It’s very hard to actually get a company broken up and I can’t remember ever seeing it happen. But when your antitrust case is judged against you, they don’t just charge you a fine and say “on your way now.”

I develop software products and we put so much attention into how we design and arrange them, including the naming of things.

Then we send everything off for batch translation by some service that probably doesn’t give a flying fuck because they’re just using AI anyway. And we have no way to check their work because we don’t speak all the languages.

I wish we could have in-house people for this.

Of course signals are for inter-driver communication. It’s a signal “to” someone, right?

We don’t need to discuss how to use your signal when no one’s around.

Physically moving into the other lane also tells them that you are moving. The sole purpose of having a blinker is to use it in advance.

Thanks - that video was more explanatory. I honestly didn’t know what I was looking at in the OP video. I know nothing about cars but I can imagine how this would be a game changer.

Hah. Your comment caused an image to flash through my brain of what it would be like if Kim Jong Un ruled China, and it was about as absurd as this Trump administration is.

Oh snap! I once worked somewhere that already had a guy with my name and he asked me to use some other name. I thought that was bad enough (and told him no). But this is next level.

By what means will society be completely reorganized to fit this need? You’re waving this away but it’s wreaking actual devastation across Japan right now, and more countries are trending this direction soon, notably China.

But this idea that more people leads to lower quality of life… that’s 1980s overpopulation panic talking.

Japan’s quality of life is suffering because they don’t have enough working age people to support their society.

Literally, we are going to have some difficulties in the coming decades because we don’t have enough people.

I’m not saying more people is always better, or that we have no limits. But when there are more old people than young people, that’s a bad situation, plain and simple.

All predictions in this vein are invalid.

If you want to say “even this little bit is unsettling and we should be on guard for more,” fine.

That’s different from “if you think this is only a small amount you are wrong because a small amount will become a large amount.”

You may think it’s as plausible as you like. Obviously you do or you wouldn’t have said it. It’s still by definition absolutely a slippery slope logical fallacy. A little will always lead to more, therefore a little is a lot. This is textbook. It has nothing to do with companies, computers, or goats.

That’s textbook slippery slope logical fallacy.

It’s literally just a document search for their internal employees to use.

Those employees are fallible humans trying to navigate tens of thousands of byzantine technical and regulatory documents all published on various dinosaur platforms.

AI hallucination is a very popular thing to get outraged about right now but don’t forget about good old fashioned bureaucratic error.

My employer implemented AI search/summarization of our docs/wiki/intranet/JIRA systems over a year ago and it has been very effective in my experience. It always links to the source docs, but it permits natural language queries and can do some reasoning about the contents of the documents to pull together information across a sea of text.

Nothing that is mission critical enough to lead to a reactor meltdown should ever be blindly trusted to these tools.

But nothing like that should ever be trusted to the whims of one fallible human, either. This is why systems have protocols, checks and balances, quality controls, and failsafes.

Giving employees a more powerful document search doesn’t somehow sweep all that aside.

But hey, don’t let a rational, down-to-earth argument stand in the way of freaking out about a sci-fi dystopia.

Dude there’s always been a ton of Star Wars content you didn’t know about, unless you read 2-3 Star Wars novels and comic titles per month.

It’s a GOOD THING to have niche content for niche audiences. Trying to make everything for the mass market is how we get brainless blockbusters.

I guess I just be weird because an ongoing monthly subscription to a creator is never something I’m willing to consider, though I have made many one-time contributions.

I can’t imagine what it is like for bereaved parents who have recently lost a child. Or for those struggling with fertility issues.

Don’t dress up your petty annoyance at having to share a world with parents as saving the bereaved and barren.

Goddamit I’m just sitting here waiting to lose my job over this fuckery.

Those are ways to gather empirical results, though they rely on artificial, staged situations.

I think it’s fine to have both. Seat belts save lives. I see no problem mandating them. That kind of thing can still be well founded in data.

It’s hardly either / or though. What we have here is empirical data showing that cars without lidar perform worse. So it’s based in empirical results to mandate lidar. You can build a clear, robust requirement around a tech spec. You cannot build a clear, robust law around fatality statistics targets.

This sounds good until you realize how unsafe human drivers are. People won’t accept a self-driving system that’s only 50% safer than humans, because that will still be a self-driving car that kills 20,000 Americans a year. Look at the outrage right here, and we’re nowhere near those numbers. I also don’t see anyone comparing these numbers to human drivers on any per-mile basis. Waymos compared favorably to human drivers in their most recently released data. Does anyone even know where Teslas stand compared to human drivers?