didn't know my side view mirrors can see through my car and behind, guess i do need those "better" ones... or maybe i should stick them on a stick 5 feet out on either side for a better angle...
side view mirrors don't catch everything when driving, reversing... ESPECIALLY BEHIND YOU... it's why that mirror exists... that is the blind spot it tries to provide a solution for
sometimes seeing the cop/ambulance/person/tree, etc behind you helps...
checking in on passengers behind you in the car without turning 180 also is a thing...
keeping an eye and 360 situational awareness while operating your vechicle is a plus
-fun scenario... how often do you have dipshits speeding way above your speed, coming up to your ass before swerving to the side lane to over take you (rarely indicating which way)? With your side mirrors... good luck seeing that shmuck... with a rear view... you can see them and adjust your driving and maybe you know... use defensive driving to avoid a costly accident and time in a hospital, recovery, etc... especially if you need to change lanes and see that shmuck coming up.

Some trucks don't have them because they literally CAN'T... they don't a line of sight... not out of an esthetic choice or some magical driving ability with spiddy sense... the moment the technology became available, they started putting in cameras to provide said capability.

if you can eliminate flare and complete blindness from a light or some rain/mud on the lens.. sure...

But from what i have experienced... nothing beats the old school mirror at actually providing visibility in most conditions when a camera would be useless. I know it's been in use for a while on some cars/makes for years now... there should be enough data to asses how much of a benefit this is at increasing safety.

Add human nature to the mix and how much more eye time is spent watching the screen versus the road and a decreased awareness.

so, who gets sued for misdiagnosis? As long as liability remains with them- the CEO for making the decision.

But also... let me look at crystal ball...
-Costs go up, not down
-premium tier charge for human review
-waivers of liability
and of course- worse patient care outcomes

AI is not am effin replacement for life and death decision making - it is to inform and assist. Not Make them. Let me hallucinate lack of cancer... or better yet.. yet me hallucinate a cancer...

that's one way to get users to signup for added storage

Multiple addresses- same storage quota

curious how they solve the "from"...

didn't take 4.4 million hours to calculate the charges to begin with...

This reminds me of stores- purchase- split second to process and money is gone from your account... refund... can take 5-10 business days to show... :/

The amount of things "Made in the USA" that are "assembled" in the US, and not even from individual pieces, just the last step of assembly, or sometimes simply repackaged... and that's fine... consumers don't need to know about deception from/by US companies... :/

Or the new one replacing "Made In the USA" with "Designed In the USA"

Difference between the US and EU-
US-
Employee (100) + AI (4) =104%
this means we can do 100% with 96 employees! yay.. we saved on paying 4 employees! stocks rise. Employees are left with more work b/c AI isn't a direct replacement for a human in most cases, but a tool to help... are then are stuck doing more, so real productivity drops)

EU-
Employee (100) + AI (4) = 104%
this means company has grown productivity by 4% and use that productivity gain into profit, better work life balance, more time, better quality, any number of things that those gains can be applied to.

slightly different priorities... short vs long

plus the focus on implementation is different as are the employment laws-
EU-
develop AI to enhance employees and in a lot of cases, it is because countries have regulations about firing people that make it more difficult to simply fire a chunk of your workforce for no reason... it's almost as if the workers have some protections.

US-
to replace employees/head count

Just think about the phrasing common in the US- "head count" - that used to relate to animals on a ranch... not people. (i.e. X amount of heads of cattle).. dehumanizing your employees makes it easier to do this crap.

so the label of confidential is THE protection mechanism... not actually blocking access, but relying on the external tool to READ and ADHERE to the label?

This is akin to writing a book with classified info, putting classified on the page and trusting who ever reads the book skips the pages that say confidential.

There once was a time the search of a journalists phone would have been a non-starter. Protected. Appears we're in a timeline where this is now a norm, and the press has no protection anymore. Just a technical hurdle to be overcome.

Freedom of the press had a purpose...
The press had a purpose...

On a parallel thought.. anyone know how to get back onto the old time line? will be happy with going back in time 30 years too... (much more sane.. and those were the 90's... )

so, we have trillions to invest in AI all of a sudden, but for decades, never had money available to put into chip foundries, and power capacity generation.

This circle jerk of an Ai bubble will decimate trillions from the markets. Compounded by the already massive disruption to the workforce, and spiking unemployment.

Curious what happens to all these companies/governments that "Adopted Ai" and the Ai company implodes... those will be some interesting times for sure as companies scramble for solutions.

$ is king... if this thing is taken out of commission for a few days/weeks for repairs every time it encounters a storm... that down time starts to eat into the profits. And by profits i mean they'd still be making money, just not as much as if they had been operating a standard cargo ship.

That is on top of the fact that a standard cargo ship runs 15-24knotts.. and can reach capacities of 300,000 tonnes (almost 60x).

So if you operated one of the behemoths... you can do twice the trips, carrying 60x the cargo... the benefit this offers being smaller is that it can operate in more ports/docks... they don't need to be as deep.

No doubt they'll find a market for green washed shipping options. Don't envision Maersk doing this for their fleet.

There is a company in one of the EU countries that has been operating sail enhanced shipping - with a parachute/kite style sail, and/or "wind wings" if you're interesting in this... been in the works for a while... and pretty interesting concepts out there.

This makes zero sense... proximity is irrelevant and more a hindrance for high value digital processing facilities/military targets... between increasing exposure to attack by proximity alone, you decrease ability to defend from an actual attack - it's an island! You complicate maintenance, staffing, repair, costs....weather/storms...

As others have hinted, the location on the equator makes it a decent listening post, and potentially jamming/interfering of Satelite systems in the hemisphere.

Aluminum hat says- Electronic warfare center.

From my understanding, the number of layers wasn't the issue ever, the thermal issues were. When you stack, you start compound the heat issues. With the tech these guys are talking about, the performance starts to degrade at 50c. Any real world scenario using these chips will require highly specialized cooling solutions.

So while great, they managed to stack vertically higher than others before... is the size/density benefit offset by the cooling requirements? Or is this one of those theoretical wins that will have a real world application with another 20 years development and massive investments in materials science.

think their surface tablets maxed out at 13... but they did a white board/touchscreen style one that maxed out at 85 inches.... To me, it feels like they should let the small shops cater to that niche market, and they can provide easily adaptable tech (i.e software that will work with a touchscreen easily) for those shops to build devices and use msft tech... there was no shortage already of specialized manufacturers creating these super specialized devices, and there was never going to be enough of a market for MSFT to make the expenditure worth it, or for apple.

It really boggles the mind what makes it through the decision making filter and approved... then they need to cut head count because of 'efficiency" while greenlighting more stupidity like this... If anyone knows any books/research papers on this, feel free to share.... really curious what makes organizations usually known for smart decision making do stupid stuff like this...

*In this case, it only makes sense in the- deny your competition the market strategic feint... to draw them into devoting resources to try and take over that piece of the pie. i.e. Msft creates device lineup to cater to "creative types" (apples core market)... so Apple needs to respond (naturally)... Apple devotes a disproportional amount of time, money, and resources to counter msfts token investment and looses a crap ton of money on the venture.

an 18 inch iPad?

Was there any person out there that wanted a tablet that is 18 inches? If you know who, can you go beat them with a rubber hose.

The weight will be insane, there is no avoiding it... it's just a matter how terrible it will be, not a question of IF.

The bulkiness will also make it useless as a tablet. Too cumbersome holding it.

Aside from a few niche areas, this will struggle to find a problem, where it is an optimal solution. Other than sucking money from fan boy wallets.