If 1:1,000,000 is lower odds than the thing I was doing before, yes, I would buy that toaster. We're not discussing people that currently don't need transportation buying self-driving cars, but people who already are doing something to meet their transportation need. If that something is more dangerous than self-driving cars, then it is irrational not to switch, given the opportunity.
The idea that you'd prefer a greater risk "just in case" you're in a collision, because you'll feel better about it if you were in control, is not a rational position to take. If the self-driving cars are genuinely and significantly safer than human drivers, the rational decision is to get over your phobia and switch to a self-driving car when you can afford one.
We can also reach that stat by having longer sentences than other countries. A related issue, if it exists. Are there stats on the how many prisoners we are adding compared to other countries?
To be fair, all seats facing forward position is only for first gen autonomous cars anyway, because that's what people who buy cars expect cars to look like. After enough acceptance, some companies will start to challenge that assumption and produce other configurations. All facing rearward might be one, supposedly that is better in an accident, or perhaps all seats face inward so you can have a group conversation with everyone in the car.
Why would it even need to be parked near the building at all? The car could just drop you off and continue on to the municipal garage which has been specially marked to accommodate autonomous vehicles. For short visits, it could just orbit the block until you're ready to leave (probably this doesn't scale, though).
I think having manual controls will increase the cost of insurance. You simply can't have an "autonomous" car that has the capability to hand-off to a real driver if it "gets tough". There's no point in it. It's hard enough paying attention when you really need to, but when 98% of the time it doesn't matter, but those 2% remaining you have to be at full attention? Good luck with that.
That may be true of Whatsapp, but that need not be true of any particular messaging service. It's possible to design a protocol that they can be routed, even through a central server, without being able to inspect the message itself.
Yes, you do. They made a shadow account with all the stuff they think they know about you. You just don't have any influence over it what they're putting there.
And this won't just affect New York and California. Smartphone manufacturers won't produce separate systems for states that require encryption backdoors and those that don't.
I agree that they probably won't produce separate hardware, or even separate operating systems, but I'd say the jury is still out on whether they'd produce parameterized software with a "pretend encryption" / "real encryption" flag set depending on what state the device is intended to be sold in.
...but they're limited to 1-for-1 time reviewing video...
Why should this be the case? youtube lets you view most videos at pitch-corrected stepped-up speed, with the right hardware you wouldn't even need to drop any frames, and the vast majority of the video will be boring stuff that shouldn't require a ton of attention. If face- and speech- detection get good enough perhaps many of the boring bits could be skipped over automatically.
I always assumed (based on the name only), that lastpass wasn't a database, but a {printable characters} encoded hash of the domain & master password. I'm somewhat disappointed that that isn't what they're using.
Slashdot Mirror
How is an encrypted bluetooth connection any less secure than a completely unencrypted audio modulated connection?
If 1:1,000,000 is lower odds than the thing I was doing before, yes, I would buy that toaster. We're not discussing people that currently don't need transportation buying self-driving cars, but people who already are doing something to meet their transportation need. If that something is more dangerous than self-driving cars, then it is irrational not to switch, given the opportunity.
Except airport security didn't catch the shoe bomber. He was caught by observant fellow passengers!
The idea that you'd prefer a greater risk "just in case" you're in a collision, because you'll feel better about it if you were in control, is not a rational position to take. If the self-driving cars are genuinely and significantly safer than human drivers, the rational decision is to get over your phobia and switch to a self-driving car when you can afford one.
We can also reach that stat by having longer sentences than other countries. A related issue, if it exists. Are there stats on the how many prisoners we are adding compared to other countries?
It can't be a tax. Revenue bills have to originate in the house, and PPACA as passed originated in the Senate.
To be fair, all seats facing forward position is only for first gen autonomous cars anyway, because that's what people who buy cars expect cars to look like. After enough acceptance, some companies will start to challenge that assumption and produce other configurations. All facing rearward might be one, supposedly that is better in an accident, or perhaps all seats face inward so you can have a group conversation with everyone in the car.
Why would it even need to be parked near the building at all? The car could just drop you off and continue on to the municipal garage which has been specially marked to accommodate autonomous vehicles. For short visits, it could just orbit the block until you're ready to leave (probably this doesn't scale, though).
I think having manual controls will increase the cost of insurance. You simply can't have an "autonomous" car that has the capability to hand-off to a real driver if it "gets tough". There's no point in it. It's hard enough paying attention when you really need to, but when 98% of the time it doesn't matter, but those 2% remaining you have to be at full attention? Good luck with that.
How would you build a zip line from the top of a windmill tower and still allow the windmill to rotate into the wind?
"Has been" wrong? It's not decided yet, unless you mean individual states, which Trump has failed to win quite a few of.
Is English no longer a required course for all 12 years of primary eduction?
What if the letter you're trying to recognize is an I or an l?
What if it accesses your neighbor's WiFi instead? It doesn't even have to be a neighbor who failed to secure his wifi - he might just have Comcast.
I see that you are anti-nuke. Are you pro-coal, or do you think that natural gas will stay cheap forever?
In 3 lines of perl.. are you actually implementing encryption, or are you just using some CPAN package and implementing the protocol only?
That may be true of Whatsapp, but that need not be true of any particular messaging service. It's possible to design a protocol that they can be routed, even through a central server, without being able to inspect the message itself.
Yes, you do. They made a shadow account with all the stuff they think they know about you. You just don't have any influence over it what they're putting there.
Due to a change in the law, not due to the addition of otherwise required safety features...
If they raise rates enough, switching to solar becomes attractive, though. Even with the time-of-day problem.
But you wouldn't have to send it to a third party.
Given two potential explanations, it is possible that the truth is neither one.
And this won't just affect New York and California. Smartphone manufacturers won't produce separate systems for states that require encryption backdoors and those that don't.
I agree that they probably won't produce separate hardware, or even separate operating systems, but I'd say the jury is still out on whether they'd produce parameterized software with a "pretend encryption" / "real encryption" flag set depending on what state the device is intended to be sold in.
...but they're limited to 1-for-1 time reviewing video...
Why should this be the case? youtube lets you view most videos at pitch-corrected stepped-up speed, with the right hardware you wouldn't even need to drop any frames, and the vast majority of the video will be boring stuff that shouldn't require a ton of attention. If face- and speech- detection get good enough perhaps many of the boring bits could be skipped over automatically.
I always assumed (based on the name only), that lastpass wasn't a database, but a {printable characters} encoded hash of the domain & master password. I'm somewhat disappointed that that isn't what they're using.