News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google Says It’s Not the Driverless Car’s Fault. It’s Oth... by scrabble on Tuesday September 01, 2015 @01:31PM (#10154182)
Yes.

Not too long ago I had the opportunity to have a surgery performed by a robot controlled by a human surgeon. My wife was adamantly against it since there had been accidents previously with the robot other places in the world. Overall, the rate of incident was lower than the rate of incident for human surgeons, but to her that was not the important point.

There are people who will definitely hold machines to higher standards, and if they don't meet them, to them they are clearly inferior.

Re:Google Says It’s Not the Driverless Car’s Fault. It’s Oth... by bholzer on Tuesday September 01, 2015 @01:51PM (#10154357)
Surgical robots do not perform as well as traditional instruments.

I've talked to a few hospital executives and all have said that in most cases, these robots only cost them money and decrease the quality of the surgical procedures.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2526934/Surge...

Re:Google Says It’s Not the Driverless Car’s Fault. It’s Oth... by linkregister on Tuesday September 01, 2015 @03:24PM (#10155024)
I know that disregarding evidence because of association is a fallacy, but can you come up with a better source? I have to strain my memory to think of an accurate article written by the newspaper you linked.
Re:Google Says It’s Not the Driverless Car’s Fault. It’s Oth... by bholzer on Tuesday September 01, 2015 @03:56PM (#10155257)
I agree, I was hesitant to even use that link, I believe the Wall Street Journal is generally considered more reputable:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/robotic-surgery-brings-higher-co...

And another from a relatively reputable healthcare company/journal:

http://www.healthline.com/health-news/is-da-vinci-robotic-su...

Re:Google Says It’s Not the Driverless Car’s Fault. It’s Oth... by linkregister on Tuesday September 01, 2015 @04:46PM (#10155566)
Thanks! These are good articles.