I believe it's pronounced "azz-WEE-pay."

That's actually a rather good analogy because in the early days of automobiling, you had to know how to fix and maintain a car in order to operate one, either for work or for pleasure. And they were very simple machines that had a rather low barrier to learning how to maintain.

Then later on, as cars got more complex, it became a pleasure to work on them, partly because overcoming the growing barrier was itself rewarding, and it came with a social cache.

Gradually, though, we've come to the point where even the most technically gifted people have to take their car to a mechanic for anything but basic maintenance, and the barrier to being a mechanic is now so high that few people do it as a hobby.

For the automobile, this process took over a century. Personal computers and programming have progressed this entire gamut since I first sat down at a computer in 1977. (A DEC printer terminal in a high school janitor closet, connected to the city hall mainframe. The account I had access to had a program called STARTREK.BAS. You can guess the rest... and remember, it was a printer terminal.)

Sounds like the GP's assessment was rather accurate then. Both the part you emphasized and the final modifying clause.

Dammit, man. I was eating lunch.

[puts away carnitas and rice bowl]

I still use a "solar" powered calculator, although most of the time the light comes from an electric lamp.

Yes, I have several smartphone calculator apps. But only physical keys are suitable for fast, repeated, accurate calculations.

Yes, well people tend to react even worse when they think they're being screwed by secret deals made in back rooms by people who they feel have screwed them before.

So the question becomes, whose reactions are more important? Up to this point, it's clear no one involved has given half a nanofuck about average citizens or workers.

The way this treaty is being negotiated and ratified just does not pass the smell test. It stinks from two kilometers away.

In other words, if you want people to trust you not to screw them, then you have to stop acting like Milburn fucking Drysdale and Thurston goddamn Howell the Third.

The bit you're apparently not grasping is something called a spatial light modulator.

You've probably encountered one as a digital cinema projector, or possibly even own one for PowerPoint presentations.

Couple it with a microwave radar or ultrasound sonar, and you can track individual raindrops and then cast shadows on them.

Sounds unnecessarily expensive for consumer automotive, but might be nice for buses/locomotives, emergency vehicles or passenger aircraft.

I need more coffee. I read this title as "Google Launches a Marketplace To Buy Parents... " and was in the act of clicking on it before realizing my error.

As my grandpa would say, when he gave me a quarter:

"Try not to spend it all in one place."

He thought it was hilarious.

(This was circa 1975, admittedly. Back when a quarter could still buy something of value.)

Yeah. I know. I was there.

Try explaining that to some of my contemporaries...

I don't need a court ruling to justify that. It's my browser, my computer, my request. You're not *entitled* to send me extra shit I don't want. And I'm not *obligated* to load anything you might put on your page.

Sorry. Deal with it advertisers and click sellers. As long as I pay for an ISP subscription, that's my right: Flat rate or metered; capped or unlimited; dial-up trickle or Tier 3 deluge. It's *my* option and I'm going to exercise it.

If you want to make money or defer your costs, charge a fee or request a donation. That's your option.

Next up: the sensor that attaches to your willy so you don't need to take your hand off of your joystick to control the mouse.

May the schwartz be with you!

That's because the existence of other universes is purely hypothetical, just like an AC's girlfriend.

This is why the idea of remote overrides of pilot controls is a particularly BAD idea.

A trained, qualified pilot must always have last resort authority, over any automated system and preferably even over any "assisted" system, whether it be fly by wire, hydraulic, etc. If control can be taken out of his or her hands remotely, because someone (or something) on the ground doesn't agree with the pilot's judgement, I guarantee we'll see more disasters, not fewer.

The instances where intentional pilot misconduct or hijacking occur are few, but notorious. But the instances where human pilots in the cockpit handle minor emergencies that could easily have turned into deadly ones occur regularly and we seldom hear about most of them.

Case in point: Do you think an autopilot on the ground could have heard a stowaway baggage handler?