I am using AI to drop hats outside my window onto New Yorkers
dropofahat.zone
dropofahat.zone
Boston must have changed since I last visited.
I was 90% sure the next sentence was going to mention drugs.
Long, long ago I did model rocketry. Using too much chute was not a good thing because it could go so far off course. The high power rocket guys do it with two chutes--a drogue that deploys high and then the landing chute that deploys low. But that requires electronics and certifications and the like. In the lightweight stuff there's nothing fancy, just a delay built into the engine after which it burns through the top, momentarily exhausting into the interior.
First there was the excessively dismissive era that spawned the infamous Dropbox comment (Which was widely misunderstood).
Then came the functional programming era, where people worshipped Haskell and frequently got posted to /r/ProgrammingCirclejerk. Eventually we got past that one as people discovered that Haskell isn't really useful for anything besides showing off how you can implement Quicksort in a single line or starting arguments over what the hell a Monad is.
Then there was the needlessly pedantic era, which basically spawned the "ACKCHYUALLY" meme. The pedantry was often a huge distraction, never added anything to the conversation, and often was actually incorrect. If you've ever said "Actually, that's not ray tracing, that's ray casting!", then congrats, you're part of this era.
We're now in the era of being dismissive, not for technical merits like the previous dismissive era, but for being unproductive. Any time a project is done purely for fun or personal reasons (ie, nostalgia), there's someone in the comments talking about how useless it is, and that the time could be better spent Making The World A Better Place(tm)[0].
I think this post captures what I’d expect from hacker news quite well. A cool single person project messing around, creating something a community can enjoy.
What I don’t like are these weird doom mentality discussions over AGI (as an example), they just make me cringe really badly.
Then again I really can’t complain, all in all I love Hacker News, great topics, great comments!
Just another day on your average know it all message board.
Hats.
Out of a Window.
For a joke.
Not a cure for cancer.
Not a peace proposal
Not a way to get people out of poverty
Hats. Out. Of. A. Window.
This hushed "no we mustn't pun or mock" type attitude is one of the main drivers of stupid tech fads
It leads to people in positions of power to write down phrases like "This product isn't seen by our customers as a bridge to the metaverse". The product being a fucking chat app with bulletin board built in. At no point did anyone in the room mercilessly rip the piss out of them. And it shows.
He's got a future in marketing.
... of AI
I wish cool stuff like this wasn't always sullied by the slimy feeling from it only being done to draw attention to some startup sitting smack in the middle of the trendiest buzzwords of the month.
It's still difficult; to do that, you need to know the wind speed at every point between them and you.
Or you need to be so close that the wind speed doesn't matter, but at that point nobody's going to be impressed that you can hit them.
It isn't aiming anything. It isn't adjusting for anything. It's doing so from a stationary point.
The ML isn't used for anything other than a simple "is there the thing I was trained to look for within this area?" It's basically a ML version of something one could pretty easily do in OpenCV.
There's NOTHING about this useful for aerial bombing, which involves dozens of problems much harder than "this is the spot you should aim for."
There are probably dozens of smartphone apps for helping marksmen calculate adjustments that are about a hundred times more complicated, and more useful for (potentially) hurting people, than this.
And then there's this Stuff Made Here project where the guy makes a robotic bow that can track objects and hit them no matter where you're aiming: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MkrNVic7pw&pp=ygUTYm93IHRoY...
I can't stand people who act like it's reasonable for the government to monitor and harass people for stuff like this. The second our government is harassing him or the SMH guy, I'm moving to Canada.
Now if you had terminal guidance... Put flaps on the hat, and use shape-memory alloy wire and a coin cell to actuate them. The hats follow a laser beam projected by the drop unit. Minimal electronics required in the hat. This is how some "smart bombs" work.
Once he's done that, the military sector beckons.
It seems like both of these are tractable issues.
A round hat that is spun with a significant initial angular momentum would probably fair better in landing more predictably.
Imagine using AI to drop an object and it falls perfectly where you want it.
There is a fantasy series that depicts this as a game that two young gods would play together when they were growing up. (Or rather, since one of them had vastly superior foresight to the other one, he'd bully his brother into playing with him.)
DARPA would definitely come knocking
A lot of states are working on legislation that includes requirements for watermarking AI generated content. But it seldom defines AI with any rigor, making me wonder if soon everyone will need to label everything as made with AI to be on the safe side, kinda like prop 65 warnings.
[ all cookies and ai stuff ]
An example of similar computer can do that isn't AI would be arithmetic
I don't disagree that it certainly meets certain AI criteria, just saying that particular phrasing (A* is AI) was never used.
The nags are kind of malicious semi-compliance, partly in effort to make the regulation look bad.
Flood users with warnings on everything and it'll get ignored. Especially if there's no penalty for warning when there isn't a risk.
Big Tobacco must love Prop 65 warnings, because by making it look like everything causes cancer, smokers keep themselves blissfully ignorant at just how large the risk factor is for tobacco compared to most other things.
To summarize, I used:
1. Low weight but very cool product (like Propeller Hats)
2. Raspberry Pi for controlling everything
3. Adafruit stepper motor for the dropping mechanism
4. Yarn for holding the hat
5. Roboflow for the AI
My immediate response to this was “ew, there’s already so much gum on the street”. Then I realized you meant you want to chew gum while walking down the street and I became enlightened.
You’re working toward this world and I commend you.
Since you haven't seen someone chewing gum in a while, I'm now curious about where you live. North Korea? Singapore?
1: https://newsroom.clevelandclinic.org/2024/06/06/cleveland-cl...
click>(GUM)
click>(SELF)
click>(USE)
"You used the GUM on yourself.
Nothing special happens.
You now have 0 GUM."
There was another game in the same genre that did the same, but with the verb OPERATE. As teenagers my friends and I used to laugh way too much at dialogue responses these games would craft, where you would get things like "OPERATE GUM on SELF"
I know a friend of mine whom the building asked to remove a camera they had. It was a camera used only to record the hill view in front of the building, so it isn't violating any privacy, and it was attached with magnets, so no damage whatsoever.
Unless perhaps the camera was attached outside their window (no longer their apartment), in a way that could be deemed unsafe and fall off and hurt someone, whereupon the building owner could be held liable? In that case I would find it reasonable to tell them to remove it.
I remember it was on the balcony, securely attached. The building simply cited their policy, not any laws nor safety issues.
Regarding the Video Object Detection:
Why does inference need to be done via Roboflow SaaS?
...(api_url="https://detect.roboflow.com", api_key="API_KEY")
Is it because the Pi is too underpowered to run a fully on-device solution such as Frigate [0] or DOODS [1]? And presumably a Coral TPU wasn't considered because the author mostly used stuff he happened to have laying around.Can anyone comment contrasting experience with Roboflow? Does it perform better than Frigate and DOODS?
Asking for a friend. I totally don't have announcement speakers throughout my house that I want to say "Mom approaching the property", "Package delivered", "Dog spotted on a walk", "Dog owner spotted not picking up after their beast", and so on. That last one will be tricky to pull off. Ah well :)
[0] https://github.com/blakeblackshear/frigate/pkgs/container/fr...
Pi inference is pretty slow (probably ~1 fps without an accelerator). Usually folks are using CUDA acceleration with a Jetson for these types of projects if they want to run faster locally.
Some benefits are that there are over 100k pre-trained models others have already published to Roboflow Universe[2] you can start from, supports many of the latest SOTA models (with an extensive library[3] of custom training notebooks), tight integration with the dataset/annotation tools that are at the core of Roboflow for creating custom models, and good support for common downstream tasks via supervision[4].
[1] https://github.com/roboflow/inference
[2] https://universe.roboflow.com
How about hanging a London Tube-style yellow dot-matrix display showing estimated times of neighbours walking past your home? Something like:
"1. Mrs Green towards Post Office 5min"
"2. Mr Smith towards Bus Stop 7min"
"3. Mr Snow towards Mrs Smith 9min"
This reminds me of thousands of blockchain projects that used the technology to flip on light switch.
I see what you did there.
This may be achievable for me with the current state of AI and GPT to help fill the gaps that my knowledge is lacking in. Thanks for showing what you made and how you did it. It's encouragement to me.
One might argue that this sort of thing rarely happens so it’s not worth doing more complex facial recognition vis a vis Jersey numbering. But I say that while it may be rare, when it does happen it’s a major event, so no complexity should be spared to ensure we capture it accurately.
Trace and hudl use shirt number and person tracking. I bet they could add skin color and gait analysis to do this as well.
Sometimes you can notice a little nob on the back/shoulder of a player.
https://www.google.com/search?q=nhl+player+tracking+jersey
https://old.reddit.com/r/whatisthisthing/comments/u5707w/wha...
I truly love the concept of pun-driven development (PDD). As a motivating economic principle, a world where every human being has the resources, time, and personal safety to dedicate absurd amounts of their time to inane levels of pun-driven development is perhaps my favorite definition of utopia.
http://www.michaelburge.us/2017/11/28/write-your-next-ethere...
I have never liked it when the ACs drip on me in midtown let alone a hat dropping on my head!
I wish I could register myself as being up for any sort of serendipity like this. While I like the idea of a hat randomly dropping onto my head, some people may not.
My biggest fear about walking around any city (but NYC in particular) is an actual AC machine dropping onto my head. Maybe you could offer the choice to drop down a hard hat on streets with high AC unit density (and then pick it up when I leave the area).
And presumably if another random person happens to stop inside the right sidewalk tile for at least 3 seconds during the 5-minute window, before the actual customer gets there, they'll get the hat instead!
Also, I've been working on a project (non-commercial) that looks down on people and have found existing models don't work super well from that angle so thank you for publishing your work on Roboflow.
TIL my dad’s entire life has been a non-commercial project
Of course, that starts to verge on what's spooky about the idea, but either way, this is really fun and cool.
Also, this would be contrary to GP's comment - it would be the right reason. Imagine if a bald person is walking by and a toupee happens to fall on their head and they can see themselves in a window reflection of a toupee shop that just so happens to be there.
Use some ML/AI to choose the right fit, style, hair color etc., the drop orientation, and angle. Throw in some ChatGTP integration to suggest using scalp glue. Combined with OP's marking skills they will be in business in no time!
wat.
Having a shitty robot that needs to be reloaded every time is not scalable.
Why 800+ votes for a thing that obviously doesn't do what it claims to be doing, and shows pictures and videos of it not doing the thing?
Do y’all think a similar stack/setup (raspberry pi and python3 and this model thing he linked to) would be a good starting point? I prefer to use a more “algorithm” solution than a full blown model (I mean cameras have had face detection since what, the early 2000s?).
Anyway, curious to hear any suggestions.
https://hackaday.io/project/12384-autofan-automated-control-...
I used Viola-Jones for face detection on a Raspberry Pi 2 and built a fan with servo-actuated lamellae from plywood using my CNC-Router. It almost landed me a job at a local engineering company but chose to stay in academia back then. I still have the hardware somewhere in a drawer in my workshop. It definitely was a fun project.
A funny way of criticizing something. Great commentary.
A Raspberry Pi would hurt quite a bit, depending on the floor!
Finally some window shopping that interests me.
Pretty much writes itself really.
TLDR: Not just any "New Yorkers", but specifically "customers who want to buy a propeller hat". And hats are dropped not "onto", but "somewhere on the sidewalk next to" these New Yorkers. And sure, this might be "using AI", but AI seems like an overkill to recognize that a person is standing longer than three seconds under the window.
So a guy sells hats by dropping them out of the window. Not sure why there are so many comments praising this. Is it because of the pun? Am I missing something?
Like there would be a law against lowering hats on a string? I think it may be more funny to have a government create such a law.
Everyone doing this seems wonderful.
It's a boring question anyway; this is HN.
Dropping things shouldn’t be illegal. Negligence that causes harm should be.
Someone lowering a hat down on a string seems perfectly fine. Throwing a chair out a window seems bad. I think the details would affect whether someone is illegal, not just a blanket “thou shall not throw things out the window.”
There’s already laws about littering and assault, so I don’t think that would matter how many floors up we are.
Why ask boring questions?
> the details would affect whether someone [sic] is illegal
Yep, that's how we apply laws.
Who cares? I assume most people here are grey/blackhats (rainbow in this case).
It's the same behavior that a helicopter would have if it was doing an emergency landing as well.
If you're asking dumb things like "how could a propeller hat dropped 50+ feet hurt someone?" then I encourage you to imagine getting hit in the eye by the spinning propeller if you happen to look up.
https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?articl...
I can’t believe someone would spend the time and effort to do this.
I love it. You’re brilliant.
1. For a Linux user, you can already build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting a kaggle account, learning by doing computer vision projects, and then using opencv to build the vision parts of the system. From Windows or Mac, you could build using a cloud system such as Amazon Bedrock.
2. It doesn't actually replace having a hat for the period from your own front door to OP's apartment. Most people I know own hats themselves or borrow from friends to be able to attend specific events, but they still carry a hat in case there are weather problems. This does not solve the availability issue.
3. It does not seem very "viral" or income-generating. I know this is premature at this point, but without charging users for the service, is it reasonable to expect to make money off of this?
[1] Actually I don't. It's really awesome.
Although since it only takes a few seconds, I’d expect you to be able to sell thousands of these a day. If you don’t mind me asking, how many slots do you release each day?
It'd be nice if we could all just chill the hell out and let someone's fun, stupid, kinda pointless project just be someone's fun, stupid, kinda pointless project.
Edit: I don't mind the downvotes, but do feel free to tell me if I'm off base for thinking comparing this project to overdosing is a hell of a stretch.
(Or maybe cause someone to take a sudden step away from the sidewalk)
(I wonder if the title is a bit clickbait and the hat dropper in fact tries out this new tech only on friends who are prepared already, not random strangers?)
> Here a busy New Yorker can book a 5 minute time slot, pay for a hat, stand in a spot under my window for 3 seconds, have a hat put on their head, and get on with their extremely important, extemely busy day
Ok. And after all, such nice hats are a bit expensive I guess (since they also function as helicopters).
Skimmed the article the first time.
Lethality dangerous
If we’re going to call something dangerous, we should probably have actual logic and data to support that claim, right?
As you seem to be massively misinformed:
> Distracted driving is dangerous, claiming 3,308 lives in 2022
> What Is Distracted Driving?
> anything that takes your attention away from the task of safe driving.
https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving
Now obviously having a hat land on a windshield and actually block visibility would be worse, but catching something falling out of the edge of your vision especially something odd like a falling hat would easily qualify.
It’s also distracting pedestrians and so likely to result in other injuries.
I am not "massively misinformed". I'm asking a person making a ridiculous claim (a hat falling from the sky will kill you) to support their claim.
I'm seeing no mention of hats in your linked information. Please share hat related injuries, as that's what we're discussing.
“Several properties of visual stimuli have been shown to capture attention, one of which is the onset of motion.“
https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13414-018-1548-1
> I am not "massively misinformed"
Your ignorant response proves otherwise.
Clearly you don’t want to see, but you lost the argument anyway.
Some basic advice, if you don’t want to come off as a fool try actually responding to an agreement as presented. You may still lose, but at least it doesn’t look like you’re hiding.
I suspect that, if the notion of a hat falling 20 feet out of a window terrifies you this much, you’ve probably not engaged much with real people or the world around you, such that I wouldn’t really have expected anything different. Glad I was not wrong!
Yet, again demonstrating you didn’t understand even the title of the article. As you clearly failed to read there in an ‘s’ at the end of “hats” at the top of the article. In this context that s means repeated hat drops.
Summing up for a simple mind. Research shows falling hats distract people. Article showing intersection means drivers would get distracted. Research showed distracting drivers risks killing someone else.
So with multiple events each risking killing someone taking place risk gasp increases.
PS: It’s also illegal, but that’s a secondary concern.
_Some_ hats? gasp. The horror!
Go outside.
You're so lost in the forced fake universe and viciously defending it digging even a deeper hole for yourself I wonder if you even remember how to walk.
Let's say 0.001% of distracted driving accidents are caused by falling hats. That's way less than one death a year. Now, DUI deaths don't just dwarf that but make it seem nonexistent which it basically is. If you stretch this to the extreme you could consider heavy snowfall to falling hats, but hundreds of hats falling around you all the time to the point they reduce your vision greatly. But even at that point alcohol is more dangerous. And at this point you linking some paper will just make you seem more deranged considering the kind of leaps you're making to try to stretch some academic reference to this theoretical question.
Please go outside.
This is not even close.
Heck, pick any one negative impact of drinking alcohol at parties (impaired driving, or long term health effects, or impaired judgment, etc) and that individual impact would probably be orders of magnitude worse than the total negative impact of dropping hats.
This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
But also I am shocked that there is a New Yorker that would pick up a hat from the street and put it on their head. My first thought would be, "how much lice is in this thing?"
Imagine being on the sidewalk and someone just hucks a hat at your head, how would that feel? More than a little alarming for many, I should think.
How is it not clear that it's inappropriate to be violating others' personal space without their consent and without warning, to force clothing upon them no less?
I guarantee you that you haven't come up with any ideas in the few minutes you've been thinking as a casual and presumably non-criminal observer that haven't been thought of already by countless criminal and terrorist groups. The only thing you're accomplishing by being vague is making it hard for us to understand what you're getting at.
Whether the idea has occurred to a bad actor and if they choose to act on it are very different.
We effectively “promote” bad ideas with detailed public discussion; it’s literally what influencers get paid to do.
<< I guarantee you that you haven't come up with any ideas [...]that haven't been thought of already by countless criminal and terrorist groups.
It is likely. My imagination is somewhat limited, but this is kinda the point. If I can think it, a sizeable portion of the population can as well. The difference is that it just made it now is easier to deploy in non-benign manner. My concern is not with terror orgs. Those can and do their own thing. I am worried about a casual kid, who uses it for 'pranks' that will happen, as they seem to invariably eventually do, to go too far.
Well and because your ideas are either fantasy land or old hat.
Do you really not see the difference?
You could drop stuff from a drone or have a drone shoot a gun too, but people don't want to hurt other people in general.
What scenario is in your head that you think being able to drop something and hurt or kill someone is going to happen more if people can do it automatically?
Who are these people that aren't hurting anyone but are suddenly going to do it once it becomes a science project?
This sort of tech could clearly be applied to the “last mile” problem in hand grenade deliveries as well, so close range jammer based solutions seem pretty hopeless (I think that’s been pretty obvious for a while, but this hobbyist project really emphasizes the fact, right?)
Toupees
Pianos
Air conditioners
Enriched yellow cake uranium
Specially trained mice with machine guns
Robert De Niro in Brazil
Etc etc
We must mobilize to stop this now before it’s too late. Hopefully this will be addressed during next week’s presidential election.