nutjob2

> won't plausibly be done better by AI in 10 years? In 5 years?

As I said, AI hysteria. People are going off the deep end.

And more to the point: want what?

The demonstrations seems to be very specific, it probably can't do anything more than fall to the ground. The practicality of actual levitating the car may out of reach.

Everyone calls it a "flying car" the idea is planted in people's mind and they let people's imagination of credulity do the rest. Stock price goes up.

He's spinning in his grave, but below the Nyquist limit

Your post is emblematic of the current AI hysteria.

This is what it feels like to be disrupted. It's not the end of the world. You consider the evidence, ponder the path forward, and adapt. It's what humans do and their superpower. It doesn't have to be a negative thing, even if it is dislocating.

We don't need to be saved, there is plenty of agency to go around. Just grasp the opportunity and forge ahead. This sort of pessimism is self-defeating. Humanity has dealt with this before and come out on top, this time is no different. AI is being wildly oversold.

Tao is being entirely rational. He maybe has more to lose as anyone, but he's getting down to brass tacks instead of jumping at shadows and imaginary boogeymen.

I got an electric chainsaw from Lidl, now my printer shows me respect.

If the Trumps get their cut, you're golden.

> but the goal is not to help humanity or open-source

Ok, but so what? That's what happening so far. Even a repressive totalitarian government I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy does some good sometimes.

If the Chinese cheap/open models rise up and destroy us, thats on us for giving them access to the tools to do so.

> giving everyone unrestricted AI is likely to make it worse

Worse for whom?

The only effective defense against predatory corporate and government AI is personal protective AI.

Anything else is unilateral disarmament. It's the only way individuals can survive in the worse case scenario.

> gun nuts

Guns are different. They can't protect you against the government, contrary to gun nut claims.

China is much more authoritarian than the US, but at this point it's like comparing two types of metastatic cancer.

The point is get what you can from both to develop open models, data and tools.

You have it in reverse. A federal EU enables EU countries to pool sovereignty and strength to protect itself from the US and China. It neither needs to or wants to challenge anyone. A federal system allows EU wide decisions to be made quickly and without petty parochial concerns.

Constituent states rightly can choose to make their own decisions in matters like this, it hardly effects anyone else, and they can choose to collaborate.

Tu quidem es

There is a cadre of right wing Elon simps on HN. Ruins every thread related to Tesla/SpaceX, just emotional posts about their love of Elon, pretty sad really given Elon arguably uses other people to make himself look good.

> and a payment terminal

This should really be handled in the car and through the charging cable.

Given that you only really need 240 volts (or maybe 3 phase longer term), I don't see why every parking space, street, public and private can't have a power socket.

It's already happening in some places, maybe one day it'll be mandated.

> swappable $300 generator

It's never that simple, but it could be. Modular standard parts that could be installed on a standard chassis design would be great. So have a small generator or an additional battery, maybe even a fuel cell. Probably never happen but it would be the nirvana of car design. Standardization would drive scale and it could work really well. That approach did wonders for the PC industry.

> Perhaps all the elderly people are expected to patriotically look after themselves?

I think that a lot of them feel they should patriotically starve to death.

https://www.deseret.com/2007/10/12/20046650/starving-man-s-d...

What compromise? The GOP are ideologically opposed to these sorts of things and immovable.

What do you suggest, trading away people's healthcare or something for net neutrality?

What a load of bullshit. There are better candidates and parties and worse ones, they are not all the same. This sort of attitude just feeds voter apathy and resignation.

Democracy is an imperfect system, but its much better than the alternatives. If more people paid attention and participated, we would have much better outcomes.

You write like the senate and its filibuster doesn't exist. They can't pass legislation without GOP votes. Of course they use the FCC given that fact.

> people are shooting your satellites out of the sky

If space powers have any sense at all they'll develop a fleet of satellites that deploy small limpet craft that attach to the enemies' satellites and drag them toward earth.

Literal shooting sounds like mutually assured satellite destruction.

> All of them give you links to source material, in case you suspect they are just making it up.

If you follow these a good portion do not contain the claims that the AI output links to. This is obviously a hard problem since actual AI "knowledge" lies deep in the weights somewhere.

Really? Isn't the arbitration binding and therefore the end of the matter?

No I just failed to check before I posted, I thought it was HBM. I don't have any interest in Apple hardware so wasn't properly informed, and have been duly crucified.

In that case why is there a "settlement agreement" mentioned that has a $10M penalty for disparagement? Not sure what that refers to exactly but how can Uber (try to) dictate terms in the settlement?

It does seem they're trying to get out of it somehow.

Not until the industry gets severe indigestion, which doesn't seem that far off.

Nothing except CPU manufacturer choices. Mac laptops use it and they're consumer products.

People will have to get used to buying a fixed amount of RAM with their CPU but thats unlikely to be a problem.

That's just an oddity due to nominally singular items having plural names.

"*a scissors/pants" is correctly "a pair of scissors/pants" and you still use the definite "the scissors/pants"

So "get me scissors" is a bit odd but works only because the singular item happens to have a plural name.

The funny thing is is that all the examples you gave are correct English.

[I learned it] "at school" - I learned it at school, I'm not specifying which school

[I learned it] "at the school" - I learned it at school, the one that was referenced

"I know the English" - I know the English people

"I know the English language" - I know the English language (specifically)

The point being that articles do a lot of work. They're not just decoration whereby there is some arbitrary correct form or rule. It's a matter of what you want to say.

But in the third and forth sentences 'English' is both a collective noun and the name of a language which is just a coincidence.

In "They are doctors" the 'they' is the subject and you don't need articles. 'They' is plural.

But in "The doctors are female" you do because the subject is some specific group of doctors. It's singular because its a single group of things.