This isn’t a court of law. I don’t need to prove that a car isn’t great to not buy it. I can choose not to buy it for perfectly false reasons. Many consumers do. Calling them idiots isn’t usually the path to profitability.
VashVashVash
VashVashVash
The big question on my mind at least, is what happens after the crash? Can I reset the system myself, or do I need to tow it to a dealer? Can I still make some use of a vehicle when some of it’s system aren’t functioning? In other words, how fault tolerant is this whole setup.
So if you buy a car from company X, that turns out to be an unreliable, expensive, heap of crap, it is illogical to refuse to buy another car from the same manufacturer?
I’m less worried about a car not knowing and adress, than I am about it sitting frozen for hours trying to calculate the best route. Do you really think every manufacturer will build systems that will never glitch?
Once a few manufacturers started putting in infotainment systems, vehicles that didn’t have them started looking obsolete to consumers. When selecting a vehicle to buy, people put a very high premium on having a large screen in the dash, even if it will be the source of their frustrations.
If the same people aren’t in charge of developing the system, than the same people are in charge of selecting who is developing those systems. Or perhaps the same people are in charge of selecting the people who will do the selecting. Either way, you go up high enough, you’ll find the same people. Responcibility is…
Exactly that. If it can be made to work so that it is invisible to the authorized user, we’ll see the technology widely employed. Until then, we wont. 9/10 times is nowhere near good enough.
I don’t think the reasonable concern is that the electronic portion of the hypothetical gun will cease to function. It’s that it fails to identify the authorized user on the first try in time.
The sensor in charge of identifying authorized user wont be. That’s the weak point of the whole system. It needs to be very quick, and very reliable to be worthwhile, otherwise no one is going to take the chance.
Does the government know how many hands are involved?
It’s nice to be able to swap a battery for a freshly charged one and keep working.
There is a potential pitfall with that approach, and that is the existing battery pack being discontinued. Suddenly you wont be able to support your products.
SLS printers are fantastically better than their FDM bretherin. They are more accurate, can print smaller features, and the part produced is actually really solid, as opposed to whatever FDM claims solid is.
Making 6 bottles look like 12 might be a better trick than making 6 look like none.
So newer vehicle, built to higher crash standards, are safer than older vehicles built to less demanding crash standards. One would hope that’s the case.
Indeed, the replacement is coming as soon as the robots are good enough to make good burgers consistently (news articles say they are, but I don’t know for myself).
To complicate things further, sometimes manufacturers move production off shore to be made by foreign robots.
That hasn’t been the case in my experience. Automation isn’t just cheaper, it’s also better, at least at doing those jobs that are suitable for automation. There is a great deal more consistency. Machines don’t have bad days when they don’t feel like working, they don’t try to sabotage production, or produce bad part…
Manufactuing in general, that is, the making of stuff, is doing just fine stateside. Manufacturing jobs are not, because we automate everything we can, so we don’t need the sort of workforce levels we did in the 60s.