Comment Re: I'm still wondering (Score 2) 113
Dire Straits of Warm Ooze
Dire Straits of Warm Ooze
"Hackers ripped down a Flock camera above a roadway,
Flock will install camera cameras to watch their traffic cameras.
mounted on drones
and deported if caught
This is kind of like saying that car wrecks wouldn't happen if we had training and standards that excluded 95% of drivers
More like 99.99%. Maybe need some more nines in there. Large C codebases without regular critical CVEs are basically nonexistent.
Sam et al warn us to take actions that will save them from bankruptcy
What bankruptcy-prevention actions are they asking for?
Engineers need to remember that time exists.
You have three months to teach a teen how to control a robot with a microcontroller.
OK, how much of that do you budget to CS and assembly?
Month 1: Architecture and data structures? You have 18 40 minute periods and maybe homework assignments.
Half of the class won't even gain mastery in that time. By time your class is over they will still be having memory management problems.
So then you've failed to achieve the goal.
There are engineers who remember that time exists and for the rest we have engineering managers. Not ideal, just how it is.
To be sure engineering schools are doing a bad job at teaching reality. Even in a dx/dr environment, it's so weird.
15-25 kWh drawn by the utility is quite a bit! I hope they're paying him well for that.
Monopolist wants the competition to slow down while they speed up in secret.
They're bringing outside scrutiny into their processes; that's going to slow them down, too.
A few days ago there was a story about how an AI store was failing horribly. It can't do that, but at the same time will destroy us?
Not "at the same time". You're conflating what AI can do now with what it will likely be able to do in a year or five, or 20.
Amodei and others are worried about what AI that doesn't yet exist may do, not about what current-generation AI can do. AI is getting better, very quickly, and unless there's some blocking obstacle that no one has been able to identify will at some point become far, far smarter than humans, individually or collectively. So before that happens, we need to figure out how to make sure that superintelligent AI wants to help us, and wants to do it in the right way.
A few days ago there was a story about how an AI store was failing horribly. It can't do that, but at the same time will destroy us?
The key word is "it." There is no singular "it". Flattening the category of AI-enabled software to a singular "it" implies that there is a flat truth that applies to that entire category.
The AI-enabled software "it" that is running a store into the ground doesn't present a meaningful threat to anyone.
the AI-enabled software "it" that is being used by black-hats to find security vulnerabilities does.
AI is a tool. Think of it not unlike nuclear. Nuclear power plants aren't an existential threat, despite the harm a plant accident can cause. Nuclear weapons are.
It's pretty clear that no one has any actual answers or little interest in being honest about the exact capabilities of AI when their bottom line depends on hype or their job position relies on prognosticating doom.
What's clear is that trying to simplify complex topics into bite-sized "common-sense" topics doesn't work in 2026.
No, I don't think the tech-bros are being honest. But I don't think it matters anymore. Someone is going to weaponize this technology and a lot of people are going to suffer because of it. Not Skynet scenarios but rather Cyberpunk / Blade Runner scenarios. There's a real danger to the health and well-being of a large portion of the human race, for sure. The tech-bros aren't going to let that stop them from getting richer, for sure.
What we - the 99% - can or should do about that, I don't know.
But the purpose of the stop was not enforcement of the vehicle code.
"When there is not probable cause to believe that a driver is violating any one of the multitude of applicable traffic and equipment regulations 24 -- or other articulable basis amounting to reasonable suspicion that the driver is unlicensed or his vehicle unregistered -- we cannot conceive of any legitimate basis upon which a patrolman could decide that stopping a particular driver for a spot check would be more productive than stopping any other driver." Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648, 661, 99 S. Ct. 1391, 1400 (1979)
In California, as I suspect in most states, the driver is required to produce a license and registration when being pulled over for a traffic stop.
California Vehicle Code 12951(b) states: "The driver of a motor vehicle shall present his or her license for examination upon demand of a peace officer enforcing the provisions of this code."
Since the vehicle was not involved, the stop would not require a license to of produced. Of course, the cop would lie and make up a reason.
You are conflating a consensual encounter with a detention.
"How do you propose that this would work? Would Flock have access to each police department's database of active cases"
I imagine it could be made to work the way a federated login works, like how you can use your Gmail / FB / Twitter account to login almost anywhere without the site you're trying to login to knowing any details beyond your userID
"But what we need to know is, do people want nasally-insertable computers?"