skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
- I like my files stored where I have access to them and no one else does (local filesystem storage)

- I like being able to share files with other people, when I choose to (Dropbox, GDrive, et al, possibly in an encrypted compression format)

- I like instant installation. I dislike software changing under me without my control, being forced to trial-and-error my way through browser choice, not knowing which build of the software I'm running, not knowing how my experience may differ from someone else's (AB testing), and not having my data stored primarily on my local device. (websites)

- I consider remote storage useful, but not 100% reliable, so I won't use it for something that must work (cloud storage)

- I consider remote data processing harmful, more often than not. Not only is it doing things to my data that I have no control over, but they aren't even visible to me, even in the sense of "well, technically you could disassemble the binary and reverse engineer the algorithm..."

- My use of a platform shouldn't depend on one vendor. NaCl depends solely on Google. Apparently, NaCl and Pepper are "destaffed"[1], and I think there was a story the other day about things on the Chrome web store moving away from being available outside of ChromeOS. It's not a platform that I'd care to really invest in, right now.

The less important a particular task is to me, the less I care about the points above. For example: most of my modern games are perma-rented from Steam, auto updates are on, and my saves are stored "in the cloud".

[1] https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=239656...
What is wikipedia (in links)
If you're ok with using your Google account for authentication then why disable password authentication? I've only been on one public network that had port 22 blocked and ssh clients are pre-installed or available for pretty much everything now.
That website is currently not loading for me.
Possibly. Other than Snowden releases, I don't know much about the inner workings or capabilities of the NSA to judge them. But consider the budget that the NSA has to work with.
As would you now be if you worked for him! "Whom" is the objective case of "who", and correctly replaces e.g. "him", not "he".
Every designer, or UI/UX person should work on a shitty CRT with a flicker and a bad green channel.

If the design doesn't work under those conditions, it doesn't work.
I assume they're reasonably confident, since they've been doing this for a while, and have ploughed more money/time into this than most others.

That, and judging by Tesla's history - if there was indeed something lacking, they might just retro-fit it for free onto people's cars. So I assume they're keen on getting this right...haha.
Are the cars going to look like Google's and Uber's self driving cars, then?

I never cared that much about self driving capabilities - I like to drive myself - and I certainly don't want to shell out $35,000 for a car with what looks like a food processor or a police emergency light mounted on the rooftop.

IMHO, one of the best features of Tesla has been that they actually made EVs look like traditional cars. It might seem trivial, but many of the budding competitors still fail to do just that:

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/08/17/vw-300-mile-ev-paris-auto...

https://www.mercedes-benz.com/en/mercedes-benz/design/commer...
Using pylint in emacs with flycheck has saved me more hours that I can count debugging simple syntax and other python errors. As the author mentions, whitelisting is the only way to go.

http://www.flycheck.org/en/latest/
EDIT: Ignore the first paragraph below; @dyarosia mentioned correctly they're working on their own vision system, so they probably buy generic camera units.

(IGNORE THIS: The surround cameras are likely still in collaboration with Mobileye, since in their case, Mobileye doesn't just give the camera hardware but also has a fair bit of software that makes all the cameras come together. It's not too likely Tesla's duplicated this so quickly.)

Ultrasonic sensors though are dirt cheap (in the few dollars range), and they probably come from one of the many tier 1 suppliers (Bosch, Delphi, etc) that makes them. These are the technology that powered those beeping back distance sensors for 10+ years.

The real news here is that again, LiDAR is absent. It seems like Tesla's pretty confident they can get to full autonomous self driving without the point cloud data that LiDAR provides. Now THAT'D be impressive!
Let all of these people 'transcend' their minds into computers, I will go the other way, and go immanently into my body.

"Behind thy thoughts and feelings, my brother, there is a mighty lord, an unknown sage—it is called Self; it dwelleth in thy body, it is thy body." -- Nietzsche

http://www.philosophy-index.com/nietzsche/thus-spake-zarathu...

Or Deleuze summarizing him: As Nietzsche would say, we stand amazed before consciousness but the truly suprising thing is the body.

To feel a raindrop on the skin, to look out on a surprising sunrise, to lie on one's back in the grass at dusk while bats fly overhead. I would not want to live 1000 years without this. I'd rather the lights go out and have it all end and gone forever than live only in a simulation, to no longer feel the randomness, the intricacy, the depth, the richness of what is happening now.

You're welcome to all the virtual you want. But no thanks.
We live in an age of abundant, easily vettable information. By your presence here on HN I would assume in fact that you are a rather well-educated person, which is why I figured I'd respond to something on the internet.

Sadly the abundance of information out there, not to mention the seeming biological inability for humans to think in a purely rational way ( https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Bias ) means that it's very difficult not to encounter some noise in scholarship. If you cannot read past even open bias to engage with a reading critically and openly, you handicap your ability to gain new knowledge (even that which may disagree with a reading's thesis!) and to respond to the misconceptions and biases of those who do not read or think critically. This advances ignorance or apathy over knowledge and does a disservice to free-thinking citizens the world over, especially in a democracy if you're so fortunate to live in one.

Now no one can force you to engage in a discussion or debate you'd rather not be a part of, and it's perfectly normal to not find interest in historical questions and essays. But to dismiss a scholarly reading on the basis of whether it has bias at all, rather than the more reasonable basis that said bias is not identified, not minimized or not properly segregated from the argument in question, is irrational.
Happens quite often. Hardware is updated but software is not ready. Similar approach happens with digital cameras, graphics cards, electronics equipment.
I mean, it's a smart business move.
I'm totally just guessing, but possibly they still need training data for the new hardware configuration which they will collect from the newly sold cars. They could pay testers to drive them around for a while to generate that data or just roll it out to the public and crowd source the problem. They deliver less functionality at launch but start generating revenue earlier. Most large car companies don't mind deferring the revenue a little after incurring the initial development costs if it means delivering a complete product, but Tesla is operating on tighter margins than big auto.
The only reason GS is still around is because they did what they did. They protected their shareholders the fine is trivial (less than 10%) compared to the losses they would have taken if they followed the course of action that everyone else did.
Great explanation, thanks. Exchange does seem to be a of a misnomer, agreed.
Complexity.
The ultrasonic sensors and radar are Bosch.

Not sure about the cameras, but perhaps the same.
That makes no sense at all.

Say Tesla's car could automatically brake if it sees a hazard in front of you. However, you opted out of that optional extra.

You aren't paying attention whilst driving, and hit somebody. Who's fault is it?

Yours for being cheap and an inattentive driver? Or Tesla's for not forcing you to give them money to pay for a feature you clearly didn't want?
Wow, what a bunch of negative nellies on here. I hope you people have mildly unpleasant evenings.

Congrats Tesla! That's amazing.
Nonpartisan too which is nice.
Hey, the deleted FB post was a pretty good score for the 4 or so minutes of actual research the writer apparently devoted to this story.
The ultimate root of patronize is the Latin pater meaning ‘father’.
This sounds a good idea. But one of the highest reader-rated comments of the article is intriguing to me:

Anna - Pittsburgh 11 hours ago

... But, this whole article just oozed misogyny. The casual
dismissal of mothers and the harsh declaration that the female
sex and their worrying is ruining today's young men is, in a
word, offensive. Worrying about boys growing up to be sissies---
who even says that anymore outside the men's rights movement?
It sounds to me that this guy wants to create a world for his
boys where girls are not allowed or, at best, are merely tolerated.
Which sort of reminds me of Silicon Valley, actually.
The paragraphs on that page become way too long in a full sized browser window on a 27" display.
>From a PR perspective, the name was a solid gold decision.

I doubt it. It creates false hopes and probably hurted/hurts them when crashs happen. The Tesla autopilot death in June was a really big thing, yet other crashes where assistant systems of other manufacturers are never in the press. Maybe because of the name, maybe because the drivers use them better?

Also look at what happened recently in Germany:

1. Basically the head of the DMVs sending a letter to all Tesla owners to RTFM that it is not in fact an autopilot.

2. Department of Transportation pushing Tesla to stop using the term "autopilot" in marketing as it is misleading.
> Maybe I'm just reading it oddly.

No, it doesn't make a lot of sense.
Automatic braking won't be an optional extra.
Those are concept cars, concept cars always look like that before the final designs come about.

Fashion does the same thing.
There is a TV series better than Black Mirror believe it or not. I'll shill for it because it's an amazing work of art.

It's called Utopia, it's a conspiracy thriller from Channel 4, and if it doesn't send chills down your spine and raise your hackles then you aren't alive.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/utopia
Maybe I'm weird, but Google would have been my first answer. Then either Tesla or Apple.
Yeah, but it sucks, because instead of just indicating that people have made it low-quality it makes it hard to read even if you would like to go ahead and brave reading a downvoted comment.
This isn't that uncommon in the automotive industry tbh.

Features including performance related features have been pushed via software updates for years.

Anything from navigation to cruise control to sport packages have been deployed either OTA or via a manual update.

Tesla is just pushing it to a new limit (not necessarily a good thing) and is actually advertising every change and feature update.
Well said. In that we can agree.
Ah, that's a mistake, that should have read "introduced [quantization] noise", which reduces the SNR in A' vs A.

If I understand you correctly, your discussion around intelligibility primarily applies to signal processing of voice vs general audio. Codecs such as MP3, AAC, etc. don't have the luxury of making assumptions about the signal content, and so aren't designed along those principles. E.g. speech codecs can generally run well at much lower bitrates than general audio codecs because they operate on a constrained domain of audio (i.e. speech).

Regarding distortion management, see Rate-distortion optimization[1] for lossy audio codecs: where the purpose is to manage distortion within the limits of the bit rate supported by a communication channel or storage medium.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantization_(signal_processin...
Watch Utopia.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/utopia

I judge it better than Black Mirror. Don't google any information about it because it will sound stupid, just watch it outright.
I listen to less music in my car because iTunes is such a pain in the butt to listen to your own music on the device. Audible has an acceptable interface so I listen to more audio books. I'm starting to think the people working on iTunes hate music. Never mind replacing the rating I spent years setting with a friggin like button.
Looks like they just fixed the typo in an OTA software update anyway.
>> configure it with a whitelist of lint checks

I have found Pylint to be very helpful, and always use it on Python projects past the size of a short script.

If you start using Pylint at the beginning of a project, you can blacklist warnings that you want to ignore fairly easily.
It's a pretty common career arc for people to start working in the city, move out to the suburbs, and then eventually want to find a job in the suburbs to have an easier commute.
This is a sign of the utter commodification of hardware and the possibility that a majority of innovation in the future (with the exception of low-power wearables) lies in the realm of software and algorithms.
A neat case study, but "Embedding Rust in Python" is a poor way to phrase it.

If I'm reading it correctly they're just using CFFI to load and call a shared library - it's really not embedding anything. The fact that the library was written in Rust is interesting, but as far as Python is concerned it could easily have been written in any language that can create a shared library.
Why Chromebooks? I'd rather use Linux straight on a normal computer (whether desktop or laptop). ChromeOS doesn't sound at all like a better way FOSS wise than let's say KDE Plasma.

And I strongly disagree that privacy should be traded for doing things "the Google way", even if for a time.
Pilot here. Airplanes have autopilot. While on autopilot you are still expected to be monitoring the flight and take control at a moments notice. Autopilot does not allow the pilot to take a nap or go in the back and party with the flight attendants.

Autopilot is the correct term. I'm tired of always having to cater to the lowest common denominator.
A problem involving power series
GOLD: Outlook Remains Higher with Eyes on 1,280.00 Zone
If you go to the order page of the Model S, it says for the "Full Self-Driving Hardware":

>Please note also that using a self-driving Tesla for car sharing and ride hailing for friends and family is fine, but doing so for revenue purposes will only be permissible on the Tesla Network, details of which will be released next year.

Interesting decision.
Whilte the author's reflections are incredibly deep and worthwhile on their own, what struck me most about this article was just the tremendous quality of the writing. Is the recipe to being able to produce writing like this simply to become a voracious consumer of similarly-excellent writing?
That is what the press release says.
The autopilot in an airplane cannot be used without a pilot paying attention, either, but it is still called an autopilot. (For example, autopilots do not avoid traffic on a collision course.)
But I thought that they had gone separate ways?
""When Tesla refused to cancel its own vision development activities and plans for deployment, Mobileye discontinued hardware support for future platforms and released public statements implying that this discontinuance was motivated by safety concerns"

from

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/16/tesla-says-mobileye-balked-af...

And yes ofc, the LiDAR absence is interesting; just not what I'm asking about here.
R.I.P. David Bunnell, founder of MacWorld
Because it's a sexual activity, illegal if done with pictures of under 18s (but not generally considered in the public interest to prosecute by the CPS if the pics are of the perpetrators themselves and it was consensual - so no "revenge porn" setting or whatever).
Has anybody ever used a tablet or laptop outside? They're unreadable. This isn't a problem with surface, it's a problem with most electronic devices in the sunlight. There probably are other glitches but low tech film isn't going away anytime soon.
Will this new neural net and hardware be capable of advanced object detection?

For instance if a plastic bag or piece of cardboard rolls across the highway a human driver knows it's safe to run over without stopping. Would a system like this just see an obstacle via radar and emergency brake?

Google has been working on this problem for longer and they have access to the largest image/video datasets in the world to train their models. I wonder how google and tesla systems would compare.
Commented above too but it looks like making a video took the extra few days:
"Will post video of a Tesla navigating a complex urban environment shortly. That was what took the extra couple of days."
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/788902908175618049
That's a strange way to evaluate selfishness.

Question 2 has virtually infinite factors impacting it, making it useless in any practical sense.

How about those who participate in activities that enrich the lives of others, such as volunteering, teaching, or giving aid?

What if their country has an overpopulation problem resulting in major constraints on resources and infrastructure?
Lately that social pressure has been pushing me away from the people that I would otherwise broadly agree with politically. I'd be more likely to vote trump (not American anyway, just a hypothetical) now than I would have been a few years ago because I'm sick of the identity wars SJW's are fighting.
Whoa...reading that doesn't rub me the right way at all. I trust Tesla, though, so maybe I'm misreading/misinterpreting it.
I fondly remember PC Magazine, it was really core part of my education on PC's in the eighties.
Because the author (Armin Ronacher) loves Rust. And because common sense is lame.
A separation between the running gear of the car, and its entertainment center / user interface, is absolutely vital if we don't want to see an endless stream of "hackers offed Public Figure X by driving their car into a bridge" in the news.

It boggles me that anyone even considers running things like antilock brakes, car security, and especially self-driving capability from an internet-connected device, no matter how nice and convenient it may be.
> going after immorality is the best option IMO

Now there is an ironic typo/autocorrect, I think the word you where looking for is immortality, unless of course you are making a scathing criticism that the pursuit of self preservation for the purpose of interstellar travel is against the laws of morality.

Thanks for a chuckle.

I do think though that emulation of "specialized" hardware with generic hardware is a complex problem space. While it's now possible to recreate classic gaming systems with fpga's for example, some cases we are able to only offer an approximation. The computing power of the host exceeds the power of the emulated CPU by several orders of magnitude.
My thinking is to emulate wetware with hardware will require hardware several orders of magnitude more powerful than wetware and I suspect the wetware is already close the physical limitation of the universe for several key problem spaces.
The hardware will be standard (as it is for Model S & X).

You can unlock it at purchase as option for $X or after purchase for $X+$Y (currently X=5000 and Y=1000).

I suspect they'll do the same for Model 3.

What's even more interesting is that at times, since the feature is entirely in software, offered 30-day trials for users to try out autopilot.
How does their autonomous car compare to nvidia's?
Thank you for clarifying your position.
So is this confirmation that they are launching essentially a driverless Tesla-brand Uber competitor?
The problem is that most consumers, like parent poster, do not really understand what pilots do, or that an autopilot simply holds the course steady (in the simplest form, at least).

Combine ignorance with misguided self-righteousness, and we get...this mess.
Perhaps the original iPhone falls in this category. It did less (games, apps) than the competition when it launched, but soon the same product overtook the competition when the app store and API was released.
Ok, makes sense. Thanks for the tweet link.
Please help explaining this to a friend
Hi, I am having a hard time explaining the concept of callback functions in DOM to a friend coming from Qt/C++ background. Any thoughts how I could make it sound more friendly sounding given his background. This was my most recent attempt:

The most common host environment in which an object, called the subject, maintains a list of its dependents, called observers, and notifies them automatically of any state changes, usually by calling one of Facade Pattern is a utility to help run multiple versions of Node. Despite the performance limitations inherent to its dynamic nature, the increasing speed of JavaScript utilities designed for the web. HTTP requests. Virtual DOM is a predictable state container for apps.
This is a big deal, actually. It's a EULA for cars.
> Google has been working on this problem for longer and they have access to the largest image/video datasets in the world to train their models

As of August, Google's self-driving cars have 2 million miles of real on-road experience, while Tesla's Autopilot systems have 140 million. They're beaming back data to Tesla the whole time.
What about the 40x faster processor with neural nets thrown in there somewhere? There's a bit more than just new cameras/sensors.
Good catch! I think you're right; Tesla probably now buys pretty generic cameras (from various suppliers) and then integrates them, so the cost is definitely not that much.
Pylint is usable in PTVS projects:

https://github.com/Microsoft/PTVS/wiki/Pylint

Also Sublime Text has a nice plugin called Anaconda, where PyLint can be enabled:

http://damnwidget.github.io/anaconda/IDE/
I highly doubt it. They're not including Lidar, which means no high-resolution point clouds to be able to identify objects. In my opinion, this just doesn't cut it since ultrasonic is limited to relatively short range, and Radar doesn't provide the level of detail you need to really understand what is going on around the car beyond "there's some kind of object 100 feet ahead".
On the other hand: The pilots are highly trained to fly and how to use the autopilot including the limitations.
Almost certainly very little.

They've been clearly working on AP 2.0 for a long time - this sort of hardware upgrade isn't something you roll out in a few weeks.
This capability was even pretty strongly hinted at for the Model 3.
SafetyCulture gets record-breaking funding in Australia