I read the same thing in the '70s, but with the date for "cheap" oil being gone set at 2000. Alas that we're living in an age of horrendously expensive oil! Woe!!!
The alternate vision of the future is that, as usual, futurists are all hot and horny about how their technology will revolutionize the world, but it will continue to be far too expensive for society to change over and it will never happen on the claimed scale.
Yeah, who really believes that owning a computer is going to be either cheap or common? C'mon, that's just wishful thinking on the part of a few fantasists.
Likewise portable phones.
And then there's that whole "automobile" thing. It'll never replace the horse & buggy, much less the train.
And don't get me started on "steamships"! Everyone knows the cost of fuel would make such a thing cost-prohibitive compared to a good sailing ship.
Also, when you swap the term "elderly" for "homebound," you realize that the invention would actually help open up the world for a far greater portion of the population.
Good point. Hadn't even really considered it in more general terms than the elderly, but you're right - it would open up the world for more than just them....
Lets assume in a dense stream of cars one decelerates a little bit. Could be wind or a hilly road. Now if the next car is following too close it will have to decrease its speed as well. In many cases even more then the first. Such waves are then propagated through the stream of cars. If multiple of these waves combine then you have a traffic jam out of nowhere. You can fix that by either reducing the number of cars or reducing the average speed of all cars. But if you just replace the control unit (human vs. computer) this will not help.
Of course it will help! The computer won't be doing the "following too close(ly)" thing that started the propagation of the wave.
And even that ignores the reaction time issues - the quicker you react to traffic issues, the fewer traffic problems. And the car will react quicker than the (human) driver....
Similarly, the elderly would participate more in life - go out, party, and socialize a lot more.
Not sure where you're coming from on this; how? Do you think the automated cars are going to be free/cheaper than existing taxi cabs and public transit? Or are you basing this claim on some rationale I have yet to consider?
Just as an example, my parents are getting into their 80's now. They can no longer handle long drives to visit family, and are increasingly worried by flying.
Autonomous car means "take me to CrimsonAvenger's house", go to sleep/read/whatever instead of watching traffic for ten+ hours.
As to public transportation, not all of our parents live in cities. Some, like mine, live out in the boonies (about 40 miles from the nearest city, in their case).
From my own POV, it means a few more hours per week doing what I want instead of "peering through a dirty pane of silica glass" watching out for lunatics who are doing the same.
And the whole "you can stay out a little later, since you don't have to be 100% awake to drive home from the party/whatever" is appealing. Or get off on trips a little earlier, because you don't need your coffee to kick in before you can drive safely....
If you have liability insurance (the only type that is legally required by most state laws), you are required to have it on each vehicle that you drive (even if there is only one licensed driver in the household). Yet the driver can only drive one vehicle at a time.
But, with autonomous vehicles, this is not quite true anymore. You can "drive" to work, then send the car home driverless.
Which also means that your wife won't necessarily need her own vehicle, since your car will be home for her to use right up till it has to go fetch you (feel free to substitute "husband" for "wife" above, as well as pronouns to taste).
Ditto the teenagers. Maybe they need a car, maybe not. Just depends on how many different people in the family need to be on the road at once (and not "in different place", "on the road" only).
Rome needed big armies and needed a system that would integrate the less civilized people it subjugated into its society.
Umm, no. Rome had a miniscule army for most of its history, when compared to its population. That's the advantage of an Empire as opposed to a city-state or similar flyspeck "nation".
Of course, you're assuming that external regulation of a market will be done by informed, altruistic entities in government, right?
The kind of people attracted to government are not inclined toward altruism, they're inclined toward "More power, more power!".
Nor are they more likely to be informed of any particular issue, since there are thousands of issues they need to be experts in to pass sane laws regulating same.
So, we get experts advising them, right? And where are the experts coming from? From the people being regulated, of course. Who knows more about book publishing than book publishers, eh?
Can you say "regulatory capture"? Sure you can....
A bit of perspective: my backyard gets about a megawatt of dumped onto it by the Sun (unless it's cloudy). It's not a big backyard (and no, we're not doing a sale)....
It's indeed a shame a lot of potential organ transplants go to the grave right now. Reasoning about this primarily in financial terms first makes no sense, though. After all, what am I going to do with the money when I'm dead?
Better question: what are your wife and kids going to do with the money when you're dead?
Seriously, I've been telling my wife for years to donate my leftovers to the local medical school. Unfortunately, my cancer history means my leftovers are basically useless for transplanting. But, given that I were reasonably healthy, I'd feel quite comfortable with her getting the proceeds from whatever leftovers still were useful after I got done using them....
Approximately 1000 horses a years a euthanized due injuries sustained from this "sport". If people died at a similar rate playing soccer for example, the sport would be banned.
Of course, if we euthanized humans for a broken leg, we'd likely have a great deal more than 1000 a year dying from playing a sport....
From TFA, Airbus is going to be spending the next five years finishing Ariane 6. Then, AFTER they're done with that, they'll start serious work on reusability.
On the other hand, SpaceX is already flying the reusability testbed(s), and running the tests required to refine the software to the point that it words as intended.
So it looks like a race that SpaceX is pretty much guaranteed to win, what with the ten year head start....
I think you could be in group #1 and think that it is marginally acceptable to subsidize a $40,000 vehicle that is being sold as a practical alternative mode of transportation while not finding it at all acceptable to subsidize an $80,000 luxury car.
Personally, I don't consider a $40K car to be a "practical alternative mode of transportation". PAMOT (to acronym this phrase) would seem to imply "practical for the average guy". Off the top of my head, I don't know many "average guys" who buy $40K cars....
Hmm, never thought of that possibility. That'll make for some interesting times, if any ISIS types read/.
Or any TLA types, for that matter. First time it happens, he's likely to say something to the effect of "hey, guy on slashdot thought of this a month or so back"....
What is the difference between a tactical assault riffle and hunting riffle?
Hmm, the selective fire capability? How about the really wimpy cartridge? Yeah, I suppose the cartridge is comparable to a good varmint rifle (if you squint real hard - most varmint guns in that general size range will be using a rather more powerful round than a.223)...
Plus there's the crappy sights (yeah, you can do really good sights on an assault rifle, but they're generally iron sights, which does not compare favorably to the scope on your average hunting rifle).
Note, for reference, that I'm comparing typical assault rifles to typical hunting rifles where I live. Which hunting rifles are as likely as not to be something similar to a scoped.30-06 bolt-action.
You need to prove that he intentionally [malegislature.gov] sought to disturb the school. Maybe he did... maybe he didn't. It sounds weird that he was there, but then again "bad judgment" is not the same thing as having an intent to disturb the school.
Weird that he was there???
I walk past two schools every morning for routine exercise. A hell of a lot closer than this clown got.
I walk past a third school about once a week, just because it happens to be on one of my alternate routes.
No, I didn't plan the routes that way. Well, okay, one of the schools I pretty much have to walk past to get out of my neighborhood, but the others just happened to be there when I was measuring out the loops....
It's really getting bad when we start having to think that it might be "weird" that someone walked past a school....
Why? Why the fuck should kids be familiar with real guns? I think you grew up in the wrong neighborhood.
Hmm, a bit of a hoplophobe, I see...
Why should you be familiar with guns? Well, how about because you're much less likely to do something stupid with one (like treat it as a toy) if you know something about them?
Also, you're much less likely to wet yourself at sight of one if you know something about them.
Keep in mind that we have no problems giving 15-year-olds access to automobiles (in some States. 16 in others), which are MUCH more dangerous than guns. Note that there are probably more guns in the US than cars, yet more people killed by cars than by guns.
Plus there's the old "we fear what we do not understand" thing. Knowing something about guns will be more likely to lead to less panic over the things....
That's right... Nothing has changed [theguardian.com]. And Mr. Snowden hasn't been watching the elections recently. Right wing nationalism is all the rage and making a big comeback. Mass media says a lot about surveillance, but at election time the people still don't give a shit.
Right wing nationalism? I'm assuming you didn't notice that the Party that voted the continuation of the spying you're upset about was the left-leaning Party?
The main reason is their fear that the people they are interacting with are armed and dangerous, what could solve that little problem,I wonder?
Hmmm...
I expect that requiring everyone to wear ankle and wrist chains at all times would work. Other than that, not much, other than convincing the cops that they go to jail for shooting people just like regular people do.....
Hmm, EPA estimates all fracking in the USA amounts to 70-140 billion gallons per year.
CA uses about 38 billion gallons per DAY (2010 estimate).
So, if ALL of the water used in fracking (worst case estimate) were diverted to CA, it would increase their water supply by about 1%.
Note that all of the water used in fracking can't be diverted to CA in any case, since we don't have a national water distribution system. Best case would be the water from the western States could be diverted to CA.
So, a quick look around the web shows that maybe 5%, tops, of the fracking is done in places where the water could be diverted to CA. Which amounts to maybe 7 billion gallons of water per year, tops. Which is almost FIVE EXTRA HOURS PER YEAR of water available for CA.
Assuming, of course, that the two DESERT States doing almost all of that fracking couldn't find a use for that water themselves....
Slashdot Mirror
I read the same thing in the '70s, but with the date for "cheap" oil being gone set at 2000. Alas that we're living in an age of horrendously expensive oil! Woe!!!
Hmm, a great many years ago, I heard that referred to as a "sleeping dictionary"....
Yeah, who really believes that owning a computer is going to be either cheap or common? C'mon, that's just wishful thinking on the part of a few fantasists.
Likewise portable phones.
And then there's that whole "automobile" thing. It'll never replace the horse & buggy, much less the train.
And don't get me started on "steamships"! Everyone knows the cost of fuel would make such a thing cost-prohibitive compared to a good sailing ship.
Good point. Hadn't even really considered it in more general terms than the elderly, but you're right - it would open up the world for more than just them....
Of course it will help! The computer won't be doing the "following too close(ly)" thing that started the propagation of the wave.
And even that ignores the reaction time issues - the quicker you react to traffic issues, the fewer traffic problems. And the car will react quicker than the (human) driver....
Just as an example, my parents are getting into their 80's now. They can no longer handle long drives to visit family, and are increasingly worried by flying.
Autonomous car means "take me to CrimsonAvenger's house", go to sleep/read/whatever instead of watching traffic for ten+ hours.
As to public transportation, not all of our parents live in cities. Some, like mine, live out in the boonies (about 40 miles from the nearest city, in their case).
From my own POV, it means a few more hours per week doing what I want instead of "peering through a dirty pane of silica glass" watching out for lunatics who are doing the same.
And the whole "you can stay out a little later, since you don't have to be 100% awake to drive home from the party/whatever" is appealing. Or get off on trips a little earlier, because you don't need your coffee to kick in before you can drive safely....
But, with autonomous vehicles, this is not quite true anymore. You can "drive" to work, then send the car home driverless.
Which also means that your wife won't necessarily need her own vehicle, since your car will be home for her to use right up till it has to go fetch you (feel free to substitute "husband" for "wife" above, as well as pronouns to taste).
Ditto the teenagers. Maybe they need a car, maybe not. Just depends on how many different people in the family need to be on the road at once (and not "in different place", "on the road" only).
So would I. Problem is that it costs more for a million college tuitions/fees than it does for a single Predator drone.
I expect that it costs more for a million college tuition/fees than it does for ALL the Predator drones we've ever bought....
Umm, no. Rome had a miniscule army for most of its history, when compared to its population. That's the advantage of an Empire as opposed to a city-state or similar flyspeck "nation".
The Persians had a civilized culture long after "they were forced to become Muslims".
Compare the culture of 10th century Persia to 10th century France or England sometime. Or even the 15th century.
And do try to remember that "algebra" isn't an Anglo-Saxon acronym....
Of course, you're assuming that external regulation of a market will be done by informed, altruistic entities in government, right?
The kind of people attracted to government are not inclined toward altruism, they're inclined toward "More power, more power!".
Nor are they more likely to be informed of any particular issue, since there are thousands of issues they need to be experts in to pass sane laws regulating same.
So, we get experts advising them, right? And where are the experts coming from? From the people being regulated, of course. Who knows more about book publishing than book publishers, eh?
Can you say "regulatory capture"? Sure you can....
IOW, a megawatt isn't really a big deal, people.
*I* wouldn't even notice him that morning. *I* would be too hungover to notice the Second Coming....
Better question: what are your wife and kids going to do with the money when you're dead?
Seriously, I've been telling my wife for years to donate my leftovers to the local medical school. Unfortunately, my cancer history means my leftovers are basically useless for transplanting. But, given that I were reasonably healthy, I'd feel quite comfortable with her getting the proceeds from whatever leftovers still were useful after I got done using them....
Of course, if we euthanized humans for a broken leg, we'd likely have a great deal more than 1000 a year dying from playing a sport....
It's not as much of a race as you might think.
From TFA, Airbus is going to be spending the next five years finishing Ariane 6. Then, AFTER they're done with that, they'll start serious work on reusability.
On the other hand, SpaceX is already flying the reusability testbed(s), and running the tests required to refine the software to the point that it words as intended.
So it looks like a race that SpaceX is pretty much guaranteed to win, what with the ten year head start....
Umm, I live in a place that has Mardi Gras. A guy in a stormtrooper costume isn't even enough to get people to pull out cameras to take pictures....
Mind you, it would prolly be considered weird to wear your stormtrooper costume on Ash Wednesday....
Personally, I don't consider a $40K car to be a "practical alternative mode of transportation". PAMOT (to acronym this phrase) would seem to imply "practical for the average guy". Off the top of my head, I don't know many "average guys" who buy $40K cars....
Hmm, never thought of that possibility. That'll make for some interesting times, if any ISIS types read /.
Or any TLA types, for that matter. First time it happens, he's likely to say something to the effect of "hey, guy on slashdot thought of this a month or so back"....
Which would be...bad.
Hmm, the selective fire capability? How about the really wimpy cartridge? Yeah, I suppose the cartridge is comparable to a good varmint rifle (if you squint real hard - most varmint guns in that general size range will be using a rather more powerful round than a .223)...
Plus there's the crappy sights (yeah, you can do really good sights on an assault rifle, but they're generally iron sights, which does not compare favorably to the scope on your average hunting rifle).
Note, for reference, that I'm comparing typical assault rifles to typical hunting rifles where I live. Which hunting rifles are as likely as not to be something similar to a scoped .30-06 bolt-action.
Weird that he was there???
I walk past two schools every morning for routine exercise. A hell of a lot closer than this clown got.
I walk past a third school about once a week, just because it happens to be on one of my alternate routes.
No, I didn't plan the routes that way. Well, okay, one of the schools I pretty much have to walk past to get out of my neighborhood, but the others just happened to be there when I was measuring out the loops....
It's really getting bad when we start having to think that it might be "weird" that someone walked past a school....
Hmm, a bit of a hoplophobe, I see...
Why should you be familiar with guns? Well, how about because you're much less likely to do something stupid with one (like treat it as a toy) if you know something about them?
Also, you're much less likely to wet yourself at sight of one if you know something about them.
Keep in mind that we have no problems giving 15-year-olds access to automobiles (in some States. 16 in others), which are MUCH more dangerous than guns. Note that there are probably more guns in the US than cars, yet more people killed by cars than by guns.
Plus there's the old "we fear what we do not understand" thing. Knowing something about guns will be more likely to lead to less panic over the things....
Right wing nationalism? I'm assuming you didn't notice that the Party that voted the continuation of the spying you're upset about was the left-leaning Party?
Hmmm...
I expect that requiring everyone to wear ankle and wrist chains at all times would work. Other than that, not much, other than convincing the cops that they go to jail for shooting people just like regular people do.....
Hmm, EPA estimates all fracking in the USA amounts to 70-140 billion gallons per year.
CA uses about 38 billion gallons per DAY (2010 estimate).
So, if ALL of the water used in fracking (worst case estimate) were diverted to CA, it would increase their water supply by about 1%.
Note that all of the water used in fracking can't be diverted to CA in any case, since we don't have a national water distribution system. Best case would be the water from the western States could be diverted to CA.
So, a quick look around the web shows that maybe 5%, tops, of the fracking is done in places where the water could be diverted to CA. Which amounts to maybe 7 billion gallons of water per year, tops. Which is almost FIVE EXTRA HOURS PER YEAR of water available for CA.
Assuming, of course, that the two DESERT States doing almost all of that fracking couldn't find a use for that water themselves....