ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Non-IT News Thread

    Water Closet
    91
    11.2k
    5.6m
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • scottalanmillerS
      scottalanmiller @black3dynamite
      last edited by

      @black3dynamite said in Non-IT News Thread:

      How quickly the US Marines can build bridges
      https://twitter.com/i/moments/976840874310107136

      They have to be able to do it quickly, bridge building (and blowing up) are huge war time activities. A military's ability to take out enemy bridges and make their own have traditionally been some of the most powerful military activities.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • hobbit666H
        hobbit666
        last edited by

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43518769
        France hostage crisis: Police shoot supermarket gunman

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • JaredBuschJ
          JaredBusch
          last edited by

          United offers passenger a voucher up to $10,000 to give up her seat
          https://twitter.com/i/moments/977160303472467968

          DashrenderD RojoLocoR 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • coliverC
            coliver
            last edited by

            https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/?comments=1

            scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • DashrenderD
              Dashrender @JaredBusch
              last edited by

              @jaredbusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

              United offers passenger a voucher up to $10,000 to give up her seat
              https://twitter.com/i/moments/977160303472467968

              better than that last one where they dragged a passenger off.. just deny entry to the plane

              scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • scottalanmillerS
                scottalanmiller @coliver
                last edited by

                @coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

                https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/?comments=1

                Very different from what the police said before.

                coliverC 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • scottalanmillerS
                  scottalanmiller @Dashrender
                  last edited by

                  @dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:

                  @jaredbusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

                  United offers passenger a voucher up to $10,000 to give up her seat
                  https://twitter.com/i/moments/977160303472467968

                  better than that last one where they dragged a passenger off.. just deny entry to the plane

                  This is how it is supposed to work.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • NerdyDadN
                    NerdyDad @black3dynamite
                    last edited by

                    @black3dynamite said in Non-IT News Thread:

                    Chris Evans has a 'stache and people aren't sure how to feel
                    https://twitter.com/i/moments/976972150652395520

                    I feel like he could be the kid of the '80's villain from Despicable Me 3.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • coliverC
                      coliver @scottalanmiller
                      last edited by

                      @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                      @coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

                      https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/?comments=1

                      Very different from what the police said before.

                      Yes, much different then the official statement. The pedestrian was still breaking the law of course by jay walking and not having the proper safety equipment on the bike. But this isn't looking good for Uber or the police department.

                      I think Uber's tech here is to blame (or at least share some of it). It will be interesting to see what the NTSB report says.

                      scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • scottalanmillerS
                        scottalanmiller @coliver
                        last edited by

                        @coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

                        @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                        @coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

                        https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/?comments=1

                        Very different from what the police said before.

                        Yes, much different then the official statement. The pedestrian was still breaking the law of course by jay walking and not having the proper safety equipment on the bike. But this isn't looking good for Uber or the police department.

                        I think Uber's tech here is to blame (or at least share some of it). It will be interesting to see what the NTSB report says.

                        The question remains, if this was something that was preventable with a human, why didn't the human do something?

                        I'm not defending the Uber tech, but only pointing out that since there was a human tasked with preventing this, and they failed as well, the Uber tech can't be any more at fault than the existing human. And if the auto-driving tech meets the quality of humans, then that's good enough. Not ideal, but good enough.

                        JaredBuschJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • DustinB3403D
                          DustinB3403
                          last edited by

                          What will come of this is likely a requirement to have forward facing infra-red obstacle sensing cameras to help to avoid human behavior.

                          Using tech to fix human is not a realistic approach. Just like if HR asked IT to talk to someone about something that HR really should talk to the employee about.

                          scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • scottalanmillerS
                            scottalanmiller @DustinB3403
                            last edited by

                            @dustinb3403 said in Non-IT News Thread:

                            What will come of this is likely a requirement to have forward facing infra-red obstacle sensing cameras to help to avoid human behavior.

                            Using tech to fix human is not a realistic approach. Just like if HR asked IT to talk to someone about something that HR really should talk to the employee about.

                            In reality, shouldn't cars have that? Seems like a simple and important thing to have. I'm all for that. If the lights all go out, it would be nice if cars could still avoid hitting living things.

                            DustinB3403D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • DustinB3403D
                              DustinB3403 @scottalanmiller
                              last edited by

                              @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                              @dustinb3403 said in Non-IT News Thread:

                              What will come of this is likely a requirement to have forward facing infra-red obstacle sensing cameras to help to avoid human behavior.

                              Using tech to fix human is not a realistic approach. Just like if HR asked IT to talk to someone about something that HR really should talk to the employee about.

                              In reality, shouldn't cars have that? Seems like a simple and important thing to have. I'm all for that. If the lights all go out, it would be nice if cars could still avoid hitting living things.

                              I agree, it should already be there. But mandating that it be there is different from a nice to have.

                              It's a fix to "human behavior" rather than HR talking to the human. . .

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • JaredBuschJ
                                JaredBusch @scottalanmiller
                                last edited by

                                @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                @coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                @coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/?comments=1

                                Very different from what the police said before.

                                Yes, much different then the official statement. The pedestrian was still breaking the law of course by jay walking and not having the proper safety equipment on the bike. But this isn't looking good for Uber or the police department.

                                I think Uber's tech here is to blame (or at least share some of it). It will be interesting to see what the NTSB report says.

                                The question remains, if this was something that was preventable with a human, why didn't the human do something?

                                I'm not defending the Uber tech, but only pointing out that since there was a human tasked with preventing this, and they failed as well, the Uber tech can't be any more at fault than the existing human. And if the auto-driving tech meets the quality of humans, then that's good enough. Not ideal, but good enough.

                                Well of course it meets the quality of humans when the human is not actually doing what they are supposed to either.

                                The orginally released video was extra dark. So fine the Uber dash cam sucked.

                                But that is not what makes the driving decisions. The LIDAR data and such are used by the AI for that.

                                Subsequent YouTubers doing illegal recordings with their cell phones in their hands show a much brighter image. So one can assume that a human that was actually watching the road would have had plenty of time to apply brakes.

                                It may not have been plenty of time to get the vehicle to stop, but plenty of reaction time.

                                scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                • RojoLocoR
                                  RojoLoco @JaredBusch
                                  last edited by

                                  @jaredbusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                  United offers passenger a voucher up to $10,000 to give up her seat
                                  https://twitter.com/i/moments/977160303472467968

                                  What did they offer the person whose dog they murdered? Or the others whose dogs were negligently sent across the globe to the wrong destination?

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                  • scottalanmillerS
                                    scottalanmiller @JaredBusch
                                    last edited by

                                    @jaredbusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                    @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                    @coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                    @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                    @coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                    https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/?comments=1

                                    Very different from what the police said before.

                                    Yes, much different then the official statement. The pedestrian was still breaking the law of course by jay walking and not having the proper safety equipment on the bike. But this isn't looking good for Uber or the police department.

                                    I think Uber's tech here is to blame (or at least share some of it). It will be interesting to see what the NTSB report says.

                                    The question remains, if this was something that was preventable with a human, why didn't the human do something?

                                    I'm not defending the Uber tech, but only pointing out that since there was a human tasked with preventing this, and they failed as well, the Uber tech can't be any more at fault than the existing human. And if the auto-driving tech meets the quality of humans, then that's good enough. Not ideal, but good enough.

                                    Well of course it meets the quality of humans when the human is not actually doing what they are supposed to either.

                                    Right, but that's part of where "humans aren't good at this." I'm not saying Uber isn't at fault, only that the Uber tech and the Uber driver seem to share that responsibility here.

                                    DustinB3403D coliverC 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • DustinB3403D
                                      DustinB3403 @scottalanmiller
                                      last edited by

                                      @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                      @jaredbusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                      @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                      @coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                      @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                      @coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                      https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/?comments=1

                                      Very different from what the police said before.

                                      Yes, much different then the official statement. The pedestrian was still breaking the law of course by jay walking and not having the proper safety equipment on the bike. But this isn't looking good for Uber or the police department.

                                      I think Uber's tech here is to blame (or at least share some of it). It will be interesting to see what the NTSB report says.

                                      The question remains, if this was something that was preventable with a human, why didn't the human do something?

                                      I'm not defending the Uber tech, but only pointing out that since there was a human tasked with preventing this, and they failed as well, the Uber tech can't be any more at fault than the existing human. And if the auto-driving tech meets the quality of humans, then that's good enough. Not ideal, but good enough.

                                      Well of course it meets the quality of humans when the human is not actually doing what they are supposed to either.

                                      Right, but that's part of where "humans aren't good at this." I'm not saying Uber isn't at fault, only that the Uber tech and the Uber driver seem to share that responsibility here.

                                      The expectation though is that computers should, no must be better than humans are driving, avoiding collisions with obstacles, traversing bad weather conditions etc.

                                      Being as good as humans is a simple bar to leap over. They have to be better.

                                      The "backup driver" was distracted, looking away from the road the entire time. The person who crossed the road obviously made a bad judgement call.

                                      The computer should've had the insight to see an obstacle that was moving in it's path and come to a complete stop as soon as possible.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • coliverC
                                        coliver @scottalanmiller
                                        last edited by coliver

                                        @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                        @jaredbusch said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                        @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                        @coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                        @scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                        @coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:

                                        https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/03/police-chief-said-uber-victim-came-from-the-shadows-dont-believe-it/?comments=1

                                        Very different from what the police said before.

                                        Yes, much different then the official statement. The pedestrian was still breaking the law of course by jay walking and not having the proper safety equipment on the bike. But this isn't looking good for Uber or the police department.

                                        I think Uber's tech here is to blame (or at least share some of it). It will be interesting to see what the NTSB report says.

                                        The question remains, if this was something that was preventable with a human, why didn't the human do something?

                                        I'm not defending the Uber tech, but only pointing out that since there was a human tasked with preventing this, and they failed as well, the Uber tech can't be any more at fault than the existing human. And if the auto-driving tech meets the quality of humans, then that's good enough. Not ideal, but good enough.

                                        Well of course it meets the quality of humans when the human is not actually doing what they are supposed to either.

                                        Right, but that's part of where "humans aren't good at this." I'm not saying Uber isn't at fault, only that the Uber tech and the Uber driver seem to share that responsibility here.

                                        Agreed all parties involved, Uber, the driver, and the pedestrian share blame in this. My point is that these conditions have been shown by other AV companies doing pretty much the same thing and the AI responds as expected. That's where I'm seeing this as a Uber tech issue and not an AV issue.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • mlnewsM
                                          mlnews
                                          last edited by

                                          The New Yorker on Cambridge Analytica and Our Lives Inside the Surveillance Machine.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • mlnewsM
                                            mlnews
                                            last edited by

                                            Chinese space station to fall to earth within two weeks.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 311
                                            • 312
                                            • 313
                                            • 314
                                            • 315
                                            • 560
                                            • 561
                                            • 313 / 561
                                            • First post
                                              Last post