The EU was never going to negotiate in the way brexiteers thought they would.
The UK market is less than 1/6th the size of the rest of the EU's single market. So clearly it makes no sense for the EU to damage its biggest market for the UK's sake, and the UK is just a small player in comparison with a weak hand.
Also the EU has lots of deals with other countries that showed the kind of thing on offer. In fact brexiteers like Farage pointed to Norway as a model we could emulate.
So all this "cake and eat it" shit was never going to happen, the negotiation was always going to be what kind of inferior deal does the UK want to downgrade to.
Even the official Vote Leave campaign wasn't dumb enough to try to leave the way Teresa May has. Their leaflet said that they would negotiate the withdrawal before triggering Article 50.
May's red lines fucked the UK. The EU's single market is nearly over 6x larger than the UK market, so clearly they were never going to do anything to damage it just for the sake of Britain. Her only plan seems to have been to negotiate a deal that she can claim delivers some perverse form of brexit, and then run down the clock until everyone panics and accepts it.
Fortunately Parliament is fighting hard to stop her, but all the while it's damaging the UK. Even if it cancels right now, a lot of harm has already been done.
And in fact the headline is wrong. This will happen even if we leave with a deal, as negotiating continued use of the.eu TLD is unlikely to be a high priority.
Before eBay finding stuff like that required a lot of effort. You had to physically go to the yard sale or charity shop and look through the stock (shops really need a search box by the door). So basically you trade your time for money.
Waymo is starting their driverless taxi service in a few months, with no-one behind the wheel. They have already demonstrated it on public roads to journalists.
What has changed is that they started calling level 2 features "full self driving", and removed the specific descriptions of what the real full self driving would eventually do. At best it confuses matters, at worst it looks like they are backtracking and have no intention of delivering what they already sold people.
Also remember that this system has been sold since 2016 and was supposed to have a fully functional demo in 2017. Now even Musk is saying 2022.
Full self driving was advertised as being able to come out of your garage, pick you up by the front door, take you to work and then go off and find its own parking space. It needs to handle every situation, including unmarked private roads that are narrow and do not conform to the normal standards.
If Tesla could do coast to coast they would. They can't. They did zero autonomous miles in 2018 according to the report they filed.
I suspect that the re-branding of "Full Self Driving" is an attempt to stave off the lawsuits by claiming that they delivered on it, but people aren't going to ignore that it isn't what they were sold.
Since the first sales started in 2016 people are now reaching the end of their leases without receiving it, so there is time pressure too.
What we need are big vats of plastic eating microbes that we can process waste through. They would have to work fast and produce something we could deal with, ideally something we could use for fuel or manufacturing.
The big problem that needs to be solved is sorting. Sorting rubbish into different types for different recycling processes.
There is just no easy, efficient way to do it. You have to come up with a system that works for all kinds of materials and objects, that can handle contamination and things like other materials inside bottles or bags. It has to be cleaner and greener than making new stuff, and it has to be cost effective.
Arbitrary inputs, and many different sorting and separating processes required. The only good news is that it doesn't have to be perfect to be useful.
Since they introduced a mandatory 5p charge for plastic bags in the UK many people started to just bring their own re-usable ones. They cost about 10x as much but many places will replace them for free when they break, which they rarely do.
Most are made of plastic, although you can get woven ones. I got some kind of hemp one once, but my cat just sort of assumed it was the latest tribute and turned it into a bed.
Drones are going to get regulated to near extinction at this rate. Between airports and other areas where safety and security are an issue, and people wanting privacy on their own property, the demands for restrictions will be irresistible.
Sure, but again you are talking about a 40 minute difference over a whole day trip in poor conditions.
Maybe I'm just getting old but I'd want to stop for that much time just to use the bathroom and get a bite to eat anyway.
Faster charging is useful to some people, but for me (and I suspect a lot of people) things like the shape and size of the car will be a much bigger factor than the difference between 20 and 40 minutes for an 80% charge. For example the Model 3 boot is too small for me, I want a hatchback.
They had a lot of engineering staff turnover in the first couple of years after he made the promise. Then it seemed to settle down a bit, I guess someone came in who was able to manage expectations.
Tesla sold "full self driving" that really would drive itself while you took a nap for $8000. People pre-ordered it with the promise of it being ready by 2017.
Now they have changed the definition and started selling the reduced functionality for a lower price.
People who pre-ordered both paid more and have no idea if what they were promised is now cancelled and this Level 2 stuff is all they are going to get. To add insult to injury, if they had not pre-ordered they could now buy the same thing for $3000 less.
Aye, it may be impossible the way Tesla is trying to do it. Their original plan was for a coast-to-coast demo in 2017, which obviously failed.
Other self driving systems like Google/Waymo's one use lidar, cameras, radar and ultrasonic sensors. They are anticipating the cost/size of lidar systems to reduce rapidly in the next few years.
If Tesla had managed to use just cameras, radar and ultrasonics. It would have been a huge coup if it had worked.
Their problem is twofold. First they underestimated the processing power needed to do handle images from the cameras. They use neural nets to process them and on the original hardware they shipped (known as AP2) it just wasn't powerful enough, they couldn't even get it to compare consecutive images (which helps when you don't have stereo vision). They went to AP2.5 and now AP3, but it's not clear if even that is fast enough for what they want to do.
The second problem is that it's just really, really hard to use neural nets to do everything they need. Not just recognizing objects like cars, signs and traffic lights. It has to see road markings, it has to see traffic police and understand their gestures, it has to understand complex 3D spaces with no/poor road markings like car parks and private driveways. It has to be able to recognize small objects that the radar/ultrasonics close to the ground won't pick up, like toll barriers and the over-hanging rear ends of trucks.
To give you some idea of how far away they are, even the current driver assist parking isn't good enough for full self driving. Sometimes it ends up a metre away from the kerb. The human driver can fix that, but for full self driving they have to get the camera to recognize the kerb, indistinct as it may be, and get close to it. Worse still, the current side facing cameras don't point far enough down to actually see it close to the car, so it has to see it from a distance, make a 3D model of the parking spot and navigate into it from memory.
Slashdot Mirror
The EU was never going to negotiate in the way brexiteers thought they would.
The UK market is less than 1/6th the size of the rest of the EU's single market. So clearly it makes no sense for the EU to damage its biggest market for the UK's sake, and the UK is just a small player in comparison with a weak hand.
Also the EU has lots of deals with other countries that showed the kind of thing on offer. In fact brexiteers like Farage pointed to Norway as a model we could emulate.
So all this "cake and eat it" shit was never going to happen, the negotiation was always going to be what kind of inferior deal does the UK want to downgrade to.
Except that we won't be able to sell that stuff to the EU, and won't be able to compete with China and the US.
Meanwhile everyone is back to working 48 hour weeks and gets to pay US prices for health insurance.
I doubt they actually believed the bullshit they were saying, it was just to win the vote.
Reminds me of all the outrage over how the EU is steering the Article 50 process. We fucking wrote it, we decided that would be how it works.
Even the official Vote Leave campaign wasn't dumb enough to try to leave the way Teresa May has. Their leaflet said that they would negotiate the withdrawal before triggering Article 50.
May's red lines fucked the UK. The EU's single market is nearly over 6x larger than the UK market, so clearly they were never going to do anything to damage it just for the sake of Britain. Her only plan seems to have been to negotiate a deal that she can claim delivers some perverse form of brexit, and then run down the clock until everyone panics and accepts it.
Fortunately Parliament is fighting hard to stop her, but all the while it's damaging the UK. Even if it cancels right now, a lot of harm has already been done.
And in fact the headline is wrong. This will happen even if we leave with a deal, as negotiating continued use of the .eu TLD is unlikely to be a high priority.
Before eBay finding stuff like that required a lot of effort. You had to physically go to the yard sale or charity shop and look through the stock (shops really need a search box by the door). So basically you trade your time for money.
Waymo is starting their driverless taxi service in a few months, with no-one behind the wheel. They have already demonstrated it on public roads to journalists.
The Slashdot editor actually fixed it. In the original quote it was spelt as one word, "enroute". Kind of like how some people write "alot" I guess.
What has changed is that they started calling level 2 features "full self driving", and removed the specific descriptions of what the real full self driving would eventually do. At best it confuses matters, at worst it looks like they are backtracking and have no intention of delivering what they already sold people.
Also remember that this system has been sold since 2016 and was supposed to have a fully functional demo in 2017. Now even Musk is saying 2022.
Full self driving was advertised as being able to come out of your garage, pick you up by the front door, take you to work and then go off and find its own parking space. It needs to handle every situation, including unmarked private roads that are narrow and do not conform to the normal standards.
If Tesla could do coast to coast they would. They can't. They did zero autonomous miles in 2018 according to the report they filed.
People who bought a top spec Model X recently lost over $20,000 the moment Tesla announced the price cut.
Because with fossil cars refuelling takes 5 minutes. All pumps are pretty much the same.
Most cars will give you an accurate number based on recent diving. If you are doing a long journey it's pretty reliable.
You also get to know your usual efficiency numbers and how they relate to charging.
It doesn't even support Windows 8.1 or below fully.
Apparently it doesn't support other browsers because it needs a plug-in that uses the Chrome/Edge architecture. They didn't make one for Firefox.
So actually it's useless for me too, because even though I use Chrome I'm not installing their plug-in.
I suspect that the re-branding of "Full Self Driving" is an attempt to stave off the lawsuits by claiming that they delivered on it, but people aren't going to ignore that it isn't what they were sold.
Since the first sales started in 2016 people are now reaching the end of their leases without receiving it, so there is time pressure too.
What we need are big vats of plastic eating microbes that we can process waste through. They would have to work fast and produce something we could deal with, ideally something we could use for fuel or manufacturing.
The big problem that needs to be solved is sorting. Sorting rubbish into different types for different recycling processes.
There is just no easy, efficient way to do it. You have to come up with a system that works for all kinds of materials and objects, that can handle contamination and things like other materials inside bottles or bags. It has to be cleaner and greener than making new stuff, and it has to be cost effective.
Arbitrary inputs, and many different sorting and separating processes required. The only good news is that it doesn't have to be perfect to be useful.
Since they introduced a mandatory 5p charge for plastic bags in the UK many people started to just bring their own re-usable ones. They cost about 10x as much but many places will replace them for free when they break, which they rarely do.
Most are made of plastic, although you can get woven ones. I got some kind of hemp one once, but my cat just sort of assumed it was the latest tribute and turned it into a bed.
Drones are going to get regulated to near extinction at this rate. Between airports and other areas where safety and security are an issue, and people wanting privacy on their own property, the demands for restrictions will be irresistible.
Yeah, she is a little late to this party... Maybe she is busy today.
Sure, but again you are talking about a 40 minute difference over a whole day trip in poor conditions.
Maybe I'm just getting old but I'd want to stop for that much time just to use the bathroom and get a bite to eat anyway.
Faster charging is useful to some people, but for me (and I suspect a lot of people) things like the shape and size of the car will be a much bigger factor than the difference between 20 and 40 minutes for an 80% charge. For example the Model 3 boot is too small for me, I want a hatchback.
They had a lot of engineering staff turnover in the first couple of years after he made the promise. Then it seemed to settle down a bit, I guess someone came in who was able to manage expectations.
Just to be clear it's actually worse than that.
Tesla sold "full self driving" that really would drive itself while you took a nap for $8000. People pre-ordered it with the promise of it being ready by 2017.
Now they have changed the definition and started selling the reduced functionality for a lower price.
People who pre-ordered both paid more and have no idea if what they were promised is now cancelled and this Level 2 stuff is all they are going to get. To add insult to injury, if they had not pre-ordered they could now buy the same thing for $3000 less.
Aye, it may be impossible the way Tesla is trying to do it. Their original plan was for a coast-to-coast demo in 2017, which obviously failed.
Other self driving systems like Google/Waymo's one use lidar, cameras, radar and ultrasonic sensors. They are anticipating the cost/size of lidar systems to reduce rapidly in the next few years.
If Tesla had managed to use just cameras, radar and ultrasonics. It would have been a huge coup if it had worked.
Their problem is twofold. First they underestimated the processing power needed to do handle images from the cameras. They use neural nets to process them and on the original hardware they shipped (known as AP2) it just wasn't powerful enough, they couldn't even get it to compare consecutive images (which helps when you don't have stereo vision). They went to AP2.5 and now AP3, but it's not clear if even that is fast enough for what they want to do.
The second problem is that it's just really, really hard to use neural nets to do everything they need. Not just recognizing objects like cars, signs and traffic lights. It has to see road markings, it has to see traffic police and understand their gestures, it has to understand complex 3D spaces with no/poor road markings like car parks and private driveways. It has to be able to recognize small objects that the radar/ultrasonics close to the ground won't pick up, like toll barriers and the over-hanging rear ends of trucks.
To give you some idea of how far away they are, even the current driver assist parking isn't good enough for full self driving. Sometimes it ends up a metre away from the kerb. The human driver can fix that, but for full self driving they have to get the camera to recognize the kerb, indistinct as it may be, and get close to it. Worse still, the current side facing cameras don't point far enough down to actually see it close to the car, so it has to see it from a distance, make a 3D model of the parking spot and navigate into it from memory.