My kid has had a OnePlus 3T for a long time and I was quite impressed with it. However, we got tired of headphones being lost/broken/failing on their own so we just found $4 wired headphones from Amazon that everyone likes and order them in bulk. OnePlus 6T no longer has a headphone port which would give us issues with losing dongles. We now all have Note 9's and we are all quite happy with them, and being able to add storage is a nice benefit.
I think what this article emphasizes is a real fear that machines will not be able to anticipate situations soon enough to react, even with lightning fast response time. All it knows is what it catches in its sensors. When I human drives with headlights, you drive so that your stopping distance is within your headlights. Will automated cars drive within their limits on interpreting the world around them properly?
And that's why there are 30,000 deaths every year. The defensive drivers look ahead, judge the speed and possibility of a child running from the closest blind spot onto the road, and slow down to an appropriate speed.
Holy shit you're daft. Kids went to school just fine without cellphones since school was invented. Has humanity really lost its way that far that they may have 'needs' that prevent them from using pay phone or going to the office to use the phone? They need them so badly that they can't even be banned in classes? Wow.
Agreed, but will a self driving car detect 'child running around who may run into the road' versus 'adult running around who knows better' ? Or will it just drive 20 through every residential neighborhood always.
People who speak proper English can't have a productive debate and always keep to 140 characters or less. People who "excel" at Twitter are why Youtube stars are soon going to be running the world.
The problem with self driving is, when you have a machine that you are programming with vastly enhanced capabilities to that of a human, then it stands to reason that the vehicle be that much more safe. If developers have programmed a car to drive without considering every possible scenario that their car may find itself in then they have been negligent. Maybe one day when 99% of cars are automated, then they will have a chance to be safer simply by driving 'slightly better than' a human and consistency and homogeneity will bring safety, but for today the assumption with automated cars must be that they will need to navigate roads with a grate many humans that do a great many unpredictable things. To ignore that an automated vehicle will need to drive with humans and not prepare for it is negligent.
That's like saying a person should be charged with arson if they buy a brand new toaster from the store and it burns down their house that night. The owner of a self driving car will not be responsible unless they somehow can be proven to have escaped the factory parameters of the vehicle. If it is possible for a user to endanger people by entering directives then the vehicle is not safe.
That's why you're supposed to be watching for people who look like they're about to jump into the road and drive at a reasonable speed so you can stop. If you can't see around an obstacle, you assume a person could walk out from there and drive at a reasonable speed so you can stop. An automated car will need to anticipate the same type of situations "those two people on the sidewalk are.an adult who is holding a child's hand, therefore the child is not likely to run out", or "the adult is not holding the child's hand and he is running everywhere, he may run onto the road".
It's pretty easy to say how good these cars will be in a low visibility situation while it's still a dream that they could ever be in such a situation.
First of all, maybe this will happen maybe it won't; but there are bound to be 100 other similar types of circumstances that make this particular circumstance irrelevant. When it happens, it will be very real. No, no one blames the human when they make one decision or the other, but a human isn't capable of logging every single variable that led to the decision in that fraction of a second, but the car better well keep track of everything because full forensics will need to be done following an event and decisions made by the AI justified.
Not always as easy as it seems. We stopped our kids from bringing their phones to school which worked out well, until we found out there was a teacher who was having the students do research on their phones in class... the same teacher who was complaining that none of the kids could put their phone down.
Ok but now you're saying stuff that has nothing to do with what you originally said. The question isn't whether minimum wage jobs and satisfying or not satisfying but whether you would do your current job for minimum wage. This logic seems to follow, given that you don't care what a job pays you.
In my experience, the people working overseas for cheap can't do much more than follow direction. If you need someone who needs to represent your team on a project (and do what is good for your team) or if you need someone to make sure everyone is working on the right thing and being efficient; you need someone from here. The work can be done remotely but everyone overseas that can do it either charges just as much as we do or they have already moved here.
Actually I go mostly by imdb ratings. Genre preferences aside, 7+ is worth my time, 6- is not. It sure seems that there are less 7+'s than there used to be that isn't a remake of a comic or book.
Allowing public to pick the story is a terrible idea. The masses are a completely predictable force and will select the most stereotypical and obvious outcomes every time. I certainly hope 'good story writing' isn't becoming a thing of the past, because I sure haven't seen much of it lately.
The trick is knowing whether your family will have health issues. As I found out, the day you get diagnosed with cancer is too late to consider applying for coverage.
I'm still waiting for one internet TV service that gives me even 90% of traditional cable because I refuse to play a perpetual shell game of switching out services as I want to watch new things. Looks like I'm still waiting.
Slashdot Mirror
My kid has had a OnePlus 3T for a long time and I was quite impressed with it. However, we got tired of headphones being lost/broken/failing on their own so we just found $4 wired headphones from Amazon that everyone likes and order them in bulk. OnePlus 6T no longer has a headphone port which would give us issues with losing dongles. We now all have Note 9's and we are all quite happy with them, and being able to add storage is a nice benefit.
This makes me wonder what would happen if bitcoin were to become as common as credit cars AND electric vehicles were to become as common as ICEs.
FYI. I did not see the comment above when I responded to this.
I think what this article emphasizes is a real fear that machines will not be able to anticipate situations soon enough to react, even with lightning fast response time. All it knows is what it catches in its sensors. When I human drives with headlights, you drive so that your stopping distance is within your headlights. Will automated cars drive within their limits on interpreting the world around them properly?
People just drive the speed limit
And that's why there are 30,000 deaths every year. The defensive drivers look ahead, judge the speed and possibility of a child running from the closest blind spot onto the road, and slow down to an appropriate speed.
Holy shit you're daft. Kids went to school just fine without cellphones since school was invented. Has humanity really lost its way that far that they may have 'needs' that prevent them from using pay phone or going to the office to use the phone? They need them so badly that they can't even be banned in classes? Wow.
Agreed, but will a self driving car detect 'child running around who may run into the road' versus 'adult running around who knows better' ? Or will it just drive 20 through every residential neighborhood always.
People who speak proper English can't have a productive debate and always keep to 140 characters or less. People who "excel" at Twitter are why Youtube stars are soon going to be running the world.
The problem with self driving is, when you have a machine that you are programming with vastly enhanced capabilities to that of a human, then it stands to reason that the vehicle be that much more safe. If developers have programmed a car to drive without considering every possible scenario that their car may find itself in then they have been negligent. Maybe one day when 99% of cars are automated, then they will have a chance to be safer simply by driving 'slightly better than' a human and consistency and homogeneity will bring safety, but for today the assumption with automated cars must be that they will need to navigate roads with a grate many humans that do a great many unpredictable things. To ignore that an automated vehicle will need to drive with humans and not prepare for it is negligent.
That's like saying a person should be charged with arson if they buy a brand new toaster from the store and it burns down their house that night. The owner of a self driving car will not be responsible unless they somehow can be proven to have escaped the factory parameters of the vehicle. If it is possible for a user to endanger people by entering directives then the vehicle is not safe.
That's why you're supposed to be watching for people who look like they're about to jump into the road and drive at a reasonable speed so you can stop. If you can't see around an obstacle, you assume a person could walk out from there and drive at a reasonable speed so you can stop. An automated car will need to anticipate the same type of situations "those two people on the sidewalk are.an adult who is holding a child's hand, therefore the child is not likely to run out", or "the adult is not holding the child's hand and he is running everywhere, he may run onto the road".
It's pretty easy to say how good these cars will be in a low visibility situation while it's still a dream that they could ever be in such a situation.
First of all, maybe this will happen maybe it won't; but there are bound to be 100 other similar types of circumstances that make this particular circumstance irrelevant. When it happens, it will be very real. No, no one blames the human when they make one decision or the other, but a human isn't capable of logging every single variable that led to the decision in that fraction of a second, but the car better well keep track of everything because full forensics will need to be done following an event and decisions made by the AI justified.
Parents should do what's best for their kids.
Not always as easy as it seems. We stopped our kids from bringing their phones to school which worked out well, until we found out there was a teacher who was having the students do research on their phones in class... the same teacher who was complaining that none of the kids could put their phone down.
Ok but now you're saying stuff that has nothing to do with what you originally said. The question isn't whether minimum wage jobs and satisfying or not satisfying but whether you would do your current job for minimum wage. This logic seems to follow, given that you don't care what a job pays you.
In my experience, the people working overseas for cheap can't do much more than follow direction. If you need someone who needs to represent your team on a project (and do what is good for your team) or if you need someone to make sure everyone is working on the right thing and being efficient; you need someone from here. The work can be done remotely but everyone overseas that can do it either charges just as much as we do or they have already moved here.
No I follow that logic, if money doesn't matter then you would do your current job even if it paid minimum wage because you love it so much.
I think the first one is spelled 'Pocahontas'.
Actually I go mostly by imdb ratings. Genre preferences aside, 7+ is worth my time, 6- is not. It sure seems that there are less 7+'s than there used to be that isn't a remake of a comic or book.
Allowing public to pick the story is a terrible idea. The masses are a completely predictable force and will select the most stereotypical and obvious outcomes every time. I certainly hope 'good story writing' isn't becoming a thing of the past, because I sure haven't seen much of it lately.
I don't really see how that makes a difference. Doesn't matter where the power comes from.
Man, makes you wonder how Microsoft Windows ever got off the ground; or Linux for that matter. All that old hardware they support somehow.
In a different way, meaning I can play them when I want to play them yes.
The trick is knowing whether your family will have health issues. As I found out, the day you get diagnosed with cancer is too late to consider applying for coverage.
I'm still waiting for one internet TV service that gives me even 90% of traditional cable because I refuse to play a perpetual shell game of switching out services as I want to watch new things. Looks like I'm still waiting.