Surely there will be a tipping point when human drivers are considered riskier than AI drivers. It seems far in the future, but it's probably not when you consider all of the human errors made every day.
Not that anyone cares about that, of course, because agency is preferred over outcome.
Also, it's super annoying that now I need multiple addons (bypass-paywalls-clean, ublock origin, and 'i don't care about cookies') just to browse basic blogs these days without jumping through hoops.
This is what gets missed. Self driving cars don't need to be flawless. They just need to be some order of magnitude better than human drivers. And assistive technology is the first step towards using that automation to make driving safer.
This idea that a computer driver should never get in an accident is flawed, IMO. Sure, we don't want "computers killing people" but the very definition of an accident is an unpredictable event and we should be looking at the entire sum/statistics of the industry, not throwing up out hands at every accident. (Not saying we shouldn't learn from each one, disect it and work to do even better, we should do that also.)
And as to those that work around safety measures so they can goof off instead of driving, congrats on the Darwin award, I have zero sympathy for them. Harsh, but c'mon. And they should be charged with a crime if they do that and injure or kill someone else.
Another thing that gets missed is this: With self-driving cars every single fatal accident will be investigated, and the result of that investigation will be used to improve the software on all cars in the network.
In this way the rate at which cars kill people will decline, similar to the systematic decline in airplane deaths over the years.
So maybe it's worth initially accepting a self-driving fatality rate that is slightly above the human-driving rate?
FANG doesn't want you to know how this one weird trick about the unreasonable effectiveness of all you need considered harmful for fun and profit and you will never guess what happened next.
We live in a society where FANG doesn't want you to know how this one weird trick about the unreasonable effectiveness of all you need considered harmful for fun and profit and you will never guess what happened next in my social experiment gone wrong.
Webtorrent is not fully decentralized since webrtc needs signalling servers for each session (you can't even store credentials in a cache and reuse them later) and it doesn't have a DHT since UDP isn't available in browsers.
For a growing percentage of the workplace, knowing that a coworker has a socially unacceptable opinion is creating a hostile work environment.
I completely understand where you're coming from, but you're literally wrong. If you don't want to be shunned from society, don't be identified as someone who does socially unacceptable things.
I'm not super keen on how this is all shaking out either, but it's pretty obvious how to avoid problems at this point.
They aren't literally wrong; we've covered this ground when deciding the role religion plays in society and made some excellent decisions that we don't want to lose.
People who claim to have superior moral principles do not get to enforce them in the workplace. Organisations that rally around moral principles don't get to decide who does and does not enjoy employment.
Intransigent squeaky wheels do not get to decide what "hostile work environment" means. It has to mean hostility in the work environment. If it comes to mean "disagrees with my politics" then society is in for a world of hurt.
"Socially unacceptable" is the litmus test? So, regardless of what the majority of your coworkers think, if you express a contrary opinion that they don't agree is acceptable, you have created a hostile environment.
"If you don't want to be shunned from society, don't be identified as someone who does socially unacceptable things," warned the Holy Inquisition and every Puritan minister.
Now with tables turned, not few people gloat when people complain getting a taste of their own medicine.
While I understand the short term gratification, I find this dangerous long term.
For all the failures of the old norms and methods, at least there was a way to formally abjure your antisocial beliefs and get accepted back into society.
Today not only we didn't yet develop such a code, but we also leave a permanent trace of our past blunders and misplaced allegeances which are now permanently associated with our identity.
Precedents of this scenario create anxiety in a lot of moderate people, most who are even agreeing with the majority of the zeitgeist.
Regular people may not be vocal about it, so we get a perception that now only KKK folks are whining about freedom of speech.
I understand that a growing number of people are confused about what hostile work environment means. That still does not change the meaning as the law defines it, nor should we change it to accommodate those people.
As a practical matter, you'd have to be insane to be espousing very unpopular views under the same name you use for employment.
If I do something outside of work in a public way, and a significant percentage of coworkers find it objectionable, it will shrink my professional network and make building relationships more difficult. Nobody wants to work with someone they find morally repulsive. There's no legal recourse available for this.
Also, from my coworkers' point of view, I'm the one causing the workplace to be unpleasant, and they might start a campaign to have me removed.
From my employer's point of view, I've done some action outside of work that's caused a problem, and now we have a problem at work. That means I've caused a problem at work.
If I can be terminated without legal risk, my employer can terminate me to satisfy the other coworkers.
If I can't be terminated legally, then I can be sidelined, put on a PIP, and eventually forced out of the organization. There's unlikely to be any legal recourse available to me if this is done correctly with good documentation.
Maybe employment shouldn't work this way, but it does.
Yes, as a practical matter, there are many injustices past and present that people put up with for the sake of their own well-being. Unfortunately, the injustices only stop when we stop putting up with them.
I think there are several problems in how things are framed and the language we use. This is important because conflict resolution depends on it.
1) "creating a hostile work environment" means different things to different people which makes it hard to pin down.
2) Person Y claims "Person X made them feel unsafe", which can't be proven since there are no outside witnesses to how people "feel". Maybe I just disliked the person for other reasons and this gave me an opportunity to get at them.
3) People will get offended easily for billions of reasons depending on what their believes are (especially in a heavily polarized society).
4) Solidarity: my friend/coworker who I like claims X makes them feel unsafe so I believe them and stand in solidarity with them because I know them better than I know X. This can easily be turned into "I don't feel safe" in order to get back at them because the moment you have an additional "witness" it will get harder to question the event with every person who says they also feel this way. It becomes safer to just stand with them or to say you weren't there but very risky to stand up for the (alleged) perpetrator.
There is a saying "I can't change what people say, but I can change my reaction and how I feel about them, and whether I allow it to affect me".
If the framing/language requires me to trust that the other party is truthful (but which I don't) then solving the resolving the conflict is impossible.
Personally I dislike the woke movement because I come from a different time where we were told to settle things by ourselves and the person screaming or appealing to the higher authority was not applauded for doing so but considered a coward. This had also many problems but they were not better or worse than what we do today.
When I see my friends bring up their children and protecting them not only from physical harm but also insulating them from the feeling of offense, telling them it's their right never to have a feeling that they don't like and blame the other party the moment they do, so they never experience outrage and how to deal with it - then it becomes clear (to me) why so many kids have turned into idiots. If we then give these people virtual/digital technology and rob them of any real type of social connections and a chance to resolve conflict IRL it's a recipe for exactly this kind of disaster.
In practice, most FE jobs consist of a designer that produces mocks in Figma or InDesign or similar, then you as the engineer take those mocks and make JS+CSS out of it.
As for what the designers do, it's mostly copying ideas from popular apps and tweaking it to appease the product people, who are requesting changes to appease leadership.
At the time, "second screen" was the term I heard used for those types of experience. The only prominent example I can think of these days is kahoot, which is only sort of the same idea.
Ah yes, I'd forgotten about the phrase "second screen". It was going to be big thing until people realized that no one wanted to look at 2 screens at once.
That's not my experience. There's a constant background hum of "what else have I seen him/her in" in my house.
Not so much "lets all talk about this in realtime!" I admit, but there seems to be a subset of people who use Twitter/Reddit like that when watching politics or sports.
I'm one of them, for example eurovision or euro'20 in a few weeks. Memes and stuff it's literally better than watching it. It just become a base to make memes of
I steam clean it (hot water + hot pan + stiff brush), then back on the stove to dry off and apply a light layer of avocado oil.
Leave it shiny on your stove and ready for next use.
The important thing with cast iron is to clean it immediately, before you've started eating. But this is actually pretty easy because steam cleaning is so effective and cast iron is really durable.
It takes about 30 seconds to clean it and rub with oil.
Not that anyone cares about that, of course, because agency is preferred over outcome.
Also, it's super annoying that now I need multiple addons (bypass-paywalls-clean, ublock origin, and 'i don't care about cookies') just to browse basic blogs these days without jumping through hoops.