Self driving cars just feels like a bunch of engineers wanting to solve a really hard and really interesting problem. But is it really the right problem to solve? I don’t think so. Currently we have:
>other unpredictable human-driven vehicles on the road
>no sensors or passive/active guides in the physical infrastructure — guidance is completely determined onboard
>no signage designed for CV — everything written in plain English, so you have to waste compute on object detection and OCR. And, you have a constant and unending need to collect mapping data
>no vehicle-to-vehicle communication whatsoever
Design the roads and signage for self driving cars, enforce an industry-wide V2V standard with NHTSA, and start small in some test areas that only allow other vehicles that are part of the botnet (perhaps not necessarily self-driving, but at least part of the V2V network). That’s a reasonable problem space. The current one is unworkable — the models won’t converge and they’ll never make it out of “beta”.
Startups should almost never use k8s. They need to iterate fast and ignore the complexities of infra. k8s is far too complex for most small companies.
CapRover Droplet on Digital Ocean + deploy your Rails app with git. Scale your single VPS up as needed. Most don’t need much beyond that for quite a while.
goto makes sense in C for cleanup of local resources. Passing a bunch of pointers to pointers to another function for cleanup makes code far less readable (jumping around in a source file instead of just reading code linearly and freeing local resources in the scope in which they were allocated). Basically, forcing structured programming over using goto is the anti-lambda — requiring a lot of jumping around in the SOURCE file (not necessarily the binary) instead of linearly scanning through the code.
Dijkstra was wrong with his “goto” paper. It’s fine to admit that. He was right about most other things.
Most schools in the US sell/provide subsidized lunch.
So yeah, there ISN’T much of a line here in the US. The school is daycare, education, basic medical attention, a cafeteria/food welfare program, and sports/after school program all rolled into one.
During early COVID in the Bay Area, the middle school in my neighborhood kept “serving” lunch. That is to say, it was too “dangerous” to hold class. However, they still staffed cafeteria staff and had a line down the street at lunch time of kids with subsidized/free lunch, and they handed out brown paper bags. So the school was literally operating ONLY as a child nutritional welfare program for a while, but not as a school.
I’m not defending daily gym class. I’m defending daily sports.
I was fortunate enough to go to a high school that did not have a gym period, but required all students to play an organized sport.
Gym in large high schools is a waste of time due to the student to instructor ratio. One frustrated gym teacher to 50+ kids playing dodgeball? Of course you’re going to have theater kids just going through the motions and goth kids behind the bleachers smoking cigarettes. It’s not real exercise.
You need small rosters, organized practices, uniforms, referees, fans (students and parents) and intra-school competition. It creates seriousness and expectations. You can’t hide from your coach when there’s only 14 kids on the roster. You need to do the sprints with everyone else and take the drills seriously.
I don’t think this scales beyond smaller high schools. Not enough facilities, not enough coaches, not enough money.
Getting home is a big issue for a lot of families. School ends around 3 pm, but most kids do some sort of after school activity like a sport to bridge the gap until after 5 pm when a parent can come through the pickup line. Growing up, there was also just general “after-school” programs. Basically just day care for after the school day that would cost extra.
Delusional. Sports are competitive. They require daily reps. Sports are also meant to keep kids physically active and healthy, and to establish a routine of physical activity into their adulthood (alongside intellectual productivity). You can’t just be physically active and healthy on the weekend.
Yeah, sorry. That doesn’t work in a huge percentage of areas in the US. Heat, cold, darkness, lack of infrastructure, and distance.
When the high is 110 F in a Phoenix suburb, you can’t ask the 14 year olds to skateboard 20 miles to school on a country road with no breakdown lane. Similarly, you can’t ask kids from Maine to skateboard to school in the dark on ice.
Whenever this topic gets brought up, a bunch of seemingly childless city dwellers think they’re making some massive revelation suggesting that kids just get their own butts to school at a comfortable 10:30 am.
It’s actually pretty simple: Both parents work. Somebody has to drive the kids to school (hard requirement — there’s no bus and a bike/skateboard is too perilous). Work starts at 9 am. School has to start earlier than that.
School start is really bounded by the start of the average parent’s workday, unfortunately. Mom and Dad start work at 9 am. Kids need to be at school before then. None of this 10 am start talk makes sense for the kids that aren’t on the bus line and have parents that drive them to school.
Not the same game, but I used to work as an Android dev for an imaging company. We had to physically test our apps in meatspace with the real device camera and we had to support hundreds of devices.
I had hundreds of Android devices hooked to a dozen or so dev machines in a test farm. A test script would run. The active device’s screen would turn green. Then a QA engineer would have to physically scan a bunch of different things. Then the next active device would turn green and they’d do it again. And again. And again. I probably could have automated more with a moving conveyor belt and a custom lighting system, but I would’ve put a lot of QA people out of work…
This was during the “bridge” period between android.hardware.camera and android.hardware.camera2, so I had to write a wrapper library bridging the two APIs. About half of our users were on the old API, half on the new. It was a mess. There was no CameraX provided by Google at the time.
Obviously Android has way more device diversity, but I can easily see 40 iPads getting accumulated by even a small iOS shop that’s taking their user experience seriously. The company that I worked for was actually quite small, yet we amassed dozens of iDevices and hundreds of Android devices. The CTO would require every camera crash to be fixed, even if it were on a random developing market junk phone. We had so many single-device workaround in the camera wrapper lib it was insane…
Yeah, but what if I want indefinite sharing (like with my wife) but would also like to be notified when I’m being tracked? That should definitely be an option. It should really be the default…
Right now it’s way too damn easy to ask to borrow someone’s phone, then share their location with you indefinitely, and have that person not notice that you’re able to track them until the next time they use FindMy. There are probably a huge percentage of users that almost NEVER open the FindMy app. It’s a glaring security and safety omission from Apple.
> i just wish it had a feature that alerted the you whenever someone used it to locate one of your devices.
I’m shocked that the very security-minded Apple doesn’t do this. I shared my location indefinitely with my wife and was shocked that I didn’t get a notification when she was tracking me. How is this not an option for the indefinite location share?
> The airtag/tile makes this much harder, perhaps the airtag should loudly beep or notify nearby devices whenever it's being actively located.
AirTags do have a feature like this. If an AirTag is detected on your person, it will make an alarm sound. Basically they can’t be carried near a device that isn’t their owner’s device for long without sounding an alarm.
Get a lawyer and do real estate planning, in either case.