I don’t think that was the point I was making at all.
This seems exactly like a case where computer algorithms would function worse than humans. It is not surprising (to me) that those exist.
For instance, put a sign that flashes “Skydivers will land 100m in front of you in about 5s, break now” and human beings will have 100% success rate in avoiding it, and computers will not. (Or any other situation that relies on written communication that is not usually used on the road).
There’s plenty of situations where human ability will perform better than computer models (and vice versa).
The dummy in no way looks human in the context I’d expect a self driving system to have. Humans don’t have a way to move their legs back and forth that way while remaining stationary (unless on a treadmill I suppose).
You can infer that it is meant to represent a human, and thus likely to move across a crossing, but there’s no reason to expect a computer to read it as a human right?
The most obvious characteristic is distinctly not human (Legs don’t work that way), so it looks like some weird windmill, or one of those hot air moving men.
They have a great group of people. I’ve worked with maybe 6-7 of them directly, and they’re all on my list of people I’d actively want to work with again, across a pretty wide set of skills.
The ones I just know of are also people friends say are both great at their stuff and good to work with, so I have high hopes they’ll make some awesome stuff.
The tasks are not the hard part. Alignment is a lot easier when you’re all close. I went from a distributed team (4 offices spread between EU and US) to a team that’s all co-located. The speed and quality of alignment is miles different.
There’s stuff we outsource (easy to describe tasks), but the stuff that needs tight iteration loops is so much easier when you can just get up, walk a few meters, and talk about it.
In Sweden, the government does the work for most normal cases. They send you a suggestion of “this is all we know about” and you just say “yeah, seems right” via SMS.
In Ireland you don’t do anything in the usual case, unless you think it’s wrong, everything is taxed at source by the employers/banks.
I too worked in France. I hated the long lunches, since it meant you left work at 6 or 7 in the evening. I’d rather be out the door at 5 (like I do now in the US) or 3-4 (like I did in some previous Swedish jobs) than spend the entire evening in the office.
The upgraded membership is 60usd more than the normal, gives you 2% back on purchases, and they will refund it to you if you ask, so not sure how you could lose 100 on that.
And there are a lot of regulators. Some of them a lot more combative than others. That is my main reason for dislike for the regulations.
Overall I support the regulations, but I really wish the penalties had more documented structure than “We will fine you anywhere from 0 to an 8 digit number (in our case) depending on what we think is right”.
It is all about risk, ambiguity and individual circumstances. I dont think that is bad, but there is no clear record of what it even is we are meant to protect.
The orchestration of a data extract from even a midsized corporation is a significant endeavour.
Someone in the company knowing what data we have on an entity is a significant step away from the entire company being able to access that, because, you know, we take data privacy seriously, so we don’t make it easy to access all data on a single entity.
If your approach to privacy is putting all the eggs in a basket, allowing easy extraction of everything from that basket, and hoping the basket can be kept secure I’d argue your model is weird to begin with.
Or you were in university/connected to a university.
The Swedish qwctf scene at least was very clearly divided in 20ms people who went to or worked at, a university, and 150ms people who played from home.
There were some 50-60ms ISDN people too but I can only remember a few.
To me it was almost unwatchable. My eyes aren’t great, and excessive use of darkness / lack of contrast magnifies that. I have the same problem with some video games.
I disagree on the best in class. Apples insistence on hard plastic means they give up the proven best choice for sound isolation (silicone or foam buds). Claiming it is a feature to save lives is a stretch.
There’s plenty of better sounding fully wireless headphones in that price range - Jabra elite 65t are meant to be good, I have the beoplay e8 and they are quite nice, Sennheiser momentum are in that same price class etc etc.
The argument of employers being these evil things that hold no loyalty is tiresome.
Loyalty is not a black and white thing.
I can list close to 15 years of small experiences that make me feel like my current employer truly cares. I’ve had very few negative experiences, and when I have had them I’ve said “hey that’s not cool”, and the company has fixed it as much as it could be fixed. The fact that I may be fired at some point does not invalidate that.
To me, loyalty between a company and an individual is not about the contract of work, it is about the environment that exists while you are working. Both I and the company have the option at any time to terminate the employment, that’s just part of the deal. That does not mean long term loyalty and expectations can’t exist.
I don’t think that was the point I was making at all.
This seems exactly like a case where computer algorithms would function worse than humans. It is not surprising (to me) that those exist.
For instance, put a sign that flashes “Skydivers will land 100m in front of you in about 5s, break now” and human beings will have 100% success rate in avoiding it, and computers will not. (Or any other situation that relies on written communication that is not usually used on the road).
There’s plenty of situations where human ability will perform better than computer models (and vice versa).