My four year old iPod Touch still works fine with iOS 5.
My four year old iPhone 3GS still works fine with iOS 6.
I fully expect my one year old iPhone 5 to work with every version of iOS for AT LEAST the next three years.
I can't see how you can compare that the the typical Android users experience of getting maybe one major upgrade a year or two after release or describe it as Apple abandoning the platform.
Apple's scheme is sufficient. An iOS device is of pretty limited functionality if you cannot update it ever from Apple. And once it is locked that is what you have regardless of your carrier does with the IMEI.
In theory thieves could root them, but the market value for that type of stolen phone will be much lower.
Its called disruption. Autonomous vehicles will be fought tooth and nail by more than a couple of entrenched interests fighting to keep the jobs or industry alive.
There will be (for example) more than one jurisdiction where the unions manage to get laws passed to require drivers in (for example) mass transit applications to "ensure public safety" but in reality to ensure that the unions won't shut things down with strikes.
In the day of 10 cent video cameras you don't think the average autonomous cab won't have about a dozen cameras recording everything and if necessary causing damage charges against your credit card (of felony charges being laid before you even have arrived at your destination?)
I'll believe it when they can drive in Boston traffic during rush hour with crowded streets, crowded highways at 65mph, one-way streets, jaywalkers, construction, snow, sleet, ice, short on/off ramps, non-standard intersections, traffic circles, etc. I've driven in San Francisco and it's a Sunday drive compared to Boston and New York.
Why are you imposing a higher burden on autonomous vehicles than human drivers?:-)
Once the MADD group realizes there almost double the number of people getting killed by human drivers than by drunk human drivers their focus will change quickly.
They have had 30 (40?) years of experience and with modern social media the campaign to migrate people into autonomous vehicles will be swift and vicious. Most likely within five years it will be (in large urban centres) about as socially acceptable to drive your own car as driving drunk is today.
Yes, But, scaling up at the accident rate they are currently experiencing (i.e. even though we don't know exactly what it is, we know that it is likely less than one accident in 300,000 miles for well maintained vehicles) would mean a lower overall accident rate than the human operated fleet manages.
So the tech doesn't have to get better. It simply has to get cheaper, more reliable (robust physically), integrated into the manufacturing process and rolled into the dealer and repair networks. No of which is actually hard, but not straight forward either. Its just more engineering time and then marketing.
Insurance companies make money by selling insurance to people.
They would have absolutely no incentive to sell expensive insurance to people scared that something might happen EVEN if there was little chance of it happening.
Translation, insurance companies are big business. They will do everything they can to increase their profits, including profiteering on peoples fears.
Unlike a single focus human, fully automated cars have many more sensors and a much wider (360) field of vision through multiple cameras and technologies (LIDAR).
So in the event of your scenario, the more probable outcome is that the car would recognize both the bag of trash and child for what they are and take out the trash. (no pun intended!)
Oh, so I guess you have come up with the ONE scenario that Google's engineers either haven't thought about, haven't considered as a sub-case of a generic problem (obstruction of current route) and didn't think any action would be required. I suggest you send your resume to Google ASAP! They obviously haven't thought this through at all.
Can't find the article, but there was a mention that in the (small number of) incidents where a human operator took over control, they reviewed the logs afterwards and in all cases the computer would have taken either the same or equally safe action. These where mostly related to pedestrians and jay walking if I recall.
The Google cars don't REQUIRE a human. They CAN operate fine without one. They MAY NOT operate without one.
They have a human behind the wheel so that they comply with the various licensing regimes. As long as there is a human behind the wheel capable of assuming control the current laws in most places are fine with the computer controlling the car.
In point of fact there are real time tests of consumer electronics taking place daily in pretty much every commercial aircraft that flies for every flight. Even if only a small (say 1 in 10 or 20) people forget to turn off one of their (many) electronic devices, given the number of people and devices on EVERY flight its simple math to determine that a huge number of devices are simply NOT turned off during take off or landing.
And that totally ignores the people who intentionally leave their stuff on.
So we are left considering that there are thousands of commercial airflight's every day, world wide, that have some positive number of powered consumer devices in them for the duration of the flight. This has been happening (at an ever increasing rate) for several decades.
Which leads to some conclusion as to whether or not having them there is causing any problem.
The f-35 will (if deployed) be (or are planned to be) in use for 30-40 years...
You are saying that purpose built drones won't be able to catch up in that time?
The design cycles on drones will be faster than a human rated plane and they'll catch up quickly. Making the assumption the f-35 flys it will probably be the last of its kind.
And as Stalin is reputed to have said "quantity has a quality all of its own."
Court awarded legal fees are usually (at least in Canada) based on a court determined scale and typically are well below what you actually will have paid.
The population density of China is high enough that pretty much anywhere you plop down a windmill you can probably use the electricity it produces without carrying it long distances. This does not mean the same strategy will work elsewhere unless they go to the same densities.
I've been using variations of this (non) integrated development environment for more than 15 years, current version:
- 2x24" running linux with up to eight 130x80 rxvts in up to 48 desktops to use vim and make in...
- 2x22" running linux with VM / windows for surfing, email etc
- 2x19" with kvms to the multitude of test systems on the lab bench
The first system uses fvwm simply because I like its multi-desktop pager and I haven't bothered to update it for the last ten years. The second system used to be Windows. Now it is Linux Mint with VMWare to run Windows.:-)
The obvious best practice would be to simply force all the lights to red. Don't reward the speeder. But also keep other vehicles out of the intersection if it appears that someone is going to fast.
Not sure how you determine what cars at what speeds constitute a hazard. Or if the instrumentation and implementation provide enough benefit overall to make it worth doing.
I solved this problem easily... switched to Linux Mint and now run Windows in VM's...
If I need a metro app it will just get its own VM and can then be resized appropriately and reside on one of the six screens on my desk and lab bench.:-)
I do still have a few standalone Windows systems. But they are all just lab bench test systems. Use until they croak from driver testing and then re-image.
Well actually they ditched the garbage standard USB connectors by adopting Lightning which is technically superior to USB micro connectors. Both in capabilities and in physical robustness.
The only problem is I keep loosing the ridiculously small USB dongles they know have.
The last generation of Logitech wireless allowed you to store the dongle in the mouse. The new ones with the small dongles don't. They expect you to leave it plugged into your laptop. Since I have several and move them around it was a pain. Then Costco had a sale a few months ago. $14.50 for the low end Logitech wireless. Bought 4... now the only problem is remembering which mouse goes with with laptop / netbook / test system...
Slashdot Mirror
My four year old iPod Touch still works fine with iOS 5.
My four year old iPhone 3GS still works fine with iOS 6.
I fully expect my one year old iPhone 5 to work with every version of iOS for AT LEAST the next three years.
I can't see how you can compare that the the typical Android users experience of getting maybe one major upgrade a year or two after release or describe it as Apple abandoning the platform.
Apple's scheme is sufficient. An iOS device is of pretty limited functionality if you cannot update it ever from Apple. And once it is locked that is what you have regardless of your carrier does with the IMEI.
In theory thieves could root them, but the market value for that type of stolen phone will be much lower.
Its called disruption. Autonomous vehicles will be fought tooth and nail by more than a couple of entrenched interests fighting to keep the jobs or industry alive.
There will be (for example) more than one jurisdiction where the unions manage to get laws passed to require drivers in (for example) mass transit applications to "ensure public safety" but in reality to ensure that the unions won't shut things down with strikes.
In the day of 10 cent video cameras you don't think the average autonomous cab won't have about a dozen cameras recording everything and if necessary causing damage charges against your credit card (of felony charges being laid before you even have arrived at your destination?)
I'll believe it when they can drive in Boston traffic during rush hour with crowded streets, crowded highways at 65mph, one-way streets, jaywalkers, construction, snow, sleet, ice, short on/off ramps, non-standard intersections, traffic circles, etc. I've driven in San Francisco and it's a Sunday drive compared to Boston and New York.
Why are you imposing a higher burden on autonomous vehicles than human drivers? :-)
MAHD - Mothers Against Human Drivers
Once the MADD group realizes there almost double the number of people getting killed by human drivers than by drunk human drivers their focus will change quickly.
They have had 30 (40?) years of experience and with modern social media the campaign to migrate people into autonomous vehicles will be swift and vicious. Most likely within five years it will be (in large urban centres) about as socially acceptable to drive your own car as driving drunk is today.
Yes, But, scaling up at the accident rate they are currently experiencing (i.e. even though we don't know exactly what it is, we know that it is likely less than one accident in 300,000 miles for well maintained vehicles) would mean a lower overall accident rate than the human operated fleet manages.
So the tech doesn't have to get better. It simply has to get cheaper, more reliable (robust physically), integrated into the manufacturing process and rolled into the dealer and repair networks. No of which is actually hard, but not straight forward either. Its just more engineering time and then marketing.
Insurance companies make money by selling insurance to people.
They would have absolutely no incentive to sell expensive insurance to people scared that something might happen EVEN if there was little chance of it happening.
Translation, insurance companies are big business. They will do everything they can to increase their profits, including profiteering on peoples fears.
Unlike a single focus human, fully automated cars have many more sensors and a much wider (360) field of vision through multiple cameras and technologies (LIDAR).
So in the event of your scenario, the more probable outcome is that the car would recognize both the bag of trash and child for what they are and take out the trash. (no pun intended!)
Oh, so I guess you have come up with the ONE scenario that Google's engineers either haven't thought about, haven't considered as a sub-case of a generic problem (obstruction of current route) and didn't think any action would be required. I suggest you send your resume to Google ASAP! They obviously haven't thought this through at all.
Can't find the article, but there was a mention that in the (small number of) incidents where a human operator took over control, they reviewed the logs afterwards and in all cases the computer would have taken either the same or equally safe action. These where mostly related to pedestrians and jay walking if I recall.
The Google cars don't REQUIRE a human. They CAN operate fine without one. They MAY NOT operate without one.
They have a human behind the wheel so that they comply with the various licensing regimes. As long as there is a human behind the wheel capable of assuming control the current laws in most places are fine with the computer controlling the car.
In point of fact there are real time tests of consumer electronics taking place daily in pretty much every commercial aircraft that flies for every flight. Even if only a small (say 1 in 10 or 20) people forget to turn off one of their (many) electronic devices, given the number of people and devices on EVERY flight its simple math to determine that a huge number of devices are simply NOT turned off during take off or landing.
And that totally ignores the people who intentionally leave their stuff on.
So we are left considering that there are thousands of commercial airflight's every day, world wide, that have some positive number of powered consumer devices in them for the duration of the flight. This has been happening (at an ever increasing rate) for several decades.
Which leads to some conclusion as to whether or not having them there is causing any problem.
They said that iGoogle would die on Nov 11, 2012... so far it is still running.
Emissions per person per square kilometre is the best way to measure.
Brings Australia and Canada waaaayyyy down and China waaaaayyyyy up.
The f-35 will (if deployed) be (or are planned to be) in use for 30-40 years...
You are saying that purpose built drones won't be able to catch up in that time?
The design cycles on drones will be faster than a human rated plane and they'll catch up quickly. Making the assumption the f-35 flys it will probably be the last of its kind.
And as Stalin is reputed to have said "quantity has a quality all of its own."
Court awarded legal fees are usually (at least in Canada) based on a court determined scale and typically are well below what you actually will have paid.
This keeps abuses to a minimum.
The population density of China is high enough that pretty much anywhere you plop down a windmill you can probably use the electricity it produces without carrying it long distances. This does not mean the same strategy will work elsewhere unless they go to the same densities.
Denmark, population about 6 million... so 28% means providing power to about 2 million. Impressive... not.
I've been using variations of this (non) integrated development environment for more than 15 years, current version:
- 2x24" running linux with up to eight 130x80 rxvts in up to 48 desktops to use vim and make in...
- 2x22" running linux with VM / windows for surfing, email etc
- 2x19" with kvms to the multitude of test systems on the lab bench
The first system uses fvwm simply because I like its multi-desktop pager and I haven't bothered to update it for the last ten years. :-)
The second system used to be Windows. Now it is Linux Mint with VMWare to run Windows.
The obvious best practice would be to simply force all the lights to red. Don't reward the speeder. But also keep other vehicles out of the intersection if it appears that someone is going to fast.
Not sure how you determine what cars at what speeds constitute a hazard. Or if the instrumentation and implementation provide enough benefit overall to make it worth doing.
I solved this problem easily... switched to Linux Mint and now run Windows in VM's...
If I need a metro app it will just get its own VM and can then be resized appropriately and reside on one of the six screens on my desk and lab bench. :-)
I do still have a few standalone Windows systems. But they are all just lab bench test systems. Use until they croak from driver testing and then re-image.
Well actually they ditched the garbage standard USB connectors by adopting Lightning which is technically superior to USB micro connectors. Both in capabilities and in physical robustness.
Ditto to this.. can't stand trackpads...
The only problem is I keep loosing the ridiculously small USB dongles they know have.
The last generation of Logitech wireless allowed you to store the dongle in the mouse. The new ones with the small dongles don't. They expect you to leave it plugged into your laptop. Since I have several and move them around it was a pain. Then Costco had a sale a few months ago. $14.50 for the low end Logitech wireless. Bought 4... now the only problem is remembering which mouse goes with with laptop / netbook / test system...
you didn't think you needed touch. But now that Win8 requires touch that means that YES you DO need touch :-)
Or just stay with Win 7 for now... Or install Linux Mint. Or buy a MacBook. Or maybe just a pad.