Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:customer-centric (Score 1) 165

by Solandri (#47793925) Attached to: Microsoft Defies Court Order, Will Not Give Emails To US Government
While I generally agree with you that this judge's order is silly, I don't think it's as cut and dry as you make it out to be. If you base jurisdiction over the data entirely upon where the data is stored, then multi-national corporations will start criss-crossing their data storage. e.g. Data for their European operations gets stored in the U.S. Data for their U.S. operations gets stored in Europe.

If the U.S. government investigates Microsoft demanding they turn over info about their U.S. operations, Microsoft will say sorry, that data is stored in Europe. The U.S. will then have to go through the European legal system to get their hands on their data. Same if Europe asks for data on Microsoft's European operations. Microsoft says it's stored in the U.S. And they have to petition the U.S. government before they can get their hands on the data. The company gets double-protection - in order for a government to subpoena any corporate data, they have to first clear it with their court system, then clear it with the court system of the country where the data is stored. Both countries' courts have to agree to release the data before it actually gets released.

I don't know what the solution is. But it's not as simple as you're making it out to be. The relevance of the data to the country requesting it somehow needs to be taken into account.

Comment: Re:can it get me home from the bar? (Score 1) 219

by PopeRatzo (#47792171) Attached to: Hidden Obstacles For Google's Self-Driving Cars

They handle them fine, detecting when you use hand signals to indicate intentions

So, a driverless car that can't handle rain or snow or recognize a pothole is going to be perfectly safe around pedestrians and bicyclists?


Stop yourself. Nobody reading Slashdot today will live to see ubiquitous driverless cars.

Comment: Re:Hype (Score 1) 219

by geekoid (#47791909) Attached to: Hidden Obstacles For Google's Self-Driving Cars

What he wrote was:
"Our self-driving cars have now traveled nearly 200,000 miles on public highways in California and Nevada, 100 percent safely. They have driven from San Francisco to Los Angeles and around Lake Tahoe, and have even descended crooked Lombard Street in San Francisco. They drive anywhere a car can legally drive."

I like how you left out the fact that, clearly, they didn't need special roads.

Comment: Re:Needs more infrastructure (Score 1) 219

by geekoid (#47791855) Attached to: Hidden Obstacles For Google's Self-Driving Cars

" entire highway infrastructure will have to be completely overhauled, at enormous expense, before 'self driving cars' could be a reality"
since they are using them everyday, and taking them on trip in CA, on normal roads, I don't think you are correct.
Of course are road infrastructure could use a few smart changes anyways.

It's trivial to kidnapped some in a car today.

"There's no way they're going to code an 'evasive maneuvers'"
Oh, I see. You think you would be able to do some Die Hard esque driving to get away from kidnappers.

Comment: Re:Stop being so impatient.... (Score 5, Insightful) 219

by geekoid (#47791817) Attached to: Hidden Obstacles For Google's Self-Driving Cars

"It is to counter Google's skewed data that make it look like autonomous cars are just around the corner."
Google has never said that. And this guy doesn't have all the data, nor does he know whats in development.

"why come out with a vehicle that has no steering wheel if it is not viable for another 5-10 years (by your estimate)?"
The same reason worlds fair showed tech that will be coming out in 5-10 years. Its' fun, it's cool. It also show they are thinking long term and not quarterly. It also shows a company spending money on RnD.
I consider all of that a good thing.

"Do you ever see a Google press release mention any of these limitations?"

" All you hear from Google is a rising tally of miles driven and the fact that there have been no accidents. "
Which is pretty important.

"The fact that the miles are driven on carefully selected, heavily scanned roads under optimal conditions never seems to make it into the reports."
That is the smart way to start, but they are moving past that.

" Driving down the same roads thousands of times is not progress."
Of course it is. Same roads, different traffic. The same rods can have 10's of thousands of changing variables at any given time.
The team members are using them. A team member took one from Google campus to Tahoe on a trip.

Do you lay awake at night just trying to think of ways to hate cool new things?

Comment: Re:can it get me home from the bar? (Score 2, Insightful) 219

by geekoid (#47791729) Attached to: Hidden Obstacles For Google's Self-Driving Cars

You'r post tells everyone everything about you: You are a pretentious hater.

" google cars should never be allowed on the road."
Not: " until they can reliable detect bicycles, driver-less cars shouldn't be sold to the public.

Have you contact Mercedes to tell them they need to stop selling there cars that can automatically follow the car in front of them? do you rally against self parking cars?

I'm sure you ancestors railed against fire.

Comment: Re:Ineffective advertising (Score 2) 126

by geekoid (#47791647) Attached to: Dell's New Alienware Case Goes to Extremes To Prevent Overheating

1. I disagree.
2. No more then it is now. Pop open the top, and blow it out.
3. As nears as I can tell, the motherboard isn't standard, but everything else is.
4. Clearly you didn't pay attention to how it removes heat. Having the weight at the bottom is better.
5. lan parties. Cute.

E Pluribus Unix