What we can do today is scale up quadcopters until they can lift a person, then shift to forward (lifting body) flight for the long haul, then vertically land.
If this rolls out in the next 3 years it will be: a) nearly autonomous, b) owned and operated by a highly regulated fleet entity, c) priced in competition with commercial air travel, not taxis.
The major stumbling block I see is: certified landing zones. ATC can handle this additional load if they are all following pre-programmed flight routes via autopilots that do not deviate. The problem, as you point out, is how much overflight risk are we willing to take? Certainly the drone routes won't be straight over the White House, or elementary schools, or stadiums, or any such place where an unfortunate malfunction would cause more damage on the ground than the damage to the vehicle and its occupants - so, that limits the routes, and the landing zones. And you'll need landing zones that you know will be available when you get there, because batteries don't last long.
Not impossible, but ambitious on the level of Segway - and I'd call Segway a 98% miss as compared to its rollout hype.
When I worked in South Houston, I considered moving the family home up north of Conroe and commuting via Mooney to Ellington field, then driving the last 10 minutes to work. Much better air quality up north of Conroe. Problem was, I just didn't like the job that much.
I agree - if it is truly stable VTOL capable, it can hover into position just about anywhere.
Now, what's its hover time capability? If it's only 15 minutes, and you spend 12 of those minutes in transit, would be a bitch to run out of battery before you find a parking space.
They also still cost like light aircraft. I think when people think of "flying cars" a component of the equation is that George and Jane Jetson can afford one. Yes, VTOL electric is possible today, but is anyone with $300K to spend on an extremely limited use case vehicle actually interested?
Making these things useful will require getting infrastructure added to cities and suburbs - same problem that made Segway an overpriced toy instead of the transportation revolution of the 2000s.
Companies don't do this because they have deeply held legal or ethical principles. They do it because one side of the case makes them more money than the other.
Very true, and we now have a list of 97 tech companies presenting their facts that allowing free travel increases their profits, and Trump has a half dozen tech companies advising him of "Alternate Facts" that make the travel ban look like a good idea.
At the end of the day, the ban isn't about tech company profits - it's about values deeply held by a minority of the population. The question is: will we let that minority opinion dictate national policy, or will we protest, file injunctions, and use the system to check and balance the executive orders?
The fact that everybody, everywhere, sends photos and videos all over the place all the time makes finding and decoding hidden messages very challenging, even with a quantum computer.
Maybe it's good that people are dumb enough to believe this. I'm not sure.
People are dumb enough to send their CC# unobfuscated in texts and e-mails... to this day.
In the current political climate, a computer that can simultaneously deal with facts and unfacts may have useful applications. In the past, we only needed to keep track of real data. Going forward, it seems we need to simultaneously handle both actual data and what the user wants to be the actual data. Being able to draw conclusions from the superposition of both versions of reality needs to be extended from social media into practical applications.
We are actually living the endgame of the Matrix... humans aren't just used for power, their collective perception of the Matrix is solving real-world problems. The incorporation of Alternate Facts into the collective consciousness is a testbed for a physical quantum computer that the overlords are designing.
I am very excited to work with industry and government to make this happen
Translation: it will be used to break encryption and end privacy.
It will not break all encryption, just careless standard ciphers.
Two creative parties communicating with a pre-arranged scheme should still be safe from eavesdroppers.
The fact that everybody, everywhere, sends photos and videos all over the place all the time makes finding and decoding hidden messages very challenging, even with a quantum computer.
Thus the "Master" and "Apprentice" system - we re-piped a house, the "Master" did the sales and billing work, and nodded at everything the "Apprentice" did, "Master" also took about 75% of the money for himself while "Apprentice" did 95% of the sweating (both pipe joints and his body.)
When you do your own electrical and plumbing, not only do you not pay for the bulk of their hours, you also don't pay their jacked up rates for materials.
I seriously doubt Windows Phone will ever come close to the huge popularity that Palm OS had...
Not in terms of market share, perhaps in terms of number of units sold - simply because Microsoft can keep dragging the product along for decades whereas PalmOS flared out in just a few years.
To wipe the Trump resistance you need ECT levels - 120VAC 60Hz, paralytics recommended to keep the subject from breaking their own bones due to the convulsions. Effectively relieves persistent depression for several weeks, after which repeat treatments are needed.
This is what happens when the head of cyber security knows nothing about the actual practice of the art. Not condemning the current administration, they didn't have control long enough to enable this screwup, but they're on track to let more and worse things happen in the future.
The solar panel ash impoundment gave way in a rainstorm and dumped millions of tons of toxic ash into the stream and river, poisoning fish all the way to the ocean... also unlikely.
Thank you. Maybe my bad for using a term that is sometimes used to mean putting the baby in the bed with mom and dad and a bunch of soft suffocating potential bedding, and maybe a giant dog to top it all off - but it's fun to watch the techno-wizards get defensive when their gadgets are challenged (BTW, I designed manufactured and sold these anti SIDS widgets in the 1990s, and ours WORKED, but were a bit of a pain in the ass to apply to the baby every night.)
For the rational thinking in the room: why do you need a remote baby monitor? Who is forcing you to put your infant on the other side of the house? Is there any increased risk of SIDS by keeping the cradle next to mom and dad's bed? For infants at elevated risk of SIDS (siblings of SIDS, for instance), there is potentially a reason to have an electronic monitor and alarm (and for God's sake, if you're going to monitor breathing, do it right and use something that detects obstructive apnea, if such a thing is even marketed anymore - it's a brutal commercial landscape where the cheap crap squeezes out better products because of a marginal price difference.) If the baby monitor is for mom and/or dad's peace of mind, just try keeping your newborn in the bedroom with you until you're over that anxiety stage.
Numbers can be factually proven wrong, resulting in the need to invoke alternate facts as the basis of the author's infalliability.
Statements like "Ultra Premium Super High Speed Deluxe" can never be proven wrong, and thus fly right through technical, legal and marketing approval reviews.
It's a published opinion of a group of scientists, it's their way of summing up to the world how they think we are doing in terms of not self-destructing our way of life.
I give 0 fucks about the political opinion of scientists. It has the same weight as the political opinion of actors and sports celebrities - none at all.
Understandable, and you are not their target audience.
Slashdot Mirror
No good guys, no bad guys, just guys.
What we can do today is scale up quadcopters until they can lift a person, then shift to forward (lifting body) flight for the long haul, then vertically land.
If this rolls out in the next 3 years it will be: a) nearly autonomous, b) owned and operated by a highly regulated fleet entity, c) priced in competition with commercial air travel, not taxis.
The major stumbling block I see is: certified landing zones. ATC can handle this additional load if they are all following pre-programmed flight routes via autopilots that do not deviate. The problem, as you point out, is how much overflight risk are we willing to take? Certainly the drone routes won't be straight over the White House, or elementary schools, or stadiums, or any such place where an unfortunate malfunction would cause more damage on the ground than the damage to the vehicle and its occupants - so, that limits the routes, and the landing zones. And you'll need landing zones that you know will be available when you get there, because batteries don't last long.
Not impossible, but ambitious on the level of Segway - and I'd call Segway a 98% miss as compared to its rollout hype.
This is why Uber is the rollout platform instead of your local used car salesmen.
When I worked in South Houston, I considered moving the family home up north of Conroe and commuting via Mooney to Ellington field, then driving the last 10 minutes to work. Much better air quality up north of Conroe. Problem was, I just didn't like the job that much.
I agree - if it is truly stable VTOL capable, it can hover into position just about anywhere.
Now, what's its hover time capability? If it's only 15 minutes, and you spend 12 of those minutes in transit, would be a bitch to run out of battery before you find a parking space.
They also still cost like light aircraft. I think when people think of "flying cars" a component of the equation is that George and Jane Jetson can afford one. Yes, VTOL electric is possible today, but is anyone with $300K to spend on an extremely limited use case vehicle actually interested?
Making these things useful will require getting infrastructure added to cities and suburbs - same problem that made Segway an overpriced toy instead of the transportation revolution of the 2000s.
Companies don't do this because they have deeply held legal or ethical principles. They do it because one side of the case makes them more money than the other.
Very true, and we now have a list of 97 tech companies presenting their facts that allowing free travel increases their profits, and Trump has a half dozen tech companies advising him of "Alternate Facts" that make the travel ban look like a good idea.
At the end of the day, the ban isn't about tech company profits - it's about values deeply held by a minority of the population. The question is: will we let that minority opinion dictate national policy, or will we protest, file injunctions, and use the system to check and balance the executive orders?
The fact that everybody, everywhere, sends photos and videos all over the place all the time makes finding and decoding hidden messages very challenging, even with a quantum computer.
Maybe it's good that people are dumb enough to believe this. I'm not sure.
People are dumb enough to send their CC# unobfuscated in texts and e-mails... to this day.
In the current political climate, a computer that can simultaneously deal with facts and unfacts may have useful applications. In the past, we only needed to keep track of real data. Going forward, it seems we need to simultaneously handle both actual data and what the user wants to be the actual data. Being able to draw conclusions from the superposition of both versions of reality needs to be extended from social media into practical applications.
We are actually living the endgame of the Matrix... humans aren't just used for power, their collective perception of the Matrix is solving real-world problems. The incorporation of Alternate Facts into the collective consciousness is a testbed for a physical quantum computer that the overlords are designing.
I am very excited to work with industry and government to make this happen
Translation: it will be used to break encryption and end privacy.
It will not break all encryption, just careless standard ciphers.
Two creative parties communicating with a pre-arranged scheme should still be safe from eavesdroppers.
The fact that everybody, everywhere, sends photos and videos all over the place all the time makes finding and decoding hidden messages very challenging, even with a quantum computer.
But can it add 2 + 2?
Yes, but the answer is both 4, and not 4, until you observe the output.
Thus the "Master" and "Apprentice" system - we re-piped a house, the "Master" did the sales and billing work, and nodded at everything the "Apprentice" did, "Master" also took about 75% of the money for himself while "Apprentice" did 95% of the sweating (both pipe joints and his body.)
Nobody inspects quality, everybody inspects price.
When you do your own electrical and plumbing, not only do you not pay for the bulk of their hours, you also don't pay their jacked up rates for materials.
Remember, "Cloud" simply means "Someone else's computers" that you have very little or no control over...much like Windows. :-)
Isn't Windows 10 more like a creeping fog?
I seriously doubt Windows Phone will ever come close to the huge popularity that Palm OS had...
Not in terms of market share, perhaps in terms of number of units sold - simply because Microsoft can keep dragging the product along for decades whereas PalmOS flared out in just a few years.
To wipe the Trump resistance you need ECT levels - 120VAC 60Hz, paralytics recommended to keep the subject from breaking their own bones due to the convulsions. Effectively relieves persistent depression for several weeks, after which repeat treatments are needed.
This is what happens when the head of cyber security knows nothing about the actual practice of the art. Not condemning the current administration, they didn't have control long enough to enable this screwup, but they're on track to let more and worse things happen in the future.
The solar panel ash impoundment gave way in a rainstorm and dumped millions of tons of toxic ash into the stream and river, poisoning fish all the way to the ocean... also unlikely.
I was thinking just this: solar can use a tremendous number of low skill collector cleaners to go out and wipe the panels when they get dirty...
Thank you. Maybe my bad for using a term that is sometimes used to mean putting the baby in the bed with mom and dad and a bunch of soft suffocating potential bedding, and maybe a giant dog to top it all off - but it's fun to watch the techno-wizards get defensive when their gadgets are challenged (BTW, I designed manufactured and sold these anti SIDS widgets in the 1990s, and ours WORKED, but were a bit of a pain in the ass to apply to the baby every night.)
For the rational thinking in the room: why do you need a remote baby monitor? Who is forcing you to put your infant on the other side of the house? Is there any increased risk of SIDS by keeping the cradle next to mom and dad's bed? For infants at elevated risk of SIDS (siblings of SIDS, for instance), there is potentially a reason to have an electronic monitor and alarm (and for God's sake, if you're going to monitor breathing, do it right and use something that detects obstructive apnea, if such a thing is even marketed anymore - it's a brutal commercial landscape where the cheap crap squeezes out better products because of a marginal price difference.) If the baby monitor is for mom and/or dad's peace of mind, just try keeping your newborn in the bedroom with you until you're over that anxiety stage.
Or, you could co-sleep like humans and pre-humans have done for literally millions of years right up to the advent of the split floorplan.
On a serious note, there are some infants who need this - not many, but the old "back to sleep" campaign improved, but did not stop, SIDS.
Numbers can be factually proven wrong, resulting in the need to invoke alternate facts as the basis of the author's infalliability.
Statements like "Ultra Premium Super High Speed Deluxe" can never be proven wrong, and thus fly right through technical, legal and marketing approval reviews.
It's a published opinion of a group of scientists, it's their way of summing up to the world how they think we are doing in terms of not self-destructing our way of life.
I give 0 fucks about the political opinion of scientists. It has the same weight as the political opinion of actors and sports celebrities - none at all.
Understandable, and you are not their target audience.
Or, Russia isn't the nuclear superpower we should be worried about.