While I absolutely agree on the topic of hand, Aurora isn't necessarily the best example.. for what it offers it's "relatively" cheap.. and please don't mention Hetzner now, we're talking fully managed extremely reliable, redundant and multi-AZ databases

It's been about China all along.

What it really should be about --- education.

A better educated citizenry would never have fallen for the con that huge new tariffs are anything but a huge new tax increase on themselves.

A better educated citizenry would realize that no country has ever taxed it way to prosperity and "greatness".

The natural enemy of democracy is ignorance --- and Trump is the proof.

Will Malignant Stupidity Kill the World Economy? - title of Krugman's April 3 article on tariffs

There is no sin except stupidity. - Oscar Wilde

In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity. - Hunter S. Thompson

Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. - Dietrich Bonhöffer

Who is more foolish? The fool or the fool who follows him? - Obi Wan Kenobi

These guys are untrustworthy liars. I assume there are thousands, possibly tens of thousands of carve outs for the tariffs, based on bribing the POTUS or approved affiliates. - Me, 10 days ago. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43561464

There will be reprisals lasting a generation. These stupid fucks will insist calling them stupid is unfair. I expect some of them will become violent. We've seen it before. The long live the Confederacy, and Lost Cause Myth assholes are really no different. They come out of the woodwork when we coddle stupidity, the constant bigotry of low expectations.

> It's been about China all along.

China will just re-route / change the labels to Vietname or another country. It's already been happening for years.

Great, I am completely on board with that goal!

How does this help? China can still create all the parts, and as long as the final assembly happens in a different country (which notably can be virtually anywhere except the US) the tariffs can be bypassed. Huh?

I absolutely love the AI labyrinth Cloudflare implemented recently. Wasting their time and resources and feeding them more and more garbage. Wonderful.

My girlfriend has Crohn's disease that can be directly correlated to food poisoning while on vacation. Now years later I can't even count the times I've read and heard exactly the same story from other people with Crohn's disease. A simple search for "Crohn's food poisoning" turns up hundreds of results. I can't believe this is not being investigated with higher priority

Another comment in this post mentions reactive arthritis and HLA-B27; there's some evidence suggesting "permanent" autoimmune conditions in HLA-B27+ people also might come from viral triggers.

most of those with crohn's would likely have developed it at some point - 99% of those with food poisoning won't develop crohn's

And also not if you value your battery life and good charging speeds.

I'm sure many of us have figured this out, it's just that there's no alternative for most.

I live in Europe and we are all unionized and I hate to break it to you but we're still creating much more value than we earn for someone else. Our work conditions may be significantly better - I work 40h/week with unlimited vacation (within reason ofc) and sick days - yet still burnout happens frequently and necessitates costly rehabilitation trajectories.

We deal with the consequences better, and I'm grateful for the conditions here, they may well be much worse elsewhere, but the core issues remain. Humans aren't built to work mentally straining jobs for 8 or more hours per day, and the fruit baskets and vacations only do so much. I believe a four day work week would help some of it.

Turns out when your work is thinking, you end up thinking a lot about the alienation of your labor's fruits.

Burnout isn't about pace of work or ability to take vacations. Burnout is about a disconnect between effort, meaning, and rewards.

I disagree.

Burnout is caused by your body running on adrenaline and cortisol for too long as you’re pushing past what is sustainable. Eventually your body says - enough! And it forces you to stop.

The _symptom_ of burnout are as you describe: essentially you no long see the point of what you’re doing.

Speculatively, I believe the drop in motivation is your body’s way of stopping you pushing it any further. It’s a defence mechanism.

Hm I see. You have a point that the causality is not necessarily how I described. But I am not convinced it is the opposite.

What causes the workplace to make you have high adrenaline and cortisol for too long? Stress is perceived by the body as a threat and it subsidizes when the body perceives that the threat is overcome. If we exert ourselves for a while but then we have a good outcome and we celebrate with our colleagues, we will have dopamine and oxytocin levels rise and adrenaline and cortisol subsidize. Something one might say makes the exertion meaningful.

So I hear what you're saying but I think we're both describing the same thing from two perspectives and not actually different causality directions. I described the subjective interpretation and you described the biochemical process underlying it.

What is “the alienation of your labor's fruits.”?

I haven’t heard of any way for objectively measuring the value of anything, or whether that is even a logically coherent concept.

> I haven’t heard of any way for objectively measuring the value of anything

Really?

If you know of some way that is logically coherent, and can demonstrate it via standard proof notation, then you should definitely publish it.

And become the most famous human being to have ever existed…

There's no need to be snarky. The values of things can most definitely be objectively measured, otherwise there would be no transactions. Objective is not absolute, the objective evaluation might change when the agents involved have new information.

I also don't thing it contentious that the stockholders pocket some of the results of the workers labor. That is the whole point of employing people isn't it?

Why do you think I am being “snarky”?

I meant it literally. I genuinely believe that if you could demonstrate the proof and publish it… then you would become so.

Man this sucks, just as I spent months integrating it into the payment pipeline of my side business app. Maybe I just shouldn't accept cards, or only through PayPal or something.

Aside of all the other obvious reasons to not get a Tesla these days this is #1 imo. Camera feeds and a neural network are not enough for self driving, no matter how much they're training. Never ever.

At the very least they seem to have downsides that the can be easily overcame with a lidar system/combination of them. That alone is enough to help me decide when its my family that would be the passengers.

And every other modern auto-braking safety system, except for Subaru for some reason, incorporates at least basic proximity radar.

I am not claiming that Tesla FSD is at this point, but it is obviously possible to use cameras and neural networks to drive a car, because that is literally how humans drive.

Do Tesla cars have stereo vision, though?

I don't think they build a 3D model of the world around them at all, while humans do (not only based on our stereo vision) and largely rely on that to drive.

They do build a 3D model: https://youtu.be/6x-Xb_uT7ts?t=129

Although I think it's interesting that even in his demo there are cars popping in and out of existence in the 3D visualization of the environment. I don't think that makes much sense, if a car is observed and then occluded the logical conclusion should be that it's probably still there, maybe add an increasing uncertainty to its location, instead of assuming it disappeared.

Tesla switched from a 3D model that with the popping glitchiness you describe to a 4D model without the popping several months ago.

Sure, but during the entire time of Autopilot/FSD so far, Teslas have been crashing in ridiculous ways and killing their drivers.

The "but they've patched that failure!" excuse has ALSO been around, and while the cars are definitely getting better, they're still also definitely killing people in ridiculous ways.

Probably because they're not actually patching anything, but playing a shell game.

If they were serious about patching issues, they would have added LiDAR already. They're trying to software patch their way out of the fact their perception stack is essentially blind to huge classes of objects drivers encounter every day.

Apparently, Tesla has stated that they do not use paired cameras for ranging or depth perception, which is the standard approach for stereoscopic vision.

Instead of stereoscopic vision, Tesla's neural net processes the data from the cameras to create a 3D view of the surroundings.

https://electrek.co/2021/07/07/hacker-tesla-full-self-drivin...

They do have 2-3 front facing cameras and their e2ee does necessarily get the same understanding of the world around it.

Humans have more senses than just vision. Also a few cameras aren't completely covering the range of human vision.

Yes, but I don't think you could argue the point that the visual sense is probably 95% of it. But even so, it could be decades before computers achieve the sensory capabilities of the human visual system. Why not, during those hundred years, add some lidar to the sensory mix. Just because it didn't evolve in humans doesn't mean it's not a good thing. Bats and dolphins use the biological analogue very effectively.

Vision isn't the only problem. Can computers do a decent job of theory-of-mind of other drivers? What about seeing a tire bouncing down off an overpass that's visible to the driver? Software developers love saying that it's the 95% that matters, but in safety critical systems, that simplification simply does not work.

> Software developers love saying that it's the 95% that matters

Perhaps if they're early in their career. But any who have done challenging projects know that it's the last 5% that's the hardest and that often matters the most.

Their cameras have better dynamic range than humans, not to mention the neural net can consume multiple exposures simultaneously. From surround video.

> Their cameras have better dynamic range than humans

This is obviously untrue if you've ever watched videos from sentry mode.

Sentry mode videos are sdr

> but it's absurd to claim it's "never" possible.

I've never made such a claim. I use self driving features in my car a good bit. They use more than just cameras though.

> Are deaf people allowed to drive cars?

Sure, but I'd say someone unable to hear things would be disadvanted at driving and potentially less safe. But you've also completely ignored the sense of feeling, understanding the feedback you're feeling on the wheel. Ignoring the feeling of the wheels on the road. Ignoring the feeling of the g forces as the car moves. Ignoring the feeling of body sway when it's windy.

You're also ignoring as others have mentioned the theory of mind of how other things actually behave around the streets. We're still not 100% sure these automated systems can actually comprehend these things.

All things a computer could sense, no doubt. But it's far more than just a few cameras.

> Camera feeds and a neural network are not enough for self driving, no matter how much they're training. Never ever.

This is the OP claim I am saying is absurd.

> it's absurd to claim it's "never" possible

Absolutely correct. The problem is that Elon has been saying that for ten years and we're not really closer to it being true.

So, in the meantime, would it kill him to admit that he was wrong about lidar?

Also humans suck at driving compared to what we expect of machines

1. Human "neural network" is few orders of magnitude more powerful than the best neural network available right now.

2. This might be obvious question but: Humans have two eyes and they are few centimeters apart so that we could use stereoscopic vision to estimate the distance. Does Tesla FSD even attempt to do something similar?

It is legal and safe to drive with 1 working eye.

Humans have many ways of modeling distances in the real world that do not rely on stereoscopic depth.

The problem with that argument is that a Tesla isn't nearly as clever as a human. I have never thought a white tractor trailer disappeared as it crossed in front of me against a bright sky. I know that I should drive a little bit slower on Halloween evening because there are kids running around. I know that I need to be a little more cautious driving past the playground or dog park. I have object permanence.

As it is, AI just isn't smart enough to rely on only vision and they ought to be taking advantage of every economically viable sensor to make up for the difference. Hell, I thought the goal was to do better than humans?

I get your point, but do you think, over the course of a decade, the average human driver or the average car with tesla FSD is more likely to have an accident where the the fault is their own?

Eyes are not cameras and brains are not neural networks. Until we have artificial techniques that can match the performance and functionality of this amazing biological equipment we have, our cars must rely on other sensors like LiDAR to make up for the deficiencies in our artificial perception networks that are not overcome by current techniques.

The actual problem statement is can such a system do so safely. If it is just to drive a car all you need are some stepper motors and a raspberry pi.

The goal is to reduce accident and fatalities not eliminate jobs .

If LiDAR has 1/10th the fatality rate of camera setup and is less costlier than 10x the value of human life(as used in legal proceedings) then it still the only viable option

Neural nets generally don't have the same level of interconnections and neurons as the human brain because it's tougher to train. I agree in principal that the human brain should be possible to replicate in a computer but I'm not sure we can do it with the current design of single direction connections between nodes. I highly doubt we'll be able to scale it down to a machine that's reasonable to fit in a car any time soon though and that's what Tesla is promising they can do with the current hardware package installed in cars (never mind that they also promised it'd be possible with the last major revision and had to walk that back and will have to install upgraded electronics in people's vehicles, unless they're just going to strand all HW3 owners who paid of FSD but the hardware is to wimpy to handle it unless that's changed since the robotaxi event).

Don’t we want it to be like way better than humans at driving? The dream pitch was that we wouldn’t have tens of thousands of preventable deaths every year. So install the damn lidar. At some point it is coming down to penny pinching and that means that preventable deaths number will not sink to the promise.

I think artificial neural networks was implied and there is a world of difference between how biological and artificial neural networks function.

That said, I'm not sure that's what the barrier is. I think humans would have trouble driving with a fixed low resolution camera too.

A human is not just a NN, but I do wonder how well a human could drive given the Tesla camera feed. Seems like it would surely be worse than behind the wheel.

Hubert Dreyfus rolling in his grave..

Musk himself said during the last Tesla AI Day: ~"FSD will basically require AGI."

I would add that it would require not only AGI, but real-time AGI!

Have you actually used FSD for, say, a week?

I'm a fan and everyday user of FSD. It's not perfect, but it's immensely useful, and frankly amazing. It works. It drives me to work and back everyday, with maybe 1 or 2 interventions each way.

I've never met any actual Tesla driver who was confused by the marketing (they're all tech guys). Some like it, some don't think it's worth the money, but everyone understands what it is.

(I'm not arguing against more detection hardware, but engineering is about trade offs.)

But not every Tesla owner is a tech guy. Not every Tesla driver lives in perfect sunny conditions. And in this case, a misinformed (or not informed at all) buyer's "engineering trade off" is death.

It drives at night and in pretty heavy rain just fine.

It is not fully autonomous. It quits when blinded by the rising sun.

It does drive in the rain. I just drove for an hour through a torrential downpour on a road trip, way less stressful than without it.

Agreed, but I believe that camera feeds and infrastructure changes could be enough.

I do wonder if this is provable via information theory.

You started with a bias and ended with another one.

I’m noticing how comments with common sense gets easily downvoted.

Honest question: why does the HW4 matter? Hasn't FSD been sold as a service all cars with older hardware can use?

Have they managed to fix the "parking sensors"?

Using vision only on my HW4-Model-Y it seems to work fine.

For those who have a rice cooker, it's absolutely perfect to cook a batch of hard boiled eggs in. Getting the amount of water right takes a few tries but worst case you just have to turn it off manually.

And the astroturfing and bots. So much in the bigger subs.