Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Keep it as is (Score 1) 277

DST is not a bad idea. Who the hell is going to wake up at 4:00 a.m. in June?

Given I currently wake up at 5:00 am standard time in June, that's the same as waking up at 4:00 am daylight 'savings' time. But instead of being forced into doing it in one big shock, I could work my wake up time slowly earlier, as the sun starts coming up earlier.

Comment Re:Insurance (Score 1) 362

If two self-driving cars are involved in a collision, who is responsible for the damages?

If the cars are owned by individuals and not a taxi service, it'll probably be related to if they've kept the software up to date. If one person's car is up to date with the latest patches, and the other person hasn't updated in the last three years, and their car has had an update which would have avoided the accident, the person who didn't maintain their vehicles software will be liable.

Comment Re:Should all car drivers be able to ride a horse? (Score 1) 362

The cost for the array of sensors is far from minimal at the moment. Maintenance on them will add up too, you have new complicated pricey parts. The majority of people are probably driving cars worth $5K or less. Cheap low maintenance human-driven vehicles will be the norm for the foreseeable future, outside of wealthy suburbs.

Driverless cars will probably be introduced as a taxi like service. That way the cost will be spread out over a large customer base. At some point most young couples will decide not to get a second car because the autonomous service will take one of the spouses to work and back. Then with a generation or two of families having only one vehicle, new young couples will start by passing owning a car in the first place. Or at that point, they will have become economical enough, the one car the family does own will be autonomous.

Comment Re:Responsibility belongs to the driver . . . (Score 1) 362

But if the car comes across something it can't handle, the car owner would be in no condition to take over control.

At that point the car says "Sir, would you mind if I hand control over to a licensed remote driver? An inebriated silence will be allowed as acceptance". Then the car will do the equivalent of todays On-Star system, and have a professional take over.

Comment Re:If "yes," then it's not self-driving (Score 1) 362

How many will risk being stranded if automated systems begin shutting down because they are confused and overwhelmed by bad weather, outdated maps, or other unforeseen circumstances?

Probably the same number who are willing to try horseless carriages that might get overwhelmed by bad weather, outdated maps, or other unforeseen circumstances.

Comment Because it's so different (Score 1) 255

but the real absurdity runs in the opposite direction -- how did Vimeo's staff give an award to the film that they should have known was a knockoff?

Probably because it's so different, it doesn't feel like anything even semi-official. At it's core, the idea behind copyright is that if a consumer is faced with a choice between content from the creator, or some knock off content from somebody who's standing on the shoulders of the creator, and to consumer picks the knock off, it hurts the original creator. This 'movie' is short enough, and despairingly different enough from the original, anyone looking to spend money on Power Rangers style entertainment, is not going to choose consuming this short film.

Slashdot Top Deals

Is your job running? You'd better go catch it!

Working...