading all zeros. It's doesn't actually need to do anything with the data. As would be the case if a database server was requesting 2Gb/s from a disk array, and then had to join/sort/add/whatever the tables retrieved.
It would seem that we've already greatly reduced the amount of cattle in the United States. From one estimate, there could have been upwards of 200million bison/buffalo: http://www.emporia.edu/cgps/tales/BISON.htm
Compare this with the 2002 Census of Cattle and Calves in 2002: http://www.nass.usda.gov/research/atlas02/Livestock/Cattle/Cattle%20and%20Calves/Cattle%20and%20Calves%20-%20Inventory.gif
I actually love seeing quotes like, "If every US dairy farmer reduced emissions by 12 per cent it would be equal to about half a million cars being taken off the road." Because it makes it seem like it would be easier to genetically breed "low emission cows" then it would be to take cars off the road. It almost implies that if we reduced enough greenhouse gasses from non-automotive sources we could go back to black smog belching cars/trucks/SUVs.
I'm of the camp that doesn't want ANY new DVD player in the house. I was one of those that bought DVDs and now probably have 50 DVDs that I haven't watched in atleast a year. However, I probably watch 1-2 HD On Demand movies a month. I know the audio/video quality isn't as good as a bluray dvd, however, I would take me almost four years> to recoup the cost of the player ALONE (when the movie's are $5 from comcast).
I'd like to know what percentage of HD movies are watched 'on demand' vs. physical media.
At work I've got an ergonomic keyboard, an ergonomic trackball, a great chair etc... However, when I travel, it's back to typing on the laptop's keyboard, and using the trackpad. While packing a trackball isn't a problem, packing an ergonomic keyboard isn't exactly a piece of cake. Coupled that with trying to type at a hotel desk using a hotel chair, neither which are ergonomic, I'm asking for wrist issues...
Anybody got a solution to this?
I bought a used car because I can buy twice the car (performance/safety/features) for half the price of the current model. Not because of CO2 emissions or the price of fuel or being "Green". I wanted a BMW M3 and couldn't afford the current model, but could afford one with 45k miles on it.
You've obviously never tried to convince someone that they should buy a used car. The most common responses I've heard:
"if the car was still good, the previous owner would still be driving it." or
"I don't want someone else's trash." or
"Why don't you wear used clothes?"
"The technology/fuel efficiency/safety/whatever in this years model is better than the previous year...."
Doesn't matter if the car has 20k miles on it and a manufacturers warranty good for up to 75k miles.
This generally doesn't equate to "as much fuel as you can use." If you read the fine print on these type of statements they often mean "1 per ." When I was a kid I won a "years supply of mac n cheese." This turned out to be a coupon book with 12 coupons in it which could be used one per month. I believe Chik-fil-a did the same thing with their 'years supply' of sandwiches. They just provided 52 coupons for one sandwich per week.
So maybe you'll be allowed one fill-up per month.
So are you advocating that you should only have to pay for a movie if you like it?
If you don't want to find out if a game sucks by buying it, then wait for someone else to buy it, read their review(s) and then buy it based upon that. What gives you the privilege or right to determine that you should have the option to pay for something. Honestly, if you (or someone you are with in the case of movie/game rentals) doesn't want to pay for the game/movie then you have no right to be able to watch it.
While I'm not a fan of rewarding crap products, you should do this by not buying them. Not by not buying them but using them anyhow. How is this any different from you walking into a supermarket and saying, "this steak isn't worth $12, I'm going to shoplift it and eat it anyhow."
How many would have bought the movie/game if you could NOT download it? I know of plenty of people that download games/movies because they don't believe they are worth it to buy them. How many people avoid going to the movie in the theater because "I'd rather download it for FREE than spend $20 to see it in the movies".
So if Terminator 4 was downloaded 1million times in the US, one could say that it cost the $18million ($18 for the DVD) plus the government $1,260,000 in taxes (assuming 7% taxes).
$1.26m buys a lot of textbooks for schools.
The people that do the most complaining about this ("I should have it for free, let someone else pay for it!") are those that don't have any Intellectual Property that they would like to profit from.
Sounds like he just watched The Terminator...
'The Internet does not forget, does not forgive and cannot be stopped. Ever.'
From the movie..
What's that old, but very common, expression? You get what you pay for.
Is a BMW/Benz 5x better than a Honda Civic? It may be a better performance vehicle, but more reliable? Not really. I've got 200k mi on my '97, and while it's reliable it's pricey. How about a Land Rover? Definitely not, yet they are easily twice as expensive as any other SUV.
People commonly associate price with quality. If you go into a store to buy something, and X is $2 while Y is $4, most people will buy the $4 because they assume "There's gotta be something about Y to justify the $2 increase in price.
The worst price? FREE. Why? Because psychologically when someone sees something that is FREE, they assume that it has no value. Have a yard sale? Don't mark anything FREE, otherwise people will look at it and assume it's junk. Would you "buy" FREE food from the supermarket? Doubt it, you'd probably think "there's gotta be something wrong with it."
Bottom line: without doing any research people look at two objects/services of different prices and instinctively think that the higher priced object can justify it's higher price.
Yes I'm arguing that some bureaucrat should be able to limit the speed on your vehicle. They already do. Ever see those signs on the side of the road? You know, the ones that say "SPEED LIMIT 55mph". Sure it's voluntary, but if you don't follow the sign, it is enforced by a nice police offer pulling your ass over for going "as fast as I feel like it." Have I ever driven 135mph on the streets? no Do I see a need to? no. So if they limited my car down to 85mph, I wouldn't care. I don't need to prove I'm Fast and Furious on public streets.
I see no reason why motorcycles should be allowed to go 190mph either. You want a "track car" go out and build (from scratch or modify) yourself an Audi that is track only. I've done more than my share of racing at NASA (http://www.nasaproracing.com/ events and there are more than enough cars which are not street legal. I also doubt less than 1% of the vehicles on the road will ever end up on a track. Even those that are considered sports cars.
I wouldn't consider nascar folks pussies, per se, as they've implemented quite a number of safety features in the past. Restrictor plates, popup spoilers on the roof, Hanns devices, safer barriers on the walls. If you want to call them pussies, then why don't you compare your Audi with it's dozen airbags, traction control and top speed of 135mph to their cars. How often are you on your track going "three wide" or even topping 100mph? Other than on the back straightaway? Do you draft often? Not at the distances that these "pussies" do.
You probably get paid to sit at a desk all day.
They get paid to drive around a track at 180mph with 30 other cars and only inches separating them.
You might come home with carpal tunnel syndrome.
They might not come home.
Pussy.
I've got no problems with speed limiting vehicles. Some are already here, if you rent a U-Haul truck, there's a governor on the engine that won't let you above 65mph. It doesn't kill the engine, but the truck just doesn't accelerate anymore. Why not just put the same thing on cars? Do we really need cars that are able to go 100+ mph? I know what someone will say, "but I need the engine power to accelerate if I need to..." I'm not saying we should nerf the engines, but just limit the max speed of the vehicle but keep all the HP/torque so you can go from 0-60 in 2seconds, but you top out at 85mph.
Btw, NASCAR does this already on some tracks for safety reasons. You don't see any of those cars going 200+ mph. Even though they are completely capable of it.
Most cars already have a limiter, my BMW is computer limited at 135mph. Though, I could spend $50 and get that part of the computer reprogrammed.
Why is it ok in the public eye for google to do this, but when the gov't does this it's BigBrother and 1984 all over again?
Mechanical masterpiece? Let's see:
Disc Brakes on the front? Not needed unless you plan on taking this thing in the rain.
Suspension: Yes in the front, but glaringly missing in the rear, which you'd want for stability.
Safety: Didn't see any reflectors on it
Convenience: Not even a water bottle holder. I guess they could hand out a Google Camelbak.
Obviously you haven't tried to use a smartcar to haul kids around.