aimkey

6 ms·

1.
by aimkey 4y ago
You fell for the boondoggle. Waymo has a very narrow set of routes you can take. They collect ultra HD maps for those routes in SF which has a completely unsustainable human labor cost. It doesn’t scale to “drive me on any road”. Waymo is l
2.
by aimkey 4y ago
Three specific demographics prefer the (from the factory) higher ride height of SUVs: 1) Women 2) The elderly 3) The overweight Women have a say in over 70% of vehicle purchases in the US. So even if the vehicle is for dad, mom (who is 5’4”
3.
by aimkey 4y ago
Their app is a thin wrapper to their mobile site. With Safari push notifications, they don’t need the App Store. I would guess the App Store isn’t a path of discoverability for them anyways. People find them very intentionally on the web.
4.
by aimkey 4y ago
Lock in
5.
by aimkey 5y ago
"Don't take the unproven, unjustified drug" is the default position in medicine. You are trying to shift the burden of proof here and it's embarrassing. YOU are making at least 3 positive claims when advocating vaccinati
6.
by aimkey 5y ago
>which confirms my point lol, no. You know that not a single vaccinated vs unvaccinated population study has ever been conducted, right? VAERS is designed to detect acute, recent reactions and only acute, recent reactions. If it's n
7.
by aimkey 5y ago
Because before 2020, natural immunity to virtually any infectious disease was considered sufficient and superior to immunization. The entire concept of natural immunity being "not good enough' is brand new. It was never uttered be
8.
by aimkey 5y ago
Useless paper. Measuring arbitrary antibody levels. The antibody levels produced by natural exposure could be sufficient to protect against hospitalization, and the additional vaccine dose could be unnecessary. Also, 21-day follow up (laugh
9.
by aimkey 5y ago
>There has never been a vaccine with a side effect found after more than 2-3 months. Long term side-effects are not a thing for vaccines. Bullshit and demonstrably false. The first gen rotavirus vaccine was pulled post-marketing because
10.
by aimkey 5y ago
>in human clinical trials for around 10 years And no approval. In other words, this is a dangerous class of drug that has failed to obtain a single human-use approval in 30 years. Thanks for the info!
11.
by aimkey 5y ago
This message has been brought to you by Pfizer. Source or GTFO EDIT: Your downvotes are delicious as you provide no source. The notion of vaccine immunity being stronger than natural immunity, especially with mRNA vaccines, is absurd. You a
12.
by aimkey 5y ago
>Algorithms are just laundering bad opinions like blood splatter analysis You have way too much faith in the legal system. So many pseudo-scientific classes of evidence exist: - Field sobriety tests - Ballistic forensics - Blood spatter
13.
by aimkey 5y ago
I don’t find it misguided at all. I’m far more productive with JVM languages than JS. It has always bothered me that JS won in the browser environment. Java applets were clunky and dangerous, but I still wish I didn’t have to delve into JS
14.
by aimkey 5y ago
I think you should watch the scenario again. The car is only beat to the junction by the truck towing the trailer because the Mobileye car takes the wide-radius ramp at sub 22 km/h (13 mph). Normal human driver takes that ramp at 40-50
15.
by aimkey 5y ago
> Yes, all evidence I've seen indicates that cars partially driven by computers Emphasis on PARTIALLY. Anyone who has read recent takeover scenario studies is rightfully horrified at the notion of a completely “hands off” driving ex
16.
by aimkey 5y ago
There WAS a proper gap in traffic if the car used its accelerator on the ramp. The car would not have impeded the truck at all if it drove the ramp faster. This is an incredibly common issue with autonomous systems: anticipation of other ve
17.
by aimkey 5y ago
The 11 minute mark is terrifying: 1) The car fails to accelerate to beat the truck as it merges (the safest option given the scenario, even with the yield sign) 2) The car almost collides with the trailer of the truck and it stops with its
18.
by aimkey 5y ago
Modern vehicles have much safer crash characteristics than older cars. The average vehicle on the road in the US is 11 years old. Do you know how much crash characteristics of cars have improved in the last decade? The comparison needs to s
19.
by aimkey 5y ago
>It seems really what you are saying is not that Tesla are charlatan but the whole industry is. The entire industry has an air of charlatanism. Tesla is the biggest charlatan of the bunch. The LIDAR-using ventures at least have a snowbal
20.
by aimkey 5y ago
Mentioning the senses wasn't meant to be an itemization of "senses" that a car or car operator needs. Of course you can still drive decently while deaf and without feeling the g-forces. The point is that vision is NOT the onl
21.
by aimkey 5y ago
>Tesla's self-driving is far safer than human driving: the number of accidents and deaths per mile driven are something like an order of magnitude lower (i.e., around 10x safer). Lies, damn lies, and statistics. Tesla here, is, agai
22.
by aimkey 5y ago
What an annoying charlatan. Karpathy is a brilliant computer vision engineer, but he has let his expertise in that subfield cloud his judgement on achieving the overall goal of autonomous driving. Musk and Karpathy have been dead wrong abou
23.
by aimkey 5y ago
It seems as if the people gobbling up the "Tesla has the data! Autopilot will keep getting better!" line have never trained a neural network in their life. Models converge. Loss stops decreasing, regardless of more incoming data.