Ocelot

Hydrogen takes a lot of energy to extract, transport, and store. It makes it orders of magnitude less efficient than simply using that energy to charge a battery directly.

The best are the downvotes without comment. To me they just read “Shit, thats a great point. But, I can’t outright admit to being wrong so downvote.”

“But don’t you remember Chernobyl?!”

Its the same old story. If there’s ONE accident the whole technology needs to be banned. It doesn’t matter if we learned from it or how much safer things are compared to the alternative. I don’t understand the mindset that massive improvements are never good enough. It has to be perfect otherwise we’re better off with the status quo, despite the status quo being catastrophically worse in every sense.

Same reason why the US healthcare system is so bad.

Potatoes never go bad. They just start the process of turning into more potatoes.

I wish some propaganda machine would fan these flames of positivity.

Reading this (or trying to) is like being on drugs. You go from “What in god’s name is the author smoking?” to some kind of nirvana.

I had some abdominal issues that caused me to be buckled over in severe pain most of the day. I was unable to eat anything for days at a time. I was constantly feeling faint and nauseous and vomiting frequently. I did a video appointment with my doctor and he referred me to get an abdominal ultrasound.

It took about a week for the office to call me to schedule the tests. They told me the next available appointment they had was 8 months out.

I wound up getting better on my own after about 6 weeks of hell. I never did find out what was wrong.

BTW I’m not in Canada I’m in the good old US of A where we “Don’t experience delays” and have “Top-Notch Healthcare” thanks to out non socialized systems. I even had good insurance.

The healthcare system in the US is in shambles. It is extremely inefficient and absolutely resistant to any kind of change, because as bad as things are right now, change introduces risk that might make it worse. No matter how slim the chance or how much the benefits outweigh the risks, nobody wants to accept meaningful changes.

I think at some point language as a whole will shift. Most languages have had a concept of masculine/feminine and differentiating between genders for most if not all of their history. This seems pretty weird as a concept in modern times since it serves no real benefit. If we were to develop a language from scratch today I don’t think it would have such features.

Its going to take a pretty long time (hundreds of years) but language is constantly evolving. I think it will get there. In the meantime things are going to remain at least a little confusing.

I have a few transgender friends and its still a bit if a mental hurdle to see them as who they want to be identified as sometimes. I sometimes slip up and will call them by their old name or use the wrong pronoun. It’s never intentional of course, but sometimes my mental auto-correct isn’t working at full capacity. If I meet the person post-transition then its never really a problem as I always see them as that gender.

Ah yes, if we can’t currently explain it then logically it must be aliens.

I wasn’t really referring to nuances as those are pretty difficult to expect to get right. As long as the general idea is correctly portrayed then it’s reasonably good journalism.

Im talking mostly about clickbait/ragebait BS. Sometimes critical information is intentionally omitted or inaccurately portrayed just to get more clicks on the article. Often times the article itself even contradicts the headline.

One example was an article making rounds in the UK months ago where some flooding had totaled some electrical components in a car. All the headlines said “Electric vehicle receives thousands in damages from a few inches of water” or some variation of it on a few dozen news sites. Each one had long comment chains about how electric cars are going to kill us all and are completely useless to everyone. The car in question was actually an early-2010s diesel.

Or “Self-Driving Tesla slams in to firetruck”. When the Tesla involved in the incident was a 2014 Model S. Which wasn’t equipped with self-driving tech.

Or the recent mozilla foundation article where they say that cars are “Monitoring facial expressions” when what it actually means is that the car is using infrared cameras to make sure the driver’s eyes are on the road.

This is amazing! I had no idea there was an actual term for this. But yeah I frequently encounter flat out misinformation in most news sources and always have the thought: “If I know these parts are BS, how many of the things I’m not familiar with are also BS?!”

Sadly I can only upvote this once

Any of the 2 syllable names ending in -er. Hunter Asher etc.

Apple definitely has a way of doing what is right sometimes, and forcing the industry’s hand to move forward.

… Sometimes. Sometimes this definitely backfires, but not this time.

TSLA doesn’t even pay dividends. Appreciate you pointing yourself out as horribly misinformed.

That’s not an EV specific thing. Hundreds of people will die TODAY in traffic related accidents, EV or not. We need to shift away from human drivers entirely.

Exactly. Also lidar is important in instances where you need millimeter precision. Its useful for calibrating camera systems in self driving cars but in order to drive safely you don’t need that level of detail about the world around the car. It makes no difference if a car or pedestrian is 72 or 73 inches away.

Actually, no you don’t. Lidar cannot dentify object’s specifically. Tesla does use lidar in their testing/prototype vehicles and they have to find any instances manually where these systems don’t agree. It always falls back to cameras.

I thought the “needs lidar” debate was settled years ago? Lidar cannot read signs. It is also prohibitively expensive to put in vehicles. If you’re going to drive with a neural network you need as much training data as possible, which means as many sensors in as many vehicles as possible.

If your cameras detect something the lidar does not, you trust the cameras, every time. Lidar can very easily misinterperet the world. It works great for simple robots who need to know where walls are and don’t need to specifially identify animals, people, obstacles, speed bumps, construction zones, etc.

Theres also the simple fact that humans can drive just fine without having evolved a lidar sensor.

So he demanded that the driver assistance software be as safe as possible before public release? paving the way for full self driving 6-7 years later? is this a bad thing?