skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Both from a comfort and safety perspective, automating long highway drives is a big win. It’s still disappointing to urbanites in particular who thought they’d never need to own a car, drive anywhere, or maybe even learn to drive in the first place.
I think people who overhyper very lacklustre neural algorithm based CV systems, thinking they can do what they cannot, are unfit for the job.
> They just have to pay "market rate" for the privilege of parking at their own damn jobs?

Yes? Why wouldn't they? At the office where I work, yeah if you want a spot in the parking garage, everyone pays. My company has free space for bikes, and they do give people a 'commute allowance' which you could certainly use for that parking if you want. Other people just use the money for public transport, or other random things.

Personally I'm open to compromise, but your attitude of treating having to pay for 100 sq ft of permanent storage at your work as some sort of atrocity is pretty weird to me.

edit: apparently it's a lot more than 100 sq ft

> The average size of a parking space is 320 square feet. Another common size is 270 square feet. These sizes include the landscaping or end of aisle areas, the circulation areas and the parking space. For perpendicular or angled parking spaces, the length is commonly 16 feet to 18 feet. Meanwhile, the standard width is 7.9 feet to 9 feet.

https://franklinst.com/about-us/newsroom/news-details/2019/0...
My people!
Correct. I once pointed out to my friends who earns a five-digit salary every month (by no means impressive in the Bay Area) that he spent 20 minutes agonizing over a $2 payment. Before I pointed it out he didn't even realize it was irrational.
To the contrary he should be admired for his candour.

It's very easy for execs to talk up utopian smack, it's harder the other way around.

I for one agree: L5 may not be viable for many decades at least, not with the tech we have. It may never happen because conditions will change to the point wherein it won't make sense.

What is viable, that nobody really talks about are 'controlled areas' - for example, highways built for long-haul trucks with 0 human drivers. This is a great place for AI because the conditions are set for all the crazy unknowns (esp. humans) to be controlled.

Special roadways within cities, where there are no pedestrians, AI drivers only, that can communicate with 'the grid' etc - could not only mean full L5 'driverless' but no stop-signs either - traffic could be designed to flow much, much more efficiently using 'today's tech'. Cars won't have steering wheels, they can be called 'on demand' and 'parking' will be very different, more like 'temp storage' and won't involve humans. All viable.
Discovering the value of reading via journaling; a thread
In europe it may not be legal to use AI based decision making.
According to article 22 of GDPR.

"Automated individual decision-making, including profiling"
https://gdpr-info.eu/art-22-gdpr/
Kodable is hiring a senior game developer to help teach millions of kids to code
What list? The one where Thomas Watson said there’d never be a world-wide market for more than five computers? Other than that, what else does that list have to stack up against:

Nuclear power, let alone fusion. What happened to “too cheap to meter”?

Supersonic travel: raynier already pointed out what a bust the Concorde was. Nothing else on the horizon now.

Automation giving me a 20 hour work week. Nope, capital holders just skim that efficiency right into their pockets.

I’d go on, but suffice it to say that about the only thing much different than my childhood in the 70s are computers in our pockets. Revolutionary, no doubt, but we are still burning oil for our energy needs, our cars don’t fly, and I still show up and do my 40 hours. And healthcare has gotten worse in the U. S., not better, if you can believe that.

So, yeah, when the head of the autonomous driving division of VW says Level 5 ain’t gonna happen, I don’t immediately jump to doubting him/her and attacking their resume.
Smart-contracts, game theory and a lottery that may never end
This is not another take on how blockchain will change the world. Or Business. Or Finance. Or any of that nonsense.

Blockchains let you write applications that no one owns or controls. Applications that are essential unstoppable.

One of the more dangerous yet intriguing smart contracts released recently I think could bear a wider introduction.

It's hard to sum up all at once but basically: part psychological experiment, part economic blackhole.

There is a large cryptocurrency prize pool.
There is 12:00 hour time that is constantly decreasing.
Once this timer runs out, the last 100 participants win a share of the prize pool
Current this is around ~$17,000 USD per person in the top 100.
To get in the top 100 list, you have to purchase "gift boxes".
These are essentially tickets that increase in redeemable value as more money flows into the game.
Every gift box purchase adds more money to the final pot, and also increases the timer by 2 minute + 30 seconds / box.
For example, if someone purchased 10 boxes, then the timer would increase by an added 7 minutes (2 minutes plus 5 minutes).
Ticker price is currently only ~$0.30 USD, making it fairly trivial for one player to add a large increment to the current time.

Obviously this is a variant of a pyramid scheme, as early investors are disproportionately rewarded.

How will this end?? How many people will pay $0.30 for a chance to win ~$17,000 USD? Also the more people that enter,
the larger the pot is and the more attention there is preventing the clock from reaching zero...

Is all the money entering this game essentially stuck forever? Is this a lottery that gets bigger and bigger but no one every wins?

https://just.game/
https://justgame.hostedwiki.co/pages/FAQ
To everyone saying they should do consulting, how can they they keep the IP rights then?

If they consult for another company, wouldn't that company own the rights?

From what I've seen, not many companies are willing to pay consulting fees and give up ownership of the work.
The user on twitter that "claimed" to do that mentioned the cars only cost "20 quid." I think it's safe to say he was not a Sooner.
Nice, exactly my niche. Does it support filtering for part/full-time and remote only jobs?
Let it be known that putting that kind of stuff on the student's car is NOT OK. A locked car cover may be helpful (would it help with the stuff in the wheel too? even if not, put your own locked cover on the wheel) (it would also prevent people from putting papers in the wind shield, I think).

But nevertheless the students should pay the fine for parking if they wish to park their car in the parking space that requires payment. If the fee is too much then they should file a public complaint with the owner of the parking lot.
And yet air travel is far safer than road travel and they embraced autopilot long ago.

The problem with complete automation is how accidents are perceived. Probably a good thing considering how low the bar is right now for road safety. Being killed by a robot's mistake is perceived far worse than by human error.

I think a middle ground like autopilot on the highway could significantly improve safety while still accommodating perception issues.
The list of 'visionaries' who said something was going to happen, but never did is 10x longer.
Open Source version of Netscape 5, which came out later than 1997
Just above the noise floor of each frequency in the band at the time of transmission. Hence undetectable.
I’d probably never say “never” to this sort of question. I can believe many decades out though.
Why did medium become popular in the first place? What sets it aside from any other blogging platform?
My experience with Tesla AP: it's great for highways, but definitely breaks down on B-roads like this. I doubt Tesla will cover this, since AP comes with a million warnings to not rely on it in such situations.
> The software is sold as helping "remove bias"...

I read this as the software is sold as a fig leafs to wantobe rules who are pretty sure they have no cloths.
Self driving trains already exist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_train_operation
Yes, I stopped reading at that point. What does the author think the small army of software engineers and researchers that create their products are paid? Nothing?
> school buses and the like

Not useful to people that live on campus and don't need to travel off-site much.

> sporting equipment and facilities

Completely useless to a lot of people. I used the swimming pool in college exactly once, during the swimming class/test. I certainly didn't use the sports fields. I used the bowling alleys, but those were paid-to-use and not covered by the sports fee we had to pay.

> library

I certainly got a lot of benefit out of this. However, with the internet nowadays, I'm not sure I would if I was in school.

The point being, for many school services, everyone pays for them while only some people get a benefit. The scale of "some people" that benefit varies, but the concept doesn't.
I noticed that browsers and curl were doing something with .. on the client side. Try telnet to the port and typing the GET by hand.
Onboarding cars onto trains in a driver friendly way should also be considered. This way you don't exclude non self driving cars, and still have good coverage (taking into account that railway systems aren't far behind highway coverage in many countries).
I don't doubt that things take time to adjust. But when it makes a lot more economic sense to take a cab compared to owning a car and driving it (after all, the main reasons cabs aren't all that economical today is the requirement of paying a driver while you just sit there), there will be less cars parked on the road and therefore it will be easier to have places where the cars can pull over and pick up / drop off.

Anyway, "people are willing to break the law but companies aren't" seems a really weird reason to stick with the status quo over something far more efficient.
This is where the Chinese companies are digging. Instead of a self-driving car, they are trying to make a car driven by an external server.

Half of the work on "self"-driving is actually traffic dispatch.
After tetrominos, purely mathematical games with pentomino tiling at its core are definitely discovered games. It's doable but not always simple to build a given shape of size 5n with n pentominos. Ever seen the "fill an n by m rectangle with pentominoes" problem?

As an aside, my favorite variant of this is from an old game Puzzle Pirates: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRQIHyC__kc
Yes.

Also Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, and almost all of the Middle East.
It’s a highly technical problem that doesn’t have much practical use. Essentially it says that a weak (polynomial time) classical computer (called the “verifier”) with the ability to query (polynomial number of times) a small number of all-powerful computers (called the “provers”) with unknown/unbounded computing power is able to be convinced that the prover is indeed all powerful (convinces the verifier that it knows the answer to some problem that is known to be difficult). These specific provers can not communicate with each other (collude) but can share some entangled bits (the quantum part). The result here is (basically) that the verifier can be convinced that the prover knows the answer to the halting problem.

The result is more interesting with some context though. One of the biggest discoveries of the 21st century is that PSPACE=IP. That’s where a single all powerful prover can convince a weak verifier of any solution in PSPACE (an extension of P that we believe to be more powerful than P). Then more recently we found MIP=NEXP which is a bunch of classic all powerful provers (with no collusion) can convince a single weak verifier of any problem in NEXP (which is like NP but with much larger proof sizes, thought to be more powerful than NP). The surprising fact is that multiple all-powerful provers can convince a verifier of harder problems. Intuitively this doesn’t make sense because we know each provers are all powerful and are permitted to do anything, even physically impossible tasks, so the fact that a single prover cannot convince a verifier of any problems harder than PSPACE is surprising. More surprising is that multiple all powerful provers can somehow prove harder problems when it feels like we’re not adding any extra power (they’re already “all powerful”).

So in that context we find the also surprising fact that if we weaken the “no collusion” requirement to “only quantum entanglement” and suddenly they can solve the halting problem (but still no more!).

This line of proving both upper and lower bounds about complexity classes is exactly what we want to see in the P vs NP world (which is in many ways less “powerful” of classes but more “practical”). But we don’t even know if P ?= NEXP.
Park legally then. It's easy, and tons of poor people do it every day. It's just a select noisy few who want to park wherever and blame someone else.
Was because it never caught on. It's worked on by a single person not working full time... Pretty much deadware, unfortunately.

And the main Haskell compiler is implemented in C. In fact, Haskell is represented at one stage of compilation by a C-like language called Cmm. Would it be fair to say that Haskell was inspired by C? What are the main differences that make Haskell much better than C?
> if you include all of the people imprisoned

Or shot.
Volkswagen doesn't develop self-driving tech. They use Mobileye's solution like everyone expect Tesla, Waymo and GM/Cruise. They aren't really in the position to make that argument.

Level 5 means that the car can drive autonomously > 95% of the time, and it will absolutely be possible. Level 4/5 distinction doesn't really make any sense once the autonomy gets beyond certain percentage. It doesn't mean that it's level 4 until it hits 100% (which is impossible).

Level 5 car is designed to drive in all conditions, but there are always statistically unlikely corner cases or situations that require high-level decision making, which the car can't handle by itself. A single driver may never hit such case, and for them the experience is full self-driving.
I wonder though if autonomous taxi's would simply highlight the parking issues and increase demand for better parking solutions (like no parking, just autonomous taxi lanes).
We could say that now about automobiles. If I were to get into an accident and then have lawyers for the other vehicle, plus everybody stuck in traffic behind me also sending their lawyers after me, I’d never drive.

Insurance solved that problem, both by eliminating the possibility of a catastrophic financial loss, and by creating a buffer between me and all those lawyers.

I predict that insurance will solve the lawyer problem for self-driving cars as well. At some point, it will cost me $5,000 a year to drive my own car, and $500 to let it do all the driving.

And on top of all that, if my car drives itself into an accident, the lawyers will talk to my insurance company, not to me. I see the insurance companies as the enabler for this tech. And they will want to enable it, it will put them in control of the market.
What are the 'morals' of some entirely different alien race? Are they going to be the same as ours? Probably not.

Maybe there are some very 'core' morals that might be consistent, but pragmatically, they won't resemble at all.

The 'morals' of Athenian life in antiquity were such that every able-bodied male had to have his own war fighting gear, and be called to fight in the defence of the city if need be. This would be an existential duty towards the community, without which, they could not exist. But Athens today? Not necessary.
Because the deaths will be network level effects that a person would be helpless to mitigate through behavior. There's no sense of being a careful or responsible driver with a self-driving car; its all whether or not the algorithm or software is correct.

It's a different type of potential error and a much more scary one. I can mitigate human drivers as a pedestrian by taking care walking, but I cannot mitigate an AI that thinks my shirt makes me look invisible due to its learning being deceived by a pattern.
Travel by plane is orders of magnitude safer than by car. Your odds of dying in a traffic accident are close to 1:100. Your odds of dying in an air accident are closer to 1:10,000.

If anything, I think your example underlines just how valuable and realistic this is for cars.

Full autonomy was always, IMHO, a silly pipe dream. But that doesn't mean that there isn't tremendous value -- in terms of safety, time, money and environment -- to partial autonomy.
Are parking laws different for Taxis than for Ubers? Say in New York City? Lots of Taxis there so if Ubers are working under the same law, seems like an already solved problem. UPS have millions? of parking violations per year, yet it is still in operation.
Should Political and Religious Affiliations Affect Your Personal Relationships?
A leader that fires people for challenging relevant mainstream opinions is not any kind of leader I want to work for or follow.
I think the OP meant they were charged for the extra hour they spent waiting in line trying to exit.
Kolmogorov complexity for games. Neat.
But what about crime? Surveillance really does stop crime. America has parts of cities that are too dangerous to walk alone in at night, and it's so well known that if somebody is murdered doing that, people blame the victim for being too stupid. That's how ingrained the acceptance of crime is. Being able to safely leave your house whenever you want should be a pretty high priority for a good city. What's the alternative to surveillance? Lots of police patrolling everywhere? Isn't that equally creepy but also much more expensive?
Things That Go Bump in the Daytime
Maybe we will have more breakthroughs as these visualization techniques improve.

This is truly an awesome accomplishment. Hats off to the scientists & engineers who made this happen.
I think penetrating oil would be counterintuitive, as it would just provide a better airtight seal, your best bet in that case is that we would slide more easily and maybe up and over the window edge gasket to break the seal
I'm not actually sure, but DeepL[1] is probably the best online one, and Google's larger M4 models[2] are probably up there too.

[1] https://www.deepl.com/translator

[2] https://ai.googleblog.com/2019/10/exploring-massively-multil...
This comment breaks the site guideline against accusations of astroturfing. Would you please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here?

Lots more explanation at https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme....
I'd love it if there were legislation requiring products that include an "online" component to be required to explicitly advertise the minimum number of years of guaranteed service, and be forced to prominently advertise "0 years" (prominent like cigarette cancer warnings) if it isn't guaranteed.

And be forced to post a financial bond at a level set by law that will be forfeited and used to keep the service running (e.g. auctioning to software companies who will bid to run the service) in case the company decides to cancel, goes bankrupt, etc. (As long as the company runs it, they get the bond back at the end of the guarantee.)

Consumers should know they're getting an actual guarantee, or be 100% aware that there isn't any guarantee at all, so they actually know what they're buying in advance.
Hacker News is not a person, and you will only drive yourself insane if you treat a conversation with a collective like it is a person.
Accuracy is relative to the need. By accurate I mean accurate enough that we can extract actionable information from it.

For power plant critical structures we want 0.5mm, updated every 6months. For forest management we want 5m, updated every 2 years.

But this increase in spatial and temporal accuracy will keep on going. At some point in the future a small swarm of insect-sized drones will be able to capture a whole forest in a day for a super low cost. And a few people walking with basic smartphones for will be enough to map a whole city.

In 1980 you would have said that google maps 3D and google street view would never exist...
Lots [1][2]. These have seen most deployment in closed networks (e.g. subways, or remote mining railways [3]), but experiments on "normal" interconnected networks are ongoing.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_train_operation
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_automated_train_system...
[3] https://www.railwaygazette.com/australasia/rio-tinto-complet...
> Special roadways

This is a point that always seems to be missing. All of our roads are/were constructed at a specific size with specific engineering requirements and specific materials. If we have a major change in the technology of the cars, it seems to be perfectly reasonable that we could have a new type of road to accommodate that. For example, before interstate highways it probably would have sounded strange to imagine high-speed roads with limited entry and exit. And before that, may have sounded strange to have automated stoplights and traffic signals.
You've inverted the meaning though. Actual title is "Socioeconomic Inequalities in Disability-free Life Expectancy in Older People from England and the United States", which may be too long for HN, but presents a very different impression of what the study may be about.

Perhaps "Socioeconomic Inequalities in Disability-free Life Expectancy in Older People in US and UK" would be better?
I would think most businesses have a civil court case as part of an agreement you sign as you become a student of the school?

Or businesses in general with trespass law?
Are you aware of any other web browsers for Windows XP, which are still updated, besides MyPal and this one (SeaMonkey)?
My opinion along these lines lends itself to depiction of self driving cars in the series Tek War. Upon entering the limit access highway or interstate the car drives on its own for the duration until your exit.

that to me is something automakers can easily cooperate with governments to get done and done well. they already mark HOV and Express lanes and with federal legislated lane markings it would make automating those drives pretty simple. Then as the number of cars increase the number of free drive lanes is decreased until the vanish.

using metro Atlanta as an example express lanes have their own entrance and exit points so they are already separated. One set for I75 is wholly elevated two lane bridge work nearly the full length of its run.

Tesla Model 3 owner, I think even Musk is walking back what he "implies" as self driving. As into self driving with human oversight
I would like to read the article, but an add covers 1/2 of the screen and can't be closed or moved.
I think he is the one and only sane C-level person in the industry, after hearing this.

People claiming most of AI hype barely know what the "AI" people mention is.

And people who go as far as drawing rosy pictures of human like general AI being your personal chauffeur are past ridiculous.

The entire idea of human-like general AI for practical applications is like trying to make people using horses for transport in 21st century, by trying to make a horse than if better than a car.
This might be a weakness in how we’re using the geocoder. If you search Berlin in the Near field on https://pinballmap.com/map you get results. You can also zoom in and check on the “redo results when map is moved button”. Or use the app. It’s easier to browse on the app.