That's if everything is working correctly.. If the cheap chinese made sensor arrays don't have crud in them, if computer board is working properly, and, if the software is bug free.. Programming heuristics is often intractable. Apple can't even get siri to understand that 'bowling' is not the same thing as 'blow job' when the user has a cold.
'emergency stop' is only one of many such life saving actions... To be effective, the others all require something more contextually aware at the controls than a craptastic cut-rate embedded cpu programmed by cutrate overworked programmers. Reaction time is one component, but it's useless if it's slaved to an awareless AI.
The fastest horses can do about 40mph for short distances, and they are specifically bred for it. The average horseride trots along at what? 8-15mph? This is not the same thing as hurtling down the highway at 70 in a machine with preprogrammed assumptions as the only defense between the passengers and their deaths. Comparing horses to self-driving cars is not a valid comparison
So the only type of train accident to consider is someone being run down?
The point is, the computer cannot possibly take into account all situations. Maybe someday in the future, we'll build a machine that can, but at the moment, they're not even close to the contextual awareness of a human.
It's not a valid comparison. Traffic lights have very limited set of inputs and outputs..and they don't control anything. They just light lamps. The driver has to be contextually aware enough to know when to obey and when not to. The world isn't a precision stopwatch you know.
My concern is that at some point, you won't have a choice. If you want to travel by car, you'll have to buy one of these accident-waiting-to-happen devices. Anything else will be made illegal (or just very very very expensive and limited) by hollywood-technology trained authorities, who will really be in it for the remote control and monitoring aspects anyway.
As they presume to know about me, and what I want/need. it's not like they're unbiased, since they've invested themselves, their money, and bet their careers..
Imagine the costs involved in treating every auto accident like a plane crash!! The bottom line is, as long as I'm to be held accountable for the car's behavior, I will insist on being the driver. If not, then the car really isn't mine, and honestly, I'd rather not own a device loaded with government/insurance company mandated NARCing nancies that do their bidding while I pay the bill. Remote kill/route override switches WILL be a part of this technology. Count on it.
Then people will do what they do now with interlocks and other idiocy. Disable the devices and take their chances. It's that or not go to work/get paid/eat.
I'm sure its route was very carefully planned and monitored and I'm sure the people inside had kill switches. If these things go public, I guarantee override buttons will disappear quickly when officials realize that people are overriding them for reasons they don't deem worthy. The whole pile is just a big "do not want" for me at the moment, for both technical (computers aren't contextually aware enough), and political (this should be obvious) reasons.
That's fine, but I don't want to reduce my safety by trusting it to a badly programmed computer. A human running a stop sign can be accounted for since the human retains control of the vehicle. A badly programmed computer in an automated car cannot.
I am not willing to sacrifice my liberty and freedom for a bit of convenience. The moment a computer is inserted between me and the car I am responsible for, it won't be long before the dirty hands of government bureaucrats and insurance companies leave fingerprints all over it. No thanks. Unfortunately, the prevailing effeminate culture disagrees, which means, at some point, society will have to relearn what it's like to lose their rights in the first place. If the night life was a big part of my lifestyle, I'd move to such an area so I could walk.
Yes, that too. Computers are faster, for sure, but they are far less contextually aware. I don't want hurtle down the highway at 70mph knowing that the only thing between me and an accident are lists of bad assumptions made by cut rate programmers.
We cant even fully automate our trains, and they are fixed point traffic!
Some of us like retaining control of our autonomy and are perfectly capable drivers. This automated car business will end up abused by governments. I want no part of it.
I thought that was the apple user stereotype. The linux nerd archetype is just a fat, ugly, basement dweller, usually with lots of body hair. Get your stereotypes straight!
I guess that depends on how 'classic' the classic mode is. Does it offer the same flexibility offered by gnome2/mate, or is it just a look-a-like?
Re:THEN GO TO THE MATE THREADS
on
GNOME 3.10 Released
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I realize it's passe in today's society to value fact, reason, and truth over feelings, impulse, and consensus, but it's still ok for people to state their opinions, whether they're using the product or not. Criticism should not be silenced for the sake of feelings. Frankly, gnome is just a collection of current design trends that are questionable at best, and that is the reason you see the commentary. The problem is bigger than gnome itself.
1. too much wasted space. I didn't buy a high res monitor just to have a giant tablet. 2. sparsely populated dialogs. I suppose this relates to #1, but still.. Why do we need 4000 extra dialogs to move through remedial tasks like changing backgrounds and color schemes? 3. hidden or nonexistent advanced tweaking. Again, a trend that makes living with computing frustrating. In this age, the user is assumed not suited to define his own workflow and layout, so we're all stuck with assumptions made by 'designers' who 'went to school for design', who never actually did anything else with their computers other than run photoshop...maximized fullscreen of course. To get what I want, I now have to manage a litany of patches against libgnome et al, or if I'm running windows 7, I have to hack up shellstyle.dll using a resource editor, and don't even get me started on windows 8. Why? This is not progress.
The problem boils down to placing aesthetics above functionality. This might work sorta ok for limited use devices, but not desktop machines used for complex workflows.
Yeah unless you happen to be human. Humans require meat and vegetables in their diets. We are not simply furnaces that'll burn whatever you dump in there..
A lot of insects are poisonous, and even the so-called edible ones trigger allergies in a lot of people. There's a reason people have instinctive fear of insects.
So, how much is amd paying you? I'd like to supplement my income.. OpenGL and D3D aren't going anywhere for the immediate future. We went down this vendor-api route with glide, and while it did run well, it created support issues for the consumer that fragmented the market and made it difficult to make money selling gpus. It would be nice, however, to see better support parity between the vendors' shader compilers.
1. today's consoles also run protected mode (or architecture specific equivalent) operating systems too. The userland kernel hardware latencies are present.
2. You're complaining about games? Today's operating systems are hardly any better off. There is no way the vendors can vouch for the security of 10gb worth of libraries and executables in windows 7 or osx. The same is true for OSS. Best practice is to just assume every application and system you're using is compromised or compromisable and mitigate accordingly.
3. IIRC that particular carmack commentary was done to hype up the new gen systems. It's largely bogus. I'm sure the latencies between the intel on-die hd5000 gpu and cpu are lower, but that doesn't mean it's going to perform better overall. Same thing goes with the amd fusion chips used in the new consoles. They're powerful for their size and power draw, but they will not outperform current gaming pc rigs..
What happened? Point-and-stick software 'development.' Visual basic on steroids (.NET), and huge interpreted runtimes (python/php/ruby/.NET/ad nauseum) being used to write programs that could be done in a few dozen lines of C or shellcode..
This disease is everywhere. Basic system software should have as few dependencies as possible. GNU land suffers from this too. Honestly if CCC was the only problem, I could live with it.
Slashdot Mirror
That's if everything is working correctly.. If the cheap chinese made sensor arrays don't have crud in them, if computer board is working properly, and, if the software is bug free.. Programming heuristics is often intractable. Apple can't even get siri to understand that 'bowling' is not the same thing as 'blow job' when the user has a cold.
'emergency stop' is only one of many such life saving actions... To be effective, the others all require something more contextually aware at the controls than a craptastic cut-rate embedded cpu programmed by cutrate overworked programmers. Reaction time is one component, but it's useless if it's slaved to an awareless AI.
The fastest horses can do about 40mph for short distances, and they are specifically bred for it. The average horseride trots along at what? 8-15mph? This is not the same thing as hurtling down the highway at 70 in a machine with preprogrammed assumptions as the only defense between the passengers and their deaths. Comparing horses to self-driving cars is not a valid comparison
So the only type of train accident to consider is someone being run down?
The point is, the computer cannot possibly take into account all situations. Maybe someday in the future, we'll build a machine that can, but at the moment, they're not even close to the contextual awareness of a human.
It's not a valid comparison. Traffic lights have very limited set of inputs and outputs..and they don't control anything. They just light lamps. The driver has to be contextually aware enough to know when to obey and when not to. The world isn't a precision stopwatch you know.
My concern is that at some point, you won't have a choice. If you want to travel by car, you'll have to buy one of these accident-waiting-to-happen devices. Anything else will be made illegal (or just very very very expensive and limited) by hollywood-technology trained authorities, who will really be in it for the remote control and monitoring aspects anyway.
As they presume to know about me, and what I want/need. it's not like they're unbiased, since they've invested themselves, their money, and bet their careers..
Safety isn't the be-all-end-all if it means that others have the power to dictate if, when, and where I may travel. It's already bad enough as it is.
Imagine the costs involved in treating every auto accident like a plane crash!! The bottom line is, as long as I'm to be held accountable for the car's behavior, I will insist on being the driver. If not, then the car really isn't mine, and honestly, I'd rather not own a device loaded with government/insurance company mandated NARCing nancies that do their bidding while I pay the bill. Remote kill/route override switches WILL be a part of this technology. Count on it.
Then people will do what they do now with interlocks and other idiocy. Disable the devices and take their chances. It's that or not go to work/get paid/eat.
I'm sure its route was very carefully planned and monitored and I'm sure the people inside had kill switches. If these things go public, I guarantee override buttons will disappear quickly when officials realize that people are overriding them for reasons they don't deem worthy. The whole pile is just a big "do not want" for me at the moment, for both technical (computers aren't contextually aware enough), and political (this should be obvious) reasons.
Faster? yes. More contextually aware? No.
That's fine, but I don't want to reduce my safety by trusting it to a badly programmed computer. A human running a stop sign can be accounted for since the human retains control of the vehicle. A badly programmed computer in an automated car cannot.
I am not willing to sacrifice my liberty and freedom for a bit of convenience. The moment a computer is inserted between me and the car I am responsible for, it won't be long before the dirty hands of government bureaucrats and insurance companies leave fingerprints all over it. No thanks. Unfortunately, the prevailing effeminate culture disagrees, which means, at some point, society will have to relearn what it's like to lose their rights in the first place. If the night life was a big part of my lifestyle, I'd move to such an area so I could walk.
Yes, that too. Computers are faster, for sure, but they are far less contextually aware. I don't want hurtle down the highway at 70mph knowing that the only thing between me and an accident are lists of bad assumptions made by cut rate programmers.
We cant even fully automate our trains, and they are fixed point traffic!
Some of us like retaining control of our autonomy and are perfectly capable drivers. This automated car business will end up abused by governments. I want no part of it.
I thought that was the apple user stereotype. The linux nerd archetype is just a fat, ugly, basement dweller, usually with lots of body hair. Get your stereotypes straight!
I guess that depends on how 'classic' the classic mode is. Does it offer the same flexibility offered by gnome2/mate, or is it just a look-a-like?
I realize it's passe in today's society to value fact, reason, and truth over feelings, impulse, and consensus, but it's still ok for people to state their opinions, whether they're using the product or not. Criticism should not be silenced for the sake of feelings. Frankly, gnome is just a collection of current design trends that are questionable at best, and that is the reason you see the commentary. The problem is bigger than gnome itself.
1. too much wasted space. I didn't buy a high res monitor just to have a giant tablet.
2. sparsely populated dialogs. I suppose this relates to #1, but still.. Why do we need 4000 extra dialogs to move through remedial tasks like changing backgrounds and color schemes?
3. hidden or nonexistent advanced tweaking. Again, a trend that makes living with computing frustrating. In this age, the user is assumed not suited to define his own workflow and layout, so we're all stuck with assumptions made by 'designers' who 'went to school for design', who never actually did anything else with their computers other than run photoshop...maximized fullscreen of course. To get what I want, I now have to manage a litany of patches against libgnome et al, or if I'm running windows 7, I have to hack up shellstyle.dll using a resource editor, and don't even get me started on windows 8. Why? This is not progress.
The problem boils down to placing aesthetics above functionality. This might work sorta ok for limited use devices, but not desktop machines used for complex workflows.
Yeah unless you happen to be human. Humans require meat and vegetables in their diets. We are not simply furnaces that'll burn whatever you dump in there..
A lot of insects are poisonous, and even the so-called edible ones trigger allergies in a lot of people. There's a reason people have instinctive fear of insects.
It would make more sense to limit population growth of humans than to make them eat insects.
They haven't needed to. The 800 series is out next year iirc. Internet rumor mills say it is a real architecture change.
You lack reading comprehension. Please reread.
Not if you care about your game running on the majority of hardware out there. You'd support a mantle path, but not exclusively.
So, how much is amd paying you? I'd like to supplement my income.. OpenGL and D3D aren't going anywhere for the immediate future. We went down this vendor-api route with glide, and while it did run well, it created support issues for the consumer that fragmented the market and made it difficult to make money selling gpus. It would be nice, however, to see better support parity between the vendors' shader compilers.
1. today's consoles also run protected mode (or architecture specific equivalent) operating systems too. The userland kernel hardware latencies are present.
2. You're complaining about games? Today's operating systems are hardly any better off. There is no way the vendors can vouch for the security of 10gb worth of libraries and executables in windows 7 or osx. The same is true for OSS. Best practice is to just assume every application and system you're using is compromised or compromisable and mitigate accordingly.
3. IIRC that particular carmack commentary was done to hype up the new gen systems. It's largely bogus. I'm sure the latencies between the intel on-die hd5000 gpu and cpu are lower, but that doesn't mean it's going to perform better overall. Same thing goes with the amd fusion chips used in the new consoles. They're powerful for their size and power draw, but they will not outperform current gaming pc rigs..
What happened? Point-and-stick software 'development.' Visual basic on steroids (.NET), and huge interpreted runtimes (python/php/ruby/.NET/ad nauseum) being used to write programs that could be done in a few dozen lines of C or shellcode..
This disease is everywhere. Basic system software should have as few dependencies as possible. GNU land suffers from this too. Honestly if CCC was the only problem, I could live with it.