tbabb

22 ms·

151.
by tbabb 8y ago
Page looks a bit broken to me. Text is cut off, and the second dialogue is missing text.
152.
by tbabb 8y ago
There are several inexcusably egregious errors in the design of the MCAS system, and this "solution" addresses none of them. - Single point of failure: The system makes command decisions based on the readings from a single sensor.
153.
by tbabb 8y ago
It basically doesn't matter if you share your DNA or not-- if your siblings or extended family share their DNA, then a malicious actor knows almost as much about you as they want to. This is how Osama bin Laden was found, as well as th
154.
by tbabb 8y ago
They are capital spending very heavily to advance their tech, so a lack of "profitability" I don't think says any more than it does about Tesla-- they would be fools to pocket their profit instead of turning it around to spen
155.
by tbabb 8y ago
I think if they could do one thing to improve their chances, it would be to find a check on Elon. A Gwynne Shotwell for Tesla, basically. Someone who can divert his energy towards reality, and stop him from making impulsive, insane mistakes
156.
by tbabb 8y ago
Changing the reward/transaction price/whatever by a certain fraction every year doesn't imply that the price will move by the same amount, due to the original problem mentioned above: If the supply is rigid (i.e. not respondi
157.
by tbabb 8y ago
> gold failed as a currency in 1933, but is currently worth $1300/oz Yes, because gold is a commodity, not a currency. In fact, if you treat gold as a metal with utility similar to copper, but scale the price of copper proportionall
158.
by tbabb 8y ago
By pointing out the folly of commodity currency, you are making a good case against bitcoin. (This, too, is addressed in the linked article).
159.
by tbabb 8y ago
That is yet another feature which is mistaken by crypto advocates for a bug. The 2% per annum is deliberate and useful; it means you have economic incentive to put your wealth to work on creating things-- new businesses, technology, public
160.
by tbabb 8y ago
> - Constrained supply means protection against inflationist central banks. This keeps being touted as a feature, but unless you are Zimbabwe it is a bug. "Supply-constrained" means "demand-driven price" which means &
161.
by tbabb 8y ago
> It is very sad that a lot of people in this forum are hoping this never works. Top level OP here. I am personally rooting for self-driving to succeed and catch on. I just don't think Tesla's current strategy is likely to work
162.
by tbabb 8y ago
Looks like the parallax is quantized into whole-pixel shifts, leading to flat planes at discrete depths. The eye can pick up very small sub-pixel shifts when doing parallax solving. Good antialiasing would be necessary for a smooth/con
163.
by tbabb 8y ago
I think it is more than that. I think the perception of time is the rate of change of your brain state. Intuitively, this makes sense-- if I double the rate of your neurological activity, the world will seem to move half as fast. Similarly,
164.
by tbabb 8y ago
And you're expecting reliability to improve by a factor of ten million before 2020?
165.
by tbabb 8y ago
That's not stereopsis. And it's terribly inaccurate.
166.
by tbabb 8y ago
I think a careful interpretation shows how far that is. A self-driving system ought not be considered reliable until it can drive O(100 million miles) without disconnecting once, in order to match human reliability (that's about the di
167.
by tbabb 8y ago
What in that video suggests sensor and/or stereo fusion to you? I notice that the temporal coherence is pretty bad-- Pedestrians pop out of recognition when they go behind trees; lane/exit boundaries wiggle all over the place and
168.
by tbabb 8y ago
I have been yelling about this for a long time: Tesla is not going to be able to deliver full self-driving as promised. They don't have the hardware, for one (ranging is terrible; they need stereo cameras), and second, their software s
169.
by tbabb 8y ago
There are a million better long-shot scientific experiments that could be done with better rigor and better theoretical/experimental foundation than what's in that paper. The ideas there are 'not even wrong' in the Wolfg
170.
by tbabb 8y ago
Utter garbage woo. I'd say it's indicative of something, but should we be surprised that even large government organizations can be taken in by BS?
171.
by tbabb 8y ago
Seems in agreement to me-- The white will contain red, green, and blue, which will make a red-green fringe against blue, and green-blue fringe against red. The sensitivity of the eye is also nonlinear, so bright-against-bright is going to h
172.
by tbabb 8y ago
Best theory I've heard of this is that it's due to chromatic aberration in the lens of your eye. Blue is deflected slightly to the left/right relative to red/yellow due to the wavelength-dependent refractive index of yo
173.
by tbabb 8y ago
Many things might look like smoke to a layperson, but aren't, like contrails or [wingtip vortices]( https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/newman/gfx/news/hire... ).
174.
by tbabb 8y ago
Uff, wincing facepalm. That man needs to close his mouth. I would bet 85% odds that Tesla is eventually going to offer a refund to all current Model 3 owners who "pre-purchased" self driving. In fact, that's the event that
175.
by tbabb 8y ago
IMO Tesla does not have the hardware on the Model 3 to do full self-driving. I believe that stereopsis (multiple cameras using parallax to solve for per-pixel depth) is necessary to get a practical, well-functioning self driving system work
176.
by tbabb 8y ago
> You can't actually "make a mark" on a particle Yes, of course. That was loose wording for "affect a particle a way that is meaningful", i.e. prepare it. :) > "But that's cheating!" you say. &q
177.
by tbabb 8y ago
Great article, thanks for sharing! I actually found your Google talk some years ago and found it fascinating. I agree with basically all of your article. It certainly explains the dichotomy of physical laws allowing a spacetime to be "
178.
by tbabb 8y ago
It is already implied by relativity that time doesn't flow. You cannot choose a definition of "now" that some other observer who is moving relatively to you would agree with. Under relativity, observers will disagree about wh
179.
by tbabb 8y ago
That color scheme physically hurts to look at. I would like to read this, but I don't think my retinas could take it.
180.
by tbabb 8y ago
I don't see how saying that it doesn't exhibit a feeling implies that it exhibits feelings.

More ›