We all understand there are actual uses for a large truck. The issue is A) these trucks keep increasing in size well beyond what is practically needed, and B) more and more people who don't have a practical use for these vehicles are commuting to work in them. The average person driving a large truck today does not live on a farm. They live in the suburbs and use it to commute to their office job and occasionally to grab a can of paint from home Depot.
These tanks aren't safe around pedestrians or smaller cars, they take up way too much space and either don't fit in most parking spots or necessitate the building bigger and bigger parking lots, they're fuel inefficient, their headlights are obnoxiously high and blind everyone else at night, etc.
They're obnoxious, dangerous, harmful to the environment, and simply unnecessary for the vast majority of people, so fuck 'em.
That's fine, I'm not calling you out specifically. My point is that the argument for the necessity of trucks isn't an argument for the necessity of these giant behemoths. Someone might genuinely need a truck, but they probably don't need a truck that has a hood height nearly 6 feet and barely fits in a standard size parking spot.
You could have done all of that in a small truck like the old ford ranger.
No one thinks that trucks aren’t useful. The problem is the absolutely preposterous size of these trucks.
That's a bit over the top. The app only has access to the data you give it permission to access. So TikTok may have access to your contacts (don't give TikTok access to your contacts, guys), but it won't have access to your text messages or activity data.
It usually isn't much good at writing new code from scratch. You have to be so specific on what you want that by the time you fully described the code you need, you could have written it yourself.
What it's really good at is refactoring or finding bugs in existing code. I will frequently paste in some ugly function that I've written and say "can you make this more readable?" and 100% of the time it produces clean, readable code that's nicer than what I gave it.
That’s only because he didn’t have an opportunity, not because he’s some arbiter of peace.
If 100% safety is your criteria, then humans shouldn't be allowed to drive. Humans suck at it. We're really, really bad at driving. We get in accidents all the time. Tens of thousands of people die every year, and hundreds of thousands are seriously injured. You are holding self-driving cars to standards that human drivers could never hope to meet.
Their assumptions about what the car can or will do without the need for human intervention makes them an insane risk to everyone around them.
Do you have statistics to back this up? Are Teslas actually more likely to get into accidents and cause damage/injury compared to a human driver?
I mean, maybe they are. My point is not that Teslas are safer, only that you can't determine that based on a few videos. People like to post these videos of Teslas running a light, or getting into an accident, but it doesn't prove anything. The criteria for self-driving cars to be allowed on the road shouldn't be that they are 100% safe, only that they are as safe or safer than human drivers. Because human drivers are really, really bad, and get into accidents all the time.
This same concept is why you can’t make a 100% safe self driving car. Driving safety is a function of everyone on the road. You could drive as safely as possible, but you’re still at the mercy of everyone else’s decisions. Introducing a system that people aren’t familiar with will create a disruption, and disruptions cause accidents.
Again, we don't need a 100% safe self driving car, we just need a self driving car that's at least as safe as a human driver.
I disagree with the premise that humans are entirely predictable on the road, and I also disagree that self driving cars are less predictable. Computers are pretty much the very definition of predictable: they follow the rules and don't ever make last minute decisions (unless their programming is faulty), and they can be trained to always err on the side of caution.
@LittleLordLimerick
@lemm.ee