Given that speed limit signs are fairly standardized and well-defined, having the system recognize them and act appropriately shouldn't be an insurmountable problem.
Except that the posted speed limit only applies in ideal conditions. You can be driving below the posted speed limit yet still be ticketed for driving at an unsafe speed.
So the self-driving vehicle would, at all times, need to choose a reasonable and prudent speed that is equal to or less than the posted speed limit.
And I wonder how often the human behind the wheel will get impatient with the computer for driving so slowly and take the wheel, or how often a following motorist will get impatient and honk or whip around, or how often rear end collisions will occur as a result of following motorists driving too fast for conditions.
I would think an "introduction to computing" course would start with the basics, such as how to use the mouse, how to double-click, how to right click, how to select and drag, how to copy and paste, how the filesystem works (and where files go when you download them, please not the desktop), and so on.
Follow that with how create and unpack compressed archives, how to copy files, how to burn a CD, how to backup and restore, and how and why to avoid logging in as administrator. It's unfortunate that these are considered to be advanced topics, when they really ought to be taught early.
Once you've learned all that, then you can progress on to task-specific software, such as MS-Office.
One reason people have so many problems with computers and they ask us for help is because they don't learn these things in the right order.
No, it isn't the tank style heaters that need to go, but any heaters that use electric resistance to create heat, unless you're in a very cold climate.
But since the author didn't take care to use consistent precision converting from metric to imperial, I think it's more likely that he converted the other way around and introduced false precision. This is what you get when journalists don't take the time to understand the science.
It would take 2-3 tons of corn just to power my car for one year (and I don't drive that much).
2-3 tons of corn makes 200-300 gallons of ethanol. That's almost a gallon a day. If you drove less, then corn ethanol would be less wasteful. So yours is a circular argument.
The US wasted millions of tons of grain making ethanol in a misguided attempt to not burn fossil fuel.
It's misguided because the farmland used to produce that grain could have produced food for human consumption, correct?
Does your argument apply to any scarce resource diverted from food production, including the petroleum that could have been used to power tractors and other farm equipment but we instead put into our automobiles?
What about farmland used directly or indirectly for meat production, a very inefficient way to produce food for humans?
Put a list of projects and costs on the internet and let people vote for them. Top votes win and we keep going down the list until we're out of money.
That isn't enough information. We also need to know the expected net social benefits, in the same currency as the costs. For example, a project that costs $2 million and gives $4 million in benefits is a better investment than a project that costs half as much ($1 million) but gives only $1 million in benefits.
No such thing as freeway driving, just freeway parking. If the whitehouse could bring freeway speeds up to 50MPH...
That's quite easy. Given that freeway congestion is a type of shortage (too many cars trying to use the same road at the same time), anyone with a basic understanding of economics knows how to eliminate the shortage, even without adding lanes.
A recent article in the Los Angeles Times reported a CT scan of the abdomen costs about $2,400 for patients insured by Blue Shield of California, while the Los Alamitos (Calif.) Medical Center cash price is only $250... Another local California hospital charges insured patients $415 for blood tests that cost only $95 in cash.
gas plants can adjust their output more quickly than coal (good since solar and wind are variable).
However, a smart grid can make demand rise and fall in sync with solar and wind generation. This negates one advantage of gas plants over coal and nuclear.
What it shows is that if you make a cleaner energy source cheaper, you will displace dirtier sources
Or you could simply fix the original market failure by adding the cost of emissions (a negative externality) into the price of energy. To prevent this from burdening the poor, return an equal share of the revenue to everyone.
Some programs that are good and useful need to be shrunk or eliminated too. Doing so is of course unpopular.
That's easy to fix, in principle. Simply do a full cost-benefits analysis on all large expenditures, and then start cutting programs, beginning with those that bring the least benefit for the cost. The numbers will help justify the cuts to those who disagree with the cuts. There are some roles of government that cannot be cut, so the goal for those should be to find the most cost effective way to fulfill them.
This is what a true fiscal conservative would do. Unfortunately, that's an animal that doesn't appear to exist in government. Republicans focus on benefits and ignore costs of their own programs, and do the opposite for programs from other origins. Democrats do exactly the same. Libertarians and Tea Partyists are no better because they ignore the benefits and focus on the costs of all programs. This appears to be the entire reason for the existence of political parties: to focus on realities you agree with and ignore those you disagree with.
So the first thing we must do is make independents more electable. Switching from plurality voting to a preferential system is a good start, and then improving education of economics and finance up through high school will help expose candidates who are financially inept.
Which of course is why the major political parties will do their best keep it from happening, and why we will continue to have budget problems for the near future.
I love these things. No more abrasive or toilet-clogging toilet paper, no more klingons/dingleberries, and no more rashes when liquids come out the solids hole. (Sorry about the TMI.)
...then don't operate deadly machinery in public. Walk, bike, carpool, take mass transit. You won't be tracked when you don't have much capability of causing destruction. And that's how it should be.
Step 1 : Request data on every member of the City Council (or whatever the local government equivalent is).
Impossible. If you had read the synopsis, you would know that the data only includes "the date, time, and location where the plate was seen." It doesn't include names.
(The New York Times did note in a 2010 article that a self-driving car was rear-ended while stopped at a traffic light, so Google must not be counting the incidents that were the fault of flawed humans.)
Maybe this new article used the word "accident" in the sense of "error", not in the sense of "collision".
Some collisions are accidental, but other collisions are due to careless or malicious driving or intoxication. The word "accident" is very much overused today.
(2) Baseball rolls out into street in residential area, followed soon by child who was initially invisible behind a parked minivan. I knew ball might be followed by someone, and slowed way down so this wasn't a problem. At normal speed, it would have been.
False. You are required by law to slow down when your visibility is limited. This is known as the "basic speed law."
Slashdot Mirror
Except that the posted speed limit only applies in ideal conditions. You can be driving below the posted speed limit yet still be ticketed for driving at an unsafe speed.
So the self-driving vehicle would, at all times, need to choose a reasonable and prudent speed that is equal to or less than the posted speed limit.
And I wonder how often the human behind the wheel will get impatient with the computer for driving so slowly and take the wheel, or how often a following motorist will get impatient and honk or whip around, or how often rear end collisions will occur as a result of following motorists driving too fast for conditions.
I would think an "introduction to computing" course would start with the basics, such as how to use the mouse, how to double-click, how to right click, how to select and drag, how to copy and paste, how the filesystem works (and where files go when you download them, please not the desktop), and so on.
Follow that with how create and unpack compressed archives, how to copy files, how to burn a CD, how to backup and restore, and how and why to avoid logging in as administrator. It's unfortunate that these are considered to be advanced topics, when they really ought to be taught early.
Once you've learned all that, then you can progress on to task-specific software, such as MS-Office.
One reason people have so many problems with computers and they ask us for help is because they don't learn these things in the right order.
If you're using electricity, heat pumps are two to three times more energy efficient than conventional electric resistance heaters, at least in warmer climates. And as a bonus, you can use even the waste cold to cool your home in the summer.
No, it isn't the tank style heaters that need to go, but any heaters that use electric resistance to create heat, unless you're in a very cold climate.
15.876.
35.000 pounds, to express the same precision.
But since the author didn't take care to use consistent precision converting from metric to imperial, I think it's more likely that he converted the other way around and introduced false precision. This is what you get when journalists don't take the time to understand the science.
2-3 tons of corn makes 200-300 gallons of ethanol. That's almost a gallon a day. If you drove less, then corn ethanol would be less wasteful. So yours is a circular argument.
It's misguided because the farmland used to produce that grain could have produced food for human consumption, correct?
Does your argument apply to any scarce resource diverted from food production, including the petroleum that could have been used to power tractors and other farm equipment but we instead put into our automobiles?
What about farmland used directly or indirectly for meat production, a very inefficient way to produce food for humans?
Uploading photos from a digital camera at full resolution can take a minute per photo at 1Mbps upstream.
That isn't enough information. We also need to know the expected net social benefits, in the same currency as the costs. For example, a project that costs $2 million and gives $4 million in benefits is a better investment than a project that costs half as much ($1 million) but gives only $1 million in benefits.
And what gives a union a reason to exist? An employer who reasons only with unions and not with individual employees.
Unions are the symptom, not the disease.
Because normal diesel smells like a field of poppies.
That's quite easy. Given that freeway congestion is a type of shortage (too many cars trying to use the same road at the same time), anyone with a basic understanding of economics knows how to eliminate the shortage, even without adding lanes.
Wrong:
However, a smart grid can make demand rise and fall in sync with solar and wind generation. This negates one advantage of gas plants over coal and nuclear.
Or you could simply fix the original market failure by adding the cost of emissions (a negative externality) into the price of energy. To prevent this from burdening the poor, return an equal share of the revenue to everyone.
That's easy to fix, in principle. Simply do a full cost-benefits analysis on all large expenditures, and then start cutting programs, beginning with those that bring the least benefit for the cost. The numbers will help justify the cuts to those who disagree with the cuts. There are some roles of government that cannot be cut, so the goal for those should be to find the most cost effective way to fulfill them.
This is what a true fiscal conservative would do. Unfortunately, that's an animal that doesn't appear to exist in government. Republicans focus on benefits and ignore costs of their own programs, and do the opposite for programs from other origins. Democrats do exactly the same. Libertarians and Tea Partyists are no better because they ignore the benefits and focus on the costs of all programs. This appears to be the entire reason for the existence of political parties: to focus on realities you agree with and ignore those you disagree with.
So the first thing we must do is make independents more electable. Switching from plurality voting to a preferential system is a good start, and then improving education of economics and finance up through high school will help expose candidates who are financially inept.
Which of course is why the major political parties will do their best keep it from happening, and why we will continue to have budget problems for the near future.
Is there a distribution of Tomato/DD-WRT/OpenWRT with this preinstalled?
It helps if you close the control panel, because it hides all but 18 of the most used buttons.
Here is a control panel in English.
I love these things. No more abrasive or toilet-clogging toilet paper, no more klingons/dingleberries, and no more rashes when liquids come out the solids hole. (Sorry about the TMI.)
What if it's a secured garage, or the vehicles are shared, or the city council members carpool, or walk, or ride bicycles, or take mass transit?
How do you do that without a court order?
You misunderstand. My point is, it's justified to track something that has a high risk of causing death and destruction.
...then don't operate deadly machinery in public. Walk, bike, carpool, take mass transit. You won't be tracked when you don't have much capability of causing destruction. And that's how it should be.
Impossible. If you had read the synopsis, you would know that the data only includes "the date, time, and location where the plate was seen." It doesn't include names.
Maybe this new article used the word "accident" in the sense of "error", not in the sense of "collision".
Some collisions are accidental, but other collisions are due to careless or malicious driving or intoxication. The word "accident" is very much overused today.
False. You are required by law to slow down when your visibility is limited. This is known as the "basic speed law."
The median is a type of average. So is the arithmetic mean, and the mode. When you say "average," I suspect you're thinking specifically of the mean.
Hope this clears up any confusion.