The levers which incentives wages closing the gap on the “super inflation” are probably more realistic than the levers that would cause the prices of everything to deflate.

Considering he asked twitter programmers to print out their pull requests Im not even sure he’s not cosplaying a programmer

I completely agree that if there are tools that can allow a vehicle to “see” better than a human it’s absurd not to implement them. Even if musk could make a car exactly as good as a human, that’s a low bar. It isn’t good enough.

As for humans: if you are operating a vehicle such that you could not avoid killing an unexpected person on the road, you are not safely operating the vehicle. In this case, it’s known as “over driving your headlights”, you are driving at a speed that precludes you from reacting appropriately by the time you can perceive an issue.

Imagine if it wasn’t a deer but a chunk of concrete that would kill you if struck at speed. Perhaps a bolder on a mountain pass. A vehicle that has broken down.

Does Musk’s system operate safely? No. The fact that it was a deer is completely irrelevant.

Yeah. I mean, I understand the premise, I just think it’s flawed. Like, you and I as vehicle operators use two cameras when we drive (our two eyes). It’s hypothetically sufficient in terms of raw data input.

Where it falls apart is that we also have brains which have evolved in ways we don’t even understand to consume those inputs effectively.

But most importantly, why aim for parity at all? Why NOT give our cars the tools to “see” better than a human? I want that!

If you watch the video, the deer was standing on a strip of off coloured pavement, and also had about the same length as the dotted line. Not sure how much colour information comes through at night on those cameras.

The point here isn’t actually “should it have stopped for the deer” , it’s “if the system can’t even see the deer, how could it be expected to distinguish between a deer and a child?”

The calculus changes incredibly between a deer and a child.

Not at all if you’re rich, and not temporary even for the rest.

You joke, but he literally did tell people he spoke with “The President of the Virgin Islands”.

Article if interested

Each of them only does it once, and thinks it’s just a matter of luck when it happens to someone else

Lol old Lemmy users chizzed

Oh well that settles it

He was “too nice” to SNC? That… That is not even a remotely accurate euphemism.

Like, Trudeau isn’t Trump. Not even close. Not even directionally similar. But that’s not at all a reasonable way to describe the scandal.

4 billion a year to house 86,000 people is $46,500 yr/person.

$3875/mo/person

Being honest, with a budget like that I could rent an apartment in NYC that I can only assume is quite a bit nicer than a literal homeless shelter

Lol the Fraser Institute is an absolute fucking joke.

To be fair, if they’re driven by an LLM I would still expect it to be wrong.

I want to live in a world where people can eat beyond rice and dried beans within their budget.

It’s 2024. Eating a thin mash of bulk grains like you’re a medieval peasant isn’t a plucky story of resilience. It’s the story of a failed economic policy.

I agree it’s one piece of a much larger puzzle towards global sustainability. But for me, that’s still a very abstract concept and my actions are a less than a drop in the bucket in that regard.

However, being my own power plant, owning my own power… “Seizing the means of production”, if you will, is incredibly concrete. And selfish.

If I were selling PV to rednecks, I don’t even think I’d mention climate change.

A guy in the mall polled me one time but he just asked me questions like “name something you groom yourself with”

Duh, a bride, obviously.

I realize I didn’t explicitly say that, and that in the politically charged environment it was probably assumed I was shilling R.

I love data sets, that’s all.