This is why you should get a proper salary even if you are working at a "hot startup". Were you expecting a $1m gross payout from owning 1% of a $100m company? That's the kind of gross income you'd get every 2 years of working at Googbookagramazon. Consider opportunity costs carefully.
True, but the graph show lots of people dying in their 20s and 30s. So if I was born in 1940s and became a heroin addict there's a good chance I die before 1979. So those born before 1950's are unlikely to die of a drug overdose between 1979-2016 because to do so they would have needed to become in contact with heroin for the first time well into their 30s instead of their teens and 20s.
Almost any GNSS receiver is by design power hungry. Modern mostly SDR constructions have faster time to (reasonable) fix, but still it involves large amounts of essentially opportunistic computantion to acquire and track the CDMA downlinks. This is one of the arguments why Spy-Fi style inconspicuous and globally accurate and useful trackers are nonsense. The whole process of associating with 2G GSM network and sending one MO-SM message is incredibly energy expensive, but getting reasonable GNSS fix is in completely different barpark.
Possibly more feasible if you periodically capture and store a few ms raw IQ, then transfer a quick burst when the handler comes near, to do the nav solution offline.
I used to work with Google's account abuse team. The company will never comment on suspensions, so you are right that you only get 1 side. Every consumer account suspension I ever looked into was due to severe abuse on the part of the account holder: folders full of child porn, account being used to spam or distribute viruses, etc. Every advertiser account that some jerk whined about being "wrongly suspended for no reason omg google is satan" was actually due to either click fraud or advertisers' sites distributing malware. Whenever you see one of these complaints you should reach for a massive, galaxy-scale grain of salt.
In this case however the account holder is being totally up front about their activities: they were using a proxy network to rip off YouTube. This is a bit like Trump committing treason on live TV and then later whining about impeachment on Twitter. What's in question is not the facts but the policy.
This is absolutely nonsense. My colleagues account was suspended for using PayPal and not Google wallet, one startup was suspended because their dev had multi sign-in, my account was suspended because of "app likeness" or whatever bullshit, people were suspended for reselling pixel, wrong credit card info, pseudo names on Google plus, dmca violation, copy right violation on YouTube, competitors hitting report, false copy right and the list goes on.
Out of curiosity, how did you notice folders were full of child porn? Do operators have access to mail folders and / or use to check randomly on people emails?
They shared it and someone reported it, 100% of the time. Complaints are verified by special contractors whose mental health is sacrificed for child safety.
My understanding is that hosting companies use hashes of known material in combination with automated scanning. Also, that some companies may not want to tell you much about how they do it, because the act of identifying it means looking at it, which is illegal (I have not researched this, I might well be wrong/inaccurate)
I'm pretty sure looking at it isn't the illegal part. Making, possessing, and distributing are the illegal bits. Maybe some other aspects too, like transporting or buying or some form of conspiring? I don't think the government (at least the US gov't) can actually make looking at anything illegal. But it's hard to look at something that's restricted in that way without doing at least one of the illegal things.
If just looking were illegal, you could shove it in someone's face on the sidewalk and they'd instantly be guilty of a serious crime.
Waymo is so far ahead in this game. Tesla has the biggest online cheerleading section and an "autopilot" that behaves as a low-budget adaptive cruise control with lane keeping that sometimes works, and a pretty big body count. Uber has a dead pedestrian and a major lawsuit. Cruise has a lot of people on staff but virtually nothing to show for it. Lyft exists. Waymo is in production revenue service.
> Tesla has the biggest online cheerleading section and an "autopilot" that behaves as a low-budget adaptive cruise control with lane keeping that sometimes works, and a pretty big body count
I don't think you're being very accurate there. There are lots of videos of people commuting 50+ miles to and from work every day without touching anything while on the interstates, including interchanges. It's doing a lot more than just lane keeping.
I disagree. It’s completely fair. Handling basic tasks on nice freeways is exactly what adaptive cruise control + lane keeping is for. Last I checked, autopilot couldn’t even stop for a stop sign unless you count “shadow mode” claims.
What other vehicle will change lanes by itself, and take on/off ramps through interchanges to take you where your navigation is routed, without you touching a single thing?
OK, sure. You have to touch the wheel or it turns off.
What I mean is, you are not providing input to the wheel, or pedals, or turn signal or driving the car in any way. You're just letting it know you have not fallen asleep.
None, because every other manufacturer is more concerned about not killing people than they are about releasing beta features for cars. The most surprising thing to me about autopilot is that Tesla hasn't been sued into oblivion for it.
Based on the description in that article, it doesn’t seem that the Tesla autonomously reacted to the stop sign, so much as it slowed to a stop before making a right turn based on its navigation system. The driver says he had to manually start AutoPilot after the stop for it to initiate the right turn:
> “The car always stops at the end of a highway exit since Navigate on Autopilot. At the stop, you just need to touch the accelerator to start Autopilot again without Navigate on Autopilot. I didn’t accelerate, you just need to touch the accelerator for less than a second and the car will do the rest at the intersection.”
Perhaps you should confirm what it's actually doing in the video? Tesla itself says that stop sign and traffic light handling is in shadow mode only [1].
It's trying to center in an extremely large lane. An easy fix would be to not have a huge concrete wall jutting into the middle of the freeway without lane markers.
I feel like people forget human drivers hit those same barriers with alarming frequency.
Comma ai's OpenPilot makes freeway driving really nice. I've gone miles without touching pedals or the wheel, it's definitely better than stock. Though I haven't tried AP on Tesla, and OpenPilot is basically just a really good LKA and ACC.
Freeways are a very ideal environment - wide, clearly marked lanes, no traffic lights, no pedestrians/bikes, no random stops, no navigation ambiguity. Unless Tesla has self driving cars on city roads (which all of the others so), they can't really be part of the same conversation.
While Tesla is far behind Waymo and probably never will catch up, especially because of CAPTCHA, I think your description is unduly harsh. Autopilot works much better than every other TACC out there and is the best thing on the market you can get.
Since it lets you fall asleep as long as your hand (or something) is on the wheel, I'm not sure it's the best thing you can get. Cadillac SuperCruise seems better from a driver awareness standpoint, given that this is "predictable abuse" otherwise.
It doesn't let you fall asleep. It needs force on the wheel to prevent disabling itself, and just a weight attached isn't enough. It needs a change in force.
Honestly, if your only critiques are based on hearsay then maybe you shouldn't critique.
I am not sure what you are talking about. Tesla autopilot regularly makes you either tug at the steering wheel or press one of the buttons on the steering wheel. Having your hand on it isn’t enough.
I’m going to ignore the fact that you’re flatly incorrect about the rest of your posts regarding Tesla, since others have more ably corrected you than I could, and simply ask what the hell this even means.
A “production revenue service”? This sounds like meaningless babble. Waymo does not currently have anything available that you can buy, lease, subscribe to, or otherwise exchange money for. That is, in fact, the entire point of the article: “coming soon,” they say, with an additional clause on top of even that: “coming soon you may...”
So: what do you mean when you say “Waymo is in production revenue service”? Because that sounds like nonsense, to be honest.
Nah man. They have a ride hailing app and seevice in Arizona. The email was to customers of this "production revenue service" that some rides soon will not have a safety driver in the car.
I used to think that, but now I agree with George Hotz. Tesla uses machine learning to map inputs to control outputs. Google is using it just to build a model of the world and then use program logic to decide the control action to take.
The problem with the latter approach is the long tail of real life variety doesn't lend itself to a fixed set of programmed rules. You'll always have more edge cases.
I think Waymos approach gets you to 90% faster, but then plateaus.
I think it's the other way around: Direct mapping of inputs to outputs will work great for a subset of conditions, but the last N% is infeasible without explicit logical programming.
You'll never run out of edge cases if you have to explicitly program the logic. At some point you have to let the machine learning decide it. Maybe there is room for a hybrid approach, but I think anything relying on programmers having thought of every situation ahead of time is doomed to fail.
You're wrong about the requirements. It doesn't have to be perfect, just better than us, and that's easily doable for computers that don't get tired, distracted, or drunk.
I'm not sure how long it will take, but I'm sure we'll get there.
Not sure there is enough evidence in support of those claims about Tesla. Tesla doesn't collect anywhere near enough data from its customer fleet to support the kind of massive training being claimed. In contrast Waymo and Cruise vehicles are regularly in the depot where each car offloads terabytes of data. Who has the bigger training set?
1:49:30. I’m on mobile otherwise I would link to the exact spot.
Tesla has tens (hundreds?) of thousands of vehicles on the road right now that are continuously feeding training data back to Tesla. What evidence is there that this is insufficient, or even deficient? From what I can gather, Waymo has limited testing geofenced to Phoenix, Arizona. Tesla has cars all over the world with autopilot, all providing training data.
I don’t see a reason for your conviction that Waymo has an advantage here.
Hundreds of thousands. The 200k mark only in US was achieved more than 1 year ago, and it triggered the phase out of the incentives.
For the last couple of quarters Tesla has been delivering almost 100k vehicles so it won’t be that long to reach the 1 million mark globally.
>Tesla uses machine learning to map inputs to control outputs. Google is using it just to build a model of the world and then use program logic to decide the control action to take.
I suspect that isn't true in so far that engineers will build what works. Building a complicated system like an autonomous car will necessarily involve a messy combination of a bunch of different strategies and with the result converging on a common solution.
That said, seems like Tesla will still benefit from Waymo being the first out of the gate. While Tesla plays catchup in technology, Waymo will take all the early criticism, while ostensibly making driverless cars more palatable to mainstream society. Similar to how Lyft benefitted from Uber being the first to bully local governments into legalizing non-taxi app-driven car service.
