That's definitely possible and I'd even say likely. Valve does have a preference for PC and anything from them since HL2 on PC has required Steam if my memory serves correctly.

I was hoping for Half Life 3 but since it was launched under a "living room" moniker I was positive that it wasn't going to be. I also highly doubt they'll make Half-Life 3 SteamOS exclusive. Valve doesn't make any extra money off of SteamOS as opposed to someone having Steam on Windows. Also, it's just not Valve's style.

This is an interesting problem that I like to talk about fairly regularly. Society is going to go through a very painful transition as more and more jobs becomes obsolete due to technology. This is really something that a lot of people should be thinking about. How will society function when nobody can get a job because machines can do it faster, better, and cheaper? Profit based growth no longer makes any sense as we approach that point. What's the alternative and more importantly, how do you handle the transition?

To what degree? CMU had driven a bus cross country with very limited manual intervention when I was an undergrad nearly 10 years ago. The bus only worked on the highway and the "driver" told it when to change lanes and took over to exit the highway but it made most of the trip by itself. I heard this story from Takeo Kanade but unfortunately my Google-Fu is failing to turn anything up so it's possible I'm mis-remembering.

Google's self-driving cars have driven over 300,000 miles without causing accidents while in automatic mode. There are two accidents I'm aware of. One, the car was rear-ended while stopped at a red light. The other was when the Google car rear ended another Prius. In that incident the car was in manual mode.

The assumption you seem to be making is that driving AI needs to be perfect. I'll save you the trouble: it won't be. It just needs to be better than humans. That's something that any auto manufacturer should be able to prove quite easily and would likely become part of standard safety ratings.

A far larger concern should be users that decide hacking together their own driving AI would be fun or those that maliciously hack into other cars. Even these are likely to be relatively small concerns.

I hate when people do that. If you're passing just speed up a lot then slow back down once you're back in the slow lane.

Seriously? 100,000 miles? You realize that's along the lines of 6-7 years of driving for people 19+ right? I'm hoping I just missed a really obvious joke

From arguments I have with my wife on this topic, it's all about not being comfortable with the loss of control. She doesn't even drive yet she insists that manual overrides need to be available in case the algorithm messes up so the human can take over and salvage the situation. I've tried explaining that this is unrealistic anyway because in a vast majority of cases the human is just going to mess things up worse if they take over. The human will take over in cases when they shouldn't since they'll think the machine lost control when it's actually fine. The rare instance when a person taking over actually helps things will be greatly overshadowed by the instances when they screw things up.

People are just uncomfortable about not having control and are also disturbed by looking at things through a statistical lens.

Last I saw Google announced that they had over 300,000 miles with their autonomous cars. That was in August 2012. Still impressive but nowhere near millions.

I find DUI laws to be ridiculous. Just because you CAN take over the vehicle doesn't mean you will. The law should be reserved for those that actually have taken control of the vehicle. Of course, reality means that you are probably correct in your assessment so that needs to be considered.

When I looked up the laws in my state it maxes at about 1/3 of what I currently make. UI works well if you're within a certain salary range but going above that can make it extremely painful. With what UI would pay, I'd be bringing in barely enough to pay my mortgage and utilities forget about anything else. My house is actually pretty average to low end for the area I live in too so it's not like I'm living way better than the typical homeowner in the area. It certainly doesn't help that I'm the only income source for me and my wife.

As someone working at a company that does 2 of those 3 things I'd like to modify "listen to your concerns" to "listen to your concerns and actually consider/act on them". Listening is easy, actually doing something is difficult.

Yup, that's already part of the plan but thanks for the advice.

I'm going through this exact thought process right now. I plan to get a job and leave my current employer with no notice. The reasons are many but the company (and the leaders in particular) have systematically disrespected and upset everyone on the technical side of the company. The only bridges I'd care about burning would be with the very people supporting me in my decision to leave without notice. Everyone's looking for a way out.

I think it all really depends on why you're leaving. If the company isn't respecting you as a professional I see no reason to give them professional courtesy in kind. I feel like the whole idea of "acting professional" is something that frequently supports a system that holds up corporations at the expense of people. That's honestly not something I can agree with.

I fully agree with this. I frequently try to hire people and a vast majority of the applicants are abysmal. I filter resumes by looking for evidence of some degree of programming experience. That removes a ton of applicants that just apply for every job they see. Then on the phone interview I ask them to code a CS 101 level problem and almost all of them fail that too. This is when I'm looking for somebody that has the basics and potential to become good. I can't imagine how tough hiring must be when you're looking for more senior level people. I should also note that many of the people failing my interviews have 5+ years of industry experience supposedly.