• AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Jesus Fucking Christ what are you fucking stupid? Read the god damn pinned mod comment on every post on r/chessbegginers, read the god damn wiki, read the god damn info button that pops up on chess.c0m, here’s a thought just google it your god damn self. What do you think you’re the first person in fucking history to experience this “weird pawn move?” You must be fucking stupid because it was only invented back in 1561. But I’m sure you thought “oh wow I know chess.c0m is a company valued in the hundreds of millions but I’m sure me, 100 ELO shit tier chess beginner, has found a bug in their program.” It boggles my god damn mind that you just blindly post your stupid fucking questions on reddit without trying to research them first. Because you must be the first person in fucking history to ever experience a problem, and logically reddit, the source of all fucking factual information, is the only god damn place you can look for an answer. So here’s a fucking thought the next time you’re about to make a god damn post stop and google e-n p-a-s-s-a-n-t.

      • itsgoodtobeawake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Are you kidding ??? What the **** are you talking about man ? You are a biggest looser i ever seen in my life ! You was doing PIPI in your pampers when i was beating players much more stronger then you! You are not proffesional, because proffesionals knew how to lose and congratulate opponents, you are like a girl crying after i beat you! Be brave, be honest to yourself and stop this trush talkings!!! Everybody know that i am very good blitz player, i can win anyone in the world in single game! And "w"esley "s"o is nobody for me, just a player who are crying every single time when loosing, ( remember what you say about Firouzja ) !!! Stop playing with my name, i deserve to have a good name during whole my chess carrier, I am Officially inviting you to OTB blitz match with the Prize fund! Both of us will invest 5000$ and winner takes it all!

        I suggest all other people who’s intrested in this situation, just take a look at my results in 2016 and 2017 Blitz World championships, and that should be enough… No need to listen for every crying babe, Tigran Petrosyan is always play Fair ! And if someone will continue Officially talk about me like that, we will meet in Court! God bless with true! True will never die ! Liers will kicked off…

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Yeah Waymo has been silently ticking away over here for years. On the east side they are all over the place. It will take longer to get to freeway speeds but I think Waymo’s approach is far safer. But fuck Google too

  • Starkstruck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    6 months ago

    I used to be so excited for self driving cars, but my naive younger self assumed they’d actually make sure they’re safe before putting them on public roads.

    I was wrong.

    • TheRealKuni@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yuuup. Muskrat decided LiDAR was too expensive to include in every vehicle and scrapped it. Even disabled the sensors on the cars that have it.

      My vacuum has LiDAR. That man is a cheap idiot.

      • Synapse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        The LiDAR you have on your vacuum isn’t going to cut it as a safety relevant component onboard your car. Automotive-grade LiDAR are on another price range. Development for such sensors is quoted separately from the part price, and it costs millions of $.

        • TheRealKuni@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 months ago

          The LiDAR you have on your vacuum isn’t going to cut it as a safety relevant component onboard your car. Automotive-grade LiDAR are on another price range. Development for such sensors is quoted separately from the part price, and it costs millions of $.

          Obviously, but my Ford Escape PHEV also has LiDAR and, despite being the highest trim level, cost FAR less than a Tesla. It doesn’t do FSD, obviously, but it still has LiDAR. And radar. And will do level 2 self driving enough that if I’m driving in traffic I’m more managing the car than driving it.

          There is zero good excuse for not including LiDAR in Teslas.

          • Synapse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            I can’t seem to find information about the Ford Escape having a LiDAR, it’s not on the spec. Sheet on Ford’s website and in the news it’s only about prototypes.

            I am not saying Teslas should or shouldn’t have LiDARs. I am just curious. I only know about Audi, Mercedes, Honda and Hyundai currently selling cars with LiDAR used for ADAS. They might be more Chinese OEMs selling cars with LiDARs, buy Ford, it surprises me.

            • TheRealKuni@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              I may be wrong then. There are a bunch of sensors above the windshield behind the rearview mirror, it could be that LiDAR isn’t one of them.

      • machinin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        When your compensation is based on profit per car, you make strange decisions like removing winker stalks and quality control.

    • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yes they sure did. I don’t believe any Tesla ever shipped with Lidar, maybe some did. The big thing that they removed/disabled was the radar. They did this because the radar and visual cameras would disagree about where things were. So instead of spending more R&D time to get it right. They just removed the radar and called it solved.

  • splonglo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    They both suck and Waymo’s has a whole ass sensor thingie on the roof. So it’s insane that Tesla’s is even legal given that they rely entirely on cameras and fate.

  • antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Chess is a very complex rules game, while Checkers is quite simple. Waymo has a complex approach to self driving:

    • Expensive suite of sensors
    • High resolution maps of operating areas
    • Remote operators standing by

    While Teslas approach is simple:

    • Capture a bazillion miles of camera footage, feed into AI, profit?
    • Unpaid volunteers teach the AI safe driving
    • Car has only a basic map for routing, the rest is inferred in real time from cameras

    Waymo’s successful approach scales linearly. They have to high-res map every city they want to operate in, and they can gradually bring down the cost of the sensors. They will require fewer remote operator interactions over time.

    Teslas success is more difficult, but it scales exponentially. They already produce vehicles at scale and full control over all the equipment on board. The existing fleet would be able to participate as well. If they succeed, they may want to offer buy-backs for customers who didnt buy FSD - the cars would be worth more to Tesla than the owner.

    In both checkers and chess, the player gains super powers for reaching the other side of the board. Time will tell who reaches the other side of the board first. They are playing different games on the same board. Okay that’s fair.

      • antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Radar and Lidar also get a lot of noise from heavy rain or snow. Fog can be just as bad. Some conditions just aren’t safe to drive in, regardless of who’s driving. I don’t think either of them are trying to design a system for those conditions.

        On a personal note, I have no interest in getting a ride in a self driving car. I do have an interest in an empty car that can drive itself. Drop myself off at the airport, valet parking downtown, easier to share one car per household, river shuttling, through hike shuttling - I would use it a lot. I understand the more profitable goal is taxi services, but I don’t want that. So in my narrow use case, I hope Tesla succeeds since that approach can be used on personal vehicles anywhere while Waymo is strictly city taxis, which I don’t use.

        • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          The USS they took out of Teslas were at least a second measurement system.

          Wavelengths with decent water transmitability exist.

          • antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Sound and light don’t propagate well through changes in media. The reason rainbows exist is because light does not travel in a straight line through drops of water, across the full spectrum. Radar is used to sense how hard it’s raining so it obviously gets returns from rain (and through it). But it will depend on the processing they do from the sensors. But just so we’re clear, cameras also work in the rain and snow. I don’t think one is clearly better than others.

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      It was the car with the car on the road. The car did it with its own body

  • Phegan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    We should abandon self driving cars and instead make the roads more safe and provide multi modal transportation options like trains.

    • valkyre09@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I wonder if they’ve thought about having an extra long car, like I’m talking fits nearly 100 people. That way instead of having 25 cars self driving, you could have 1 driver.

      You could even put it on tracks so you don’t need to worry about steering. Just go /stop.

      Brb gonna patent something…

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    I still want to see someone slap an airplane grade INS suite into a car and load it up with some maps to see how far it can go without relying on GPS lol.

    Not that it would functionally change much, but I find it annoying only self driving cars are still using dedicated navigation setups.

    Google Maps has an aneurysm if you’re not going above 5mph even though the accelerometer really should have made this a non problem. Its even more dumb to be using your tiny phone receiver for vehicle navigation. GMaps still has to wait until you’re past a spot before finally deciding where you actually are.

    • geogle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      A couple things#

      I like the INS approach, but couple that with cameras to correct for random walk error (this is much like our eyes correcting for our inner ear.)

      I think the issue with Google maps requiring GPS differentials for getting your trajectory has mostly to do with it being agnostic of your phone’s orientation while moving.

  • fpslem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    6 months ago

    Both are risking the lives and safety of the non-consenting public as they beta test 2-ton vehicles on public streets. Damn them both.

    • filister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I wonder what you then think about people who drive after heavily drinking or taking drugs. To be honest, I have more faith in technology than in humans.

      Not to mention that self driving can probably solve some other problems too, like traffic jams caused by erratic driving behavior of humans, etc.

      If you have vehicle to vehicle communication, it is possible to adapt the speed of all the vehicles on the street to avoid them being stuck in a traffic jam.

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Driving while inebriated is illegal, self driving is not.

        Traffics jams and erreactic behaviour could be fixed if everyone is in a self driving car, but at that point it woild be far more energy effecient, environmentally friendly and cheaper for society to build electrified transit instead.

        If you prioritize the street so that only self driving cars are on it and they need wireless communications to function, how do other road users like cyclists and pedeatrians safely use the street?

        Self driving cars are not here to make your life better, they are here to make a handful of people rich.

        • filister@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          I tend to disagree here. For example if you have vehicle to vehicle standardized communications, vehicles can communicate between themselves the location of cyclists, some road obstacles, etc. generally making the roads safer and reducing the number of fatalities.

          Yes, they will make some people more rich, but is this a legitimate reason to obstruct technological advancements? I am sure people were thinking the same way at the cusp of electrification, or automation of some factories, where machines were augmenting the human labor and in the process making those people redundant.

          If we think the same way we should never abandon coal power plants and mines because miners might lose their job, right?

          • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            There are greener, more energy effecient and more socially fair ways to get the same results than selling everybody a high tech steel box.

    • DerArzt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Eh, if there was an automated taxi service that was really cheap (since there isn’t a driver) I have a feeling that the need for individuals to own cars would go down.

      There are people out there that can’t drive or that have limitations on driving that this could help, and in the long term it may be cheaper to pay for a service rather than own a car which needs maintenance, costs generally 20k+ new, and is a liability from a financial view.

      • Jimmycakes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah their tech is clearly gonna be b2b last mile delivery type stuff which is the application I would use it for

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    And in the news this just in… Tesla runs over checkered flag and flagman at Daytona. Shortly after, it burst into flames. As it burned it was discovered that the car’s emblems melted into the shape of Toyota emblems…

  • Hucklebee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    6 months ago

    It really is an insult for checkers as a game. It is a common misconception that it’s simple. The game has surprising amount of depth, and the saying “x is playing chess while y is playing checkers” should really die.

    X is playing chess while Y is playing tictactoe would be a better analogy.

    • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Chess has roughly 10^44 positions. Checkers has roughly 10^20.

      That means under that metric, chess is roughly 24 orders of magnitude more complex as checkers.

      Tic tac toe has roughly 10^3 positions, or 17 orders of magnitude simpler than checkers.

      In other words, the complexity gap between chess and checkers is larger than the gap between checkers and tic tac toe.

      • Num10ck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Maybe they should compare playing chess with playing Go.

        The number of legal board positions in Go has been calculated to be approximately 2.1×10^170, which is far greater than the number of atoms in the observable universe, which is estimated to be on the order of 10^80.

      • Hucklebee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        My point is that checkers actually still is very mich complex. Tictactoe is not and every board position can reasonably be managed by a human.

        With checkers, that is unfeasable. That’s why I am of the opinion that checkers is unfairly treated as “the simple game” when for humans it is far from simple.