also, google's implementation is such that the driver can grab the wheel at any point.
i'd imagine they'd see a BSOD and immediately grab the wheel.
i'd imagine everything is logged, and can be analyzed readily.
i see two options:
- in robot-driver world a rare bug leads to an accident. the software is improved and the accidents don't happen anymore. when more bugs are found and fixed, driving gets safer for everybody.
- in human driving world, a human makes a human error, there's a crash, and nothing is learned from it. people continue to have the same chances of an accident.
also, the above poster talking about their car dropping them off and finding a parking spot on it's own has really captured my imagination. i want that.
i want seats that can be turned around so that i can see to the screaming child behind me.
i want the knowledge that every car out there is driving just as predictably as mine is. not having to mentally size up every single driver that hits my field of view would be a relief. it would also do a lot to reduce racism:)
i can't see how it would be more expensive and less safe than the stuff on the streets now.
and maybe big pharma should take control? there'd be measured dosages with clear information on how much can be used per body weight, there'd be consistency so you'll never end up with a "hot shot" and die.
it'd just be a matter of asking your pharmacist and you'd be much safer.
also, users could be logged and tracked through the medical system meaning help would be at hand if things got out of hand.
i can't see how it could be worse than it is now.
you example of gambling threw me a bit - they're so different. the state i live in (not the USA) always had semi-legal gambling (sports mainly), but not casino and pokie style gambling. when pokies were allowed, venues popped up everywhere. a big shiny casino was built, RSL clubs (like a cheap pub for former soldiers and their families) all got pokie machines. there was an immediate social impact that is well documented, and there continues to be.
if prohibition has stayed in place, i'm sure more people than just the venerable Noone you speak of would have made money.
think how long prohibition was in place compared to how long the harder stuff has been illegal.
the two don't compare perfectly though, as alcohol has always been pretty simple to make and can be made from anything that contains carbohydrates, where cocaine can only be made from 1 plant. ditto heroin. ditto weed, though it's tacitly tolerated far more (because it just makes people indolent and lazy, not violent and crazy).
UFO hoaxes are all shaky because motion tracking is difficult and therefore doing it successfully is more likely to look "authentic"
if i had a locked-off high def camera sitting out in a field for countless hours, i'd be happy to catch some UFOs with it, but both scenarios are quite unlikely.
look at the amateur footage of the 9/11 attacks, or the zapruder film. or the hindenburg film.
hell, even the footage of the A-bomb attacks on japan are pretty damn blurry and shaky.
people would scoff at the fact that the camera was locked off, even if it was 100% real footage.
if a person with a family commits a crime, it is them who have let the family down, not the state. they need to think about the people who depend on them before committing a crime, or they're hurting more people than themselves.
this is the reason most sane people actually don't commit crimes - it wont just hurt them if they're caught.
that argument applies to organised crime in general.
perhaps the employer then has a responsibility to it's employees and must compensate them for any losses they incur as a result of the employer's crime(s)?
i like it when they fabricate bills, ring you at work asking if you are [some person] and not telling you what it's about because you're not [some person].
but you still get harassed by collection agencies...
and no matter how often you chew their ears off, they don't get the hint.
IMAX 3d is actually the worst implementation by far. it's still physically on film, so it gets scratched and bobs around in the gate. that alone is puke-making.
twin-lens DCI is the best currently.
reason - IMAX is pushed right up on your face, but the cinematography is done with a normal viewing distance in mind. if you want to shoot IMAX you have to shoot WIDE, but action movies are all shot close-in-handheld these days to cover the fact that the actors aren't as athletic as they'd like.
so the 3d image would work just fine if you were much much further back from the screen, or if it was a native IMAX film, not an upconvert from 35mm or digital.
it's the equivalent of trying to browse the web with a 52" plasma right up in your face instead of a laptop.
Slashdot Mirror
ITT: node 3 getting trolled hard.
if a person buys a car that drives itself, that person will not lose their job.
people didn't fight robots in manufacturing because they feared Skynet - they did it because they would lose their jobs.
cab drivers might kick up a stink, but i, for one, welcome our new Johnny Cab overlords.
these are all optional -- disable every single one of the systems mentioned, and the car would still work
same deal with the google cars...
and i certainly wouldn't want a car that i couldn't drive myself if i wanted to. some people enjoy driving.
but i'd also love to be taken home when tired or drunk, and i'd LOVE to not have to worry about finding a parking spot.
also, google's implementation is such that the driver can grab the wheel at any point.
i'd imagine they'd see a BSOD and immediately grab the wheel.
i'd imagine everything is logged, and can be analyzed readily.
i see two options:
- in robot-driver world a rare bug leads to an accident. the software is improved and the accidents don't happen anymore. when more bugs are found and fixed, driving gets safer for everybody.
- in human driving world, a human makes a human error, there's a crash, and nothing is learned from it. people continue to have the same chances of an accident.
also, the above poster talking about their car dropping them off and finding a parking spot on it's own has really captured my imagination. i want that.
i want seats that can be turned around so that i can see to the screaming child behind me.
i want the knowledge that every car out there is driving just as predictably as mine is. not having to mentally size up every single driver that hits my field of view would be a relief. it would also do a lot to reduce racism :)
the people that wanted to work for NASA as kids are now working for the military, and its various contractors.
ain't it grand.
Ad Standards authorities are stupid fuckers though... try dealing with them.
i doubt any of them bothered to check the law to see if they were right or wrong.
hopefully this little box will cause some legal reform if the ASA is right.
should i mention economies of scale and supply chains?
no?
he bought up lots of stock in Dewars and Gordons during Prohibition and sold it soon after repeal for a huge profit.
that just seems like a logical, shrewd investment move that anyone could do, whether they're in the business or not.
i can't see how it would be more expensive and less safe than the stuff on the streets now.
and maybe big pharma should take control? there'd be measured dosages with clear information on how much can be used per body weight, there'd be consistency so you'll never end up with a "hot shot" and die.
it'd just be a matter of asking your pharmacist and you'd be much safer.
also, users could be logged and tracked through the medical system meaning help would be at hand if things got out of hand.
i can't see how it could be worse than it is now.
you example of gambling threw me a bit - they're so different. the state i live in (not the USA) always had semi-legal gambling (sports mainly), but not casino and pokie style gambling. when pokies were allowed, venues popped up everywhere. a big shiny casino was built, RSL clubs (like a cheap pub for former soldiers and their families) all got pokie machines. there was an immediate social impact that is well documented, and there continues to be.
if prohibition has stayed in place, i'm sure more people than just the venerable Noone you speak of would have made money.
think how long prohibition was in place compared to how long the harder stuff has been illegal.
the two don't compare perfectly though, as alcohol has always been pretty simple to make and can be made from anything that contains carbohydrates, where cocaine can only be made from 1 plant. ditto heroin. ditto weed, though it's tacitly tolerated far more (because it just makes people indolent and lazy, not violent and crazy).
alcohol never had to be smuggled that far.
even at one sentence, the sarcasm was apparent...
UFO hoaxes are all shaky because motion tracking is difficult and therefore doing it successfully is more likely to look "authentic"
if i had a locked-off high def camera sitting out in a field for countless hours, i'd be happy to catch some UFOs with it, but both scenarios are quite unlikely.
look at the amateur footage of the 9/11 attacks, or the zapruder film. or the hindenburg film.
hell, even the footage of the A-bomb attacks on japan are pretty damn blurry and shaky.
people would scoff at the fact that the camera was locked off, even if it was 100% real footage.
Penn and Teller's Bullshit to everybody else's Mythbusters.
what does that even mean?
both shows are entertaining and very light on the science.
you could always just stop buying stuff except from farmer's markets and 2nd-hand shops...
just watch your bandwidth and you'll be fine.
or explicitly ban all IP addresses you don't install yourself.
or just use encrypted wifi and don't give your freaking TV the password...
i always wonder how that will effect the power management shit that comes with it.
probably not a huge amount on a competent system.
but what about the little shortcuts that control screen brightness, volume, etc. most of those aren't hardware based.
if a person with a family commits a crime, it is them who have let the family down, not the state. they need to think about the people who depend on them before committing a crime, or they're hurting more people than themselves.
this is the reason most sane people actually don't commit crimes - it wont just hurt them if they're caught.
that argument applies to organised crime in general.
perhaps the employer then has a responsibility to it's employees and must compensate them for any losses they incur as a result of the employer's crime(s)?
considering in TFA they talk of having to constantly answer questions of potential customers that were raised in that very episode...
this is our MS troll again
sounds like every telecom ever.
i like it when they fabricate bills, ring you at work asking if you are [some person] and not telling you what it's about because you're not [some person].
but you still get harassed by collection agencies...
and no matter how often you chew their ears off, they don't get the hint.
i looked at the date... March 31st. so close.
so now i'm not sure whether to believe this or not.
i'm'a gonna watch and see if anybody else in the world of Samsung laptops finds the same thing. i'm sure many are searching for it now.
IMAX 3d is actually the worst implementation by far. it's still physically on film, so it gets scratched and bobs around in the gate. that alone is puke-making.
twin-lens DCI is the best currently.
reason - IMAX is pushed right up on your face, but the cinematography is done with a normal viewing distance in mind. if you want to shoot IMAX you have to shoot WIDE, but action movies are all shot close-in-handheld these days to cover the fact that the actors aren't as athletic as they'd like.
so the 3d image would work just fine if you were much much further back from the screen, or if it was a native IMAX film, not an upconvert from 35mm or digital.
it's the equivalent of trying to browse the web with a 52" plasma right up in your face instead of a laptop.
not buying into 3D is like piracy. you're robbing the MPAA of revenue by not buying their 3D blu-rays.
you must buy a 3d telly today, and as many glasses as there are people living in your street.
or the MPAA will sue to recover lost revenue.
which is why I still routinely games that are 20 years old
I still accidentally games that are 20 years old