No Self-Respecting Engineer Supports Driverless Car Theory It's A Load of Horseshit.

Users Online Now: 1,174 (Who's On?)		Visitors Today: 273,139
Pageviews Today: 346,219	Threads Today: 66	Posts Today: 1,071
03:04 AM

Page 1 Bottom Search Replies Previous Page Next Page
Search Terms: Highlight Matches
No Self-Respecting Engineer Supports Driverless Car Theory It's A Load of Horseshit.
Anonymous Coward User ID: 74538547 United States 03/26/2017 06:32 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation	No Self-Respecting Engineer Supports Driverless Car Theory It's A Load of Horseshit. 100% Science Fiction. 100% Superstition. Only the smallest and least educated minds could believe in this nonsense. The math is way, way, against it. The probability of driverless car theory every becoming law is 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000... X 10^1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000... ad naseum It's ain't gonna happen. Most efficient machine known to man was 54% efficient. That had hundreds of moving parts. You tell me you're going to beat that with a machine with 1 billion + parts. I say go back to 2nd Grade. Listen this time!!! FLUNKIE.

Anonymous Coward (OP) User ID: 74538547 United States 03/26/2017 06:41 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation	Re: No Self-Respecting Engineer Supports Driverless Car Theory It's A Load of Horseshit. 100% Science Fiction. 100% Superstition. Only the smallest and least educated minds could believe in this nonsense. The math is way, way, against it. The probability of driverless car theory every becoming law is 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000... X 10^1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000... ad naseum It's ain't gonna happen. Most efficient machine known to man was 54% efficient. That had hundreds of moving parts. You tell me you're going to beat that with a machine with 1 billion + parts. I say go back to 2nd Grade. Listen this time!!! FLUNKIE. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74538547 The Billion + parts is a way low estimate. This statement was based on the assumption that there is zero problems with the machines themselves and that they are 100% efficient, and that's another load of horseshit. Each of the machines is roughly, 20%, just a stab in the educated dark guess on that. You can research it may not be that high. [link to www.quora.com (secure)] Word of the day class 2nd Grade Science - Efficiency. Yes, that is in the 2nd grade curriculum. Curriculum is a contract between the government the teacher and the family and the student. We promise your student will achieve knowledge-based understanding of these concepts at a mastery level of 76% or greater as assessed by the profession teacher. You got left behind. You can't hide a lack of education. Those who think they can also don't get the concept of curricula. It is narrowly defined. Your GAPS are OBVOIUS!
Anonymous Coward User ID: 2946559 United States 03/26/2017 06:44 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation	Re: No Self-Respecting Engineer Supports Driverless Car Theory It's A Load of Horseshit. For some odd reason I think the OP's had a little bit too much sauce... .
Anonymous Coward User ID: 74235569 United States 03/26/2017 07:06 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation	Re: No Self-Respecting Engineer Supports Driverless Car Theory It's A Load of Horseshit. For some odd reason I think the OP's had a little bit too much sauce... . Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2946559

Anonymous Coward (OP) User ID: 74538547 United States 03/26/2017 07:07 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation	Re: No Self-Respecting Engineer Supports Driverless Car Theory It's A Load of Horseshit. For some odd reason I think the OP's had a little bit too much sauce... . Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2946559 I remember in 2nd grade when I got taught this, and when I learned this, and now I teach it to you. Stick to the Point. Here you've attempted to change the subject to sauce or sauces when the point was about driverless car theory as invalid, and that those who entertain as missing the basic understanding of the concept of efficiency. I like Worcestershire personally.
Page 1 Top Previous Page Next Page

GLP