When you start to type something into your address bar or search bar; it's going to start looking more like a Facebook news feed enticing you to click on a Sponsor's clickbait/ad, than search results.
I think if that happens they are just fucked, as nobody is gonna pay the hundreds of millions they got from Google and Yahoo for their search, not with numbers as low as they are.
It should not cost millions to make and distribute a browser.
They need to downsize back into the community project they are supposed to be, they should have an annual budget of less than $1million a year, anything beyond that is fat that needs to get cut.
You take it to them and they say they're not interested while copying your idea.....
This is kind of what happened to the inventor who came up with the concept of the Television, designed, and prototyped; Philo Farnsworth.
Except it was even worse... the Inventor was sued for patent infringement after he couldn't sell the technology and had to start his own business.
Ultimately, his invention was stolen by RCA, and Filo lost mucho $$$ of his own money and bank money, and never got a dime of profit from having invented the Television; in the end, he was forced to sell his patent rights for a $1 million token amount of $$$ to reduce crushing debts.
He died destitute, with no recognition or respect from the public for his invention.....
Still pickable, but only with a special tool and a lot more time.
Not pickable by mortals, and I see no report of anyone ever successfully picking one without knowing the combination before they started; in a practical sense, the way to attack is going to be violent entry. The rotary picking tool is only of practical use on weak disc detainers and counterfeit chinese versions of the high-security ones that you could probably force open anyways.
(Yeah, these are expensive enough that there have been counterfeits going around.)
On the real ones, the 11 disks are robust, each disk has multiple false gates, and there's no way to know if a particular disk is in a false gate. You're literally talking about brute forcing millions of combinations at that point
There was at one point a dumb weakness, where the company stamped numbers on their disks, and it was possible to use an impressioning technique to work out which number was stamped on the disk ---- but they fixed that long ago.
The Masterlock #-series locks are sheer pin locks. That is, in order to set the pins, you literally insert the key you want it keyed to, and sheer the pins off to the lengths that match the cuts in the key.
Basically, this is identical to all pin tumbler locks....
Well, it's immaterial whether the manufacturer chose to use different size pins as replaceable parts, or whether they chose to cut the key pins to the same length when keying. It would be generally better if they would thread their pin chambers, use ASSA-style high-security pins, get the slop out of their pin chambers (tighter tolerance), and tighten up keyways closer to European lock tolerances, so attackers cannot get a rake or paperclip in there.
I understand the typical Masterlocks are considered easy to pick, because they have really really sloppy manufacturing tolerances, also their locks have only 4-pins, where you'd really prefer to see at least 6-pins, they don't consistently use High-Low High-Low key patterns to deter pick access, they generally provide too much extra space in their keyways for ne'erdowells to easily access with a pick.
Anyways, if I wanted a secure padlock.... I would consider ones such as Trioving 5652R, Abloy PL342, Abus disc detainer models, or at least an American Locks lock (After modd'ing to disable the bypass punch).
Better install with the lock a protective cover over any hasp (if applicable)
Don't bother with a >$50 lock; if it's just securing a weak chain, or if the actual item costs not much more than the lock.
But everybody needs to realize that locks and keys only keep honest people honest anyway.
I would say the purpose of locks is to persuade Lazy people to go pick another target.
Honest people shouldn't steal anything, even if it were left unlocked, although the lock might also dissuade some people from taking up crime at an early age, or "borrowing" something without permission, since now they would be forced to commit a definite crime or a more severe offense.
One of those is that the person pulling the trigger be military so that you are ensured a direct chain of command
What they really should do is provide an "easy" way for their 'civillian' drone operators to just become military by signing a piece of paper that subjects these people to a chain of command, without other problematic caveats such as a 6 year or X year commitment, or caveats of an ability to be reassigned to any other random job as an interchangeable part, or caveats of a requirement to undergo physically excruciating trials.
They would likely find many more volunteer drone combat pilots; if these people didn't have to go through a huge unnecessary ordeal and be worried about being spontaneously re-assigned to physical labor or an in-the-line-of-fire job, or guard duty on someone's whim.
Her motive for taking the job was very likely to steal medications from the elderly.
In the US now, there is an entire segment of the population who believes you should have no right to judge her based on her life history now.
You would be considered a "bigot", "racist", "xenophobe", "misogynist" for wishing to discriminate based on such factors as life history.
This is what's driving the right to be forgotten..... also, before too long, it will also be illegal to discriminate in hiring/retaining employees based on criminal conviction history, DUI, past driving record, etc.
Wrong. Only failures as a direct result of any modification should be denied. See: Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.
Yes, unfortunately Magnuson-Moss is not strong enough.
What we really need is a law that says if the manufacturer creates an electronic device that is not readily- accessible to repair shops for economically available fully-functional replacement of every physical component and electronic component or module, then the manufacturer is required to warrant the device against defects in the device and all non-serviceable components for no less than 5 years after sale, that transfers with change of ownership with no requirement of registration, and provide repair or replacement for equipment service for no less than 20 years after sale, at a cost no more than the cost of raw materials for replacement modules.
I think the biggest change happened when they decided to use their ability to regulate commerce between the States to stomp on a farmer and SCOTUS decided to uphold it
There was a progression -- from Marshal, to the meatpackers, to the New Deal
Gibbons v. Ogden -- 1824, 22US
The wisdom and the discretion of Congress, their identity with the people, and the influence which their constituents possess at elections, are, in this, as in many other instances, as that, for example, of declaring war, the sole restraints on which they have relied, to secure them from its abuse. They are the restraints on which the people must often rely solely, in all representative governments....
; But the end affect is the commerce clause barely exists, most certainly not implemented as it was intended. The commerce clause evolved from allowing Congress to regulate interstate commerce to allowing Congress to regulate anything that affects interstate commerce, thanks to the "Necessary and Proper clause"; for example, congress may regulate the channels of interstate commerce, congress may regulate anything that threatens interstate commerce, even if it's only intrastate activities, and congress may regulate any activity that has a substantial affect on interstate commerce.
Then we got this whacky idea called rational basis review, where the judiciary must show deference to current elected representatives, if there are reasons that support congressional judgement, the justices are supposed to support the current elected, even if the judges would come to different conclusions.
Increasing deference towards current politicians is also deference away from slamming their laws by declaring things "unconstitutional" when they are unconstitutional. US vs Lopez.
Congress authority is set out in the constitution. Congress can pass resolutions which become law when signed by the president
Congress can pass laws, But congress cannot transfer any of their own lawmaking authority to an outside entity.
For example, it is not within congress' power to pass a law stating "Whatever Young billy says is the law, is the law."
You can replace 'Young Billy' with any corporation or government department you want, and it's still true --- congress literally does not have the power to say "Whatever foobar says," as that would be a transfer of lawmaking authority contrary to the constitution's requirements for passing laws.
I assume the criminals who would do this have risen to a new level of evil, and there's a measurably higher reward to offset the high likelihood they'll get caught eventually.
I am imaging "Ransomware" evolves into "Racketeeringware"
Instead of "pay us this ransom...." to infected users, they launch a campaign getting people to "Pay 400BTC in Exchange for protection"
The explanation being... the evil device hackers are killing people left and right, But if you pay this "protection charge", Your medical device will get added to a list of devices that they won't attack
A short bit later, they change into a monthly protection fee to be paid by the device manufacturer.
And a long while later, they recast themselves as an "antivirus company" that releases proof of concept malware to the public, for devices whose manufacturers are not customers.
Is a burka -- which objectively speaking prevents identification of the wearer -- in conflict with the legitimate interest of identifying drivers for the sake of accountability?
Yes, and people should not be allowed to drive, if they will not remove the burka to have their picture taken, And remove the burka while operating a motor vehicle.
Does that conflict override the tenet of religious freedom?
No it does not, because you are free to not drive. This might limit your options and choices in other areas (For example.... taking on certain jobs and living in certain places might be out of reach without driving), however, you have the religious freedom.
MySQL has had some nice features for years, like REPLACE, but since the 9.x branch
The features MySQL has are good enough for 99% of real-world web applications.
Yes, Postgres has more, but the extra features it has don't necessarily add much value for most programs.
MySQL multi-master replication features are immensely valuable by comparison, and Postgres lacking them has prevented me from using Postgres, more than once.
That and the master-master replication suite from Percona.
I think that is a good reason to pick MySQL.
As much as I like Postgres..... it seems to be a heck of a lot easier to do replication with MySQL and put together a highly-survivable system.
I'm not even sure how to even start to go about doing it with Postgres.... although in the past; I have had a Cold/Warm standby Postgres with Slony-L based replication;
It was quite frankly, a PITA.
Isn't the Google self driving car supposed to be cheap?
I think the Google self-driving car is more like a proof of concept they're working on, and
Google will probably be more like an "arms dealer" attempting to license technology and designs
to be incorporated by existing car manufacturers --- who always add a huge price premium to new
models, especially when new features are included.
I see "self driving" as being a luxury feature not included in base models, at least initially.
I just don't see Google ever becoming an auto maker, that's so far removed from their core business.
Why would a corporation threaten some OSS developer?
Because they're scared, and don't have the right expertise in their company to deal with the situation,
also they don't have any consultant who can help them,
And the bug is an unmitigatable remotely-exploitable 0Day in the web application framework
used on their main e-commerce website with public exploit code but no patch,
so that's an act of desperation and demonstration of internal management incompetence
(not having competent staff or agreements in place to deal with the impact of a bug).
And when you really need them most (like after new year's eve), it could be four or more hours.
Convenience. Trade $$$ for time. These are good non-financial reasons to want a self-driving car.
Even a tiny taxi ride in my town is at least $40.
This is still workable. Suppose you go out 2 nights a week; 3 weeks per month.
4 taxi rides X 3 X 12 X $40 = $5,760/Year
That still looks better financially than the figured $48,000 upfront + $600/Yr, that comes
to $5400/Year.
What we haven't mentioned.... is that when you take Taxi rides, you are not committed upfront;
there is a certain value in not having to front money, and pay $40 as you go.... most of the money you would spend
on taxis is delayed upfront, so you can be earning 2% CD interest, or 10% stock market returns on most of
that cash for more than 5 years in the Taxi scenario.
Another thing is that it's an unrealistically optimistic assumption that your
brand new self-driving car will last 10 years, most cars won't last beyond 5, a self-driving car is more complicated,
and therefore, likely more fragile/fault-prone; we have not considered the additional maintenance
repair costs, and equipment replacements that will be required to keep this self-driving car working
with all the sophisticated added sensors, GPS antennae, 4G LTE radios for internet, and
computers needed for it to function.
With conventional cars, drivers typically pay more than $5000 a year in maintenance costs; it's not far fetched to
consider that the additional sensor arrays may add at least a few more thousand bucks worth.
We haven't talked about the additional expected towing costs and inconvenience, when the car with no steering wheel
needs a tow, because one of the sensors had a rock crack the glass, resulting in "safety shutdown".
Where do you find a $15 taxi? for $15 you can go about 3 miles.
In N.O., a cab is about $4 to start, plus $2.50 a mile, so 5 miles is about $16.50 plus $1.70 tax.
You could easily do some walking, take a streetcar to get across town, and then find a cab ride
for the last few miles.
Even if you had to pay $30 for that cab ride home, though... it's still not going to justify the expense of
a self-driving car economically. Seriously.... who goes out and get drunk at a bar more than two or
three nights a week, and is still employable.? sounds like an alcohol addiction.
The price of booze far exceeds the price per ride of transportation, at that point.
The reasons to purchase a self-driving car would still be comfort and convenience.
(Not that there's anything wrong with that)
As customer of a Taxi, you don't have to pay any of those things, only a miniscule portion of them.
The AI is more expensive, because all new cars are super-expensive, and you have to add Research and Development costs, "brand premium", And "coolness premium" the manufacturers will charge b/c the thing can drive itself.
If instead of buying a $12,000 used car that meets all your needs, you spend $60,000 on a brand new car-that-can-drive itself and lasts 10 years, plus a $50 monthly service fee for the cloud maps service, then you're paying approximately $5000 extra a year for self-driving capabilities.
That would buy you 333 $15 taxi rides.
Anyways, based on that, unless you spend more than $5000 a year on the Taxi, then it just isn't a worthwhile economic proposition.
Also, the self-driving cars are probably going to be introduced at about the $120,000 price point, not the $60,000 price point.
Then you'll also spend an extra $10,000 in vehicle loan interest per year to get the self-driving feature.
Slashdot Mirror
When you start to type something into your address bar or search bar; it's going to start looking more like a Facebook news feed enticing you to click on a Sponsor's clickbait/ad, than search results.
I think if that happens they are just fucked, as nobody is gonna pay the hundreds of millions they got from Google and Yahoo for their search, not with numbers as low as they are.
It should not cost millions to make and distribute a browser. They need to downsize back into the community project they are supposed to be, they should have an annual budget of less than $1million a year, anything beyond that is fat that needs to get cut.
You take it to them and they say they're not interested while copying your idea. ....
This is kind of what happened to the inventor who came up with the concept of the Television, designed, and prototyped; Philo Farnsworth.
Except it was even worse... the Inventor was sued for patent infringement after he couldn't sell the technology and had to start his own business.
Ultimately, his invention was stolen by RCA, and Filo lost mucho $$$ of his own money and bank money, and never got a dime of profit from having invented the Television; in the end, he was forced to sell his patent rights for a $1 million token amount of $$$ to reduce crushing debts.
He died destitute, with no recognition or respect from the public for his invention.....
convict simply petitions the state with a "hardship" temporary license to get to and from work.
So either abolish "hardship" licenses Or put them in jail for a minimum of 90 days, if they violate while on a "hardship" license.
Still pickable, but only with a special tool and a lot more time.
Not pickable by mortals, and I see no report of anyone ever successfully picking one without knowing the combination before they started; in a practical sense, the way to attack is going to be violent entry. The rotary picking tool is only of practical use on weak disc detainers and counterfeit chinese versions of the high-security ones that you could probably force open anyways.
(Yeah, these are expensive enough that there have been counterfeits going around.)
On the real ones, the 11 disks are robust, each disk has multiple false gates, and there's no way to know if a particular disk is in a false gate. You're literally talking about brute forcing millions of combinations at that point
There was at one point a dumb weakness, where the company stamped numbers on their disks, and it was possible to use an impressioning technique to work out which number was stamped on the disk ---- but they fixed that long ago.
The Masterlock #-series locks are sheer pin locks. That is, in order to set the pins, you literally insert the key you want it keyed to, and sheer the pins off to the lengths that match the cuts in the key.
Basically, this is identical to all pin tumbler locks....
Well, it's immaterial whether the manufacturer chose to use different size pins as replaceable parts, or whether they chose to cut the key pins to the same length when keying. It would be generally better if they would thread their pin chambers, use ASSA-style high-security pins, get the slop out of their pin chambers (tighter tolerance), and tighten up keyways closer to European lock tolerances, so attackers cannot get a rake or paperclip in there.
I understand the typical Masterlocks are considered easy to pick, because they have really really sloppy manufacturing tolerances, also their locks have only 4-pins, where you'd really prefer to see at least 6-pins, they don't consistently use High-Low High-Low key patterns to deter pick access, they generally provide too much extra space in their keyways for ne'erdowells to easily access with a pick.
Anyways, if I wanted a secure padlock.... I would consider ones such as Trioving 5652R, Abloy PL342, Abus disc detainer models, or at least an American Locks lock (After modd'ing to disable the bypass punch).
Better install with the lock a protective cover over any hasp (if applicable)
Don't bother with a >$50 lock; if it's just securing a weak chain, or if the actual item costs not much more than the lock.
But everybody needs to realize that locks and keys only keep honest people honest anyway.
I would say the purpose of locks is to persuade Lazy people to go pick another target. Honest people shouldn't steal anything, even if it were left unlocked, although the lock might also dissuade some people from taking up crime at an early age, or "borrowing" something without permission, since now they would be forced to commit a definite crime or a more severe offense.
One of those is that the person pulling the trigger be military so that you are ensured a direct chain of command
What they really should do is provide an "easy" way for their 'civillian' drone operators to just become military by signing a piece of paper that subjects these people to a chain of command, without other problematic caveats such as a 6 year or X year commitment, or caveats of an ability to be reassigned to any other random job as an interchangeable part, or caveats of a requirement to undergo physically excruciating trials.
They would likely find many more volunteer drone combat pilots; if these people didn't have to go through a huge unnecessary ordeal and be worried about being spontaneously re-assigned to physical labor or an in-the-line-of-fire job, or guard duty on someone's whim.
the video would have to be viewed at least 200,000 times within two months of its publication this week.
How about robotically-generated views from numerous cloud instances temporarily stood up for the purpose of generating simulated views?
Her motive for taking the job was very likely to steal medications from the elderly.
In the US now, there is an entire segment of the population who believes you should have no right to judge her based on her life history now.
You would be considered a "bigot", "racist", "xenophobe", "misogynist" for wishing to discriminate based on such factors as life history.
This is what's driving the right to be forgotten..... also, before too long, it will also be illegal to discriminate in hiring/retaining employees based on criminal conviction history, DUI, past driving record, etc.
because it's no longer possible to determine whether you have tampered with it
Sorry, NO. It is not legal to deny your customer warranty, because you can't determine they did not tamper with it.
If they claim they didn't touch it, then you actually have to be able to prove that specific device was abused by the consumer to deny warranty.
They can still claim damages against the CPU, even if they broke a sticker and opened the case.
The consumer has a legitimate right to inspect the unit, and the system not booting gives them a perfect excuse, by the way.
Wrong. Only failures as a direct result of any modification should be denied. See: Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.
Yes, unfortunately Magnuson-Moss is not strong enough.
What we really need is a law that says if the manufacturer creates an electronic device that is not readily- accessible to repair shops for economically available fully-functional replacement of every physical component and electronic component or module, then the manufacturer is required to warrant the device against defects in the device and all non-serviceable components for no less than 5 years after sale, that transfers with change of ownership with no requirement of registration, and provide repair or replacement for equipment service for no less than 20 years after sale, at a cost no more than the cost of raw materials for replacement modules.
I think the biggest change happened when they decided to use their ability to regulate commerce between the States to stomp on a farmer and SCOTUS decided to uphold it
There was a progression -- from Marshal, to the meatpackers, to the New Deal
Gibbons v. Ogden -- 1824, 22US
; But the end affect is the commerce clause barely exists, most certainly not implemented as it was intended. The commerce clause evolved from allowing Congress to regulate interstate commerce to allowing Congress to regulate anything that affects interstate commerce, thanks to the "Necessary and Proper clause"; for example, congress may regulate the channels of interstate commerce, congress may regulate anything that threatens interstate commerce, even if it's only intrastate activities, and congress may regulate any activity that has a substantial affect on interstate commerce.
Then we got this whacky idea called rational basis review, where the judiciary must show deference to current elected representatives, if there are reasons that support congressional judgement, the justices are supposed to support the current elected, even if the judges would come to different conclusions. Increasing deference towards current politicians is also deference away from slamming their laws by declaring things "unconstitutional" when they are unconstitutional. US vs Lopez.
Congress authority is set out in the constitution. Congress can pass resolutions which become law when signed by the president
Congress can pass laws, But congress cannot transfer any of their own lawmaking authority to an outside entity.
For example, it is not within congress' power to pass a law stating "Whatever Young billy says is the law, is the law."
You can replace 'Young Billy' with any corporation or government department you want, and it's still true --- congress literally does not have the power to say "Whatever foobar says," as that would be a transfer of lawmaking authority contrary to the constitution's requirements for passing laws.
Makes one wonder why they didn't ban them.... and blamed the pedestrians who got hit....
I assume the criminals who would do this have risen to a new level of evil, and there's a measurably higher reward to offset the high likelihood they'll get caught eventually.
I am imaging "Ransomware" evolves into "Racketeeringware"
Instead of "pay us this ransom ...." to infected users, they launch a campaign getting people to "Pay 400BTC in Exchange for protection"
The explanation being... the evil device hackers are killing people left and right, But if you pay this "protection charge", Your medical device will get added to a list of devices that they won't attack
A short bit later, they change into a monthly protection fee to be paid by the device manufacturer.
And a long while later, they recast themselves as an "antivirus company" that releases proof of concept malware to the public, for devices whose manufacturers are not customers.
Just wait 'til they start accidentally hitting the undersea cables and partitioning the internet......
Is a burka -- which objectively speaking prevents identification of the wearer -- in conflict with the legitimate interest of identifying drivers for the sake of accountability?
Yes, and people should not be allowed to drive, if they will not remove the burka to have their picture taken, And remove the burka while operating a motor vehicle.
Does that conflict override the tenet of religious freedom?
No it does not, because you are free to not drive. This might limit your options and choices in other areas (For example.... taking on certain jobs and living in certain places might be out of reach without driving), however, you have the religious freedom.
MySQL has had some nice features for years, like REPLACE, but since the 9.x branch
The features MySQL has are good enough for 99% of real-world web applications.
Yes, Postgres has more, but the extra features it has don't necessarily add much value for most programs.
MySQL multi-master replication features are immensely valuable by comparison, and Postgres lacking them has prevented me from using Postgres, more than once.
That and the master-master replication suite from Percona.
I think that is a good reason to pick MySQL.
As much as I like Postgres..... it seems to be a heck of a lot easier to do replication with MySQL and put together a highly-survivable system.
I'm not even sure how to even start to go about doing it with Postgres.... although in the past; I have had a Cold/Warm standby Postgres with Slony-L based replication; It was quite frankly, a PITA.
Isn't the Google self driving car supposed to be cheap?
I think the Google self-driving car is more like a proof of concept they're working on, and Google will probably be more like an "arms dealer" attempting to license technology and designs to be incorporated by existing car manufacturers --- who always add a huge price premium to new models, especially when new features are included.
I see "self driving" as being a luxury feature not included in base models, at least initially.
I just don't see Google ever becoming an auto maker, that's so far removed from their core business.
Why would a corporation threaten some OSS developer?
Because they're scared, and don't have the right expertise in their company to deal with the situation, also they don't have any consultant who can help them, And the bug is an unmitigatable remotely-exploitable 0Day in the web application framework used on their main e-commerce website with public exploit code but no patch, so that's an act of desperation and demonstration of internal management incompetence (not having competent staff or agreements in place to deal with the impact of a bug).
And when you really need them most (like after new year's eve), it could be four or more hours.
Convenience. Trade $$$ for time. These are good non-financial reasons to want a self-driving car.
Even a tiny taxi ride in my town is at least $40.
This is still workable. Suppose you go out 2 nights a week; 3 weeks per month.
4 taxi rides X 3 X 12 X $40 = $5,760/Year
That still looks better financially than the figured $48,000 upfront + $600/Yr, that comes to $5400/Year.
What we haven't mentioned.... is that when you take Taxi rides, you are not committed upfront; there is a certain value in not having to front money, and pay $40 as you go.... most of the money you would spend on taxis is delayed upfront, so you can be earning 2% CD interest, or 10% stock market returns on most of that cash for more than 5 years in the Taxi scenario.
Another thing is that it's an unrealistically optimistic assumption that your brand new self-driving car will last 10 years, most cars won't last beyond 5, a self-driving car is more complicated, and therefore, likely more fragile/fault-prone; we have not considered the additional maintenance repair costs, and equipment replacements that will be required to keep this self-driving car working with all the sophisticated added sensors, GPS antennae, 4G LTE radios for internet, and computers needed for it to function.
With conventional cars, drivers typically pay more than $5000 a year in maintenance costs; it's not far fetched to consider that the additional sensor arrays may add at least a few more thousand bucks worth.
We haven't talked about the additional expected towing costs and inconvenience, when the car with no steering wheel needs a tow, because one of the sensors had a rock crack the glass, resulting in "safety shutdown".
Where do you find a $15 taxi? for $15 you can go about 3 miles.
In N.O., a cab is about $4 to start, plus $2.50 a mile, so 5 miles is about $16.50 plus $1.70 tax. You could easily do some walking, take a streetcar to get across town, and then find a cab ride for the last few miles.
Even if you had to pay $30 for that cab ride home, though... it's still not going to justify the expense of a self-driving car economically. Seriously.... who goes out and get drunk at a bar more than two or three nights a week, and is still employable.? sounds like an alcohol addiction. The price of booze far exceeds the price per ride of transportation, at that point.
The reasons to purchase a self-driving car would still be comfort and convenience. (Not that there's anything wrong with that)
As customer of a Taxi, you don't have to pay any of those things, only a miniscule portion of them.
The AI is more expensive, because all new cars are super-expensive, and you have to add Research and Development costs, "brand premium", And "coolness premium" the manufacturers will charge b/c the thing can drive itself.
If instead of buying a $12,000 used car that meets all your needs, you spend $60,000 on a brand new car-that-can-drive itself and lasts 10 years, plus a $50 monthly service fee for the cloud maps service, then you're paying approximately $5000 extra a year for self-driving capabilities.
That would buy you 333 $15 taxi rides.
Anyways, based on that, unless you spend more than $5000 a year on the Taxi, then it just isn't a worthwhile economic proposition.
Also, the self-driving cars are probably going to be introduced at about the $120,000 price point, not the $60,000 price point.
Then you'll also spend an extra $10,000 in vehicle loan interest per year to get the self-driving feature.