The article sensibly asks if the (intentionally or not) cherry-picked stats about automated driving (fair weather only, limited to specific areas that aren't especially difficult) is valid then cites a study that really massages those stats in a dubious way (e.g. only counts as a crash if the airbag triggered, no mention of weather). Hmmm...

Another thing I'd really like to know: let's suppose that these are indeed safer than the average driver. Is it also the case for the median driver?

Do you care to elaborate further or would you like to just join the nebulous cynicism club and keep on making irrelevant comparisons?

Well, Flock is great and has caught many murderers. What's your point?

> I have NEVER seen a single person accuse anyone of being a bad person for still preferring to drive a car manually

Just read further in this thread, will you?

Yeah I have. I still don't see it, I do see a lot of unwarranted cynicism and extremely sloppy arguments against these cars.

Sounds like what Mazda did with the MX-30 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_MX-30) which flopped hard. They used their new Wankel engine as range extender, perfect use case since the power:weight ratio of these is impressive.

How else would you define bias if not an offset from equality or zero mean?

For example, the b in y=mx+b

> How else would you define bias if not an offset from equality or zero mean?

As an offset from what the ground truth justifies. Suppose the researchers had decided to load the dice when creating the fake sample data; an unbiased analyst should seek to discover the extent of that, not insist on reporting equality.

Well, in this study, they explicitly had equality - all four groups were as likely to succeed. So any difference in hiring was actual bias (or statistical noise).

The point is about the definition, not about how it relates to the specific circumstances.

No, this is the religion here

Can it do holes like this?

  (typep 3 '(or (integer 0 10) (integer 50 100)));; => T

You can use a "subtype predicate" for this: https://learn.adacore.com/courses/Ada_For_The_CPP_Java_Devel...

Might be less efficient, no? At least in CL (https://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/t_sat...) this is the case, that static type analysis isn't clever enough to work with predicate based types.

I don't know enough about the details to speak to it.

Even if that's impressive, the README is low SNR slop as usual...

Thank you.

Put a five-line TL;DR at the top of the README — what it is, the number, the honest limit, the two findings, credits — with the detail below for anyone who wants it.

What was the decision to leave the LLM to write the detail section rather than author it yourself? There's a growing resentment about asking people to read LLM-produced words, especially if it's a large amount to read. Not sure if you were aware of that or not (I think there's been links to surveys / polls just recently on H.N)

Fun thing, both SA and ChipsAndChesse similarly dunked on that presentation:

https://www.semiaccurate.com/2026/09/07/arms-2026-tech-day-i...

https://chipsandcheese.com/p/arms-c2-ultra-g2-ultra-nx-and-c...

You're probably thinking of LZMA2.

I've been searching for one hour, and the only truly safe thing is an HTPC linked to an OS-free commercial display like these large VAs from ViewSonic: https://www.viewsonic.com/global/products/commercial-display... (goes from 45" to 100").

What software would you install on the HTPC?

User will typically want to have a remote control and have applications like youtube.

At first I thought about something like https://libreelec.tv/ but Kodi instead of the much more powerful mpv is not an option.

So probably a custom lightweight distro with mpv outputting to DRM directly and a game controller to navigate some file explorer ? Maybe try to script around some speech-to-text LLM to be able to say "Play me X", heh.

Or just control it via ssh because that's actually simpler for me.