Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:This was addressed (Score 1) 241

2) The number of measles cases is roughly 800, but the number of new cases has leveled off. The number of cases doesn't appear to be growing in the manner of an epidemic.

Nobody is saying it's an epidemic. It's just a major outbreak that's unprecedented in recent decades. Measles is unlikely to become an epidemic in the U.S., because most of us have been vaccinated and the vaccine provides lifelong immunity. Only very foolish people (or people with foolish parents) are contributing the the measles outbreak.

Comment Re:No such thing.... (Score 1) 241

I WILL GO LOOK at the adverse effects studies, the ingredients of the injection, and the current statistics on the effects of those who have already taken, that which I am about to take myself or give to my child.

And had you done that in the case of TDAP, you would have gone ahead and had her get the injection anyway, because there are no statistics that suggest or would even hint at what you're claiming was an adverse effect.

Comment Re: No such thing.... (Score 2) 241

The underlying data that is not publicly available, could be doing a LOT MORE if it were open to scrutiny and statistical study by third parties.

The data is publicly available. It's just not all that statistically significant. The reports are all self-selecting; that is, many people who might have experienced an adverse effect do not report it, and many people who think they have experienced an adverse effect do report it, even though they're wrong about the cause. All VAERS does is gather reports. It's up to doctors and scientists to decide whether there is any validity to the reports. VAERS itself draws no conclusions.

Comment Re:"driverless" (Score 1) 110

They're called "fleet response agents" now. The minutia of driving is still automated, but the remote controllers can set a path and push it through a subset of restrictions. If it needs help, it's no longer autonomous.

A lot of subway trains are essentially autonomous, yet they still have operators in the event of some kind of failure state.

I buy Waymo's assertion that the actual driving is fully autonomous. Remember, you will never go to a dealership and buy your own Waymo. The whole project is designed as a service, not the future of private car ownership.

Comment Re:Waymo in Phoenix (Score 1) 110

Maybe they've improved the routing between my house and the airport, the last time I used it to go to/from the airport the routing was so circuitous that it was irritating.

In San Francisco, getting to the airport generally means taking the freeway. Although Waymo has permission to test its vehicles on the freeway, I don't think it's begun doing so. There is probably a way to get to the airport without the freeway, but it would take a very long time and it would mean boing outside of Waymo's service area. Effectively, going to the airport is not a use case for Waymo in San Francisco.

Comment Re:Need I say more (Score 1) 110

But don't cherry pick one aspect of driving and imply that that one aspect makes them better than human drivers.

OK, but scientific studies don't typically take the entire world into consideration. They tend to focus on one specific area of research. I have anecdotal evidence that Waymo cars also corner exceptionally well, accelerate and brake efficiently, and do a great job of observing traffic rules and laws ... but this study didn't look at those things.

Comment Re:"driverless" (Score 1) 110

Though not really relevant for operation, the army of remote controllers pushing them through their fail safe behaviour (stopping) is essential.

What army is that? There is a team that can "provide information" to the car, but there is no remote control. The actual driving is totally autonomous. In a worst-case scenario, an operator can instruct a car to pull over and wait for assistance. More info here.

Comment So let me get this straight... (Score 3, Insightful) 94

OK, so this is a device with a tiny e-ink screen that functions like a phone but costs 4x as much as the lowest-priced Kindle, and as much as 10x as much as a basic dumbphone.

On the left side of the device is a button that houses one of its key features: offline mode. Switching to this mode disables all wireless connectivity and support for the camera, so it truly becomes distraction-free..

I'll say it's "distraction-free." It doesn't do anything. I guess you can play chess with it? Or use it like a pocket calculator?

Comment Do consumers care about AI? (Score 2) 56

The elephant in the room is that none of these companies that are betting their futures on "AI"—whatever they mean by that—has yet to prove that consumers are interested. Last I heard, Apple Intelligence wasn't exactly driving up iPhone sales figures, either. They say the new MacBook Pros have it, too ... great?

I was at Best Buy the other day, and I saw an electric toothbrush that claimed to clean your teeth with AI. It cost $360. Does anybody buy this stuff? Even as gifts? I just can't see how slapping some mostly-meaningless tag onto a product that people are already familiar with, then upping the price, is going to be of interest to any average person.

Slashdot Top Deals

Life is a healthy respect for mother nature laced with greed.

Working...