If I can prove by experiment that can drive more safely while texting than most people with their attention fully focused on the road will I be exempt from these kinds of laws
No.
Not looking out of the window while driving = bad. Mmmmkay?
I work in the insurance industry, and you seriously misread their motivation. Surcharges for violations are not a profit source for the industry, far from it. They exist to try and equalize the risk associated with bad drivers and if you crunch the numbers on premiums vs. claims you'll find that they barely manage to break even on some of these drivers even with the surcharges.
That's not the problem.
They might have to fire an awful lot of people if we replace the idiots behind the wheel with machines.
Intellectual property is a useful social construct.
Sure. The problem is that these people think that draconian legislation is the answer to a changing marketplace that made their business model obsolete.
Imagine if the buggy-whip manufacturers had had enough money to bribe the government to pass laws preventing manufacture of automobiles...
MD5 is broken, SHA1 has been weakened slightly but it isn't broken.
Same for RC4. The cypher is still OK, you just have to initialize it better (his has been known about for decades, the fact that Microsoft isn't doing it is the real news).
i they meant the phone can be longer but curved so that it is the same length/width as a noncurved phone, the problem is just the height or depth is increased which probably isn't that big of a deal. but which way is it curved? like a half-tube, or a bridge?
Apparently math makes people's heads spin even on slashdot.
The point of all those numbers up there was to prove that you'd have to curve it by a ridiculous amount to make a noticeable difference in width/height (eg. more then 1% shorter/narrower) .
Slashdot Mirror
If I can prove by experiment that can drive more safely while texting than most people with their attention fully focused on the road will I be exempt from these kinds of laws
No.
Not looking out of the window while driving = bad. Mmmmkay?
The problem with "public transit" can be found in the first of the two words I put in quotes.
I guess you're speaking for the USA. The country that thinks it's 'more advanced' than all those others.
I work in the insurance industry, and you seriously misread their motivation. Surcharges for violations are not a profit source for the industry, far from it. They exist to try and equalize the risk associated with bad drivers and if you crunch the numbers on premiums vs. claims you'll find that they barely manage to break even on some of these drivers even with the surcharges.
That's not the problem.
They might have to fire an awful lot of people if we replace the idiots behind the wheel with machines.
I dunno, but I'm guessing none of these politicians have ever heard of the Streisand Effect.
Intellectual property is a useful social construct.
Sure. The problem is that these people think that draconian legislation is the answer to a changing marketplace that made their business model obsolete.
Imagine if the buggy-whip manufacturers had had enough money to bribe the government to pass laws preventing manufacture of automobiles...
I'll buy drugs, but I won't buy video games or software. What does that say about me?
You haven't figured out how to get free drugs using the Internet?
Why are European politicians involved in "negotiations" at all?
They get travel expenses and fine food plus hook^Wentertainment...?
I prefer "HHC" - Humongous Hardon Collider.
MD5 is broken, SHA1 has been weakened slightly but it isn't broken.
Same for RC4. The cypher is still OK, you just have to initialize it better (his has been known about for decades, the fact that Microsoft isn't doing it is the real news).
Yep.
Also: Poor people could read them as well.
The real problem with America is that everybody thinks they're entitled to their opinion even when there's hard facts to the contrary.
2 + 2 = 4? Go online and let us know what you think...
While this MAY be true for Norway it is certainly not true for most of Europe.
Yep.
Here in Spain we'd be cutting their heads off it it were legal and they weren't heavily armed.
Why would a country full of blondes and saunas have any suicide rate at all...?
Maybe the locals don't normally eat radishes and wouldn't know what to do with them.
Sweden != Norway
Well, duh.
You know how I know you didn't watch the video you're responding to?
as somebody who has spent more than a year in prison cumulatively, let me assure you that I am motivated never to return!
Your use of the word "cumulatively" suggests that you already did return...once wasn't enough.
There are jobs that, as a society, we should be happy to cut.
Glaziers?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window
Some figures from http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/norway
Civilian guns on Norway: 1,320,000 (1 in three people)
Government guns in Norway: 80,000
The Government is outgunned by 16:1
(Which is as it should be)
But according to Fox News, how can you be a democracy if the police is unarmed?
Oh, dear ... I didn't know it had got to that stage yet.
The curve will be around the horizontal axis, just like the other curved phones that already exist.
The Pesky Facts are against you I'm afraid.
Plus: Is it worth it to gain 1mm...?
i they meant the phone can be longer but curved so that it is the same length/width as a noncurved phone, the problem is just the height or depth is increased which probably isn't that big of a deal. but which way is it curved? like a half-tube, or a bridge?
Apparently math makes people's heads spin even on slashdot.
The point of all those numbers up there was to prove that you'd have to curve it by a ridiculous amount to make a noticeable difference in width/height (eg. more then 1% shorter/narrower) .
Yep. It's very obvious in this video: http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/29/samsung-galaxy-round-hands-on/
More glare.
I'm going to enjoy pointing that out to proud owners.
He also said "shorter device" instead of "narrower device", when it's curved *vertically*.
And he did that on a 'nerd' website.
Yep. I think Apple has found their target market. They've run out of new features but this will have people queuing up all night to buy a iPhone6.
The claim is "More screen in the same space!!"
As a mathematician, I'm having trouble understanding what goes on in people's heads when they say things like that. It's so obviously not true.
Whenever I see one I'm going to point out how it increases screen reflectivity and makes it harder to see.
Monitors were actually better...