Something goes wrong in a vehicle, the vast majority of the time you end up stuck on the road.

Things go wrong much less in a plane, and when they do the plane has backups for most systems that have any likelihood of failing. Also, all of those systems undergo thorough inspection every year (even more often for rentals). So yes, when something serious goes wrong in a plane, it is far more difficult to safely "pull over" but the level of rigor preventing those bad things from happening more than makes up for it. On top of all that, it's not like anyone is stopping you from asking the pilot to show you his logbook prior to the flight.

Is this a new low in late new on /.?

I think you just had a brain sand avalanche.

Also, just because they haven't evolved to do this yet doesn't mean that they won't ever evolve to do that. People seem to think as "today" as if it's the pinnacle of evolution, but it's not. Who knows what kinds of species the Earth will be home to in 100,000 yrs? 1 million years?

Either way, I'm going to need you to come in on Saturday.

I'm pretty sure I answered this question in my post...

it's not really any more convenient for those things than the smartphone that you still have to have in your pocket anyway, and it can't do any of the other cool stuff the smartphone does

Arguably, having the thing attached to your wrist makes some functions *less* convenient than holding your smartphone in your hand. I'm not arguing against the fact that these devices exist on the market, but the expectations for their uptake should be much lower, and we shouldn't be surprised when they are more of a fad than a disruptive tech.

What sort of severance package do I get?

More fired. This isn't wall street!

Bandwidth doesn't really matter after a certain point

Also, 640k will be enough for anyone!

The reason they don't take off is because they are niche.

My proof-reader is fired.

The reason they don't take of is because they are niche. Fitbits only track fitness info. They don't do anything else. As much as we like to believe fitness is a necessity, it's not the #1 priority in most peoples lives so they are easy to forget to wear, and once you forget them for a day or two, you've lost the momentum and it's actually harder to get yourself to start caring again. Similar thing with the smart watch -- it can do a couple of things, but it's not really any more convenient for those things than the smartphone that you still have to have in your pocket anyway, and it can't do any of the other cool stuff the smartphone does. It doesn't have a chance until it can completely replace the smartphone, and even then it isn't a sure thing.

I think the last figures put a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio of workers to roles.

What figures were those? Were they regional? All of the US? j/w

Just because you've heard of this "logical fallacy" thing doesn't mean you should beat people over the head with it.

That one is called "Ad Hominem."

Reductio Ad Absurdum fallacy at its finest.

But skimping on doing it properly may make future versions harder to ship.

Yes, that's true, but that's a risk that the person who owns the software needs to consider. That owner is almost certainly not the developer and likely not their manager, either.

These suits all have lighting apparently, and that lighting matters. Of the three options, the one that gives the most visibility to the wearer is the third, because the lighting extends down the legs.

Other than that, I don't think it matters which of these is built.

allows the programmer to take the needed time to test, rewrite, test, rewrite...

Real developers ship. You are working for a business; you are not doing an academic study.

The sheer number of bugs I see in every one of their releases means they dont[sic] care about good code

And here we have another problem. You think that good or elegant code means bug-free. It doesn't. There's lots of pretty code out there that doesn't do what it's supposed to do.