I'm not sure why so many people are up in arms about helmet laws when there are no laws in the USA which require adults to wear helmets. Seeing as how there is strong statistical evidence that helmets greatly reduce the risk of death in the event of bicycle-vehicle collisions, is it such a bad thing to enforce the usage among children? How many parents would still be smoking in their cars while driving the kids to school if it were not illegal?
http://www.iihs.org/laws/HelmetUseCurrent.aspx http://www.iihs.org/research/fatality.aspx?topicName=Bicycles&year=2010
Aside from these factors, people will choose to ride or not ride for a variety of reasons. For those who would choose not to ride because they think they have to wear a helmet, we're probably better off without them on a bicycle and giving the rest of us informed cyclists a bad name.
... it wouldn't be immediately obvious that it wasn't recording anything permanent...
Based on the size of the device, it would be highly impractical to bother recording video or images as it does not have the memory capacity to make it worth while. Wireless transmitters are multiple square centimeters in size so this is not really a viable option either given current technology. Again it circles back to a fear from lack of understanding.
Congratulations on scratching the surface of a much bigger problem: why aren't there an equal number of women in technology careers as there are men? Typically men are more interested in electromechanical things because it's forced down our throughts from day 1. If you wonder what I'm talking about, when was the last time you saw someone buying their son a doll instead of a toy car? When daughters are born we dress them in pink and give them baby dolls to play with (or similar, I'm speaking generaly). When sons are born we dress them in blue and provide them with trucks and trains. Why? Because these fit our preconcieved images of boys and girls (read: it's not something we do conciously). These actions are also self reinforcing: the more little boys we see with planes and trains, the more we think they need planes and trains. To bring my point home, if you want to see more females in technology (both career and hobby wise) expose them to it as children and provide them with equal opportunities to explore it.
My goal: to raise a daughter who's writing Android apps for the elementary school science fair.
The energy density argument also touches the liability argument. Could you imagine the cost of insuring a vehicle which had a nulear reactor inside of it? Lets say you accidentally bounce your flying car off the road a bit too hard and damage your reactor control rods, next thing you know the better part of the metropolitan area surrounding your destination has been destroyed.
I would argue that we'll have affordable flying reactors (read: flying cars) only after sythetic inteligence has dominated the transportation world and rendered individual vehicular insurance policies pointless.
I'm really glad to see that AT&T is embracing technology and digital freedom. It reminds me of when the RIAA was introduced to MP3s and P2P networking. I'm sure that the AT&T execs are busy soiling themselves over VOIP rather than finding ways to embrace the technology and provide new services.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know, I kinda miss destroying my finger tips pulling 4x2 flat bricks off of larger plates.
At Microsofts request I went ahead and upgraded my machine... to Ubuntu Server, then went out and got a MacBook Pro. It was a good decision!
I'm not sure why so many people are up in arms about helmet laws when there are no laws in the USA which require adults to wear helmets. Seeing as how there is strong statistical evidence that helmets greatly reduce the risk of death in the event of bicycle-vehicle collisions, is it such a bad thing to enforce the usage among children? How many parents would still be smoking in their cars while driving the kids to school if it were not illegal?
http://www.iihs.org/laws/HelmetUseCurrent.aspx
http://www.iihs.org/research/fatality.aspx?topicName=Bicycles&year=2010
Aside from these factors, people will choose to ride or not ride for a variety of reasons. For those who would choose not to ride because they think they have to wear a helmet, we're probably better off without them on a bicycle and giving the rest of us informed cyclists a bad name.
... as we look to the next book in the series which was opened in Silicon Valley a little over 10 years ago.
Can we hold Microsoft to this 'deterrence' for their operating systems?
... it wouldn't be immediately obvious that it wasn't recording anything permanent...
Based on the size of the device, it would be highly impractical to bother recording video or images as it does not have the memory capacity to make it worth while. Wireless transmitters are multiple square centimeters in size so this is not really a viable option either given current technology. Again it circles back to a fear from lack of understanding.
Nobody would have cared had someone at Walmart decided not to sell an iPad to an Iranian. Don't blame Apple for an expression of old southern bigotry.
86ing the phones is not going to eliminate the problem, ditching the human control system would be a much better option! Anyone want to go for a pub crawl and have Google drive us home? http://www.smartplanet.com/technology/blog/thinking-tech/googles-self-driving-car/5445/
Congratulations on scratching the surface of a much bigger problem: why aren't there an equal number of women in technology careers as there are men? Typically men are more interested in electromechanical things because it's forced down our throughts from day 1. If you wonder what I'm talking about, when was the last time you saw someone buying their son a doll instead of a toy car? When daughters are born we dress them in pink and give them baby dolls to play with (or similar, I'm speaking generaly). When sons are born we dress them in blue and provide them with trucks and trains. Why? Because these fit our preconcieved images of boys and girls (read: it's not something we do conciously). These actions are also self reinforcing: the more little boys we see with planes and trains, the more we think they need planes and trains. To bring my point home, if you want to see more females in technology (both career and hobby wise) expose them to it as children and provide them with equal opportunities to explore it. My goal: to raise a daughter who's writing Android apps for the elementary school science fair.
Some do. See here for reference (How It Works section, under "Cooling"): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reactor
The energy density argument also touches the liability argument. Could you imagine the cost of insuring a vehicle which had a nulear reactor inside of it? Lets say you accidentally bounce your flying car off the road a bit too hard and damage your reactor control rods, next thing you know the better part of the metropolitan area surrounding your destination has been destroyed. I would argue that we'll have affordable flying reactors (read: flying cars) only after sythetic inteligence has dominated the transportation world and rendered individual vehicular insurance policies pointless.
I'm really glad to see that AT&T is embracing technology and digital freedom. It reminds me of when the RIAA was introduced to MP3s and P2P networking. I'm sure that the AT&T execs are busy soiling themselves over VOIP rather than finding ways to embrace the technology and provide new services.