Conversations would be different if the uber car was at fault but not all accidents can be avoided.
But there are also accidents that one could have avoided even if it were not their fault. This could very well be one of those cases. I have avoided accidents where another driver has not properly yielded more than a few times. Its a matter of not trusting the other driver to do the right thing. Its the kind of thing that is very hard to program in to an automated system.
The liable party is defined in the purchase contract. It could be anyone that agrees, the end user, or the developer, or whomever sets the parameters for operation.
We allow people on bicycles that can do about the same damage without requiring they prove themselves.
False logic. We actually have a very long history of bike riding and know very well the safety and risks. There are even rules and laws established to manage these risks. And on top of that there is human self preservation instinct that helps. Not so for autonomous vehicles.
The regulations would be smart to impose some restrictions for vehicles operating with no driver. One of them could a an successful operating history with a driver. Speed limits should also be considered. We may not want driver-less cars on the road doing, say, 40 mph + when there are zero demonstrations of technology being able to do that safely.
Even Tesla, the self proclaimed leader in this technology, is struggling to get the simplest things to work reliably; http://bgr.com/2017/03/02/tesl...
The just the skin of the walls were printed, all the rest was done by meat robots using normal tools and materials.
When the plumbing, wiring and paint is laid down by the printer (it's a robot; an extruder robot right now) I'll start listening to the possibility of 'printed in a day'. I don't think it's that far off, honestly.
It would be easy to construct a larger, more complex structure in a day using modular panels.
Whether this is a good offer or not depends on the price etc. It is just a sales pitch. Buy my stuff and I guarantee it will be delivered within 3 months... Nothing special here. If he is asking some ridiculous price or if his product is not suitable for the job it is just air being emitted.
Tesla products are expensive. And for this offer there is nothing technologically unique about Telsa. They can find and install storage products from Asia for much less. If it were cost effective, they would be doing it already.
He said from the "day the contract is signed", meaning all those things will be covered by the contract.
That's the rub. He hasn't even clearly defined what problem he will solve. The recent articles describe the symptoms of a more complex problem. Musk is proposing to alleviate the local symptoms possibly, not necessarily the core systemic problem which is continuously evolving. And of course he needs to tell them how much it will cost to 'solve' the problem.
Yup, more benefits for those who don't need it at the expense of the poor. Anyone that can afford to pay $30K+ for a car doesn't need this help. There is already a generous federal tax credit that is also only accessible to the well off.
An OLED screen, or a screen with similar properties might be ideal considering the lighting conditions of the spaces where the machines are often used.
They could have a convex curvature like an old CRT as well.
In addition, the service is getting CW, USA, FX, FXX, Syfy, FreeForm, MSNBC, CNBC, Fox News, Fox Business, Disney, Disney Jr., NatGeo, Sprout, E! and others.
Cable channels, not the locals, particularly sports channels are what drive up the price. Any cable package with all the cable channels listed above will cost a lot more than $35/mo. Sports is what keeps me 'corded' atm.
I haven't read the details, but the key for me would be how many viewers does it allow at one time? If it only allows 1 viewer than its not worth it. If it allows 3 it would suit my family needs and I could save a lot of money.
They have a peer-reviewed article published in "Science", other Researcher's have published papers on the same effect using difference materials and the "The Economist" article shows the Researcher's holding a big-ass roll of the stuff, there isn't much to be sceptical of.
How does holding a roll of it prove how effective it is in a practical application? I didn't say it didn't exist, in fact I said that since they have produced it why don't they demonstrate it in a practical application. The fact they have not when it would be so easy to do is why I am skeptical.
"Passive cooling on the order of what this article talks about would seem to be too good to be true. If it is true these guys should be filthy rich soon."
Don't forget to sell your Air Conditioning stock.
Its interesting that they have made the film, yet have not demonstrated it in a practical application. That makes me skeptical as they are relying on performance claims when they shouldn't have to. Why could they not take the film and cover a small structure (like a shed), and simply tell us the resulting cooling effect? And maybe compare against a simple reflective coating
So you're saying that small ISPs don't have the resources to do things like know what their own damned pricing structure is?
No, he absolutely never said that. Common sense tells us that they do, and obviously their customers will know. So no need for regulation that requires it and comes with other requirements such as performance which the ISP may not take time to measure or guarantee.
Not enough space. Yucca was for the comparatively low volume of nuclear fuel rod waste, not nearly as voluminous as the worlds CRT and electronic waste. Not even close.
Yes people like you are too stupid to be able to change a setting and your only option is failure. Obviously even the most simple of tasks is well beyond your capability.
Facebook sucks by default, no settings can change that.
Slashdot Mirror
Conversations would be different if the uber car was at fault but not all accidents can be avoided.
But there are also accidents that one could have avoided even if it were not their fault. This could very well be one of those cases. I have avoided accidents where another driver has not properly yielded more than a few times. Its a matter of not trusting the other driver to do the right thing. Its the kind of thing that is very hard to program in to an automated system.
Lets apply Moore's law to all our problems.
The liable party is defined in the purchase contract. It could be anyone that agrees, the end user, or the developer, or whomever sets the parameters for operation.
I makes a difference if you are trying to get out of its way.
We allow people on bicycles that can do about the same damage without requiring they prove themselves.
False logic. We actually have a very long history of bike riding and know very well the safety and risks. There are even rules and laws established to manage these risks. And on top of that there is human self preservation instinct that helps. Not so for autonomous vehicles.
The regulations would be smart to impose some restrictions for vehicles operating with no driver. One of them could a an successful operating history with a driver. Speed limits should also be considered. We may not want driver-less cars on the road doing, say, 40 mph + when there are zero demonstrations of technology being able to do that safely.
Even Tesla, the self proclaimed leader in this technology, is struggling to get the simplest things to work reliably; http://bgr.com/2017/03/02/tesl...
The just the skin of the walls were printed, all the rest was done by meat robots using normal tools and materials.
When the plumbing, wiring and paint is laid down by the printer (it's a robot; an extruder robot right now) I'll start listening to the possibility of 'printed in a day'. I don't think it's that far off, honestly.
It would be easy to construct a larger, more complex structure in a day using modular panels.
Or they could just buy much lower cost batteries from Asia that are just as good. The reason they have not done that already is cost.
Whether this is a good offer or not depends on the price etc. It is just a sales pitch. Buy my stuff and I guarantee it will be delivered within 3 months... Nothing special here. If he is asking some ridiculous price or if his product is not suitable for the job it is just air being emitted.
Tesla products are expensive. And for this offer there is nothing technologically unique about Telsa. They can find and install storage products from Asia for much less. If it were cost effective, they would be doing it already.
He said from the "day the contract is signed", meaning all those things will be covered by the contract.
That's the rub. He hasn't even clearly defined what problem he will solve. The recent articles describe the symptoms of a more complex problem. Musk is proposing to alleviate the local symptoms possibly, not necessarily the core systemic problem which is continuously evolving. And of course he needs to tell them how much it will cost to 'solve' the problem.
Australia clearly won't fall for his rhetoric.
Then we'll be left with a lot of wind plants, I wonder how they'll be able to afford to provide fuel for them...
We'll build a lot of nukes, then run windmills as fans and cool the earth. :)
Yup, more benefits for those who don't need it at the expense of the poor. Anyone that can afford to pay $30K+ for a car doesn't need this help. There is already a generous federal tax credit that is also only accessible to the well off.
An OLED screen, or a screen with similar properties might be ideal considering the lighting conditions of the spaces where the machines are often used.
They could have a convex curvature like an old CRT as well.
If someone marks a news item as disputed which turns out to be true, they should be eliminated from being able to mark items in the future.
I mean, Amazon must be getting carbon credits or something for this, right? Right? /s
They get tax credits, which basically amounts to the public paying for part of their power usage.
Read and ye shall be enlightened;
In addition, the service is getting CW, USA, FX, FXX, Syfy, FreeForm, MSNBC, CNBC, Fox News, Fox Business, Disney, Disney Jr., NatGeo, Sprout, E! and others.
Cable channels, not the locals, particularly sports channels are what drive up the price. Any cable package with all the cable channels listed above will cost a lot more than $35/mo. Sports is what keeps me 'corded' atm.
I haven't read the details, but the key for me would be how many viewers does it allow at one time? If it only allows 1 viewer than its not worth it. If it allows 3 it would suit my family needs and I could save a lot of money.
They have a peer-reviewed article published in "Science", other Researcher's have published papers on the same effect using difference materials and the "The Economist" article shows the Researcher's holding a big-ass roll of the stuff, there isn't much to be sceptical of.
How does holding a roll of it prove how effective it is in a practical application? I didn't say it didn't exist, in fact I said that since they have produced it why don't they demonstrate it in a practical application. The fact they have not when it would be so easy to do is why I am skeptical.
"Passive cooling on the order of what this article talks about would seem to be too good to be true. If it is true these guys should be filthy rich soon."
Don't forget to sell your Air Conditioning stock.
Its interesting that they have made the film, yet have not demonstrated it in a practical application. That makes me skeptical as they are relying on performance claims when they shouldn't have to. Why could they not take the film and cover a small structure (like a shed), and simply tell us the resulting cooling effect? And maybe compare against a simple reflective coating
So you're saying that small ISPs don't have the resources to do things like know what their own damned pricing structure is?
No, he absolutely never said that. Common sense tells us that they do, and obviously their customers will know. So no need for regulation that requires it and comes with other requirements such as performance which the ISP may not take time to measure or guarantee.
Not enough space. Yucca was for the comparatively low volume of nuclear fuel rod waste, not nearly as voluminous as the worlds CRT and electronic waste. Not even close.
Maybe in chronological order, but not in the pecking order.
And the remaining 10% are bad at math.
I thought Apple was a pretty capable company, but they can't design a phone that isn't a hazard to repair?
Yet another reason to not use facebook.
Yes people like you are too stupid to be able to change a setting and your only option is failure. Obviously even the most simple of tasks is well beyond your capability.
Facebook sucks by default, no settings can change that.