Well no, I had help making it up. Your post about "passing as many cars as pass you" seemed to imply that. As does stuff like:

Anyone who thinks that it is ok to drive faster than the posted speed limit in a construction slowdown area because they fail to see the workers is definitely advocating unsafe driving practices. You need to be replaced with a robot, and the sooner the better.

As for the fallibility of robots, they just have to be more reliable than humans like you and we as a society win. It will never be a perfect solution, but the bar is pretty low thanks to folks who drive the way you describe, so I for one look forward to our future autonomous driving overlords and the reduction in fatalities and insurance rates they will bring.

But stopping the car is generally the correct answer, even for humans. More lives would be saved if people simply drove safely and, when something bad happened, stopped the car whilst staying on the road. Robots don't need moral calculus to arrive at the correct answer. If a person/deer runs out onto the highway in front of me, the safest thing to do is BRAKE; some gentle swerving *might* help, but in most cases you are better off not; it is usually impossible to predict WHICH WAY the person/animal will move to try and avoid your oncoming car, so you have a 50% chance of making things worse by steering into their escape route. The best answer is almost always to brake and stay on the road. Losing control of the vehicle in order to avoid hitting something, even a human, is not something I would ever want to program a car to do.

Driving is fun. I like driving. I will miss driving, if autonomous cars become common in my lifetime. I dearly hope that happens, though, because I really won't miss the way many people drive, and I believe that even as safe and careful a driver as I am, a good robot will be safer and better than that, and if I want thrills I can go off-roading and pay to drive a car on a separate reserve for thrill-seekers. I will be ok with that.

Autonomous cars would solve all that silly "it's ok to drive at unsafe speeds because everyone else is" stuff, eh?

"Many, many accidents occur or are made worse because someone tried to make a decision instead of just following the simplest rule: stop."
THIS, so much this.

"He's saying that there's a problem with the question, which is the assumption that the robot will be capable of understanding such a scenario"
I would take this even further: there is no NEED for the robot to be capable of understanding the scenario at any level beyond "something I must stop fro has jumped in front of me: STOP" if all we desire is safer roads. Robots that could drive for us and follow this, along with the other general rules of the road, would already result in a net gain of safety over our current humanly-operated cars. There is zero requirement for any moral/ethical choice-making if what we want is better safety than what we have now.

Actually, I would think that it is almost always better to "not drive off the bridge", and despite your claim, also almost always better to "not swerve into the ditch". At highway speeds, swerving into a ditch = death; at city speeds, stopping is so fast that the computer should that. Many, many people die each year because they swerved to avoid a deer or a dog or a cat or whatever, when they should have simply braked while trying to avoid the obstacle WITHOUT swerving into the ditch. As a universal rule, it would net save lives if people stopped driving off the road, not net cost lives.

As for "I probably see a half dozen accidents a year avoided by someone taking the shoulder because the car in front stopped too fast", the whole idea is that automated cars would not be tail-gating, and will always leave sufficient safe margins for braking (something humans often fail to do...like everyone in your example).Robotics experts predict that traffic will flow much smoother and faster as a result of this.

Myself and a friend also figured it out together, and then wrote down the instructions on a couple of sheets of paper and shared it around my high school. It only took about a week for the two of us to work out a series of processes that would, in the end, solve the cube. Later on, when a book on solving the cube came out, it used almost all the same patterns (although I think it had a couple of optimizations that could combine two patterns into shortcuts). Once you decide that the way to solve the cube is to move ONE piece at a time into place, and work from one layer to the next until complete, the solutions to "how do I get this one piece from here to there" become easier to figure out.

On a side note, we used to grease our cubes with vegetable oil (yeah, awful), and the fastest I ever managed to complete a randomized cube was 30 seconds. Today, I no longer remember the exact patterns, and it would probably take me 30-60 minutes to stumble through.

"A Tritium plasma is safe, but it's important to keep track of all of it (and that includes losses to the vacuum vessel of the tokamak, we really don't want any going missing!)."

My Google-fu was weak on this one: could you perhaps elucidate why exactly we really don't want any going missing? Is it rare and valuable? I am trying to figure out just what Tritium plasma is...my physics background ended at first year uni, so it all sounds like "dilithium crystals" to me, and means about as much.

Thank you, you made my morning.

Thank you for the best laugh of my day so far.

GIMP's choice of making "Save As" separate from "Export" was infuriating. Like MS Office ribbon bars, it was a step backwards in usability.Can anyone give me a good reason why all of the functionality of "Export" and "Save As" shouldn't be bundled into a single menu selection?

ChronoCloud, that was a weird post. While Japanese gaming culture has some marked differences when compared to, say, N.A gaming culture, it is just plain racist (and factually incorrect) to say "they're Japanese so they didn't really understand what people liked/didn't like about the early MMO's". I'm guessing your frame of reference excludes the early Japanese MMOs, for example.

As for EQOA being "better and more enjoyable" than FFXI, I totally disagree, and I guess I'm not the only one; EQOA is long gone, but FFXI is still going strong.

My automated modding bot categorizes you as "troll", so there!

EA's "custom" STL implementation was mostly just a customized memory allocator.
Game companies use STL container objects all over the place in their code; it is considered safe, efficient, and familiar.

No, the metal and composite heads are already made hollow. Titanium has a better strength vs. weight ratio than most other materials they could use. Its alloys also have useful "hardness" and "ductility" (elongation) properties when making heads for golf clubs.

So no, it's not used for its name, it's used for its performance.