skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Have to agree with you. This is the automatic exposure control of the camera. my 1440p dash cam does the same thing. In its video it looks like everything outside of the cone of the headlights is pitch dark, but it is actually not. I have seen deer standing by the side of the road and later checked the dash cam, which did not pick them up at all.
Passing a bill is certainly a small step forward but the focus should be in the implementation (like in every other thing) and the details within it. Factors such as the provision and quality of teacher training, resources for teachers to integrate CS in the classrooms, support for students to work on meaningful projects rather than dry, academic projects, and job prospects will probably be more influential in making this a "forward-thinking" step.
Colleagues remember Stephen Hawking (1942–2018)
> It also seems to me that for those who tend toward original intent interpretations (majority of current Supreme Court) would agree that the founders only saw it fit that people be able to own guns with similar firepower and lethality as muskets.

You'd be wrong there. The Supreme Court agrees that the founders saw fit that people are armed with weapons similar to those used by the military, with certain restrictions.
I mean... I even provided a source and everything. And you threw that all away with a glib "nah I read somewhere that you're wrong".

Please read the link. I may still be wrong, but by my math, the car was a Volvo XC90 which means the acceptable margin of error on the speedometer is +/- 3 miles per hour.
I know people are saying this is just like Cloudflare, but there might be some real value differentiation here. Google has been doing some really advanced things in this area for a long time. I think I saw a research paper or talk from 5-10 years ago about how Google shows the impact of network policies before applying them, I just searched for it and couldn't find it[1]. The things like Preview Mode and Rich Rules Language could be very advanced.

[1] But I did find this page about their network research: https://research.google.com/teams/netsys/
Thanks for the clarifications - dashcams sound exactly like the first few generations of GoPro cameras (haven't tried any of the last few so can't generalize) - almost useless in low light conditions, great in sunlight or in front of a high powered light source.
Paper actually looks interesting. I'm afraid that without an explanation, the title is going to turn a lot of would-be-interested readers away.

Also, I've read that pdf files (with "[pdf]" in the title) get a lot of traction on HN, so if you re-post it, you may want to link directly to the pdf. This is an especially good candidate as the abstract is at the top of the paper.
>built with server side page rendering techniques (I am looking at you, Kibana).

I'm not sure if this is actually accurate:

1. https://github.com/elastic/kibana/search?utf8=&q=React

2. https://elastic.github.io/eui
> apply the brakes

Or swerve out of the way.
People crossing streets mid block is such a common in pheonix that last week Arizona announced a plan spend $250k on educating the community on this very problem. Pheonix is one of the most dangerous cities for pedestrians and bikers. Pheonix is built for cars not people, a ton of roads are fast 4 Lanes in residential areas.
> The AI will learn

https://xkcd.com/1838/
Apologies, meant to type 18 meters. That's just for the braking - not including reaction time.

But the point is, she was well within the field of detection at that range.
No, this is an urban area just north of downtown Tempe:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/N+Mill+Ave+%26+E+Curry+Rd,...
>which can't be deemed common behaviour by anybody.

Judging by the replies in this thread, it would seem some American roads are more pedestrian than they are pavement.
Show HN: Windows Unicode Character Insertion Utility
If the vehicle can't detect objects in the non visible spectrum (even just IR) at least as far away as a human can in the visible spectrum then that is a showstopper right there for the technology. Additionally if it can't then it shouldn't be traveling at a speed where it can't react in time.
Kind of sums up my reply. Generally, if you know or there is enough suspicion the cure is going to harm or kill one and euthanasia is out of the picture then you are liable. That's why the whole process exists about medical trials. One nice window here is that you can in general experiment on yourself (people have and are doing that). Depends on the framework, but good point.

Anyways, my point here is you can not override law (or you shouldn't be able to).
I would love to see what the lidar/ir system was seeing. I'm not sure that will be released if it's obvious uber fucked up.
GMO anyone?
right, so the camera's night vision mode that detects objects in the dark would have been completely blinded by the street lights while passing under the streetlamp. Take night vision goggles and look at a light. It blinds the whole field of vision.

The only thing that I think was the cars fault was that the car is programmed to drive when the driver is driving around distracted. There is no point to a human driver sitting behind the wheel of an autonomous vehicle if they aren't paying attention.

People need to understand that self driving mode isn't a freedom from the responsibility of driving safely. Rather its a tool to help ensure that driving statistically becomes safer as more self driving vehicles find their ways onto the road.

Hopefully someday all cars will be self driving and dangerous hazards/traffic reduced to the point that they are virtually none existent rather than being towards the top of the list of "preventable death" and "things humans don't want to waste most of their time during the day doing".
> I wouldn't be one bit surprised. The antics of this company are well known.

I would be surprised under the new CEO.
> My experience of seeing red isn't the same thing as whatever behavior I might have as result.

The deeper you look at how the brain works, the more those two processes look like well-coordinated siblings.
Under the new CEO?
The housing crunch is real, but on "developer salary" you shouldn't have any problems finding a rental. Mar Vista and Palms are the closest relatively affordable neighborhoods to Culver. You can probably find something in Venice too, but (this is purely personal prejudice) I can't understand why anyone would do that to themselves.
You have to be the change you want to see. I have no problem with other people holding views which I think are disgusting. The only thing I have a problem with is censorship.

H. L. Mencken quote is applicable here, "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."

edit, The one thing I'm finding I really don't like about Voat is that it requires whitelisting Javascript from google domains in order to be able to post.
There is no such compromise. High and rising house prices are inherently incompatible with low and flat housing prices. These are two counterparties on opposite sides of the same market.
I had the same question, especially because several relatives and I own Volvos and pay attention to their safety promises. One would assume that Uber cannot disable Volvo's safety systems...

However, it appears that Volvo's "City Safety" detection of pedestrians or bicyclists requires clear visual identification. So it works in daytime, or at night with strong illumination, but not in relative darkness. [1]

One other thing that seems off in the video is that the headlights don't illuminate much distance ahead.

[1] https://support.volvocars.com/en-CA/cars/pages/owners-manual...
I suspect the raw output of their main sensing sensors is proprietary somehow.
Years of Clojure has made me a dramatically better Rails programmer. The biggest change for me is that I now treat ActiveRecord models as gloried hashes with easy-access to a namespace of related functions (ie. methods) that operate on all manner of underspecified partial data, rather than traditional OOP-style objects with sophisticated invariants. I'm also very careful to strictly separate reads from writes, and to discard/reload all mutated objects immediately after transacting with them.

My new business is built on Rails for a very long list of reasons, not the least of which is that both Ruby is quite a nice language, and Rails is actually quite good for back-office/lo-fi/quick-and-dirty, server-side-rendered UX with relatively low web traffic.
Something that's worth pointing out as well is what happens to low-light contrast sensitivity as we age. I believe there's something like a 50% loss in night vision between the ages of 20 and 50.

Having watched the video, I seriously doubt I'd have seen the pedestrian in time to stop for her. I don't know that I would even feel that sorry for her, frankly -- there is only so much we can (and should) do to protect drunks and idiots from hazards like crossing the street at night without looking.

Finally, had the driver been paying attention, at least some blame could probably be assigned to DOT's stubborn refusal to bring their lighting standards into the 21st century. Cars in other countries are equipped with noticeably better lighting tech than US cars are allowed to use. It looks like you'd be overdriving these headlights at any speed over 15 MPH or so.
Xenon lights should be required on all new car sales. My new car has them and the difference is incredible. Not only can I see far more, but signage really pops. I've noticed that they are also much easier to look at when approaching. It is an incredible safety feature.
You're absolutely right, that's often the intent.

I approached my project with the hope of creating antibodies that makes those techniques less valuable. Or at minimal, help a few people better understand the incentives/techniques behind what they're seeing.
The fact that the pedestrian died is precisely the point. As a frequent pedestrian, and as a person who likes people, and because people are often pedestrians, I would like to prevent pedestrian deaths. That happens by holding SDV developers to rigorous standards, but also by highlighting that crossing the street safely requires paying close attention and being careful, more so than many people do. I've seen several places where pedestrians have the right of way a lot, and many will just step directly into the street, legally mind you, when cars are traveling quickly nearby. No matter how you slice it, that yields an unacceptably high probability of death, and you can blame whoever you want but you will still be dead. There's a difference between victim blaming, and pointing out that you can avoid becoming a victim by taking sensible precautions. This is the latter. It doesn't absolve SDV developers of any carelessness they may have had in their work to point that out too.
Valley Forged: How One Man Made the Indie Video Game Sensation 'Stardew Valley'
I suspect it's too late to chnage now but have a "throwaway" account is an indicator you might not be committed to the community. one has to dig a little deeper to find out a multi year history with 4000 karma. so first impressions of your comments might be getting biased (it might just the "red car effect" but i am seeing a lot more throwaway accounts these days)

I would also not judge the community based on reactions to this very contentious thread - i am wary of jumping in on this one, but thought it worth noting your comment was not wildly out of place.

stay, we have cookies :-)
>Why so much faith in non profits?

I don't have that much faith in non-profits. But I don't have any faith in a for-profit company for social good.
The onus is on driver to see what the path ahead is clear. Uber clearly violated the 3 sec. rule [i.e. reaction time plus braking time with the braking time dominating the equation]. Uber was driving too fast for the conditions. If you have only 30m clear view, you can't drive faster than 10m/s. Driving faster, like Uber did here, is basically driving blind, reckless and negligent. The woman was in the headlights for only 1 second - thus Uber was driving 3 times faster than the maximum safe speed in those conditions ( specifically the power and angle of their low beam headlights)

>the pedestrian showed up in the field of view right before the collision

It takes AZ police and $70B corp together to conclude that the woman appeared too fast. Guess what? If people and objects appear too fast in the field of view then you're driving too fast.
According to the cloud.elastic.co recommendations for 'production' grade clusters suggests from 4GB upwards.
Yes google was so much better than all those other sites it was like night and day.

I was in high school at the time in the 90's. Where I lived the internet wasn't very widespread only place I could access it was via dial up in our school library I remember trying to do school projects having to go through the search engine dance you'd start by searching yahoo, then infoseek, then lycos, then altavista one by one slogging through pages of useless results trying to find what you were looking for.

I was in 8th or 9th grade we were given an assignment to write a report about the "G8 forum" none of the search engines I used at the time were capable of returning meaningful results for all the possible combinations of "G8", "G+8", "G and 8", "Group of 8", "G AND 8 AND Summit OR Forum" I could think of. I'd just get pages and pages of nonsense compounded by the fact my school's dial up was so slow - a 33 kb modem I think it was an exercise in frustration.

I complained to my parents about it over dinner and my Dad said 'oh you should try google.com' First time I'd ever heard about google, the next day at school I tried a google search and got meaningful results on the very first page. I don't think I ever used Yahoo or any of those other sites again after that.
> The cars don't have to increase ISO to get detail, that's for human eyes. Increasing ISO only works because we can't see details in shadows, but computers don't have that limitation. A neural network wouldn't have to add 100 to each pixel to make out detail, like a human would.

I'm not an expert on this stuff but I think you're misunderstanding or mixing up the ISO value with exposure compensation. The ISO value corresponds to the sensor's sensitivity, and even RAW photos (which are more or less dumps of the raw sensor data) are captured with specific ISO values, and look different at different ISOs.
I agree. I can remember quite a few times I've had to slow down.

One time there was a bar fight that spilled onto the road I was driving along. I slowed down as I could see the commotion on the sidewalk, and lucky I did because they ended up in the path of my car.

This self driving car would have killed quite a few people in that case it seems.
paris is one of the highest density cities on earth with virutally no highrises whatsoever.
Not if the algo is making statistical inferences from a visual input as well. I feel it may have clouded the "perception" of what was actually there.
>the pedestrian has the right to the road over the car. Maybe it's true in Europe judging by comments on previous articles, but it's not common in the US. It's illegal.

You are conflating two different concepts. In every state in the U.S., it is illegal to hit a pedestrian whether or not they are where they are supposed to be. If you see a pedestrian jaywalking then you are required to avoid the pedestrian to the greatest extent possible. Anything less is at least manslaughter.
Assuming it is true, for which I have yet to see any evidence, what is the substance of point #2?

I have trouble finding these arguments convincing in light of concrete data.

I have looked at examples of the fake news posts on Facebook, as reported by the media. Two of them say that you can tweet or SMS to vote instead of going in person. Is this all it takes to disrupt an American election?

I saw two other posts - one for a fake event called miners for Trump, and one that says Hillary Clinton has a low approval rating with military veterans. Is there someone making a serious argument that Hillary voters saw this and changed their minds? Folks were on the fence but this is what pushed them to vote for President Trump? I don't find that believable. The posts are weak and hardly convincing, if at all.

There was also an anti Trump march after the election which was attended by a large number of people including Michael Moore, which turned out to be organised by Russians on Facebook. That one was effective but seemed to be aimed at the President.

This is the kind of hoax stuff that you used to see in email forwards, and those have been doing the rounds for years. Seeing them on Facebook is not a new phenomenon, it's just a different platform.

I find this line of reasoning very sketchy because I have yet to see any content or post that makes a compelling argument based on false facts. If you have seen any such posts I would like to see them.

I'm also confused about why CA needed the data they took from Kogan in order to do this. How does one relate to the other? Let's pretend I have Kogans data right here with me and I have a few of these fake posts, what do I do next? Do I start adding some of these folks as friends and start sharing content with them? How did they use the Kogan data exactly?

By comparison I think some of the memes and hoaxes that the online Trump groups (mostly young Americans) came up with were quite well made. There was a campaign called #DraftOurDaughters that purposely perpetrated a hoax that Hillary Clinton wanted to draft women to fight wars in the middle East. There were also several campaigns to draw attention to the practice of spirit cooking, which was referenced once or twice in John Podesta's emails. I remember being in a discord voice chat one day in 2016 with a few folks from 4chan's /pol/ board and there was work being done where the emails were being made into pamphlets to pass around at church to reach some of the less tech savvy folks, and older folks who were not on Twitter and didn't know much about Wikileaks.

As for point #1, given that nobody consented to their data going to either Obama or Trump I think the comparison is quite valid. CA broke an arbitrary platform policy whereas the Obama campaign got the data with their blessing. I don't think that is a good thing, or that it makes their use of people's personal data acceptable.
I wonder what the "deaths per vehicle miles" stats for autonomous vs human-piloted cars look like right now? Humans kill, what, 30,000 other humans a year or so in The US? But there's a _lot_ of vehicle miles driven. My guess is this one incident has likely pushed the autonomous car death rate per vehicle mile way beyond the current human piloted death rate per vehicle mile...

(Having said that, there's not much doubt in my mind that stuff like antilock brakes and autonomous emergency braking have reduced the road toll (and will reduce it further as these recent-ish technology become more common i the aged vehicle fleet) - I think the difference there is then those technologies are not nearly so inclined to make driver pay less attention to what's going on around them. I _hope_ people don't think "It's OK, I've got emergency braking - I'll just watch this tv show as I drive to work!")
“Demographics can refer to any subdivision of a population, it’s not a synonym for “race”.
What the Trump campaign did was more aggressive and dishonest. They took it too far, finally inspiring a backlash. It happens with lots of things: crime, financial bubbles, etc. Eventually you hit a critical mass and a reaction starts. Once started the reaction spreads virally and feeds on itself.

It also doesn't help that Trump is allied with and most ardently supported by neo-Nazis. Not claiming all his supporters are such, but that's obviously his most vocal and enthusiastic base.
> The markets can be irrational for longer than you can stay solvent.

Cute quote, now show me the data.

> You can pull out silly tropes like some concept of "correct market pricing". Which means "correct" according to some group of concerns vs some other group of concerns. Rarely do we get to directly design markets, and designed changes often go vastly wrong with unintended side effects.

Correct market prices are the cost plus risk-adjusted returns. Essentially, the point at which economic profits are zero.

> It's not irrelevant from a life stability perspective if you get priced out of your domicile for rent increases, vs keeping it for an owned property. People can individually value that stability or not, but it's a real consideration.

That only happens if there is an artificial constraint in supply, generated by NIMBY policies.

> here is also large overhead in not choosing the time that one wants to move if rents increase uncontrollably.

Again, with freedom to build, prices won't move like that.
No competition? There are many CDN and DDOS protection services. Cloudflare's own copy claims they have 35% of the market which indicates there is certainly competition out there.
There is no shortcut or method to better learning. You get better at it by practice. The best way to learn something is to teach it to someone. You can use the revolutionary Fennyman technique for doing this. You assume that you are teaching a new topic that you have learned to a 5 year old.
I think YC has a template somewhere
Maybe you have heard of the Overton Window?*

You essentially can't publish it if it a. Falls too far outside what the public will readily believe and b. Is not adequately backed up with verifiable hard facts.

Speculation that they intentionally pulled the fire alarm would have been considered mudslinging and yellow journalism at the time the research was done. It's print-worthy now because we now know that Theranos did so much dishonest crap that pulling the fire alarm is not unbelievable and is such small potatoes in the grand scheme of things that it isn't even mudslinging. It's a nit.

* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
I agree that we shouldn't idealize.

As an American, I've lived in western Europe, eastern Europe and spent months in Japan. There are some things these places do worth idealizing.

Americans should travel more and replicate the best parts.
YouTube Red is solid as everyone uses Youtube to listen to music. THus it knows and creates the best mix playlist especially if you listen to many, many genres of music. Apple Music like Siri is stupid .. the playlist it creates aren't based on all genres I listen to but only one.

Also Red integrates well with Google Home as you can tell home to wake you up to whatever song and play whatever song.

No commercials is a bonus to all previous mentioned.
Apparently, they don't support external origins yet. IMHO without this feature they can't be considered a direct competitor to CloudFlare. Also, CloudFlare lately is adding a bunch of very neat features, it's not just about DDoS.

Of course, for those who are already using GCP and depending on their needs is a great alternative.
>Can't they do both? I don't think they're going to be in short supply of prisoners anytime soon.

Except there should be a much smaller supply of prisoners because many laws are unjust as they are now. The drug war directly serves the prison industrial complex and private prisons are one of the biggest lobbying groups against decriminalization and legalization.

Now maybe Promise won't lobby for the war on drugs because it would shatter their illusion of social good, but if they grow they will end up lobbying in other ways that will directly oppose public interests.
And an autonomous car that actually worked in theory would be able to swerve safely, since it would have a full knowledge of surrounding obstacles and be able to measure the physics of the car as it was swerving, allowing it to keep in a safe envelope. In my mind, the complete lack of reaction from the car paints this as a total failure on the part of the car.