First up, making features artificially bad is not only a badtechnical case, but its also a bad technical case. We engineers have a tendency to thibk that othet littlings aren't as smart as we are, but give them a week or two with the new system and they'll adapt.
Then again, your flying car analogy is inaccurate. As an aerospace engineer, flying cars need to be autonomous. That will reduce training, so wrong assumption on your part. As for regulation,heard of GPS? Safety, hmm... How about a parachute that is deployed by rockets when the power goes out, akin to canopies popping out of fighter planes in peril, as found in the terrafugia models? Wrong analogy and wrong assumptions.
Slashdot Mirror
First up, making features artificially bad is not only a badtechnical case, but its also a bad technical case. We engineers have a tendency to thibk that othet littlings aren't as smart as we are, but give them a week or two with the new system and they'll adapt. Then again, your flying car analogy is inaccurate. As an aerospace engineer, flying cars need to be autonomous. That will reduce training, so wrong assumption on your part. As for regulation,heard of GPS? Safety, hmm... How about a parachute that is deployed by rockets when the power goes out, akin to canopies popping out of fighter planes in peril, as found in the terrafugia models? Wrong analogy and wrong assumptions.