Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:She can give me 30 of them (Score 1) 571 571

I'll even do the install on my home myself. give me 30 monocrystalline current tech 300 watt panels. 9000 Watt Hour will reduce my carbon footprint dramatically, in fact I will use a syncing inverter that will push my excess power back to the grid so that my neighbors can benefit from it.

No it doesn't cost the power company anything.

What are you talking about it sounds like they just lost a customer and gained another competitor.

Comment So now?!?!!! (Score 1) 571 571

she intends to pay for it by cutting tax breaks to the oil and gas industry.

Wow so now she is backing out of the race entirely? If she was actually serious about it she would never get elected. My guess is if elected those cuts would mysteriously change place and come from somewhere with less money flowing into Washington.

Comment Re:Why Own? (Score 1) 252 252

First off I own a car so I don't have to wait. No way in hell I'm waiting 1 minute when I want to go somewhere. That's why I own a car rather than waste 5 minutes walking to a bus stop then another 15 for the bus or go slowly somewhere on a bicycle. No ride sharing algorithm is going to violate physics and return the car to me instantly it's going to be the same 5-15 minute crap I purchased the car to be free from. There will be no money to be made by ownership because of supply and demand - if somehow this automagically were not true I would buy a fleet of 100 and use it as a business. For my ride no screw that.

Comment Question mark in title (Score 1) 252 252

So never. Well ok probably around the same time you don't have to manually map the entire route out to 50m in all directions at all times beforehand with cm resolution or the system nearly shuts down like google cars do today. If you actually had the processing power and algorithm capability of a squirrel you could run a car with a crappy stereo camera, 3- axis accelerometer, 3 axis gyro, and dual microphone like us meat bags can. All these fancy sensors are a crutch for the inability to extract features newborn animals with inferior sensors can, when we can do that in software then the tech is ready for mainstream use. For the obvious reasons above few to no Americans are ever going to share their ride for a few extra dollars when it means getting it trashed daily, autonomous or not. I sure as hell wouldn't for my personal ride.

Comment Re:tip of the iceburg (Score 2, Insightful) 157 157

It is becoming increasingly obvious to me that we have no idea how to secure information systems.

It's this kind of stuff that scares the crap out of people and there is no end in sight. As a matter of fact, this is only going to get worse as we migrate to an IoT.

I sometimes wonder if the technology bubble will someday be crushed under the weight of exploitation. A victim of its own complexity and insecurity.

Yep no one cares. Rather than just the potential murder of an annoying journalist few people know about or care about its probably going to take some complete ahole(s) with an exploit like this causing the first mass cyber fatality incident before anything really gets done and your average person cares.

Comment Re:Really? (Score 2) 157 157

Read more carefully. They acknowledged the attack was viable and real, they just aren't calling it a defect. They patched it by blocking access over the cellular network as demonstrated, and further are providing a patch and additional security updates, whatever that actually turns out to be.

Comment Maybe I'm cynical but (Score 2) 46 46

All data, no matter how seemingly innocuous, when ammassed, allows agencies to substantially abuse everything from subtle advertising, to obtaining private medical information, to downright spying. At this point, given all the breaches at every single level from government, medical, and business on down, and given that even major agencies/groups have sold information - isn't it a bit like trying to put the cat back into the bag? I mean it's a nice idea but I see it as trying to fix healthcare in America - there is no right answer we have built upon a foundation already and are entrenched. Not to mention that the NSA/CIA/FBI will just snoop any left over anyhow and likely still bungle security at some level as insane as that sounds. Or are we thinking of the children who have yet to have generated information to be stolen yet?

Comment Re:"Drug Companies Seek to Exploit"!!! (Score 4, Informative) 93 93

Quite likely true. However at least this gets them quite a bit of indirect exposure and may, yes may, eventually provide them with treatments (doubt we will have cures for genetic conditions anytime in our lifetimes). So I am going out on a limb and going to say it's not 100% bad for these people because without that interest they truly are 100% screwed instead of just 90%. If I was in that position I'd probably take those odds at a treatment.

Comment Re:Citation NOT given (Score 1) 76 76

The grandparent was challenging the specific claim YOU made that SDC's get rear-ended because they stop too often.

The article you linked doesn't even mention any of the collisions the SDC's have been involved in, and certainly don't support the claim you made about them.

Try again.

Ok mr coward here are the actual citations, I was quick to post and put the wrong post above. Too many hipsters with common place movie knowledge and not actual engineerinrg knowledge so here you go I hope someone actually reads this that will appreciate facts.

The number of miles that google cars have driven so far including its safety record as stated by google directly :

This equates to an accident every 90.9 thousand miles though the wiki clams 14 accidents that puts this at 71.4 thousand - all of which are meticulously planed courses - none have left turns into traffic - none of which are in heavy traffic at all - none of which are in adverse conditions such as snow or rain which the car can't even function at all and which of course makes for more difficult human driving. So it is pointless to try and compare that to bumper to bumper rush hour driving on freeways, hundreds to thousands of accidents during large snowstorms, bad winter driving in general, rush hour in general, etc. This makes it extremely difficult to compare to actual human driving statistics.

Note the wiki even states google as saying the car will often revert to extra cautious safety conditions and cannot handle many situations which wont even be addressed till 2020.

Google admits its cars rear ended suprisingly often :

Given that google has not made more than one accident detail public this is hurting their image in all likelyhood. Its a pretty safe assumption that a slow plodding car that often stops, say like you are supposed to text book style, but no one does, for pedestrians, will cause motorists to rear end you.

Comment Re:At least it is a place that gets some snow... (Score 2) 76 76

Dear god I couldn't help but comment or I would mod this up huge - someone with points please do. The google car is about the best there is and yet without painstaking manual mapping of every driveway, every road sign, every lane, every curb, every traffic light, manual entry and review of every goddamn last detail along the route it's absolutely helpless and yet it still can't handle erratic human drivers, many obstacles, rain, snow, occlusions of nearly any kind, any sensor failures of any kind, it's very early in demonstrating the technology.

I just wish google would be honest with the masses what the actual state of the technology actually is.

"And do you think (fop that I am) that I could be the Scarlet Pumpernickel?" -- Looney Tunes, The Scarlet Pumpernickel (1950, Chuck Jones)