The data showed that 7.6% of crash-involved drivers tested positive for marijuana or THC, versus 6.1% of the control group. In raw terms, that would suggest that marijuana was associated with a 25% increased chance of crashing. But it's not that simple: the figures have to be adjusted for other factors possibly contributing to crash risk, including the driver's gender and age.
As it happens, males and young drivers have higher crash rates than females and older drivers; they're also more likely to be marijuana users. And once these factors are corrected for, "the significant increased risk of crash involvement associated with THC...is not found." The same outcome was determined for other drugs tested for, including sedatives, antidepressants, and stimulants.
Contributing to the doubts about marijuana's effect on auto safety was the inadequacy of the testing. Pot, like other drugs, can continue to show up in test samples for days or weeks after it's used, meaning that some subjects found to have THC in their systems may have been well past the period of impairment.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
Actually, RAID can be used to speed up access and/or to survive a disk failure (depending on setup). While important in case of major disaster, restoring from backup generally knocks out the service altogether, while a simple (and fairly common in large data centers) disk failure wouldn't even be noticed by anyone but a system admin with a RAID designed to tolerate it.
In any group of 23 or more people, there's a 50% chance two will have the same birthday.
While it's an interesting idea, I'm not really sure how it applies. The 'birthday in common' is only between two of the group and is an 'equally probable date' rather than a specific one. So even if Jesus was one of the group, there is only a small chance he'd be of the pair with matching birthdays.
True, but there are those who love horses as well, yet now most people rarely even see a live horse, let alone own one.
I think two things will 'drive' the adaption to driverless cars, parking and driving. People already spend a good deal of time trying to find a parking spot. With a driverless care you'd have your own 'valet parking' everywhere and the storage location for the car isn't limited to the local area, a car could easily be sent back home (yours or its). At first parking will get cheaper and more abundant, but eventually, 'Downtown parking' will not only become almost unneeded, but it will also largely disappear and I think even suburban parking will become rare. Also, thanks to digital reflexes and networking driverless cars will be able to tailgate not only to save gas, but to keep the traffic flowing at higher volumes. I suspect that 'manual drivers' will find themselves 'locked out' of the fast lane by cars on autodrive. Sure frustrated drivers will force their way into the fast lane and jam up traffic (as they do now), but the cars will record the reckless driving, likely by a few 'angles', eventually, it'll become a citation to do it.