1970-01-01

4 ms·

1.
by 1970-01-01 6d ago
It is not. It is "up to 90%" We all know what this means in reality.
2.
by 1970-01-01 6d ago
This is something that isn't going to work for two practical reasons: 1. Losses remain very high for daily use. 2. Nobody is going to spend to install these propriety chargers except for millionaires that don't care about the cost
3.
by 1970-01-01 7d ago
Which is the one zombies hunger for and which is the one driving their unstoppable hunger? Maybe they just really miss having their brain whole again, and eating and walking is the only thing they know?
4.
by 1970-01-01 9d ago
They're intelligent and not conscious. This is not hard to understand, yet people insist the artificial in artificial intelligence must be directly linked with consciousness because we've observed intelligence only in life. Unlink
5.
by 1970-01-01 10d ago
This qualifies as "AI took away my job" but we are dismissing that because the AI influence was indirectly responsible for the job loss.
6.
DOE Seeks New Path for Future Light Bulb Standard(inside.lighting)
1 points by 1970-01-01 10d ago|0 comments
7.
by 1970-01-01 11d ago
You're supporting the USA decisive victory with this take. We are not disagreeing on the winner.
8.
by 1970-01-01 11d ago
That remains a ridiculous argument. The thing about a race is you can always think of excuses for not winning. Plans for Mars were being met by all accounts, however Nixon still cancelled them because the Apollo victory was so decisive.
9.
by 1970-01-01 11d ago
The goal is entirely different. Apollo - Cold war. USA must do it before Russia and win the space race. Money is not a restriction. USA did it before Russia and won the space race. Artemis - Prove a multi-national program can function under
10.
by 1970-01-01 13d ago
Bured lede: i7 CPUs for border patrol.. why?
11.
First Naval Drone Duel Results in Ukrainian Success(navalnews.com)
24 points by 1970-01-01 13d ago|5 comments
12.
by 1970-01-01 15d ago
Buy the box of 2 gallon freezer bags, bag all cables by type, and then just chuck all of it into a big box or bin. Organized, forever.
13.
by 1970-01-01 16d ago
Finally something that isn't outright overpriced. At this price I expected 1 earbud. Here you have TWO and the quality is still unmatched. Two at this price is a good deal.
14.
by 1970-01-01 16d ago
The same place as existing taxis and busses? Busses are a worse customer experience than a 10 minute wait.
15.
by 1970-01-01 16d ago
>you also have to have societal buy-in. Isn't this, as all deadly decisions are, driven (pun intended) by your death rates? As more non-believers of autonomous cars are killed, the momentum of societal buy-in accelerates.
16.
by 1970-01-01 16d ago
It isn't truly stick-and-go, you need to have existing ADAS and other sensors already in the vehicle. As people are now holding onto cars for an average of 15+ years, the bolt-on kits are about 10 years ahead of the average driver&#x27
17.
by 1970-01-01 16d ago
>all of the resources that are going into autonomous cars was instead going into proper public transit infrastructure. They need not be separated. This is the entire point of the Cybercab and the Cybervan: Get self-driving cars, vans, et
18.
by 1970-01-01 17d ago
Make it work with Android and I'll buy it. That's true innovation. Yet again, all we have here is incremental progress. The battery lasts longer, the sensors sample faster, and "more AI". $800 and I just don't care.
19.
by 1970-01-01 17d ago
Apple innovation truly looks dead at this point. At $1200 I expect them to be made in the USA by union workers.
20.
by 1970-01-01 17d ago
What iPods could make a phone call and browse the Web in 2007 that weren't made by Apple?
21.
by 1970-01-01 17d ago
If you're expecting 10% loss at the register and have terrible service , that's a 1-2 punch for bankruptcy.
22.
by 1970-01-01 17d ago
>The merchant pays 2.5% The best way to pay for poor services already rendered and move on with life is to simply pay via card. Didn't like that haircut? Terrible food at the restaurant? Hold onto your cash and slip them the card.
23.
by 1970-01-01 17d ago
Google and Samsung have been at this for years. Nothing here is actual innovation, is it?
24.
by 1970-01-01 17d ago
Disney found this out the hard way with Infinity. On v3.0 a large chunk of their IP was staged into a fully customizable and open universe.. and it was so unremarkable that they shutdown the servers and killed all development a few years la
25.
by 1970-01-01 17d ago
Google has forgotten the plot. A quick tangent story follows: I attempted to add a Tesla Supercharger as it went live to Google Maps. I was the very first to pay to recharge at the new location. The process went something like this: 1st tim
26.
by 1970-01-01 17d ago
Lotus is the best example of why you don't let IBM touch you.
27.
by 1970-01-01 18d ago
And if (when) it becomes safer than taking the bus, you're going to see schools and cities stopping bus services and taking a fleet of FSD cars. And from there, you're jumping directly to questioning rail and subway costs.
28.
Rivian's gambit for full autonomy(spectrum.ieee.org)
97 points by 1970-01-01 18d ago|137 comments
29.
Has the DVD-hacking case made a t-shirt illegal? (2000)(cnn.com)
2 points by 1970-01-01 19d ago|0 comments
30.
by 1970-01-01 19d ago
It's not effective technology if it is secure via obscurity. If it fits on a shirt, you're also fine. The key here (pun intended) is to publish it and show how obvious it was to reverse engineer. https://www.cnn.com&#x2

More ›