barnabes

Yeah, but it seems that they may be, statistically speaking, right. The fears that surround self driving cars may be unfounded, and if they are unfounded, then it would be a shame to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

They're right when they say we don't speak of the accidents that didn't happen, and I bet there's a ton of them.

As someone who's been in multiple car crashes, as a passenger, I really on longer want to be at the mercy of human drivers.

Brief reminder of the same discussion, in a different context.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzD4tIvPHwE

Yet on one, and I really mean no one complains about computer assisted landings and takeoffs. I'm not sure why. Lots of passengers even sleep through them.

I guess we've come to realise that the man machine symbiosis works well for flight. But it might take time for this to get engrained into our culture when it comes to driving.

Do limits guarantee a price?

Right. In addition to that, I was simply going to write "make it not fail". In the plane example, what the author doesn't mention is that there are many mechanical failures, or human errors on a plane that lead to, well, death of 100% of its passengers. Yet we still fly.

So in this respect I see the Hyperloop as being very similar to air travel: make it not fail.

This looks like an excellent addition to the family of terminal-based editors. Truly looking forward to trying it out at work.

The issue, in my eyes anyway, is when the scientific method is used as a hammer; when it's used to crush a debate.

Any method, whether scientific, philosophical, spiritual or otherwise should be used to spawn debate, and to contribute to a rich discussion.

But science being used to stop debate, used to stop exchange, used to stop meaningful conversation does more harm than good to all involved.

You're incredibly stupid.

Because money talks. I used to play a game when I really wanted to bargain hard on something: I'd change my money to as many notes of the lowest possible denomination, and show up with a huge stack of notes.

You're be surprised what a huge stack of notes can do. It triggers something in the recipient of said huge stack of notes. It's deeply psychological. People stop thinking when faced with a huge wad of money.

People will do anything for money, including bad longterm decisions.

Money talks.

I've only tried a VPN provider once, and all it involved was to download a program that took care of all the configuration for me. Child's play it was.

My foray into VPNs was good.. pretty much download, install, and play.

Leaving the politics aside for a second, wouldn't using a VPN fix this?

It's those who complain about the quality of Wikipedia whom, in the same vein, complain it's hard for newbies to edit it.

I've had edits rejected and I must say Wikipedia's 'assume good faith' policy makes it less hard on the newbie ego.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith

Maybe newbie edits that don't cut the mark is one of the processes that attempt to drive the quality upward.

It's odd that in 2017 we are still having this debate. wiki welcomes you to improve the article. In fact that's the whole idea behind the site. It's odd that some users are still missing this use case in its entirety.

The doomsday clock always strikes me more as a doomsday gauge ;)