"Intellectual property" is called property for a reason -- it is protected by legislation from copying, which is akin to stealing. You are stealing potential wealth from people who may chose to sell copies.

That's why it is called property: because taking it (via copy) is stealing, thabks to legislation. Do not devolve into semantics. because it "works around" the word "stealing".

There is no point there you are trying to make.

Most US prisoners are for drug crimes. We have a vigorous debate going on about legalization.

Many (most?) Soviet prisoners were political prisoners. Criticism of that got you added to it.

Your parallel is silly and an obvious nod towards what issues in the US you consider paramount at the moment. At least normal blame America firsters (nice cold war reference there!) tie something the US did as, normally ludicrously, heavily controlling over some other nation. You simply skip that part.

All three of your citation neededs are asinine. Anyone who has been remotely paying attention to these things over the years and decades knows them the same way they know New York is on the east coast. Repeated references to same.

Go do your own homework, see that he is right, and come back and apologize.

Yeesh, what brought that on all of the sudden?

It's already been prognosticated that general household robots will be a massive goldmine for lawyer frauds. The only way around it is a black box, perhaps with video, to show people fucking around and deliberately causing problems.

I always wondered if the rate of slip-and-fall accidents in supermarkets plummeted after security camera installation (even dummy ones.)

Well, they crossed that bridge already with complex nav systems that may distract you. You may be able to sign away your rights, but you still cannot sign away the rights of people you may cream.. They can still aue the company.

While not always bug-free, automotive embedded software is a hell of a lot better than desktop or phone shit. I have done both.

Embedded goes through rigorous testing of every single feature. Software is code reviewed with difference tools and every line poured over. Every path is guaranteed execution in testing. Worst case stack use is capped. Infinite loop failsafes are created.

"Regular", i.e. desktop development, is a yee-haw, flyin' by the seat of your flaming pants endeavor. I have done both. So should most developers as there are some eye opening things which can be easily adopted without slowing the bleeding edge nature.

Having said that, this new system is just an extension of already-existing lane keeping and distance keeping automation.

This is exactly what happened in Gaza the past few weeks, to weed out Hamas.

Where are the mod points when I need them. Sad day when nobody even at /. knows who Robert Zimmermann is.

I've often heard of Perl being referred to as a write-only language.

That list comprehension is actually very much the reason why Python is terrific. C# programmers will be familiar with the idea from Linq.

for: This is a for loop
a,b,c,d: Each value of the iterator is itself composed of 4 values. In Python this is called a tuple, but you can think of it as an array if it helps. The first value is bound to a, the second to b, etc. Thus, the variables a,b,c, and d are defined in the loop body.
in: The next thing mentioned is the iterator
[x.q for x in y if x.z]+[x.r for x in y if x.z]: This iterator is a mess, let's look at it's parts, which are:
[x.q for x in y if x.z]
+
[x.r for x in y if x.z]:

[x.q for x in y if x.z]: y is an iterator. Return only the q property of each item in y, only if the z property is defined. This results in a list (another Python datatype which you can think of as an array) being return, of q properties.

[x.r for x in y if x.z]: y is an iterator. Return only the r property of each item in y, only if the z property is defined. This results in a list being return, of r properties.

+: Combine the list of q properties with the list of r properties.

Like learning another (human) language, it it incomprehensible at first. However, I'm no Pythonista and even for me it was very simple to figure out what this does.

The situation is really not that simple, even if you consider non-cyborg humans. See this Stack Exchange thread on the topic:
http://philosophy.stackexchang...