Then Google can teach the cars to do just that. You seem to think there are things these cars can't even conceive of, which is patently nonsense as they are trained by humans. If there is a great way to behave in a certain situation, the car can be trained to do just that, but with its far superior reaction times.
Try your test with human drivers and see how many toddler dummies you get through.
And then the human driver gets lost in thought (or tired, or angry, or distracted, etc. etc.) and crashes anyway, as they are intrinsically terrible at driving.
You should heed your own advice - if anecdotal stories are not evidence, what does that make your ass-delving hypothetical situations and guesses?
The Wikipedia article doesn't say that, though. It does say that, in 2014 at least, the Google cars would become extra cautious (not 'over [sic] cautious' as you claim) should they approach an unknown, complex intersection.
What's wrong with where you live? Over here in Germany the vast majority of taxis are well-maintained, clean Mercedes. They nearly all have full leather interior, electric everything, and run like a charm. Even the non-Mercedes taxis are clean and run well. Maybe fix your messed-up taxis and Uber wouldn't be necessary:)
I'm absolutely no fan of Uber, but let's not play this game. They did bring something considerably different to the market - the ability to track reviews of specific users, and with it the ability to jettison anyone who didn't behave in accordance with their desires. It also encompasses many different geographical regions under one umbrella, as opposed to the frequently-disparate online offerings before.
There is enough rope to hang Uber without having to make stuff up;)
You are showing your ignorance again. You are assuming it costs the same to restore a space suit as it does an oil painting, then running on from there. No wonder you come to such fucked-up conclusions when you confuse "something you pulled out of your ass" with "reality". It explains so much of the drivel you've shat on this thread. Wow.
Hint: People have been restoring oil paintings for hundreds of years, the mechanics and materials involved are well known, and art restoration is a thriving industry, with people being trained in it working around the world. You fucking idiot.
Other countries have inner cities, too, filled with scary minorities and spooky poor people as well. You are making lazy excuses for why it's someone else's problem. Grow the fuck up, please.
This one post shows just how little you know of the systems you decry as being worse than the US, all without a single hint of irony. You just told everyone you have no idea, and still seem to think people should pay attention to you.
You are making all that up. Seriously. You make a couple of half-hearted observations and then scale those up to the size of countries, and then expect them to make sense. Absolutely incredible. You are so full of yourself I'm surprised you can breathe.
Nonsense. It's pathetic, baseless ass-delving like that which will ensure the US will hemorrhage money on its healthcare for generations to come. The US is not doing fine with regards to healthcare. It spends far too much and achieves far too little. You can argue about inner-city demographics skewing things, but that doesn't make as much of a difference as you seem to think it does. Of course anything called "socialist" is bad to you (except the socialised programs you happen to approve of - cognitive dissonance!), so you will rail against your own interests under the misguided notion you are fighting for the side of good.
You are arguing against the entirety of studies performed on the state of the US healthcare system. But I'm sure you know better, right?
The famous Chase study estimated that every $1 spent on the Apollo-era space program returned $7 to the economy. Manned space-flight has historically had decent returns, especially if it is in order to achieve something. Floating around the Earth, not so much, but still pretty good.
The Moon is a great place to practice going to Mars, as it has no atmosphere, is close, offers great scientific benefits, and can help further space programs (including to Mars).
You might not know as much about this as you seem to think you do... I don't know much about this at all, and even I can see you're out of your depth!
So you'd just give $30bn to NASA if the other agencies/programs wasted that much or more? What's that going to achieve - now you're $60bn in the hole and still angry as fuck. Hint: FIX THE SYSTEMS.
Just because you have not heard of the animals some groups are attempting to save does not mean you shouldn't care about it. That is pathetic reasoning, and assumes one's knowledge is perfect. Ecosystems are important to us, as we rely on them for pretty much everything, even if it's not immediately obvious. Ecosystems are made up of relationships between sometimes-fragile populations of animals, and an imbalance in one can cause massive repercussions in others, leading to all sorts of problems you should already be aware of if you want to criticize this field. You might be upset in funding a few million here and there to protect various biotopes or species, but I'm sure you'd be even more upset to spend much more on managing the ecology because the animals that did it for free were not known to ganjadude, and so were eradicated by apathy.
"It's wrong" - no, it's well understood and financially sound.
How does that help the monospace-fetishist improve their readership? If someone points out to you that your hat is on fire, do you thank them for helping you or snipe back that they should stand further away from you if they don't want to get burned?
Here's what a numbered list looks like in slashcode:
No
Numbers
Present
You really should stop leaping to conclusions - it can cause you to fundamentally misunderstand the world you live in, which would explain a lot of the stuff you post here;)
If you want fun, go have it in a place where people who are merely trying to get on with their lives are not endangered by it. Your fun is an artefact of driving, not the reason why people drive. Cars are a mode of transport. You finding fun in driving one is akin to a foot fetishist at the shoe store - the shoe store serves a distinct purpose, yet the fetishist derives pleasure for a different reason. I appreciate you having fun, but to insist on endangering others simply for your fun is, well, hideously selfish.
Music labels rip the artists off, but you are calling for music labels to be respected in their dealings. It seems you are slightly confused as to what roles artists and labels play.
Just to play devil's advocate - the software on the TPB might have lead to a lost sale, but it also might not have. You'd need some actual evidence one way or another to make that leap.
It's not the artists getting ripped off, but the music labels. You really should figure out how much money from these services - even the 100% legit ones - goes to the artists. It's apparently a lot less than you seem to think, and if you think the labels ask the artists whether they want their music to be available for streaming, think again. Large acts with good representation might be able to swing it, but everyone else is screwed. Why do you support music labels screwing over artists and the public alike? Honest question.
It's demonstrably bad for the entire music industry, especially as the labels which are complaining now are seeking to remove the access they used to get successful. I've created a fair bit, personally, so I'll save you the hassle of having to accuse me of not knowing.
Calm down, Sparky! If MS or the NSA wanted to fuck with your computer, they'd use a sneaky backdoor/exploit into your system and then run whatever tools they wanted to, which would not include well-known tools, as they are easy to spot. You seem to be more paranoid than sensible.
Slashdot Mirror
Then Google can teach the cars to do just that. You seem to think there are things these cars can't even conceive of, which is patently nonsense as they are trained by humans. If there is a great way to behave in a certain situation, the car can be trained to do just that, but with its far superior reaction times.
Try your test with human drivers and see how many toddler dummies you get through.
And then the human driver gets lost in thought (or tired, or angry, or distracted, etc. etc.) and crashes anyway, as they are intrinsically terrible at driving.
You should heed your own advice - if anecdotal stories are not evidence, what does that make your ass-delving hypothetical situations and guesses?
The Wikipedia article doesn't say that, though. It does say that, in 2014 at least, the Google cars would become extra cautious (not 'over [sic] cautious' as you claim) should they approach an unknown, complex intersection.
What's wrong with where you live? Over here in Germany the vast majority of taxis are well-maintained, clean Mercedes. They nearly all have full leather interior, electric everything, and run like a charm. Even the non-Mercedes taxis are clean and run well. Maybe fix your messed-up taxis and Uber wouldn't be necessary :)
I'm absolutely no fan of Uber, but let's not play this game. They did bring something considerably different to the market - the ability to track reviews of specific users, and with it the ability to jettison anyone who didn't behave in accordance with their desires. It also encompasses many different geographical regions under one umbrella, as opposed to the frequently-disparate online offerings before.
There is enough rope to hang Uber without having to make stuff up ;)
You are showing your ignorance again. You are assuming it costs the same to restore a space suit as it does an oil painting, then running on from there. No wonder you come to such fucked-up conclusions when you confuse "something you pulled out of your ass" with "reality". It explains so much of the drivel you've shat on this thread. Wow.
Hint: People have been restoring oil paintings for hundreds of years, the mechanics and materials involved are well known, and art restoration is a thriving industry, with people being trained in it working around the world. You fucking idiot.
Other countries have inner cities, too, filled with scary minorities and spooky poor people as well. You are making lazy excuses for why it's someone else's problem. Grow the fuck up, please.
This one post shows just how little you know of the systems you decry as being worse than the US, all without a single hint of irony. You just told everyone you have no idea, and still seem to think people should pay attention to you.
You are making all that up. Seriously. You make a couple of half-hearted observations and then scale those up to the size of countries, and then expect them to make sense. Absolutely incredible. You are so full of yourself I'm surprised you can breathe.
Nonsense. It's pathetic, baseless ass-delving like that which will ensure the US will hemorrhage money on its healthcare for generations to come. The US is not doing fine with regards to healthcare. It spends far too much and achieves far too little. You can argue about inner-city demographics skewing things, but that doesn't make as much of a difference as you seem to think it does. Of course anything called "socialist" is bad to you (except the socialised programs you happen to approve of - cognitive dissonance!), so you will rail against your own interests under the misguided notion you are fighting for the side of good.
You are arguing against the entirety of studies performed on the state of the US healthcare system. But I'm sure you know better, right?
First they'd need to become a ride-sharing service. Currently they are rather far from that, right in the "taxi company" territory.
The famous Chase study estimated that every $1 spent on the Apollo-era space program returned $7 to the economy. Manned space-flight has historically had decent returns, especially if it is in order to achieve something. Floating around the Earth, not so much, but still pretty good.
The Moon is a great place to practice going to Mars, as it has no atmosphere, is close, offers great scientific benefits, and can help further space programs (including to Mars).
You might not know as much about this as you seem to think you do... I don't know much about this at all, and even I can see you're out of your depth!
So you'd just give $30bn to NASA if the other agencies/programs wasted that much or more? What's that going to achieve - now you're $60bn in the hole and still angry as fuck. Hint: FIX THE SYSTEMS.
That writing style reminds me of APK... I wonder...
Just because you have not heard of the animals some groups are attempting to save does not mean you shouldn't care about it. That is pathetic reasoning, and assumes one's knowledge is perfect. Ecosystems are important to us, as we rely on them for pretty much everything, even if it's not immediately obvious. Ecosystems are made up of relationships between sometimes-fragile populations of animals, and an imbalance in one can cause massive repercussions in others, leading to all sorts of problems you should already be aware of if you want to criticize this field. You might be upset in funding a few million here and there to protect various biotopes or species, but I'm sure you'd be even more upset to spend much more on managing the ecology because the animals that did it for free were not known to ganjadude, and so were eradicated by apathy.
"It's wrong" - no, it's well understood and financially sound.
I doubt it. H-1B is not quite the open flood-gate of workers some seem to think it is.
How does that help the monospace-fetishist improve their readership? If someone points out to you that your hat is on fire, do you thank them for helping you or snipe back that they should stand further away from you if they don't want to get burned?
Here's what a numbered list looks like in slashcode:
You really should stop leaping to conclusions - it can cause you to fundamentally misunderstand the world you live in, which would explain a lot of the stuff you post here ;)
If you want fun, go have it in a place where people who are merely trying to get on with their lives are not endangered by it. Your fun is an artefact of driving, not the reason why people drive. Cars are a mode of transport. You finding fun in driving one is akin to a foot fetishist at the shoe store - the shoe store serves a distinct purpose, yet the fetishist derives pleasure for a different reason. I appreciate you having fun, but to insist on endangering others simply for your fun is, well, hideously selfish.
Music labels rip the artists off, but you are calling for music labels to be respected in their dealings. It seems you are slightly confused as to what roles artists and labels play.
Just to play devil's advocate - the software on the TPB might have lead to a lost sale, but it also might not have. You'd need some actual evidence one way or another to make that leap.
It's not the artists getting ripped off, but the music labels. You really should figure out how much money from these services - even the 100% legit ones - goes to the artists. It's apparently a lot less than you seem to think, and if you think the labels ask the artists whether they want their music to be available for streaming, think again. Large acts with good representation might be able to swing it, but everyone else is screwed. Why do you support music labels screwing over artists and the public alike? Honest question.
It's demonstrably bad for the entire music industry, especially as the labels which are complaining now are seeking to remove the access they used to get successful. I've created a fair bit, personally, so I'll save you the hassle of having to accuse me of not knowing.
Calm down, Sparky! If MS or the NSA wanted to fuck with your computer, they'd use a sneaky backdoor/exploit into your system and then run whatever tools they wanted to, which would not include well-known tools, as they are easy to spot. You seem to be more paranoid than sensible.
Then they've lost your trust. I'm sure they're gutted. The rest of the world moves on...