You're going to make a dent on easy, cherry picked routes at the expensive of things like "I thought that truck was a sign" or "Sorry, I didn't see you crossing the road on your bicycle.
It's not good enough to improve the numbers overall by being better at ideal driving circumstances.
If they can't avoid accidents like these (it didn't even detect that there was a pedestrial there from all available evidence), they shouldn't be on the road.
The standard needs to be, at a minimum, as good an the best humans in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES.
I'm not talking about when she was first illuminated by the headlights. I saw movement in the dark using the same intensity of focus I would have used when driving in those conditions. I would have also been driving slower, because it's hard to see.
And this is just in the video, I expect I would have seen her much sooner with my eyes. This coming from someone with fairly bad night vision!
In my opinion the standard for this technology is that there should never be any doubt a human operator couldn't have done better.
Another thing to consider: what if this had been a bicycle legally occupying the lane? Or small displacement scooter?
I detected movement that would have alerted me about 3-4 seconds prior to impact. And I expect that the video is much darker than human eyes would have made out.
It was quite dark, but I expect that human eyes would do much better than the camera. She was at the end of crossing multiple lanes of traffic, she certainly didn't abruptly step into traffic at the worst possible time. The car made NO attempt at slowing down or maneuvering.
I just read about how AI isn't sophisticated enough to pick strawberries out of a plant.
Personally, I'd like to see footage of this accident and judge for myself.
Linux originated with GNU, an operating system created with the idea that software should be free. Not that computer enthusiasts should have something to tinker with.
So far it's been successful on the desktop with computer enthusiasts; great. But the goal has been to have a viable replacement for all proprietary software, including shiny plastic. Like it or not, that's where Gnome for instance (part of the GNU project!) fits in.
If that's not what you want, fine. Use a different distribution, use a different desktop environment whose goal is to cater to your use. Contrary to what you said, there's plenty to choose from.
What are you supposed to do, wait and find out what the person breaking in plans to do and whether they're armed?
This isn't onerous or crazy. Just don't break in to people's houses unless you're willing to be shot.
I lived in Fort Worth, TX for a while. I've been to cities in the the Northeast US, California, Canada. It was something of a shock how different it was.
Everything is just so huge and sprawling for miles and miles... basically homogenous throughout the entire Dallas / Fort Worth area. I seem to recall a large number of very tiny trees, so maybe they're working on that. It is in fact brutal to walk anywhere with the sun and things being so widely spaced though.
Instead of lines there were these dirty dots that you couldn't see in the day because they were washed out in the sun. Or at night because they weren't especially reflective. The roads themselves are also falling apart everywhere you go.
Evidently you don't need to wait to feel sorry for people. Just look at the parent's attitude. They don't even seem to understand the basic concept of what an adventure is.
If nothing else, there's motorcycles. Nobody wants a self driving motorcycle, and I don't think we're approaching a dystopia where they aren't tolerated. They also have the cheapest insurance.
The idea that insurance is going to be prohibitively expensive sounds very questionable to me as well. But I'm not informed enough about economics to be sure.
Steve Jobs was the first one I thought of when I saw Torvald's quote. People basically worship him for having some simple ideas (or I guess more likely picking the best of other people's ideas).
Seeing what he said about nuclear weapons, he actually seemed surprisingly reasonable. Context is important here.
He definitely doesn't come across as itching to use them. What he actually said seems pretty much in line with the mutually assured destruction policy. Which yes, is in fact making and having them to use them under extreme circumstances. That is the context under which he made those remarks.
So what if he's open to nuclear retaliation to a nuclear attack from Europe? He obviously doesn't expect this to happen though.
I think by saying he wants to be unpredictable, he means he doesn't want to give blanket statements like "I'll never use nuclear weapons," because he fears that will open America to nuclear attacks.
Slashdot Mirror
It's more expensive, huge and stupid than dual booting which solves your problem perfectly.
Lives on the line doesn't mean it won't be a buggy computer. It just means that the basic premise is bad idea.
You're going to make a dent on easy, cherry picked routes at the expensive of things like "I thought that truck was a sign" or "Sorry, I didn't see you crossing the road on your bicycle.
It's not good enough to improve the numbers overall by being better at ideal driving circumstances. If they can't avoid accidents like these (it didn't even detect that there was a pedestrial there from all available evidence), they shouldn't be on the road. The standard needs to be, at a minimum, as good an the best humans in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES.
Right. I'm under the impression that the only reason self driving cars are getting good numbers is that they're cherry picking their routes.
I know I sound like an apologist but an "alert" driver could likely avoid most crashes that occur.
Yes, and that HAS to be the standard for technology.
I'm not talking about when she was first illuminated by the headlights. I saw movement in the dark using the same intensity of focus I would have used when driving in those conditions. I would have also been driving slower, because it's hard to see.
And this is just in the video, I expect I would have seen her much sooner with my eyes. This coming from someone with fairly bad night vision!
In my opinion the standard for this technology is that there should never be any doubt a human operator couldn't have done better.
Another thing to consider: what if this had been a bicycle legally occupying the lane? Or small displacement scooter?
Now what is the chance that the investigators are going to understand all this and feel this way? I really wish you were part of the team.
The first report I read said she abruptly entered traffic from the median, and sounded generally annoyed that she didn't use a crosswalk.
Personally, I think human eyes could have done better than the camera in terms of seeing in the dark.
I detected movement 3, maybe 4 seconds before impact. Even if impact were unavoidable, I'm sure I'd have the brakes on and likely swerved.
I detected movement that would have alerted me about 3-4 seconds prior to impact. And I expect that the video is much darker than human eyes would have made out.
Even in the video, I can clearly see movement that would have alerted me about 3-4 seconds prior to impact.
They actually did release the video.
It was quite dark, but I expect that human eyes would do much better than the camera. She was at the end of crossing multiple lanes of traffic, she certainly didn't abruptly step into traffic at the worst possible time. The car made NO attempt at slowing down or maneuvering.
I'd also like to point out that this person seems to be suggesting that the presence of a nearby crosswalk made crossing the street more dangerous.
I just read about how AI isn't sophisticated enough to pick strawberries out of a plant. Personally, I'd like to see footage of this accident and judge for myself.
Representative democracy, not republic. I mean, it's a republic too, but that just means there's no monarch. Which was never on the table.
Sure.
Have you seen in the US what happens when you suggest the smallest gun control measure?
You think people are going to give up their right to determine their own method of transportation? Think of all the motorcycle and car enthusiasts.
I've got to disagree with you here.
Linux originated with GNU, an operating system created with the idea that software should be free. Not that computer enthusiasts should have something to tinker with.
So far it's been successful on the desktop with computer enthusiasts; great. But the goal has been to have a viable replacement for all proprietary software, including shiny plastic. Like it or not, that's where Gnome for instance (part of the GNU project!) fits in.
If that's not what you want, fine. Use a different distribution, use a different desktop environment whose goal is to cater to your use. Contrary to what you said, there's plenty to choose from.
What are you supposed to do, wait and find out what the person breaking in plans to do and whether they're armed? This isn't onerous or crazy. Just don't break in to people's houses unless you're willing to be shot.
There's no message to decode; it was an unmodulated signal.
I lived in Fort Worth, TX for a while. I've been to cities in the the Northeast US, California, Canada. It was something of a shock how different it was.
Everything is just so huge and sprawling for miles and miles... basically homogenous throughout the entire Dallas / Fort Worth area. I seem to recall a large number of very tiny trees, so maybe they're working on that. It is in fact brutal to walk anywhere with the sun and things being so widely spaced though.
Instead of lines there were these dirty dots that you couldn't see in the day because they were washed out in the sun. Or at night because they weren't especially reflective. The roads themselves are also falling apart everywhere you go.
Evidently you don't need to wait to feel sorry for people. Just look at the parent's attitude. They don't even seem to understand the basic concept of what an adventure is. If nothing else, there's motorcycles. Nobody wants a self driving motorcycle, and I don't think we're approaching a dystopia where they aren't tolerated. They also have the cheapest insurance. The idea that insurance is going to be prohibitively expensive sounds very questionable to me as well. But I'm not informed enough about economics to be sure.
Except that isn't true.
https://qa.debian.org/popcon-g...
Steve Jobs was the first one I thought of when I saw Torvald's quote. People basically worship him for having some simple ideas (or I guess more likely picking the best of other people's ideas).
Apparently you can be president of the United States if you can't read.
Citation: https://youtu.be/7LFkN7QGp2c
Seeing what he said about nuclear weapons, he actually seemed surprisingly reasonable. Context is important here. He definitely doesn't come across as itching to use them. What he actually said seems pretty much in line with the mutually assured destruction policy. Which yes, is in fact making and having them to use them under extreme circumstances. That is the context under which he made those remarks. So what if he's open to nuclear retaliation to a nuclear attack from Europe? He obviously doesn't expect this to happen though. I think by saying he wants to be unpredictable, he means he doesn't want to give blanket statements like "I'll never use nuclear weapons," because he fears that will open America to nuclear attacks.