Wow you haven't looked too hard. There are numerous free energy and reaction less thruster designs up - some even with tens of thousands pledged. http://www.reddit.com/r/shitty....
If it bugs you enough, like it did with me and my H7150 Smart 60", you can open casing and disconnect the microphone. Took about an hour due to all the screws and the button panel, but the silly microphone can just be unplugged from its source board once you get to it. Smart View Voice Control just complains "it can't hear" now.
Problem solved.
Wow. Just wow. You fell for it. There are two more smaller microphones hidden deeper in the tv. By manually disabling the main dummy speaker not only did you make it onto a short list at the NSA but now have a dedicated data channel opened as well. It just keeps saying that to placate you into thinking you have one. Oh and watch out fo......... NO CARRIER
The government will scrutinize my returns for the last five years and screw me if I make one tiny mistake. Then proceed to not even bother to check that they are sending the return to the right person period? Only after dozens of people file criminal complaints to they get off their butt and check?
There needs to be better protection in place to prevent this such as cross verifying the bank account to the actual person doing the filing. It's pretty shitty when 28 false claims can shut down the entire system and ruin it for everyone. Thank you for ruining it for everyone.
Considering you could say every one of your points in reference to human drivers, I really don't see the difference. Most human drivers lose their mind when there is an inch of snow on the ground. It is the rare drivers that do well in snow. This is true for most of your points. How many human drivers see the drunken idiot stumble in front of them? How many are able to react quick enough to avoid them?
Every single organism has been navigating the world almost as soon as life began. Animals have had half a billion years to evolve. Despite some really fantastic leaps in image recognition in theast five years computers still aren't better than informed humans. Humans still far exceed any computer ability to extract abstract data from a video stream in real time. And despite all the research AI driven cars aren't better than inattentive overreactive bad drivers in a general sense, in fact not even close. Yes for parallel parking, radar assisted speed following, and other highly controlled simple tasks they do well. There is no way for AI to extract the necessary cues from sensor data to match humans so it's not a matter of reaction time it's a matter of properly reacting at all. But it's going to take decades before AI cars can even match a texting teenagers ability to properly abstract the details needed to drive like a human.
Yes I would hope they are going to get better. It's an amazing technology. However saying they are better than humans (which is widely reported in media) is like the people who said computers would beat humans at chess in a few short years in 1960. Even the first real win against a human took a dedicated supercomputer, programmed with every single game it's human counterpart ever played in public, and even then - 40 years later - only won because it was relentless and tireless and killed the human by forcing a draw in a way that exploited his human stamina weaknesses.
its highly likely to take several decades yet before computer driven cars are even as functional as an average15 year old given a continuous rapid development.
I worked for 7 years in a robotics lab so i do know a few things about vision and vehicle automation. What grinds my gears about this is every last mile was pre planned. Routes were mapped in gps, every last sign, stoplight and speed limit was pre-programmed in. Every single test was on a sunny day with free flowing traffic. Even under those circumstances the algorithms spazzed out and did very unhuman like things. Sure it sounds nice to lock up the brakes for a blowing trash bag but that's asking to be rear ended and is highly dangerous.
TL:DR they took ideal conditions under which normal humans fare far far better than on average and ran their AI. They then compared this mean time between failure to what humans have to deal with on average in totally different enviornments - rain and snow - asshole drivers in traffic jams, unexpected icy conditions - drunken driving. It's not science it's intellectually dishonest.
I would totally watch that. It's already happening in a way like the guy they just released after three years due to the sudden acceleration defect he claimed was there from day 1 and no one believed him.
Why do the signs need to be programmed in? Signs in every country are regulated and their design standardised. It just needs to be able to cross reference the image of the sign with its database. That is significantly easier than the facial recognition Google is so good at. It would also likely be better than a human if the sign is hanging at a strange angle.
Personally I think things like road furniture, signage, lights etc is probably the relatively easy part of this challenge. The bigger challenge is likely to be the impact of weather on the sensors, things like low density objects like newspapers or even dust clouds.
Even other drivers on the road are probably easier then the sensor problem.
I think your time frame is probably correct but not for getting to average levels of human but for self driving cars to be on the roads in private hands.
Eventually signs wont need to be programmed in. Nor would you need corrected gps to stay on roads. Currently signs are programmed in yet this is often covered up by the people involved. Occlusions from trees, poles, wires, etc along with poorly placed, facing, or damaged signs are beyond the scope of current AI vehicles on the fly. We are not even talking about dirty sensors such as rain, snow, dirt or salt over the view of a camera either as an example you mention - though the last 5 years in image recognition have suprised AI experts. . As you mention this could eventually be automated but until new signage is added to some kind of master database it will likely underperform people.
You have it backwards. You would need to get the auto manufacturer to buy insurance. It will be an icy day in hell before I am forced to buy a shitty AI car only to have bad, poorly performing in real conditions, and malicious coding force injury upon myself and others while constantly driving up the price of insurance to insane and unsustainable rates.
but certainly things will improve over time. to be honest I'm surprised at the negativity in the comments on this article.
sure AI can't handle all scenarios, and it is worse when only some cars are AI controlled, but I would expect there to be 'partial' implementations first.
what about motorways that are designed or updated specifically for AI vehicles? for example the AI does "see" the traffic light, it receives a signal from a traffic light controller or some other system.
what about roads where it is limited to only AI vehicles (then they can all talk to each other and you don't have the human drivers behaving unpredictably)
The negativity I've posted and seen posted stems from the misleading way AI driving is presented. People pushing the technology get on sound bites promoted by media to say things like AI has better than human performance. In reality it's comparing sunny day pre planned everything to icy roads and hellish jam packed commutes. It's the same reason i tend to hate on coal powered cars that hide their higher than economy car tailpipe emissions - fully electric cars.
the problem is the hype boarders on or crosses into outright lies making people feel good about uninformed decisions with unforeseen consequences. Both are highly promising technologies that need decades of work before delivering on their promises.
Simply looking at the lights can be confusing to humans. What lane does that light belong to? Is it a vertical or horizontal light? Easy things like this aren't easy for current AI. They would need access to the information electronically. Furthermore imagine signs. Not every sign is programmed in. Temporary signs too. The list keeps getting longer.
comparing gentle turns and straight line sunny day driving along pre planned routes with manually entered everything is not comparable to human capability. Not even close. We are 20-50 years out from average human like skill given the same cues.
You would think on slashdot people would be slightly aware of the state of AI. But nope. Comparing sunny day pre planned everything short jaunts to what humans have to deal with in the real world of driving makes for yet another shiny piece of media hype that some people just buy hook line and sinker.
this is a HUGE pet peeve of mine! if we deployed self-driving cars tomorrow we'd see a huge drop in overall accident rates but we're not doing it out of fear of edge cases! guess what: human beings encounter unforeseen scenarios on the road all the time & have to make reflexive decisions in real time. guess what? we f up a large % of the time! if a computer can reduce overall accidents by double-digit %s I'll be the first to say I'll accept the risk of being one of the edge cases that may (or not) have survived had a human been behind the wheel.
it's like the vaccine debate - guess what? there ARE people who have bad outcomes who would not have otherwise but the overall net gain to society is so big we (rightfully) shame people who don't participate...
I can see you obviously have never worked in AI or even follow it as an armchair hobby. These algroithms work great in unpopulated pre-mapped parking lots. They work acceptably on perfect condition roads, pre-planned with everything from dgps to stop signs to every last detail manually entered.
In real conditions, adverse conditions, they fail miserably. Not every road sign is mapped into computers yet, temporary signs none are. They slam on the brakes for blowing newspapers and puddles. They can't handle snow or predict when animals, children, drunken idiots will lumber into traffic. The technology is a minimum of 20 years away, perhaps even 50 years before AI can drive like a human.
you have been misled by sensational media storytelling.
They're basically deathtraps on wheels and they don't work at all
SDCs have already logged hundreds of thousands of miles on public roads, and have a safety record better than human drivers.
Highly misleading comment. Those tests have been on perfect condition roads, pre-planned everything, no construction, no rogue animals or children, no snow, no lose dirt or gravel, hell i doubt it was during bar close. Compare apples to apples please. Compare straight driving on highways and roadways under perfect conditions to humans and i doubt AI is better. Compare AI to humans in adverse conditions and it's like comparing a drunken teenager getting road head while texting to, well damn near anyone sane.
Who the hell thinks a Segway vehicle is suitable for high speeds?!??!? That thing is top heavy as hell and when it needs to emergency brake actually has to acc fucking ellerate before slowing down! Basically anything over 15mph and your asking for head plant brain salad with a side of ranch dressing.
On the bonus side the organ donation program wouldn't see business this good since the invention of the crotch rocket.
Like in California where constant earthquakes sometimes open huge gaps in the roadway and present a danger to drivers?
Or perhaps they really are moving forward with fault tolerance by brib er lobbing to make it completely the passengers fault when accidents occur? I know it worked super well for credit ratings so maybe they really are fast tracking its deployment.
I'm saying the social interactions and the incidental learning you aren't graded on is much more useful.
You learn all that homeschooling, only much better because day to day you are interacting with a much wider age range.
That's actually the main area where homeschoolers turn out much better than kids going to public school.
By far the most important thing you get out of school is proving to others you not only know the material presented, but are capable of sitting down and dong mountains of mostly busy work and doing it well. That's what colleges want to see
That sounds like a fucking horrible college, why would you pay $60k/year for that nonsense? What value would ding four years of busywork bring you? What kind of awful life would it prepare you for if that was your job afterward?
That wasn't anything like the college I went to. Yes SOME classes required a lot of work, but it wasn't busywork - it was *thinking* work. The same kind of work I did when homeschooling... the same kind they generally do *not* do in public schools. Homeschooling, if t can work for parent and child, is a vastly better preparation for how you will actually learn and work in college.
That awful college experience was what earned me a masters in mechanical engineering. 95% of the crap, and it was mostly crap, i never used in a job - which turned out to be robotics. I learned nearly everything useful outside of class. And yet that's not what employers cared about. You don't go to college to learn. Learning is free. Famous professors post their courses online for free and there are almost no views. They don't exactly lock the doors at universities. No one is sneaking in to learn for free and almost no one audits. College is about proving to employers you have what it takes. College is about bullshitting your way into a job until you actually learn the skills that make you employable. The same goes into getting into universities.
School is not really about learning actual skills you will use later in life both in the workplace and in your personal life. I'm not saying you don't need some basic math to understand phone contracts or mortgages. I'm saying the social interactions and the incidental learning you aren't graded on is much more useful. You won't get that at home. But that's not even the most important thing...
By far the most important thing you get out of school is proving to others you not only know the material presented, but are capable of sitting down and dong mountains of mostly busy work and doing it well. That's what colleges want to see, thats what colleges expect you to do, that's going to be very important to employers. That's why snobby expensive college prep schools are so important. Simply scoring high on tests won't convey that. In my opinion homeschool is fail sauce because of what society expects. It may be stupid but that's our world.
Send your child to as prestigious a school as possible and then if you want them to learn useful things supplement their education.
No need for it to be passive. A little wireless charger would do nicely, and we already have pressure monitors in car tires.
Unfortunately auto ones pretty huge and weigh a lot which would mess with the center of gravity and how the ball handles. Something similar will likely be developed soon though.
Given the purported steroid use I'm surprised the whole deflated balls thing hasn't come up more often. Then again i don't watch and may be misunderstanding things.
We are almost there where we can put a tiny unnoticeable chip inside the ball to monitor pressure and temperature passively. All it will take then is a scanner used by a ref or some large loop antennas in or around the field and that will put an end to it. Any change could be picked up right away.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow you haven't looked too hard. There are numerous free energy and reaction less thruster designs up - some even with tens of thousands pledged. http://www.reddit.com/r/shitty....
If it bugs you enough, like it did with me and my H7150 Smart 60", you can open casing and disconnect the microphone. Took about an hour due to all the screws and the button panel, but the silly microphone can just be unplugged from its source board once you get to it. Smart View Voice Control just complains "it can't hear" now.
Problem solved.
Wow. Just wow. You fell for it. There are two more smaller microphones hidden deeper in the tv. By manually disabling the main dummy speaker not only did you make it onto a short list at the NSA but now have a dedicated data channel opened as well. It just keeps saying that to placate you into thinking you have one. Oh and watch out fo......... NO CARRIER
That's like asking the lottery to track down who actually won instead of just keeping the winnings. Unlikely.
The government will scrutinize my returns for the last five years and screw me if I make one tiny mistake. Then proceed to not even bother to check that they are sending the return to the right person period? Only after dozens of people file criminal complaints to they get off their butt and check?
So why don't they stop filing federal as well?
There needs to be better protection in place to prevent this such as cross verifying the bank account to the actual person doing the filing. It's pretty shitty when 28 false claims can shut down the entire system and ruin it for everyone. Thank you for ruining it for everyone.
Considering you could say every one of your points in reference to human drivers, I really don't see the difference. Most human drivers lose their mind when there is an inch of snow on the ground. It is the rare drivers that do well in snow. This is true for most of your points. How many human drivers see the drunken idiot stumble in front of them? How many are able to react quick enough to avoid them?
Every single organism has been navigating the world almost as soon as life began. Animals have had half a billion years to evolve. Despite some really fantastic leaps in image recognition in theast five years computers still aren't better than informed humans. Humans still far exceed any computer ability to extract abstract data from a video stream in real time. And despite all the research AI driven cars aren't better than inattentive overreactive bad drivers in a general sense, in fact not even close. Yes for parallel parking, radar assisted speed following, and other highly controlled simple tasks they do well. There is no way for AI to extract the necessary cues from sensor data to match humans so it's not a matter of reaction time it's a matter of properly reacting at all. But it's going to take decades before AI cars can even match a texting teenagers ability to properly abstract the details needed to drive like a human.
Yes I would hope they are going to get better. It's an amazing technology. However saying they are better than humans (which is widely reported in media) is like the people who said computers would beat humans at chess in a few short years in 1960. Even the first real win against a human took a dedicated supercomputer, programmed with every single game it's human counterpart ever played in public, and even then - 40 years later - only won because it was relentless and tireless and killed the human by forcing a draw in a way that exploited his human stamina weaknesses.
its highly likely to take several decades yet before computer driven cars are even as functional as an average15 year old given a continuous rapid development.
I worked for 7 years in a robotics lab so i do know a few things about vision and vehicle automation. What grinds my gears about this is every last mile was pre planned. Routes were mapped in gps, every last sign, stoplight and speed limit was pre-programmed in. Every single test was on a sunny day with free flowing traffic. Even under those circumstances the algorithms spazzed out and did very unhuman like things. Sure it sounds nice to lock up the brakes for a blowing trash bag but that's asking to be rear ended and is highly dangerous.
TL:DR they took ideal conditions under which normal humans fare far far better than on average and ran their AI. They then compared this mean time between failure to what humans have to deal with on average in totally different enviornments - rain and snow - asshole drivers in traffic jams, unexpected icy conditions - drunken driving. It's not science it's intellectually dishonest.
I would totally watch that. It's already happening in a way like the guy they just released after three years due to the sudden acceleration defect he claimed was there from day 1 and no one believed him.
You just need to have the AI auto manufacturer like google also sell the insurance to you. What could possibly go wrong?
Why do the signs need to be programmed in? Signs in every country are regulated and their design standardised. It just needs to be able to cross reference the image of the sign with its database. That is significantly easier than the facial recognition Google is so good at. It would also likely be better than a human if the sign is hanging at a strange angle.
Personally I think things like road furniture, signage, lights etc is probably the relatively easy part of this challenge. The bigger challenge is likely to be the impact of weather on the sensors, things like low density objects like newspapers or even dust clouds.
Even other drivers on the road are probably easier then the sensor problem.
I think your time frame is probably correct but not for getting to average levels of human but for self driving cars to be on the roads in private hands.
Eventually signs wont need to be programmed in. Nor would you need corrected gps to stay on roads. Currently signs are programmed in yet this is often covered up by the people involved. Occlusions from trees, poles, wires, etc along with poorly placed, facing, or damaged signs are beyond the scope of current AI vehicles on the fly. We are not even talking about dirty sensors such as rain, snow, dirt or salt over the view of a camera either as an example you mention - though the last 5 years in image recognition have suprised AI experts. . As you mention this could eventually be automated but until new signage is added to some kind of master database it will likely underperform people.
You have it backwards. You would need to get the auto manufacturer to buy insurance. It will be an icy day in hell before I am forced to buy a shitty AI car only to have bad, poorly performing in real conditions, and malicious coding force injury upon myself and others while constantly driving up the price of insurance to insane and unsustainable rates.
but certainly things will improve over time. to be honest I'm surprised at the negativity in the comments on this article.
sure AI can't handle all scenarios, and it is worse when only some cars are AI controlled, but I would expect there to be 'partial' implementations first.
what about motorways that are designed or updated specifically for AI vehicles? for example the AI does "see" the traffic light, it receives a signal from a traffic light controller or some other system. what about roads where it is limited to only AI vehicles (then they can all talk to each other and you don't have the human drivers behaving unpredictably)
The negativity I've posted and seen posted stems from the misleading way AI driving is presented. People pushing the technology get on sound bites promoted by media to say things like AI has better than human performance. In reality it's comparing sunny day pre planned everything to icy roads and hellish jam packed commutes. It's the same reason i tend to hate on coal powered cars that hide their higher than economy car tailpipe emissions - fully electric cars.
the problem is the hype boarders on or crosses into outright lies making people feel good about uninformed decisions with unforeseen consequences. Both are highly promising technologies that need decades of work before delivering on their promises.
Simply looking at the lights can be confusing to humans. What lane does that light belong to? Is it a vertical or horizontal light? Easy things like this aren't easy for current AI. They would need access to the information electronically. Furthermore imagine signs. Not every sign is programmed in. Temporary signs too. The list keeps getting longer.
comparing gentle turns and straight line sunny day driving along pre planned routes with manually entered everything is not comparable to human capability. Not even close. We are 20-50 years out from average human like skill given the same cues.
You would think on slashdot people would be slightly aware of the state of AI. But nope. Comparing sunny day pre planned everything short jaunts to what humans have to deal with in the real world of driving makes for yet another shiny piece of media hype that some people just buy hook line and sinker.
this is a HUGE pet peeve of mine! if we deployed self-driving cars tomorrow we'd see a huge drop in overall accident rates but we're not doing it out of fear of edge cases! guess what: human beings encounter unforeseen scenarios on the road all the time & have to make reflexive decisions in real time. guess what? we f up a large % of the time! if a computer can reduce overall accidents by double-digit %s I'll be the first to say I'll accept the risk of being one of the edge cases that may (or not) have survived had a human been behind the wheel.
it's like the vaccine debate - guess what? there ARE people who have bad outcomes who would not have otherwise but the overall net gain to society is so big we (rightfully) shame people who don't participate...
I can see you obviously have never worked in AI or even follow it as an armchair hobby. These algroithms work great in unpopulated pre-mapped parking lots. They work acceptably on perfect condition roads, pre-planned with everything from dgps to stop signs to every last detail manually entered.
In real conditions, adverse conditions, they fail miserably. Not every road sign is mapped into computers yet, temporary signs none are. They slam on the brakes for blowing newspapers and puddles. They can't handle snow or predict when animals, children, drunken idiots will lumber into traffic. The technology is a minimum of 20 years away, perhaps even 50 years before AI can drive like a human.
you have been misled by sensational media storytelling.
They're basically deathtraps on wheels and they don't work at all
SDCs have already logged hundreds of thousands of miles on public roads, and have a safety record better than human drivers.
Highly misleading comment. Those tests have been on perfect condition roads, pre-planned everything, no construction, no rogue animals or children, no snow, no lose dirt or gravel, hell i doubt it was during bar close. Compare apples to apples please. Compare straight driving on highways and roadways under perfect conditions to humans and i doubt AI is better. Compare AI to humans in adverse conditions and it's like comparing a drunken teenager getting road head while texting to, well damn near anyone sane.
Who the hell thinks a Segway vehicle is suitable for high speeds?!??!? That thing is top heavy as hell and when it needs to emergency brake actually has to acc fucking ellerate before slowing down! Basically anything over 15mph and your asking for head plant brain salad with a side of ranch dressing. On the bonus side the organ donation program wouldn't see business this good since the invention of the crotch rocket.
Like in California where constant earthquakes sometimes open huge gaps in the roadway and present a danger to drivers?
Or perhaps they really are moving forward with fault tolerance by brib er lobbing to make it completely the passengers fault when accidents occur? I know it worked super well for credit ratings so maybe they really are fast tracking its deployment.
I'm saying the social interactions and the incidental learning you aren't graded on is much more useful.
You learn all that homeschooling, only much better because day to day you are interacting with a much wider age range.
That's actually the main area where homeschoolers turn out much better than kids going to public school.
By far the most important thing you get out of school is proving to others you not only know the material presented, but are capable of sitting down and dong mountains of mostly busy work and doing it well. That's what colleges want to see
That sounds like a fucking horrible college, why would you pay $60k/year for that nonsense? What value would ding four years of busywork bring you? What kind of awful life would it prepare you for if that was your job afterward?
That wasn't anything like the college I went to. Yes SOME classes required a lot of work, but it wasn't busywork - it was *thinking* work. The same kind of work I did when homeschooling... the same kind they generally do *not* do in public schools. Homeschooling, if t can work for parent and child, is a vastly better preparation for how you will actually learn and work in college.
That awful college experience was what earned me a masters in mechanical engineering. 95% of the crap, and it was mostly crap, i never used in a job - which turned out to be robotics. I learned nearly everything useful outside of class. And yet that's not what employers cared about. You don't go to college to learn. Learning is free. Famous professors post their courses online for free and there are almost no views. They don't exactly lock the doors at universities. No one is sneaking in to learn for free and almost no one audits. College is about proving to employers you have what it takes. College is about bullshitting your way into a job until you actually learn the skills that make you employable. The same goes into getting into universities.
School is not really about learning actual skills you will use later in life both in the workplace and in your personal life. I'm not saying you don't need some basic math to understand phone contracts or mortgages. I'm saying the social interactions and the incidental learning you aren't graded on is much more useful. You won't get that at home. But that's not even the most important thing...
By far the most important thing you get out of school is proving to others you not only know the material presented, but are capable of sitting down and dong mountains of mostly busy work and doing it well. That's what colleges want to see, thats what colleges expect you to do, that's going to be very important to employers. That's why snobby expensive college prep schools are so important. Simply scoring high on tests won't convey that. In my opinion homeschool is fail sauce because of what society expects. It may be stupid but that's our world.
Send your child to as prestigious a school as possible and then if you want them to learn useful things supplement their education.
Ahh kats and your eternal wisdom.
America thinks they have this all figured out but eventually somebody set us up the bomb.
No need for it to be passive. A little wireless charger would do nicely, and we already have pressure monitors in car tires.
Unfortunately auto ones pretty huge and weigh a lot which would mess with the center of gravity and how the ball handles. Something similar will likely be developed soon though.
Given the purported steroid use I'm surprised the whole deflated balls thing hasn't come up more often. Then again i don't watch and may be misunderstanding things.
We are almost there where we can put a tiny unnoticeable chip inside the ball to monitor pressure and temperature passively. All it will take then is a scanner used by a ref or some large loop antennas in or around the field and that will put an end to it. Any change could be picked up right away.
Yes like bricking everyone's band as they run past at a marathon or popular path. Perhaps adding a mandatory PWNT message on the band.
Im thinking this is an unintended concequence of a smug and vindictive type benevolent overseer decision.
There are better ways to get DIY support IMO.