Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Smart guns - survey... sort of [View all]discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,669 posts)20. I agree about the thread taking a tangent
I infer that you are in the camp accepting a deeper level of automated control than I am. I can see disallowing exceeding speed limits when the limit is over 45 MPH.
Re: "If one could FORCE their gun to "malfunction", then the problem of criminals stealing other people's guns would still exist."
OTOH a criminal wouldn't have to "force" a gun to malfunction. A criminal would only have to hack the gun. A criminal could just steal one of the 300+ million existing dumb guns.
Back to a minor point: A failing automated system doesn't always know that it's failing. Software uses binary numbers for calculations. An "8" would be 1000 in binary. A speed limit of 85 would be "10000101". Imagine the consequence of the left most "1" being a "0". Suddenly the speed limit changes from 85 to 5.
Have a picture: https://goo.gl/maps/nPm4P2h9KJ42
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
41 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

re: "...perhaps a malfunctioning driverless car could just have a set speed limit that is low..."
discntnt_irny_srcsm
Jul 2017
#11