[WindyCityCard]

Holmes has to be held accountable for her crimes.  However I'm reluctant to separate a mother from very young children unless there is no other alternative.  Some people might speculate Holmes would not be a good mother.  I haven't read anything to support that.  The reports I've seen say she is a good mother.  The children should not suffer because of a parent's mistakes.

Yes it sucks for the kids, and they will suffer.  But we don't refrain from sending men (including good fathers) to prison just because they have kids.  The dad seems like he'd be plenty good as a solo parent for a while, despite his questionable choice for a life partner.

[WindyCityCard]

Holmes has to be held accountable for her crimes.  However I'm reluctant to separate a mother from very young children unless there is no other alternative.  Some people might speculate Holmes would not be a good mother.  I haven't read anything to support that.  The reports I've seen say she is a good mother.  The children should not suffer because of a parent's mistakes.

Yes it sucks for the kids, and they will suffer.  But we don't refrain from sending men (including good fathers) to prison just because they have kids.  The dad seems like he'd be plenty good as a solo parent for a while, despite his questionable choice for a life partner.

[lex24]

Holmes has to be held accountable for her crimes.  However I'm reluctant to separate a mother from very young children unless there is no other alternative.  Some people might speculate Holmes would not be a good mother.  I haven't read anything to support that.  The reports I've seen say she is a good mother.  The children should not suffer because of a parent's mistakes.

How many potentially “good mothers“ do you think are in prison for much lesser crimes? Not gonna make the rules based upon whether or not, somebody may be a “good mother”. Particularly given the fact that she apparently decided to become a mother with all this was going on. Which given the fact that she’s probably a sociopath makes certain sense. She’s gonna be exactly where she belongs and her kids will be better off for it.

Quite honestly, if she truly cared “about the children” she wouldn’t have allowed herself to get pregnant, knowing that the odds were very very good that she was going away for a long time. I see it as nothing more than a ploy to gain sympathy and hope for a reduced sentence. And I’m very glad it didn’t wok

[lex24]

Holmes has to be held accountable for her crimes.  However I'm reluctant to separate a mother from very young children unless there is no other alternative.  Some people might speculate Holmes would not be a good mother.  I haven't read anything to support that.  The reports I've seen say she is a good mother.  The children should not suffer because of a parent's mistakes.

How many potentially “good mothers“ do you think are in prison for much lesser crimes? Not gonna make the rules based upon whether or not, somebody may be a “good mother”. Particularly given the fact that she apparently decided to become a mother with all this was going on. Which given the fact that she’s probably a sociopath makes certain sense. She’s gonna be exactly where she belongs and her kids will be better off for it.

Quite honestly, if she truly cared “about the children” she wouldn’t have allowed herself to get pregnant, knowing that the odds were very very good that she was going away for a long time. I see it as nothing more than a ploy to gain sympathy and hope for a reduced sentence. And I’m very glad it didn’t wok

[qwerty49]

Holmes has to be held accountable for her crimes.  However I'm reluctant to separate a mother from very young children unless there is no other alternative.  Some people might speculate Holmes would not be a good mother.  I haven't read anything to support that.  The reports I've seen say she is a good mother.  The children should not suffer because of a parent's mistakes.

How many potentially “good mothers“ do you think are in prison for much lesser crimes?  Not gonna make the rules based upon whether or not, somebody may be a “good mother”. Particularly given the fact that she apparently decided to become a mother with all this was going on. Which given the fact that she’s probably a sociopath makes certain sense. She’s gonna be exactly where she belongs and her kids will be better off for it.

Quite honestly, if she truly cared “about the children” she wouldn’t have allowed herself to get pregnant, knowing that the odds were very very good that she was going away for a long time.  I see it as nothing more than a ploy to gain sympathy and hope for a reduced sentence. And I’m very glad it didn’t work

Somehow I think this is yet another test of whether not justice is truly blind.

[qwerty49]

Holmes has to be held accountable for her crimes.  However I'm reluctant to separate a mother from very young children unless there is no other alternative.  Some people might speculate Holmes would not be a good mother.  I haven't read anything to support that.  The reports I've seen say she is a good mother.  The children should not suffer because of a parent's mistakes.

How many potentially “good mothers“ do you think are in prison for much lesser crimes?  Not gonna make the rules based upon whether or not, somebody may be a “good mother”. Particularly given the fact that she apparently decided to become a mother with all this was going on. Which given the fact that she’s probably a sociopath makes certain sense. She’s gonna be exactly where she belongs and her kids will be better off for it.

Quite honestly, if she truly cared “about the children” she wouldn’t have allowed herself to get pregnant, knowing that the odds were very very good that she was going away for a long time.  I see it as nothing more than a ploy to gain sympathy and hope for a reduced sentence. And I’m very glad it didn’t work

Somehow I think this is yet another test of whether not justice is truly blind.

[Mick]

Some think GM's Cruise is the Theranos of the driverless car industry. Apparently, remote human intervention is required every 2.5 to 5 miles of driving, and they use 1.5 operators for every vehicle. Yikes...

Could Cruise be the Theranos of AI? And is there a dark secret at the core of the entire driverless car industry?

[Mick]

Some think GM's Cruise is the Theranos of the driverless car industry. Apparently, remote human intervention is required every 2.5 to 5 miles of driving, and they use 1.5 operators for every vehicle. Yikes...

Could Cruise be the Theranos of AI? And is there a dark secret at the core of the entire driverless car industry?

[OutsiderFan]

Some think GM's Cruise is the Theranos of the driverless car industry. Apparently, remote human intervention is required every 2.5 to 5 miles of driving, and they use 1.5 operators for every vehicle. Yikes...

Could Cruise be the Theranos of AI? And is there a dark secret at the core of the entire driverless car industry?

The Giants sure covered themselves in glory taking sponsorship money from a dishonest company.

[OutsiderFan]

Some think GM's Cruise is the Theranos of the driverless car industry. Apparently, remote human intervention is required every 2.5 to 5 miles of driving, and they use 1.5 operators for every vehicle. Yikes...

Could Cruise be the Theranos of AI? And is there a dark secret at the core of the entire driverless car industry?

The Giants sure covered themselves in glory taking sponsorship money from a dishonest company.

[82lsju]

Some think GM's Cruise is the Theranos of the driverless car industry. Apparently, remote human intervention is required every 2.5 to 5 miles of driving, and they use 1.5 operators for every vehicle. Yikes...

Could Cruise be the Theranos of AI? And is there a dark secret at the core of the entire driverless car industry?

true self driving cars (level 5) 



are a long way in the future, I'd guess at least 10 years and probably much more

I think some applications will appear sooner, like point-to-point drives by trucks on mostly freeway routes, but true self driving cars that can negotiate city driving in all weather conditions will not happen anytime soon

[82lsju]

Some think GM's Cruise is the Theranos of the driverless car industry. Apparently, remote human intervention is required every 2.5 to 5 miles of driving, and they use 1.5 operators for every vehicle. Yikes...

Could Cruise be the Theranos of AI? And is there a dark secret at the core of the entire driverless car industry?

true self driving cars (level 5) 



are a long way in the future, I'd guess at least 10 years and probably much more

I think some applications will appear sooner, like point-to-point drives by trucks on mostly freeway routes, but true self driving cars that can negotiate city driving in all weather conditions will not happen anytime soon

[cctop]

true self driving cars (level 5) 
are a long way in the future, I'd guess at least 10 years and probably much more

I would say that is pessimistic.

Here in San Francisco Waymo appears to be well ahead of Cruise in driverless technology.

Waymo has been giving driverless taxi rides to paid customers for several months while Cruise removed their vehicles from the city streets after a pedestrian accident. Also I've heard reports of Cruise vehicles circling around city blocks for hours, presumably to pad their "miles driven without an accident" stats.

I don't know how often Waymo requires human intervention but it's certainly less than having a full-time taxi driver sitting in the car.

[cctop]

true self driving cars (level 5) 
are a long way in the future, I'd guess at least 10 years and probably much more

I would say that is pessimistic.

Here in San Francisco Waymo appears to be well ahead of Cruise in driverless technology.

Waymo has been giving driverless taxi rides to paid customers for several months while Cruise removed their vehicles from the city streets after a pedestrian accident. Also I've heard reports of Cruise vehicles circling around city blocks for hours, presumably to pad their "miles driven without an accident" stats.

I don't know how often Waymo requires human intervention but it's certainly less than having a full-time taxi driver sitting in the car.

[Softball Fan]

Some think GM's Cruise is the Theranos of the driverless car industry. Apparently, remote human intervention is required every 2.5 to 5 miles of driving, and they use 1.5 operators for every vehicle. Yikes...

Could Cruise be the Theranos of AI? And is there a dark secret at the core of the entire driverless car industry?

true self driving cars (level 5) 



are a long way in the future, I'd guess at least 10 years and probably much more

I think some applications will appear sooner, like point-to-point drives by trucks on mostly freeway routes, but true self driving cars that can negotiate city driving in all weather conditions will not happen anytime soon

I agree.  My son is a software engineer working on Autopilot at Tesla.  He also says it is at least 10 years away before there is true full self driving in any situation, in any weather, on any road.   He does feel the new generative AI approach has the potential to move things along faster than what was previously expected.

The frustrating thing about these current robo-taxis in San Francisco is they are confined to mapped areas where every road is programmed into their software and they are still having major problems.  If you took them outside the mapped areas they wouldn't know what to do and would come to a stop.  Eventually it will work but still a way to go.

[Softball Fan]

Some think GM's Cruise is the Theranos of the driverless car industry. Apparently, remote human intervention is required every 2.5 to 5 miles of driving, and they use 1.5 operators for every vehicle. Yikes...

Could Cruise be the Theranos of AI? And is there a dark secret at the core of the entire driverless car industry?

true self driving cars (level 5) 



are a long way in the future, I'd guess at least 10 years and probably much more

I think some applications will appear sooner, like point-to-point drives by trucks on mostly freeway routes, but true self driving cars that can negotiate city driving in all weather conditions will not happen anytime soon

I agree.  My son is a software engineer working on Autopilot at Tesla.  He also says it is at least 10 years away before there is true full self driving in any situation, in any weather, on any road.   He does feel the new generative AI approach has the potential to move things along faster than what was previously expected.

The frustrating thing about these current robo-taxis in San Francisco is they are confined to mapped areas where every road is programmed into their software and they are still having major problems.  If you took them outside the mapped areas they wouldn't know what to do and would come to a stop.  Eventually it will work but still a way to go.

[chrisk]

Cruise has suspended the ability of its employees to sell their stock to GM quarterly, while GM reevaluates the operation. Two years ago, GM said Cruise was valued at $30 billion.

---

More troubles in tech. One day after his big speech at APEC, Sam Altman is out as CEO of OpenAI.
The board posted the following:


“Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities. The board no longer has confidence in his ability to continue leading OpenAI,” the blog post read.

All the money floating around tech seems to result in a lot of cutting corners.

[chrisk]

Cruise has suspended the ability of its employees to sell their stock to GM quarterly, while GM reevaluates the operation. Two years ago, GM said Cruise was valued at $30 billion.

---

More troubles in tech. One day after his big speech at APEC, Sam Altman is out as CEO of OpenAI.
The board posted the following:


“Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities. The board no longer has confidence in his ability to continue leading OpenAI,” the blog post read.

All the money floating around tech seems to result in a lot of cutting corners.

[82lsju]

Cruise has suspended the ability of its employees to sell their stock to GM quarterly, while GM reevaluates the operation.  Two years ago, GM said Cruise was valued at $30 billion.

---

More troubles in tech.  One day after his big speech at APEC, Sam Altman is out as CEO of OpenAI.
The board posted the following:


“Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities. The board no longer has confidence in his ability to continue leading OpenAI,” the blog post read.

All the money floating around tech seems to result in a lot of cutting corners.

and you have to like the announcement of his departure happening on a Friday afternoon before a holiday week.....

[82lsju]

Cruise has suspended the ability of its employees to sell their stock to GM quarterly, while GM reevaluates the operation.  Two years ago, GM said Cruise was valued at $30 billion.

---

More troubles in tech.  One day after his big speech at APEC, Sam Altman is out as CEO of OpenAI.
The board posted the following:


“Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities. The board no longer has confidence in his ability to continue leading OpenAI,” the blog post read.

All the money floating around tech seems to result in a lot of cutting corners.

and you have to like the announcement of his departure happening on a Friday afternoon before a holiday week.....

[chrisk]

Holmes dropped out of Stanford in 2004 and Altman dropped out the following year.

[chrisk]

Holmes dropped out of Stanford in 2004 and Altman dropped out the following year.

[82lsju]

Cruise has suspended the ability of its employees to sell their stock to GM quarterly, while GM reevaluates the operation.  Two years ago, GM said Cruise was valued at $30 billion.

---

More troubles in tech.  One day after his big speech at APEC, Sam Altman is out as CEO of OpenAI.
The board posted the following:


“Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities. The board no longer has confidence in his ability to continue leading OpenAI,” the blog post read.

All the money floating around tech seems to result in a lot of cutting corners.

and you have to like the announcement of his departure happening on a Friday afternoon before a holiday week.....

the second of three co-founder quits...(MIT and Harvard dropout)

Hours after OpenAI announced the departure of CEO and co-founder Sam Altman, fellow co-founder and former chair Greg Brockman announced, “based on today’s news, i quit.”

https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/17/2396...an-leaving

[82lsju]

Cruise has suspended the ability of its employees to sell their stock to GM quarterly, while GM reevaluates the operation.  Two years ago, GM said Cruise was valued at $30 billion.

---

More troubles in tech.  One day after his big speech at APEC, Sam Altman is out as CEO of OpenAI.
The board posted the following:


“Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities. The board no longer has confidence in his ability to continue leading OpenAI,” the blog post read.

All the money floating around tech seems to result in a lot of cutting corners.

and you have to like the announcement of his departure happening on a Friday afternoon before a holiday week.....

the second of three co-founder quits...(MIT and Harvard dropout)

Hours after OpenAI announced the departure of CEO and co-founder Sam Altman, fellow co-founder and former chair Greg Brockman announced, “based on today’s news, i quit.”

https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/17/2396...an-leaving

[Mick]

Holmes dropped out of Stanford in 2004 and Altman dropped out the following year.

In late 2022, Elizabeth Holmes was sentenced to 11 years and three months in prison which originally indicated a release date of December 29, 2034. She's cut two years and four months off of her sentence in two separate tranches and her release date is now August 16, 2032:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/11/tech/eliz...index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/07/tech/eliz...end_recirc

[Mick]

Holmes dropped out of Stanford in 2004 and Altman dropped out the following year.

In late 2022, Elizabeth Holmes was sentenced to 11 years and three months in prison which originally indicated a release date of December 29, 2034. She's cut two years and four months off of her sentence in two separate tranches and her release date is now August 16, 2032:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/11/tech/eliz...index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/07/tech/eliz...end_recirc

[BostonCard]

Ironically, she may have been ahead of her time (WSJ article, but it should be “gifted”)

https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/fi..._permalink

Theranos has “always been a two-edged sword in that it put a stain on the integrity of the industry that I don’t think will ever go away,” said Eric Olson, founder and chairman of Babson. “And at the same time, it awoke the idea that things can be different.”

BC

---

And since I am looking at the WSJ, here’s a subscribers only video about flaws in Tesla’s autopilot system.

https://www.wsj.com/video/series/tesla-a...jem10point

The TL;DR version is that because Tesla relies on cameras instead of RADAR and LIDAR for autopilot, it runs into issues when it detects something that it is not trained on.  I think it is compounded by Musk’s salesmanship and branding of some features as “full self-driving” which messages to drivers that it is a higher level of autonomy than it actually is.

BC

[BostonCard]

Ironically, she may have been ahead of her time (WSJ article, but it should be “gifted”)

https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/fi..._permalink

Theranos has “always been a two-edged sword in that it put a stain on the integrity of the industry that I don’t think will ever go away,” said Eric Olson, founder and chairman of Babson. “And at the same time, it awoke the idea that things can be different.”

BC

---

And since I am looking at the WSJ, here’s a subscribers only video about flaws in Tesla’s autopilot system.

https://www.wsj.com/video/series/tesla-a...jem10point

The TL;DR version is that because Tesla relies on cameras instead of RADAR and LIDAR for autopilot, it runs into issues when it detects something that it is not trained on.  I think it is compounded by Musk’s salesmanship and branding of some features as “full self-driving” which messages to drivers that it is a higher level of autonomy than it actually is.

BC

[bbm233]

---

And since I am looking at the WSJ, here’s a subscribers only video about flaws in Tesla’s autopilot system.

https://www.wsj.com/video/series/tesla-a...jem10point

The TL;DR version is that because Tesla relies on cameras instead of RADAR and LIDAR for autopilot, it runs into issues when it detects something that it is not trained on.  I think it is compounded by Musk’s salesmanship and branding of some features as “full self-driving” which messages to drivers that it is a higher level of autonomy than it actually is.

BC

The best money I never spent was declining the full self driving option when I bought my Tesla 7 years ago. I think most other manufacturers have already matched what Tesla was doing well with cameras, and I haven't seen any indication that Tesla has made much progress to get to full self driving. My battery will wear out before that feature is released...

Regarding Theranos ... the idea always had merit but that doesn't excuse the fraud. We are certainly on the verge of being able to diagnose many, many diseases through the combination of AI/computer modeling and simple tests. Diabetes screening at your eye exam? Yep, coming. Accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's through a simple blood test? Yep, coming. Send some toilet paper in for colon cancer screening? Yep, already here. And best of all, highly effective cancer vaccines (see Moderna's work on melanoma, for instance). We're all going to live to 100...

[bbm233]

---

And since I am looking at the WSJ, here’s a subscribers only video about flaws in Tesla’s autopilot system.

https://www.wsj.com/video/series/tesla-a...jem10point

The TL;DR version is that because Tesla relies on cameras instead of RADAR and LIDAR for autopilot, it runs into issues when it detects something that it is not trained on.  I think it is compounded by Musk’s salesmanship and branding of some features as “full self-driving” which messages to drivers that it is a higher level of autonomy than it actually is.

BC

The best money I never spent was declining the full self driving option when I bought my Tesla 7 years ago. I think most other manufacturers have already matched what Tesla was doing well with cameras, and I haven't seen any indication that Tesla has made much progress to get to full self driving. My battery will wear out before that feature is released...

Regarding Theranos ... the idea always had merit but that doesn't excuse the fraud. We are certainly on the verge of being able to diagnose many, many diseases through the combination of AI/computer modeling and simple tests. Diabetes screening at your eye exam? Yep, coming. Accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's through a simple blood test? Yep, coming. Send some toilet paper in for colon cancer screening? Yep, already here. And best of all, highly effective cancer vaccines (see Moderna's work on melanoma, for instance). We're all going to live to 100...

[Goose]

Regarding Theranos ... the idea always had merit but that doesn't excuse the fraud. We are certainly on the verge of being able to diagnose many, many diseases through the combination of AI/computer modeling and simple tests. Diabetes screening at your eye exam? Yep, coming. Accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's through a simple blood test? Yep, coming. Send some toilet paper in for colon cancer screening? Yep, already here. And best of all, highly effective cancer vaccines (see Moderna's work on melanoma, for instance). We're all going to live to 100...

No we won't. Many of us will be killed by "self-driving" vehicles equipped with AI to minimize their travel distance :-).

[Goose]

Regarding Theranos ... the idea always had merit but that doesn't excuse the fraud. We are certainly on the verge of being able to diagnose many, many diseases through the combination of AI/computer modeling and simple tests. Diabetes screening at your eye exam? Yep, coming. Accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's through a simple blood test? Yep, coming. Send some toilet paper in for colon cancer screening? Yep, already here. And best of all, highly effective cancer vaccines (see Moderna's work on melanoma, for instance). We're all going to live to 100...

No we won't. Many of us will be killed by "self-driving" vehicles equipped with AI to minimize their travel distance :-).

[BostonCard]

1722372998[/url]']


Regarding Theranos ... the idea always had merit but that doesn't excuse the fraud. We are certainly on the verge of being able to diagnose many, many diseases through the combination of AI/computer modeling and simple tests. Diabetes screening at your eye exam? Yep, coming. Accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's through a simple blood test? Yep, coming. Send some toilet paper in for colon cancer screening? Yep, already here. And best of all, highly effective cancer vaccines (see Moderna's work on melanoma, for instance). We're all going to live to 100...

Just yesterday, the FDA approved a blood test to screen for colon cancer (so you don’t even need to collect poo to send).  Basically, the test looks for mutated DNA from the tumor or polyp that leaks into circulation.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-ne...rcna163630

Still not as accurate as a colonoscopy for screening, but some people are squeamish about them, and for others it might carry higher risks, so it is good to have options.

BC

[BostonCard]

1722372998[/url]']


Regarding Theranos ... the idea always had merit but that doesn't excuse the fraud. We are certainly on the verge of being able to diagnose many, many diseases through the combination of AI/computer modeling and simple tests. Diabetes screening at your eye exam? Yep, coming. Accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's through a simple blood test? Yep, coming. Send some toilet paper in for colon cancer screening? Yep, already here. And best of all, highly effective cancer vaccines (see Moderna's work on melanoma, for instance). We're all going to live to 100...

Just yesterday, the FDA approved a blood test to screen for colon cancer (so you don’t even need to collect poo to send).  Basically, the test looks for mutated DNA from the tumor or polyp that leaks into circulation.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-ne...rcna163630

Still not as accurate as a colonoscopy for screening, but some people are squeamish about them, and for others it might carry higher risks, so it is good to have options.

BC

[MV72018]

---

And since I am looking at the WSJ, here’s a subscribers only video about flaws in Tesla’s autopilot system.

https://www.wsj.com/video/series/tesla-a...jem10point

The TL;DR version is that because Tesla relies on cameras instead of RADAR and LIDAR for autopilot, it runs into issues when it detects something that it is not trained on.  I think it is compounded by Musk’s salesmanship and branding of some features as “full self-driving” which messages to drivers that it is a higher level of autonomy than it actually is.

BC

The best money I never spent was declining the full self driving option when I bought my Tesla 7 years ago. I think most other manufacturers have already matched what Tesla was doing well with cameras, and I haven't seen any indication that Tesla has made much progress to get to full self driving. My battery will wear out before that feature is released...

Regarding Theranos ... the idea always had merit but that doesn't excuse the fraud. We are certainly on the verge of being able to diagnose many, many diseases through the combination of AI/computer modeling and simple tests. Diabetes screening at your eye exam? Yep, coming. Accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's through a simple blood test? Yep, coming. Send some toilet paper in for colon cancer screening? Yep, already here. And best of all, highly effective cancer vaccines (see Moderna's work on melanoma, for instance). We're all going to live to 100...

That last claim seems to me to be false. "We're" NOT "all going to live to 100." It is highly likely that millions of our fellow citizens (and those in other countries) will continue to lack the economic resources to gain access to cutting edge medical care (including diagnostic tests, care before and after delivery of the curative treatment, and follow-up besides the curative care itself). The fact that one can introduce a new technology into a society, including a democratic-capitalist one with very expensive medical care, does not imply or guarantee that that technology will be accessed, immediately, soon, or eventually, by all citizens of that society. Belief that it does has a name: "technological determinism," a belief which recurs and has yet to die off.

[MV72018]

---

And since I am looking at the WSJ, here’s a subscribers only video about flaws in Tesla’s autopilot system.

https://www.wsj.com/video/series/tesla-a...jem10point

The TL;DR version is that because Tesla relies on cameras instead of RADAR and LIDAR for autopilot, it runs into issues when it detects something that it is not trained on.  I think it is compounded by Musk’s salesmanship and branding of some features as “full self-driving” which messages to drivers that it is a higher level of autonomy than it actually is.

BC

The best money I never spent was declining the full self driving option when I bought my Tesla 7 years ago. I think most other manufacturers have already matched what Tesla was doing well with cameras, and I haven't seen any indication that Tesla has made much progress to get to full self driving. My battery will wear out before that feature is released...

Regarding Theranos ... the idea always had merit but that doesn't excuse the fraud. We are certainly on the verge of being able to diagnose many, many diseases through the combination of AI/computer modeling and simple tests. Diabetes screening at your eye exam? Yep, coming. Accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's through a simple blood test? Yep, coming. Send some toilet paper in for colon cancer screening? Yep, already here. And best of all, highly effective cancer vaccines (see Moderna's work on melanoma, for instance). We're all going to live to 100...

That last claim seems to me to be false. "We're" NOT "all going to live to 100." It is highly likely that millions of our fellow citizens (and those in other countries) will continue to lack the economic resources to gain access to cutting edge medical care (including diagnostic tests, care before and after delivery of the curative treatment, and follow-up besides the curative care itself). The fact that one can introduce a new technology into a society, including a democratic-capitalist one with very expensive medical care, does not imply or guarantee that that technology will be accessed, immediately, soon, or eventually, by all citizens of that society. Belief that it does has a name: "technological determinism," a belief which recurs and has yet to die off.

[Mick]

---

And since I am looking at the WSJ, here’s a subscribers only video about flaws in Tesla’s autopilot system.

https://www.wsj.com/video/series/tesla-a...jem10point

The TL;DR version is that because Tesla relies on cameras instead of RADAR and LIDAR for autopilot, it runs into issues when it detects something that it is not trained on.  I think it is compounded by Musk’s salesmanship and branding of some features as “full self-driving” which messages to drivers that it is a higher level of autonomy than it actually is.

BC

The best money I never spent was declining the full self driving option when I bought my Tesla 7 years ago. I think most other manufacturers have already matched what Tesla was doing well with cameras, and I haven't seen any indication that Tesla has made much progress to get to full self driving. My battery will wear out before that feature is released...

Regarding Theranos ... the idea always had merit but that doesn't excuse the fraud. We are certainly on the verge of being able to diagnose many, many diseases through the combination of AI/computer modeling and simple tests. Diabetes screening at your eye exam? Yep, coming. Accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's through a simple blood test? Yep, coming. Send some toilet paper in for colon cancer screening? Yep, already here. And best of all, highly effective cancer vaccines (see Moderna's work on melanoma, for instance). We're all going to live to 100...

That last claim seems to me to be false. "We're" NOT "all going to live to 100." It is highly likely that millions of our fellow citizens (and those in other countries) will continue to lack the economic resources to gain access to cutting edge medical care (including diagnostic tests, care before and after delivery of the curative treatment, and follow-up besides the curative care itself). The fact that one can introduce a new technology into a society, including a democratic-capitalist one with very expensive medical care, does not imply or guarantee that that technology will be accessed, immediately, soon, or eventually, by all citizens of that society. Belief that it does has a name: "technological determinism," a belief which recurs and has yet to die off.

Given how my not-quite-a-carcass feels at 61, I'm pretty sure I don't want to live to see 100...

[Mick]

---

And since I am looking at the WSJ, here’s a subscribers only video about flaws in Tesla’s autopilot system.

https://www.wsj.com/video/series/tesla-a...jem10point

The TL;DR version is that because Tesla relies on cameras instead of RADAR and LIDAR for autopilot, it runs into issues when it detects something that it is not trained on.  I think it is compounded by Musk’s salesmanship and branding of some features as “full self-driving” which messages to drivers that it is a higher level of autonomy than it actually is.

BC

The best money I never spent was declining the full self driving option when I bought my Tesla 7 years ago. I think most other manufacturers have already matched what Tesla was doing well with cameras, and I haven't seen any indication that Tesla has made much progress to get to full self driving. My battery will wear out before that feature is released...

Regarding Theranos ... the idea always had merit but that doesn't excuse the fraud. We are certainly on the verge of being able to diagnose many, many diseases through the combination of AI/computer modeling and simple tests. Diabetes screening at your eye exam? Yep, coming. Accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's through a simple blood test? Yep, coming. Send some toilet paper in for colon cancer screening? Yep, already here. And best of all, highly effective cancer vaccines (see Moderna's work on melanoma, for instance). We're all going to live to 100...

That last claim seems to me to be false. "We're" NOT "all going to live to 100." It is highly likely that millions of our fellow citizens (and those in other countries) will continue to lack the economic resources to gain access to cutting edge medical care (including diagnostic tests, care before and after delivery of the curative treatment, and follow-up besides the curative care itself). The fact that one can introduce a new technology into a society, including a democratic-capitalist one with very expensive medical care, does not imply or guarantee that that technology will be accessed, immediately, soon, or eventually, by all citizens of that society. Belief that it does has a name: "technological determinism," a belief which recurs and has yet to die off.

Given how my not-quite-a-carcass feels at 61, I'm pretty sure I don't want to live to see 100...

[cardcrimson]

---

And since I am looking at the WSJ, here’s a subscribers only video about flaws in Tesla’s autopilot system.

https://www.wsj.com/video/series/tesla-a...jem10point

The TL;DR version is that because Tesla relies on cameras instead of RADAR and LIDAR for autopilot, it runs into issues when it detects something that it is not trained on.  I think it is compounded by Musk’s salesmanship and branding of some features as “full self-driving” which messages to drivers that it is a higher level of autonomy than it actually is.

BC

The best money I never spent was declining the full self driving option when I bought my Tesla 7 years ago. I think most other manufacturers have already matched what Tesla was doing well with cameras, and I haven't seen any indication that Tesla has made much progress to get to full self driving. My battery will wear out before that feature is released...

Regarding Theranos ... the idea always had merit but that doesn't excuse the fraud. We are certainly on the verge of being able to diagnose many, many diseases through the combination of AI/computer modeling and simple tests. Diabetes screening at your eye exam? Yep, coming. Accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's through a simple blood test? Yep, coming. Send some toilet paper in for colon cancer screening? Yep, already here. And best of all, highly effective cancer vaccines (see Moderna's work on melanoma, for instance). We're all going to live to 100...

That last claim seems to me to be false. "We're" NOT "all going to live to 100." It is highly likely that millions of our fellow citizens (and those in other countries) will continue to lack the economic resources to gain access to cutting edge medical care (including diagnostic tests, care before and after delivery of the curative treatment, and follow-up besides the curative care itself). The fact that one can introduce a new technology into a society, including a democratic-capitalist one with very expensive medical care, does not imply or guarantee that that technology will be accessed, immediately, soon, or eventually, by all citizens of that society. Belief that it does has a name: "technological determinism," a belief which recurs and has yet to die off.

In his favorite work, The Last Question, Issac Asimov explored AI well before it was coined, and in fact before computers were really capable of much of anything. It's a quick read, and apropos of the discussion, I think.

https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~gamvrosi/thelastq.html

[cardcrimson]

---

And since I am looking at the WSJ, here’s a subscribers only video about flaws in Tesla’s autopilot system.

https://www.wsj.com/video/series/tesla-a...jem10point

The TL;DR version is that because Tesla relies on cameras instead of RADAR and LIDAR for autopilot, it runs into issues when it detects something that it is not trained on.  I think it is compounded by Musk’s salesmanship and branding of some features as “full self-driving” which messages to drivers that it is a higher level of autonomy than it actually is.

BC

The best money I never spent was declining the full self driving option when I bought my Tesla 7 years ago. I think most other manufacturers have already matched what Tesla was doing well with cameras, and I haven't seen any indication that Tesla has made much progress to get to full self driving. My battery will wear out before that feature is released...

Regarding Theranos ... the idea always had merit but that doesn't excuse the fraud. We are certainly on the verge of being able to diagnose many, many diseases through the combination of AI/computer modeling and simple tests. Diabetes screening at your eye exam? Yep, coming. Accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer's through a simple blood test? Yep, coming. Send some toilet paper in for colon cancer screening? Yep, already here. And best of all, highly effective cancer vaccines (see Moderna's work on melanoma, for instance). We're all going to live to 100...

That last claim seems to me to be false. "We're" NOT "all going to live to 100." It is highly likely that millions of our fellow citizens (and those in other countries) will continue to lack the economic resources to gain access to cutting edge medical care (including diagnostic tests, care before and after delivery of the curative treatment, and follow-up besides the curative care itself). The fact that one can introduce a new technology into a society, including a democratic-capitalist one with very expensive medical care, does not imply or guarantee that that technology will be accessed, immediately, soon, or eventually, by all citizens of that society. Belief that it does has a name: "technological determinism," a belief which recurs and has yet to die off.

In his favorite work, The Last Question, Issac Asimov explored AI well before it was coined, and in fact before computers were really capable of much of anything. It's a quick read, and apropos of the discussion, I think.

https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~gamvrosi/thelastq.html