Sadly that's never going to happen, at least not legally. I can't imagine a legislature or insurance company that would allow people to operate an automated vehicle while inebriated or not in full control of their faculties. You're going to need to be able to take over at any time in case of emergencies or software failures, which means you'll have to keep a constant eye on your surroundings as well.

Not to say it won't happen anyway, but it won't be legal.

I have to wonder how people such as yourself manage to paddle coherent sentences past the idot-drool as you hunch over your keyboard.

Women are a gender. Feminism is an ideology. Remember the difference.

One can be completely opposed to the warped ideology of feminism while loving and supporting women, indeed the only way to love and support women is to oppose feminism as it seeks to turn them into perpetual victims and undermines their personal growth.

As for right wing, marxist zealots identify anyone that doesn't agree with their dualistic cult as "right wing", which includes an awful lot of distinctly non conservative groups.

So, tl;dr you're a thundering moron.

I'll take this crap all day every day over one more SJW/feminist public service announcement.

Corporate dystopias are much more fun than real life socialist dystopias which don't have exclusive rights for anyone. Although if Administration steps in, nobody wins.

Do they? I know there's a premium on popup ads and interstitial pages, but I've never met anyone who said "wow, what an amazing ad jumping around and flashing lights at me, let's click on that instead of checking out the content I came for". Maybe some people pay more for them but I wouldn't call it a well advised move.

The most interesting part of the article for me is the idea of real time bidding - maybe web adverts will finally start paying as well as print adverts.

That actually adds to the cool factor, for my money. Speaking of which I keep throwing money at the screen and I still don't have one of those butterflies, more tech details here.

Killing isn't bad when it's mosquitoes. You've supped your last on me you little bloodsucking bastards!

Some nutter uses a syringe (!) to inject your eyeballs with fish guts in his garage.

Awesome if it's got practical uses though.

Oh yes, and as for the feminist conspiracy, it's not as though it's a big secret: https://eyebeam.org/events/art...

That's only one area of many where feminists try to rewrite wikipedia en masse to reflect their ideology.

You mean this submission with the link in the usual place?

http://slashdot.org/firehose.p...

Or she's a neurotic hypersensitive feminist. How's that for equality of outcome.

It's not possible to sexually objectify someone. Even objects intended for sex must be made to look like sexually attractive people/body parts in order to successfully achieve their goal. You can have a very impersonal relationship with someone else but objectification is nonsense.

Yes, I submitted an article about how Wikipedia canned a gaggle of feminist editors from Wikipedia for spewing crap on gender related entries and it never saw the light of day, yet this agitprop makes the grade? Okay, the day will come and indeed is coming when this clear bigotry will reflect very badly indeed on slashdot editors. I know I'd certainly never hire one of them based on their past performance.

Exactly, the only way the summary makes any sense to me is if you replace the word "woman" with "feminist".

No, they really don't. They may make jokes and talk frankly about women, but guess what, women do the same thing about men. Are you calling women savages now?