................. A whole bunch of the robots are turned off, and it was reverted to a manual station because the robots kept faulting out. When the robot faults out -- like the vision system can't figure out how to put the object in -- then you've got to reset the system. You've got to manually seat the components. It stops the whole production line while you sort out why the robot faults out.
That seems to me a lack of fault tolerance in the overall design approach. A major oversight if so. An entire line should not shut down due to one fault.
I wonder how much $$$ was lost on that automation equipment now collecting dust.
For a large automation project like this, it's better to start with something you know works.....
But I've been told that because Musk could land a rocket booster, he was absolutely going to be able revolutionize the car assembly line. It perfect logic, right?
The problem for Musk isn't that he's had to change his approach, the problem is that he now requires more assembly lines and labor than he planned, therefore production costs will remain higher than planned.
My guess is he desired to shut off the hacked pump, and not shut down all the pumps. If those buttons trigger an emergency response (someone enlighten me) then that might have played into it as well.
I"m sure they'll get around to looking at how this happened, but obviously that is for another day. I do find it curious that none of them apparently know how to swim. I suppose its just a cultural difference or something like that, for some reason they just don't prioritize teaching kids to swim.
I saw the only comments so far and as usual they are fuck Musk. Sorry, but I love the guy. This might be a press thing but who gives a fuck. If you are in a position to help with the top tech out there and offer help, then that is ABSOLUTELY GREAT. I hate these fucking socialist fucktards on here lately hating everything someone with money or tech does for others. It's not a bad thing if everyone is helped out in the end. Go screw yourselves instead assholes.
I wonder how many other people or organizations with resources are also offering help but not tweeting about it. The divers risking their lives to get in there don't appear to be tweeting about it.
If divers got in there, surely they can get some more divers in there with some more equipment, and then tow the kids out of there in spite of their lack of swimming ability?
If you've seen the diagrams, its a cluster maze. Experts say it is highly dangerous and only to be a last resort.
I'd hate to be the guy having to decide how to get those kids out. No good options at the moment. I don't see how batteries would help, I'm sure they already have batteries and are apparently running power/communication to the boys location.
I wonder if there is a flexible pipe with a wide enough ID to pull these boys through. If they could snake such a pipe through the underwater sections, then pump out the water, it might be an option. I suppose that effort itself would be quite dangerous and take a lot of time to act on, if its even feasible to start with.
Issue / roadblock / tomAto/tomAHto. It's people like you who love to bring up "issues" and "problems", believing that they're somehow smarter than most of the people already working on the problem.
Never said I was smarter than anyone. I don't assume you are either. You can go ahead and believe they've got it all figured out. I am sure they aren't as averse to talking about the challenges as you are.
I really wish people would spend the extra fixe seconds needed to consider solutions to the roadblocks they love to throw in front of new ideas.
So... if you had to solve the problem of "all those cars driving back downtown at the same time to pick people up", how would you do it?
Hint: The answer lies in the way the quote was phrased in the first place.
I really wish people would tend to oversimplify every solution they like the sound of. I threw no roadblock, I threw a potential issue. Its people like me that think of potential issues so they can be resolved that are critical to success. Touting great promise only to find disappointing results because nobody thought ahead isn't always so wonderful.
I didn't cause the present 'roadblocks' that are preventing us from moving forward at a faster pace with autonomous driving. I predicted some of them and got similar responses at the time.
I'm not sure having to log all my travel in with some large collective is a freedom enhancement. I suppose I'll be free to clean up the last user's trash if I like.
Yes, basically a valet would be quite convenient. OTOH, everybody leaving the office waiting for their car to pick them up at the front door at the same time brings its own problems, as would all those cars driving back downtown at the same time to pick people up.
Exactly. More cars driving around with nobody in them. Also, people may not try as hard to avoid rush hour if they can sit and browse the internet or watch a movie.
Exactly, Rolling Stone can't be expected to consider the credibility of something when it has already been reported. It is their job to repeat stuff and if anybody calls BS they just point to the original article. That is how media works these days.
the headline and article concluded that - not the study...big difference. but the gist is correct, drink coffee live longer. exercise live longer. drink more water live longer.
I agree they showed drinking coffee correlates with living longer. They haven't shown it is a cause. That case could be strengthened by a study which determines if there are other known lifestyle differences that also correlate with coffee drinking and then normalize with that data.
they weren't looking to see if coffee led to extended life - how many ways do I have to say that? it was study on caffeine metabolism that happened to show coffee extended life. are you unable to process that?
Yes, I can process that. But what they were looking for doesn't matter. What they conclude matters. They can't draw the conclusion of causation simply due to correlation.
If I do a study to determine if people who own golf clubs are wealthier than those who don't, and along the way I happen to discover people who own golf clubs are better golfers than those who don't, I can't conclude that owning golf clubs makes you a better golfer, even though it correlates. I'd have to study other factors such as practice, which also correlate, and eliminate those before I could determine if simply owning the clubs made them better golfers.
you obviously did not read the study...the study did not look at other lifestyle indicators - it was meant to see across 500k individuals was caffeine life extending...they found out that coffee of any sort was life extending. other lifestyle changes also extend life and that has already been proven.
I read what I could, and from what I read they made no attempts to normalize against those other known lifestyle indicators. They may have, as it would be very important to drawing a conclusion about causation, but I didn't see it stated. If you have a proven lifestyle indicator that correlates with coffee drinking, than it might not be the coffee that extends life.
If they grouped people according to lifestyle, and saw the caffeine correlation within those groups instead of across them, then you have a more solid basis.
the study did not look at other lifestyle indicators - it was meant to see across 500k individuals was caffeine life extending...they found out that coffee of any sort was life extending. other lifestyle changes also extend life and that has already been proven.
They found caffeine/coffee drinking correlated with longer life. Correlation is not causation, and normalizing for other correlations can help in determination of cause. If coffee drinkers on average are also people that live healthier lives on average, then that might be the cause.
Slashdot Mirror
................. A whole bunch of the robots are turned off, and it was reverted to a manual station because the robots kept faulting out. When the robot faults out -- like the vision system can't figure out how to put the object in -- then you've got to reset the system. You've got to manually seat the components. It stops the whole production line while you sort out why the robot faults out.
That seems to me a lack of fault tolerance in the overall design approach. A major oversight if so. An entire line should not shut down due to one fault.
I wonder how much $$$ was lost on that automation equipment now collecting dust.
For a large automation project like this, it's better to start with something you know works.....
But I've been told that because Musk could land a rocket booster, he was absolutely going to be able revolutionize the car assembly line. It perfect logic, right?
The problem for Musk isn't that he's had to change his approach, the problem is that he now requires more assembly lines and labor than he planned, therefore production costs will remain higher than planned.
My guess is he desired to shut off the hacked pump, and not shut down all the pumps. If those buttons trigger an emergency response (someone enlighten me) then that might have played into it as well.
Offices are like Orifices. Nobody wants yours to be open, particularly when its next the theirs.
Didn't they deploy some for Puerto Rico? I wonder how well that has been working.
I"m sure they'll get around to looking at how this happened, but obviously that is for another day. I do find it curious that none of them apparently know how to swim. I suppose its just a cultural difference or something like that, for some reason they just don't prioritize teaching kids to swim.
I saw the only comments so far and as usual they are fuck Musk. Sorry, but I love the guy. This might be a press thing but who gives a fuck. If you are in a position to help with the top tech out there and offer help, then that is ABSOLUTELY GREAT. I hate these fucking socialist fucktards on here lately hating everything someone with money or tech does for others. It's not a bad thing if everyone is helped out in the end. Go screw yourselves instead assholes.
I wonder how many other people or organizations with resources are also offering help but not tweeting about it. The divers risking their lives to get in there don't appear to be tweeting about it.
If divers got in there, surely they can get some more divers in there with some more equipment, and then tow the kids out of there in spite of their lack of swimming ability?
If you've seen the diagrams, its a cluster maze. Experts say it is highly dangerous and only to be a last resort.
I'd hate to be the guy having to decide how to get those kids out. No good options at the moment. I don't see how batteries would help, I'm sure they already have batteries and are apparently running power/communication to the boys location.
I wonder if there is a flexible pipe with a wide enough ID to pull these boys through. If they could snake such a pipe through the underwater sections, then pump out the water, it might be an option. I suppose that effort itself would be quite dangerous and take a lot of time to act on, if its even feasible to start with.
Issue / roadblock / tomAto /tomAHto. It's people like you who love to bring up "issues" and "problems", believing that they're somehow smarter than most of the people already working on the problem.
Never said I was smarter than anyone. I don't assume you are either. You can go ahead and believe they've got it all figured out. I am sure they aren't as averse to talking about the challenges as you are.
Video data is treated differently than data. Treating any data differently than any other data violates the principle of net neutrality.
Not when you throttle only your own data.
I really wish people would spend the extra fixe seconds needed to consider solutions to the roadblocks they love to throw in front of new ideas.
So... if you had to solve the problem of "all those cars driving back downtown at the same time to pick people up", how would you do it?
Hint: The answer lies in the way the quote was phrased in the first place.
I really wish people would tend to oversimplify every solution they like the sound of. I threw no roadblock, I threw a potential issue. Its people like me that think of potential issues so they can be resolved that are critical to success. Touting great promise only to find disappointing results because nobody thought ahead isn't always so wonderful.
I didn't cause the present 'roadblocks' that are preventing us from moving forward at a faster pace with autonomous driving. I predicted some of them and got similar responses at the time.
Also, people may not try as hard to avoid rush hour if they can sit and browse the internet or watch a movie.
They can do that already... it’s called public transportation.
I take the train to work, so I am free to read, watch movies, listen to podcasts, or nap during my commute.
Well then, I guess we don't even need autonomous cars at all, public transportation meets the needs of all those people in rush hour traffic.
I'm not sure having to log all my travel in with some large collective is a freedom enhancement. I suppose I'll be free to clean up the last user's trash if I like.
Yes, basically a valet would be quite convenient. OTOH, everybody leaving the office waiting for their car to pick them up at the front door at the same time brings its own problems, as would all those cars driving back downtown at the same time to pick people up.
Exactly. More cars driving around with nobody in them. Also, people may not try as hard to avoid rush hour if they can sit and browse the internet or watch a movie.
First you pay them to come. Then you pay them not to leave.
Exactly, Rolling Stone can't be expected to consider the credibility of something when it has already been reported. It is their job to repeat stuff and if anybody calls BS they just point to the original article. That is how media works these days.
âoeI am 1st Lt. Robert Rackstraw" decodes to: " Fuzzy Wuzzy Was A Bear"
Not having RTFA yet, my first thought was ..how do you give a placebo shock?
I've never read one. I guess I'll miss my chance if I don't hurry.
the headline and article concluded that - not the study...big difference. but the gist is correct, drink coffee live longer. exercise live longer. drink more water live longer.
I agree they showed drinking coffee correlates with living longer. They haven't shown it is a cause. That case could be strengthened by a study which determines if there are other known lifestyle differences that also correlate with coffee drinking and then normalize with that data.
they weren't looking to see if coffee led to extended life - how many ways do I have to say that? it was study on caffeine metabolism that happened to show coffee extended life. are you unable to process that?
Yes, I can process that. But what they were looking for doesn't matter. What they conclude matters. They can't draw the conclusion of causation simply due to correlation.
If I do a study to determine if people who own golf clubs are wealthier than those who don't, and along the way I happen to discover people who own golf clubs are better golfers than those who don't, I can't conclude that owning golf clubs makes you a better golfer, even though it correlates. I'd have to study other factors such as practice, which also correlate, and eliminate those before I could determine if simply owning the clubs made them better golfers.
you obviously did not read the study...the study did not look at other lifestyle indicators - it was meant to see across 500k individuals was caffeine life extending...they found out that coffee of any sort was life extending. other lifestyle changes also extend life and that has already been proven.
I read what I could, and from what I read they made no attempts to normalize against those other known lifestyle indicators. They may have, as it would be very important to drawing a conclusion about causation, but I didn't see it stated. If you have a proven lifestyle indicator that correlates with coffee drinking, than it might not be the coffee that extends life.
If they grouped people according to lifestyle, and saw the caffeine correlation within those groups instead of across them, then you have a more solid basis.
the study did not look at other lifestyle indicators - it was meant to see across 500k individuals was caffeine life extending...they found out that coffee of any sort was life extending. other lifestyle changes also extend life and that has already been proven.
They found caffeine/coffee drinking correlated with longer life. Correlation is not causation, and normalizing for other correlations can help in determination of cause. If coffee drinkers on average are also people that live healthier lives on average, then that might be the cause.