1,705 karma · joined June 6, 2017
It has been my experience that technology has to perform significantly better than people do before it gets massively adopted. Self driving cars come to mind. Tesla has self driving that almost works everywhere but Waymo has self driving that really works in certain areas. Adoption rates for consumers has been much higher with Waymo (I was surrounded by 4 yesterday) and they are expanding rather rapidly. I have yet to see a self driving Tesla.
A popular belief these days is that investors from 2000 ultimately got it right. Truth - they simply got it wrong. They dumped tons of money into things that had no hope of justifying an ROI. They thought adoption of the technology would happen at a pace that was unprecedented or even possible. They assumed things would happen in 3 years that actually took 20. Yes - Shocker!
Instead of synthetic porn lets substitute cigarettes. Is it ok for people to sit in a public place and subject everyone to toxic gases. Collectively we in the US have decided to restrict smoking in public places. Or is it ok to provide a 14 year old Bourbon for breakfast. Most of would say no even though we would permit a 18 to do it if they want.
There have been and always will be "Entrepreneurs" that think like this. Prior to AI they had to convince large numbers of employees/people to buy into that type of thinking. This kept the proliferation of things like porn and gambling to lower levels because most people find them uninteresting career wise - especially technologist. As our tools improved - "Entrepreneurs" can do more with less people - the proliferation of socially questionable/beneficial activities has become cheaper. Hence the explosion of gambling and porn on the internet.
Now image an AI world were people with this type of thinking can conjure up their dystopian ideas with out having to convince others that their ideas are worthy. They pay for tokens and make a product that is addictive to young men - something that would have previously take much more money and employees.
We have already been experiencing this with social media. AI will amplify it. I am concerned about the benefit to detriment ration b/d. I have always been in the technology is making that number bigger camp. I am no longer so sure is all.
Many CEO's are using their fiduciary responsibility to the company to justify this behavior. But CEOs are also Human beings. Human beings have a social responsibility to not harm other Human beings.
1. Thermal considerations are important due to throttling for thermal protection. Apple seems best at this but $$$$. The Framework (AMD) seems a reasonable compromise (you can have almost 3 for 1 Mini). Laptops will likely not perform as well. NVIDIA seems really bad at thermal/power considerations.
2. Memory model matters and AMD's APU design is an improvement. NVIDIA GPUs where designed for graphics but where better than CPUs for AI so they got used. Bespoke AI solutions will eventually dominate. That may or may not be NVIDIA in the future.
My primary interest is AI at the edge.
So no I wouldn't think flying a beater around is a good idea. People generally get away with flying unsafe planes now because they fly over unpopulated areas. They only kill themselves. Start flying over populated areas and you can wipe out a kids soccer game.
I was wrong. In reality the main innovation driver is the battery. The car is great and EVs are much less maintenance. I think used sales would be better if there were better aftermarket options for batteries.
A car. You'd just hop in to determine if it is drivable.
Scott is a sport pilot enthusiast and approached the evaluation from that perspective. I don't think there are many pilots, myself included, that believe we are on the verge of flying cars for mass transportation. They are expensive to purchase, maintain and impractical for many reasons.
In the 70's we had Environmental Pollution - the 2000s will be defined as a fight against Social Pollution.
If this ship sinks they are all going down together.
1. I am in San Francisco.
2. Upon further research Flock does not appear to be used by SFPD for ticketing. They have another camera system for that. That does not mean that Flock could not be used for speeding tickets or a host of other things like running red lights, littering etc. Microprocessors and CMOS cameras can do amazing things.
Regardless of what company is doing the surveillance the debate remains the same.
1. Pervasive surveillance has the potential to be used inappropriately by authorities. Discussion is needed.
2. The data collected by a company such as Flock but not necessarily Flock could be used inappropriately or sold for other purposes. Benn Jordan has a good video on the subject https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp9MwZkHiMQ&t=21s
3. The claim that Flock is responsible for %10 of solved cases seems dubious but without data it is difficult to know or believe. Given that Flock is in YC's portfolio makes it even more suspect.
Flock or a company like Flock may try and become pervasive and indispensable before a public discussion places any limits on their behavior.
Pretty bold statement without citing data to back that up. I have already received a speeding warning letter from one of these things. Does that count as a crime Flock solved?
I tire of all this binary thinking. It is true that surveillance helps victims. It is also true that the same surveillance can endanger civil liberties. We should have some say in how much we will allow our liberties to be endangered.
Sounds like someone watched too much Person of Interest
Norwest Venture Partners: A venture capital firm that invested in Sunshine.
Felicis Partners: A venture capital firm that also backed Sunshine.
Ron Conway's SV Angel: An early-stage venture fund that invested in Sunshine.
Archetype Agency: A public relations firm that was a Sunshine shareholder.
This time it will different;)
"The focus of the lawsuit was the Internet Archive’s Great 78 Project, which officially started in 2017 and aimed to digitize the shellac discs that were the dominant medium for recorded music from the 1890s until the 1940s and 1950s, when vinyl arrived. With the help of audio preservationist George Blood (who was also named as a defendant in the suit), the Archive said it has digitized more than 400,000 of these old recordings." [1]
Benn Jordan discussion of piracy in general. [2]
[0] https://great78.archive.org/
[1] https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/internet-archi...