Nay, a true self-driving car'll hae a name like Kitt - a true scotsman
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
I'd like to see code that can "not hit people" equally or better than human drivers, but that also manages to hit stationary and larger than human targets worse than human drivers.
In theory, it could send out low-power pulses and check for reflections from antennas, then only go to full power if there is a nearby device that could use it.
Seems like as much an argument for km/l than for l/100km.
You don't even need to go this far. Just say, "I'll gladly disable any other cameras on my person if you can find them, too".
Brian: Lady, seven bucks for a used Kenny Loggins record? I'll give you five.
Record Store Customer: Ugh-huh, he autographed it himself.
Brian: All right, I'll give you four.
As far as I know, you can still add multiple domains to your account (I have two)
There is some convenience in not being caught unawares by quick speed limit changes.
The important question is when a few transmitters at the beginning of a reduction are "out of service", will that indemnify you against the speed trap?
posting to undo a bad moderation.
Just to stay on topic a little, the patent holders are likely to only be able to use this patent to try to protect specific 3d parts that will enable manufacturers to extend the service while keeping it under some semblance of control.
I didn't know they axed duplicates now..
"Memory On Demand" Cuts Energy Use
Posted by CmdrTaco on Wednesday January 26, @09:00AM
from the cut-it-off dept.
"Researchers are testing memory that can be powered down when not in use. This could slash the power used by computer memory, combining the benefits of DRAM (speed) and Flash (low power, non-volatile). The memory could also allow "instant-on" computers, according to an IEEE Computer Society report of the research at Carolina State University."
Every system has a false positive rate. The question is whether a given technique has a lower rate than other methods.
Threshold too high..
You have the option of dealing with which corporations you wish to do business with. The government is not optional, it is at best slightly changeable.
If a corporation violates your rights*, that is a good place for the government to step in. For example, if corporation destroys your property, they are just as liable as an individual that does the same.
*no, not violate your sense of moral outrage
Most of corporation's power comes from government, not despite it.
The Taliban has only existed since 1994, so that gives them at most 7 years of funding opportunity before they ran afoul of the US. Even so, I can only remember some anti-drug money going to the Taliban.
Ok, so you respond, we armed and funded the mujahedin, part of which eventually formed the Taliban. This is not what you stated in this post, though. Glad to know you never made a decision that went against your initial hopes, though.
That much is true. However accounting requires discovery, then investigation.
If the US government had announced three years ago a large estimate of mineral wealth based on the fact that some soldiers noticed a lot of ore lying around, would we be saying "at least they are not trying to make a big deal out of 3 year old news!"?
My impression is politically, POTUS would rather be saying "so Afghanistan, you got the check? I'm outta here" as opposed to "great another set of targets to defend!".