skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
OK. And the person you responded to with the fatality stats said nothing about proving which way either:

> That's a very bad look; the whole point of self-driving cars is that they can react to unexpected circumstances much more quickly than a human operator, such as when someone walks out into the road. Sounds like Uber's platform may not be up to that standard yet, which makes me wonder why they're on public roads.
AnemicDomainModel
To repeat my comment from a previous discussion which brought a lot of downvotes: what happens when (not if) a self-driving car runs-over and kills someone (e.g. because of a software bug)? Do such cases cause criminal penalties? Who is penalized? Or will all cases of autonomous car accidents with deaths become civil cases? If so - do human drivers get the same new rules or if they kill someone by accident (because they got distracted) they still go to jail? Is that fair?

In this particular case I assume the operator will be thrown under the bus, which is also unfair.
It occurs to me that because the deaths caused by autonomous vehicles may not follow the same distribution across types of deaths, it might make more sense to compare total deaths per million miles between human and autonomous drivers.
The problem is the blame game. Human behind a wheel hits a pedestrian, if they're found at fault then that "horrible inattentive/drunk/whatever driver" goes to jail for the death of another human being. It never makes anything "right", and I won't even start on how a jail sentence regardless of length can ruin your life in the US, but the public as a whole gets a feel good that "justice has been served".

How do we handle this for autonomous vehicles? Do we just fine/sue the company that made the vehicle/developed the software? Do we send imperfect human developers to jail because they made a mistake, even if in the grand scheme of things they have saved lives compared to humans being behind every action made by a vehicle?

A big part of the public image for autonomous cars is increased safety, any deaths at their hands starts raising where and how to place the blame - a subject I think very few are prepared for right now, which is likely part of why Tesla explicitly states autopilot needs a human driver present right now, and why Google has been extremely cautious with operator-supervised tests up until recently.
> Sounds like Uber's platform may not be up to that standard yet, which makes me wonder why they're on public roads.

Who exactly do you think is granting Google, Uber, etc. approval for trials like this on public roads? It's going to be some bureocrat with zero ability to gauge what sort of safety standard these companies' projects have reached.

There are no standards here... what were you expecting would happen?
I know quite a people working on this at Uber ATG. They are in panic mode.
Does anyone use path tracing for live renderings? I think that is the question.
This seems like the opinion of someone who drives too fast?
I agree my tool could be detrimental to many teams. I hope to deploy feature optionally limiting usage to certain channels and disabling direct messaging in the next couple of days.
You're goddamn blind. Yes, of course it matters more if I'm killed by an AI machine than it does if I'm killed by another human being. This is a new development, humans killing humans are not. What if it was autonomous warfare? It is surely coming about in a very near shipment, SOON. The world and history are not static, and techno-utopia is big fat lie, and the idea that things just get better as time advances frontwards is plain infantile. Reality is way more fucked up than you can imagine.
Does anyone know if FB uses deleted photos in their face recognition feature? Or if there is any detail around what happens when data is deleted? I think it probably is like running chkdsk: the data still exists it's just not addressed at the user level any more.
For someone so confident in the application of data, you sure just made up some data to support your point.
Humans don't suddenly become perfect actors just because incentives align. The stress of that risk and efforts taken to mitigate it seems like it would actually make the software worse.

It's up to the product (the collective of individuals that deliver the product) to address and mitigate the risk it creates, that's not solely on the shoulders of individual software contributors.

If A writes a generic computer vision algorithm and open sources it, B integrates that into a "is this a bomb or not" product with a white paper outlining its failure rate in a specific situation, then C sells that product to D who uses it in an entirely different situation and E gets blown up... who gets sued? It definitely should be somebody, there should certainly be a liability and incentive to avoid such a liability but I it probably lies somewhere in C-D space, not A-B space.
I'm not sure it's fair to describe those as hacks. Those techniques are also used for animated movies, which take many CPU-years to render. Those "hacks" are used even when artist have huge amounts of hardware, no real-time constraints, and need extremely high quality.

Techniques other than raytracing have an artistic place, not merely a pragmatic one.
In some sense, yes.

But is it any surprise that Uber had the first self driving car to kill a human being? You can cook in an orderly, careful way, or you can turn the kitchen into a disaster zone and expect other people to clean up for you.

I know which I prefer when it comes to human lives.
Thanks for the feedback and great question here.

PRs are still attached to an hourly or flat rate that you and the client have agreed upon. This means you will not make more money for submitting more PRs. You just receive your payments sooner.

The client also approves your pull request to trigger the payout. The minute your code is accepted into their codebase you receive payment.

I'd love to hear more thoughts on your concern here and if this solves it, really great insight.
Friendly feedback, coming from a reverse engineer: the commenter who also answered this question gave a really good, concrete example of how this could be used in the context of DRM. When I visited your page I was initially perplexed as to why you’d want any of this. You should include a specific example of how this service delivers value, and the reverse engineering example is a good one.
The article also mentions the pedestrian as "a woman walking", so it's not clear whether they are referring to a cyclist as a pedestrian, or whether they are getting different information and actually think it was a pedestrian. Very confusing
I think you're going to have to prove that, for one, Free Markets actually do lead to those things, and for two, that our current situation is one that could reasonably be called a Free Market.

"Interested in why you think the playing field isn't level"

I think all one has to do is look at places like the inner city, where poverty is common, and where the opportunities are simply not there. And I feel it is extremely defeatist to say "We can't do anything about unfairness". I believe we absolutely can. We just don't seem to want to.
While the above is accurrate I think it's a bit one sided.

Physically Based Rendering has become the dominant approach in VFX because it's a huge simplification and productivity boost. Integrating tons of special purpose hacks into one renderer isn't just hard for the renderer devs, the control parameters exposed to artists become an absolute nightmare. Combing the PBR perspective with raytracing greatly simplifies both sides of this.

Not every game is trying to be the next Far Cry. Ray tracing will be adopted by teams that value that unification and simplification over getting the very last bit of performance possible by a pile of hacks. As the hardware improves, which still seems likely, we'll see the balance point of who makes that call shift in favor of tracing IMO.
Agreed. I should have been more clearer. Any time someone mentions google's free services you hear things like "it's not really free", "google is not a non-profit" and so on. I'm not defending google but they have changed the landscape of the internet as we know it, and I think people tend to take sides and forget how different things were before companies such as google (not limited to) came along.

On another note, I'm often amazed at organizations this big don't crumble overtime with so many moving parts. It's practically impossible to be without fault.
CS is a field that hasn’t encountered consequences
I did this by running a sikuliX script. Took about 5 minutes a day for a week to iron out all corner cases it got stuck on.
Yes, I bike almost daily on Venice Blvd in LA, and every intersection I encounter is setup like the one discussed here, along with buses weaving in and out. A vicious battle flared up last year when the city replaced a lane of traffic on Venice with protected bike lanes (some discussion here https://la.curbed.com/2017/10/25/16528864/road-diets-los-ang...). There seems to be a marked increase in the hostility between cyclists and drivers now.
ViceToken VIT Refund Tutorial
This opens up an interesting question going forward. We can't rely on Uber themselves to analyse the telemetry data and come to a conclusion, they're biased. So really, we need self driving car companies to turn over accident telemetry data to the police. But the police are ill equipped to process that data.

We need law enforcement to be able to keep pace with advances in technology and let's face it, they're not going to have the money to employ data analysts with the required skills. Do we need a national body for this? Is there any hope of a Republican government spending the required money to do so? (no)
You'll have to leave earlier for your important appointment!
I haven't been able to find any reliable source of miles driven by self-driving cars to make that claim, but if one exists it wouldn't surprise me.

But that's not really my point. My point isn't that self-driving cars are safer, it's that merely looking at one car accident doesn't prove that self-driving cars are less safe.
They also fail to "write" human body language. Nobody else can predict what the autonomous vehicle will do.

It gets worse when a person is sitting in what appears to be the driver's seat. If the car is stopped and that person is looking toward another passenger or down at a phone, nobody will expect the vehicle to begin moving. Making eye contact with the person in that seat is meaningless, but people will infer meaning.
Nice case for a "Reductio ad Absurdum":

Should "not killing pedestrians" be a competitive advantage? No. It should be mandatory for every vehicle.

Therefore,we should make sure that everything works towards this goal, including sharing data!
Given the number of sensors on these it will be very interesting to see the telemetry when it comes out.
I would install it, but I already know stuff about myself.
I agree. I think Airtable's interface (ease of use, responsiveness) is leagues ahead of Quickbase, but Quickbase still offers a more complete feature set, and in many cases one missing feature can cripple a use case (e.g., QB offers predecessor/successor dependencies for project tracking by linking to other records in the same table, Airtable does not).
Perhaps (self driving) cars can be redesigned to mitigate the outcome of pedestrian collisions, eg, like cowcatchers on trains [1], except something more appropriate for the situation. External airbags?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_(locomotive)
The data will have been lost in an unfortunate accident, which Uber will promise never to repeat.
Do they have more granular data? I guess they're more prevalent in Western Europe (I read about people from Spain or Italy being all on).
Sadly, if the limit is 8 characters, they might be using something like the original DES provided by crypt()[1], it silently truncated to 8 characters. Or they may have moved on to something newer by now on the backend, but have the 8 character limit hardcoded in a bunch of places.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypt_(C)#Traditional_DES-base...
Why is it a dangerous notion? For the sake of argument, if everyone went completely over the top and deleted all their social media accounts, the world would go back to looking like it did around 2006. A few corporations would go broke. A few other corporations values would increase. Mass psy-ops would become more difficult and expensive.

Doesn't sound dangerous at all to me.
Merrill Lynch insiders who supplied information for a 2016 case against Bank of America.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-19/two-whist...
Uber self-driving prototype involved in a fatal crash investigated by police
Sure, but in the above user's hypothetical, that would mean that in such an area a concerned human driver with a greater ability to predict general human behavior would have a statistical safety improvement on the autonomous vehicle, which might not understand, for instance, that since it's a Friday night and the big game just ended and I'm in the city center I should be more careful than usual because there will be more intoxicated people.

Which is a lot of high level reasoning and inference with information from a variety of sources which aren't on the face of it strictly related to the driving task.
Thanks for your feedback! The payout is only triggered when a client approves a pull request.
> The people leading the development of these horse-drawn carriages should demonstrate that they can stop for pedestrians by jumping in front of them on a closed test dirt-path. If they're not able to demonstrate this, they shouldn't be putting them on public carriageways

Sounds silly when compared against old tech.

Accidents happen, best we can do is try to prevent them.
... this would make from some creepy film scene - someone shouting for help and the car only watching.
Likely the more apt word is liable.

In law you split that into criminal and civil. Very unlikely there will be any criminal charge, hence no criminal liability but it’s possible.

Civil liability is more interesting, but if the deceased’s estate brings suit it opens up a can of worms in the discovery process. Every internal communication, prior incident, etc...

At the end of the day it’s not much different than any other vehicular fatality case, but there will be a defective product component (again nothing unheard of in the case of vehicular fatalities). At the end of the day the car will be insured for accidents, so we will probably learn more about the insurance coverage for self-driving cars.
Good question. We charge the client by ACH.
I really wish i kept a bookmark for an article over at filfre.net, because in it a game dev, from back around the C64 era i believe, lamented how whenever there was a big step up in hardware performance, game developers had a bad habit of getting stuck trying to show how far they could push the hardware while ignoring game mechanics and similar.

Effectively whenever some new piece of hardware hit the market, the quality of games would be rolled back by a number of years as companies released what may well be glorified tech demos.

And as of late i wonder if the pace of GPU development have lead to perhaps the most prolonged period of such tech demos.
Bradley Birkenfeld did quite well whistleblowing on UBS [1]. $104m.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Birkenfeld#Whistleblow...
Guide on how-to get rid of facebook (surveillance social/mass media)

https://social.coletivos.org/@ajeremias/99704836594528204
No, the time to overact is now, before millions of these get on the road.

Actually, the time to "overeact" was even earlier, but most of self-driving cars ignored any criticism. So now you have stupid car companies cutting corners and killing people so they can be "first" on the market or whatever.
Suburbs are pastoral in the same way that a Domino's is reflective of a Neapolitan pizza. They certainly have somewhat artificial greenery. But very few suburbs are actually pastoral.

It's interesting to note that Hong Kong, while very urban, is also 40% park. https://www.hongkongfp.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/106761...

IMO it's a lot better to have a small amount of highly developed area and lots of pristine, verdant land rather than some cookie-cutter landscaping into the horizon.
Very interesting. Does or will Webflow eCommerce provide a developer API for 3P integrations, like for a fulfillment provider?
On the one hand I'd say give it to the NTSB, because historically they are really good at this sort of thing.

On the other hand, I'd wonder if increasing NTSB scope this much would drastically decrease the average quality of NTSB's work. Scaling ain't easy.
I love Sumatra when I’m writing papers since it auto reloads PDFs without losing page context. However, I usually have chrome open anyways.
Lots of confusion! It seemed the video was for an injury collision rather than a fatality? This is what we get from posting a Cincinnati source for an event that occurred in Tempe.
> It's interesting to see how many people make excuses for still using Facebook because it makes event organizing and the like easier. I'm 26 and never used Facebook.

If you've never used it, how do you know it does not make life easier? Similarly, it's possibly a burden (albeit small) on your friends who have to text you in addition to organising for others.

> Now for friends who live in distant locations you need to ask yourself: Does Facebook status updates really make me feel more connected to this person?

For you no, for me absolutely 100%.

Additionally, there are many opportunities I have discovered through Facebook that I likely would not have otherwise. For example, just last weekend I happened to be flying across continents and when I checked Facebook on my phone, I discovered a cousin I haven't seen in a while also happened to be flying to the same city on the same day. There would have been no reason to share this with each other, but because it was out there publicly I was able to see and organise time for us to meet. I often see content which prompts me to get in contact with people.

I have no doubt I can survive without Facebook (though perhaps some might not), so for me you're arguing a strawman. For me, there is no doubt that it _is useful_, the question is whether that offsets the myriad negative impacts. To suggest that your experience (with admission that you've never used Facebook) is reflective of everyone and they should "stop making excuses" is pretty narrow.
One use is if you need to replay captured traffic. Another is if you are doing protocol development or WAN acceleration.
I didn't see how terrible our system is until I moved to an area that is friendly to walkers, well friendlier than the giant pickup truck havens of the Midwest where I lived most of my life.

Someone above mentioned how this type of dependency problem has happened since the first tool -- I don't think so. The problems I deal with daily are drivers who are staring at their smartphone as they turn, or people simply trying to beat the pedestrian across the crosswalk. I've had moments where my life flashed before my eyes more than I can count, and every single time the driver waves their hand at me like it's my fault. I'd like for them to get out of their mobile uterus so we can discuss this like adults, but instead I'm left yelling at their big metal machine, and they're yelling at the interior. And this is in a "walker friendly" area.
I’m interested in making binaries, to hopefully ease distributing in-house utils. Our various projects depend on misc node versions and reinstalling our utils to each new global bin ain’t fun. If there’s a better way, I’m all ears.
The news video in the original post also says bicyclist. Speed limit goes up to 45 mph just before the bridge.
State governments, especially those authorizing self driving cars, could authorize this to some extent.
I normally wouldn't defend Facebook, but did people using it really think that they weren't selling off their private information? I thought this was just something everyone accepted, as they accept Siri/Alexa/Google to listen to their every word. (yes I know they listen for only wake words)

I mean, Zuck called us all "dumb fucks". You can look it up. Everyone shrugged it off because college boys be college boys.

I have a Facebook profile, and never used it with the expectation that I owned the content I placed on it. I do think that we need a better alternative to Facebook, but at the same time it's not wrong for someone not to delete their profile.

Sorry, but texting is not a viable replacement. Neither is email. Reactions and comment threads are fun and useful ways of interacting with shared life events. For a lot of people, including myself, being off Facebook means missing out on social interaction. The reality is that texting or emailing people sometimes simply doesn't cut it; if you don't pull the same perceived weight as everyone else in your social group, you're going to be outcast and perhaps forgotten about. That can be the perception, anyway, and it's not entirely wrong.

Why hasn't a viable alternative to Facebook come up? I mean a serious one – not some piece of shit whipped up by right-wing bloggers. Perhaps it's because everyone feels that they need to compete with Facebook. Facebook has its tentacles in a lot of things, but perhaps we can just boil it down to a few things:

- Posts with images, comments, and reactions.

- Direct messages that are interoperable with email and SMS.

- Event planning and coordination.

How much else do you really need to be social? Everything else about Facebook is really about selling ads and has nothing to do with people being social. Building something that can replace the social aspect of Facebook shouldn't be that monumental. If Duck Duck Go has survived, surely a DDG of social networking shouldn't be so far away.

Even better: sell it with the idea that it's algorithm-free. Everything should go back to being chronological.

Outlandish? Not really. The real reason that your feed is algorithmically sorted is to bubble up more paid content and viral posts. If you unlike/unfollow all the company and group pages associated with your account, you're left with only what your friends are posting. Ooh, even better – delete people who aren't actual friends. If you only include the people you care about, you don't need some black box algorithm to tell you what you need to be seeing. You'd have enough time to see what people are up to in the order of which their posts were made.

But not, I won't be deleting my Facebook. I'm fine limiting my use to mbasic.facebook.com. That is, until that better thing comes along or I have the time and will-power to just build it myself.
Omelet metaphor aside,that doesn't really seem fair. We're talking about accepting more than 0 deaths caused by AI because the death rate should still be much lower than with humans driving. IOW, the perfect is the enemy if the good.
Pedantic comment: The word is "moot"
Incentivize Teams, not People
I know this is a slightly insensitive question to ask right now, but assuming that what happened was that the car tried to turn right and the cyclist came from behind and crossed into its path[0]: Who would actually have been in the wrong?

I cycle along paths like this from time to time myself, and I always assume that I should let a turning car pass in front of me. As soon as I see the turn signal I will either fall back or even pass into the car lane to overtake on the other side.

Of course that's in part because I know I would lose the fight anyway, but also because I think I am not actually supposed to be "overtaking" them on the right side, so they have the right of way before me.

What do the rules say in this case?

[0] This is based on this link posted elsewhere: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.4370667,-111.9430321,3a,75y,...