Most executives would be happy to say 'we'll accept a slightly lower margin if we can make up for it in sales volume because more people will buy our product if we can guarantee a certain standard of living for people on our production lines'.
Nah, most executives prefer to trick people into believing that while still manufacturing in China.
Proof? Labels that say stuff like "Designed in California"...
A better target for the Guardian is the surveillance society in general, not MI5; it's council busy-bodies snooping with town centre cameras and things like that, not what the intelligence services are getting up to.
I was in the passenger seat of a high-end BMW the other day that did exactly that: the driver drove slowly along the row of parked cars until the car beeped, then he let go of the steering wheel, reversed and let the car park itself. Quite amazing really...
So it works exactly like the autoparking on Toyotas, Volvos, Mercedes and probably many other cars with the only distinction that you don't need your foot on the brake?
Nope. Those can only parallel-park.
(Clue: Try reading the article before posting...it works wonders)
However who's responsible for a self driving car? Do I (or more accurately, my insurer) sue the owner (who was not in control of the vehicle at the time) or the car company (who has no doubt waived responsibility for this with a ream of paperwork when they sold it).
I'm sure that lawyers everywhere are salivating at the thought of self-driving cars but I fail to see why we should ban them for that reason. Road safety can't possibly go downwards simply because we took humans out of the equation.
Aren't we just encouraging people to become less skilled and overall less intelligent when we remove the necessity to actually learn skills like driving?
That cat's already out of the bag.
Might as well use all available technology to stop them destroying our cars/property.
Arguably, if you lack the skills to park, you shouldn't be driving in the first place
That utopia hasn't worked out too well. They figured out how to get licenses anyway. The best we can do now is sell these to the idiots so they don't bang *our* cars up in car parks.
(Seriously, has anybody ever failed to get a license given enough attempts? Did they ever tell anybody, "Sorry, driving isn't for you..."?)
Slashdot Mirror
No, but it certainly makes police sting operations a lot easier.
The database could be maintained by the Police. Only reported stolen bikes would be on it.
Wow, idiocy is spreading to other courts around the world.
Why? Moderation of comments isn't difficult.
You think a person having taped the episode, will have a high enough quality rendition for them to use? I doubt it.
I've seen some of the other 'found' episodes and the quality is quite bad, yes.
Real fans only...
When you've got three square miles of them you can bet that a few of them will break down every single day.
Especially in a dry place full of sand.
Being one third of the holy trinity, he was his own father... how could he possibly disobey himself?
It's just another plot hole in the Great Omniscient Book.
Jesus also says that he's not here to change any of the old laws, that all the old laws still apply.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5%3A18-19&version=KJV
They just don't apply to him because he's the son of god. Or something.
It's a bit like star football players, they basically get a free pass on obeying the school rules.
Disobeying your parents is punishable by death (in The Bible).
He got off lightly. If they followed The Bible literally he'd be dead by now.
Most executives would be happy to say 'we'll accept a slightly lower margin if we can make up for it in sales volume because more people will buy our product if we can guarantee a certain standard of living for people on our production lines'.
Nah, most executives prefer to trick people into believing that while still manufacturing in China.
Proof? Labels that say stuff like "Designed in California"...
A better target for the Guardian is the surveillance society in general, not MI5; it's council busy-bodies snooping with town centre cameras and things like that, not what the intelligence services are getting up to.
Why not both?
Every time you wave your arm in the air you destroy an infinite number of universes.
In a lot of them you're currently having sex with Miley Cyrus.
(Whether or not that's "catastrophic" is up to you...)
So you can expect to come back to the car park and find your car boxed in by one of these parked each side six inches from your car.
If I come back and see you've done that to me then your door's getting banged up.
So much for this technology saving you from dents and scratches...
I was in the passenger seat of a high-end BMW the other day that did exactly that: the driver drove slowly along the row of parked cars until the car beeped, then he let go of the steering wheel, reversed and let the car park itself. Quite amazing really...
Over here we get that in a Ford Focus, etc.
So it works exactly like the autoparking on Toyotas, Volvos, Mercedes and probably many other cars with the only distinction that you don't need your foot on the brake?
Nope. Those can only parallel-park.
(Clue: Try reading the article before posting...it works wonders)
However who's responsible for a self driving car? Do I (or more accurately, my insurer) sue the owner (who was not in control of the vehicle at the time) or the car company (who has no doubt waived responsibility for this with a ream of paperwork when they sold it).
I'm sure that lawyers everywhere are salivating at the thought of self-driving cars but I fail to see why we should ban them for that reason. Road safety can't possibly go downwards simply because we took humans out of the equation.
That brilliant plan has two massive shortcomings:
1) You still need to squeeze back into the car when you're ready to leave (assuming there is no "unpark" feature)
You know how I know you didn't read the article...?
Aren't we just encouraging people to become less skilled and overall less intelligent when we remove the necessity to actually learn skills like driving?
That cat's already out of the bag.
Might as well use all available technology to stop them destroying our cars/property.
Arguably, if you lack the skills to park, you shouldn't be driving in the first place
That utopia hasn't worked out too well. They figured out how to get licenses anyway. The best we can do now is sell these to the idiots so they don't bang *our* cars up in car parks.
(Seriously, has anybody ever failed to get a license given enough attempts? Did they ever tell anybody, "Sorry, driving isn't for you..."?)
this would follow the curve of your leg.
Whose leg?
Won't it rock if you try to use it on a table?
Maybe easier to use when holding it in your hand, it will be harder to use when you put it on a table.
You're having trouble using a flat phone in your hand?
I'd like to be able to tap the screen when it's on a table without it rocking.
Weirdly enough, the side of my head isn't very curved.
Hard to see, hard to listen to. Look on the bright side though: It's banana shaped to fit nicely in my chimp-hand.
Hip flasks are a lot bigger. If hip flasks were only a couple of inches wide they wouldn't need the curve.
Not if you just stand there with your hands dangling limply underneath them.
The problem is user error. Bug closed.
Some people enjoy the "programming" part (some people even enjoy it more then the "playing" part).
Yes they do. The trick is to rub your hands together in the airstream (like you're washing them in the air).
I bet you also wonder why clothes dryers don't work if you jam them full of clothes. Oh, wait, you've never used one.