The resistance to exact sciences has been increasing over the last decades as people become more new age fuzz heads.
Rather then putting in the hard yards yourself, it is far easier to ridicule those that do and feel good.

That is just the thing. People used to say "I think that..."" now they say "I feel that..." A subtle difference, the latter does not have to provide a reason for their argument. It is a feeling after all.

There really is no need among this audience to point out how stupid this is. I blame education and the way it had become a socialist brainwash exercise in nihilist subjects where everyone get's a prize. Especially those that are liked.

Stick with science, resistance will increase but so will your pay check.

I used to fly 737's and although that was 17 years ago, we had glass cockpits and auto-land. It was easy to see how planes can fly automatically, yet today pilots are still very much involved with the flying process. Highly trained and checked every 6 months.

Back to Joe Blogs in the autonomous car, it would be naive to expect a similar level of vigilance. Hell, I am sure I would zone out too.

But I do agree that the shape of transport would change. And why not. The car has only existed for about 100 years. That is not that long in the scheme of things. I can easily see myself walking along pressing a button on my phone calling for a car and just hop in a few minutes later. Cars could park themselves tightly in out of view underground car parks. It would certainly make a city look a lot nicer. In this model my arguments would not hold since the transport provider becomes responsible for the vehicle performance and safety.

I would love to see a development where such a transport company becomes so good that people voluntarily get rid of their outdated cars.

1 - If the car hits someone. Who is responsible
2 - If the car hits another autonomous car who is at fault.
3 - Imagine the much more complex and costly process to sort out damage claims.
4 - Strict standards and regulations will be required. This of course means less freedom.
5 - Government will want to switch off your car when you don't comply. For safety of course.
6 - The NSA and FBI will get their hands on those switches and do with you as they please (Movie: Fifth Element)
7 - The perceived benefits are so great that soon manual driving is banned.

Result, cost goes up freedom goes down. As much as I love my car to take me home after having a few too many drinks, I think I prefer to take a cab and retain my freedom or what is left of it.

A spectacular pile of legislation makes cost calculation very complex affair.
Why is it Tesla's responsibility to accurately calculate the real cost of owning their car?

If they advertise the lowest possible cost under ideal circumstances (Everyone else does that too) then it is up to the buyer to check and see how it applies to them.
If the buyer finds that process too hard, then blame the overly complex legislation not Tesla.

But on a serious note. I am seeing way to many hairbrain schemes where drivers attention on the road is drawn to a screen where graphical information about potential dangers is displayed.

I am willing to put money on it that in every single case the results of the distraction causes more harm then it prevents.

How the hell can people be banned from using a mobile phone in a car but it is perfectly fine to use Satnav, radio or a gazillion new doodads. Each of them far more distracting then a conversation on the phone.

I while back I even saw an IPad application that uses the camera to interpret the car's dashboard ( http://www.gizmag.com/audi-a3-augmented-reality-manual/28693/ )

Madness.

An upgrade is not always an upgrade.

Can't wait to see the IPhone version. That should clean up a bit.

Our prime minister John Key is so far up Obama's ass, you can barely see his shoulders. This whole thing is driven by the USA administration.

Another lot of "Researchers" wanting to use scare tactics to get funding.

"Additionally, more controlled experiments should be conducted...."

I like to see the testing results in a wood shop or metal shop. Let them measure nano particle emissions when using spray cans or how about a simple inkjet printer?
Suddenly the world is full of "Harmful" nano particles. Scary things you can't see or prove easily always good for a good scare.

We need a nano tax to stop the inhuman crime of nano particle emission. I want to see Greenpest protesting against nano pollution. Get your banners out morons.

I hire staff on contract once in a while. As a small business I can not afford to stuff up the hire. So I make sure I get to know the applicant and there is no way I leave that in the hands of some "Expert"

Large cooperates are like government. Riddled by policy and ass covering. go for small businesses where you get to talk to the owner and sell yourself.

I was in the unwilling category. Being a highly skilled and comfortable Delphi programmer feeling at home with the win32 API I resented the idea of having to give up my comfortable tools and in discussions I'd use any argument to win. Eventually, everyone around me had moved. Mostly to dot net. Although I resent dot net now as much as I did then, I did realize that I needed to move to new technologies or become irrelevant.

That was over 5 years ago. Since then I embraced most technologies and love them for the same reasons as I used to hate them. I still think today's tools are backwards compared to the highly integrated IDE's we used to have. Especially for web applications but I am having fun again and now I am more open to new ideas and technologies.

But having said that, I probably don't run as fast to the next shiny thing as young developers do.

I know people in their nineties that are still sharp. If you manage to remain in the technology current and open your mind as a software engineer, you can perform your craft till you die.

Money is a "I owe you" As long as we play the game and use fiat money the governments can regulate but there are so many kinds of alternative currencies becoming more popular.

It is quite common to do a plumbing job for a mate and have the mate come around one weekend to build a fence. I owe you. Currencies can take so many forms and those that are trusted will become main stream.

After I have done a plumbing job for my mate he owes me building a fence. However, I don't need a fence but my neighbor who is a baker does. What I do need is bread. I can go to the baker and pass on my mates debt of building a fence to the baker in exchange for bread but if my mate has a bad reputation and the baker doesn't trust my mates promise then there can't be a deal.

Governments can only regulate through compulsion. Fiat money that may not be refused as a legal tender. But with bitcoin, they don't appear in the game at all. I like that.

Good on the bar owner for banning these intrusive and hideous things. My patronage is assured (If I lived there)

But everyone here is going on about right to not be recorded and so on. Can you just stop going on about your rights and look at it from a decency and morality perspective? Society is perfectly capable to manage it's own etiquette. No laws or rights required.

Poking a camera in ones face unasked is plain rude. It would piss me off. It is the domain for paparazzi and they are assholes. Google glass is the equivalent of poking a camera on ones face and if I were exposed to such a twat I warn him once and slap the bloody thing off his face the second time.

The other irritating thing that also applies to smartphone users is having them checking their damn phone every few seconds during a conversation. It is rude and persons that feel the need to glue their damn screen to their eye while in a social environment are just the ultimate assholes. I tend to break off conversation when I detect those stealthy glances to their phone.

But, it won't come to that. Google glass has always been a stupid idea and has no hope in hell to ever become cool or socially accepted. Good for the bar owner to make his declaration and get a conversation around the politeness aspect of those things started.

Microsoft is very slow to adjust to market pressures which may become it's undoing. The world is networked now. An OS has become largely irrelevant while the browser has become the new OS.

People no longer buy an eternal license of Windows anymore. Besides that model never made sense due to continuous Windows updates. Also new PC's tend to be sold with an OEM license and only savvy PC users know how to get a box without the Microsoft tax.

Adobe got it right with their rental of their latest software suite. Priced at $40 a month you get access to thousands of dollars worth of software for as long as you keep paying.

Microsoft is well overdue to do the same. An monthly or annual Windows rental for X dollars for their latest Windows OS with maybe the first year free or at reduced cost. Not only does it remove the Windows tax from ever more competitive priced hardware but it also makes it possible for Microsoft to innovate faster and keep their Windows OSes out there up to date.

Look at Youtube! Over the years it has drastically changes the look and feel but Google did it in many small steps, slowly easing users in the direction it wants to go. If Microsoft had done this with Windows they would not have the resistance to the new Metro interface they experience today. Hardware suppliers would embrace the "free" windows OS as it allows them to compete again against other free operating systems.

Consumers win too because they don't need to fork out for a full new license every few years while being able to use the latest OS without the need to perform massive monolithic upgrades.

My company is located outside the USA and until a few years ago we would quote projects in USD and absorbed the diminished value of the USD over the term of the project. That changed a few years back because of the 2008 crash. We simply don't do business in USD. This means clients in the US are required to buy foreign currency and on a year by year basis drastically see our perceived cost go up in terms of funny money (USD)