A better analogy - your car came with an ejector seat on all models. Then one morning you came out to find it no longer worked on hardtop cars, only convertibles. You're pissed because you cut a hole in the roof specifically for your ejector seat, which is now inhibited on your car.
This has demonstrated the difference between artists who know how to ride the wave of popularity that surrounds a meme, like Psy, and those who don't. Kate could have rode the Left Shark wave to the bank, Gangnam Style, but chose to listen to a money grubbing lawyer. Now she's not only lost her chance to ride the wave, she got swamped by the wave instead.
Just like a dog attack. You didn't create the dog - you bought it from a store. You didn't train the dog - you paid someone else to do that. But when it rips the face off a toddler, you're the one to pay any damages and put the dog down.
By 1930, science fiction was already well into stories of going to the moon or even Mars. Remember that Jules Verne wrote from 1863 to 1905, and wrote "From the Earth to the Moon" in 1865. So I'd say at least some people in 1930 would have said it was inevitable that man go to the moon, or put probes on Mars.
Hehe - yeah, I went through a phase where I was using computer programs to generate graphs of strange attractors. It was fun for a while, but it puts a whole new lean on the idea of "random". Annnnnnd most random number generators aren't.
We need essay votes, or fill in the blanks. This multiple choice with easy labels like "Republican" or "Democrat" means morons with no understanding of what's at stake can sell their vote to the highest bidder - or the person with the most hysterical rhetoric. If they had to write in the name of the people they wanted for the correct office, or fill out a description of the bill they wanted passed, they would have to at least known something about the person (enough to remember his name and office) or the bill. The morons can still vote, but they're going to have to study, which means they really have to want this.
Here's how I explain this cereal to folks: Kellogg had a cereal called "Shredded Dog Turds" that was "healthy" but no one would buy it! So the great minds at Kellogg got together and figured out that the problem was - they weren't frosted. So they came out with "Frosted Dog Turds", but no one bought those, either! So they once more pondered on the problem... it's clearly too big! So they finally came out with "Frosted Mini Turds", thus solving the problem once and for all!
Utterly wrong. Teens are more likely to be pulled over for nothing than adults. They're easy to intimidate, and rarely ever fight tickets, even when they know they're in the right. A teen can easily be driving along at the flow of traffic (being a safe driver) but still above the speed limit. If an officer decides to ticket someone in this group of cars, he'll pick either the guy in the fancy sports car, or the teen. It's even more likely to be the teen if he's also the one in the sports car.
Tickets very rarely have anything to do with being safe or unsafe. They most often have to do with generating revenue for the city/county. When an officer has a quota to meet, everyone is a target, safe driving be damned. Judging drivers by tickets is usually (but not always) a bad way to make said judgments. Even accidents can be a bad way of judging driving. There are many people who crow about how good and safe they are because they've never gotten a ticket, and never had an accident... but they leave a trail of destruction behind them wherever they go.
The person who causes an accident is very often never actually part of the accident. They cut someone off to exit the freeway at the last second causing a chain-reaction pileup, look in their rearview mirror (if they notice it at all), and say "Damn! What terrible drivers! Glad I'm not one of them!"
People are judged on their driving by tickets and accidents because it's the EASIEST way to judge a driver, and is most often likely to place them into a category where you can charge them more for the same service - which is really all the insurance company cares about, not "safe" driving.
The voice recognition in the video is FAR beyond SIRI or Cortana or the Google chick (what's her name) despite not being hooked to a supercomputer to do the recognition like SIRI/Cortana/what's-her-face, and the responses to said voice recognition is FAR beyond what IBM has achieved using their latest supercomputers.
It had access to personal info that exceeds what the government has, and processed it into meaningful responses faster than a team of experts, something computers still can't do at all, much less as fast as shown in the video.
Even the voice synthesis was a little too good - clearly an actor reading lines rather than real speech synthesis. The video is clearly faked, and what people will receive is a roomba with an Android tablet on it that works like a bad copy of SIRI.
Not really. If you're under 18, have a couple speeding tickets, and one accident on your record, insurance can be hundreds each month - something many families can't pay. If the teen is the only driver in the family for whatever reason, they have to keep driving despite the lack of insurance. I knew a teen who was a good driver, but due to a few tickets, his age, where he lived, and the type of car he had (a Toyoto pickup, which are big theft targets in some cities), he was paying $6000 every six months for insurance. He could afford it (actually, his parents could), but how many people can't?
Since the number of uninsured vehicles is so low in Utah, this is clearly aimed at OUT OF STATE drivers. Especially those from states that don't require insurance. Just like speeding is normally more strictly enforced if you have out of state plates, so too will this law.