Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | tootie's commentslogin

This runs with just a single front-facing camera?

Depends on the car what it has access to. It may leverage radar data, for example. Some cars (Ford Lightning for example) it only does lateral (steering) control, longitudinal control is still under the control of the OEM adaptive cruise.

3 cameras. Front facing 180 degree, and front facing telephoto. Rear facing 180 for driver attention monitoring.

Looks like there are 3 cameras on the Comma 4. There's a narrow FoV camera facing forward for distant objects.

It's like I can't grow corn, but I can buy corn. That's not the same thing. I can also write code to order corn for me, provided I supply it with a credit card and pay the bill. That is also not very interesting.

Incidentally I clicked through to this guy's blog and found his predictions for 2025 and he was 0 for 13: https://avc.xyz/what-will-happen-in-2025-1


12 was close - we have bags.fm but twitter not tiktok

Corporate raiders is a bit of a different concept. That implies a hostile takeover. Like aggressively buying up shares in order acquire a majority stake and set company policy against the wishes of other insiders.

Bending Spoons is what we'd call vulture capitalists which have and continue to exist. Basically they buy weakening businesses and carve them up for parts, selling anything of value and squeezing max revenue of whatever is left.


> Basically they buy weakening businesses and carve them up for parts, selling anything of value and squeezing max revenue of whatever is left.

People say this like it's a bad thing, but without "vulture capitalists", struggling companies would default and banks would attempt to do the same, except they are much worse at it and even more people would lose their jobs.


I am kinda the same only I'm not clear how the author describes useful. Being useful to my team, my employer my clients is ok but a lot of my career has been building software for businesses I did not understand and sometimes actively disliked. I'm unofficially retired after 25+ years in industry and look back at a spotty record of building anything lasting and positive. I had plenty of great teams and received praise for being effective at delivery but honestly it feels hollow in retrospect.

There's no indication government is behind this and given that Google is rolling out tools now to protect against it this was probably always doable and just never prioritized.

That's a just incredibly naive.

It's observable facts. They are rolling out the features now. So what changed in 2025? Is the present government more liberal than the past? Clearly not. More like this kind of feature will be ignored and irrelevant for 99% of users.

They're not arguing that AI sucks. Only that OpenAI has no hope of meeting it's financial obligations which seems pretty reasonable. And very on brand for Sam Altman. It seems pretty obvious at this point that model training is extremely expensive and affords very little moat. LLMs will continue to improve and gain adoption, but one or more companies will fall by the wayside regardless of their userbase. Google seems pretty clearly to be in pole position at this point as they have massive revenue, data, expertise and their own chips.

I worked in a research lab like 30 years ago and it was all on computers. We had loads of generic data collected by someone somewhere and we just looked for patterns to infer sequences. I wrote Java and C++ and got my name on a paper. There were maybe a dozen scientists in the lab and they were all just coders with expertise in one or another field of biology. It was called a "dry lab".

The promise of small nuclear reactors, modular reactors, thorium or whatever else has really failed to materialize at the same time that solar and battery has just leapfrogged the entire field. Nuclear has some big advantages, but it's still mired in humongous upfront costs and the intractable issue of nuclear waste. And I think we're also about to see an explosion in enhanced geothermal. The good kind of explosion.

What about spam? Spam is absolutely protected free speech. Nobody bats an eye at aggressive censorship of spam. We've had the US Congress pass bills restricting spam. Should we overturn all of that and let the spammers have absolute freedom?

Free speech absolutism is not necessary at all. We can be thoughtful about it. Think about the American criminal justice system and the criminal culpability standard of "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt". We have the concept of being "reasonable" at the core of our justice system for centuries and it works far more often than it fails. And certainly no one has come up with anything better.

I'm also reminded of the last time Matthew Prince was locked in the horns of a free speech issue when there was outcry for Cloudflare to stop platforming Daily Stormer and Kiwi Farms. Sites that were claiming their free speech rights to not only spread hate, but to doxx and threaten and, by extension, chill the speech of people they disliked. Hence, free speech is not unlimited. Some speech restricts the speech of others. And then it is very much the responsibility of regulators to step in and make a judgment.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: