So, this dark matter, what is it? Because it seems to me that it hasn't been defined properly, it's just a massive kludge that scientists did when their observations didn't make scientific sense according to our current best theories of physics.

Dark matter is a theory without basis, it says oops, our measurements don't make sense. What is it, axions? - a type of particle that hasn't even been proved to exist. Dark matter is a theory shakily based on other unproven theories, proposed because the initial theories aren't working.

Nice to hear some skepticism here on Slashdot. It certainly seems like scientists desperately want dark matter and dark energy to exist because their numbers are never adding up. It looks like bad science when they keep fiddling with the numbers to patch up their deficient theories.

Its had too many features removed and freezes for up to 20 seconds if you stop a page load, pages screw their formatting up, it has no solution for popup boxes that center themselves offscreen. gmail.com, mail.com both pretty unusable. (galaxy note 2). no undo close tab. most options removed.

Really, what is the point of your post, would you prefer that philanthropists are never criticised?

It seems to me that philanthropy is often a way for the mega-rich to try to right their wrongs. The likes of Bill Gates et al can't even do that right, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gates_foundation#Criticism

It also serves to distract from their questionable actions.

No rich person makes their money, the workers of the companies they own make the money. Rich is not right, greed is not good. Philanthropy does not absolve the rich of their greed.

Although, since the number of pay-outs would most likely be massively reduced, insurance premiums would also drop hugely. So I would expect insurance companies to be against driver-less cars, due to the reduced profit.

Do insurance companies currently sue car manufacturers when faults occur?

I really don't see any need for change from the status quo, the insurance company pays, not the driver, not the manufacturer.

That would cause a pile-up.

Note the massively different braking distances, even in the same car model - braking differences of up to 40 meters

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/the-power-to-stop

This idea of cars driving bumper to bumper is pure fantasy, extremely dangerous, would cause a pile-up, regardless of how good inter-car communications is etc.

Curse Slashdot's non-editing, I of course meant from stopping from 100mph, not 40mph.

They can do 160km/h safely, bumper to bumper.

No, they can't.

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/the-power-to-stop

http://www.which.co.uk/news/2012/05/best-and-worst-supermini-braking-distances-285596/

Even with the same car, stopping from 40mph, some stops took 40 meters longer than others. 40 meters is not bumper to bumper.

Pile-ups happen because people don't understand stopping distances.

If the gov'ts and councils that actually build and maintain the roads charged the costs to the vehicles that actually do the damage there would be much less of a problem. HGVs should have weight taxes, they rip up the roads. I think the percentage of gov't revenue that comes from fines is miniscule after the cost of policing those fines is taken in to account.

" The car can be trusted to drive within its own limits.."

That is not the correct way to look at it, there are parts of London where it is hard enough to try and navigate lanes without having cars going at stupid speeds.

Just because the car can drive at 50mph doesn't mean it should, that would cause problems for non-computer controlled cars, bicycles, horses, pedestrians etc.

If the car is driving down a thin residential London road with a van parked and a gap behind the van, will it slow to 5mph so as to avoid running over anyone who might step out from behind the van? ( example road http://goo.gl/maps/wu4i6 ).

Would you say this to pedestrians? Because cycling is safer than walking for experienced (few hundred miles) cyclists.

Well thank god for that, how could terrorists spread their message of hate and terror without Facebook's cooperation, thank you Facebook, from terrorists everywhere.

And that goes for the politicians and the news media too, thank you for scaring the shit out of people, rather than pointing out the low odds of being killed by terrorists, the terrorists would be nothing without you. You help to put the 'terror' in to terrorism.

If you knew the govt was killing Jewish people, coloured people, gays, unionists etc, ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust#Non-Jewish ) you'd think hard about adding yourself to the list, most people don't wish to be martyrs.