Apple has clearly announced that their product is dangerous, so the TSA should ban them.
I hope a legislator at one of these state legislators makes this point if an Apple employee is stupid enough to raise this.
The best reason for driverless cars is to reduce the massive death toll on the roads. The primary question is not whether the package will 'protect my family', but whether it will sufficient to ensure a substantial cut in road deaths. Given that the sensors will have a better view of the road than a human driver has atm, the only question is whether the software will be good enough to convert that data into safer driving than we get atm. This seems achievable.
Given that they have demanded the extradition of British citizens who have spied on US government websites from their homes in the UK, logically the FBI can be charged with the same offence...
A conservative who has just been arrested...
Of course a conservative is a liberal who has just been mugged...
That's the issue we're disagreeing on. My expectation is that it won't add more than $10,000 dollars overall, and that's not dissimilar to the price of insurance over a 10 year period for a lot of people. Given that insurance will no longer be necessary for a lot of people - if they aren't planning to leave the areas that are fully automated - then this will pay for the upgrade
Of course this assumes that people will persist in having their own cars, when it is likely that the shift will enable people to rent cars more cheaply than buying.
I think it will be a case of city and suburban dwellers will take to it pretty rapidly as the financial advantage dawn on people and on the governments. It's not the answer for every situation, but it will make massively safer roads rapidly. The ability to give mobility to kids and old people who would otherwise be stuck without it will be worth a LOT.
Over the life of a car, that's a big gain. Similarly your medical insurance will be lower if you don't drive yourself.
Once automatic driving becomes required - when the safety advantages are recognised - there will be a need for small manufacturers to offer it. And they won't be able to start from scratch....
When someone finally rejects the system in which they have been living, it is inevitable that they will find themselves allies of those who have long opposed that system. The US ended up allied to Russia in 1941 despite Russia's invasion of the Baltic Republic in 1940; that didn't mean that FDR was now supporting Uncle Joe's purges, just that he had to find support for his war wherever he could get it.
The invasion of the Crimea is a continuing offence under any reasonable take on national independence. Remember how Russia and RT spun the story at the time - and how Putin now admits it was a preplanned invasion.
Then remember how many lies Radio Moscow of the USSR produced, and don't be surprised that it's been resurrected.
I don't recognise the website, but I leave you to investigate
Not RT accused directly but
A reminder about the lies at the time of the invasion of the Crimea
Corporations need to ensure that their data is held by legal subsidiaries that can only be hit with a warrant by their own country's courts and which have no ability to access data controlled by another legal subsidiary. Whilst not trivial, it is surely possible for the relevant security keys to be strictly under the control of the relevant county's board of directors. That board of directors would be protected by the courts of its domicile - though I guess members may end up being unable to travel to the US if they resist a US warrant. But then sometimes the empire must be resisted...
Given that the story - which is alarming - is over 6 weeks old, what has happened since?
Memory fault -- brain fried