Whilst the DMCA may or may not be a good thing, it is certainly not a means for the car manufacturers to impose a SAFETY based restriction. That organisations pull that sort of abuse is why the legal system is held in contempt.

That's the problem we have. Given how much of 'accepted science' gets challenged and reworked, we are always faced with a spectrum from the very secure to the totally crackpot. After all, Einstein successfully torpedoed Newton's laws of motion, which were as widely accepted as you get. Somehow we need to have a process for determining whether a scientific claim is sufficient to justify its use for criminal trials. On a good day the court process will do that; on a bad day a poor quality lawyer will be unwilling to challenge it.

One of the frustrations we slashdotters often suffer is the ordinary person who disbelieves a scientific finding; climate change and anti-vaccers are the most visible at present. Yet it is stories like this that give people every justification for their scepticism; we need to be willing to hear their attitude and its reasons!

It's the difference between deliberate lying and passing on a fact that proves to be inaccurate. To the extent that these guys were reflecting the general consensus of their profession, then their comments aren't lying. To the extent that they had their own doubts which they failed to express to juries, they are guilty of perjury. But never underestimate the power of groupthink. The experimental demonstrations of the way in which people succumb to social pressure to say what is not true, when those they are with are actors saying the untruth, are terrifying. http://www.simplypsychology.or...

I'll give you the smart phone; as a luddite who refuses to use one, I tend to forget their significance. Digital cameras - also true. Genome sequencing - not yet THAT significant; whilst helpful for law enforcement, we've yet to see its wider application. LCD monitors - only significant as leading towards smartphones etc. LINUX, Amazon and electric cars - nah - not that significant.

However the central experience of western life - of living in nuclear families in dispersed suburbs, travelling to work in non-agricultural occupations every day whilst children are schooled in institutions - hasn't changed qualitatively for 150 years; more and more conform to this pattern of course, but my point is that we're doing more of this - not changing those forms much.

The last major, world changing thing, was the internet - some 25 years ago. Since then we've just seen it get better and better - but no real breakthroughs

Before that it was jet planes and anti-biotics - mid 50s

Before that motor cars - 1900 or so

Before that railroads - 1830 or so

Now it may be that we are waiting for the next major breakthrough.

At some point it will cease to make sense to update your computer on a regular basis. I have a 10 year old one that is fine for internet browsing and word processing. I have a friend who still uses Windows 2000 on hers - though her household does have another one. As computers get to be point of being good enough for all but the latest, most processor intense, activities, then the concept of keeping an heirloom one - especially ones designed to be upgradeable - will probably make more and more sense.

Legitimate court rulings that demonstrate real harm as a result of bad software design are a means of achieving change; the alternative is that the providers get to hide behind the claim that they are complying with all the regulations - despite providing a product that doesn't work. Whilst much lawyering is unhelpful, the reality is that SOMETIMES it does enable good things to happen!