> One of the few reasonable datasets suggesting it doesn't help is the amish
When you literally live on the farm where the cow is milked, there is less benefit to pasteurization, yes. Unless you want us to live like the Amish, then let's keep our pasteurized milk, OK?
Some of us do want to live near where our food comes from and eat it fresh. I haven't seen anyone advocating that pasteurization should be banned, just that raw milk should be un-banned.
You were never forced to, don't change the subject. Issue is with the secretary of health spreading obvious lies about pasteurization, a process that saved countless lives over the course of more than a century.
Are you referring to the one where a Waymo, and several other cars, were stopped at a traffic light, when another car (incidentally, a Tesla) barreled into the traffic stack at 90 MPH, killing several people?
Because I am not aware of any other fatal accidents where a Waymo was even slightly involved. I think it's, at best, misleading to refer to that in the same sentence as FSD-involved fatalities where FSD was the direct cause.
> 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.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2025/05/01/tesla-pr...
reply