Forgot your password?

Comment: Botball (Score 1) 115

by tiberus (#47855325) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Robotics or Electronic Kits For Wounded Veterans?

I'd startup a conversation with these folks My son and several of his friends have participated and it was a great experience for them. While the kits are a pricey, the setup they use for competition isn't. Once you have the kits it shouldn't take that much effort to let the vets do their own thing or even organize botball-esque events within the VA.

U.S Army
Medical Hold

Comment: Dumn Idea Stories (Score 2) 163

by tiberus (#47584159) Attached to: Fooling a Mercedes Into Autonomous Driving With a Soda Can

"This is, without a doubt, a really stupid thing to actually try. So don't."

Hmm, wow. Nope the really stupid idea is posting a story on the InterWeb about a really stupid idea and warning us that it's "a really stupid idea". Road & Track should be ashamed that many Slashdoters are now searching E-Bay, CarMax and the trades for an S-Class to try this out in or texting their friends (hopefully not while driving to see them) with S-Class' to try this out. Responsible media, right! Telling geeks about a hack, is like giving crack to a junkie. Tomorrow's lead, dozens die recreating S-Class hack.

Oh, yeah, please PM me your findings.

Comment: Re:why? (Score 1) 346

by tiberus (#47375711) Attached to: Goldman Sachs Demands Google Unsend One of Its E-mails
Granted it all seems reasonable, the issue I see is that it's not practical. You can't un-send an e-mail, not really. I have to control my desire to chuckle, in that sad sort of way, every time we get this sort of request internally. Unless the message was just messed in some way that keeps it from being sent, it's gone pretty much as soon as you hit send. We don't have a practical way to pull it off a system that isn't running Outlook (and even then if it's been read, it's a no go) and if the recipient has a Blackberry, pretty much all bets are off. I'm left wondering what real result or final state Goldman thinks they are going to achieve, the damage is already done. P.S. Wondering why anyone at Goldman ever sends anything to a GMail address . . .

Comment: Re:Democrats voted (Score 1) 932

by tiberus (#47214209) Attached to: House Majority Leader Defeated In Primary
Open primaries go both ways, so I really don't see how you can complain. It's also rather odd to think that just two parties can represent the depth and breadth of political views in the U.S. How about we junk the primary system and simply have run off elections in the case where no candidate gets more that 50% of the vote?

Comment: Usefullness Factor . . . (Score 2) 43

by tiberus (#47212991) Attached to: Project Un1c0rn Wants To Be the Google For Lazy Security Flaws
Okay, so I want to visit a site. So I have to go search Un1c0rn to see if it's on the list? What about all the ad, video and other sites this sites gets content from? Seems like a plugin that uses data from the "your site is in a poor state" database would be much more practical. It could replace at risk content with a big WHOA! graphic...

Comment: Re:your premise is wrong (Score 0) 255

by tiberus (#47050517) Attached to: The Sci-Fi Myth of Robotic Competence

The legal issue comes after the moral one. The questions posed is a classic choice of "sacrificing one to save more than one" an ethical dilemma, not a legal one. Laws may be written to codify the ethical decision that has been made but, the ethics must be resolved before laws can be created to uphold those morals.

Thanks for giving me the opening for this thought (Charliemopps)... While reading the article, I was again amazed by the lengths that some individuals will go to in order to avoid answering the moral question before them. In the case presented someone is going to die; either the driver or the two bystanders. It doesn't matter why the situation exists, it exists, we've gone past why. You must choose who will die as the dilemma dictates someone must die.

Stopping the car isn't an option that is available or putting it another way, stopping the car results in either the death of the driver or the two bystanders.

Comment: Re:Kind of a ??? ... (Score 1) 626

by tiberus (#47049185) Attached to: Driverless Cars Could Cripple Law Enforcement Budgets

Driverless is not very accurate description of what is going on. Semi-autonomous seems a bit better but lacks marketing flash.

I'd suspect that no matter what the 'driver' is going to be given the ticket, maybe the 'car' gets a copy too. Some investigation will have to be done (and laws updated) to determine fault (what is you live in a no fault state). Was the car in autonomous mode? Was the firmware/software current? Did the driver ignore a warning?

The expectations of the driver will also have to be defined. Can the driver fall asleep? How much attention must the driver pay to the vehicle's operation?

Lot's of questions, not problems

The number of arguments is unimportant unless some of them are correct. -- Ralph Hartley