23 karma · joined November 3, 2017
Rospy aside, writing and implementing your own SLAM/path-planning tools in ROS is quite simple once you get familiar with the architecture of ROS. All the sensor data can be collected by subscribing to the right channel, and then you can return driving instructions back to a controller by publishing them on another channel. Since all this channel business operates on the network layer, you can even offload the computational workload of the algorithms to a remote system and have the robot get its moving instructions over Wi-Fi.
Overall, I had more issues with finding good resources on the rospy module than anything else. It seems almost all robotics development with ROS is done using C++ instead of Python (in my little experience), so there is little I could find in terms of code samples that would allow to get past a project like this (https://github.com/gandalf15/CS3027--CS5059--Robotics-Univer...).
It would also be really nice if the "popularity" metrics that OP mentions (i.e. preferred language, least preferred language, language most used at work, etc.) could easily be grouped by "Developer Type". After some quick googling, it has become apparent that the data from previous years is available to download, but it would be nice for SO to show that data in the blog post.
Reading this article made me reflect on my understanding on the goals of counter-terrorist measures of the United States and how they (somewhat hypocritically) revolve entirely around a consequentialist point of view.
Maybe I have my tin foil hat a little to snug on my head, but I can't seem to find a way in which the mentality of the U.S. government's perception of "terrorism" has evolved from the days of COINTELPRO. To the US government, the only difference between MLK and Kim Jong Un is that only one of those was a threat to the state in 60's while the other is a threat now.
While I'm admittedly not really well versed in stoicism, I believe that an individual's oikeiôsis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oikei%C3%B4sis) of something or someone else is the guiding factor of how they act or behave towards something. However, is it really fair to hold people to the same standard as a government?
There are some measures, like TSA in America, that appear to be more focused around the illusion of security than actually preventing acts of terrorism. But what about some of the surveillance efforts conducted by intelligence organizations within the Five Eyes?
Maybe this merely a display of my own ignorance, but I don't understand why the efficacy of surveillance measures (both domestic and non-domestic) isn't discussed more often. If governments were more open about all the terrorist attacks they were able to prevent ahead of time, maybe the general public wouldn't have such a negative opinion of them when one terrorist slips through the cracks.
This paper (https://www.cepol.europa.eu/sites/default/files/26-reinhard-...) has some interesting insights into the matter. While admittedly a slightly biased source, this ProPublica article also has some interesting things to say about mass surveillance (https://www.propublica.org/article/whats-the-evidence-mass-s...)