Computers COULD drive "better" than humans. But what would happen is the computer would try to minimize accidents - so it will take fewer chances. It will stop and refuse to go forward in fog (and hopefully talk to all the neighboring cars to slow down as well). It won't go over snowy roads. It won't cross open water.
The net result is that you may be safer, but forced to detour or wait. That's a perfectly rational way to do things - but humans aren't rational very much of the time. I just don't see this as happening any time soon. Perhaps in a generation or two who grow up away from the 'open road', but not in the near future.
We have been monitoring you ravings and it is clear that you suffer from a bad case of uncollectivist psychosis. We understand your pain and would like to help you with your problem.
Please walk (do not drive) to the closest re education facility.
How do you square that with the fact that local governments don't exactly have the spare change to fund major infrastructure changes? In my rural town, there is a debate as to whether we should unpave some roads to decrease maintenance costs (the costs then go to the vehicle owner in terms of increased damage and wear and tear).
ANYTHING that's an unfunded mandate is likely to be ignored unless it comes with adequate funding from somewhere else (in which case it's not an unfunded mandate, just pie-in-the-sky). I don't think the insurance 'savings' are going to fund this switch. If you have actual data to suggest this, I'd love to see it.
Show me a credible validation plan for a truck tractor that can deal with a high-side load like a moving van, filled to maximum legal weight, going down the western slope of the Sierra Nevada on I-80, in the rain, coming to a curve at the bottom of a 6% grade, dealing with a jack-ass driver in a light hatch-back returning from a ski trip cutting off the truck.
Well, not that I disagree with your general argument, but your specific example is quite easy:
You squish the annoying little hatchback. You'd even get a prize.
Oh, AT&T is 'being nice' - it's cheap publicity and unlike the usual bit of AT&T publicity these days, is actually positive. The costs are but a rounding error in some small department and are probably being born mostly by the City. I imagine that NYC isn't charging them a siting fee. The stations will have an AT&T logo - so it's advertising.
I sure hope the rest of NYCs storm mitigation efforts are a bit more substantive.
He's really just trying to create a stable supply of virgins to toss down Mauna Loa's throat. The only thing that produces more hot air than Larry Ellison is a volcano. And he's working to stop that.
Man, if you think perchlorates are dangerous, wait until you've tried to deal with molecular oxygen! The stuff burns things. It's an oxidizer. Free radicals even. It'll snap your bonds faster than you can type out the redox reaction.
I instantly believe you. It's not as if it's the government's fault that people are so distrusting of it or anything; it couldn't be!
Funny, you instantly believed a 29-year-old who ran to Hong Kong to make outlandish claims about surveillance...
Perhaps I'll give him the benefit of a good look at what he said since he has apparently struck a nerve. If this was a large fabrication, the obvious ploy would be to SHOW the public that he's making things up, that he didn't have access, that he's wrong.
Instead, they're trying to shoot the messenger.
So we don't really know what's happening yet. And it's likely that Snowden isn't perfect. Julian Assange is a bit of a nutcase, Bradley Manning has a lot of issues, and yet they have both opened our eyes into misuse of power.
I'm willing to bet there is a good deal of heat in the smoke.
So? Manufacturers differentiate products on the basis of technically trivial differences all the time...
Yep, a lot of the new features don't really need better hardware. But that's consumer electronics. If you don't like it, either hack it yourself or wait for somebody else to do it.
You're correct. Obama care is going to save precious little money. What it might do is increase the number of people who are covered with insurance. But that requires the states to tag along and pay some money themselves. Not a very popular concept these days. It might decrease the rate of increase in medical costs - whoopedo. It will create another cottage industry of consultants trying to explain the thousands of pages of rules and regs to everyone else.
It probably was the best anyone could do which is a damning insight into the state of this country's political and economic systems. Obama should have aborted the damaged fetus, but I suspect he was too emotionally attached to it. It's going to need a long period of rehab before it becomes a useful citizen.
Except that my first take on this was what innovations. Yes, a lot of stuff is hyped up, but I've seen precious little utility for genomics in the trenches.
I think this study is total BS - especially since the methodology is hidden. Sequencing the human genome is interesting, but the real key is sequencing other genomes and comparing them. That's happening with abandon now.
And we're finally getting a handle on what controls the genome and how all the little pieces fit together. That should yield some better therapies but aside from a few edge cases in cancer treatment, there isn't much out there. And it's not like these cancer treatments have overwhelmingly improved survival - improvements of 20 - 50% are typical. Nothing to sneeze at, but not the Holy Grail.
And lighting and computer use are just a small fraction of the total power budget.
The elephant in the room is population and the desire for same to adopt higher standards of living (imagine that...) which ALWAYS results in using more energy.
Slashdot Mirror
Computers COULD drive "better" than humans. But what would happen is the computer would try to minimize accidents - so it will take fewer chances. It will stop and refuse to go forward in fog (and hopefully talk to all the neighboring cars to slow down as well). It won't go over snowy roads. It won't cross open water.
The net result is that you may be safer, but forced to detour or wait. That's a perfectly rational way to do things - but humans aren't rational very much of the time. I just don't see this as happening any time soon. Perhaps in a generation or two who grow up away from the 'open road', but not in the near future.
Dear Citizen:
We have been monitoring you ravings and it is clear that you suffer from a bad case of uncollectivist psychosis. We understand your pain and would like to help you with your problem.
Please walk (do not drive) to the closest re education facility.
Yours in Homogenization,
The Minders.
How do you square that with the fact that local governments don't exactly have the spare change to fund major infrastructure changes? In my rural town, there is a debate as to whether we should unpave some roads to decrease maintenance costs (the costs then go to the vehicle owner in terms of increased damage and wear and tear).
ANYTHING that's an unfunded mandate is likely to be ignored unless it comes with adequate funding from somewhere else (in which case it's not an unfunded mandate, just pie-in-the-sky). I don't think the insurance 'savings' are going to fund this switch. If you have actual data to suggest this, I'd love to see it.
An employed blue collar joe is easier to deal with than a chronically unemployed blue collar joe without any real hope for a decent job.
You really pull the rug out of the middle class in this country and you find out that the veneer of civilization is thin, indeed.
Show me a credible validation plan for a truck tractor that can deal with a high-side load like a moving van, filled to maximum legal weight, going down the western slope of the Sierra Nevada on I-80, in the rain, coming to a curve at the bottom of a 6% grade, dealing with a jack-ass driver in a light hatch-back returning from a ski trip cutting off the truck.
Well, not that I disagree with your general argument, but your specific example is quite easy:
You squish the annoying little hatchback. You'd even get a prize.
Computers and complex machinery are cheap? Good to know.
I have all three on various devices. Verizon on my iPad is often so slow as to be usable.
Use a terminal program with some buffering. It's not 1998 anymore.
Oh, AT&T is 'being nice' - it's cheap publicity and unlike the usual bit of AT&T publicity these days, is actually positive. The costs are but a rounding error in some small department and are probably being born mostly by the City. I imagine that NYC isn't charging them a siting fee. The stations will have an AT&T logo - so it's advertising.
I sure hope the rest of NYCs storm mitigation efforts are a bit more substantive.
And I don't like AT&T becauseCALL FAILED.
2013 Old
My fantasies are entirely different. And since my wife has discovered my Slashdot handle, I ain't tellin.
I'll bet you get invited to all the parties.
I wonder if there are sharks around the island. There have to be sharks.
He's really just trying to create a stable supply of virgins to toss down Mauna Loa's throat. The only thing that produces more hot air than Larry Ellison is a volcano. And he's working to stop that.
Man, if you think perchlorates are dangerous, wait until you've tried to deal with molecular oxygen! The stuff burns things. It's an oxidizer. Free radicals even. It'll snap your bonds faster than you can type out the redox reaction.
No way. That's heavy stuff.
I instantly believe you. It's not as if it's the government's fault that people are so distrusting of it or anything; it couldn't be!
Funny, you instantly believed a 29-year-old who ran to Hong Kong to make outlandish claims about surveillance...
Perhaps I'll give him the benefit of a good look at what he said since he has apparently struck a nerve. If this was a large fabrication, the obvious ploy would be to SHOW the public that he's making things up, that he didn't have access, that he's wrong.
Instead, they're trying to shoot the messenger.
So we don't really know what's happening yet. And it's likely that Snowden isn't perfect. Julian Assange is a bit of a nutcase, Bradley Manning has a lot of issues, and yet they have both opened our eyes into misuse of power.
I'm willing to bet there is a good deal of heat in the smoke.
I take it that you have a large supply of tin foil at home?
but it is well known fact that everything changes your DNA, even the food that you eat, could cause a change..
Put the comic books down.
Ah yes. Thanks. I keep trying to apply rationality to the stock market.
You'd think I would have learned by now.
Pheasants...
I'm still using my CB Radio.
So? Manufacturers differentiate products on the basis of technically trivial differences all the time...
Yep, a lot of the new features don't really need better hardware. But that's consumer electronics. If you don't like it, either hack it yourself or wait for somebody else to do it.
You're correct. Obama care is going to save precious little money. What it might do is increase the number of people who are covered with insurance. But that requires the states to tag along and pay some money themselves. Not a very popular concept these days. It might decrease the rate of increase in medical costs - whoopedo. It will create another cottage industry of consultants trying to explain the thousands of pages of rules and regs to everyone else.
It probably was the best anyone could do which is a damning insight into the state of this country's political and economic systems. Obama should have aborted the damaged fetus, but I suspect he was too emotionally attached to it. It's going to need a long period of rehab before it becomes a useful citizen.
Except that my first take on this was what innovations. Yes, a lot of stuff is hyped up, but I've seen precious little utility for genomics in the trenches.
I think this study is total BS - especially since the methodology is hidden. Sequencing the human genome is interesting, but the real key is sequencing other genomes and comparing them. That's happening with abandon now.
And we're finally getting a handle on what controls the genome and how all the little pieces fit together. That should yield some better therapies but aside from a few edge cases in cancer treatment, there isn't much out there. And it's not like these cancer treatments have overwhelmingly improved survival - improvements of 20 - 50% are typical. Nothing to sneeze at, but not the Holy Grail.
And lighting and computer use are just a small fraction of the total power budget.
The elephant in the room is population and the desire for same to adopt higher standards of living (imagine that...) which ALWAYS results in using more energy.
Plenty of information, no actual reactors.
Don't count your less radioactive chickens just yet.