skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think in my comment i mentioned the fact that, taken as a whole, autopilot systems have made planes "so, so, so much safer."

I was only remarking on the possibility that some of the issues that this automation have now created in aircrafts might also be seen in cars, especially when there are things like still keeping your hands on the steering wheel despite the fact that the car is in control.

And, unlike your rational analysis, I don't trust politicians or the media to think about it like that. Instead, I'm sure the first accident that could even be remotely attributable to an automated system would immediately ignite a firestorm of bull-shit articles and possibly damaging regulation.
Abiti Da Sposa Principessa Economici- Noradres
I knew of a hospital when I was a kid that had raceways mounted just below the ceilings. It was like little toy trains bringing paperwork and drugs to each room. But if you watched them long enough, four-legged critters also used the raceways.
Indeed. I wasn't implying that the blog post authors were copycats. I've updated my comment to hopefully avoid confusion.
What other car can parallel park itself in 100% automated mode?
"Andy Barron was booked on a charge of battery" HAH
It's plenty possible with disparities in sentencing. If one group tends to spend 2x the time another group does in prison for the same crime, and the crime rates and population size were identical, in a steady state prison populations would be made up of twice as many of the former group.
The hands must be on the wheels part is a CYA statement. There are many videos released today that show that you really do not have to have your hands on the wheel. Mercedes' system requires driver input every 14 seconds.
Have We Detected Megastructures Built by Aliens Around a Distant Star?
It only prompts the driver and turns off if the system can no longer reliably track the lines in the road OR track the car in front of you.
Understood. I haven't been keeping up with Security News so I wasn't aware, until now, about the presentation they gave in May.
CircleCI Down over 7 hours
Fossil teeth place humans in Asia '20,000 years early'
No need to defeat the system. It doesn't require hands on the wheel all of the time. Only in the case where the system can't see the road lines.
"A Deceased Centimillionaire Leaves $1.2B" But that person is a billionaire. =|
Sorry, I can appreciate some devil's advocacy, but I'm just not buying it here. Assuming the Tesla employee was unarmed (which I think is a safe assumption), then there's nothing potentially dangerous enough to justify running someone over rather than wait the few minutes for law enforcement to arrive. Even if you think you are being falsely imprisoned, I don't think you are justified in running someone over rather than wait a few minutes for law enforcement if you are not in immediate danger.
XD

I guess I had that coming.
There is no basically in an aircraft accident. If you wish to make such a statement, please explain what actually happened in this flight (icing of the pitot tubes, deactivation of normal flight control law for the fly-by-wire system, flight at night over the ocean and over a storm, stall under the specifications for the stall warning system). It's respectful for the crew.
So my friends and I riding motocycles through the mountains on a sunny afternoon are reckless endangerment?

How about sightseeing buses? Or bicyclists riding purely to stay in shape? Or people learning how to drive? Or cops paroling neighborhoods? Or ice cream vans? There are lots of perfectly reasonable uses of roads that have little to do with A-to-B. The elimination of "fun" in the name of safety is a very uphill battle.
How much software has been updated to use stronger DH either ECC or 2048 bit prime field?

Is there an easy way to check if a VPN provider has updated?

The ASICs NSA built for breaking some common 1024 bit fields are probably breaking specific RSA keys now...
Was it any less on-topic than the comment it replied to, or was it just a less fashionable opinion?
Any reason not to just settle on ECDH for new applications?
There is still stigma with online dating and people don't want people they know to identify them there.
According to 'The Innovators', the early Gates negotiated a non-exclusive license for the use of his sisters catchers mitt :)

http://www.amazon.com/The-Innovators-Hackers-Geniuses-Revolu...
They did injure at least two people with a car and one of them was while reversing. Because you normally don't accelerate while reversing, I think it will be hard for them to call this an accident if the physical evidence corroborates Tesla's version of the story.

If it were just one person, I'd be more inclined to claim it was purely accidental. Once there were two separate incidents where they hit someone, the claim of it being an accident gets less credible. I can believe that they might have been afraid, but attacking someone with a car is deadly force (as is confirmed by the charges).

So, at minimum, they'd have to show that the Tesla guards were trying to kill them or inflict grievous bodily harm. The fact that they did not allege any injury to themselves is going to really hurt their case unless they have some kind of evidence that they reasonably feared for their lives.

I'll reserve judgement until we hear more facts, but the uncontested parts of the story currently indicate that the driver is in big trouble. If new facts or evidence do not come to light, I would reasonable expect them to go to prison, barring a plea deal. The passenger is probably ok, though, other than trespass.
Lane Keeping Assistant is very different from Lane Centering/Steering.

I've driven many cars with Lane Keep Assist - it is really a warning/minor correction system to keep you from crossing over your lane. If you let go of the wheel, most systems will ping pong from lane to lane.

Tesla's system actually centers you in the lane, steers around corners, and handles changing lanes. That is the innovation.
You don't have to keep your hands on the wheel.
Strongly disagree.

> A human can make judgement calls in unexpected situations.

A properly programmed machine can behave smarter and faster and it also knows its limitations, so it can account for them. "Judgement calls" is something not needed because the machine always keeps good judgement.

> Objectively, a human is more likely to see falling debris and react to it than a self-driving car (of course depending on the programming and sensors).

Very much depending on programming and sensors, but from some point on, I'll always be betting on programming and sensors.

> Or when the road is slick and you are doing 5 under, and you see someone pass you doing 5 over, with a car following too closely to it... you have a better understanding that there's likely to be an accident ahead... (I've seen this happen several times). A computer wouldn't predict that most likely.

The computer will track all vehicles, their velocities, past observed movement history, perceive road conditions that you can't due to limitations of Mark I Eyeballs, and will push all that data through an inference system that is capable to stay rational all the time, without being affected by "stress" or "surprise". Solutions will be computed literally faster than the blink of an eye. The machine will see the phase space of the road-cars system and be able to navigate it to safety.

> Unless ALL cars are automated, it is a must that a driver be able to take over quickly.

The driver needs to never take over. A dog should be placed, trained to bite the driver if he tries to touch the controls. Better yet, remove the controls.

The machine knows its limitations. The right way to avoid an accident is not to perform stunts based on intuition, it's to keep the entire system (of cars and the road) in a stable and known state, and navigate that state to safety.

People seem to get machines really wrong. Machines today are limited in their creativity. But they are orders of magnitude better than humans in getting things right. On the road, we need more of the latter than the former.
They also have very flat land and an amenable climate in the Netherlands.

Cycling becomes significantly harder in hilly or windy (read coastal) locations.

I live somewhere generally considered "flat" as there are no mountains, however there are a lot of undulations (short, steep hills) and a Mediterranean climate (hot, dry summers) with strong, coastal winds in the morning and afternoon. Cycling any distance in summer will involve sweating. Most people opt to drive in an air-conditioned car, even the 1 km to get some milk/bread.

Better/more bike infrastructure is unlikely to change most peoples behavior.

Having said that, there has been a boom in the number of people cycling to work in the last 10 years. There are two main reasons for this. One is the low availability/high cost of car parking in the city and surrounding suburbs. The other is that we get the Tour de France televised on free to air, during prime time for the entire tour. That has driven a huge increase in road cycling and even non-cyclists like to watch and talk about what is happening in the Tour.
The escape re trespassing is an interesting point. If a guard tells someone to leave, fleeing is a form of leaving. I could see a defense attorney argue that they were not trespassing post-confrontation as they attempted to leave as soon as they were told so to do. It's a vicious argument, but that's what they are for.
There's an old joke about a pilot lost in a deep fog who shouts out the window "Where am I?", hears in response "You're in an airplane!", and immediately realizes that he is over the Microsoft tech support building, because no one else could be so accurate and so useless at the same time.

That's what you're doing here. Saying "the copilots crashed it" teaches us nothing; we need to know why they crashed it, what cues they misunderstood and what skills they lacked, so we can keep it from happening again.
The only rule is: What a company can do and what they can't do. If it's possible, assume it's being done and protect yourself accordingly (i.e proxies, blockers, host files, etc.)
Is this new or has it existed since some time?
What do you count as independently wealthy? Middle class (1-3 years savings, good education, professional job prospects) to successful startup founder is not uncommon enough to call an outlier - I personally know at least half a dozen people with that background and story. It's not exactly easy, but people can do it.

It is much harder for working-class folks (no savings, no college degree, no unique skills) to make the jump.
Copying and Formatting Rows/Columns and Exporting Reports with Large Data Sets
Yeah, great marketing video. Here is reality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hb3TLRaMVIY

Ping pong back and forth in the lane, no curve steering. Bleh.
And here is the reality of that same car: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hb3TLRaMVIY
The thing that worries me about semi-autonomous cars is that we might end up in the same place we've ended up with aircraft. Aircraft are sufficiently autonomous in nominal conditions that pilot skills atrophy, and then when the plane encounters adverse conditions, these de-skilled pilots simply do not respond correctly to the problem, crashing the plane. Specifically, I'm thinking of something like Air France Flight 447, where it turned out that the pilot and co-pilot had lost familiarity with how the Airbus A330 behaved while at cruising altitude.

Similarly, I'm worried that auto-drive and smart cruise control systems will take care of highway driving in the normal case, but when things go wrong and the auto-driver disengages, the human at the wheel will have forgotten that a car traveling at 60mph behaves differently than one traveling at 25mph. With aircraft, we can mitigate this risk by forcing pilots to spend extra time in the simulator, keeing their feel for the aircraft from decaying too badly. I'm not sure what the solution is for drivers. Maybe we can force everyone to play a racing sim for a few hours every month ;)
How are the controls sized and placed? Is there a layout engine in there?
ECC just shifts the problem domain. Just change your curve/prime modulus often and don't use NSA-recommended parameters.
I said 99%, not 100%. Most of the driving is commuting. But fair enough, there is some wiggle room there; still:

> So my friends and I riding motocycles through the mountains on a sunny afternoon are reckless endangerment?

If you're breaking the law then yes, you're reckless, period. If not, then enjoy it all you want.

> How about sightseeing buses?

They're driving A-B-C-D in a sightseeing-optimal way within the limits of law and safety.

> Or bicyclists riding purely to stay in shape?

They aren't doing it next to cars, are they? There are dedicated areas for riding bikes for sports.

> Or cops paroling neighborhoods?

A-to-B driving, with lots of As and Bs. Also, there are two of them, one is doing the driving, the other is doing the patrolling.

> Or ice cream vans?

A-to-B, with lots of As and Bs.

Public roads are not the place for having fun. You can enjoy driving on them however much you want as long as it doesn't affect the safety of others.
Don't use out-of-the-box Diffie Hellman params

Wrong answer. Standard primes are fine; just avoid the small ones. If you try to select your own parameters you're probably going to pick wrong, either in the sense of breaking the crypto or making people wonder if you selected your parameters to hide a backdoor. The standard large primes (my preferred option is the "group #14" 2048-bit prime) were very obviously not selected maliciously, and there's no way anyone has done the precomputations necessary to index that group.
I dunno. I automatically assume that everything that passes any third-party site unencrypted can be intercepted, retained and subsequently disclosed to advertisers, government, or whatever else. This especially applies to for-profit companies for which I'm not a paying client but the commodity being sold. I mean, I don't need to read TOS to assume this, it's just common sense to me.

Probably I've been on the internet for too long.
Sounds like someone's lying.
> Yes, there were bunk beds in the office. And they got a lot of use!

Glad they got rid of the office, maybe it will allow people to have a better work life balance.
Currently 2015 Doritos Crash the Superbowl Most Viewed Commercial
I must be missing something, because it seems like Mr. Mindell is saying cars shouldn't be fully driverless because they can't be. He cites numerous examples of other promised automation technologies that seem to have become a pipe dream over the past several decades.

Except, Google's driverless cars have now logged over a million fully automated miles. It is a proven technology. These aren't exploratory machines going where no human has gone before, they're out there on the road doing what we've all been doing for a hundred years already.

I get the impression this article is just a shill for his book.
So this looks a lot like XAML[1] for WPF (Windows Presentation Foundation)[2] to me. and I'm actually quite surprised that this was not the case for iOS development from the beginning!
(declaimer: I never touched native iOS development before as a 100% Microsoft technologies professional)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensible_Application_Markup_...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Presentation_Foundatio...
I don't have a lot of experience with either, but I was close to really digging in and learning R just for the ease of use of ggplot.

I tried the ggplot for python (ggplot.yhathq.com/) but eventually settled for seaborn (http://stanford.edu/~mwaskom/software/seaborn/). It is really quite easy to get most of the common plots that I wanted and hasn't let me down yet. The standard plots look SO much better than the standard plots of MPL without a lot of customization.
Its...their...job...

I wonder what world you all live in in which this is a bad thing. Theres real threats out there and i'd hate to live in a country that lacked the geopolitical leverage to make use of these tools to my nation's interests.
Audi:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2PDPxMPLWg

This reckless Infiniti driver even gets into the passenger's seat while the car is driving:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY_zqEmKV1k

Mercedes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-2jwN5a6HE

Volvo:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmdWBH-IvDg

The Tesla can change lanes on its own while the others can't, but the others have some interesting gadgets the Tesla doesn't - for example, Audi has the super trick night vision display which also picks out and highlights/alerts on pedestrians and animals.
Mercedes' version requires the driver's hand to be on the wheel during steering. If not detected within 14 seconds it is disabled. Tesla's version (despite their CYA language) requires no hands on the wheel, UNLESS the system loses sight of road lines OR a tracking car in front.

In addition the Mercedes' system can't change lines automatically.
I'm not saying it's not aliens, but it's not aliens.

I read the paper which quite happily discusses clouds of debris of various kinds and avoids any mention of aliens. Comets sound reasonable. Still, it looks like an object worry keeping an eye on.
If you get shot by a toddler, I'd suggest you deserved it.
Regarding 1: I am a huge proponent of Kaizen and, what you're probably more after is the influence Demming had on Japanese companies. The interesting part is that if you've studied Demming you'll know he pitched his process to every American manufacturer first - and all of them wrote him off, which, as we all know came back in spades from a quality comparison perspective shortly after. Demming: Quality = Results of Work Efforts / Total Costs.

Regarding OTA: It is. But, ignorance is even scarier. Look at any company that embraces CI (continuous improvement). Amazon - how many changes to production do they push a day? Now compare that to a legacy F50 that has process designed to be change averse as they view that as risk in and of itself. This seems to be the viewpoint you're working from through GM and maybe (I'm speculating here) you're influenced by the process internally. Maybe your view is that it's risky because of what you're exposed to? My guess is that given the culture of Telsa - critical software OTA is not taken lightly. Speculation - but they likely have a far more rigorous process for deployment than many others since they've done this from the beginning. If I can suggest reading on this subject I would point you in the direction of Gene Kim's work in this area as he has studied high performing organizations and, in a nutshell, has found that companies that embrace change and do it frequently have less operational problems than those who don't. Risk-averse seems to compound mistakes and, this could very well flow into those hypothesis around practice. The more you do, the better you are and "10k" hours.

While I agree accidents can (and will) happen - again I wouldn't put my money that it happens to Tesla first or with any cadence of frequency. Keep in mind Tesla is riding on quality in software - full stop. If they have a problem there, it could be detrimental to the point of failure. This is a good thing for consumers because they're most likely getting a superior product comparatively. And we already know that non-OTA software that has gone out the door in vehicles has caused death and harm. Is it scary that those bits are note able to benefit from a timely OTA update? There are definitely two sides to this coin.

And finally... While I know that it's been said quite a bit that "we've done that". I'm not truly sure people are grasping the reality of what Tesla is doing. While I understand others have these features, the Jalopnik short sums up what they've accomplished that, in my opinion, others are definitely lagging behind in - if you haven't watched it definitely do:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yCAZWdqX_Y

Again... Even if others are kind-of-sort-of doing this today, the iterations will be across model years. No vendors have the long-term upgradability that Tesla does at this point. Not sure I would trust an American car to change lanes on it's own based on it's situational awareness as shown in the video.
> I'd expect it to make the most legal sense for Tesla to avoid posting this,

If they only include basic data that's in the police report I imagine it can't be too bad. You've got to imagine they've got this all on CCTV anyway.
Standing desks are mostly bullshit
Stripe doesn't do POS systems. You're not likely to see a lot of Stripe POS systems in the Bay Area or elsewhere. Their prominence in the Bay Area is because they cater to developers who build stuff that uses credit cards.

Square primarily does POS systems. I don't believe the two companies really compete in any real way yet.
It actually doesn't though - it's just a CYA legal sentence thrown in.
I'm not sure about that. Keeping the cars closer together would suggest more abrupt acceleration and braking to such to avoid space being created as the car ahead accelerates from a stop. Given these accelerations will not be initiated by the driver, they will come as a surprise and thus be more jarring. I imagine that might result in autodrives that accelerate/brake more slowly, leaving greater distances between cars in stop=and-go environs. And I cannot see autodrives leaving much less room between cars while in steady motion or stopped. Humans are pretty good at tailgating.
LOCATION: San Francisco, CA

REMOTE: No

WILLING TO RELOCATE: Yes (US and Canada only, with preference for the west coast)

TECHNOLOGIES: Strong in JavaScript, Git, AngularJS, Node.js/Express, HTML, jQuery, Grunt, MySQL, Bookshelf.js, D3.js, Bluebird.js; Experienced in Heroku, Ionic, Backbone.js, MongoDB, SML, LISP, Ruby, Waffle.io, ZenHub, CSS, REST, SASS, Gulp, Python

WHAT I LOVE: Web development, full-stack or backend

BLOG: http://coderpillar.co/

GITHUB: https://github.com/m-arnold

RESUME: http://tinyurl.com/nswgzqq

EMAIL: michaelaarnold@gmail.com
> Tesla is a party to the incident and has a reason to spin it as far in their favor as possible.

They have, but the reason many people, myself included, trust them is that they didn't follow such reasons in the past. Honesty is being accurate even if you have a reason to spin.

> Their account also completely omits any mention of the window of the jeep being broken with a rock and the driver's side seat belt being severed so idk why we should just swallow their account on it's face.

That's why I say we'll see how it plays out in court. Facts will (hopefully) be uncovered. I'm not assuming Tesla is definitely 100% right; this may be the case when they start bullshitting like every other company. I'm only trusting they're honest here given that they've been honest before, which is not industry-standard practice.

> The hero worship is real.

It's not hero worship, it's trusting those who've proven themselves trustworthy.
Correct, that statement is just for cover. You don't really have to keep your hands on the wheel at all.
This danger will be avoided in automobiles by making human control impossible as soon as that makes any sense. There will be no steering wheel, the front seat will face backwards to facilitate conversation, and accident rates will plummet. The thing that robocars can do, which roboplanes cannot, is slow down or stop completely when faced with vexing situations.
The actual filing: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1512673/000119312515...
Thanks, good point: I should use incognito mode.