Excellent interpersonal skills

Oh well.

I liked the movie. The activity itself is as boring as baseball.

This is the plastic bag reference. LIDAR cannot determine mass. A lot of cars were jamming on the brakes several years ago every time a plastic bag floated in front of their field of view. The algorithms were then tweaked in an attempt to prevent a 20 car pileup because the car freaked out about 1 oz of air-filled plastic. Humans make assessments like this on the fly based on our knowledge of physics, an understanding of real-time conditions, and some level estimation. We may even choose to ignore road markings and normal driving rules if we deem the risk too great vs. the risk of causing a secondary incident (pileup, attention of police, etc). This is not to say meat sacks are exactly perfect in these types of analyses either… This is the tweaking the ML engineers are trying to perfect, for all possible scenarios. A difficult undertaking for humans and machines alike.

The update corrects an error in the software that “assigned a low damage score” to the telephone pole

[…]

Waymo vehicle was driving to a passenger pickup location through an alley that was lined on both sides by wooden telephone poles. The poles were not up on a curb but level with the road and surrounded with longitudinal yellow striping to define the viable path for vehicles. As it was pulling over, the Waymo vehicle struck one of the poles at a speed of 8mph

It seems the vehicle treated the polls as road debris, etc. This is the plastic bag dilemma. Do you treat something you don’t recognize as a sacred object that must be avoided, or drive through it. This comes up a lot with machine learning based identification of objects - everything is given a percentage of assurance of its identity and nothing is ever 100% guaranteed. That’s a statistical property. Also, every item must have a closely related set of images to model that object in that situation. In this case, a bunch of telephone polls with yellow striping around them seem to have confused the car.

deleted by creator

Humans are prone to violence. The only differences now are: Our tribes are bigger and our sticks and stones have rockets and explodey bits.

I’m still sullen about napster. It didn’t change anything about music sharing- other than to take music sharing into the spotlight. I.e., they got greedy and gained the attention of the media.

By extension of this philosophy, we shouldn’t bury people, since worms will desecrate their deceased flesh. It seems to me then that shrunken heads might be a good way to save space.

I’m okay with it. Unless we start putting them on keychains. That might be taking it too far.

Uh. This is not a good picture my journalism dudes. It’s strap-on; what kind of tasks are we talking about here?

Do you expect us to consume that?

Spoken like a Russian agent or a petulant child. I can’t tell which, but I don’t actually care. Sewing discontent, pointing to yourself as a victim. You might as well be sitting there with your arms crossed and your tongue out.

Now I see why my original response riled you up so much- you took it personally. You are the problem.

Your sarcastic response is reductive and dismissive of a serious issue. Political polarization isn’t about excusing harmful behaviors; it’s about recognizing that extreme divisions are tearing society apart. Simply mocking the idea of understanding the widening chasm between “both sides” ignores the reality that effective solutions come from constructive dialogue, not from deepening the divide.

Political issues are complex and often involve legitimate concerns from multiple perspectives. In s normally functioning society, there aren’t two sides; free thought leads to a continuum of beliefs. Dismissing these concerns with sarcasm doesn’t help. Instead, it perpetuates the very polarization you’re deriding. Real progress comes from engaging with these issues thoughtfully, not from trivializing them with inflammatory rhetoric.

If you genuinely cared about reducing harm and making society better, you would consider how your words either contribute to the problem or help solve it. If you can’t contribute constructively, perhaps consider that you don’t need to contribute at all?

Yup you got me. That’s my quote.

Okay. If you don’t think polarization leads to tribalism and is a first step to civil war, then perhaps you should pick up a history book or two.

Edit: You’re even showing it your response. Us v. “them”.

Fix global warming. Fix political polarization, bigotry, hate, etc. The economy isn’t the only reason this generation is holding back from bringing children into the picture.

Any way, maybe a smaller population on our limited resource rock ain’t too bad an idea?

This is one way to get males of earth to take interest in the environment.

deleted by creator

Hmm. I just realized I haven’t been excited about anything in a long time.

That sucks.

Just because you click on it that doesn’t make it accurate. More importantly, that text isn’t “clickable”, so they can’t be measuring raw engagement either.

It’s not A/B testing if they aren’t getting feedback.