I beg to differ. I know several highly intelligent people who drive for Lyft. A friend of mine drives part-time in his Bolt for extra income when he has time.
And KHTML predates Safari by years as well. Safari basically took KDE's KHTML and forked it to remove the dependency on QT. KHTML was fairly standards compliant and the code was quite clean. I used to use Konqueror quite a bit back in the day since it didn't suffer many of the issues that Firefox did (i.e. single threaded Javascript and horrendous memory leaks).
What about Jared Kushner using private email accounts after being told not to for official business? Or how about dear Trump frequently using a non-secure phone for his communications? Then there's Ivanka Trump's private email usage. Of course, nobody says anything about Colin Powell using AOL for official email, which was deleted.
Anything the liberals have done pales in comparison to Trump. Hell, even Nixon was a lightweight compared to Trump. How about bribing Putin with a $50M penthouse in order to build a tower, something he even admitted to, to be financed by a Russian bank currently under sanctions? That's not to mention the number of witches who have currently plead guilty and been indicted, all by a Republican prosecutor (who was approved 98-0 as director of the FBI under a Republican president).
Let me see, my deep blue state produces far more food than it uses and exports it to the rest of the country. We export 1/3 of the entire country's vegetables and 2/3's of the nation's fruit and nuts are grown here. California leads the nation in farm receipts by far.
Which is insane. The replacement cost for a key fob for a Tesla model S is $200. This includes the programming of the new fob to the car at the service center. Mine recently had one of the buttons stop working, though with no questions asked they replaced it under the extended warranty free of charge.
This reminds me of how expensive it was to deal with Toyota when I had my Prius. After I sold it to my parents the touch screen stopped accepting touch input. Toyota wanted $5000 to replace the MFD (touchscreen) plus over $1000 in labor. It was a known problem and we found a place online that would fix it with a lifetime warranty for $400. It took 5 minutes of labor to remove it and another 5 minutes to reinstall it requiring nothing more than a 10mm socket wrench. Every time something went wrong, Toyota would want a fortune for the part and an arm and a leg for labor. HID headlights burning out? $200 per bulb and $140 labor. (The ame new Sylvania bulb was on Ebay for $50). This was another known defect and wasn't covered under the extended warranty. I had both go bad shortly after the initial 3 year/36,000 mile warranty. Another dealership did replace it free of charge under a "good will warranty" but my local one wanted $340 per bulb. The bulb was not easily accessible, unlike the MFD.
I know several people that work or have worked at Amazon in tech and it's almost as bad with management and incompetence. A Friend of mine who's working as a contractor describes what he's running into with the Echo team and the incompetence he's running into there. I also have a close relative who spent quite a long time there. Managers are basically at each other's throats and the politics are insane from what everyone tells me. My friend who's a contractor there working on the Echo keeps telling me horror stories about the incompetence he runs into daily from lead developers. Another friend of mine who left told me that most of the competent people leave.
Upon watching the video closely and looking at the exact spot the accident happened with Google Street view, there is no way this accident should have happened. While the video doesn't show the woman in the distance, I believe she should have been clearly visible since there are two street lights close to where she was crossing. The dynamic range of the dashcam video is poor so the darker areas which would clearly be visible to a human driver just show up as black. If the driver had bothered to look up rather than focus on his lap the accident would not have happened. Additionally, the LIDAR should have detected the pedestrian who was crossing the street. Uber has a bad reputation with their autonomous driving and is well behind everyone else when it comes to safety. They were the only ones who balked when California required them to register, in part because California requires them to document every time a human driver has to take over and every incident.
Uber had also decided to cut costs by reducing the number of people monitoring the self-driving cars from two to one.
It's easy to blame technology. Notice in the video that there are TWO nearby streetlights. All the video shows is that it's a crappy dashcam with very poor dynamic range.
I totally agree. I noticed that there were TWO nearby street lights and the pedestrian was certainly within the range of those. Additionally, I can still see past the cut-off line of my headlights designed to not blind the drivers in front of me. The light is dimmer, but I can still see what's ahead. The dashcam footage is pretty crappy without a lot of dynamic range, further reduced by the video codec that throws away dark information (video codecs typically only use 16-235 instead of 0-255).
I think this most likely is due to the shitty video from the dashcam which has a much more limited dynamic range than a human eyeball, not to mention the compression algorithms throwing away all of the dark information. Video is often encoded using less than 8-bits, using the range 16-235 instead of 0-255. Codecs usually use the 16-235 range.
The dashcam footage is pretty shitty. The pedestrian SHOULD have been visible. I noticed that the pedestrian was not that far from TWO streetlights. I also can see above the cut-off line of my headlights whereas the dashcam clearly can't. I can make out the pedestrian even in the video if I turn up the brightness, though the compression algorithms turn her into just a blob. Remember, the car also has RADAR and LIDAR. It should have detected the pedestrian even if the driver didn't, because from the video it's quite clear that the driver was not paying attention.
Human vision has a much higher dynamic range than the dash cam video shown. In the video, I could see the pedestrian before she was in the bright area of the headlights although this was difficult to see due to the compression algorithms turning it into a blob. Dashcams generally have shitty dynamic range at night and this one is no exception. When driving at night I generally don't have too much difficulty seeing beyond the bright area of my headlights. I also see that there were streetlights as well and the pedestrian was not that far away from two of them.
I think what we're seeing is dashcam footage, not the main cameras. Dashcams tend to be rather shitty at night, even good ones. Dashcams have nowhere near the dynamic range of the human eye. Even in this case, I can still see the pedestrian in the footage a fair distance out before she reached the bright area of the headlights. Most dashcams suck when it comes to dynamic range and this one appears no different. I also clearly see that the driver was looking down, possibly texting or something instead of focusing on the road.
I agree. Just the other night I stopped at a light and a bicyclist rode through and I couldn't see them well until they were directly in front of me because of the dark clothing and bicycle and lack of any reflectors. I have also, however, been in situations like what happened in Arizona numerous times yet I can still see them in the distance since my eyes have much better dynamic range than many dashcams, including my current one which is a fairly high-end one.
Deer also tend to jump out of nowhere in front of a vehicle. The dashcam footage is horrible and human can certainly see better than that at night. Even in the dashcam footage I could see the pedestrian where some reaction should have taken place. The pedestrian was not moving quickly either. It's also clear that the driver was not doing a good job of paying attention.
I agree. I've seen a lot of dash cam footage and a lot of it leaves a lot to be desired. Even in that video, I could still see the pedestrian quite a ways out. The human eye has a lot more dynamic range than the small dashboard cameras. I have a fairly good dashcam though my eyes are still quite a bit better.
I agree with this. Additionally, as bad as the video quality is I could still see the pedestrian quite a way out. The car could have at least attempted to brake, honk the horn and swerve away. The LIDAR most certainly should have seen the pedestrian as well. I think if the driver was paying a lot more attention to the road then this could have been avoided since typically a human has better night vision than a dashboard camera.
I can also say in Uber's defense that just the other night that I barely saw a bicyclist who crossed in a crosswalk without any reflectors or lights and wearing dark clothing. In this case, however, it was a lit crosswalk and a traffic light so I was stopped.
The radar and lidar certainly SHOULD have seen the pedestrian and it certainly appears that the driver was NOT paying attention. I also will say that in the video I could see the pedestrian while still a way out where the car should have started braking and it could have avoided killing her. While not nearly as noticeable as they would have been had the bicycle had reflectors on the wheels I could still see it when pausing the video.
The pedestrian should have had reflectors on the bicycle wheels. Just the other night I barely saw a bicyclist crossing the street in front of me at a crosswalk until they were in my lights due to the lack of any reflectors and dark clothing. I don't know what the laws are in Arizona, but where I live bicycles are required to have reflectors, a headlight and a taillight at night.
If the driver were paying a lot more attention to the road than the phone then this also could have been prevented.
That reminds me of some of the laptop computers I worked on back in the early 1990's. I worked for a well-known laptop manufacturer who made some laptops for the military. The military laptop I worked with was Tempest certified. It had a removable SCSI hard drive where all data on the drive was encrypted. It was a nightmare to take it apart. Once you took off the cover you had to remove all of the RF shielding (128 screws held the RF shielding on, I kid you not!). The screen was an electroluminescent VGA screen with a fine wire mesh in front of it. It was designed so there were no detectable RF emissions. The company's laptops were also quite rugged. One of the other commercial laptops they made was modified to run on the US space shuttle.
The DOD can have a lot of weird hardware requirements and often the current hardware is what we would consider outdated due to the long development times and how long all the approvals and whatnot took.
That is no longer true. In fact, you can have better control over grain size with 3-D printing than you can with casting. Additionally, you can change the metal composition based on location. SpaceX, for example, makes extensive use of 3-D printing of its metal parts. Their SuperDraco rocket engine is entirely 3-D printed, for example. Here's an older Slashdot story where 3-D printed stainless steel more than doubles the strength.
SpaceX has been very successful 3-D printing metal. For example, their SuperDraco engines are entirely 3-D printed. From what I have read and heard, they are able to do things with 3-D printing that are impossible any other way, including changing the properties of the metal based on location. Heating something to the melting point isn't necessary for strength (i.e. see friction stir welding). 3-D printing does not mean the parts are weak.
3-D printed parts can be made lighter and contain far more complexity than non-additive manufacturing methods due to being able to create shapes and cavities that would normally be very difficult if not impossible. Metals can also be mixed in ways that are not possible with forging or casting.
Slashdot Mirror
I beg to differ. I know several highly intelligent people who drive for Lyft. A friend of mine drives part-time in his Bolt for extra income when he has time.
And KHTML predates Safari by years as well. Safari basically took KDE's KHTML and forked it to remove the dependency on QT. KHTML was fairly standards compliant and the code was quite clean. I used to use Konqueror quite a bit back in the day since it didn't suffer many of the issues that Firefox did (i.e. single threaded Javascript and horrendous memory leaks).
What about Jared Kushner using private email accounts after being told not to for official business? Or how about dear Trump frequently using a non-secure phone for his communications? Then there's Ivanka Trump's private email usage. Of course, nobody says anything about Colin Powell using AOL for official email, which was deleted.
Anything the liberals have done pales in comparison to Trump. Hell, even Nixon was a lightweight compared to Trump. How about bribing Putin with a $50M penthouse in order to build a tower, something he even admitted to, to be financed by a Russian bank currently under sanctions? That's not to mention the number of witches who have currently plead guilty and been indicted, all by a Republican prosecutor (who was approved 98-0 as director of the FBI under a Republican president).
Let me see, my deep blue state produces far more food than it uses and exports it to the rest of the country. We export 1/3 of the entire country's vegetables and 2/3's of the nation's fruit and nuts are grown here. California leads the nation in farm receipts by far.
https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/statis...
California's agricultural value is around double that of Texas.
http://beef2live.com/story-sta...
Oh, and we legalized pot.
Which is insane. The replacement cost for a key fob for a Tesla model S is $200. This includes the programming of the new fob to the car at the service center. Mine recently had one of the buttons stop working, though with no questions asked they replaced it under the extended warranty free of charge.
This reminds me of how expensive it was to deal with Toyota when I had my Prius. After I sold it to my parents the touch screen stopped accepting touch input. Toyota wanted $5000 to replace the MFD (touchscreen) plus over $1000 in labor. It was a known problem and we found a place online that would fix it with a lifetime warranty for $400. It took 5 minutes of labor to remove it and another 5 minutes to reinstall it requiring nothing more than a 10mm socket wrench. Every time something went wrong, Toyota would want a fortune for the part and an arm and a leg for labor. HID headlights burning out? $200 per bulb and $140 labor. (The ame new Sylvania bulb was on Ebay for $50). This was another known defect and wasn't covered under the extended warranty. I had both go bad shortly after the initial 3 year/36,000 mile warranty. Another dealership did replace it free of charge under a "good will warranty" but my local one wanted $340 per bulb. The bulb was not easily accessible, unlike the MFD.
I know several people that work or have worked at Amazon in tech and it's almost as bad with management and incompetence. A Friend of mine who's working as a contractor describes what he's running into with the Echo team and the incompetence he's running into there. I also have a close relative who spent quite a long time there. Managers are basically at each other's throats and the politics are insane from what everyone tells me. My friend who's a contractor there working on the Echo keeps telling me horror stories about the incompetence he runs into daily from lead developers. Another friend of mine who left told me that most of the competent people leave.
Upon watching the video closely and looking at the exact spot the accident happened with Google Street view, there is no way this accident should have happened. While the video doesn't show the woman in the distance, I believe she should have been clearly visible since there are two street lights close to where she was crossing. The dynamic range of the dashcam video is poor so the darker areas which would clearly be visible to a human driver just show up as black. If the driver had bothered to look up rather than focus on his lap the accident would not have happened. Additionally, the LIDAR should have detected the pedestrian who was crossing the street. Uber has a bad reputation with their autonomous driving and is well behind everyone else when it comes to safety. They were the only ones who balked when California required them to register, in part because California requires them to document every time a human driver has to take over and every incident.
Uber had also decided to cut costs by reducing the number of people monitoring the self-driving cars from two to one.
A human driver would NOT have hit her. Notice the two nearby streetlights? All it proves is that it was a shitty dashcam.
I also noticed two nearby streetlights. I'm almost certain I wouldn't have hit her either.
It's easy to blame technology. Notice in the video that there are TWO nearby streetlights. All the video shows is that it's a crappy dashcam with very poor dynamic range.
I totally agree. I noticed that there were TWO nearby street lights and the pedestrian was certainly within the range of those. Additionally, I can still see past the cut-off line of my headlights designed to not blind the drivers in front of me. The light is dimmer, but I can still see what's ahead. The dashcam footage is pretty crappy without a lot of dynamic range, further reduced by the video codec that throws away dark information (video codecs typically only use 16-235 instead of 0-255).
I think this most likely is due to the shitty video from the dashcam which has a much more limited dynamic range than a human eyeball, not to mention the compression algorithms throwing away all of the dark information. Video is often encoded using less than 8-bits, using the range 16-235 instead of 0-255. Codecs usually use the 16-235 range.
The dashcam footage is pretty shitty. The pedestrian SHOULD have been visible. I noticed that the pedestrian was not that far from TWO streetlights. I also can see above the cut-off line of my headlights whereas the dashcam clearly can't. I can make out the pedestrian even in the video if I turn up the brightness, though the compression algorithms turn her into just a blob. Remember, the car also has RADAR and LIDAR. It should have detected the pedestrian even if the driver didn't, because from the video it's quite clear that the driver was not paying attention.
Human vision has a much higher dynamic range than the dash cam video shown. In the video, I could see the pedestrian before she was in the bright area of the headlights although this was difficult to see due to the compression algorithms turning it into a blob. Dashcams generally have shitty dynamic range at night and this one is no exception. When driving at night I generally don't have too much difficulty seeing beyond the bright area of my headlights. I also see that there were streetlights as well and the pedestrian was not that far away from two of them.
Tesla has video (8 cameras), radar (up to 160M), and long-distance (8M) ultrasonic sensors.
I think what we're seeing is dashcam footage, not the main cameras. Dashcams tend to be rather shitty at night, even good ones. Dashcams have nowhere near the dynamic range of the human eye. Even in this case, I can still see the pedestrian in the footage a fair distance out before she reached the bright area of the headlights. Most dashcams suck when it comes to dynamic range and this one appears no different. I also clearly see that the driver was looking down, possibly texting or something instead of focusing on the road.
I agree. Just the other night I stopped at a light and a bicyclist rode through and I couldn't see them well until they were directly in front of me because of the dark clothing and bicycle and lack of any reflectors. I have also, however, been in situations like what happened in Arizona numerous times yet I can still see them in the distance since my eyes have much better dynamic range than many dashcams, including my current one which is a fairly high-end one.
Deer also tend to jump out of nowhere in front of a vehicle. The dashcam footage is horrible and human can certainly see better than that at night. Even in the dashcam footage I could see the pedestrian where some reaction should have taken place. The pedestrian was not moving quickly either. It's also clear that the driver was not doing a good job of paying attention.
I agree. I've seen a lot of dash cam footage and a lot of it leaves a lot to be desired. Even in that video, I could still see the pedestrian quite a ways out. The human eye has a lot more dynamic range than the small dashboard cameras. I have a fairly good dashcam though my eyes are still quite a bit better.
I agree with this. Additionally, as bad as the video quality is I could still see the pedestrian quite a way out. The car could have at least attempted to brake, honk the horn and swerve away. The LIDAR most certainly should have seen the pedestrian as well. I think if the driver was paying a lot more attention to the road then this could have been avoided since typically a human has better night vision than a dashboard camera.
I can also say in Uber's defense that just the other night that I barely saw a bicyclist who crossed in a crosswalk without any reflectors or lights and wearing dark clothing. In this case, however, it was a lit crosswalk and a traffic light so I was stopped.
The radar and lidar certainly SHOULD have seen the pedestrian and it certainly appears that the driver was NOT paying attention. I also will say that in the video I could see the pedestrian while still a way out where the car should have started braking and it could have avoided killing her. While not nearly as noticeable as they would have been had the bicycle had reflectors on the wheels I could still see it when pausing the video.
The pedestrian should have had reflectors on the bicycle wheels. Just the other night I barely saw a bicyclist crossing the street in front of me at a crosswalk until they were in my lights due to the lack of any reflectors and dark clothing. I don't know what the laws are in Arizona, but where I live bicycles are required to have reflectors, a headlight and a taillight at night.
If the driver were paying a lot more attention to the road than the phone then this also could have been prevented.
That reminds me of some of the laptop computers I worked on back in the early 1990's. I worked for a well-known laptop manufacturer who made some laptops for the military. The military laptop I worked with was Tempest certified. It had a removable SCSI hard drive where all data on the drive was encrypted. It was a nightmare to take it apart. Once you took off the cover you had to remove all of the RF shielding (128 screws held the RF shielding on, I kid you not!). The screen was an electroluminescent VGA screen with a fine wire mesh in front of it. It was designed so there were no detectable RF emissions. The company's laptops were also quite rugged. One of the other commercial laptops they made was modified to run on the US space shuttle.
The DOD can have a lot of weird hardware requirements and often the current hardware is what we would consider outdated due to the long development times and how long all the approvals and whatnot took.
It depends. For example, if it is specialized hardware it can't just be replaced.
That is no longer true. In fact, you can have better control over grain size with 3-D printing than you can with casting. Additionally, you can change the metal composition based on location. SpaceX, for example, makes extensive use of 3-D printing of its metal parts. Their SuperDraco rocket engine is entirely 3-D printed, for example. Here's an older Slashdot story where 3-D printed stainless steel more than doubles the strength.
SpaceX has been very successful 3-D printing metal. For example, their SuperDraco engines are entirely 3-D printed. From what I have read and heard, they are able to do things with 3-D printing that are impossible any other way, including changing the properties of the metal based on location. Heating something to the melting point isn't necessary for strength (i.e. see friction stir welding). 3-D printing does not mean the parts are weak.
3-D printed parts can be made lighter and contain far more complexity than non-additive manufacturing methods due to being able to create shapes and cavities that would normally be very difficult if not impossible. Metals can also be mixed in ways that are not possible with forging or casting.