Not quite. Experience is like the 2rd stage in a rocket. It is what brings you to orbit. But without the first one (education), it cannot even get you reasonably high.
Wait, uneducated people can't get high now? Things sure have changed since I was young. Back then, it was mostly the uneducated kids getting high.
Yes, as if nobody could feed some photos into a genAI chatbot and have it generate a video of that face performing those actions on command. Right, nobody could possibly do that, not in our lifetime... wait a minute, I'm getting an update from the studio...
The worst part isn't that now anyone who can get a few pictures of your face off the Internet can log in on your account. The worst part is that you can't recover from it. You can't change your face so once they've got it all you can do is disable this feature completely, and hope Google doesn't re-enable it.
My problem with Amazon lately has been more about shipping, and how at least a third of the things I order get lost or show up late.
Heh. You reminded me that something I ordered got mis-delivered to some random unknown house, and since they don't provide delivery coordinates, there's no way to know where. So thanks for reminding me that I needed to reorder and reach out to Amazon Custom Service for a refund on that.
I was looking for a new AP. A specific model from a specific brand. Amazon gave me a massive list of other crap, and the one seller who had what I was looking for wanted $20+ for 5-day shipping. Walmart, of all places, only showed me what I searched for, was the cheapest option, and I got it a day earlier than they said.
This matches with my experience. Amazon has a wider selection than Walmart, but often slightly worse prices.
And yeah, Amazon's search engine is absolute trash, designed to promote what will make Amazon the most money over what you're asking for. Alexa shopping (on Amazon's website) is often better, and doing a Google search with site:Amazon.com is also often better. As another poster pointed out, odds are the seller on Amazon was just buying it at Walmart and selling it on Amazon at a markup.
Having taken Waymos a couple dozen rides so far I am willing to say those things work. If Google was able to build a system to allow someone in the Phillipines to drive like they do they kudos to them for that because you can't tell, it reacts very fast.
They didn't. The GP is very, very incorrect.
When a remote operator takes control of the vehicle, you'll know it, because it will mean that the vehicle has already been stuck for a minute or so without being able to figure out how to proceed, and will be sitting there for additional minutes while the remote operator looks at camera/LIDAR data and draws a proposed path through the problem area on a map.
It is not physically possible, for any amount of money, to do what the GP is claiming. Sending a signal over a cellular network from the Bay Area to the Philippines and back takes a quarter of a second on average. That's up to a 33% increase in response time compared with a driver in the vehicle. If you tried to fake self-driving with a remote operator in that way, they would crash into things constantly.
Even if the remote operator were in the same city, the latency spikes would still likely cause the cars to crash into things constantly.
LEO satellites also won't work, because these things mostly run in cities, where tall buildings would block the signals, so again, the cars would crash into things constantly.
Maybe if you had a dedicated cellular network running in parallel with the public one on a private frequency band AND dedicated trunk lines to a control center, you might be able to get something that worked most of the time, but at a cost that would be mind-blowing.
I finally dropped service a couple of years ago because the service had crept up to something like $70 a month for a basic landline phone with Caller ID. I kind of feel like they're laughing all the way to the bank either way.
I'm finding the idea that something that speeds up your heart like some 1990s 31337 h4x0r overclocking their Athlon is "healthy" just implausible.
Caffeine is a vasoconstrictor. It could well be the case that narrowing blood vessels causes blood to flow more rapidly through them, increasing its ability to wear away plaques that are attached to the walls of arteries, or that the flexing associated with the constriction and later relaxation helps these plaques break away in microscopic amounts rather than building up where they become a clog risk.
AliExpress and Amazon are both cesspools, where thousands of sellers sell identical or nearly identical products under different brand names with different markup. And most of the products are trash.
Case in point, I bought a bunch of metric bolts and nuts at Amazon, and they wouldn't screw onto each other. They would get to some random point and the nuts would stop turning. Sometimes it was half an inch up, sometimes it was two inches up, but the failure rate was something like 40% and I budgeted for 20%. I ended up buying a tap and die set and rethreading all the bolts. It actually would have been cheaper to buy the bolts in 5-packs from Lowe's. (On the other hand, if it happens again, I don't have to buy the tap and die set again, so I guess that's a "win".)
I've reached a point where about one in five Amazon products results in a return, because the quality is so poor, the descriptions are inadequate, etc. I buy enough stuff that they tolerate my return rate, but it's a huge hassle that I wish I didn't have to deal with. If I want a high risk of fixer-upper hardware, I'd rather buy from AliExpress for half the price and wait a week.
Oh, thanks. I misread per hour as per day. But at 5 miles per hour, you won't get 40 miles per day. IIRC, the full-sun-equivalent hours in the U.S. varies from about 2.5 to about 6 or so. You won't get the equivalent of eight hours of sun unless you're smack in the middle of the Mojave desert with no mountains nearby on a dry day. So depending on where you are, you will get anywhere from 12.5 miles per day to 30 miles per day.
"So, we tried the biggest node we could find but the die came out too small, we had to find a bigger process node to make it big enough we could handle it to fit it in the package and attach it."
The manufacturers may win by arguing that "is recycleable" in the law doesn't mean "is recycled" which is what the state wants to enforce. And they'd be right. If you read "is recycleable" as "made from material that can be recycled", which is the right reading at the manufacturing level, then the label is accurate: the containers are made of recycleable material. The counter-argument is that the law isn't requiring truth about what the material itself is but requiring truth about the container as finally delivered to the consumer. Yogurt containers, for example, may be made of recycleable materials but, as delivered to the consumer, are not recycleable because they're contaminated with food product and will not be accepted by recycling programs. Most consumers assumed that if the container is marked with the "chasing arrows" symbol, that means they can put it in the recycling bin and it'll be recycled. The manufacturers, the plaintiffs here, deliberately contribute to that misunderstanding by their advertising and promotional material about recycleables, and they know what their products are going to be used for so they know it's going to result in the containers not being recycleable.
It's going to come down to how the CA lawyers argue the case. As usual, if they let the plaintiffs frame the case they're going to lose.
The average American drives 37 miles per day. Adding 5 miles per day of range means barely an eighth of the power gets replaced every day. And that 5 miles per day of charging adds weight; chances are, it doesn't break even for the extra weight. There's a good reason nobody else puts solar panels on cars. If it were a good idea, or even a not-complete-harebrained idea, Tesla would have done it years ago.
It's designed to produce plausible or most likely outputs, not correct outputs. It may be honest, but it's certainly not a mistake.
It is generally possible to download without uploading. You'll just likely get a dribble of data when you do.
Absolutely. Even companies that try to switch licenses to "protect" their code, like MinIO did, run the risk of people quickly switching to or creating alternatives. Like RustFS was created specifically to deal with the frustration of MinIO's change.
AGPL is a plague. GPL, I tolerate, though I have a strong preference towards v2. But AGPL has no redeeming qualities. The hypothetical world where someone creates a closed-source fork of a web service, convinces everyone to use it, and then holds their data hostage just isn't particularly plausible.
Meanwhile, AGPL precludes any interesting integrations, custom in-house authentication systems, using custom database backends, and all sorts of other stuff that potentially is useful to keep company-proprietary, but that has no impact whatsoever on the hypothetical freedoms that the AGPL is intended to protect.
It's a license that is so toxic that even companies that are strong proponents of open source with large open source offerings have outright bans on letting AGPLed code anywhere on the premises.
As far as I can tell, the main benefit of AGPL is for companies that create code and want to release it to the public as "free software", because by requiring contributor agreements, they can keep their own branch proprietary while forcing everyone else in the world to comply with the AGPL, thus ensuring that the only company that can create their own proprietary features is them.
I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"
