Sure, we’re in agreement as far as that goes. My point was just the commenter above me was indicating it should be common knowledge that Tesla self driving hits motorcycles more than other self driving cars. And whether their comment was about this or some other subject, I think it’s counterproductive to be like “everyone knows that.”
It’s helpful to remember that not everyone has seen the same stories you have. If we want something to change, like regulators not allowing dangerous products, then raising public awareness is important. Expressing surprise that not everyone knows about something can be counterproductive.
Going beyond that, wouldn’t the new information here be the statistics?
This headline reads like a threat
I’m not a lawyer, but best I can tell from this language, the law is the person operating the plane has to make sure there are seats with restraints, while the people are responsible for using them during takeoff and landing.
I get that for liability reasons, no airline wants to expose themselves by landing without people in their seats. Going further, I interpreted the comment above mine to be saying planes might run out of fuel if the passenger didn’t exit the bathroom. My point was no pilot is going to let the plane crash because someone is in the bathroom.
Maybe they don’t want to land the plane with someone in the bathroom, but I have a hard time believing they can’t.
Why is this guy being such a weenie?
I think it would have helped for the person who posted that to include context, but I would guess they were linking because it also talks about how Kagi isn’t privacy focused.
The linked post goes into detail about why the author views Kagi as not privacy oriented, and that in the author’s opinion Kagi is overly focused on AI. (And was originally started as an AI company)
My thought was that the video loading probably isn’t going to be nearly as fast as TikTok because of the money behind their servers and optimization.
Yeah that’s pretty dystopian. Something worse hasn’t been done with it probably just because many bad actors haven’t been aware its an option.
Very satisfying
But I don’t want my devices to be bombs
I didn’t take the image to be showing a macbook, it could just as easily be my computer or probably many others.
You’re right, doesn’t sound great. In the example they shared, sounds like the issue wasn’t that the car couldn’t drive around the fire truck, but that it couldn’t break a programming rule about crossing into a lane that would normally be opposing traffic. Once given the “ok” to follow such a route, the car handled it on its own, the human doesn’t actually drive it.
I could imagine a scenario where you need one human operator for every two vehicles. That’s still reducing labor by 50%.
Obviously they want it to be better than that, they want it to be one operator per ten vehicles or no operator at all.
And the fundamental problem with these systems is they will be owned by big corporations, and any gained efficiency will be consumed by the corporation, not enjoyed by the worker or passed on to the customer.
But I think there’s true value to be found there. Imagine a transportation cooperative - we’re a thousand households, we don’t all need our own car, but we need a car sometimes. We pool our resources and have a small fleet that minimizes our cost and environmental impact, and potentially drives more safely than human drivers.
Seems like a company that initially differentiated itself by hyping 3D printing, and once they realized that won’t work they’ve got to pivot without spooking everyone.
This is pretty exciting
With respect, I think you’re projecting a discussion with a different person onto this article.
You’re right, the climate is going to get worse before it gets better. You’re right, the impacts of climate change will disproportionately affect poor and underdeveloped areas. We can’t make that go away with positive thinking, and it’s not enough for humans as a species to survive, we need to focus on reducing suffering while we’re turning the ship.
What I took away from this article is that the market forces for cheap renewable power and the means to store it are now stronger than the forces for CO2 emitting power. And those forces are moving faster than predicted. That’s good, and it’s ok to talk about something good when it’s true!
People who have been paying attention and care about others have good reason to be wary about the narrative “oh, everything is going to be fine” because that’s what industry and politicians have been saying for a long time instead of taking needed action.
We’re at a point where most people recognize climate change is real, and they can see it’s effects. We’re also at a point where many people don’t have hope for the situation. It’s dangerous to tell people “shit’s fucked and there’s nothing you can do about it” because they might believe you and do nothing.
Interesting read, thanks.