see what i find puzzling is that warehouses have flat floors right? so what benefit does the upfront cost of building something with a bunch of extra actuators for all the joints in 2 legs, and the ongoing running costs of far less mechanically efficient bipedal locomotion have over wheeled movement like their other robot, the Handle, offers? i should mention i know nothing about robots so i'm sure there must be a good reason for it, but this thought has been on my mind ever since I saw george hotz bring it up in the Comma Body reveal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dhvt0ZmqmGQ
as a layperson, i feel like biomimicry only makes sense for hands and arms, at least for the vast majority of commercial use cases
You are absolutely right. And this is reflected in the choice of robots deployed in warehouses.
For example, Amazon uses hundreds of thousands of simple wheeled floor-jack like robots to move the shelves around [1], and they started doing this many years ago.
Meanwhile, they have only a handful of humanoid robots, on experimental basis, trying to decide if they are useful [2].
For UK banks on my Graphened Pixel 6a I can use the apps for HSBC, First Direct, Barclays, NatWest, RBS, Co-Operative Bank and Metro Bank with no issues, and have only had trouble with the Lloyds Bank app as of an update from maybe 2-3 months ago which throws an error saying they've detected I'm using a jailbroken/rooted device
I get a message that the device is not secure but I can still make transfers and such from the banking app on a rooted OP9Pro.
Never tried to use NFC payments though.
yeah i'm hoping it was just an auth server outage and browser sessions werent invalidated because this basically described my situation, but i wont have access to the only device i own that still (hopefully) has a an active login session until the weekend to find out
As a hypothetical owner of both a Tesla and an autonomous mower, i would not want my Tesla to swerve (at least in any way that might endanger me or other humans) for a squirrel, whereas I would probably want my autonomous mower to "swerve" to avoid a hedgehog, if not because i like little animals then just because i wouldn't want to clear up entrails off of my lawn
Out of curiosity, does your autonomous mower behave as idiotically has a autonomous vacuum like a Roomba? For a vacuum, that's okay, but for something on my lawn, I'd hate to see what the patterns in the grass would look like.
I clearly have no experience with one of these things, and just taking the worst of one and (most probably) improperly applying it to something else.
It's not the weight of the mower that makes the patterns. it's the direction of the suction, the direction of the rotation and cut. Sure, the wheels can leave a depression, but it's the cut that is important.
yet as technological innovation gets faster over time, you would've thought the optimal patent term length to balance the innovation-incentivizing and innovation-chilling effects would decrease
It gets worse, it seems even his great grandfather was participating in the abuse from beyond the grave. From the article: "When I was younger, I looked at my great grandad's prisoner-of-war diaries and I just love everything about the period."
Even his teachers were getting in on the sickening brainwashing operation: ""Callum went away on a school trip when he was about 12 and came back with an old-fashioned hat on," she says.
"I thought it was funny, and I just asked him, 'Where did you find this?'.
"He said 'that's the way I want to dress, that's going to be me'.
"Ever since then, that's just been Callum," his mum says."
I don't think it is, but you havent really given me anything to present a counter argument against... i just dont think there is any abuse for me to minimize, if it wasnt clear from the sarcasm oozing off my previous comment
People are consistently arrested and/or charged for resisting arrest for not identifying themselves in states that do not have “stop and ID” laws.
Even if you know to the letter what your state law requires, the police often don’t. If you take the arrest and sit in jail for 2-12 hours, you can fight it later in court. Somehow, this is a luxury for most people in the US.
"You were rude to me earlier, so I don't want to talk to you" may get you beaten up but won't get you in further legal trouble.
If it comes up at trial, you simply explain that the officer was rude to you, so you didn't want to talk to them, which caused them to be even more rude to you, which confirmed your decision to not talk to them.
technically they tossed it onto the earth's core, which is estimated to be around 5000°C. though even if it had been a (completely uncovered, unrugged, and un-folded-up-sweatered) tile floor, i would absolutely expect most manufacturers' phones to hold up just fine at that height...
to get serious for a moment though, id like to go against the anti-glass grain by pointing out that supposedly, successive generations of Corning Gorilla Glass get stronger by some multiple each time, yet we see phone screens smashing with the same regularity because manufacturers are just using thinner panes each time (probably chasing thinner phones more so than some kind of planned obsolescence conspiracy, although both explanations are credible). so we end up with a tradeoff between thickness, durability and glass backs, but that beats having to rule out durable phones with glass backs entirely from being able to exist
Thinner panes are cheaper panes. In theory they could keep the thickness the same and use a lower grade of material, but the savings likely aren't that high and thinner phones are likely the nail in the coffin.
I don't think it's a "conspiracy" so much as "the first design objective" but I think I agree with every other part of your comment. (I have also added the bit about the earth's core to my standup routine; thanks).
I see a lot of San Franciscans online complain about homeless people leaving their feces and used needles in the streets and harassing people going about their lives, I don't see so many complaints about them eating food. Surely an approach that maximises the freedom for all would be one that criminalizes the actually harmful behaviour, rather than going after the segment of society whose existence correlates strongly with that behaviour. It just seems like going after Tony Soprano by putting italians into internment camps, rather than devoting police activity to capturing mafia criminals
The trouble with using the word "theft" while making an argument about unauthorized copying is that it never holds water - does the popular singer lose their ability to sing? If not then the closest you can really get and still come across as genuine is to say they "stole" the uniqueness of their talent, rather than their unique talent itself
The above comment wasn't a passage in a legal document, it's a comment on a discussion site. "IP theft" is a colloquial, non-legal term generally referring to violations to copyright law. Neither the RIAA's complaint nor the DMCA contain the word 'theft'.
Well sometimes though. In the case of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act the word “unauthorized” can mean basically anything the DOJ wants to pull out of their asses and prosecute. Fortunately we have courts to remove ambiguity.
The idea of copying as theft isn’t new but I agree it’s not really the same.
