> The article notes that the data is incomplete, but that only means that there are more incidents than the graph shows.
But what it doesn't note is where the data is incomplete.
If they started actively looking for incidents in March of this year, and the previous months are just whatever they happened to notice on social media, then it could be both true that "the data is incomplete" and that "there has not been a skyrocketing of incidents".
If you care about absolute numbers, then you need to compare it against human-caused incidents too. If there's 100,000 human-caused incidents then AVs going from 3 -> 300 isn't even a blip.
Yes, that is exactly my point, which is why I added that important detail! I saw that it behaved in a way that made it clear that it was better if I let the box hit my car than to slam on the brakes or steer out of the way.
I am not talking about any specific case. The difficulty is precisely in creating an autonomous system that is capable of making such embodied decisions. I learned to recognize how a lightweight object behaves with a lifetime of experience. The type of sensory input does not matter for this and if we are trying to train a system that is capable of this kind of deeper modeling of the world it is traveling through then the focus needs to be on building and training of such a system.
Fluttering boxes is just one of an infinite number of such embodied decisions I am able to make as a human living on the planet earth!
> And in some circumstances four-way stops flow more traffic.
There's no way that's true, is it? What circumstances would a four way stop sign allow for more traffic flow than a roundabout?
I'm pretty sure it's purely cost-cutting. Four way stop signs are extremely cheap compared to roundabouts. There's no other advantage that I can think of.
Roundabouts are safer (there is no opportunity for t-boning at a roundabout), faster and simpler to navigate than four way stop signs (a roundabout you just give way to people already on the roundabout, a four way stop sign requires you to keep track of who arrived first and then do a weird dance if you both arrived at the same time, and you still need to watch out for people attempting to go out of turn -- which is not possible with a roundabout)
> There's no way that's true, is it? What circumstances would a four way stop sign allow for more traffic flow than a roundabout?
Heavy traffic. In most situations a roundabout will do better, but when completely saturated, the 4-way has a slight advantage. This is probably due to how 4-way stops with dense traffic develop an predictable alternation pattern that eliminates ambiguity and reduces the clearance requirements.
What I've seen here is that traffic will sometimes back up into the roundabout from a blockage down the road, and then things grind to a complete halt, which a 4-way stop should never suffer from.
There's a 6-way roundabout I know of that frequently has one of the 3 intersecting roads dominate the traffic, so people just go full speed from that road. In that case, the other roads can be completely starved, so a 6-way stop would have been better for those roads in those times.
As for t-boning, you can definitely have someone enter a roundabout early/late and hit another car on the side, or dart in front of a car that's in the roundabout (especially possible if the roundabout is not perfectly circular) and themselves get hit on the side.
And people manage to go "out of turn" in roundabouts all the time, by not yielding, or by tailgating.
It's fairly well-known that the Tea Party was basically funded by the Koch brothers, right? I assume you've read things like [1] which go fairly deep into how they funded and organized pretty much all the "grass roots" activities of the Tea Party
Now, these "reopen" protests are basically the same. The sentiments of the people are real, but the funding and organizing are not "grass roots" by any normal definition of the word. For example, of the Michigan protests[2]:
> The Michigan Freedom Fund, which said it was a co-host of the rally, has received more than $500,000 from the DeVos family, regular donors to rightwing groups.
> The other host, the Michigan Conservative Coalition, was founded by Matt Maddock, now a Republican member of the state house of representatives. The MCC also operates under the name Michigan Trump Republicans, and in January held an event featuring several members of the Trump campaign.
The exact same problem exists with volunteer-maintained maps. In fact it's even worse there because at least with a commercial map, quality is basically correlated with where the users are. With a volunteer-maintained map, quality is correlated with where the volunteers are, which is not necessarily going to be where the users are.
I don't even understand the benefit of 100.00% uptime, over 99.99% anyway? I mean, I probably spend more time in a parking garage with no internet available to me at all, than google spends being down in any given month.
I mean, I understand the idea that Google wants to increase their uptime because every lost query is lost revenue, but OP seemed to imply there's some intrinsic benefit that's more than just the incremental benefit...
Regardless of the marginal benefits of 100% uptime vs 99.99...the entire point of ETH is that once the contract is posted to the block chain, it continues to operate in perpetuity...and no centralized service provider or government can take it down. That's powerful, and in our age of creeping power consolidation by big tech cos and overreaching governments, I applaud the development of censorship-resistant tech.
None of that really matters if Mars is on the other side of sun from Earth. You'd need relay satellites to direct the signal around the sun, and even at the speed of light that's going to take tens of minutes, one way.
As the parents suggest, even at Earth-Moon distances, we need to completely rethink things.
My guess is we'll just have local datacenters on mars for the big services (google, netflix, etc). And then more websites will use services like cloudflare so they can get their website cached on mars. AWS will eventually have a mars datacenter. No need for IPFS.
This papers over the whole "relying on large cloud providers" issues in the first place. A decentralized system will ensure that websites won't need to rely on large, centralized powers beyond core infrastructure providers (which we have to fight to ensure are neutral parties, ala Net Neutrality) to avoid concentration of power to a select few.
While I agree with your assessment, it reminds me of the "flying horse carriage" view of the future. Wouldn't be surprised, if multiplanetary hosting would change things more generally.
You will have to attend community tournaments and compete locally for the chance to play against a Mars team over a high-bandwidth satellite array, possibly on a lunar base, possibly only during seasons of opposition between Earth and Mars.
Even then, you will be playing on a specially-modified version of the game that disables server-side anticheat systems, instead relying on human referees.
Maybe because, according to your link, hundreds of people inside Google knew about this for over a year and said nothing?
It's one thing for a plan like this to be secret among a bunch of C-levels in a boardroom for a week. It's something else when HUNDREDS of people are involved, and a product is ready to deploy. That indicates a cultural problem within the company.
More evidence of that (again from your link):
"Company managers responded by swiftly trying to shut down employees’ access to any documents that contained information about the China censorship project, according to Google insiders who witnessed the backlash."
In another thread about this I asked a Googler, who was outraged of being accussed to have done nothing about it or planning to do nothing about, what they planned to do and there was no response at all.
Googlers don't care, they get to have Google on their resume!
But what it doesn't note is where the data is incomplete.
If they started actively looking for incidents in March of this year, and the previous months are just whatever they happened to notice on social media, then it could be both true that "the data is incomplete" and that "there has not been a skyrocketing of incidents".