In that scenario there also would be an investigation. It would find you left the stove burner on and you might be charged with arsen or similar. If we put tracing in place and if you left your house for no essential reason and without a mask and infect someone else and they die you get charged with manslaughter, that would certainly work. If we can overcome the practical problems and actually enforce this, I think it would be a great practice that I think would make all the freedom over community people happy as well. But is it realistic that we can do this in practice?
For the more limited use case of “get a link from a desktop to my phone right now” I have really enjoyed using an extension on the desktop browser that pops up a QR code linking to the current tab. Then I just point my phone camera at the QR code on the monitor to open the link on my phone. I like this setup because it doesn’t require any pre-configuration to link the desktop and the phone. Your friend sitting next to you can scan the QR code too.
I’m not linking to any specific QR code extension because I haven’t audited them for privacy but it’s easy to find one that claims to generate the QR code locally.
This seems backwards to me. If you get hit by Google, you’ll wake up in a hospital bed full of flowers from ambulance-chasing lawyers who are salivating over the chance to represent you so they can get in on that sweet settlement money.
Hit by a human, decent chance they flee and if you track them down, it’ll probably be some uninsured drunk with a negative net worth.
The financial benefit seems pretty clear, conditional on self-driving tech working. The capital cost of the hardware would be amortized. Let’s say a driver costs $10/hour. If the self-driving car is active for 16 hours a day it saves you $58k a year in driver wages. Then over more years that number multiplies. It seems totally realistic for self driving tech to cost five figures per vehicle. With mass production the cost of hardware would go down like it always does. I also think it makes a lot of less driver-time-inefficient routes more viable, like driving someone from the city deep into the suburbs with little chance of a return fare. This grows the addressable market.
There are also ethical, legal, and P.R. disadvantages to exploiting human drivers that seem to be getting more significant over time. Personally I’m not super optimistic about the near-term technical viability of self driving cars but it does seem to make Uber’s prospects look better to investors given some possible paths the future might take.
So instead of paying a bunch of people $10/hour, Uber is going to pony up front for a huge number of vehicles and the staff it takes to maintain them? Or are scads of private owners going to hand over their car to Uber to run as AI-taxis for $10/hr?
$10/hour is a rough estimate for the after expenses earnings for Uber drivers. The gross Uber pays is more like $16/hour so that’s the number to compare if you are going to look at Uber’s all-in cost to run a fleet. Using the 16 hours/day estimate it comes out to $93k a year of driver payments saved, which seems like it should easily pay for the purchase and maintenance of a car (especially if the car lasts multiple years). Uber has access to capital so they can handle the “up front” nature of the expense. Paying people to drive a car around all day is expensive and if Uber could avoid that they would have a better business.
Yeah, 16 hours of driving a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year for multiple years does seem reasonable for a car. Feeling like a fool for doubting Uber’s self-driving end game.
People shouldn’t be tricked into taking on tens of thousands of dollars in depreciation by committing to many years of monthly payments. Yes this system is good for car manufacturers, but no I don’t think that’s worth how much it ruins the finances of a good chunk of the country.
To my mind, a freezer is a pretty low priority item if you are trying to mitigate “shit hits the fan” tail risk. You can easily survive without a freezer, and a dependency on a freezer isn’t a good thing in that scenario. Then you just have a bunch of food that’s doing to go bad if the power goes out.
IMO calling someone your direct report carries with it the connotation that you also have non-direct reports. Maybe I’ve been misinterpreting but I’ve been hearing it as a subtle way someone can bring up how high they are on the org chart.
I believe that illiilliiililil is expressing a somewhat complex set of opinions:
1) They genuinely don’t like the 1619 project.
2) They understand that the Pulitzer is supposed to be an award for good journalism.
3) They believe that journalism about some subjects is more likely to win a Pulitzer without being the best by illiilliiililil‘s standards. You could compare it to the concept of an “Oscar bait” movie: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_bait
I’m not sure I agree with this criticism - I think exploring tough subjects can lead to great work that is especially deserving of praise.
On the American Revolution, pivotal to any account of our history, the project asserts that the founders declared the colonies’ independence of Britain “in order to ensure slavery would continue.” This is not true
ChowNow and qMenu are apps that restaurants can pay a small fee to use, that provide a similar experience to users as the big apps. The selection of restaurants is more limited but there are enough options for me on there in the Bay Area. Some restaurants do offer delivery on these apps, although I’m not sure if it’s restaurant employees doing delivery or people hired by the app.
