Flash Gordon Ramsay posted:

Trying to unfuck a stuck chuck?

chitoryu12 posted:

I remember a pilot of I think a KC-135 whose canopy broke off in flight. Even going just above stall speed (about 200+ MPH), he compared breathing to “trying to drink from a firehose.”

Fallom posted:

It's definitely all of them

Dannywilson posted:

Not only would they not abandon the $2.5m truck for the $45k apiece tires, they actually go to great lengths to repair the tires themselves:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfPuNQ5kK9I

Mining is so low margin most of the time, you gotta use every part of the buffalo.

Ghostnuke posted:

They tried, but they could only find 30-50.

Rust Martialis posted:

MRI have a weaker field, but its bigger. The sample holder in the NMR machine is buried out of harm's way, and the field outside the magnet casing is really not THAT strong even on a 750 MHz machine. You can resist it.

The cavity on an MRI is an inch across, an MRI has to fit a human.

Powershift posted:

Nenonen posted:

She's like three to five meters away, are you the Slenderman?

Submarine Sandpaper posted:

aww chute

Taerkar posted:

A lot of people buy trucks entirely as a status symbol or vanity item rather than actually needing one for truck things, so is it really surprising that some of them have options that make them bad at actually being a truck.

chitoryu12 posted:

Thread:

https://twitter.com/maryrobinette/status/1152277166996017152?s=21

Humphreys posted:

I used to do it all the time as a kid on the farm. It was worse when it did explode due to using anfo or other stuff I stole that was used for stumping because the ants weren't dead...they were EVERYWHERE

GotLag posted:

The real safety hazards are the chuds and MRAs in the comments on that video, Jesus Christ

bonelessdongs posted:

Putting your nuclear power plant on the internet is a power move that makes it infinitely easier to administrate from home and maintain with consumer hardware. Everyone else is just jealous they didn't think of it first.

Spatial posted:

Yes it is criminally negligent. Also it's completely and utterly bugfuck insane that anyone is allowed to test something like this on a public road. A giant multi-ton projectile with unknown behavioural characteristics with the public as the guinea pig. It's like testing a self-shooting gun in a public park.

Sex Skeleton posted:

This isn't something you can QA into a product. It would have required very careful and tedious analysis of the software design and implementation. Which is stuff that Agile developers don't really do as a rule. But on safety-critical systems it's negligent not to:

1.) Identify all of the paths in your code that can potentially lead to a hazardous condition due to logic errors.
2.) Identify all data that could lead to a hazardous condition if it is out of range or sensed or calculated incorrectly.
3.) Identify hazardous situations that your software could find itself creating, and work backwards through the logic in your code base to determine whether those hazardous situations could concievably occur.

Frankly there is no evidence that Uber ever did this. And the problem with using neural nets and AI to classify objects is that there is no concievable way to establish that those systems function reliably or correctly. Any experienced engineer of a safety-critical software system would have recognized the serious risks involved in feeding the output data from your impossible-to-verify AI classification system into your object detection and object tracking routines.

You cannot test safety or quality back into a piece of software if it was never developed to be safe software in the first place. By the time it makes it to QA if the architecture and design of the software does not adhere to quality or safety standards, no amount of testing will change the architecture or design to be of sufficient quality.

And don't get me started on how negligent it is to hire a safety driver but not provide any methods of ensuring they're paying attention to the road the entire time. Even putting a little "object classification checker" minigame on a tablet or HUD would have been better than what Uber did, which was nothing. The rail industry has had this figured out for decades, and it's also pretty loving negligent to not hire anyone who has experience designing those kinds of systems to design a system to keep the safety driver involved in the monitoring process.

Cichlidae posted:

People are going to do what they want; you can't force them to get on a bus, at least not with the current political system. It seems like it's practical to allow self-driving vehicles once they demonstrably save lives relative to human drivers, so if we have the opportunity to replace something bad with something significantly less bad, why not? Waiting for perfection is just going to keep costing lives.

Dread Head posted:

Where was this tree even going to land if it did not hit the house?

PathAsc posted:

Hi I'm here to be cockwatch.

Yeah, you can poo poo but leave the door open.

Wait, I need my glasses

Yooper posted:

Am I missing something with that truck? I've never once expected my truck to survive a bowling ball impact on the side or rear window.