repiv posted:

show 👏 us 👏 the 👏 architecture 👏 roadmap

Rastor posted:

That's just his uniform, like Steve Jobs's turtleneck

Dadbod Apocalypse posted:

so it's "his thing." got it, thanks.

ufarn posted:

https://twitter.com/JMBooyah/status/978690591117774848

Just stick to our shootymans and announce the new lineup pls.

Khorne posted:

I'm confused how one accident causes things to grind to a halt. Especially after seeing the video of the accident. Hello, it's night, and you're dressed in black slowly waddling across a highway nowhere near a crosswalk. A human being would have hit that woman. Which begs the question, why aren't the uber self driving cars using something like FLIR?

Khorne posted:

I'm confused how one accident causes things to grind to a halt. Especially after seeing the video of the accident. Hello, it's night, and you're dressed in black slowly waddling across a highway nowhere near a crosswalk. A human being would have hit that woman. Which begs the question, why aren't the uber self driving cars using something like FLIR?

Khorne posted:

I'm confused how one accident causes things to grind to a halt. Especially after seeing the video of the accident. Hello, it's night, and you're dressed in black slowly waddling across a highway nowhere near a crosswalk. A human being would have hit that woman. Which begs the question, why aren't the uber self driving cars using something like FLIR?

Khorne posted:

I'm confused how one accident causes things to grind to a halt. Especially after seeing the video of the accident. Hello, it's night, and you're dressed in black slowly waddling across a highway nowhere near a crosswalk. A human being would have hit that woman. Which begs the question, why aren't the uber self driving cars using something like FLIR?

wolrah posted:

Now I of course agree that had a human driver hit the person in the exact same situation no one would have batted an eye and it'd just be written off as yet another idiot running out in front of 3 tons of metal, but the Uber car 100% should have been able to detect her and at least try to avoid a collision. It did nothing, so something went very wrong there.

SwissArmyDruid posted:

That's what I thought, but whatever video device they were using is garbo. Saw a youtube video where someone drove past the same place where the woman was hit, and it is WAY better lit. Cellphones have got far better video, the speed and other diagnostic information is redacted, and there's this article about how while Google's self-driving cars require on average one intervention every 1000 miles, Uber struggles to make one intervention in thirteen miles.

Links later when I get back to my desk and can look up my histories.

Winks posted:

The visible light video is questionable, others have taken video at the same location at night and it's way brighter. Having driven in the area myself the other videos seem more right to me. The driver would have likely seen her if his eyes were on the road. Then even if it was magically as dark as the video shows, the car has a number of sensors that also should have detected the pedestrian and braked.

repiv posted:

Welp, what's the next event that Nvidia usually attends? Computex?

ItBurns posted:

We'll see who's optimistic and who's delusional after Nvidia announces its next datacenter or crypto card without any updates on their gaming line.

Alpha Mayo posted:

You are assuming it didn't see her, I think the car did see her and was thirsty for blood.

Dadbod Apocalypse posted:

Uber has been on thin ice since forever based on really shady business practices and outright skirting/flouting local laws. I don't think anyone trusts them to investigate themselves to a satisfactory degree about anything.

Dadbod Apocalypse posted:

Uber has been on thin ice since forever based on really shady business practices and outright skirting/flouting local laws. I don't think anyone trusts them to investigate themselves to a satisfactory degree about anything.

Khorne posted:

quote:

Waymo, formerly the self-driving car project of Google, said that in tests on roads in California last year, its cars went an average of nearly 5,600 miles before the driver had to take control from the computer to steer out of trouble. //As of March, Uber was struggling to meet its target of 13 miles per “intervention”// in Arizona, according to 100 pages of company documents obtained by The New York Times and two people familiar with the company’s operations in the Phoenix area but not permitted to speak publicly about it.

SwissArmyDruid posted:

Google's self-driving cars require on average one intervention every 1000 miles, Uber struggles to make one intervention in thirteen miles.

Craptacular! posted:

Uber’s self driving car thing, much like their maps thing, is based off them starting off as an app dependent on Google Maps libraries and Google Ventures VC cash; then panicking when they found out all their routing info was being shared with Google and Google themselves were working on a competing car hailing app that would feature Google’s brand familiarity and tech know-how.

They had a conniption and an immediate need to start buying startups and dive into self driving cars because they got big the easy way by taking Google’s work and money, only to find they actually were nothing more than an R&D lab to make an app that does the same thing with more money and a heaping of Material Design and cheerful Google Doodles.

As for the legal stuff, Uber did what it had to do to get into places like Chicago and Las Vegas where the taxi industry is extremely politically well-connected and possibly mobbed up. Which is to say, it operated illegally just long enough to create the public outcry for it’s service, because without the trial run the voting public wouldn’t have cared. Much like socialized medicine, it sounds scary until you try it.

They did that in Nevada and I don’t blame them for a second, since the headlines in Vegas regarding taxis are alternating between “well connected person leaves TA, former politician takes their place” and “why can’t we stop the taxis from taking us halfway across the city to move us five blocks?” The combination of good ol boy poo poo, tourist complaining of long hauling, combined with their inability to give a poo poo about residents because a half million drunk gamblers in a one mile radius pay better, spelled obvious opportunity.