591–600 of 651 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not so difficult to add this feature with the help of human like voice and LLM backend.
That kind of misses the point; it was the human that was interesting to me and the interaction we had, not that he gave information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Further, it seems to me that if you brake hard to avoid a dog, your car should warn me as I’m approaching. I’m not sure why we are trying to teach each car to drive when we could be teaching all the cars and the road to drive.
> Further, it seems to me that if you brake hard to avoid a dog, your car should warn me as I’m approaching. What does this mean? Electric cars are already required to emit a sound as they drive. I guess if it has to brake hard for something, honking might be a good idea, but I wouldn't want cars to constantly be beeping at everything in their vicinity if there's no imminent crash. > I’m not sure why we are trying to…
Well, if your car brakes hard to avoid a dog, your car should warn me. I’m not sure how to make this concept simpler so I can only repeat it.
> Electric cars are already required to emit a sound as they drive.
I know.
> I guess if it has to brake hard for something, honking might be a good idea, but I wouldn't want cars to constantly be beeping at everything in their vicinity if there's no imminent crash.
If you think in a discussion about robot cars that drive themselves being conducted on a hacker website, I’m suggesting that cars communicate their sensor data to each other by honking their horns, in really not sure what to tell you other than yes, this would be profoundly dim witted.
> I'm not sure what you mean.
I believe it.
> Presumably Waymo's software is the same across its fleet. They're not training one car's model at a time.
I believe it. I also believe you’re deeply missing the point, perhaps intentionally.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
took two waymo rides in SF and two nightmare cab rides in SF and memphis in the last couple of days. one waymo was perfect, the other ran a red light then stopped in the intersection diagonally across two lanes of traffic until the light turned green. didn't endanger anyone but felt awkward! on the cab ride to SFO my driver kept falling asleep and veering into the next lane, i tried talking with him to keep him awake…
My AIs have no character, I demand my Roomba show a little passion when cleaning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is absolutely false in California, please don't spread dangerous misinformation. See CVC 22400(a): No person shall drive upon a highway at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic unless the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation, becauseof a grade, or in compliance with law. No person shall bring a vehicle to a complete stop upon a highway so as to impede or b…
The above was referencing stopping on a city street ("Powell between Bush and Sutter"). You're talking about stopping on a highway. These things are not particularly comparable.
[0] https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a terrible driving decision.
As long as it doesn't impede traffic, and make these kind of smooth merge, it isn't. This is the difference between normies and first-principle-thinkers. They are being brainwashed into thinking all rules / laws are there to maximize total good for society
What you call first-principle-thinkers, the rest of the world calls dicks. Everybody sees that manoeuvre, it doesn't require a genius. Most of the people don't do it because they are afraid of repercussions (if they get caught) or are civilised enough to realise that their time is not more important then the time of others. Yes, that manoeuvre doesn't "save you 5 minutes", it steals 1-2 seconds of everybody else's time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In the future, when you're old and quite possibly disabled, you might rethink the whole "walkable cities" thing. I am disabled, and like many other disabled people, I can't drive a car. Often times as people age they also lose the ability to drive a car safely. That is precisely why walkable neighborhoods are so important to old and disabled people.
[flagged]
Groceries are not a mile away when you live in a walkable neighborhood. My grandparents could easily walk to the corner store to buy their daily groceries until they passed away. Chances are that walking a little every day for their whole lives helped them stay in better shape.
> I mean, if y'all like "walkable cities" so much, why not just move to one
The few walkable neighborhoods where I live are, unsurprisingly, highly desirable and thus unaffordable. In my forties I don't feel like immigrating yet again to another country.
> But no, everyone else has to conform to what you think is best
The immense majority of the large metropolitan area where I live only allows single family homes to be built. I would like walkable neighborhoods to be made legal again so that offer can meet the existing demand.
Don't you worry, car-dependent suburbs are not at any risk of disappearing in North America.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oddly enough people are self-regulating, so few people are having children now because modern economics makes it a bad idea for most people . In my grandfather's time you could work a normal job and buy yourself a three-bedroom house in what's now one of the most expensive cities in America. If I wanted to buy the same house at the same city, me and a partner would both have to make 150k to 200k each. And even then w…
If you're the age I think you are (mid-30s), then during your grandfather's time most women didn't work and many racial minorities were barred from many jobs and forms of housing. If you cut the labor supply in half or more, then wages naturally go up because demand doesn't change that much per capita. That said I completely agree with you about everything else. I think the US needs to firm up its social safety net (…
Back in the 1950s, it was much easier to build. Now it takes much longer and it's more expensive to just get permits. It's kinda wacky to think we're still using housing stock from 100 years ago. New construction is rare.
A middle class person, say a Firefighter needs to be able to buy a home where he works. Many city workers in California have to ride long Metrolink rides just to get to work. This is also a safety concern.
Do you really want a subway conductor to have to get up at 5am to get to their 9am to 6pm shift?
This has been an issue for decades, but it's coming to a head now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As long as it doesn't impede traffic, and make these kind of smooth merge, it isn't. This is the difference between normies and first-principle-thinkers. They are being brainwashed into thinking all rules / laws are there to maximize total good for society
I don't know where you live, but here in Europe, the driver would lose the driving licence for 1 month for this little stunt. Specifically, changing lanes near the intersection over the solid line, and cutting those waiting in line. What you call first-principle-thinkers, the rest of the world calls dicks. Everybody sees that manoeuvre, it doesn't require a genius. Most of the people don't do it because they are afra…
Just read this https://fooledbyrandomness.com/ConvexityScience.pdf
From fig (1)
Waymo/ HNers : Knowledge Edge
Musk : Convexity Bias
That's why Musk's approach will win. Waymo will no doubt provide a safe, rule-following driving experience, but Tesla will have frontier breakthroughs and provide more human-like, adapting and sufficiently aggressive driving experience
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That new group is people who aren't at the frontier of trying out new tech. The way this will manifest is the drunk idiot who'll puke all over the car. The bored asshole who carves his initials in the seat. The edgelord who gets their jollies out of destroying other people's stuff. Good chance you had some in the original group as well, but early adopters are usually mostly people who deeply understand tech. Once tha…
I don't know what 'deeply understanding tech' has to do with any of that. Plenty of people who 'deeply understand tech' get drunk and puke in places. Honestly, you sound like a Victorian-era petty lord looking down his nose at 'commoners'.
This isn't about "commoners". It's that any large group of people contains assholes, assholes restrain themselves depending on circumstances, and the new users might well lack that understanding.
It's fundamentally not about "commoners", but about a knowledge-based restraint falling away. (As for the "commoners", you might also want to read the last part of my comment, instead of outraging)