I'd take an X% chance of being in an accident when I drive than an X%-Y chance when the car drives. Because I am in control and can subtract my own Y by making appropriate decisions.
If you want me to get into a car and let it drive itself, it would have to have accident rates comparable to airline accident rates.
A. occur anytime soon or B. drive down car ownership,
is a pipe dream.
Billions have been poured into flight control systems and they all still require someone to sit behind the yoke and monitor them. While they do have an extra dimension, they also don't have to deal with as many variables, crappy roads, detours, crappy drivers to avoid, nonsensical roads, etc.
Before driverless cars are ubiquitous, nothing less than a complete overhaul of the roads to simplify routes, clearly mark boundaries, simplify interchanges, and reduce to a minimum possible conflicts, will be necessary. Billions and billions of infrastructure overhaul.
Anyone who has ever cycled the slide on a semi auto can tell you that it's pretty much beyond a "child's" capability.
A teen, yes, but some toddler or six year old, no. So when you talk "child proofing" you are talking the same thing as covers on the outlets, a fence around the pool and gates across the stairs.
So, an empty chamber and storing above 5 feet high is about as child proof as you need for a semi.
I have a feeling that sometime in the future, language like his will be found to be invalid.
It's about the same as selling a car and claiming that you can't be held liable if there is something wrong with it. If you are paid money for code your wrote to perform a function, and it fucks up and wipes out something else, it should be on you. sure, it's a bit more complicated than a car, but the principle should be the same.
jammed in with a horde of unwashed masses, unable to stop when and where I want.
So you never fly eh?
But I digress.
I still think there is an opening for rail here. First, avoid the insanity that are airports. Second, it's safer as one device can't destroy an entire train full of people. Third, you could load your car on the train and then use it at your destination.
Key is to not force the service to stop at every podunk town between destinations. Just stick with Major Cities.
I'd much rather drive my car into the train and then spend two days traveling cross country in a nice comfy observation car, then drive off at my destination, even if I had to end up driving several hours more to reach the ultimate destination.
I suspect the economics would work. Just need someone/some company to champion it and over come the inertia of he current rail industry.
...that if they require this, it is edging towards some kind of implicit acceptance of responsibility for that code.
If I use code from a forum, offered freely, and burn down my stuff, it's on me. If I use code from a paid source and it burns down my stuff, it's on them. If I use code from a forum, but I have to attribute that code in mine, then ???
I would dismiss that conclusion right off the bat. But you give some lawyers even the slightest rationale, it's off to the courts you go.
What part of "Prior Restraint" do they not understand?
That said, we do not want to become like other parts of the world where people with grievous injuries are filmed and displayed like some kind of Tarantino movie.
But you can't pass a law saying you can't be a dick.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a matter of Control.
I'd take an X% chance of being in an accident when I drive than an X%-Y chance when the car drives. Because I am in control and can subtract my own Y by making appropriate decisions.
If you want me to get into a car and let it drive itself, it would have to have accident rates comparable to airline accident rates.
The idea that "self driving cars" will
A. occur anytime soon or
B. drive down car ownership,
is a pipe dream.
Billions have been poured into flight control systems and they all still require someone to sit behind the yoke and monitor them. While they do have an extra dimension, they also don't have to deal with as many variables, crappy roads, detours, crappy drivers to avoid, nonsensical roads, etc.
Before driverless cars are ubiquitous, nothing less than a complete overhaul of the roads to simplify routes, clearly mark boundaries, simplify interchanges, and reduce to a minimum possible conflicts, will be necessary. Billions and billions of infrastructure overhaul.
". I don't even own a gun"
Yes, that much is apparent.
Well...if I could have explosive, incendiary and armor piercing rounds...I might buy one.
Anyone who has ever cycled the slide on a semi auto can tell you that it's pretty much beyond a "child's" capability.
A teen, yes, but some toddler or six year old, no. So when you talk "child proofing" you are talking the same thing as covers on the outlets, a fence around the pool and gates across the stairs.
So, an empty chamber and storing above 5 feet high is about as child proof as you need for a semi.
And the "survey"? Web based.
OK, sure.
No different than Chicago or DC.
Ha!
Which fucking way will he point when he prays?
Didn't some group just recently lose their shit about the amount of water used to grow vegetables in CA?
Accused the farmers of some kind of environmental crimes or something. Where do these Vegans think their veggies will come from?
Vegans taste like fish, or chicken?
Seems to me that if they are hitting targets in the U.S., the Navy is pretty much out of the picture.
Don't forget the mandatory safety training class.
Odds are, someone on Slashdot will respond,"why not?"
So...Microsoft is the same as a sleazy used car dealer? :-)
I have a feeling that sometime in the future, language like his will be found to be invalid.
It's about the same as selling a car and claiming that you can't be held liable if there is something wrong with it. If you are paid money for code your wrote to perform a function, and it fucks up and wipes out something else, it should be on you. sure, it's a bit more complicated than a car, but the principle should be the same.
There will always be people to take what they have and run with it.
There will always be people who look at what they have and blame someone else.
Whether it's a street vendor selling trinkets or food, or a Steve Job and Woz, someone will move ahead while others will simply mark time.
jammed in with a horde of unwashed masses, unable to stop when and where I want.
So you never fly eh?
But I digress.
I still think there is an opening for rail here.
First, avoid the insanity that are airports.
Second, it's safer as one device can't destroy an entire train full of people.
Third, you could load your car on the train and then use it at your destination.
Key is to not force the service to stop at every podunk town between destinations. Just stick with Major Cities.
I'd much rather drive my car into the train and then spend two days traveling cross country in a nice comfy observation car, then drive off at my destination, even if I had to end up driving several hours more to reach the ultimate destination.
I suspect the economics would work. Just need someone/some company to champion it and over come the inertia of he current rail industry.
...that if they require this, it is edging towards some kind of implicit acceptance of responsibility for that code.
If I use code from a forum, offered freely, and burn down my stuff, it's on me.
If I use code from a paid source and it burns down my stuff, it's on them.
If I use code from a forum, but I have to attribute that code in mine, then ???
I would dismiss that conclusion right off the bat. But you give some lawyers even the slightest rationale, it's off to the courts you go.
Everything is going just fine for Whole Foods and they need something to fuck things up.
I would think a Board member would tell them that this opens a can of worms and will ultimately distract from the core business.
Sounds like the work of Cyberdyne Systems/
Reddit?
I am proud to say I've never browsed Reddit. I guess it's one of the more seedy parts of the internet?
Holy Fuck.
What part of "Prior Restraint" do they not understand?
That said, we do not want to become like other parts of the world where people with grievous injuries are filmed and displayed like some kind of Tarantino movie.
But you can't pass a law saying you can't be a dick.
I suspect the Environmentalists will be having none of this.
If I recall, Edison called or DC, while Tesla advocated AC.
Edison even electrocuted a couple of Elephants to demonstrate how dangerous AC could be.
He still lost the battle.
The old laws are pretty much local laws. So a Federal law allowing it will supersede the local laws.
Six mile bike ride for me.
When I took the bus, the stop was 1/4 mile away, around three blocks. i was out of sight after the first turn. That was grade school.