If you want to check IDs you are preventing those without IDs from participating, which in the case of voting is a bit more fucking important than playing the lottery.

Don't speak for everyone - it's a great sign you haven't really considered your argument. It was a logical extension of the Google accounts people used. It was expected by many, welcomed by many, and used by many. Your experiences do not speak for everyone else's.

"Almost certainly bad" he says, without a shred of evidence... It will not serve you to sum up all the taxi regulations around the world which Uber is falling foul of as being "almost certainly bad for the industry", as that patently isn't true. You are comparing regulations in well-functioning countries with those in fucked-up places, as if they have the same effect in both. You are not doing your argument any favours with that sort of over-simplistic nonsense.

Notable to you :) I doubt many people read your first sentence and thought "he's talking about Salt Lake City, surely".

Yes, as eBay was not used for ordering taxis. Having a ratings system which tightly focused on provider/consumer ratings was considerably different for this sector.

And that justified the ruining of peoples' lives who simply had left-leaning sympathies? Being a socialist or even a communist doesn't mean one is automatically an enemy of the state.

Surely It's also a balance of how useful something is when used correctly compared to the damage it can do when misused.

But we're not talking about the world, but on a particular society in a specific location. Get a grip.

We get it - you are scared and lashing out like a petulant child at anyone or anything which threatens to shed just a little more light on your insecurities.

I think you'll find it's predominately poor people who are overrepresented in the crime statistics. Non-white people have generally had a harder time in the US than white people, and that continues to this day, which goes a long way to explaining their overrepresentation. Your misses-the-point-entirely-but-is-too-caught-up-in-petty-racism-to-even-realise post shows just how dangerous opinions like yours spread and persist.

Grown-ups are talking. Be quiet.

So you don't understand both the US's implementation of free speech, or what "hate speech" is.

Then Google can teach the cars to do just that. You seem to think there are things these cars can't even conceive of, which is patently nonsense as they are trained by humans. If there is a great way to behave in a certain situation, the car can be trained to do just that, but with its far superior reaction times.

Try your test with human drivers and see how many toddler dummies you get through.

And then the human driver gets lost in thought (or tired, or angry, or distracted, etc. etc.) and crashes anyway, as they are intrinsically terrible at driving.

You should heed your own advice - if anecdotal stories are not evidence, what does that make your ass-delving hypothetical situations and guesses?

The Wikipedia article doesn't say that, though. It does say that, in 2014 at least, the Google cars would become extra cautious (not 'over [sic] cautious' as you claim) should they approach an unknown, complex intersection.