The guy will keep spurting "FSD is 2 years away" every year till the statement "a broken clock is right twice a day" becomes true.
Politics - Quarantine Thread
- Thread starter steve841
- Start date
- Status
That's a nice quote.
Not relevant to any of this, but just as a curious thought, Adolf Hitler in Mein Kampf and Goebbels later circulated the thought of a big enough lie that nobody would believe it was made up.
I wonder if driverless Level 5 capable AP2 qualifies.
Last edited:
T34ME
Active Member
Why do you inject politics into a thread about configuration, especially when your post is simply not true? Your post is clearly off topic, shame on the moderators for not moving it.
MitchJi
Trying to learn kindness, patience & forgiveness
The policy in both the Middle East and Korea seems to be let’s go kick a hornets nest without a reason.
His policies on renewable energy seem to be designed to make America obsolete instead of great.
“The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump”: Psychiatrist Dr. Bandy Lee on Growing Mental Health Concerns | Democracy Now!
“There are Thousands of Us”: Mental Health Professionals Warn of Trump’s Increasing Instability | Democracy Now!
We speak with Dr. Bandy Lee, a forensic psychiatrist on the faculty of Yale School of Medicine and an internationally recognized expert on violence. She edited the best-selling book, “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President.”
It’s sad that mental health professionals are required to testify to Congress that trump is missing some of his marbles. That should be as obvious as the facts that he is heartless and a bigot. I take that back. The professional assessment is worse than I thought:
<Snip>
DR. BANDY LEE: And, of course, his decision-making capacity, having such levels of impulsivity, having a loose grip on reality and being so fragile in his ability to cope with ordinary stresses, such as basic criticisms or unflattering news, will tend to unravel, especially in times of heightened stress, such as under the special counsel’s investigations.
<Snip>
DR. BANDY LEE: Well, there’s actually a lot that’s outlined. It’s a reprint of an article that he wrote, I believe for The New Yorker. He outlines very much his interactions and experiences with the president. And he describes, most markedly, this emptiness, this—what he calls a black hole level of self-esteem or self-worth that is missing, whereby he can have all the admiration of the world, all of the successes, and he will—his thirst will never be quenched, because of that intense need. And that is what we’re seeing, over and over.
And what is most concerning for us is that his way of coping with this critical sense of need at every moment, so much, to the point where he cannot think of the past or the future or consequences, his main urgency is to quench the need at the moment. And the way he does this is by burnishing his power, by going to belligerent language or affirming conflicts and others’ sense of the world as a threatening place where you have to be violent.
<Snip>
DR. BANDY LEE: I think the laypersons, the public or lawmakers, would be prone to underestimating the dangers of this president, because most people are used to seeing individuals who are healthy. It’s only professionals who see those who are impaired, day in and day out. And so, the natural tendency will be to interpret what they’re seeing in terms of a normal range, a normal variation of human choices, decision making and behavior. What we are—what we feel pressed to do is to warn about the situation where someone is not acting within normal range, where one is normalizing what is in fact a malignancy in one’s interpretation of reality.
<Snip>
BANDY LEE: So, whereas we would not make a diagnosis without all the information—in fact, it would be irresponsible to do so. And I believe that we basically cannot, until we do a full assessment. But, of course, we have many running hyphotheses in our head, what we call differential diagnoses. And so, we have some hyphotheses as to what might be going on with the president. What we—things that we predicted seven months ago, when we put the book together, have mostly come true.
AMY GOODMAN: Like?
DR. BANDY LEE: That he was worse than he appeared in public, that he would get worse, that he would not be containable, and that—I think around this time people were expecting he would pivot and become more presidential—that all of this would not happen, and in fact his impairment is more deep-seated and would follow a certain course. In other words, with increasing pressures, with evolution of his presidency, that he would grow worse.
<Snip>
Last edited:
lunitiks
Cool James & Black Teacher
MitchJi
Trying to learn kindness, patience & forgiveness
zmarty
Member
Nasty comparison AR
Godwin's law - Wikipedia
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1
You're disgusting. You cheapen and disrespect the experience of millions of Jewish Holocaust victims and simultaneously smear Elon Musk with this analogy. "Mein Kompf"?????! WTF?
@lunitiks Be that as it may, but given what we know of the AP2 suite, doesn't it seem preposterous to think that a driverless AP2 car could drive coast-to-coast and pick you up through remote Summon? Not just that the car technically could do it, but that it could do it without a person inside. It is a very, very big claim that Tesla made - even with all the disclaimers.
It may be hard to fit into this otherwise interesting quote:
Now, it is possible AP2 will be able to do it. But it is still a very big claim. Perhaps that is why it remains a bit hard to be inspired by it by now?
Dude - it's a software problem. Hardware is not even interesting at this point. Put in a board with an upgrade path should more TFLOPS prove necessary (they did) and 360 vision (they did) and you have the hardware needed to self drive at some statistical level of safety. Put in front radar and to add an extra barrier against from devastating and common frontal collisions and the hardware is over. Would rear radar increase confidence of incoming objects from the back? Yes obviously. Nobody has even quantified the crash frequency of Level 5.
Software on the other hand may take years and THAT is what is the interesting and difficult problem. You just sound like a child going on and on and on about hardware suites when the hard problem - traffic logic - is over to your left. Few on this board can speak with any articulateness about the core issues - @verygreen and two or three others . @verygreen provides great info on the code. @jimmy_d clearly has a current working knowledge of deep learning. Their comments are always spot on but notice they are about the details. You're always off in the corner insisting we talk about spinning domes and saying "Go Audi!" "Strong research history! Many years! Tradition! Also look guys Audi says they have Level 3 ready to go were it not for the rules in place . I have my Jr. Explorer badge on SAE Level definitions! They're super important!Organization!" You sounded merely silly until you began bringing up Holocaust literature.
You keep saying "AP2" as though it means something. It doesn't. It's a bunch of cameras and a computer chip. AP2 doesn't do anything just like any other computer doesn't do anything until software is loaded that runs.
The question that matters is "Can artificial neural networks learn to interpret visual scenes reliably enough to recognize objects and plan paths in order to travel public roads at XYZ arbitrary level of MTBF (MTBF defined as hitting something)."
You just sound like such a simpleton. All the evidence we have is improvement over time and yet you continually express evidence-free doubts that XYZ is possibly for software to do - despite the improvement happening in front of your own eyes and despite the continual progress neural netsbare making in the lab and in the field all over the world.
Actually you sound old. Not a simpleton- but old. You sound like a certain brand of very educated old man who came of age decades ago and you still have a hard time wrapping your head around the idea that a software program NOT entirely hard coded by humans can, and likely will, surpass human abilities in certain tasks (if not all tasks). All you have to rest on is a kind of desperate God of the Gaps argument (I can't imagine evolution could do THIS therefore - God!!!!).
I can picture you in a sweater, smoking a pipe by your fire, feeling content imagining highly organized groups of stern white haired men in lab coats and holding clipboards watch Mercedes S Classes tool around a test track. Hanz und Franz affix another gizmo to the car between runs and everyone takes notes again. "Sehr guht" grunts the leader and everyone goes home for a schnitzel and beer until tomorrow.
You just can't handle the idea that new software developments could and are rendering decades of lab work irrelevant - and a bunch of 20-something phd punks in sneakers from Stanford are turning the world upside down again (disclaimer - the theories are much older but no hardware existed to test them decades ago). To make it all the more humiliating these punks are using code that nobody actually UNDERSTANDS.
You sound like Noam Chomsky bitching that Google Translate doesn't follow any identifiable universal grammar rules. It's embarrassing and humiliating to a giant like Chomsky to come to the end of his life and find that his work achieved nothing of practical value and in the end the accomplishments in the real world turn out to largely also be - black boxes.
Last edited:
buttershrimp
Click my signature to Go Mad Max Mode
Good job translating from Russian today... you useless ingrown hair on a walrus taint.
I intended to do no such thing.
I was talking about comms and messaging. The events which I refer to happened in the 1920s and early 1930s, before the atrocities, when it was a question of gaining political power in a Weimar-German democratic process at the time. The people I mentioned were politicians of their time and those were concepts of political messaging of the time.
However, the same idea in comms - the idea of a big lie - certainly could apply to other fields.
The point was not about the persons named, the point was about the concept of using a big lie in comms - and whether or not that could be an effective form of comms (to inspire or to mislead).
It was a response to the contrary idea that a preposterous-enough idea can not be inspiring, which I found appealing too. Still, arguably the big lie of the 1920s Germany was effective in gaining popular support, that can not be discounted either.
Last edited:
Some might even draw parallels between the "big lie" concept and the current populist movements. If you simply make a big enough promise, will many people believe you because it is simply too big to not to believe?
buttershrimp
Click my signature to Go Mad Max Mode
Perhaps when taken that way, I did not intend to invoke "Nazis", though. I pointed out a historical political messaging concept as a potential counter-argument to the quote offered by Leopold Stotch. A preposterous lie can inspire masses.
I'm not sure what I think of the Leopold Stotch quote, I like it personally, or the big lie, which I can see historically unfortunately worked. It is just something to ponder.
What propaganda outlet did you get this nonsense from?
may be I could say this-EV tax credit $7500.00 is save. So many things in life is somehow connected: Roy Moore lost in Alabama sends a big warning to GOP who wants to kill so many things including EV tax credit that mid term election next year will be disaster.......
- Status
Similar threads
