skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not a gun owner. Indeed I'm very much opposed to people being able to own guns and hope that someday they will be banned in the U.S. I do understand your perspective and why this is upsetting to you.

For me I see it as a step toward people being more anti-gun ownership. Societies evolve and social views change. Our views on marijuana, smoking, etc. have changed over the decades. I hope I am now seeing the beginning of the end of acceptance of gun ownership.

While we are on opposite sides of this issue I encourage you to continue to stand up for your rights and fight for what you believe in. Let Reddit and Youtube know you are upset about this. Be active and vigilant. I will too.
LiDAR is not affected by the amount of visible (sun) light. I'm very curious to see the data returned from the LiDAR, because this should've been a very clear human frame, albeit with a bike behind it.
I've encountered one 25 minute ad on YouTube, I don't recall what it was for though. I laughed and reloaded the page, and off to the races.

I've also encountered a number that range in the 5-10 minute range. I don't use YouTube very often, so I'm not sure how regularly these occur.
"Whatever reason" is because the quality of life in an urban area is much higher than in a rural "cheap" area. Jobs are centered in urban areas, you can eliminate a huge commute by living close to work, clawing back hours of your life. For those who are unable to afford a car the rich transit options available in urban areas are life lines to school, work, a community. Cheaper areas can be massive voids where go to the grocery store or post office is a 30 minutes round trip car ride.
Cuck is invented/re-invented by alt-righters.

"As linguist Mark Liberman explained on Language Log, cuck “was extended figuratively on 4chan to reference ‘relinquished manliness’ and more abstractly ‘selling out, abandoning principles.’”"
Coinbase: Buy/Sell Digital Currency
Just wondering... If there are differences, which you concede, then maybe it's those differences and not "an engineered campaign by Trump's enemies" driving the difference in outrage?
I think this brings up an interesting philosophy for autonomous driving technology - is it feasible if it's "only as good as human driving"?

I mean I've seen comments that a human might not have seen the pedestrian. Is that a "defense" of driving AI? That's it's about as good as human driving?

Seems to me the public won't accept driverless cars unless there is significant evidence that it's much better than human drivers - after all human drivers make a lot of mistakes and cause a lot of fatalities. I don't think any other claims of the advantages of AI driving could offset any negative publicity of injury or death.

Just a thought in the context of this tragedy.
You're letting them off too easy. The FTC consent decree was in 2011 and this happened in 2013. They settled with the FTC and paid no fines by agreeing not to give users data away without express consent and then let the api continue doing exactly that until 2014.

Maybe in 2010 your comment would apply, but when this happened they knew very well they weren't supposed to be doing this.
Even in that over-exposed video, at 35mph, I think you would have to be extremely lucky to not hit her. From her coming into view to collision is ~700ms. Subtract average human reaction time (250ms), and that leaves a little less than half a second to swerve.

A human would have made this mistake, but I don't know enough about LIDAR to understand if a computer should have made this mistake. Is night vision poor on these machines?
The other day I forgot to re-enable my ad blocker after testing a site, and I'm amazed that anyone can even use YouTube without blocking the ads (let alone enjoy it).

I literally have no idea why anyone would go through that to watch a 5-minute video.
I don't understand why HN now finds this super interesting, but when it was reported more than a year ago, it was a lot of hand-waving and "no proof that it actually worked" over here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13542735
They got the whole thing.

https://twitter.com/cld276/status/975568130117459975
> Housing is a free market

I would encourage you to attend some planning hearings, city council meetings, and so on before asserting that. Because it really, really isn't. Look at a zoning map of your city.
Why don't you install an adblocker, which will block the ads for you?
I think the 'P' in NPR is the biggest difference.
The house itself normally isn't appreciating; it's the land that does. People don't consume land (usually).
This time it actually has the video. And it is a poignant reminder that there is no such thing as a too reflective vest for bicyclists.
How did LIDAR and IR not catch that? That seems like a pretty serious problem.

It's clear from the video that a human driver actually would've had more trouble since the pedestrian showed up in the field of view right before the collision, yet that's in the visible spectrum.

When I argue for automated driving (as a casual observer), I tell people about exactly this sort of stuff (a computer can look in 20 places at the same time, a human can't. a computer can see in the dark, a human can't).

Yet this crash proves that all the equipment in the world didn't catch a very obvious obstruction.
The point is that any asset class can crash, and it's very relevant.

People need to stop treating housing with the expectation that the value of a house should grow and grow and grow, because that's part of how we got to all this NIMBY bullshit.
http://KeepTheInternetGreat.com

https://www.startengine.com/gab-select

In b4 this thread gets locked lol.
>And if you're starving and there is free food one block over you go and eat there.

Well most people generally want to do better than that, surprisingly enough.

> The problem is that no one wants to live there because living in dense cities for whatever reason is extremely appealing now

People want a better quality of life, is that not obvious? Not only that but its better for the environment as well. You don't need a car in London, but you definitely do in suburbia.

>The price of a house grows exponentially with the minimum travel time to a metropolis from it.

It becomes exponentially more expensive as you get further away from the city? I don't think that's true, and I don't know what the relevance is to the discussion anyway.

>Blaming home owners for this is very useful scapegoating while ignoring the context.

What context? You've provided none. Home owners aren't the problem, home owners who seek to deny people affordable housing are the problem. It's selfishness, plain and simple.
Yeah, it's surprising. Mine was at 6+ upvotes but not on frontpage and then made it with ~10. The other post has 27 upvotes (within an hour) but also 19 comments. (I'm under the impression that comments/upvotes ratio is a factor).

I also assume any Twitter link is downmodded at the start.
While not the sole way to build wealth, it’s one of the most accessible ways for anyone who isn’t already wealthy and intends to live somewhere more than a few years.

I could, tomorrow, go buy a duplex, triplex, or quad with only 3% down and immediately rent out all units except the one I’m living in. Usually a much higher cash on cash return than index funds when done properly, your co-tenants are paying your rent, and you’re getting to depreciate an asset annually on your taxes that is most likely appreciating.

How could you tell people not to take advantage of such a good deal?
I mean the buying and selling of existing houses, not the building of new houses. Those comments are primarily with respect to what could happen to the housing market for existing homes in a city that implements large changes housing policy.
Anyone have a mirror? I can't play videos on twitter for some reason.

Mirror: https://streamable.com/vllgl

She wasn't wearing anything visible at a pitch black street at night. It seems like there was about 7 meters before her shoes were even visible.
This seems like a simple case. I would have expected the driver assist in my 2017 Subaru to have reacted to something in the road. I'm surprised that the much more sophisticated self driving system did not.
No problem!

I'm sure Dr. Cummings would be more than happy to talk about issues facing validation and verification in the context of NHTSA/FAA.
Can’t believe all those redundant sensors didn’t catch this obstacle.
On the one hand, the cyclist became visible in the footage at a very late stage. If that is how the drivers eye saw it they would have very little time to react, however they may have been able to do a sharp swerve.

On the other, the operator was clearly distracted regardless of if they would have been able to avoid this.
Why not an iPhone? At least Apple seems to care about privacy, and they aren't an ad-tech company like Google or FB.
Lol you people can't be serious. "Alt-right slur." Hilarious stuff.
> there is no such thing as a too reflective vest for bicyclists

And to not jaywalk a bike across a street in the dark!
googleflare
Seriously, do you think Mueller is immediately publicizing every finding? Do you not see the pattern of indictments?
Not sure why you're down voted. It's a legitimate question, particularly from many who may not follow US politics very closely.

The alt right popularized particular terms that have racial and misogynistic undertones as insults such as cuck and soy boy.
...by using the latest, greatest new term to shut down debate and avoid addressing the concept of being intellectually honest.
He should resign. Or this bullshit will keep repeating. As it already has too many times.

Tech/Engineering folk are totally unfit to run social companies of the scale of YouTube/twitter/facebook etc. They don't have the skills or the experience or the sense in handling this stuff.

They know how to scale things and that's where their expertise ends and contribution should end.

They should be run by elected politicians with an advisory board filled with people who understand sociology, psychology, religion, culture, law and security. Those are the people who keep society running not the fucking plumbers.
Exuse me sir, but this approach is well known as "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt", or FUD in short.

It definitely works, meaning it shifts the public opinion, and quite effectively so, but I would rather examine the facts and form my own opinion after such examination. If I ever want to go to the second step without first one, I can always watch some CNN.
I've had a few.

It's annoying. I don't use a blocker. I don't skip the ads. Yet youtube shows me some really tedious 25 minute ad (for obscure builing material; for some online god knows what; for some money scam).

I thought it must be some experiment to see how bad ads could get before people like me hit reload or start blocking, because it makes no sense otherwise.
Tech giants shun Facebook as ACCC inquiry looms
Looking at a video to guess if a human could have seen her or not does not make sense. Most eyes are vastly superior to this dash-cam.

As for the car, I agree, this was about as basic, trivial test as it gets. Open road, low light conditions (where many sensors shine) and she is walking normal speed.
Yeah, it's a lot different.

NPR used to be publicly funded, much like the BBC in the UK. The idea was to offer objective journalism for the strength of democracy. It has helped a lot in the UK may have helped prevent the current disaster we now experience in the US. When that public funding started being removed, NPR had to start acting more like a private company, satisfying target demographics and seeking seeking donor support.

So, NPR pledge drives are in large part them trying to maintain an objective perspective. A feeble attempt, sure, but they are trying. Youtube is merely maximizing profit.
If there is something that isn't going to help the public perception of autonomous cars at all, it's releasing a compressed to shit capture of another video showing a single camera angle from dozens.

I would say it's a deliberate attempt to manipulate if I didn't also strongly believe ignorance on part of the police department has lead them to believe that autonomous cars could even exit a parking lot without data from many more than this one camera, not to mention the vastly more useful LIDAR on top.

(That's before you consider the video angles shown here are just for dashcam purposes. The real cameras for the autonomous driving are in the sensor array on top of the roof)
It's not new, now literally everything to do with anyone or anything that's not left-wing SJW is now RUSSIAN!
The first question that comes to my mind watching this, is, why didn't the _pedestrian_ see the _car_? It looks as though she didn't even look up until the car was only a few feet away from here. I'm not just trying to "blame the victim". The car "should" have responded sooner. But see-and-avoid works both ways. If you're choosing to cross a road in the dark, you, too, have a responsibility to understand the drivers' limited visiblity and act accordingly. My point is that this is a teachable moment for not only SDV developers, but also for pedestrians.
Lead, mercury, fluoride. Other cumulative neurotoxins. It seems obvious to me that we should work to eliminate anything which damages our brains, whether or not we can test yet for effects.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16643491
I sure couldn't have reacted quickly enough to have prevented this collision. I'd expect the car to have better reflexes then I do, but given the little time from when the pedestrian first showed up on camera and the time when the collision occurred, I doubt that there was anything that the car could have done, regardless of the sophistication of its software.
I feel like a human would've been able to at least brake a little or swerve in this situation?

Not avoiding the collision but perhaps lessening the damage?

It looks like the car doesn't even try to slow down.
I didn't know that new Subaru's can come with driver assist. How does it work? What's your experience with it?

I've got a 2013, and am thinking about trading in.
Can confirm. Was running a playlist on a Windows machine with Edge as a cheap substitute for burn-in/stability testing. No dice: it would stop after every song with a ad dialog that required clicking (for YT Red, or for Chrome). Horrible experience generally - it wasn't clear if this torture was reserved for Edge users or I was special that day. I switched to Vevo and it provided the necessary hardware testing that I was seeking.
I suppose we'll need to wait for some standardization in the sensor department, but it would be great if autonomous car makers could share the sensor data for collisions so that everyone can learn from the mistakes. Test data is great, but there's nothing like real world problems.
However bad the car was or wasn't at detecting the victim, it's nothing compared to how bad the human victim was at detecting the car (which presumably had its lights on coming down an empty street at night).

Imagine if the victim was driving a car...
As someone who lives in the center of a large city: no. It's not the work commute. It's everything else.

Having a coffee shop at the bottom of my lift. Having 4 super markets within walking distance. Having 200+ restaurants to pick from. Museums when I get bored, book shops, theaters, cinemas, meetups, hacker spaces the list goes on.

Having to commute for an hour would give me enough time to wake up. My previous job was 5 minutes walking from where I lived, my current one is 8. I take a detour through a park to make it 30 so I can drink a coffee before I get in.

That people are complaining that they can't afford that and making it into an issue on the same level as getting food and drink is ridiculous.

Housing prices are a systemic problem that needs to be addressed. The way to address it is by cutting demand. Build up infrastructure in rural areas so I can actually get decent internet, that bridges don't feel like they will fall down if I drive over them too quickly. Change the regulations so only livable units are built in cities. Change the requirements that non-citizens can't own more than 50% of a dwelling. There is a huge number of tweaks that could solve the housing affordability problem.
A Template for TypeScript Projects Using React and Redux
"Short" being a relative term though. Your points make sense but there's simply no way raytracing can be as performant as current rasterization techniques in geometry-heavy scenes at a same-or-better quality level, resolution, and framerate until GPUs get substantially more powerful.
The Obama campaign used that data in every way that CA did. The fact that the app only represented that it was sending messages to friends is just as misleading as what Kogan (not CA, who never had an app) did. They used this data that 99.5% of the people didn't authorize them to have for targeting, campaign strategy, etc.
What disaster do you see in Argentina? During the last years It cancelled all of it's debt with the IMF (in one payment, and this debt was generated many years ago) and also with the Paris Club. It's Central Bank is in relative good position. A monetary issue is the high inflation rate, but I wouldn't call it an "economic disaster" since unemployment is relatively low, if we compare it with historical levels or with unemployment of other LatAm countries.
Two obvious things from the footages: the pedestrian is invisible until the last moment, and the "driver" is focused on something else, probably a smartphone.

Given of how little time there was between the hitted woman became visible and the impact, a driver action may not have been able to avoid it, but what will be interesting is how his responsability will be engaged or not.

Anyway one advantage of automous car is the theoretical the ability to have faster than human reaction and extra-human sensors. It should have been able to catch the problem.
thank you for your response! We originally posted without "Show HN", don't know what happened there...
Thanks for the explanations. On the transaction front, what about share trading activity based on Value statements or actions that impact Brand/Goodwill etc? Though the sale of shares is a future transaction, a company could reasonably conclude something like:

We will make X and Y the value statements of our company/brand. If our actions reduce the value of X and Y statements, what will that cost us? This at least would provide a 'rough' starting value, to be reviewed/measured against market response. Do companies already do this? I'd think it important for service/advertising based companies (but I am guessing, I have only couch-potato knowledge).
"The move has left organizations offering services to the LGBT community unable to directly target their audiences."

Some of the benefits of ad targeting that some want to restrict and regulate into oblivion.
I think experience is the best teacher. In a perfect world, Uber will look at the data, determine why this happened. The AI will learn and it won't happen again. That is compared to countless new human drivers entering the road every year. That's not a defense, or an excuse, but an explanation or reality.

I know we don't live in a perfect world, but regardless, we can't change what happened here, so it's best to learn something from it.
Julian Assange works for RT [1], which is the Russian state propaganda media [2], or was that a rhetorical question?

1. https://www.rt.com/tags/the-julian-assange-show/

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)#Propaganda_cla...
While I'm surprised the sensors on the car didn't catch the cyclist, I pretty sure if I had been driving and paying full attention I would have hit the bike too.

Personally, given this video, I'd still be totally comfortable with a self driving car on the road with no safety driver (who clearly didn't make a difference here anyway, not that they could have).
Humanity as a whole is probably better off.

A core strategy of US nuclear forces for the past sixty years has been to increase precision and to reduce warhead size.

The biggest US warhead ever was in service in 1954 - a 15,000 kiloton bomb. Our biggest current bomb, designed in the 70's, is 1,200 kilotons, less than a tenth of what we've had before. Our latest ICBM warhead is only 300 - 475 kilotons.

Also with the increased precision, the US has been reducing the number of warheads - we now have one third? the number of warheads we had in the 1960's. In fact, Russia has more declared nuclear weapons than the US.

The increase accuracy is likely to save a lot of lives in the case of war.
As usual, the discussion about whether something is secure enough or not should start from describing various attack vectors (which will be different for different class of users). AFAIK, the airborn product tries to eliminate an attack on its own servers / data stored on servers and in transit. While it is a good thing but by itself it doesn't necessarily make all the users of the product secure. In particular, they ignore attacks on the client itself, injection on the network, and several other "offline" attack vectors (e.g. taking pictures of user's screen). I understand the desire to make marketing simple for end users, but I really don't think that it helps people make rational decisions about security.
What a vapid post. It's X vs Y, and everything is relative to that?

Here's an exercise for you. Identify federal law enforcement agencies, and see what public statements and actions they've taken on this. There is not partisan symmetry, but I won't give the answer away.
It isn't at all clear from the video. Video cameras of this quality vastly underperform human vision in low-light conditions.
Since I've seen this be a very controversial statement here in the past, I'd just like to point out to everyone that American drivers on four lane roads are not expecting pedestrians to be in the middle of the road and not at a crosswalk. That is not a normal thing to happen in America, and no one expects it to happen. It is a very rare situation.

--edit: okay guys... no where did anyone argue that you shouldn't be watching for pedestrians crossing. Stop yelling "gotcha!" like you caught me in a trap. What I'm arguing against is the common refrain on these articles that there is no such thing as jaywalking and 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.

Congratulations on expertly knocking down your own strawman, though.
You're getting downvoted but the guy was obviously reading his phone the entire time...
Isn't the driver clearly looking at a phone in his lap?
Yeah. Does the Uber car really capture video at 480p and 15fps? Also only releasing the video conveniently ignores the fact that these cars have IR and LIDAR. The pedestrian is hard to see in this video essentially because it is dark and they are wearing dark clothing. Neither of these are at all obstacles to LIDAR and IR, and the video at least shows us that the road is clear of obstructions.
> are free to harangue you all they want

Any exec hauled on the carpet is going to want a drink afterwards. That's not the concern.
I would think the car would have been able to at least do something in this situation? It looks like it didn't react at all.
Nice. Cloudflare has had no competition for too long.
I love our 2017 Outback w/ EyeSight. Luckily, we haven't had to test the auto braking system at high speeds but the lane assist and assisted cruise control are wonderful.
"There is no such thing as an accident. Only negligence."

This was no accident. The jaywalker was negligent for crossing the street as she did.

Uber is negligent for not having autonomous vehicle standards that clearly exceed what humans can do (I don't think a human could have avoided her based on the video).

Not sure about the driver. Depends on his training/job etc...
She crossed at a spot that was pitch black. Sneakers come into view maybe 40 feet away. Clearly visible at 20. Is that enough time to stop at that speed? Not sure I would have stopped in time.