nexuist

You can build a physical server for $500 once. Relying on proprietary hardware and registering to some service, that may "upgrade" to premium tier anytime, is pretty off-putting.

Huh, TIL (and relevant username). Thank you for the correction. I noticed the article says they only admitted fault for the second crash, do you know what happened with the first? Did Boeing admit fault for that too?

> Can we be sure that the average driver who has received no special training in the matter will be able to take over from an autopilot in a split second when driving at high speeds?

The beta system controls for this by only allowing in people who score 98 or above in Tesla's safety surveillance program. The restrictions are tight enough that you have to actively try to be a safe driver to get anywhere close to the cutoff (some people even got pissed off because their score went down because someone brake checked them and they had to decelerate too quickly). Not everyone who buys FSD gets into the beta.

> If/when the system is rolled out at scale will drivers actually comprehend that?

The only ethical way to roll this out at a wider scale than the scale allowed by the safety surveillance program is if it's good enough to avoid incidents like the one depicted here. I think we can all conclude that Tesla deserves the fat lawsuits if they were to green light FSD in the state it is in today.

> but no one can bring a dead pedestrian back to life.

An unfortunate fact of life, hopefully made irrelevant by the comeuppance of autonomous transportation technology (including but not limited to automobiles) that makes motor vehicle accidents a thing of the past. Until we get there, though, someone has to keep trying.

It is for unprecedented and should be discussed. I just don't buy into the kneejerk reaction of getting this off the roads ASAP when we know drivers use FSD to drive millions of miles a year and accidents are not common at all. It shows that the drivers seem to be responsible enough to keep the tech in check.

The name is stupid and should be changed, but I also don't want people to be absolved of responsibility because they bought into marketing. "But they said the ship couldn't sink!" Doesn't matter, you're still on the hook for the hundreds of people who drowned. Due diligence is a part of responsible adulthood.

The airlines that got fucked by Boeing's MCAS still had to send payouts to families who lost loved ones, because it was ultimately their decision to buy and operate a 787 MAX. They can (and certainly should) sue Boeing for the losses, but it doesn't change the fact that the crashes are theirs to own. You don't get a get out of jail free card for being gullible.

Nobody should be using driver assist technology if they're not ready to accept the consequences it may get them in. We let teenagers buy sports cars despite being totally incapable of understanding the risks that 300+ bhp brings. I don't see the difference between that and FSD.

From my perspective, everything went right here. The software screwed up, it alerted the passengers that a collision was going to happen, and a human driver quickly took over and avoided the accident. Is this not what we should expect from a beta?

The responsibility is still on the driver even with driver assist / full self driving technology turned on. All this talk of regulating the software when we just saw a worst case scenario resolve with a favorable outcome.

"But what if the driver wasn't paying attention?" Then the driver will face the consequences as if he had been driving the car himself, because it's his car and it's his responsibility.

The pathfinding algorithm is separate from the object detection neural network. It's possible for it to incorrectly identify paths going through solid objects, however, I would hope they have dumb code to detect that the path is invalid and throw it out when that happens. Maybe they don't?

Part of the difficulty of trying to have reasonable discussions about FSD is that so much of it is black-boxy nobody really knows what's going on. I don't care if Tesla wants to keep its ML models proprietary, but I feel like we deserve to know how it uses those models to make driving decisions on public roads. And not just Tesla either; every self driving company should be required to open source their "dumb" code so that we understand them better. The competitive advantage comes from the ML models anyways, so it wouldn't be anti competitive to regulate that disclosure.

The solution is to cut off industrial and commercial sites first, which draw the most power anyways, and keep residential zoning online as much as possible. The economy can take a break for one day.

As an Albanian myself I have yet to meet anyone who thinks Albania isn't European who also actually lives in a European country.

Cynicism is obedience. We can and should beat this.

Computer science evolves in a circle. Analyzing data for meteorological predictions was one of the first uses of a digital computer; it just wasn't hip at the time and involved 0 pandas.

As far as I'm aware stone doesn't erode in space, so we could always just laser in bumps on a stone and read it like a CD. The primary concern then becomes avoiding getting hit by micro debris.

> Apple allows “free apps” that are entirely ad-supported, never giving Apple a dime (aside from $99/year), yet they are consuming infrastructure

Because Apple doesn't give them a choice! Android developers can host their own apps, set up their own CDNs and downloading/updating infrastracture, pay journalists to review their apps etc.

This is like tying someone up in your basement and telling them to be grateful that they don't have to pay rent.

How is open access to information not a fundamental human right? Do you believe in a society where people can't find out about things? If you don't, then you believe in the open access of information.

This has been a reality since Sputnik, it's not really a recent concern. The obvious solutions are:

- Test at night

- Test with clouds overhead

- Test indoors

Once the aircraft takes off or lands hiding it is easy. It's just for the few minutes that it's out on a tarmac that you have to worry about it being spotted.

One possibility is that this is a deliberate misdirection, there is no plane in that hangar or if there is it looks completely different from the one in the picture. The fact that so many people in this thread are going down the NGAD rabbit hole (a program which is barely fleshed out and nearly all of it is open for interpretation) may indicate that this is the path the US wants Chinese and Russian researchers to go towards in order to cover up the "true" path. I'm more willing to believe that than the possibility that they left a billion dollar aircraft out in the open with a publicly tracked satellite directly overhead. It's not like they don't know when Planet or other satellites are going to be photographing the base.

Because there are still needs to test secretive aircraft and technology? Just because everyone knows about its general location doesn't mean everything that happens within its borders is known. There's most likely useful work being done there today.

The numbers are off because it is a private company. They have $150M in disclosed assets, the true number may be magnitudes higher and probably is if the company can cough up $320M on a dime. Unless you have insider trading information there is no way to know Jump's real AUM.

Oh, I didn't think you were calling them stupid! That's part of what I mean as the culture shock - that Westerners will respond to being told they're doing something stupid as if it was an insult to themselves, and not an insult on what they're doing, disregarding the fact that smart people can do stupid things and vice versa. What the OP was trying to do _is_ stupid, but that doesn't make them a stupid person. They could in fact be a very experienced engineer who has delivered beautiful and capable web apps. I don't believe your intent was to make the OP feel stupid, but perhaps the lack of sugarcoating and straightforwardness of your response makes it seem like that. I don't think you were impolite either, it's just that terse responses usually signal impatience and may get misconstrued as anger, despite the intent being to clearly communicate a simple message.

By these standards a brick is not "perfectly safe" because someone might get hit by one if it gets thrown out of the Empire State Building.

Some of this is probably culture shock. Dan grew up in Russia and immigrated to the UK. Russian engineering material is usually very direct. If you do something stupid, then it will say what you are doing is stupid. There is no thought towards the feelings of whoever is told they're doing something stupid. Western textbooks for better or worse try to not be as scathing and try to gently let the reader know that they are going down the wrong path.

I much prefer the Russian approach. We are professionals doing professional work, our feelings are not part of it and if your ego matters to you that's your own problem. It is objectively stupid to use something named __SECRET_INTERNALS_DO_NOT_USE_OR_YOU_WILL_BE_FIRED because, even if it works, you're not meant to use it! And they made it very, very, unmistakably clear. Dan did the right thing by not budging.

How is React even supposed to know if this is the last render for a component? If the user changes the state, isn't React obviously going to re-render the component?

> They insert ads into music playlists, they often skip more than one track, they don't truly shuffle music, and they also add a ton of frustration with buffering and connectivity issues into the simple process of listening to music

Why are you comparing music players to streaming services? That's like comparing a Honda Civic to a cement mixer. You don't use both to accomplish the same job even if they both have four wheels and a gas pedal.

Is that fair? Why can't you develop software for the hardware you purchased? How is that different from the argument against Apple's App Store?

> Those aren't general-purpose devices

So if Apple sold an "iPad Gaming Edition" then none of this would matter?

Jump Trading Group isn't some rando crypto org, it's a legit hedge fund established in 1999. Supposedly it has at minimum $150M AUM[1] but because it's a private company nobody actually knows the real amount. We can predict that they probably have a few billion in cash lying around if they've been successfully trading for over 20 years. Jump Crypto, the group that bailed out Wormhole, is their crypto trading division.

[1] https://wallmine.com/fund/3mg/jump-trading-llc

How is this any worse than smartphone tracking today? What does it matter if I buy technology that tracks me because I feel like it'd be useful to me?

> It is very weird to me that they can lack the self awareness of being in a cult while calling other things cults.

It isn't weird at all. It's probably one of the hallmark symptoms of being in a cult. Everyone in your outgroup are the ones who are misguided, being misled by lies, etc.

Tesla is supposed to mimic human driving so its cars are predictable to other human drivers. What's the point of driving safely if it gets you in an accident?

> Speeders that endanger lives of everyone not currently inside a car, now embedded in an efficient algorithm

Maybe pedestrians should be voting to improve public transportation instead of trying to walk in roads clearly not meant for pedestrians. Has nobody heard of trains or buses? How is it a solution to make every car go 25 mph just in case some random person decides to jaywalk?

Ask my dad or the variety of people in your life that have had it happen to them. I guarantee you know people this has happened to. Have you never heard of getting rear ended?

Learn bash scripting and you will hate yourself every day for having to wade through terrible language decisions made >30yrs ago while having to do everything by yourself because nobody else at your company knows Bash while also having no opportunities for advancement because nobody understands what you do and why it's important.