I would love an explaination on how you get a broken jaw from a excessively vibrating washing machine. I am not sure what the person was attempting to do but they were doing it wrong.
The Model X has auto-pilot but not collision detection? Shouldn't the car have seen the wall and applied the brakes no matter how hard she stomped on the gas?
The US has lots of available land but not in areas people want to live. Of course the want to live part is usually linked in some way to job availability but obviously lots of other factors like family, climate, etc. It would be interesting to see what would happen with UBI. Would people spread out more than they do today or would everyone stay in the cities and suburbs they are in today and just pay more for their housing. What I will say is UBI will certainly be great for the housing market in most locations. (Detroit not so much).
Unemployment goes up when jobs go away. In this case there would be more people volunteering to leave the workforce. They would not be counted in any unemployment number I am aware of unless you look strictly at the number of people who do not have jobs regardless of if they want One. This actually would decrease normal unemployment measures assuming the number of jobs stays constant.
Lowering wages is hard to do. Say ubi is 20k a year. Cutting all salaries by 20k is not feasible. Those currently making 20-30k will just stop working. So there is some minimum you have to pay to make it worthwhile to go to work each day. Beyond that the people with more experience obviviously want more money for their more difficult jobs. So no real way to take X amount out of salaries with UBI. Could you decease by a percentage - maybe. But that would require all employers to do that together. Or the ones that do not decrease will get the more talented people and those that did decrease will struggle to find people. However one thing that could bring down the salaries is severe unemployment. If robots/AI take a significant portion of jobs high unemployment could push down salaries.
The assumption is that there is a finite resource of housing that is distributed based on current income levels and has high occupancy rates. If you raise the income of the people on the lower end they will have the income to live in housing equivalent of this new income level. This could be homeless who can afford housing or people living in small dwellings that want larger ones. Except there is not enough equavent hosing for this new income level so instead prices rise. Example - new college grads often live together in small places because housing is expensive. If you had this basic income they could all afford their own place. Except there is not enough housing for all to have their own place. So demand for nicer housing goes up and therefore rents go up. Then college grads live together again in their small place spending much more on that place than they would have without the basic income in place.
The argument should hold true anywhere there is high occupancy.
What about housing? Everyone suddenly gets X per month free, rents go up X as demand increases (more people can afford housing) but no additional housing is built. I doubt it will go up exactly X but maybe.5X to.75X.
You have very low expectations on your investments. Your money should double every 7-10 years if you are doing it right. Doubling every 30 years is a horrible return.
Yes older cars are easier to maintain but the newer ones are outlasting them. Current average is almost 11 years before scrapping compared to under 7 in 1930. Sure you could fix the old cars up but with all that sheet metal rust was a major concern. I know old guys complain about the new plastic boxes on the roads these days but you hardly ever see rusted cars anymore.
Besides in 10-15 years when you go to scrap your ford you can upgrade to a self driving car. http://www.forbes.com/sites/ji...
So what would happen if someone calls 112 saying a shooting happened at your residence? A Police officer shows up and calmly knocks on the door? I am inclined to agree that the swatting response in the us is way overkill. But no or minimal response likely isn't the answer either.
Have you looked at NAND prices? The difference between 32 gigs and 128 gigs is like $12. Apple charges $200 for the privilege. They don't even list 16 gigs on the pricing sites anymore.
This is the reason why I buy the 16 gig version because the upgrade isn't worth $200 to me. If it was $50 (a mere 300% markup) I would pay for the upgrade.
This guy may be taking things a bit too far but there is certainly a lot of room for potential use of 3D printers in construction. The two things I really wish already existed are a 3D room painter and a 3D Drywall Joint Compound Printer. Having a machine that can make your walls perfectly smooth (with no sanding). Then have another machine to paint it with no brush strokes and perfectly straight lines. It would be amazing for both home builders and home owners. When compared to paying someone there would be significant savings with a very quick payback if you used it often (home builder). Although a lot of people would be out of a job because of it.
All the debate has been about 1984 big brother type stuff. Am I the only one who is wondering how the heck he managed to get a hold of a fake passport and use it at a US embassy for YEARS without being caught? I would think the FBI would be routinely cross-checking all photos from passport applications/visa applications against all known databases (mug shots, driver licenses, etc) and kicking out anything that does not match. Maybe TV has me thinking the technology is much more advanced than I thought.
I think you are taking the hovercraft name too literally. All they have said is that the car will hover a few inches above the road. There a few ways to accomplish this none of which are easy which is why we have not seen one in real life yet. One option would be to use a maglev type system. Although that would likely require expensive changes to the roads. Other options are using an air cushion in some way but again that is not an easy solution. All we can really gain from this artificial is that Toyota is attempting to think outside the box when developing cars. But we can say that the vast majority of these ideas will never make it into the hands of the consumer (or at least not anytime soon).
Supply Chain Management is a field that tends to be on the tech heavy side but unfortunately most people working in it do not have an CS/Programming background. Having that background would give you a leg up if you can get hired. There are some interesting problems in this field like linear optimization and forecasting to keep you busy.
Google has overcome a lot of that already. http://www.gizmag.com/google-s... Their car can recognize road construction, cones, and even bicycle hand signals. For accidents police only have to put out a few cones or flares and the car will route around. The more interesting scenarios are things like fallen tree blocking the roadway or someone stopping the car at gunpoint to rob you. These cars will quickly handle every situation possible except for the extremely unlikely events.
I am sure in a race simulator alcohol will have a marked negative impact on driving. However the objective here is safety not speed. So imagine your normal aggressive driver who is constantly speeding and tailgating. Give them a few beers and they will either stupidly drive the same way being even more of a hazard on the road. Or they will realize they are either near or over the legal alcohol limit and therefore not want to give the police a reason to pull them over. So they drive at the speed limit, hands at 10&2, leaving plenty of space. I wager it is probably safer to drive with the legally drunk guy being cautious than the sober aggressive guy. There is a point in alcohol consumption where this is no longer the case but I do not think it is at.08.
You need to re-think the distribution model once humans are removed from the equation. One potential, UPS opens a large number of very small completely automated warehouses across the country. Deliveries from the main distribution centers which currently can serve 100s of towns are broken out to the smaller ones that might only server a few square miles. From there small autonomous electric vehicles deliver to your house. Automated system gives you a call/text/email to confirm you are home for delivery and the truck is sent. You walk out and grab your stuff. No more deliveries when you are not home. Want it delivered at 2AM, no problem. Removing people from package distribution opens up a vast array of options and the company(s) that gets it right will make a ton of money.
Slashdot Mirror
I would love an explaination on how you get a broken jaw from a excessively vibrating washing machine. I am not sure what the person was attempting to do but they were doing it wrong.
The Model X has auto-pilot but not collision detection? Shouldn't the car have seen the wall and applied the brakes no matter how hard she stomped on the gas?
This! Maps is much slower to load these days since the UI upgrade a few years ago. I love google maps just make it load faster!
The US has lots of available land but not in areas people want to live. Of course the want to live part is usually linked in some way to job availability but obviously lots of other factors like family, climate, etc. It would be interesting to see what would happen with UBI. Would people spread out more than they do today or would everyone stay in the cities and suburbs they are in today and just pay more for their housing. What I will say is UBI will certainly be great for the housing market in most locations. (Detroit not so much).
Unemployment goes up when jobs go away. In this case there would be more people volunteering to leave the workforce. They would not be counted in any unemployment number I am aware of unless you look strictly at the number of people who do not have jobs regardless of if they want One. This actually would decrease normal unemployment measures assuming the number of jobs stays constant.
Lowering wages is hard to do. Say ubi is 20k a year. Cutting all salaries by 20k is not feasible. Those currently making 20-30k will just stop working. So there is some minimum you have to pay to make it worthwhile to go to work each day. Beyond that the people with more experience obviviously want more money for their more difficult jobs. So no real way to take X amount out of salaries with UBI. Could you decease by a percentage - maybe. But that would require all employers to do that together. Or the ones that do not decrease will get the more talented people and those that did decrease will struggle to find people. However one thing that could bring down the salaries is severe unemployment. If robots/AI take a significant portion of jobs high unemployment could push down salaries.
The assumption is that there is a finite resource of housing that is distributed based on current income levels and has high occupancy rates. If you raise the income of the people on the lower end they will have the income to live in housing equivalent of this new income level. This could be homeless who can afford housing or people living in small dwellings that want larger ones. Except there is not enough equavent hosing for this new income level so instead prices rise. Example - new college grads often live together in small places because housing is expensive. If you had this basic income they could all afford their own place. Except there is not enough housing for all to have their own place. So demand for nicer housing goes up and therefore rents go up. Then college grads live together again in their small place spending much more on that place than they would have without the basic income in place. The argument should hold true anywhere there is high occupancy.
What about housing? Everyone suddenly gets X per month free, rents go up X as demand increases (more people can afford housing) but no additional housing is built. I doubt it will go up exactly X but maybe .5X to .75X.
It's not a tumor!
You have very low expectations on your investments. Your money should double every 7-10 years if you are doing it right. Doubling every 30 years is a horrible return.
Uganda be kidding me
Yes. Metric time.
Yes older cars are easier to maintain but the newer ones are outlasting them. Current average is almost 11 years before scrapping compared to under 7 in 1930. Sure you could fix the old cars up but with all that sheet metal rust was a major concern. I know old guys complain about the new plastic boxes on the roads these days but you hardly ever see rusted cars anymore. Besides in 10-15 years when you go to scrap your ford you can upgrade to a self driving car. http://www.forbes.com/sites/ji...
Perhaps this system will help with the flying car which are (perpetually) 10 years away.
So what would happen if someone calls 112 saying a shooting happened at your residence? A Police officer shows up and calmly knocks on the door? I am inclined to agree that the swatting response in the us is way overkill. But no or minimal response likely isn't the answer either.
Am I the only one who thought the prison population was at an all time high?
Have you looked at NAND prices? The difference between 32 gigs and 128 gigs is like $12. Apple charges $200 for the privilege. They don't even list 16 gigs on the pricing sites anymore. This is the reason why I buy the 16 gig version because the upgrade isn't worth $200 to me. If it was $50 (a mere 300% markup) I would pay for the upgrade.
This guy may be taking things a bit too far but there is certainly a lot of room for potential use of 3D printers in construction. The two things I really wish already existed are a 3D room painter and a 3D Drywall Joint Compound Printer. Having a machine that can make your walls perfectly smooth (with no sanding). Then have another machine to paint it with no brush strokes and perfectly straight lines. It would be amazing for both home builders and home owners. When compared to paying someone there would be significant savings with a very quick payback if you used it often (home builder). Although a lot of people would be out of a job because of it.
All the debate has been about 1984 big brother type stuff. Am I the only one who is wondering how the heck he managed to get a hold of a fake passport and use it at a US embassy for YEARS without being caught? I would think the FBI would be routinely cross-checking all photos from passport applications/visa applications against all known databases (mug shots, driver licenses, etc) and kicking out anything that does not match. Maybe TV has me thinking the technology is much more advanced than I thought.
I think you are taking the hovercraft name too literally. All they have said is that the car will hover a few inches above the road. There a few ways to accomplish this none of which are easy which is why we have not seen one in real life yet. One option would be to use a maglev type system. Although that would likely require expensive changes to the roads. Other options are using an air cushion in some way but again that is not an easy solution. All we can really gain from this artificial is that Toyota is attempting to think outside the box when developing cars. But we can say that the vast majority of these ideas will never make it into the hands of the consumer (or at least not anytime soon).
Supply Chain Management is a field that tends to be on the tech heavy side but unfortunately most people working in it do not have an CS/Programming background. Having that background would give you a leg up if you can get hired. There are some interesting problems in this field like linear optimization and forecasting to keep you busy.
Google has overcome a lot of that already. http://www.gizmag.com/google-s... Their car can recognize road construction, cones, and even bicycle hand signals. For accidents police only have to put out a few cones or flares and the car will route around. The more interesting scenarios are things like fallen tree blocking the roadway or someone stopping the car at gunpoint to rob you. These cars will quickly handle every situation possible except for the extremely unlikely events.
I am sure in a race simulator alcohol will have a marked negative impact on driving. However the objective here is safety not speed. So imagine your normal aggressive driver who is constantly speeding and tailgating. Give them a few beers and they will either stupidly drive the same way being even more of a hazard on the road. Or they will realize they are either near or over the legal alcohol limit and therefore not want to give the police a reason to pull them over. So they drive at the speed limit, hands at 10&2, leaving plenty of space. I wager it is probably safer to drive with the legally drunk guy being cautious than the sober aggressive guy. There is a point in alcohol consumption where this is no longer the case but I do not think it is at .08.
How about a statue of Muhammad? It would offend both Christians and Muslims and make no one happy. Sounds like a perfect government solution.
You need to re-think the distribution model once humans are removed from the equation. One potential, UPS opens a large number of very small completely automated warehouses across the country. Deliveries from the main distribution centers which currently can serve 100s of towns are broken out to the smaller ones that might only server a few square miles. From there small autonomous electric vehicles deliver to your house. Automated system gives you a call/text/email to confirm you are home for delivery and the truck is sent. You walk out and grab your stuff. No more deliveries when you are not home. Want it delivered at 2AM, no problem. Removing people from package distribution opens up a vast array of options and the company(s) that gets it right will make a ton of money.