In high school, I asked my grade 13 chemistry teacher why Hydrogen was on the left column of the periodic table where everything else was a metal. I was told because it had one electron in the outer shell, like everything else in that column.
The conversation went something like "But, if everything else in the column is a metal, doesn't that imply Hydrogen is a metal?" "No, it's a gas." "But hydrogen can be cooled to a liquid and it behaves like other liquefied metals (ie Mercury), couldn't it be cooled to the point where it is solid and will it behave like a metal?" "Go away."
In university, I asked the same question and was told that my reasoning was not unique and the idea was put forward many years before but that we'll probably never produce the necessary conditions on earth where Hydrogen will be a solid and we can see if it will be a metal.
Nice to see that we've done something that was thought to be, if not impossible, extremely difficult.
Our former government didn't have any problem at all with muzzling scientists, their organizations as well as defunding anybody who didn't step up to their pro-oil agenda.
Very disturbing to see an anti-science government, regardless of where it is.
Why would you assume "a bad computer program with a dozen eyes is likely to be better than a bag of meat with only two"?
I'm not up on state of the art on computer image/object recognition but the experience I have from about 10 years ago leads me to believe that there are still challenges to be solved, especially when it comes to recognizing movements and intentions. As a driver, some of the cues I rely on include turning indicators, wheel positions, other driver/pedestrian/cyclist eye contact as well as sounds.
I'm not saying that the challenge of coming up with software that allows a car to autonomously drive itself better than a human isn't possible. I just challenge the assertion that a computer with multiple cameras is likely superior to a human.
Agreed. If I bought a car with a feature called "autopilot", I would think I would be comfortable taking a snooze (or watching a Harry Potter movie) while the car did the driving for me. I am really surprised they haven't dropped the name "autopilot" as it is totally misleading and something that has been pointed out repeatedly. I suspect that there are egos involved in the decision not to change the name.
Or, maybe, they think their software is close enough to achieve certification for totally taking over responsibility for driving the car that they think that can weather this storm and keep the name for the big roll out.
A crash rate of 1.3/ million miles and having 130 million miles of data means that there has been about 170 crashes.
I'm guessing accidents range from minor fender-benders (although with cars of today, a "minor" fender bender costs $2k+) to the fatal accident.
I would like to know where this 40% reduction takes place in the accident spectrum ? Does this mean that there are much fewer fender benders or fewer accidents which resulted in personal injuries?
If it's at the lower end of the range then big whoopdie fucking do - if it results in fewer injuries (and I would guess this would be significantly more than 40%) then it's something to look into and see if this improvement can be brought to other manufacturer's cars (and trucks).
I've not spent a lot of time in Japan but on future trips I will have a little nostalgia remembering coming in after a long night of Karaoke and trying to figure out how to relieve myself without flooding the bathroom.
Of course, that option is a lot better than the ubiquitous hole in the floor with a shell that you squat over that my wife always wondered why I took pictures of.
I would think the most interesting aspect of this device is that it requires a bendable display and, looking at the drawings, I would guess a very scratch proof surface (pun not intended) would be required. Actually the need for a scratch proof (not *resistant*) would be absolutely necessary or else the areas where the fold take place are going to look like shit in short order. The same for the bottom surface when the device is folded and resting on something like a diner tabletop.
Now, based on Microsoft's history with personal devices, I would think that the likelihood of this becoming a successful product is between slim and dick.
I don't see an autonomous flying car in neighbourhoods, except in locales where there aren't: - Power lines - Trees - Pets (and children) that will be blown around lift jets - Shingled roofs (see previous) - Anything that can be blown around - Anything that could come into impact with the flying vehicle
Don't these "futurists" know that their creations won't be allowed to fly/land anywhere aircraft can't fly/land now?
As somebody who works with kids & technology, I'm convinced that things would go a lot more efficiently if kids could use a keyboard effectively along with knowing how to use a mouse.
Most kids are quite adept at working with touchscreen on a phone or a tablet, but put them in front of a keyboard and anything you are trying to teach them is lost as they search out basic letters and then try to figure out how the shift key works.
When I saw the headline to this article, it made me think that the requirement was for a switch that would cause the robot to start killing all humans.
I've had a plasma for 8 years and haven't thought anything about it until I bought a decent LCD for the kids.
I was shocked at the difference in the picture quality and clearly, if anybody thought LCD was good enough, they haven't seen what you can get with a plasma TV.
I'm looking forward to replacing the plasma in the next year or two with an OLED, when the burn in/life issues are understood and not a problem.
Yes. I am expecting the battery technology to get 900k miles.
That doesn't mean the drivetrain has to last 900k miles, or the body, or the seats or the whatever...
I'm expecting the ability of the batteries to go 900k for them to be a demonstrably mature technology that matches typical automotive technology.
So, if I have say, 5 technologies in the vehicle (batteries, motors, drivetrain, body, interior) that all rated at 900k, then I should be able to expect 300k miles from the entire package.
Avoiding the obvious comment/joke/pun regarding fiery past Samsung has with rechargeable products recently, the first thing I always want to see in regards to car battery technology is how many charge/discharge cycles can it handle?
If we were to assume the worst case, a vehicle could be driven 600 miles (two charge/discharge cycles) every day. Multiply that by 300 days in a year and an expected 5 (7?) year life, this is 3,000 charge/discharge cycles and what I see for most lithium battery technology is usually around 500 cycles. This doesn't include temperature extremes (say from -30C to 45C).
Can this (or any) technology provide this kind of life in a car environment? What do Tesla batteries claim to be able to do?
How would you recommend to somebody who feels they have a great application idea and is probably ready to go for Angel/1st round funding but feels that the application should be Open Source?
Do you put in customization/support as the way to fund the endeavor long term or is there another approach for the OSS conscious entrepreneur?
Slashdot Mirror
If nothing else, this research has resulted in the technology for compressing something at incredible pressures, never before thought possible.
I'm sure it's suitable for compressing The Flash's costume to the point where it could be hidden in a ring!
In high school, I asked my grade 13 chemistry teacher why Hydrogen was on the left column of the periodic table where everything else was a metal. I was told because it had one electron in the outer shell, like everything else in that column.
The conversation went something like "But, if everything else in the column is a metal, doesn't that imply Hydrogen is a metal?" "No, it's a gas." "But hydrogen can be cooled to a liquid and it behaves like other liquefied metals (ie Mercury), couldn't it be cooled to the point where it is solid and will it behave like a metal?" "Go away."
In university, I asked the same question and was told that my reasoning was not unique and the idea was put forward many years before but that we'll probably never produce the necessary conditions on earth where Hydrogen will be a solid and we can see if it will be a metal.
Nice to see that we've done something that was thought to be, if not impossible, extremely difficult.
Yeah, that must be it. If the results don't match your political leanings, you're a "Trudeau fanboy".
Thank you for exemplifying the attitude of a Harper Conservative and why it's okay to ban research.
Our former government didn't have any problem at all with muzzling scientists, their organizations as well as defunding anybody who didn't step up to their pro-oil agenda.
Very disturbing to see an anti-science government, regardless of where it is.
Sorry, this sounds like something that SPECTRE is more likely to exploit.
Why would you assume "a bad computer program with a dozen eyes is likely to be better than a bag of meat with only two"?
I'm not up on state of the art on computer image/object recognition but the experience I have from about 10 years ago leads me to believe that there are still challenges to be solved, especially when it comes to recognizing movements and intentions. As a driver, some of the cues I rely on include turning indicators, wheel positions, other driver/pedestrian/cyclist eye contact as well as sounds.
I'm not saying that the challenge of coming up with software that allows a car to autonomously drive itself better than a human isn't possible. I just challenge the assertion that a computer with multiple cameras is likely superior to a human.
Agreed. If I bought a car with a feature called "autopilot", I would think I would be comfortable taking a snooze (or watching a Harry Potter movie) while the car did the driving for me. I am really surprised they haven't dropped the name "autopilot" as it is totally misleading and something that has been pointed out repeatedly. I suspect that there are egos involved in the decision not to change the name.
Or, maybe, they think their software is close enough to achieve certification for totally taking over responsibility for driving the car that they think that can weather this storm and keep the name for the big roll out.
A crash rate of 1.3/ million miles and having 130 million miles of data means that there has been about 170 crashes.
I'm guessing accidents range from minor fender-benders (although with cars of today, a "minor" fender bender costs $2k+) to the fatal accident.
I would like to know where this 40% reduction takes place in the accident spectrum ? Does this mean that there are much fewer fender benders or fewer accidents which resulted in personal injuries?
If it's at the lower end of the range then big whoopdie fucking do - if it results in fewer injuries (and I would guess this would be significantly more than 40%) then it's something to look into and see if this improvement can be brought to other manufacturer's cars (and trucks).
I've not spent a lot of time in Japan but on future trips I will have a little nostalgia remembering coming in after a long night of Karaoke and trying to figure out how to relieve myself without flooding the bathroom.
Of course, that option is a lot better than the ubiquitous hole in the floor with a shell that you squat over that my wife always wondered why I took pictures of.
Why do you think that any of the 75 employees got anything close to $10M a piece? I'd be surprised if even 1% of that amount made it to the employees.
That line item looks like accounting games to make the company look more valuable to Facebook shareholders.
No fucking kidding.
I would think the most interesting aspect of this device is that it requires a bendable display and, looking at the drawings, I would guess a very scratch proof surface (pun not intended) would be required. Actually the need for a scratch proof (not *resistant*) would be absolutely necessary or else the areas where the fold take place are going to look like shit in short order. The same for the bottom surface when the device is folded and resting on something like a diner tabletop.
Now, based on Microsoft's history with personal devices, I would think that the likelihood of this becoming a successful product is between slim and dick.
I would argue with that - I've had a (serious for me and my company) Bluetooth issue that I have been first trying to convince Microsoft that exists.
It's easy to say you have better tech if you ignore the complaints about it.
I don't see an autonomous flying car in neighbourhoods, except in locales where there aren't:
- Power lines
- Trees
- Pets (and children) that will be blown around lift jets
- Shingled roofs (see previous)
- Anything that can be blown around
- Anything that could come into impact with the flying vehicle
Don't these "futurists" know that their creations won't be allowed to fly/land anywhere aircraft can't fly/land now?
As somebody who works with kids & technology, I'm convinced that things would go a lot more efficiently if kids could use a keyboard effectively along with knowing how to use a mouse.
Most kids are quite adept at working with touchscreen on a phone or a tablet, but put them in front of a keyboard and anything you are trying to teach them is lost as they search out basic letters and then try to figure out how the shift key works.
Who said the landing was on Earth? Mr. Musk's creation is a lot more advanced than we can even suspect.
My killbot has a gun, blackjack and hookers - in fact, forget the gun.
http://www.rollingstone.com/mo...
When I saw the headline to this article, it made me think that the requirement was for a switch that would cause the robot to start killing all humans.
Bender B. Rodriguez would be proud.
A bit ironic, but I'm sure it would be appreciated!
How long can you drive 36 hours straight with 2 hour naps in between?
I picked 600 miles as a reasonable average.
I've had a plasma for 8 years and haven't thought anything about it until I bought a decent LCD for the kids.
I was shocked at the difference in the picture quality and clearly, if anybody thought LCD was good enough, they haven't seen what you can get with a plasma TV.
I'm looking forward to replacing the plasma in the next year or two with an OLED, when the burn in/life issues are understood and not a problem.
Yes. I am expecting the battery technology to get 900k miles.
That doesn't mean the drivetrain has to last 900k miles, or the body, or the seats or the whatever...
I'm expecting the ability of the batteries to go 900k for them to be a demonstrably mature technology that matches typical automotive technology.
So, if I have say, 5 technologies in the vehicle (batteries, motors, drivetrain, body, interior) that all rated at 900k, then I should be able to expect 300k miles from the entire package.
Avoiding the obvious comment/joke/pun regarding fiery past Samsung has with rechargeable products recently, the first thing I always want to see in regards to car battery technology is how many charge/discharge cycles can it handle?
If we were to assume the worst case, a vehicle could be driven 600 miles (two charge/discharge cycles) every day. Multiply that by 300 days in a year and an expected 5 (7?) year life, this is 3,000 charge/discharge cycles and what I see for most lithium battery technology is usually around 500 cycles. This doesn't include temperature extremes (say from -30C to 45C).
Can this (or any) technology provide this kind of life in a car environment? What do Tesla batteries claim to be able to do?
How would you recommend to somebody who feels they have a great application idea and is probably ready to go for Angel/1st round funding but feels that the application should be Open Source?
Do you put in customization/support as the way to fund the endeavor long term or is there another approach for the OSS conscious entrepreneur?