Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Just to add useful information (Score 1) 17

Alphabet are alleging they have specific evidence the former employee downloaded the designs to a laptop, which he then tried to wipe to hide any trace he'd done this. Alphabet are also alleging the same former employee actually bragged about what he was going to do before he did it.

So... assuming they're not lying, this is pretty much open and shut. I guess we'll find out over the next few weeks.

Comment Re:so non dealer service or not paying for softwar (Score 1) 144

Sometimes the user is at fault. Maybe that means not updating software. Maybe that means after-market software or hardware modifications. Maybe that means extreme neglect of maintenance leading to mechanical failure (which happens now with non-self driving cars), assuming that self-maintaining cars will be way off in the future.

Not only can this be out of the user's control, it should be. The car should be constantly monitoring itself, and the car - being self driven - is capable of driving itself to be serviced, or calling a tow truck if it isn't capable of driving, with core functionality disabled if the car detects a state that means it can't guarantee a safe journey.

There's absolutely no reason not to take this out of the hands of the car "owner". The car doesn't have to be capable of servicing itself, it just needs to be capable of getting qualified people to provide that servicing.

Comment Re:The owner should be liable (Score 1) 144

So in other words, you believe Truth in Advertising laws should be overturned? If someone advertises a car as self driving, the consumer should be on the hook for believing them?

If a car is self driving, the manufacturer is making a claim they should stand behind. The consumer shouldn't be blamed for a fault they could not possibly predict or know about.

Comment Re:Huh? (Score 1) 144

I'm not following. At worst, you'd expect the additional costs to be equal to, or less than (if the manufacturer believes their cars are less likely to get into an accident, or that the accidents will be lesser in cost, than a human car) to the cost of the liability insurance human-driven car owners pay.

So anyone looking at a self driving car vs a regular car will see a lower TCO, all other things being equal. In reality, right now the SDC will cost slightly more due to the cost of the actual driving equipment, but what we're looking at here is something that brings the cost down, not pushes it up.

Comment Re:It's just a power grab (Score 3, Informative) 89

Wait, do, do you think that an 80% failure rate is good just because there are courts with HIGHER rates?

Let me slow it down for you:

Only about 1.01% of the circuit court's rulings go to Supreme Court. By definition, these are cases that SCOTUS has looked at and seen enough of a problem that they granted a writ of certiorari. If they didn't see a problem, they'd just bounce it back.

So, of the 1% that goes to SCOTUS, 80% of those are overturned and 20% are affirmed. That means the true rate of 9th Circuit cases being overturned is closer to 0.8%, not 80%.

I mentioned Breitbart, because you will only find this spurious claim of "The 9th Circuit gets overturned 80% of the time" will only be found in websites that cater to alt-Right jackoffs. And they will never mention that the courts with the highest rates of being overturned are in solid red states.

Now, do we have some clarity on this issue?

You're still looking bemused. Let me put it more simply: 80% of the 9th Circuit's rulings are not overturned, you stupid sonofabitch.

Comment Re:It's just a power grab (Score 3, Informative) 89

Bwahaha, you mean the fucking Ninth Circuit? The one that, on appeal to the Supreme Court, gets overturned a whopping 80 percent of the time? Yeah, I think any court with that kind of failure rate should be disbanded, as well.

There's some supreme nuttery going on out in California these days...

I often see this repeated by people who don't know shit.

First of all, when the Supreme Court takes a case, it overturns the Appeals Court decision in over 70% of the cases. They only grant a writ of certiorari in cases where they see an issue and it usually means they will be overturned. And despite what you read on Breitbart, the 9th Circuit is not the most overturned Appeals circuit. Kentucky/Ohio/Michigan's 6th Circuit has that distinction with an 87 percent rate of being overturned. Then comes Alabama/Florida/Georgia's 11th Circuit with a record of 85 percent. But the fact is, if your case goes to the Supreme Court, it's odds-on that it will be overturned.

6th Circuit - 87 percent;

11th Circuit - 85 percent;

9th Circuit - 79 percent;

3rd Circuit - 78 percent;

2nd Circuit and Federal Circuit - 68 percent;

8th Circuit - 67 percent;

5th Circuit - 66 percent;

7th Circuit - 48 percent;

DC Circuit - 45 percent;

1st Circuit and 4th Circuit - 43 percent;

10th Circuit - 42 percent.

Comment Re: s/drug trials/climate change/g (Score 1) 260

Are you unfamiliar with the phrase "hand waving", or just being deliberately obtuse?

Science is about numerically accurate, falsifiable predictions. We need some of those in the Climate Change debate, but the science isn't there yet. Non-scientists like yourself, however, are happy to substitute hand waving (like a magician, hoping to distract the audience from the lack of substance).

Comment Re:How about traveling without? (Score 1) 131

Your reply wandered so much that it's rather difficult to tell if you even had a plan for it. I'll take the most coherent parts of it and try to reply to them:

Yes, you can, especially if you're only vaguely on social networks. But we shouldn't have to jump through hoops like this

If you are so married to your online existence that you consider leaving your laptop behind to be "jumping through hoops" then you probably couldn't be helped by any amount of anything here. Fortunately for you people who are at that level of dependency seldom notice when they are more than 10 miles from their home - as they almost never look away from their screens anyways - so traveling doesn't really matter. As the majority of slashdot readers are far more than 10 miles from an international border, it is reasonable to expect that you wouldn't be a likely candidate to wander far.

when you're visiting friends and whatever while travelling, guess what, social networks are very useful in that case

First of all, if you are visiting other people, that should be your social network, right there. Why do you need to worry about other people at that time? You're taking your attention away from the people who actually cared enough about you to spend time with you in the real world.

Second, if you are visiting people who you interact with in your online social networks, you probably haven't gone some place where you need to worry about a travel mode for your devices; likely you haven't gone more than 10 miles from your home.

Do you think it stops at social networks? Should you leave your phone completely?

Do you really think the two are equivalent in levels of importance?

Social networks today, your phone call history tomorrow? Is that OK?

There are nations that for years have checked visitors' phones at customs. In case you didn't know this before, US laws don't travel with you when you enter another country - you enter another country and you are now expected to adhere to their laws. If you don't like their laws you should have traveled elsewhere.

You can do this at the moment. Then tomorrow when they start doing automatic searches based on your name, and show you an account they've found that looks like you and has your name, what then?

What are you talking about? This is quite a bit removed from the topic at hand. If you're worried that a foreign nation is going to ask you to log in to a social media account, then you've made yourself a slave to social media. I'm guessing you don't leave home often with that attitude, though so you're probably just fine with that.

Comment Re:Only Tech? (Score 1, Insightful) 140

The major headlines in America today (Feb 23rd) are not about war, famine, or plague, but about whether school restroom usage policy should be decided by the federal government, or left up to locals. I don't mean to belittle the issue, but that is hardly an existential crisis for humanity.

Yet it appears to be a focus of the current government.

Comment Wow, just wow. (Score 4, Insightful) 96

So apparently an ISP being able to tell people up front what their fees and charges will be is a

burdensome requirements [...] that impose serious and unnecessary costs

I guess this explains why big ISPs like Comcast and such manage to fuck up billing people on a regular basis. It's just too goddamn hard for companies to know what they charge for their services.

User Journal

Journal Journal: Reactions to General will 2.0: Rousseau, Freud, Google

Reactions to General will 2.0: Rousseau, Freud, Google by Hiroki Azuma (2.0 )

In summary, a tremendously provocative and rather interesting book, but too flawed and immature to be important or influential. It makes me feel like I have to start with rationalizations about the book's limitations. I think there're three kinds of problems that affected this book.

Comment this applies to all EU and Canadian citizens too (Score 1) 102

Under the treaties that the US signed with the EU and with Canada, this applies to all such recordings - even in the US or stored in the US - of any conversations of citizens of the EU and of Canada.

Next time, don't sign treaties which overrule laws passed by Congress.

Slashdot Top Deals

One man's "magic" is another man's engineering. "Supernatural" is a null word. -- Robert Heinlein

Working...