It is covered in history, and so I remember it. However that was a few decades ago and so I’d have to look up details to talk about it again. I did well in history, I expect everyone else remembers less than me. (except for those who for some reason it is relevant for their daily life, or those who for whatever reason have looked it up)
How do you propose to not pay taxes? Most people don’t get a choice - their boss takes the money and gives it to the IRS. You can maybe get a little less than correct withheld and thus owe a couple thousand, but the IRS would catch on to that quickly and send you to prison.
They might or might not pay taxes, but they either way they are paying their legally required taxes. If they are paying less taxes than you think they should - that is politically debated.
I wasn’t trying to suggest that you are biased, only that I have no clue and so it is possible you are somehow unfairly doing something.
Human vision is very, very, very good. If you think a camera installed to a car is even close to human eyesight, then you are extremely mistaken.
Why are you trying to limit cars to just vision? That is all I have as a human. However robots have radar, lidar, radio, and other options, there is no reasons they can’t use them and get information eyes cannot. Every option has limits.
And bullshit on you not being able to see the lights. They’re specifically designed so that’s not an issue for colour blind people
Some lights are, but not all of them are. I often say I go when the light turns blue. However not all lights have that blue tint and so I often cannot tell the difference between a white light and a green light by color. (but white is not used in a stoplight and I can see red/yellow just fine) Where I live all stoplights have green on the bottom so that is always a cheat I use, but that only works if I can see the relative position - in an otherwise dark situation I only see a light in front of me and not the rest of the structure and so I cannot tell. I have driven where stoplights are not green on bottom and I can never remember if green is left/right.
Even when the try though, not all colorblind is the same. There may not be a mitigation that will work from two different people with different aspects of colorblind.
I can see red clearly and so not sure means I can go.
I’ve only noticed issues in a few situations. When I’m driving at night and suddenly the weirdly aimed streetlight turns yellow - until it changed I didn’t even know there was a stoplight there. The second was I was making a left turn at sunset (sun behind me) and the green arrow came on but the red light remained on so I couldn’t see it was time/safe to go until my wife alerted me.
Cows are big and will accidentally kick you breaking ribs, or otherwise injure you. They are mostly safe, but there is a reason farming is one of the most dangerous jobs.
Anyone who has driven (or walked) into a sunrise/sunset knows that human vision is not very good. I’ve also driven in blizzards, heavy rain, and fog - all times when human vision is terrible. I’ve also not seen green lights (I’m colorblind).
like regulators not allowing dangerous products,
I include human drivers in the list of dangerous products I don’t want allowed. The question is self driving safer overall (despite possible regressions like this). I don’t want regulators to pick favorites. I want them to find “the truth”
Humans are terrible drivers. The open question is are self driving cars overall safer than human driven cars. So far the only people talking either don’t have data, or have reason cherry pick only parts of the data that make self driving look good. This is the one exception where someone seemingly independent has done analysis - the question is are they unbiased, or are they cherry picking data to make self driving look bad (I’m not familiar with the source so I can’t answer that)
Either way more study is needed.
Ann reason you choose authenik? There are a nmber of options and I’m not sure why to choose one over the other.
We have been investing in battery tech for centuries. It is a hard problem and there hasn’t always been a path forward. Engines are much easier, but we are near the end of where we can go with them according to the laws of physics. (too bad, liquid fuels are such a great energy dense solution)
Are they going to invade Russia, North Korea, Iran? That would be about the only useful exorcise to solve problems fast. Technically we can make code and servers more secure, but that will do nothing about social attacks which are a large source of the problem.
Once you get the above countries still have to make it clear your plans to invade countries like India and China are serious to get them to shape up, but there is a chance you won’t have to. You might have to invade a few countries in Africa or something though as well.
Pi’s built in audio is terrible. Even if it works you will want a better audio interface. The PI only has digital inputs (I think there is a mic input), so you need something to get audio in. If you can get the digital audio that is best, but often that is behind encryption and so you end up with analog inputs. (I’m not sure what the options here are, worth looking deeper).
Once you have the audio in, there are a number of Jack (which port audio supports) to network low latency products that will work. Configuration will be hard but that is something you only do once. (configuration is hard because almost everyone who uses this wants a different complex setup and so there is no way to make it easy in a way that would help anyone else)
AT this point it is safe to assume you will fall for scams like this in your life. They are too like the real thing. We need the laws and police to catch up to investigating this thus making crime not pay (most of this is from countries that don’t work with police - so probably some major international efforts required as well).
The question is are they safer than human drivers, not are they safe. Cars exist, are everywhere, and are very unsafe to pedestrians. You won’t be able to get rid of cars, so if waymo is really safer we should mandate it on all cars. That is a big if though - drunk drivers are still a large percentage of crashes so is if far to lump sober drivers together with drunks - I don’t know the real statistics to figure this out.
Good transit gets you close enough (as others have said, you don’t drive your car down the aisles of the supermarket). That few people have good transit is the problem that needs to be fixed. Sadly few really care - in the US the republicans hate transit, and the democrats only like transit for the union labor is employees - importantly neither cares about getting people places.
I was thinking about restoring the backup in a temporary location and running diff on random files to check the files match the source, but I don’t know if this is redundant now.
That isn’t as useful as you would think. If your computer fails there are high odds you will restore to a fresh install of a newer OS and newer software/services versions. Which means that you really want/need to also test data/config migration.
OTOH, if you have backups odds are the data is there even if you never tested them. Testing you can restore is mostly about do you have everything backed up. Your backups can pass all the validation but if you accidentally configured them to only backup /tmp (or something else worthless) you may as well not have backups. Thus you should test that you can do a full restore just to make sure that the data you want is all there. I generally trust that backup software can restore all the data you pointed it at without problems even if you didn’t test them - but I don’t trust that you (or I) configured them to backup the right things.
I don’t care why. That is still libel and it is illegal for good reason. if you can’t stop this for all cases then you ai is and should be illegal.
they will ask questions if you try and when you cannot answer them ‘correctly’ refuse it.