From the article: "Tesla began delivering the Blade Runner-inspired truck in November 2023"

Me: Fuck you. That is an insult to Syd Mead's legacy.

I hope that, at some point in the series, they reference his prized bottle of Chateau Picard that he's been saving for a special occasion.

It's the Pravda of the VC-centric tech scene and has been for a very very long time.

(I am referencing the Soviet Union implementation thereof, for clarity)

It's never going to bite the hand that feeds it, where people will voting-ring or the owners will just force-edit it to prevent that from happening. Outside of that, sometimes it might say something useful. The problem is that today's problems are not because of a lack of advanced mathematics understanding or new programming languages.

I mean, I think he's a textbook example of why not to do drugs and why we need to eat the rich, but I can understand the logic here.

When you navigate a car as a human, you are using vision, not LIDAR. Outside of a few edge cases, you aren't even using parallax to judge distances. Ergo, a LIDAR is not going to see the text on a sign, the reflective stripes on a truck, etc. And it gets confused differently than the eye, absorbed by different wavelengths, etc. And you can jam LIDAR if you want. Thus, if we were content to wait until the self-driving-car is actually safe before throwing it out into the world, we'd probably want the standard to be that it navigates as well as a human in all situations using only visual sensors.

Except, there's some huge problems that the human visual cortex makes look real easy. Because "all situations" means "understanding that there's a kid playing in the street from visual cues so I'm going to assume they are going to do something dumb" or "some guy put a warning sign on the road and it's got really bad handwriting"

Thus, the real problem is that he's not using LIDAR as harm reduction for a patently unsafe product, where the various failure modes of the LIDAR-equipped self-driving cars show that those aren't safe either.

It's important to realize that the nerd you saw on the news has always been someone wearing nerd as a costume and the entire history of technology is loaded with examples of the real nerd being marginalized. It's just that in ages past the VC's would give a smaller amount of money and require the startup to go through concrete milestones to unlock all of it so there was more of a chance for the founder's dreams to smack up against reality before they were $230m in the hole with no product worth selling.

... you mean the skies are looking Fantastic tonight?

More to the point, the company using shady means to collect the data does not need to care if the data is useful, just that it's marketable.

Yeah, Blucifer has killed and will kill again.

While there is arguably a larger pool of people who you can reach by not having open racism and the CEO whipping his dick out (and mysteriously not slamming it into his Tesla door, even if it is a masterful gambit) you can still get a lot of white men of privilege who are smart and hardworking who don't nominally worry about being on the receiving end of most of the harassment so it's OK as long as they end up part of the winning team because they'll get mega stock bucks at the end. And this does extend to the factory floor, at least people's impressions while joining the factory floor. They wouldn't be an engineer but they'll be a supervisor or something?

It's kinda un-earned? Like, there's stories that people tell each other of questionable veracity? Some set of startups in the days of yore gave their cleaning staff or whatnot options so I think it's become part of the cultural mythos now even if the reality is that the cleaning staff these days is contractors who are mistreated so even if it did actually happen then, it won't happen now.

And, dono, once you've solved the hard problems early on, there's less of that drive to do the truly novel things and so you get more of the people who want to be part of a company that's going to the top and wouldn't mind if they could coast and/or fail upwards along the way.

The problem is that employers tend to presume that they can continue to abuse people going forwards into the future because they've gotten away with it so far. Until they do things like yank offers from new college grads or laying off too many of the professional staff, at which point you've shattered the illusion.

tl;dr: Elon sowing: Haha fuck yeah!!! Yes!!

Elon reaping: Well this fucking sucks. What the fuck.

I always thought Troi should have been more of a goth princess. The real kind, the in-a-black-hoodie-screeching-for-snacks-writing-bad-poetry-on-the-living-room-floor kind, not the dressed-up-for-a-show-in-black-fishnet-and-lace-finery kind.

All things being equal, however, I'd rather they do the version more likely to remove themselves from the gene pool.

Masterful gambit, sir.

You need to control the current going through the LED, either by wasting it as heat (resistor or linear controller) or via switching power supply mechanisms.

Non-intelligent LED strips (where the whole strip is the same color, as opposed to the intelligent kind where each LED can be a different color) are generally not using a resistor per LED because you can use a row of LEDs in series with a single resistor. Generally there's a marking to designate where you can cut such that they've got several LEDs per resistor because each LED is going to be somewhere in the 2-3V range, depending on color.

Strips are a design compromise built around convenience, of course. But there's a lot of engineering compromises here because the switching power supply is going to burn up some energy running things as well.

Manufacturers of finished LED products do make bright LEDs frequently by making a series-parallel array of LED chips on a single substrate such that they've pre-selected similar LEDs. But if you are building your own strips, you can use a constant-current switching supply to run a series of LEDs off of a relatively high voltage, somewhere in the 24v to 48v range, where you'd want to select for a relatively bright individual LED so you don't need to make a bunch of the constant-current switching power supplies.

Yeah, like, we've got a fairly nice sporty-ish sedan that's approaching 300k and since we've only got one car we kinda have to be ready to buy a new one quickly, I've done some of the thought process based on our needs and where we are in life. And the thing is, I like a nice car but I'm unclear on exactly how nice of a car I would actually appreciate driving, given that I don't like to die or hurt other people, so I'm not going to go 3x the speed limit on some backroad and have never gotten a speeding ticket just that the upgrade from a 1.8L engine ecomony-ish sedan to a 2.5L engine sporty-ish sedan did feel real nice.

Meanwhile, one in-law got a Porsche so another in-law on the same side of the family had to trade in his Audi SUV for roughly the same SUV on the Porsche side and it's all some douchebag power fantasy.

But, yeah, I like seeing actual-car-persons nerd out because I know enough to get at what they are nerding out about. Joy is much funner than douchebaggery.

There's a lot about the hatred of Bambu that's just sinophobic. Which is too bad because there's plenty of completely rational reasons to avoid Bambu printers.

I have a pile of hobbies and I guess one common thread is obnoxious dude shit. And I say this as a male type person.

3D printing is a weird one because 3D printers are hella good for all kinds of stuff, from the more "femme" coded hobbies to the "dude" hobbies. But somehow the not-male people I know engage with some of the same communities as I do and for some reason I always get a lot more useful answers to my questions. There's a certain aesthetic to homebrew open source 3D printers and it's kinda industrial.

Electronics hackery is worse because it's a lot more "masc" coded. Even software stuff isn't quite as bad because at least there there's been concerted social pressure.

Photography is sad because if I work with a female model I have to go through a whole process for her to make sure that she's going to be safe during our shoot, some of which I didn't even fully realize that was part of the process for a while. And pretty much all of the semi-pro-to-pro experienced models have at least one story and sometimes Names Are Named and it's someone I've met, so I have to be constantly on guard.

Okay, so understanding that Boeing has been shipping airliners that boing instead of fly or have some bolts missing...

My dad was a frustratingly retired aerospace engineer because there was this period of the 90s where we actually did shrink the defense industry until 9/11 and the contractors started figuring out exactly how to "bribe" people. And one of his side complaints is that any aerospace engineer is probably actually good at being a general-purpose mechanical engineer, except that they've generally made the hard stuff actually safe earlier along, but nobody will hire them. His example being fully-automated-digital-engine-controls and fly-by-wire and having three redundant chains.

So, in the aftermath of the whole Toyota throttle-by-wire thing that really didn't go a whole lot of useful ways, I decided to check out his observation and I did some googling to discover a page where some big company was advertising to the auto industry at large their throttle controllers. And they talk about how they were built with "aerospace technologies" to be reliable and safe. And, looking farther along, it seems like that was not actually three redundant chains, just three threads of execution on the same processor.

Oh yeah, and generally any airplane that does have fly-by-wire and FADEC there is going to always be a set of reversion modes and people have to know about them. Obviously some aspects of this are far stricter because a car can just pull over to the side of the road... but also it needs to do that safely. Witness poor Anton Yelchin dying ignominiously because of the digital gear shifter thing on his Jeep.

But, yeah, the underlying problem is that the cultural expectation is to make cars that will go most places containing capabilities that a vehicle might never actually use in its entire service life and require the minimum amount of knowledge and basically zero knowledge above the collective cultural understanding of a car that's only mildly changed since a fully-mechanically-linked control system.

Oh yeah I feel a weird version of this, ugh. See, I'm a big fan of going places and I like complicated mechanical toys and I guess I actually know a lot of deep down details about cars especially after a year or so stint doing car-related tech things, but I'm also an environmentalist who hates cars.

So, like, goofy engine swap projects, actually racing the damn sports car, actually taking the SUV off road to see something cool, details required to engineer a V12 sports car that doesn't spin out, et al are all interesting to me but then literally everything to do with car culture seems like folks who are driving their super-fancy tuned vehicle in a traffic jam wasting gas spouting right wing BS.

Oh, funny, I looked at the photo and was like "Oh, this seems like this one artist who did stuff like that and posted on the Internet but who I lost track of" and then I realized that .. oh, yeah, that's the guy.

As best I can tell, the touchscreen is added at the concept phase by folks who mostly know what's going to make people look at the car and want to buy it, several years before the car hits the market and well before the actual car electronics teams are involved.

So, yeah, car UI/UX sucks right now because we're seeing all of the things added to cars a few years ago in response to Tesla and implemented by people who think that just because they programmed a random car-focused microcontroller back in the day that this means that they understand all of the layers involved in a modern Linux or Android or Windows embedded car electronics unit including layer 8 of the OSI stack (meaning: interfacing with humans)

But, yah, dono. I don't actually have my own car. My spouse got a Mazda a bunch of years ago now and it has actually a pretty good touchscreen interface with physical controls such that if you want to dig into stuff, you can touchscreen but all of the common stuff is switches and knobs. The generation before that had way way too many buttons and it was just gag-me-with-a-spoon. The generation after that removed the touchscreen because the leadership at Mazda decided people were just not to be trusted with a touchscreen and I feel like they went a little too far in the wrong direction. Meanwhile, in airplane cockpit design, they put great pains into having you be able to navigate by touch where necessary such that all of the knobs are differently textured or shaped. And, as I said, I don't actually have my own car, but I have to say that if I did have a car, I'd want it to be designed like that.