In my state, the two laws aren't in contradiction, as the "real" law is: drive at a safe speed considering the conditions. When the weather is bad, you can get a speeding ticket without exceeding the posted limit, too.
Around here, when someone gets a ticket for driving too slowly, it seems that it's always because they're driving in a way that is causing a lot of disruption because of cars passing them. The ticket is not actually written for "driving too slow", it's for obstructing traffic or driving in reckless manner, depending.
I am not a lawyer or otherwise expert on this subject, by the way, so I am likely to be in error about some specifics. I'm just friends with a cop who likes to talk about his work.
One thing is certain: that these systems will not be as adaptable to the environment as people. (Of course, in the conditions you describe, even people are usually officially discouraged from driving).
So self-driving cars cannot used in all circumstances. I'm guessing that the car itself will often know when it's hit those circumstances. White-outs and the like are easy error conditions to detect.
The real issue will be that your car will just stop working if conditions were to change, potentially stranding you somewhere.
The litigation system will require they are absolutely safe to pedestrians and other drivers.
Well, it would help, but it wouldn't require absolute safety (which, to be pedantic, is an impossible standard that is demanded of literally no other product or service).
What will happen is that the companies will perform a calculation and determine an amount that they can absorb as a cost of doing business. That amount won't be zero, but won't be infinite, either.
They only need the failure rate of the car (or any other product/service that can maim or kill) to be low enough as to remain "in budget".
That's an interesting point. Plus, the actual laws about speed limits aren't always cut-and-dried.
I live in a "basic rule" state, where it's technically legal to exceed the speed limit if, taking into account road and weather conditions, it is safe to do so.*
If you're driving in a traffic stream that is going a certain speed, the legal thing to do is to match the speed of traffic even if that is above the posted limit. You can (and it does happen, although it's rare) get a ticket for driving too slowly if you fail to match the flow.
*With exceptions such as school and hospital zones. Also, if you are exceeding the posted limit, there's a good chance you'll get a ticket no matter how safe you are. You have to make your "basic rule" claim in court, and you have to be able to prove your case.
I think it's clear she lost because she wasn't as compelling a candidate as trump.
Given that she won the popular vote, that isn't actually clear. But it's true that both candidates were (and remain) about as popular as dumpster fires.
I get a target of 5% of folks that have to be worked out of the company, and there is no credit for exiting poor performers earlier in the year. WTF?
You actually could have had it worse! A Fortune 500 company I worked for (I quit, I wasn't laid off, and I won't name the company) had a requirement that 5% of the people had to be laid off every year.
The kicker is that nobody in the management chain of those people had any say whatsoever in who got laid off. Instead, the company had a high-level corporate committee that would decide which individuals got the heave-ho, and it was far from clear on what basis they made those decisions. It was quite common that high performers got laid off while the lower performers didn't.
The hypothesis among the engineers was that they decided based on pay rates: the higher your pay rate, the more likely you were to get the axe.
It takes almost zero time and effort to release the information required to allow others to write the drivers, so where's the bother? What they'd get in return is a larger pool of people who would consider buying their product.
Slashdot Mirror
Most of your data is going through someone else's servers if you are using the Internet.
Yes, but that doesn't mean that your data must be exposed to them.
I'm with you, people who think Microsoft is alone in doing this is clueless.
I don't think that anyone thinks Microsoft is alone in doing this sort of thing.
I think he was referring to the Ubuntu Dash services.
Ubuntu constantly monitors your typing to sell you stuff from Amazon. How is that any different?
First, Ubuntu is not the sum total of all Linuxes -- just because one distro does something doesn't mean "Linux" does it.
Second, you can totally disable this.
Are there ANY OSes out there that don't spy on you? I don't think so...
Yes, there are quite a few, including the vast majority of Linux distros.
/. runs plenty of articles about the issues around Google, etc. I think there's room to cover this too.
Do you like your devices insecure by default?
We don't know how secure/insecure Face ID is yet, so this seems a bit off-target.
so google isn't processing all of your browsing history in chrome, gmail conversations and google voice text messages
Of course they are. Why is that relevant to Cortana and Skype?
Why do you assume that this is only a concern if you're discussing "secret" stuff?
However, we do know how Cortana et. al. works.
Skype is awful. But if your concern is corporate spying, then don't use Cortana (or Siri, or Bixby, etc.)
Ah, I understand. But I was talking about consumer products, not services where there are providers and clients.
With consumer products, there isn't really a two-way relationship in the same sense, so customers have little opportunity to express arrogance.
In my state, the two laws aren't in contradiction, as the "real" law is: drive at a safe speed considering the conditions. When the weather is bad, you can get a speeding ticket without exceeding the posted limit, too.
Around here, when someone gets a ticket for driving too slowly, it seems that it's always because they're driving in a way that is causing a lot of disruption because of cars passing them. The ticket is not actually written for "driving too slow", it's for obstructing traffic or driving in reckless manner, depending.
I am not a lawyer or otherwise expert on this subject, by the way, so I am likely to be in error about some specifics. I'm just friends with a cop who likes to talk about his work.
Goofball? Is that the kind of sportsball Lebron James plays?
That's also an interesting point.
One thing is certain: that these systems will not be as adaptable to the environment as people. (Of course, in the conditions you describe, even people are usually officially discouraged from driving).
So self-driving cars cannot used in all circumstances. I'm guessing that the car itself will often know when it's hit those circumstances. White-outs and the like are easy error conditions to detect.
The real issue will be that your car will just stop working if conditions were to change, potentially stranding you somewhere.
The litigation system will require they are absolutely safe to pedestrians and other drivers.
Well, it would help, but it wouldn't require absolute safety (which, to be pedantic, is an impossible standard that is demanded of literally no other product or service).
What will happen is that the companies will perform a calculation and determine an amount that they can absorb as a cost of doing business. That amount won't be zero, but won't be infinite, either.
They only need the failure rate of the car (or any other product/service that can maim or kill) to be low enough as to remain "in budget".
That's an interesting point. Plus, the actual laws about speed limits aren't always cut-and-dried.
I live in a "basic rule" state, where it's technically legal to exceed the speed limit if, taking into account road and weather conditions, it is safe to do so.*
If you're driving in a traffic stream that is going a certain speed, the legal thing to do is to match the speed of traffic even if that is above the posted limit. You can (and it does happen, although it's rare) get a ticket for driving too slowly if you fail to match the flow.
*With exceptions such as school and hospital zones. Also, if you are exceeding the posted limit, there's a good chance you'll get a ticket no matter how safe you are. You have to make your "basic rule" claim in court, and you have to be able to prove your case.
I think it's clear she lost because she wasn't as compelling a candidate as trump.
Given that she won the popular vote, that isn't actually clear. But it's true that both candidates were (and remain) about as popular as dumpster fires.
betrayal of the founding principles of your country for money is also called treason.
Not according to the US Constitution.
I think he's some sportsball dude or something.
Form TFS:
aimed at addressing the skepticism many people have about autonomous technology
Even my skepticism resulting from the fact that Google is involved?
I get a target of 5% of folks that have to be worked out of the company, and there is no credit for exiting poor performers earlier in the year. WTF?
You actually could have had it worse! A Fortune 500 company I worked for (I quit, I wasn't laid off, and I won't name the company) had a requirement that 5% of the people had to be laid off every year.
The kicker is that nobody in the management chain of those people had any say whatsoever in who got laid off. Instead, the company had a high-level corporate committee that would decide which individuals got the heave-ho, and it was far from clear on what basis they made those decisions. It was quite common that high performers got laid off while the lower performers didn't.
The hypothesis among the engineers was that they decided based on pay rates: the higher your pay rate, the more likely you were to get the axe.
Hulu has 17% of the market and climbing. Some people clearly want it.
No, Quirkz is correct: a temporary promotional price is not a "lowered price" in the commonly understood sense. It's a "sale price".
On the one hand, I'm happy to see anyone taking Netflix down a notch.
On the other hand, Hulu is the team effort of Disney, Fox, and Comcast -- and I can't really cheer for any of those guys.
It takes almost zero time and effort to release the information required to allow others to write the drivers, so where's the bother? What they'd get in return is a larger pool of people who would consider buying their product.