jfoster

22 ms·

421.
by jfoster 3y ago
It's really interesting how many people see a product/service with an impressive result (previously seemed impossible), albeit with flaws that humans find funny/obvious, and then are unable to imagine how it might be once imp
422.
by jfoster 3y ago
Potentially the opposite. It may become more difficult to use such images to harm someone's career or relationship. Perhaps nothing is believable in the future.
423.
by jfoster 3y ago
One arm of Google has no idea what the other arm of Google is doing. Watch them re-enter domain registration within the next 5 years. Just try to follow along with their chat developments if you don't believe me.
424.
by jfoster 3y ago
They're only opening it up to residents bit by bit. They've shown no interest in opening it up to tourists. Presumably it will only be available for tourists once it's available to absolutely anyone.
425.
by jfoster 3y ago
Yeah, many failure modes would be interesting. If Waymo think they've handled them well, maybe they should let some journalists have at it on a car or two.
426.
by jfoster 3y ago
And if that were the case and someone did it, journalists would get plenty of opportunity to get in on that story. They don't have to be the first to trigger every failure mode.
427.
by jfoster 3y ago
That did cross my mind, but how far should they really take it? Should they also deflate a tire to see how the vehicle responds to that?
428.
by jfoster 3y ago
> I wondered what would happen if I touched the wheel, so I grabbed it as the Waymo merged from one lane to another. The car ignored me and drove on. Surprised they admit to this, considering earlier in the article they mention being ins
429.
by jfoster 3y ago
> we tried to duplicate the experience a tourist might have bopping around the city in a driverless taxi. Tourists are probably going to be the last cohort to get access to Waymo.
430.
by jfoster 3y ago
You're making me nostalgic for the first time they retired one of their chat offerings...
431.
by jfoster 3y ago
Those are great points. Agree with everything, except does Porkbun actually make a decent margin on any of their offerings? They all seem quite cheap, but it's possible that some of the hosting could be shared out to a ridiculous degre
432.
by jfoster 3y ago
Pricing like that makes me uncomfortable. Even if they have a tiny margin on the domain costs, that means that they are probably a loss-making business. So they plan to just sell to Google, Amazon or Microsoft in the future, and we don&#x27
433.
by jfoster 3y ago
The point was that it's a stupid and harmful crime. Calling it a hack makes it sound like a clever harmless prank. The point is about the characterization of it, not about what hacks can and cannot be.
434.
by jfoster 3y ago
That wasn't my point in the original post. Obviously overlap between those two things is possible.
435.
by jfoster 3y ago
You'd be doing it so the vehicle won't move, and if the vehicle doesn't move it will cause traffic. If your argument is even slightly correct (that there would be any problem prosecuting such behavior) then it at least won&#x
436.
by jfoster 3y ago
I don't really think the semantics matter too much. Sure, call the circle of cones a hack. The point is, it's criminal & likely causes a degree of chaos well beyond a simple prank.
437.
by jfoster 3y ago
They don't put the cone on the bonnet for no reason. They do it because they know what the likely outcome will be. In a similar way, if you booby trap a vehicle such that it might surprise a human driver in some way whilst they are dri
438.
by jfoster 3y ago
Is putting a cone on a vehicle to cause traffic jams really so complex? Perhaps the first person to do it was a bit clever, but anyone imitating it really isn't.
439.
by jfoster 3y ago
Good question & to be honest I'm not 100% sure, though I bet there are many laws vague enough to capture it. If it causes extreme traffic jams, perhaps there's some kind of public nuisance law that will cover it? Is interferen
440.
by jfoster 3y ago
They may have right of way, but does that mean they can blast through an intersection at any speed or is there a reasonable speed they should be proceeding at? On what's currently made public, this really feels like it could go either
441.
by jfoster 3y ago
Cone blocking isn't hacking. It's simple criminal behavior.
442.
by jfoster 3y ago
Yeah, and sometimes it leads beyond megacorps to governments, too. Optus (telco in Australia), owned by Singtel, which is majority owned by Temasek, which is owned by the Government of Singapore. You can also substitute in India's 2nd
443.
by jfoster 3y ago
This is essentially Microsoft releasing this. After ZeniMax acquired id, they were acquired by Microsoft.
444.
by jfoster 3y ago
Too many problems there is actually a good thing, because it means solving each one should yield some incremental reduction in risk.
445.
by jfoster 3y ago
AI can't animate a character at will? After everything we have seen AI become capable of, it seems incredible to claim that animating a character is something it simply won't be able to do in the future.
446.
by jfoster 3y ago
3 hours for 8 bit. I wonder what it would be if going further. Greyscale? Black & white?
447.
by jfoster 3y ago
Are you suggesting that Apple & Samsung might sell phones in Europe that are technically in violation of this law? Or are you just saying that it was unnecessary for them to be included, but acknowledging that they will design their dev
448.
by jfoster 3y ago
Yeah, theoretically of course, but if they were bringing online that degree of manufacturing then they would also match it with higher targets.
449.
by jfoster 3y ago
You could be right about the inventory, but isn't idling factories the exact opposite of what they're doing if they're smashing production targets?
450.
by jfoster 3y ago
The comparison isn't about scalability. It's about spin.

More ›