You got that right... Black Ice is NOT much fun to drive on and very hard to see... I've driven on it in the past and lived to tell the tale. It was no fun waiting for the car to slow down from 55MPH without using the brakes, hoping it stayed on the two lane road...
I don't think automation would deal kindly with that....
You can trick human drivers by defacing street signs
Yea, not always. Try to change the signs on a road that I drive every day and you won't trick me. I'm not likely to even look at the things. Robots? Totally different story. They cannot think or reason and have to be programed to look at ALL signs, defaced, false or not. The guy flying the bird next to the sign isn't going to register as anything but a pedestrian to avoid hitting.
Dead Reckoning? Yea, that's a self fulfilling prophecy, dead.... Eventually the error between where you THINK you are and where you ACTUALLY are gets too big, you crash and die.
You use "Dead Reckoning" for as short of a distance as possible and use pilotage to correct your position often. That's why, when I fly I always carry a map with the expected course marked on it with check points about every 5-10 min of flying time. Then, as I fly, I verify where I am, update my course on the map as necessary. As a pilot you need to always know where you are. It's called pilotage.
Have it your way. I'm not trying to talk you out of your bias.
Trump is president at least until January of 2021 and by the looks of things in the democrat party right now is likely to be president until 2025 unless they come up with a viable candidate which isn't looking too likely for 2020. The leading contender is Hillary, who's lost the presidency twice now (once to the likes of Trump) and I don't think she'd make the primary and everybody else losses the general to Trump hands down. Things could change after the midterms next year I suppose, but somehow I doubt they will..
In short, You need to learn to live with Trump, or the next 3.5 - 7.5 years. You don't need to like him, but you do need to live with him because he's not going anywhere.
And before you start into quoting polls... Remember this line "Trump has no path to 270" was based on these very same polls! I remember that was widely thought to be true, until about 8 PM on election night 2016.
The concept of maneuvering a DC_10 without any controls except the throttles is a simple problem for a computer to deal with.
Likely with a better outcome than in Sioux City
This fault would have NEVER been planned for. The events that lead up to the engine coming apart and severing all three hydraulic systems was not considered possible, or there would have been larger separation between hydraulic system lines and isolation valves. The very thing the FAA required for all DC-10's following this accident.
Also, they loaded this up in the simulator at the UAL training facility in Denver a couple of times (My Dad worked on the equipment there at the time) and where unable to reproduce the successful landing, even using human pilots. You see, the simulator is not 100% accurate. It's close enough to train pilots in procedures and even normal envelop flying, but it's not exactly the same when you push the edges of the flight envelope.
So, no, they couldn't do this. They would not have thought about it and the available simulations were not accurate enough to validate any solution you might have come up with.
LOL... You just don't like him and are looking for data to confirm why you are right. It's called "confirmation bias" in this case, of a partisan nature. You obviously disagree with nearly HALF of voters out there so I'd not get up on that high horse so readily if I were you. Lots of people disagree with you...
I'll offer the following advice. If you are trying to convince folks that Trump is not a good president, I would recommend that you focus on accomplishments (or lack there of) and actual actions he's taken and forget the laundry list of personal reasons you don't like him. It won't likely be effective, but it has a better chance.
You know what's wrong with that statistic? Not that it's not true, but that it is misleading. In commercial aviation, crashes are vanishingly rare events. You are more likely to die on the way to the airport by a couple orders of magnitude than in a airplane accident. Pilots are SAFE, really really safe.
What statistic you need to make any reasonable comparison here is how many times pilots have "taken over" from the automation to avoid a crash and compare that to how many times pilots have "taken over" and THEN crashed a perfectly flyable aircraft. Problem is, you don't have ANY idea how many times pilots have prevented crashes because these events happen all the time and are not reported.
The pilots that did that hadn't trained to do it either. They adapted, adjusted and figured it out "on the fly" using their vast flying experience and skills. Computers and automation do not have the ability to adapt, learn or figure out stuff "on the fly", even AI, if it's not trained for the situation, won't reliably be able to do this kind of thing.
First, simulators are just simulators, they are NOT real life. Even in pilot training scenarios simulators are a tool to teach procedures but they are NOT a valid tool for teaching stick and rudder skills. Pilots are still required to have actual time flying before they can sit up front as PIC. There is a reason for that.
Also, you can only test scenarios that you dream up. In a system as complex as a modern airliner, there is no possible way to know much less catalog all the possible failure modes that the automation would need to deal with. You MIGHT be able to deal with every possible Single Point of failure and test the millions of possibilities that represents, but what about dual failures? Triple mode failures? Any idea how many possible combinations you will need to test? And that's just the aircraft's systems. You will need to add all sorts of external events and situations to your fault tree.
I'm thinking that Billions of tests will be required to fully validate just the aircraft faults... In short, you cannot do this. It's impossible.
Why not just leave the fuel on the ground too? That will save a bundle!
We could dump seat belts, that seat back flotation device, emergency exits, fire extinguishers, evacuation slides and heck the seats too. All those things cost money. Who needs to maintain aircraft anyway? Do away with the mechanics and toss out all those spare parts in the inventory... Yea, that's the ticket.... Oh wait.. Tickets, we can do away with those too.... Selling those and collecting the money costs money you know...
Human error is a risk, yes, but it can be managed. I want pilots up front for a reason. Take a look at UAL 232 that crashed in Souix City Iowa on July 19, 1989 after an uncontained engine failure at cruse that severed all the hydraulics systems. Three pilots crash LANDED a DC-10 without the benefit of any controls except throttles saving 185 people. Those people should have died by all accounts, but the skill of the pilots and a bit of luck saved them.
Then there was the recent double bird strike that lead to the ditching of US Air flight 1549 on January 15, 2009 in the Hudson river. I'm sure you remember that.
Also, there are COUNTLESS cases of the aircraft's systems failing which where routinely handled by the pilots that we just don't know about because they where no big deal, given that the pilots just dealt with it, nobody crashed and nobody got hurt. All that remains of these incidents are entries in the "gripe sheet" in the aircraft's log books. With "automation" folks could have died instead.
Give me pilots, well trained with finely honed skills and proficient on the aircraft they fly over ANY automation Boeing or Airbus can cobble together to deal with those highly complex systems that make up your modern airliner that have more failure modes than you could document in a lifetime of trying.
Forget programming mistakes... What about unplanned faults or bad preflight data gets fed into it? If the automation hasn't been designed to deal with some specific issue or has bad data that happens what does the automation do? Who knows, but crashing becomes a much bigger risk in these cases.
Remember, automation only knows how to deal with the stuff that was planned for... If anything else happens, it's more likely to do the wrong thing than the right thing.
Automation in the cockpit is great, except when something happens that wasn't expected, then, not having a pilot who has experience and skill is a death sentence. In fact, some would argue that we have already automated too much of the work pilots are doing, leaving them with few chances to actually practice their flying skills, increasing the danger should something unexpected actually happen.
How many times will we blithely assume that we can just automate complex tasks like flying passengers around? In the grand scheme of things labor costs of pilots is literally a drop in the bucket compared to fuel, logistics and maintenance. Are we going to do away with the cabin crew and their salary costs too? I mean they are only there to pass out peanuts and drinks (or the odd overpriced meal) to passengers. Why are THEY there? Oh wait, you say they have a safety component to their job? You don't say, and Pilots don't?
Personally, give me two happy pilots, well paid, well rested and well practiced who have actual flying skills sitting up front. I feel safer having to people who are likely going to be the first to die if we crash. I suspect they will put their best effort into saving us, given the situation.
Like my father, who worked for United Airlines for more than three decades said... "Pilots don't get paid for what they do, they get paid for what they can do when necessary." Stop trying to be cheap and pay up...
The only problem with this idea is this.. If you don't know where you are and what direction is which, a Road Atlas is useless. Just knowing that you are "somewhere on I-80 and the ground is hilly" is going to be a problem without a bit more information. Not to mention you kind of need to know how to read a paper map that doesn't automatically adjust to point in the direction you are traveling.
Of course, you *could* ask one of the drivers milling a truck stop about where you are and which way is north, but again, if you don't know how to relate that to a paper map you will be lost again in short order.
In my experience, the kids coming out of our great public schools today barely know basic geometry and are thus going to be totally hopeless with that paper map. Heaven help us should the GPS satellites ever stop working...
He won, Hillary lost, you need to learn to live with that. I lived though 8 years of Obummer without complaining about his "qualifications" though I did oppose his policies and bald face lying. Your laundry list of complaints are pointless.
The "Qualifications" for the job of president are set out in the US Constitution and boils down to three things. 1. A Natural Born US citizen. 2. Over 35 years old. 3. Winner of the electoral college vote. Nothing else matters. Constitutionally Trump is qualified.
You can complain that you don't LIKE him personally, or you don't like what he's doing and you can eve REFUSE to work with him in any way, but you CANNOT keep up this pretense that he's not qualified.
Or didn't vote, or kidded yourselves and voted third party are about to see the results. I didn't like Hillary either but the alternative was obviously worse.
LOL. Trump wasn't my first choice, but he's hands down a better choice than Hillary "Keep towing the same policies" & "I cannot run a successful campaign, even as a shoe in" Clinton. Personally, I voted for the lessor of two evils in the general.
We can argue the details all day, but I'm guessing that your objection to Trump is more partisan than it is about policy. Truly Trump is more centrist than his republican rivals and down right progressive in the social issues of the day and you'd know that if you actually listened to HIM instead of what is being reported about him.
But, as it sits, democrats are not about to assist Trump in any way, regardless of it would serve their own policy objectives. Why? Because it's not about policy, it's about politics, not about getting stuff done but about getting back into power... Eventually the voting public will catch on to this, at least I hope they do.
Trump won because he appealed to people OUTSIDE the party, ostensibly the middle of the road political folks. He also won because of Hillary, who was such a bad candidate that she lost even after the "Access Hollywood" tapes dropped within weeks of the election. Then there is the whole racial perspective on this where democrats ran a white woman to follow the black man into the presidency and I'm pretty sure that suppressed the democratic turnout in some key places and allowed Trump to pick up states on narrow margins to pick up electoral votes and win.
Seriously, Trump didn't really win this on his merits, Realistically he should have lost hands down. What happened is Hillary was such a bad candidate, ran such a bad campaign that SHE LOST despite being a shoe in for the win. Surely you see this. And don't forget this is coming from what you describe as a "White middle aged snowflake"... Hillary was the worst possible candidate I could imagine and ran a horrible campaign who lost to the second worst possible candidate I could think of. She got cocky, drank her own kool-aid and lost because she didn't think she had to put any effort into it.
LOL... Yea, because the parts where made by other manufacturers and simply purchased by Ford and GM. Go buy a Deloran door panel or any of the unique parts they made (or had specifically made) for that car. Good luck. Same with the custom parts of that Ford or GM, where there *might* be a stock of third party parts out there due to the shear numbers of vehicles involved, but once those are gone you will be left scavenging in junkyards or manufacturing your own.
Tesla has parts which are not easily sourced from anybody else, parts that are known to wear out regularly. I'm willing to bet, only Tesla builds some of them. I'm guessing brake parts, tires, rims and wiper blades are going to be available nearly forever because I cannot image Tesla designing and sourcing custom parts for these things, but if you need a battery, some electronic module or a new battery and Tesla is out of business, you are going to be hitting the phones calling junkyards for parts or manufacturing your own. (Mostly the latter as there are precious few Tesla's out there yet.)
Oh, so you are for equal OUTCOME then? Look, I'm not discounting racism happens, I've seen it, it does. However, you simply cannot measure racism by outcome alone. What we want is equality in OPPERTUNITY, where all men (regardless of the circumstances of their birth) are equal in terms of law and thus opportunity. Not all are equal in ability or drive, which is why you cannot measure opportunity by outcome.
MLK wasn't using the measuring stick of race, he was using the content of your character to measure others. This MUST be properly understood. People should be measured by their character, their effort, their intelligence, by what they produce and NOT by what they look like or what family, race, religion or gender they happen to be. (to extend MLK's dream beyond race). He didn't advocate equal outcome, but equal opportunity. And you produce equal opportunity between the races in law by making laws which are agnostic to race and enforcing them equally.
Any attempt to equalize outcome is nothing more than socialism in disguise. Socialism is antithetical to our founding which was based on equality of opportunity and treatment under the law, which always leads to various levels of outcome due to variances in individual's character. Don't confuse opportunity with outcome, they are not the same in our system.
It *should* matter to buyers too. Where are you going to get that Tesla serviced if Tesla goes bust? How about getting parts? Do you have any idea how much it costs to maintain a DeLorean? Even WITH being able to time travel, it's expensive...
Sure, this does still happen but when this happens, IT IS ALREADY ILLEGAL!
We don't ne government to do anything about this except to ENFORCE the existing law that makes it illegal to discriminate based on race. If you have an example of people doing this, document the problem and call law enforcement and get it dealt with. IF law enforcement won't help you, call the state, call the feds, call your elected officials and tell them the law isn't being enforced. Tell your friends, call the news paper, TV and Radio outlets and even protest if you need too. If you live in North Texas, CALL ME, I'll do what I can to help you.
Slashdot Mirror
You got that right... Black Ice is NOT much fun to drive on and very hard to see... I've driven on it in the past and lived to tell the tale. It was no fun waiting for the car to slow down from 55MPH without using the brakes, hoping it stayed on the two lane road...
I don't think automation would deal kindly with that....
I got to think that keeping a sign ice free when it's -20F is going to be some kind of expensive...
Road signs are commonly missing, rotated, shot, stolen or defaced
Or, like around here, just plain wrong because it costs money to change them and the government doesn't have the cash.
You can trick human drivers by defacing street signs
Yea, not always. Try to change the signs on a road that I drive every day and you won't trick me. I'm not likely to even look at the things. Robots? Totally different story. They cannot think or reason and have to be programed to look at ALL signs, defaced, false or not. The guy flying the bird next to the sign isn't going to register as anything but a pedestrian to avoid hitting.
Dead Reckoning? Yea, that's a self fulfilling prophecy, dead.... Eventually the error between where you THINK you are and where you ACTUALLY are gets too big, you crash and die.
You use "Dead Reckoning" for as short of a distance as possible and use pilotage to correct your position often. That's why, when I fly I always carry a map with the expected course marked on it with check points about every 5-10 min of flying time. Then, as I fly, I verify where I am, update my course on the map as necessary. As a pilot you need to always know where you are. It's called pilotage.
Have it your way. I'm not trying to talk you out of your bias.
Trump is president at least until January of 2021 and by the looks of things in the democrat party right now is likely to be president until 2025 unless they come up with a viable candidate which isn't looking too likely for 2020. The leading contender is Hillary, who's lost the presidency twice now (once to the likes of Trump) and I don't think she'd make the primary and everybody else losses the general to Trump hands down. Things could change after the midterms next year I suppose, but somehow I doubt they will..
In short, You need to learn to live with Trump, or the next 3.5 - 7.5 years. You don't need to like him, but you do need to live with him because he's not going anywhere.
And before you start into quoting polls... Remember this line "Trump has no path to 270" was based on these very same polls! I remember that was widely thought to be true, until about 8 PM on election night 2016.
The concept of maneuvering a DC_10 without any controls except the throttles is a simple problem for a computer to deal with.
Likely with a better outcome than in Sioux City
This fault would have NEVER been planned for. The events that lead up to the engine coming apart and severing all three hydraulic systems was not considered possible, or there would have been larger separation between hydraulic system lines and isolation valves. The very thing the FAA required for all DC-10's following this accident.
Also, they loaded this up in the simulator at the UAL training facility in Denver a couple of times (My Dad worked on the equipment there at the time) and where unable to reproduce the successful landing, even using human pilots. You see, the simulator is not 100% accurate. It's close enough to train pilots in procedures and even normal envelop flying, but it's not exactly the same when you push the edges of the flight envelope.
So, no, they couldn't do this. They would not have thought about it and the available simulations were not accurate enough to validate any solution you might have come up with.
LOL... You just don't like him and are looking for data to confirm why you are right. It's called "confirmation bias" in this case, of a partisan nature. You obviously disagree with nearly HALF of voters out there so I'd not get up on that high horse so readily if I were you. Lots of people disagree with you...
I'll offer the following advice. If you are trying to convince folks that Trump is not a good president, I would recommend that you focus on accomplishments (or lack there of) and actual actions he's taken and forget the laundry list of personal reasons you don't like him. It won't likely be effective, but it has a better chance.
And how many times has this happened? Three? Four? In over 100 years of commercial aviation? How is this relevant to this discussion?
You know what's wrong with that statistic? Not that it's not true, but that it is misleading. In commercial aviation, crashes are vanishingly rare events. You are more likely to die on the way to the airport by a couple orders of magnitude than in a airplane accident. Pilots are SAFE, really really safe.
What statistic you need to make any reasonable comparison here is how many times pilots have "taken over" from the automation to avoid a crash and compare that to how many times pilots have "taken over" and THEN crashed a perfectly flyable aircraft. Problem is, you don't have ANY idea how many times pilots have prevented crashes because these events happen all the time and are not reported.
The pilots that did that hadn't trained to do it either. They adapted, adjusted and figured it out "on the fly" using their vast flying experience and skills. Computers and automation do not have the ability to adapt, learn or figure out stuff "on the fly", even AI, if it's not trained for the situation, won't reliably be able to do this kind of thing.
Tested in a simulator? Not so fast..
First, simulators are just simulators, they are NOT real life. Even in pilot training scenarios simulators are a tool to teach procedures but they are NOT a valid tool for teaching stick and rudder skills. Pilots are still required to have actual time flying before they can sit up front as PIC. There is a reason for that.
Also, you can only test scenarios that you dream up. In a system as complex as a modern airliner, there is no possible way to know much less catalog all the possible failure modes that the automation would need to deal with. You MIGHT be able to deal with every possible Single Point of failure and test the millions of possibilities that represents, but what about dual failures? Triple mode failures? Any idea how many possible combinations you will need to test? And that's just the aircraft's systems. You will need to add all sorts of external events and situations to your fault tree.
I'm thinking that Billions of tests will be required to fully validate just the aircraft faults... In short, you cannot do this. It's impossible.
Why not just leave the fuel on the ground too? That will save a bundle!
We could dump seat belts, that seat back flotation device, emergency exits, fire extinguishers, evacuation slides and heck the seats too. All those things cost money. Who needs to maintain aircraft anyway? Do away with the mechanics and toss out all those spare parts in the inventory... Yea, that's the ticket.... Oh wait.. Tickets, we can do away with those too.... Selling those and collecting the money costs money you know...
Human error is a risk, yes, but it can be managed. I want pilots up front for a reason. Take a look at UAL 232 that crashed in Souix City Iowa on July 19, 1989 after an uncontained engine failure at cruse that severed all the hydraulics systems. Three pilots crash LANDED a DC-10 without the benefit of any controls except throttles saving 185 people. Those people should have died by all accounts, but the skill of the pilots and a bit of luck saved them.
Then there was the recent double bird strike that lead to the ditching of US Air flight 1549 on January 15, 2009 in the Hudson river. I'm sure you remember that.
Also, there are COUNTLESS cases of the aircraft's systems failing which where routinely handled by the pilots that we just don't know about because they where no big deal, given that the pilots just dealt with it, nobody crashed and nobody got hurt. All that remains of these incidents are entries in the "gripe sheet" in the aircraft's log books. With "automation" folks could have died instead.
Give me pilots, well trained with finely honed skills and proficient on the aircraft they fly over ANY automation Boeing or Airbus can cobble together to deal with those highly complex systems that make up your modern airliner that have more failure modes than you could document in a lifetime of trying.
Forget programming mistakes... What about unplanned faults or bad preflight data gets fed into it? If the automation hasn't been designed to deal with some specific issue or has bad data that happens what does the automation do? Who knows, but crashing becomes a much bigger risk in these cases.
Remember, automation only knows how to deal with the stuff that was planned for... If anything else happens, it's more likely to do the wrong thing than the right thing.
Automation in the cockpit is great, except when something happens that wasn't expected, then, not having a pilot who has experience and skill is a death sentence. In fact, some would argue that we have already automated too much of the work pilots are doing, leaving them with few chances to actually practice their flying skills, increasing the danger should something unexpected actually happen.
How many times will we blithely assume that we can just automate complex tasks like flying passengers around? In the grand scheme of things labor costs of pilots is literally a drop in the bucket compared to fuel, logistics and maintenance. Are we going to do away with the cabin crew and their salary costs too? I mean they are only there to pass out peanuts and drinks (or the odd overpriced meal) to passengers. Why are THEY there? Oh wait, you say they have a safety component to their job? You don't say, and Pilots don't?
Personally, give me two happy pilots, well paid, well rested and well practiced who have actual flying skills sitting up front. I feel safer having to people who are likely going to be the first to die if we crash. I suspect they will put their best effort into saving us, given the situation.
Like my father, who worked for United Airlines for more than three decades said... "Pilots don't get paid for what they do, they get paid for what they can do when necessary." Stop trying to be cheap and pay up...
Don't forget the compass, watch, sextant and sight reduction tables...
The only problem with this idea is this.. If you don't know where you are and what direction is which, a Road Atlas is useless. Just knowing that you are "somewhere on I-80 and the ground is hilly" is going to be a problem without a bit more information. Not to mention you kind of need to know how to read a paper map that doesn't automatically adjust to point in the direction you are traveling.
Of course, you *could* ask one of the drivers milling a truck stop about where you are and which way is north, but again, if you don't know how to relate that to a paper map you will be lost again in short order.
In my experience, the kids coming out of our great public schools today barely know basic geometry and are thus going to be totally hopeless with that paper map. Heaven help us should the GPS satellites ever stop working...
He won, Hillary lost, you need to learn to live with that. I lived though 8 years of Obummer without complaining about his "qualifications" though I did oppose his policies and bald face lying. Your laundry list of complaints are pointless.
The "Qualifications" for the job of president are set out in the US Constitution and boils down to three things. 1. A Natural Born US citizen. 2. Over 35 years old. 3. Winner of the electoral college vote. Nothing else matters. Constitutionally Trump is qualified.
You can complain that you don't LIKE him personally, or you don't like what he's doing and you can eve REFUSE to work with him in any way, but you CANNOT keep up this pretense that he's not qualified.
QED
Or didn't vote, or kidded yourselves and voted third party are about to see the results. I didn't like Hillary either but the alternative was obviously worse.
LOL. Trump wasn't my first choice, but he's hands down a better choice than Hillary "Keep towing the same policies" & "I cannot run a successful campaign, even as a shoe in" Clinton. Personally, I voted for the lessor of two evils in the general.
We can argue the details all day, but I'm guessing that your objection to Trump is more partisan than it is about policy. Truly Trump is more centrist than his republican rivals and down right progressive in the social issues of the day and you'd know that if you actually listened to HIM instead of what is being reported about him.
But, as it sits, democrats are not about to assist Trump in any way, regardless of it would serve their own policy objectives. Why? Because it's not about policy, it's about politics, not about getting stuff done but about getting back into power... Eventually the voting public will catch on to this, at least I hope they do.
You cannot be serious...
Trump won because he appealed to people OUTSIDE the party, ostensibly the middle of the road political folks. He also won because of Hillary, who was such a bad candidate that she lost even after the "Access Hollywood" tapes dropped within weeks of the election. Then there is the whole racial perspective on this where democrats ran a white woman to follow the black man into the presidency and I'm pretty sure that suppressed the democratic turnout in some key places and allowed Trump to pick up states on narrow margins to pick up electoral votes and win.
Seriously, Trump didn't really win this on his merits, Realistically he should have lost hands down. What happened is Hillary was such a bad candidate, ran such a bad campaign that SHE LOST despite being a shoe in for the win. Surely you see this. And don't forget this is coming from what you describe as a "White middle aged snowflake"... Hillary was the worst possible candidate I could imagine and ran a horrible campaign who lost to the second worst possible candidate I could think of. She got cocky, drank her own kool-aid and lost because she didn't think she had to put any effort into it.
LOL... Yea, because the parts where made by other manufacturers and simply purchased by Ford and GM. Go buy a Deloran door panel or any of the unique parts they made (or had specifically made) for that car. Good luck. Same with the custom parts of that Ford or GM, where there *might* be a stock of third party parts out there due to the shear numbers of vehicles involved, but once those are gone you will be left scavenging in junkyards or manufacturing your own.
Tesla has parts which are not easily sourced from anybody else, parts that are known to wear out regularly. I'm willing to bet, only Tesla builds some of them. I'm guessing brake parts, tires, rims and wiper blades are going to be available nearly forever because I cannot image Tesla designing and sourcing custom parts for these things, but if you need a battery, some electronic module or a new battery and Tesla is out of business, you are going to be hitting the phones calling junkyards for parts or manufacturing your own. (Mostly the latter as there are precious few Tesla's out there yet.)
Oh, so you are for equal OUTCOME then? Look, I'm not discounting racism happens, I've seen it, it does. However, you simply cannot measure racism by outcome alone. What we want is equality in OPPERTUNITY, where all men (regardless of the circumstances of their birth) are equal in terms of law and thus opportunity. Not all are equal in ability or drive, which is why you cannot measure opportunity by outcome.
MLK wasn't using the measuring stick of race, he was using the content of your character to measure others. This MUST be properly understood. People should be measured by their character, their effort, their intelligence, by what they produce and NOT by what they look like or what family, race, religion or gender they happen to be. (to extend MLK's dream beyond race). He didn't advocate equal outcome, but equal opportunity. And you produce equal opportunity between the races in law by making laws which are agnostic to race and enforcing them equally.
Any attempt to equalize outcome is nothing more than socialism in disguise. Socialism is antithetical to our founding which was based on equality of opportunity and treatment under the law, which always leads to various levels of outcome due to variances in individual's character. Don't confuse opportunity with outcome, they are not the same in our system.
It *should* matter to buyers too. Where are you going to get that Tesla serviced if Tesla goes bust? How about getting parts? Do you have any idea how much it costs to maintain a DeLorean? Even WITH being able to time travel, it's expensive...
Sure, this does still happen but when this happens, IT IS ALREADY ILLEGAL!
We don't ne government to do anything about this except to ENFORCE the existing law that makes it illegal to discriminate based on race. If you have an example of people doing this, document the problem and call law enforcement and get it dealt with. IF law enforcement won't help you, call the state, call the feds, call your elected officials and tell them the law isn't being enforced. Tell your friends, call the news paper, TV and Radio outlets and even protest if you need too. If you live in North Texas, CALL ME, I'll do what I can to help you.