The real problem here is that IT is regarded as something like a janitorial service, rather than an integral business function. That's a recipe for a slow burn into the ground. There is plenty of cog work to be done, sure. But if you don't use IT to actually change how you do business, you're not doing IT.
I'm not surprised then that Disney is only making money by buying IP, and riding old IP. They're organizationally prohibited of producing something new.
You're in the Bay Area and out of work? Fuck, they're hiring here like it's 1999. If you don't have a job right now, it's your own problem.
Insurance means very little to companies who have a certain service standard to uphold. No one will give a shit if they get their money back if their order of 10k worth of shoes disappears. These people want their service, and they will blame whoever they bought their stuff from if anything goes wrong.
There is a reason why certain trucking operations pay their truckers a shit-ton of money, have armed guards, locked trucks, tracking devices, etc. It's so that shit doesn't get "lost", not that they can pay their customer for shit that got "lost".
And people still excuse the internment of Americans of Japanese descent in WW2. Granted, not a genocide, but people were essentially thrown in prison and expropriated for where their parents were born.
And this is why the "channel" Internet is a horrible, horrible idea, which needs to be nuked from orbit, just to be safe. It'll be the return of corporate-interest TV, with all the propaganda that comes with it - but with the veneer of "it's on the Internet, so people checked it!".
That's not even the worst offender. CA has lots of freeways that sit right next to frontage roads and on the same level as them. The only thing that separates the two is a bit of chain link fence and about 10 feet of grass. Guess what those frontage roads have? Yep, speed signs. Guess what a car I test drove picked up on as the speed limit for the freeway? Yep, the speed on the frontage road.
This is a terribly thought out idea. I'd rather trust a GPS map that has the speedlimits assigned to it.
You mean, like how we effectively nuked Saddam's army and occupied Iraq? Your only way to continue is by actually turning all of Iraq into a glass desert. Then all of the Middle East. Then all of North Africa. And when the Russians and Chinese start calling, you'll have to turn the world into a glass desert.
Yeah, no thanks. I'd rather deal with a few crazies killing a few locals by taking a few potshots at them from a distance.
Let me ask you this: if a country would come into the US and start razing cities and towns, would that break your will to fight? Or would that just inflame your desire to see of the invaders dead?
The problem with your approach is that it defeats the purpose of killing terrorists: it creates more than it kills. The only way you can actually succeed is if you wipe out every opposing person - and in today's connected world, that will very quickly be everybody but you and your buddies. Are you willing to go to war with the entire world? Even if they drop nukes on you?
Carthage worked because it was a city state surrounded by a desert. There were not enough people to take the side of Carthage once it was destroyed. But you won't find that today anymore.
WW1 and WW2 are interesting examples, where a local superpower thought it could win a total war.
If brutality would work, ISIS would be in complete control of the Middle East. But it doesn't, and that's why ISIS is being battered by both Western and Middle Eastern States.
On the speed detection: TSR is not just improving the accuracy of the speed detection. How do I know? The Tesla read a sign on the side of the freeway, and thought it was the speed limit for the freeway. It wasn't. It was the speed limit for the frontage road next to the freeway, and I was about 30 mph over that speed. So whatever they're doing, they're not just doing a tree search weighted with the currently known speed.
But yes, that's 101-level.
Fair enough that the hard issue is the amount of time the lane analysis needs to be right. Here's something though that doesn't make sense to me in your problem description: why in god's name would you ever consider a discrete change in assessment of where the lane is to be valid? Specifically, why would you perform an action based on a sudden change in where the lanes are? Granted, I'm making an assumption about continuous lanes, but the scenario you're describing is that the car is humming along in the right lane just fine and dandy, and then, due to bug/memory corruption/light glare off of the cameras, the algorithm thinks it needs to move exactly one lane over. Yes, it's hard to get the TP rate up to 5 nines, but then again, the decision process should never be such that a jump in lane condition results in an immediate action.
There's a separate problem with line markings disappearing, but I contend that that's a problem even human drivers struggle with.
Finally, I don't think that I can solve this - I've seen it solved: by Google and Audi, specifically. Now, how "solved" this is? Google has a few 100k miles under the belt of its autonomous cars, Audi quite a bit less. But both have navigated in traffic, with passengers inside. My incredulity doesn't come from me having solved it, it comes from having used other people's work 20 years ago to answer the question "what am I looking at", and having seen it progress from edge detection in a jpg to cars driving on their own in a fenced-off terrain 10 years ago, and now have seen driverless cars on the road. Doing what you're describing as not solved.
Maybe you should talk to the Google engineers. Or the Audi ones. Or the Tesla ones. I hear Tesla opened up all its patents anyway. Maybe they opened up how they do their lane detection and decision process.
Seriously? It's called OCR. That's being done for things way harder than lines on the road. To the point that the Teslas today will display what the speed is on the road that they read from the sign off towards the side.
As others pointed out, you don't just use one signaller. You use multiple ones, chained. The odds that all are wrong in the same exact way will be much, much less than 10%.
Furthermore, you don't need to be perfect to improve road safety. You just need to improve on the average driver. Which is much, much easier than perfection.