That would have to be approved by the courts. It could go either way.

If you want to stop AI Cheating, turn the classroom into a faraday cage and all work is done there.

Again, it doesn't say why they think they were "Kremlin based hackers."

I personally tracked the IP address of an open webcam I was monitoring, and I found it was hacked by redmid17 - 1217076. I have all the proxy traceroute logs. Very suspicious.

Citation needed.

Google doesn't even have self-driving cars. Maybe you're thinking about Waymo (which is part of Alphabet, not Google).

Regardless, no, to the best of my understanding, they cannot be driven remotely at all, at least by any normal person's definition of the word "drive". When intervention is required, the remote operators get a dump of camera images to review, and then they draw a proposed path on a map. The car then tries to follow it, and aborts if doing so would result in hitting anything. This may have to be done more than once to get it out of the problem situation. When the vehicle says that it is comfortable proceeding on its own, the remote operator tells it to go ahead, and it takes over path planning again.

At no point is any remote operator in direct control over the vehicle. All they can do is propose an alternative path when the vehicle's path planner gets stuck trying to figure out how to safely extricate itself from some situation. At all times, the vehicle's software is the driver. The remote operator is just hinting that it should go to the left of safety cone A, to the right of cone B, etc. (or whatever the situation happens to be). This is why it takes so long to extricate a stuck car. If there were an actual remote driver that could take real-time control, it would take just a few seconds.

From what I've read, when a Waymo car sees emergency lights, it stops driving and gets out of the way. I do see one (presumably) recent video where a Waymo stopped in a place that actually delayed an ambulance from getting past it on a narrow street, so unless that's an old video, I'm guessing there's still a bit more tweaking required in terms of recognizing whether the right choice is to stop or to move out of the way. I'd imagine someone is already working on making sure that particular edge case doesn't happen again.

What I'm not seeing is evidence of some widespread problem with autonomous vehicles in general. There's an edge case here or an edge case there where something didn't work as expected. And they'll complain about it, and the AV company in question will figure out why the car did the wrong thing, update their training sets, and that specific scenario won't happen again.

(This, of course, ignores Tesla, because the emergency vehicle drivers can't tell if the vehicle is being driven by the car or by a human, making any sort of reporting problematic at best.)

So realistically, I suspect that the answer to a vague demand from a government agency demanding to know what AV companies will do to prevent bad interactions with emergency vehicles will always be "exactly what we're already doing", because apart from coming up with new simulated situations to test (which they're always doing), there's really nothing they can do to prevent the car from behaving the wrong way in some vague unspecified future situation that nobody has thought of yet. And the answer to what they're doing to prevent a specific situation will usually be "We've already updated our training sets and that won't happen again."

To that end, I'm really not sure what they're trying to accomplish with sending a letter like that. Seems more like political posturing than any actual attempt at solving a problem. *shrugs*

The article doesn't say why they think it's Russians.

Taking control of a device with a default password is not really a heavy hacking task. It doesn't require nation state resources. You could probably do it yourself in an afternoon, if you were motivated.

Construction zones are not exceptions, they're a very predictable common case.

Sometimes it can save you money, even if you have insurance: https://www.consumerreports.or...

Given the US current economy and the GOP prospects for the coming election, the absolute worst thing Trump could do for the GOP is to enact new economic measures.

If he messes up enough he will be impeached again. Just takes a few more democrats in the senate.

That's all the more reason to not try to appease him, because there's no limit to reasons he'll think of to retaliate against perceived grievances. He could wake up one morning and fart crosswise and impose sanctions on the EU.

So the EU (and rest of the world) should just go about their lives, do what they need to do, and not worry about trade sanctions, because even trade agreements signed by Trump himself won't prevent sanctions.

There are a couple of alternatives. The problem is that there are only a couple.

They never do. :-(

Good luck to him, I hope he discovers things that improve humanity.

2001.
2012
2023
2001
1980s

I'm sure they have an innovation here, but it's not clear what, having been filtered through layers of scientific journalism.

Well, I think you are more reasonable than that.

There is a segment of the population who will never switch parties under any circumstances. They are the partisans. They are easily recognizable because their opinions always somehow match the platform of the party (which is silly, because a party platform is of necessity a compromise between people with different desires).

These people were not party loyalists. Note that not all party loyalists are braindead: some of them get real benefit from being loyalists, and they are thus making a rational decision. (That said, they are hard to have an interesting conversation with).

Probably not. Would you ever vote Republican?