Do you have any evidence that self-driving cars are unsafe, or that human intervention has been necessary?
None at all, that's my only point. I'm extremely optimistic that automated cars will be safer than human drivers within the decade if they aren't already. It's not a very high bar to attain, really.
Their record so far is excellent, but the tests are still being done with professional drivers behind the wheel. We don't know what sort of weather conditions the cars have had to deal with, or how much the drivers have needed to intervene. Have they gone out in thunderstorms and blizzards and still have never needed driver intervention? It's possible, I don't know.
You can't drive on the road now without having a drivers license and insurance. You may call that a bubblewrap mentality that curtains your freedom and volition. You're free to have that opinion, I just want to be able to get from point a to point b without some idiot slamming into me. Reasonable restrictions to that end are fine by me.
And... so? None of this will happen until self-driving cars are in fact the safer alternative. At which point, great. Since when do you get to endanger others because you think it's fun?
First of all, I didn't say anything about shiny objects so I'm not sure what that's about. Second of all, I'm pretty sure that shiny objects in your periphery attracting your attention is basic human nature. Being aware of your surroundings has always been an important survival skill. It still is, especially when driving.
Education and critical thinking skills have nothing to do with it. How would that prevent humans from getting distracted, or fatigued, or from missing something that is outside their field of vision?
A computer controlled car can't do worse than a human in that sort of situation. Most drivers would probably just reflexively swerve somewhere before even seeing what is going on in adjacent lanes.
A black holes event horizon is a consequence of its massive gravitational field, so if you get that a wormhole should also have a massive gravitational field than the event horizon would follow from that.
And from my understanding, it's not the event horizon they are saying is smaller in the wormhole, it is the wormhole itself. So I think it is something like a difference in the tidal force, a more concentrated source of a gravitational field would have a stronger tidal force which can be detected.
In an accident in which a fatality is unavoidable, I don't want my car to agree with the other cars that its best for me to be the fatality
That's shortsighted, you're assuming you will always be on the losing side of this situation. If the cars strategy is to preserve as many lives as possible, even if that means harm to the occupant, you are more likely to be saved by this strategy when it is the other drivers car trying to save you.
Things are legal by default, the question should be why do you think it is illegal for companies to choose who they sell their products to? Is their a specific law that is being violated? Keep in mind the companies are not based in the US so our laws don't apply.
How would you describe red only in terms of blue and green? You can't. If the people were actually seeing a new color they wouldn't even try describing it.
No, the assertion was never made that all alternative medicine has been proven not to work. The assertions made are that all alternative medicine have not been proven to work, and some have been proven not to work. Both are true.
Right, that's why there are still medical researchers improving and expanding the field of western medicine continuously. No one claimed western medicine was perfect and complete.
Except it's not like that, because if it's mandatory then the robber knows ahead of time that the thing is useless to steal. That's the idea, at least.
Territory to be defended? Were talking about a bar in San Francisco, not a third world war-zone. If your experience is with the kind of place where it's normal to assault others at the slightest provocation, that's fine. But don't expect your experience to reflect those of us in a more civil society.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you have any evidence that self-driving cars are unsafe, or that human intervention has been necessary?
None at all, that's my only point. I'm extremely optimistic that automated cars will be safer than human drivers within the decade if they aren't already. It's not a very high bar to attain, really.
Their record so far is excellent, but the tests are still being done with professional drivers behind the wheel. We don't know what sort of weather conditions the cars have had to deal with, or how much the drivers have needed to intervene. Have they gone out in thunderstorms and blizzards and still have never needed driver intervention? It's possible, I don't know.
You can't drive on the road now without having a drivers license and insurance. You may call that a bubblewrap mentality that curtains your freedom and volition. You're free to have that opinion, I just want to be able to get from point a to point b without some idiot slamming into me. Reasonable restrictions to that end are fine by me.
We don't know how many times the driver in the cars have had to intervene to prevent an accident, do we?
And... so? None of this will happen until self-driving cars are in fact the safer alternative. At which point, great. Since when do you get to endanger others because you think it's fun?
It's their parents cable subscription, obviously. They watch it on the extra TV in the basement.
First of all, I didn't say anything about shiny objects so I'm not sure what that's about. Second of all, I'm pretty sure that shiny objects in your periphery attracting your attention is basic human nature. Being aware of your surroundings has always been an important survival skill. It still is, especially when driving.
Why would those everyday situations be something that the car can't handle?
Education and critical thinking skills have nothing to do with it. How would that prevent humans from getting distracted, or fatigued, or from missing something that is outside their field of vision?
People have these same problems.
A computer controlled car can't do worse than a human in that sort of situation. Most drivers would probably just reflexively swerve somewhere before even seeing what is going on in adjacent lanes.
Maybe because less people have landlines these days, so ever subscriber pays a greater share of the infrastructure costs.
I was wondering that too. Eventually wouldn't a wormhole accumulate enough mass to have a gravitational singularity too? How would that work?
If a wormhole creates an event horizon on both ends then we won't see anything coming out of it.
A black holes event horizon is a consequence of its massive gravitational field, so if you get that a wormhole should also have a massive gravitational field than the event horizon would follow from that.
And from my understanding, it's not the event horizon they are saying is smaller in the wormhole, it is the wormhole itself. So I think it is something like a difference in the tidal force, a more concentrated source of a gravitational field would have a stronger tidal force which can be detected.
Not where I live. I wish my policy makers were pushing hard for more transit options.
Electrons are actually considered points by physicists. If they do have a size it is not currently known.
In an accident in which a fatality is unavoidable, I don't want my car to agree with the other cars that its best for me to be the fatality
That's shortsighted, you're assuming you will always be on the losing side of this situation. If the cars strategy is to preserve as many lives as possible, even if that means harm to the occupant, you are more likely to be saved by this strategy when it is the other drivers car trying to save you.
Things are legal by default, the question should be why do you think it is illegal for companies to choose who they sell their products to? Is their a specific law that is being violated? Keep in mind the companies are not based in the US so our laws don't apply.
No, to confuse a teaparty persecution complex with reality.
Lawrence Krauss said he wouldn't take legal action to avoid giving this movie any additional publicity due to the Streisand Effect.
How would you describe red only in terms of blue and green? You can't. If the people were actually seeing a new color they wouldn't even try describing it.
No, the assertion was never made that all alternative medicine has been proven not to work. The assertions made are that all alternative medicine have not been proven to work, and some have been proven not to work. Both are true.
Right, that's why there are still medical researchers improving and expanding the field of western medicine continuously. No one claimed western medicine was perfect and complete.
Except it's not like that, because if it's mandatory then the robber knows ahead of time that the thing is useless to steal. That's the idea, at least.
Territory to be defended? Were talking about a bar in San Francisco, not a third world war-zone. If your experience is with the kind of place where it's normal to assault others at the slightest provocation, that's fine. But don't expect your experience to reflect those of us in a more civil society.