You talk about civil liabilities and brand damage to the car company, but actually what that means is that people will die, and the company will calculate how much brand damage is acceptable.

Imagine the face on the poor guy whose computer got owned when ze looks at their internet bill.

The story submitter and/or editors clearly had some agenda here in using a misleadingly suggestive title.

You are assuming a person is a troll or not a troll.

I wonder how many accidents the Google cars witnessed but did not participate in. That data could be very useful in determining fault, if it could be subpoenaed or somehow made available.

I assume that numbers are much higher for people living in the city.

When reaction speeds and computation starts to exceed humans' by orders of magnitude, many things become possible. Letting go of the brakes, then hitting the brakes again after getting struck to avoid damage to the front car. Taking into account the reactions of other drivers (heuristically) is possible.

Wow, that sounds awesome! Is there more info on this somewhere?

Ye of so little faith! Computers will be better than us at this sort of thing soon, if not already.

What makes you think the queen bee is "ruling"? She's just there to make babies.

Whether cash or credit, it's all controlled by a cartel of banks.

You aren't the target audience for the scientific article. That's what the press release is for. Abstracts are not the same as introductions. They are necessarily succinct, to the point where use of jargon is required.

if is_patent_dispute(case) {
if regex(case.claims, "\(.*software.*\)|\(.*internet.*\)") or find_prior_art() != null or !working_prototype_exists() {
invalidate_patent()
}
}

It's pretty clear from the syllabus that it's not a good course.

Does that mean that for women in computer science, the chance of marrying someone in computer science is up >75%?