skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Agree. The NHTSA Standing General Order (SGO) 2021 [1] requires reporting of crashes involving vehicles equipped with SAE Level 2 ADAS (Advanced Driver Assistance Systems) or higher when the system is engaged. However, the data only started being collected in June 2021, and my understanding is the NHTSA claims it's still too early to draw statistically significant conclusions.

[1] https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2023-04/Second-A...
It is easy to do mocks wrong.

Here is however an example of how one does it right.

Say you have a system that accepts input, does something with it and stores it to some storage.

You don't want to touch actual storage in the build pipeline.

Then you mock in testing out the storage.

Everything can still be tested:

- the validation of incoming stuff isn't affected at all

- the transformations aren't affected

- the only difference is your tests now read the output back from a memory location instead of from a permanent storage somewhere
100 Lines of C, in a Closet (2020)
A related effort is the NYC MTA's 10-year project to bring cell connectivity to subway tunnels (not just stations). You can already experience this if you take the L from Manhattan to Brooklyn: you will have continuous cell connectivity from the First Ave station to the Bedford Ave station. https://new.mta.info/press-release/mta-announces-universal-s...

It's not clear from the article whether the Underground is trying to add between-station cell coverage?
> Why would they be building so many new dorms if most students live at home?

There is no implication that the students live at home (assuming that means a parent's place). If you mean home as in where one lives, doesn't everyone live at home?

> Where do all those people in the middle of nowhere go to school?

This was already covered.

But in an effort to try and salvage something here: Never underestimate the unreasonable effectiveness of the highway. Quite often people living in the middle of nowhere can get to places in the city faster than those who live inside the city. I know it is common misconception, but living in the middle of nowhere doesn't mean you have to be permanently affixed to it.
The Tor Project is primarily funded by the US State Department and DARPA [1], so it is a forgivable error if someone mistook TOR for FBI surveillance software.

[1] - https://www.torproject.org/about/reports/
This is not true: https://support.google.com/mail/answer/10434152?hl=en#:~:tex....
Once there is adequate competition, autonomous taxis should be much cheaper.
This was an interesting experiment. The images tend to converge to a specific style
Is it really the case that those charges are high because the drivers are getting paid so much, or because the vehicles and things like deadheading are expensive? Uber’s been driving driver compensation down for years but there’s only so much room for further reductions and it’s not like the hardware or support for self-driving systems is free.
> Do I use TDD?

Sometimes. If the project/feature I'm working on lends itself to TDD, I use it. Generally speaking, all this guidelines and principles are good to know. They become a problem when people take them religiously. Ideologists are really a plague in our profession.
As of today, you can natively compile YAMLScript programs
And I though Windows Vista (which is basically same look as win7) was inspired by KDE3.
Aero was amazing. Windows XP and Windows 7 were big UI revolutions.

Even when Windows 7 was active, there were plenty of projects trying to bring Windows XP and Aero to Linux GUIs.
Continuous Memory Profiling for Rust
This can be said for taxis as well, though, right? What's the difference?
I think this is a useful and impressive study - I haven't read all 40 pages, neither have you :) I did do some good-faith skimming. Assuming Waymo didn't falsify their data (they didn't), this makes me feel comfortable having Waymo in SF and Phoenix. I think it's clearly safer than an Uber. But some caveats:

- The major caveat is that Waymo is not being directly compared against sober humans driving lawfully.[1] The reason why this caveat is so important is that technology which makes it impossible for humans to exceed a posted speed limit might be overall much safer than replacing human drivers with autonomous drivers. Uber isn't more dangerous than Waymo because humans are incompetent, it's because humans obey orders from impatient drivers and Waymo currently does not. This is a UI choice, not an AI advancement.

- More specifically, lawful driving is an important caveat because Tesla Autopilot had two different settings for driving unlawfully, according to the users' own sense of personal risk. An AV manufacturer who advertises "AI-assisted speeding" will almost certainly find a lot of customers, even if it's under the table. People don't speed and run red lights because they're too stupid to understand why it's dangerous: they do it because they're reckless and selfish. AI won't stop that, only regulation will.

- Another caveat is that Waymo was trained on human-dominated streets. Waymo being safer in a sea of human vehicles does not actually translate to Waymo being safer in a sea of Waymos. I think this is a low-probability risk but it's hardly a simple question: I believe Waymo has had issues where several AVs occupied the same street after an event and blocked traffic because they couldn't decide what to do - they were waiting on each other to behave like a human. But again, the risk seems like gridlock, not property damage or injury.

- And a minor but still important caveat is that SF and Phoenix have modern linear grids which have been mapped to death by AV manufacturers. As a Boston resident I am still holding my breath about their performance here :)

[1] Not because of anything insidious, it's just a granularity that both the analysis and the data struggle to capture.
Likewise, the Python typing annotation language could very well be on the compiled side...

Someone took the interpreted JavaScript language, added typing syntax on top, and typing can be checked statically.

The Python team took the interpreted Python language, added typing syntax on top, and here we are reading a claim that it can't be checked statically because it's interpreted. You understand my puzzlement.
Their timezone has been wrong in the tzdb for at least 10 years apparently

https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2023-December/033339.html
It was designed by VW I think, who handed it over to other car companies so there could be a universal connector.

The reason it's bigger is because it supports 3-phase power, which NACS does not.
3-phase power is a big thing in Europe.
Dialogue?

I suppose the FDR had better writers, and was better at sticking to his scripts.

But there were a lot of people who referred to FDR as "that man in the White House" rather than use his name. And Edmund Wilson quoted somebody at a dinner party in the 1930s, where someone denouncing Hitler was answered with "That's going too far. You're talking about him as if he was Roosevelt."
Here are a couple of possibilities. Working aged person sends their car to their elderly parent's place so that they can use the vehicle to do their groceries. Families with kids in various activities can get the car to deliver and pickup all the kids at the appropriate times without needing multiple vehicles if the parents need to accompany some of the children. Car pooling becomes more acceptable because you can sleep during the detours to pick people up.

In reality, I don't think it is useful to try to enumerate these small immediate changes that are distinct from the availability of taxis. The long term cultural shift of having autonomous vehicles may lead people to fundamentally share vehicles in a different way. This may lead to a situation where fewer vehicles are driving more miles.
nothing you said contradicts anything I said
we use the aws/azure because the model is much better. We're thinking about on-device models, but it's challenging since we need a state-of-the-art vision capability and potentially a voice.
This is from 2022.
Wait, it works cheaper than Post Docs? I am somewhat serious because I am a musician. In Dallas my view is Bench Science is woefully underpaid and over performs at an unsustainable dynamic.
That's very interesting! In English, we differentiate them because they are actually two different things, at least in our mind. I wonder if there's another Polish word that might differentiate?

Here's an image that explains the difference pretty succintly: https://www.antarcticglaciers.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/11...
Discussed less than 24 hours ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38704982
The price on these rides is simply a way to control demand and better approximate real world use cases, not to subsidize operating costs. If Google can make this technology commercially viable there are unlimited avenues for monetization.
I'm not sure why you think rails are safer than rubber tires. Metal-on-metal contact has way less friction, which makes for much worse stopping distance and worse safety especially at crossings. Having grade-separated dedicated infrastructure _does_ improve safety, especially if there's no human drivers involved, but we can do that just fine with pavement in tunnels or elevated roadways.
I keep seeing more laws and potential laws like this. It just goes to show that most of the folks who work in government and public policy are the type of people who were really good at school but don't have much in the way of common sense.

Were any of these people ever young? Anyone who's been a normal teenage boy at some point in their life, will tell you that there is no law under the sun that can prevent a teenage boy from getting his sweaty hands on pornography. No government in the history of humanity has ever successfully legislated porn out of the hands of teenagers.

So can we just acknowledge reality for a second, live with imperfection and stop trashing everyone's privacy in a vain attempt to keep teenagers from looking at naked people on the internet?
I agree that the autonomous cars are likely to cause a shift away from car ownership, reducing the total number of cars (which reduces the impact of making all these cars). It might also drastically cut down the required size of parking lots, which especially in America might be a big improvement.

But if you own the car, it's just waiting wherever you left it. If you have an autonomous cab, it has to make an extra trip from wherever it dropped off the last driver to wherever it's picking you up. That alone increases the number of cars on the road. And that's before you consider the cab potentially driving a holding pattern when nobody is actively using or calling it.

But most of all roads are governed by induced demand. People would take a lot more and longer trips if there was the option to just teleport to the destination. The main downwards pressure on the number of trips is the time investment. That's why adding more lanes to roads often doesn't reduce traffic (outside of a short adjustment period): faster trips means more people willing to take it, which fills up that lane. But a trip people weren't willing to do for 40 minutes behind the wheel they might take if it's instead 60 minutes watching Netflix in a driverless car. Which makes the roads fuller and thus slower for everyone.
While that is true to some extent, it's a very dynamic situation/market.

https://electrek.co/2023/12/19/audi-puts-big-ev-push-on-the-...

https://electrek.co/2023/11/16/volkswagens-ev-woes-worsen-ov...

VW owns Audi, Seat and Skoda.

(On a side-note, I own a VW EV and love it)
If that was true, then all mathematics teaching would be both impossible and superfluous.

You don't choose whether or not to process the audio, but you absolutely do choose to do the mathematical processing to arrive at an answer. If that's a struggle to contemplate, increase the complexity of the problem until you can't reach the answer in one step, and then you should see the chain of thought.
Not All Balance is the Same (2022)
About ten years ago I made a prediction:

Self-driving technology will overtake average human ability with regard to safety within a decade, but the biggest hurdle will be public acceptance. The AI will not make the same kind of mistakes humans make. So while the aggregate number of accidents will be (likely much) lower without a human at the wheel, the AI will make deadly mistakes that no human would make, and this will terrify the public. A intuitively predictable crash will always be scarier than one that makes no sense to our minds. The only way self-driving tech will ever succeed is if the AI can be limited to the same kinds of mistakes humans make, just fewer, and that's a VERY hard technical nut to crack that I do not believe will be solved anytime soon.

That said, I still believe that the ubiquity of cars is inherently a problem, human operator or no. If we put more effort into self-driving busses and autonomous trains—which have regular schedules, routes, and predictable speeds—I think we would see much greater dividends on our investment and far fewer "unintuitive" errors. Our collective fixation on cars blinds us as a society to this option unfortunately. More cars just clog up the road even more, demand more parking, and otherwise monopolize land use that could be more productive otherwise. More idling/circling driverless cars adds to the blight rather than relieving it. We need to transport more people between points in higher density, not lower, and cars are the lowest density transportation options available.
Here's a reasonable post by nvidia that can help put the terms in context (take it with a grain of salt given the marketing overtones) https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/mastering-llm-techniques-l... .

MLOps is akin to DevOps but takes into account getting machine learning models to production and how to instill a process so that you can iterate and avoid outages, etc.
Been using it for some years, but I've had a lot of "heisendisks"; Greaseweazle gives a different image every time.

Still need a lot of work on my pile of old Amiga disks.
The US has so much sunk cost in car centric urban design that all discussion of self driving cars taking investment away from public transit is all wasted words. It’s not just the roads and the number of people absolutely committed to driving on them. It’s urban design that is so sparse that we’ll be locked into personal transit for hundreds of years. Compared to Europe where Romans laid down street plans thousands of years ago, people will still be walking around in another thousand years.

Must as well have the cars in the US drive themselves so we can all get a nap at least.
> I'm unimpressive

Your comments about Terry Gross seem completely off-base, but I nevertheless think you're being a little hard on yourself.
There seems to be an implicit assumption in a lot of cases that robo-taxis will drastically slash the price of taxis relative to today. Maybe cut the prices by 50% at best? That's about the delta between me driving my own car versus getting an Uber into the city. It's enough to get me to drive but is certainly not in too cheap to meter territory. And being able to have the vehicle I want with various stuff stored in it today is useful as well.
I hope you are correct yet Xerox and Kodak paid for plenty of breakthroughs, did they not? Google faces a similar "innovator's dilemma" challenge: successful companies often struggle to embrace new technologies or business models that could disrupt their existing, successful products.
pixel perfect! great job, really
I remember one post on reddit where some idiot in a Tesla launched it into an intersection and saw nothing wrong with that -- claming that it was unfair for everyone to give him shit over unsafe driving while he was merely "enjoying" his vehicle.
React Aria: Craft world-class accessible components with custom styles
You can serve my browser some JavaScript and then consume my memory and CPU, right now. This is inherent in communication over the Internet: there are costs borne by both sides.

But mining Bitcoin is quite different from routing messages anyway. That's a strained example. SMTP is a lot closer. And Apple will accept emails from Android, Linux or Windows systems just fine. HTTP is not as close, but still more so than Bitcoin.

I don't know why people try to make an argument that even Apple, as far as I can tell, is not making. They stick to their usual "protecting the user" line.
If you're already trenching tunnels through suburban neighborhoods, seems like adding residential fiber would be a no brainer. Could make the whole thing a lot more sustainable.
Sure, but one would expect that any country whose military was a credible threat wouldn't be 50 years behind on any technology, and therefore would have independently invented something equivalent, or at least have all the knowledge/technology to be able to.
Aren't superchargers just the endpoint? Isn't the actual infrastructure mostly the power/energy companies?
In Monboit's book "Heat"[1] he makes clear that green energy leads to _more_ consumption because people make the mental fallacy thinking it's 0 impact. Greenwashing leads to increased pollution/emissions. Thusly, Saudi knows that increasing renewables is not a competitor to oil consumption. People will simply consume _both_.

[1] - https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/340289
The art world, or the art market? I can see a historian of art finding interest in an artists doodles. But would the acquisitions arm of a museum want them, unless part of its mission was to serve historians?
It is deeply ironic how much you've engaged with political ideas in this comment while denying that you are doing so.
The EU messed up with the GDPR - they should have implemented it at least a decade earlier and ignored the lobby which lead to the cookie banner instead of either an outright ban on tracking for all but a tiny number of purposes. Such a ban would have had a negligible impact on the tech industry financially but would have had huge privacy rewards.

They're trying to get in early on AI so as not to make the same mistake again. Which might result in them making the opposite mistake.
Designing a prototype car for trials vs mass production are two different things entirely. Those lidar sensors will become far less intrusive once a car is designed for mass production.

Most likely, the existing Waymo cars have their LiDAR sensors equipped like that because they need to be maintained and swapped at a regular basis.

I think the value proposition is more than enough for mass adoption, once people realize they can work and commute at the same time.
It's easy to criticize Florida, but California is also essentially uninsurable for earthquake risks even with government subsidies. While insurance is technically available, very few homeowners purchase it because it's just pointless. Premiums are high and if the big one hits we won't get much. Everyone sort of implicitly assumes that in a real disaster the federal and state governments will bail us out somehow even if we're uninsured.

And now some parts of California are also becoming uninsurable for wildfire risks. More and more homeowners are switching to government subsidized minimal coverage plans as commercial insurers increasingly refuse to write.

What we'll probably end up doing in Florida, California, and other vulnerable states is further tightening building codes so that structures are more resilient to natural disasters. Better to build something durable than to use insurance money to rebuild after every major disaster. The downside is that this will make housing even more expensive in areas where there are already critical shortages.
It will start in cities with people declining to purchase new cars since they can just take a cheap self-driving car everywhere. It's true that at sufficiently low population density it would not makes sense to rely on a taxi service even if most people were using it, but I think that is only in very rural areas. 90% of the Americans live in an region where, if they all used a self-driving taxi service, the experience would be better than everyone owning a car. The hard economic benefits of not having to worry about maintenance, parking, or the up-front capital costs at purchase (huge!) will steam roll the romantic aspects of owning a personal car.
we took a road trip last summer about 4000 miles in our model Y Long range. You end up supercharging approximately every three hours for about 15 minutes. it actually worked out very well because our first stop of the day was almost always lunch. we picked hotels that had chargers on site so we started each day with enough charge to make the next supercharger.
Yeah, and some specific images even... Part of this is likely due to my prompting (I use an adverb to prompt, E.G. "describe this image obsessively"), which likely leads to some sort of clustering...
This is already happening if you pay attention to all the vans and even cars with blacked out windows parking in your neighborhood, maybe even in front of your house. Stealth campers are very real, even if they don’t stick out as much as meth RVs.

You could already commute with cheap taxis (eg in the developing world). The more important thing is that people want to live in San Francisco, they wouldn’t be happy commuting from some far off place in the first place. And as stealth campers have already figured out, not a lot of places available to camp in your car even 40-60 miles out, so might as well be where you want.

But the idea that your car could just involve itself in traffic jams all day rather than pay for parking is interesting, it could also look for time limited but free parking and move on to somewhere else when that expired, which is more common outside the city. Heck, it could park at a shopping mall that doesn’t allow walk offs…because no one is walking off.
Ah! Thank you. I’d not had this happen before.
The problem is that (in the US) an overwhelming majority of car journeys (and traffic) occur during rush hour. And it's difficult to see how autonomous vehicles could reduce the amount of cars used during rush hour. Rush hour traffic involves a lot of vehicles moving to similar destinations, during the same time window. While some cars could certainly be used for multiple journeys during the same rush hour, most cars would likely sit in parking garages all day, just like today.
>The open driver is great under linux because it bypasses AMD's craptacular support. But AMD doesn't support consumer GPUs in ROCm under Linux, and de-facto they don't seem to support ROCm on the open driver in the first place anyway, you have to use AMDGPU-PRO (according to geohot's investigations).

While they don't officially support any consumer GPU aside from 7900XT(X) and VII, I haven't encountered any issues using it on a 6700XT with the open source drivers, pretty much the only tinkering required was to export HSA_OVERRIDE_GFX_VERSION=10.3.0. It was quite a pleasant surprise after never getting my RX480 to work even though it was officially supported back in the day.
I thought of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Exactitude_in_Science and its relation to language, which is discussed by Baudrillard's Simulacra and Simulation. Large Language Models are the efforts of mapmakers to encapsulate reality in a way that is ultimately futile.
I know there's been improvements to the defaults in Plasma 6 which is set to release in February. Stuff like double click instead of single click for opening folders. I plan to try it once it releases.
The current Waymo driver uses cameras, RADAR and LIDAR, which are meant to compliment each other's capabilities.

https://wondery.com/shows/how-i-built-this/episode/10386-the...
Just go try them both. CCS2 Has separate AC and DC conductors, and the plug is huge owing to having 2 pair of charging pins and backward compatibility. They are more awkward and heavier than a fuel pump, and significantly heavier than the Tesla plugs. It's terrible.