You didn't read what I wrote. The claim is that camera-only automated cars can never be safer than human cars. That's wrong, because the safety comes from automation itself being a better driver than a human, even if it only has cameras. Other sensors may or may not add safety. The do not guarantee additional safety.

An automated car can also be worse than a human driver, even with a dozen sensors. But it won't be because of the sensors.

Automation is safer because it doesn't get distracted, drunk, or drowsy, not because it uses lidar. Adding lidar can add safety, but it doesn't guarantee it.

No you don't. Humans get distracted, drunk, and drowsy. Automation doesn't. That's where automation is safer than humans.

Lidar and radar can add safety, but they do not guarantee it.

He's lying.

"Better than humans" is possible with cameras only, because most of the errors humans make have nothing to with their eyes. Humans get distracted, drunk, and tired. Automation doesn't.

I'm sure lidar and radar can do better than cameras alone. But lidar and radar do not guarantee better than humans.

He's just trying to justify his expensive system.

More sympathy than concurrence? I still the CSB (Charity Share Brokerage) idea could have worked. The CSB was imagined as a kind of crowdfunding system with project management and accountability. A new kind of meta-charity? However now I sadly conclude you just can't compete with PROFIT-driven greed as a motivation. Too often a motivation with evil side effects, but they're only looking at the PROFIT!

Going for funny, too? Or some kind of time machine joke? I actually started working on the CSB ideas before I ever heard of crowdfunding. But crowdfunding appeared to have PROFIT for a while and now appears to have mostly collapsed into scams. AI-generated at last?

Hawaiian eruption last a long time and the lava flows persist for years.

Your effusive eruptions last on average no longer than our effusive eruptions. The fact that Iceland also has phreatic eruptions doesn't change the fact that most of ours are effusive basalt, just like yours, with corresponding eruptive dynamics. Also, FYI, for a given total effusion volume, slow eruptions are easier to divert. Diversion is much more challenging when an equivalent volume of lava is effused in a short period of time. And it's not like you have vastly larger average lava flows than we do. The largest lava flow on Earth in the Holocene (modern era) is in Iceland (the THjórsárhraun - 900km2, 25km3, 70km underground travel followed by 130-140km on the surface). For comparison, Hawaii's largest holocene flow is the Ailaau Flow at 430km2, 4-5km3, and 40km.

If we want to limit to more recent flows (since Ailaau was fairly recent, in case you think Iceland stopped having big eruptions), Iceland's biggest *after* Alia'au was Laki (1783–1784 AD), at 600km2, 15km3, and 80km. It lasted for 8 months to 2 years, depending on whether you count the concurrent Grímsvötn eruption as part of it. So much gas was released from that huge volume of lava that despite us being nearly arctic (polar volcanoes have much lower near-term climate impacts than equatorial volcanoes), it caused a winter so severe that the Mississippi froze at New Orleans and ice was seen floating in the Gulf of Mexico.

We simply get bigger effusive eruptions than you, full stop. Not all eruptions, of course, both of us have a huge variance in eruption scales and dynamics. But trying to claim ours are somehow "easier" is just not in line with the facts. Also, Hawaiian eruptions tend to occur on terrain that slopes significantly more consistently toward the sea, aka where you want to divert lava toward; on flatter or less-consistently-angled terrain, lava "piles up" more and makes it easier to overtop berms.

There is a practical side that it is easier to move people and build coffee shacks

I'm not talking about "coffee shacks", I'm talking about whole communities and beloved places. In particular, I'm thinking about the 2018 Lower Puna eruption. Of course the homes near the vents in Leilani Estates were doomed, but there is absolutely NO reason why you should have lost anywhere close to as much as you did so far from the vents. Losing Kapoho Bay for example was simply cultural fatalism. I watched a person crying on the news saying she didn't understand why Pele chose to take such a beautiful place. It's not Pele who took it, it's your insane resistance against doing anything to protect yourselves. That was one of the easiest possible flows to divert. Most of the lava fronts moved at a crawl, you had warning long in advance of the eruption and a very slow eruptive rampup (didn't really take off until June), and you had a steep slope to the south into unpopulated areas you could have easily diverted it down. Losing all that was a choice.

"Oh, we can't!" is just an excuse for your fatalism that gives you an excuse to not put forth the effort to actually do it. It's not the 1940s anymore, we're not chucking surplus WWII bombs at lava tubes anymore. Lava diversion is a science and is routinely effectively done. There are limits, but you were nowhere near said limits for sites far from the vents. There are costs, but they are nowhere near the costs that you paid by refusing to act.

Story got some coverage here. I think they said the Korean temperature records only go back to around 1910.

Still, it isn't such a good thing. Relatively nearby in Kumamoto they are also suffering from record heat, but they are also trying to deal with the devastation of a major quake last week...

Of creating more Funny comments for Slashdot. Isn't there a funny mathematician in the house?

Greatest teacher I ever had was actually a math professor. I only had him for one semester, but one class session was a topology-based magic show and he read a funny section from Life on the Mississippi in another lesson, with some mathematics inserted into Twain's story. Tried to get him for another class, but after I registered they pulled him out and substituted another teacher who could barely talk. (Of course it wasn't his fault that he had suffered a stroke, but the disappointment was so large that I withdrew from the course...)

Mod parent Funny, but America is dying from NIMBY syndrome. That and the hatred of science.

The YOB thinks he's the dictator, but he's just the king of lies. However in a country increasingly operating on anti-scientific on lies, the biggest liar should be king? "We don't need no stinkin' telescope to look for gawd!"

I take native Hawaiian religious objections seriously. These are people who take a fatalistic "Pele will take what she wants, it's pointless to try to stop her" attitude toward lava flows running over their houses that seems utterly insane here in Iceland. We'll buy up every available water pump on the international market and walk on active-flowing lava fields to save a harbour for a couple thousand people. We'll keep running tourist sites right next to a volcano that erupts every couple months by building multi-story-high berms around it with giant bulldozers and cooling anything that tries to overtop to make the berms even higher. And it totally works . But Hawaiians will sit back and watch incredibly slow-flowing flows with easy diversion paths take out everything they hold dear. At best they'll point to some primitive failed attempts in like the 1940s as a reason to not try, but then when pressed, it often comes back to: "Pele will take what she wants to take."

Another example: geothermal drilling on the Big Island. Massive protests. Massive resistance, way beyond the token NIMBY resistance here. Meanwhile Hawaii continues to generate most of its electricity from oil, at great cost. Hawaii is the only other place (outside of Iceland) to have accidentally drilled into a magma chamber. In Hawaii they treated it as a major incident and immediately shut down the well. When we did it? Our reaction was, "WOW, we can produce REALLY hot steam from THIS well!", made it into a production well, and started planning to drill more.

I guess one major difference here is that in the early Icelandic cosmology, volcanoes weren't the product of a high-ranking creator goddess, but rather, Surtr, who was practically a demon and was fated to destroy the world. It's good to resist Surtr!

And then I noticed Slashdot running an ad for ZenDesk. There's the joke I was looking for.

ZenDesk is where support goes to die. Not a clean death, either, but the ugliest death possible. As soon as I detect that a company is using ZenDesk I know that company does not care about support. At all. But I've also noticed that the use of ZenDesk is usually disguised and hidden these days?

Disclaimer needed: I sincerely tried to get something useful out of ZenDesk channels for some years. Then I gave up. But is it possible ZenDesk got better after so many attempts to turn me into a newt? Maybe you want to report on your better mileage?

But there's a potentially funny anecdote here, too? I think ZenDesk is basically a trouble ticket system. LONG time ago I worked with an old engineer named Paul. He claimed he was the originator of the trouble ticket system, though he probably meant the local trouble ticket system rather than the general idea. But it was a long time ago so it is possible that his was a seminal system of yore. When I worked with him computers were still rather precious resources, and the system he created long before that time was still mostly paper based.

You're welcome, but I'm still disappointed the potentially juicy story didn't produce more Funny.

I basically agree with the comments, but I would actually cast a lot of that blame on Microsoft. It's that EULA thing again. Not just blocking liability for overt failures and incompetence, but also facilitating the shipment of incomplete software that, as you noted, needs more support. But there was a period when even Microsoft understood that there was something rotten there... Swept under the rug since then, so you can abandon all hope now.

Except his complaint is not.

Yes, it literally was. The main public complaint of the weavers was that they spent their entire life learning their art, and then their bosses come in with a machine that they teach to replicate the patterns that they developed, churn out cheap "slop" versions of them, and fire them.

And here we're talking about profits, despite their huge scaleup expenditure. Theirs and OpenAI's margins on serving inference are ~40%.

It's almost impossible for a company undergoing a massive scaleup rate to turn a profit, let alone growing 10X annualized for 3 1/2 years running, but Anthropic pulled it off.