877 karma · joined December 11, 2012
The article mentions Google's self-driving fleet size but I didn't notice other companies. I wonder what the fleet size is at other companies that are working on this, anyone know?
The reason I ask is that I'm curious if "making more cars" is really the bottleneck. It's totally possible that the Waymo team doesn't have the headcount to keep up with the data output from the existing 55 units, or the fleet logistics bandwidth to keep up more than 50 or 60 heavily custom self-driving vehicles. It may very reasonably be a staffing issue rather than a money one, and it's possible that even if Google bought the rest of the self driving industry they might not be able to maintain more than a couple hundred cars.
Disclaimer: I work for Google, but not on self driving cars. I actually know almost nothing about our self driving efforts, sorry.
If you read the article it's not "HTTP is good enough" it's "HTTPS is too slow" or "HTTPS is a plot by Google to take over the web" or fundamentally misunderstanding the value proposition of HTTPS or straight up lying about what it does.
Anti-vaxxers is absolutely a valid comparison here, the people in this blog aren't just not using HTTPS, they're actively encouraging people in their capacity as professionals to avoid using it, for really dumb and dangerous reasons that don't stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.
I played the pre-tutorial version and I found it highly intuitive and easy to get in to, I think you really nailed that aspect. Thanks for the great game!
The tinydrm code seems like absolute pure shit that has never seen a compiler.
I'm upset, because I expect better quality control. In fact, I expect some qualitty control, and this piece-of-shit driver has clearly seen none at all.
And those patches were apparently committed yesterday.
WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK?
I get tons and tons of lines of warnings:
drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/mipi-dbi.c: In function ‘mipi_dbi_typec1_command’:
drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/mipi-dbi.c:65:20: warning: field width
specifier ‘’ expects argument of type ‘int’, but argument 5 has type
‘size_t {aka long unsigned int}’ [-Wformat=]
DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("cmd=%02x, par=%ph\n", cmd, len, data); \with nasty chains of nested defines, but then I also get actual compile failures
drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/core/tinydrm-helpers.c:198:26: error:
redefinition of ‘tinydrm_of_find_backlight’
struct backlight_device tinydrm_of_find_backlight(struct device dev)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from drivers/gpu/drm/tinydrm/core/tinydrm-helpers.c:11:0:
./include/drm/tinydrm/tinydrm-helpers.h:53:1: note: previous
definition of ‘tinydrm_of_find_backlight’ was here
tinydrm_of_find_backlight(struct device dev)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(with similar stuff for tinydrm_disable_backlight()).
It looks like it might compile if CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_CLASS_DEVICE was enabled rather than being a module.
Doing this:
-#ifdef CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_CLASS_DEVICE
+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BACKLIGHT_CLASS_DEVICE)
in tinydrm-helpers.h gets rid of the complete build failure, and only
leaves the tens of lines of warnings.How the hell did this get to the point where crap like this is even sent to me? Nobody tested anything*?
AND WHY THE HELL WAS THIS UTTER SHITE SENT TO ME IF IT WAS COMMITTED YESTERDAY?
But what we do know is that anti-depressants can be a powerful tool for helping people who aren't responsive to other types of treatment. Even if it takes some effort to figure out which one is the best fit for the underlying disorder, that's better than nothing.
If I hadn't gotten a prescription for Prozac I probably would have killed myself by now. And I definitely would have destroyed my marriage and most of my important friendships. That's not an over-dramatization, it's the honest truth just based on the direction my life was heading without them.
If you can't make your own neurotransmitters, store bought are fine. I'm not writing this to say "RARGH YOU MUST USE THESE DRUGS", but I absolutely am writing it to say "hey, this worked for me and got me out of a really dark and bad place". If you are reading this from a dark and bad place, please know that you're not alone. You have a lot of options, and I promise that if you take that first step, things can get better.
It's early in, look for the part about Vic Tandy.
By this reading, the author is probably saying that unless your car malfunctions and prevents you from stopping or steering, or there is some equivalent fluke happening (a deer darts out in front of you and you physically can't stop in time), then "accidents" are caused by negligence (not checking lanes when changing, playing with the radio, not looking for pedestrians) or malfeasance (unsafe passing, driving at an unsafe speed for the conditions, drunk driving).
I have mixed feelings about this, but I've been driving a while and I've seen a lot of truly stupid and/or mean spirited and/or reckless behavior that could quite predictably result in a collision, but it'd be a stretch to call the sad and obvious outcome an 'accident'.
There are several good recent examples of this: - the project veritas employee trying to shop a false abortion story to the post - the schumer accusation that was shown to be falsified - weinstein's fake accuser that was planted by his own team to discredit investigations
When people come with false information, it gets found and reported on, because journalists do their due dilligence. News organizations are really careful about this kind of thing, because screwing up here is a really good way to get your entire org badly burned.
Sawbones is an edu-comedy podcast about medical history, and I tried listening to it faster and just didn't enjoy it as much. I really enjoy the comedic timing and interplay between the hosts, and it's already information rich enough that I feel fine listening to it at normal speed is fine.
One of the things I really like about WtNV is the almost menacing, deliberate pacing of the narrator. His speech is so perfectly even, regardless of the content, that it's almost hypnotic. I tried that at 1.25x and it felt off, but again it's a personal preference thing.
I am cautiously optimistic that they might be able to accomplish something good here and create a more data-driven analysis of something that's a hot-button, highly emotionally charged topic right now.
Answers: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C48&as_yl... is a good starting point. Euler's paper demonstrating that there is no solution to the Königsberg bridge problem and inventing graph theory in the process is one of the more recognizable (to me) papers, but there's a lot of truly interesting, foundational work there.
My wife guessed that Newton would be on there, but I couldn't easily turn him up. I'm probably just bad with Google scholar, or maybe it's so foundational that nobody bothers to provide a citation for e.g the very existence of _calculus_ or _gravity_
My original question was "the oldest still-cited scientific work") but I relaxed my criteria due to poorly defined definitions on 'still-cited' and 'scientific'. Still an interesting way to spend some time, so thanks for the digression!
Soylent's main distinguishing features are marketing and sloppiness. They are also a little cheaper than other options, but here as with most things, you get what you pay for.
This feels like one of those things that's going to keep snowballing.
My understanding is that we're not trying to strike down all the barriers and make all toilets unisex, but there definitely are people who are working to make sure that every building has at least one of those unisex single-occupancy bathrooms, for people who need it. It doesn't cost Googlers anything except at most a couple of conference rooms.