I voted FF. At work I use FF for all my development needs because I am comfortable with its debugging toolset and Chrome for anything not work related (can have flash disabled, adblock running, etc.). At home I almost never use Chrome because Google's penchant for data mining your personal information. Also, my Linux box (an ancient PC with Fedora) is much more stable with FF - Chrome will cause a kernel panic within a few minutes of browsing.

It's not nearly so cut-and-dried as you suggest: source

If you have family in Cuba, there could be some repercussions.

I voted "Canada" - but on second thought, their government is so much in bed with the US government, that being spied on by the CSE is tantamount to being spied on by the NSA.

There is one other fact of human psychology that will get in the way of having robot driven cars sharing roads with human drivers: assertion of dominance. Aggressive drivers will carry out various risky moves to get in front of a more timid driver (or if the 2nd driver is not so timid, he may attempt another maneuver to prevent 1st car from getting ahead). Whoever is the most recklessly aggressive come out the winner. As pointed out in Pinker's _How the Mind Works_, if two drivers are going to play chicken with one another, if one had his steering wheel removed before the contest, he would win. If there are risk avoiding computers driving cars, aggressive human drivers will exploit this greatly.

There is a lot of variability in the USA in cost, convenience, travel time, and availability. Even just commuting isn't the whole picture, as I doubt taking a bus or train is convenient for grocery shopping. In much of the country there is large expanses where public transportation isn't available and wouldn't even make sense to provide it. In NYC, if you live in Brooklyn or Queens and commute to Manhattan, taking a car would take more time than public transit and be prohibitively expensive (mainly for parking); in contrast, taking subways and/or buses is about $120/month.

I find myself unable to multitask. Either I am listening to music (mostly classical) and all my mental resources are allocated to hearing what is going on (melodies, harmonies, motives, structure, etc.), or I am involved in work-related activities (coding, coming up with solutions to software engineering problems, reading specs, keeping abreast with subject matter, etc.) that require full concentration. For situations that don't require full concentration, such as testing, the music is distracting.

I really don't see where the articulated cars save will save loading/emptying times. Train cars during rush hour are so packed that most of the time to empty is spent on passengers having to push their way through the crowd to the nearest door. If they are in the space between trains, there are that many more bodies to get past. Also, you would need much more than an 8-10% increase in capacity to see much of an improvement. Train cars still will be sardine cans.

"slow" being defined as anything less than 50% above the posted speed limit.

There are a few areas I see problems with automatic cars. One is the sort of staged accidents that we see all the time on Russian dashcam videos. If a pedestrian can run in front of the car and get hit, would he not be able to legally argue that the computer in the car should have been smart enough to ignore him. Another is the situation drivers have when in densely populated places like Manhattan. There are situations where you have to drive through pedestrians to turn onto a cross street or be waiting all day. Of course the pedestrians are reasonable enough not to get themselves hit, but ignore crossing signals nonetheless. Another is with aggressive drivers, who know bounds in vehicular assholery.

What about when the jellyfish call in a giant carbon-consuming space jellyfish to consume all the terrestrial biomass?

Nonsense. Nearly all the sheet music available for solo cello is edited, containing fingerings, phrasing, dynamics, bowings, etc. And if you play in an orchestra, the principal cellist will provide those for the score part.

Ah, a product of the Russian educational system - the article specifically mentioned 65 countries in the study. Not to mention you're making assumptions on how the math was scored that cannot be inferred from the article or data. Or bringing up the favorite boogeyman in Russian media - America - to deflect blame in Russia's shortcomings. Lets face it, in Soviet times, Russia was a powerhouse of scientific innovation and scientists were treated as national heroes. Now science has gone down the shitter, anti-science runs strong and is growing daily. The government's taking over the RAS bodes ill.

BTW students do learn calculus, physics, chemistry, etc. in US schools. And you can read some of the results of the UN study - in which 470,000 students took part in - and some of the reasoning why countries like Finland and South Korea are so much better than Russia. The superior educational systems teach how to apply knowledge while Russia teaches by rote and memorization. In fact I do know people currently enrolled in Russian schools, where they literally have to memorize hundreds of poems when they are 6 or 7 years old.

Sorry if I sound bitter. I really had hope that after the Soviet Union fell, Russia would become a free country with all the legacy of Russia's rich cultural history. I was proven wrong on both cases, and every day I get more evidence that the country is going down as a neanderthal fascist state.

Sorry, I don't buy this. The Russian Federation is way below the US in math and science:

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/dec/07/world-education-rankings-maths-science-reading

I would assume the risk of catastrophic failure would preclude it's use as an on-site office. However, keeping it up would yield invaluable data as to what components do fail and how, as well as what parts and systems do hold up very well.