Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
In other areas, AI has led to striking advances. Voice recognition, for example, has come on enormously over the last couple of decades, as has machine translation.
Agreed. First generation Siri was absolutely useless in my opinion. Overhyped garbage. But now I regularly while driving or in some other situations eg control my music or do other things by speaking to my phone.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
In other areas, AI has led to striking advances. Voice recognition, for example, has come on enormously over the last couple of decades, as has machine translating.
Indeed, but just as in the 1970s and 1980s, these are much less challenging than the promised domestic robots that would run your house and take care of all functions. The disappointing result for many were mini Tomy robots which would wheel up and down carrying a mug of beer, until they hit unforeseen walls.
You mean we're not going to get Jetson's style Rosie the Robot or flying cars that transform into a briefcase?
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
I think that's way too soon - but equally I agree that people underestimate the progress being made. AI processing is improving at a rate that well outstrips Moore's law, even as the pace of development in conventional chip manufacturing has slowed somewhat. And the available sensors are also improving at a rapid clip, which makes real world visualisation simpler problem. Before the end of the decade is a near certainty, IMO.
These advances are very specific. They don't require integrating the knowledge of Siri with running a household or driving a car many hundreds of miles, to help answer her questions or perform those tasks, for instance.
Really interesting video about how electric cars will interact with classic cars in the future.
TL:DR almost everyone buying an electric car now, is doing it for the tax advantages. Classic cars that drive few miles have almost no effect on CO2 emissions.
Harry is a dreadful old poseur but he's right about classic car values going to the moon.
My 'investment' picks:
E36/E46 M3 (these are already getting rare, if you seen one then buy it) E39/E60 M5 (wish I had one of each) 964 911 (maybe a 3.3S, there is no value left in the RS or Cup cars) Honda S2000 Ferrari F430 (this was peak V8 Ferrari as it was the last one with a gated manual but didn't have a derivative of the 50 year old Dino engine)
1st gen Gallardos are on the move upwards but a) relatively poor aftermarket support (unlike the Porsche and Beemers) and b) Johnson had one so fuck that.
Usual rules: no mods, manual, no sunroof, never red
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
In other areas, AI has led to striking advances. Voice recognition, for example, has come on enormously over the last couple of decades, as has machine translating.
Indeed, but just as in the 1970s and early 1980s, these are much less challenging than the promised domestic robots that would run your house and take care of all functions. The disappointing result for many then was mini Tomy robots which would wheel up and down carrying a mug of beer, until they hit walls.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
But in between, hugely overvalued companies, projects and shares, for instance, are more realistically priced.
Really interesting video about how electric cars will interact with classic cars in the future.
TL:DR almost everyone buying an electric car now, is doing it for the tax advantages. Classic cars that drive few miles have almost no effect on CO2 emissions.
Harry is a dreadful old poseur but he's right about classic car values going to the moon.
My 'investment' picks:
E36/E46 M3 (these are already getting rare, if you seen one then buy it) E39/E60 M5 (wish I had one of each) 964 911 (maybe a 3.3S, there is no value left in the RS or Cup cars) Honda S2000 Ferrari F430 (this was peak V8 Ferrari as it was the last one with a gated manual but didn't have a derivative of the 50 year old Dino engine)
1st gen Gallardos are on the move upwards but a) relatively poor aftermarket support (unlike the Porsche and Beemers) and b) Johnson had one so fuck that.
Usual rules: no mods, manual, no sunroof, never red
The issue with classic cars is going to be how do you get fuel for them once nobody else uses fuel?
Petrol stations will go the way of Kodak film retail and processing shops.
In the last couple of days I've had two 'BT' phone calls, wanting to reset my Broadband service......against which of course BT warns one. When I've said no thank you..... quite politely...... the scammers have become quite abusive. Can't think that's the way to worm their way into ones confidence. Are they getting desperate?
Millwall and QPR players to stand arm-in-arm in 'show of solidarity' before Tuesday's match
It looks like those nasty Millwall fans have won.
That implies there are ‘nice’ Milwall fans.
A really nasty lot. Always have been.
They have certainly always had a reputation, they certainly did when I was a kid 40-50 years ago. "No-one likes us. We don't care".
Why not just require them to once again play to an empty stadium for another couple of months? The lack of reaction by the football authorities or government to this speaks volumes as to why the players need to take a stand in the first place. Nothing but platitudes so far.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
I'm not sure what you mean by longer term, but let's say 50 years for the sake of argument. What do you think we now have that wasn't envisaged 50 years ago? And, conversely, what don't we have that, 50 years ago, people expected we would have?
She/he wants to come and live around my way. All you can hear every day is builders as they crack on with one of n number of house extensions, decking areas, new driveways or patios. Skips all down the street. If there is a recession it aint in the small builders trade.
In the last couple of days I've had two 'BT' phone calls, wanting to reset my Broadband service......against which of course BT warns one. When I've said no thank you..... quite politely...... the scammers have become quite abusive. Can't think that's the way to worm their way into ones confidence. Are they getting desperate?
My new scam call yesterday was a robocall claiming to be from HMRC stating that there was a warrant for my arrest for tax evasion and fraud. Lol, no.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
I'm not sure what you mean by longer term, but let's say 50 years for the sake of argument. What do you think we now have that wasn't envisaged 50 years ago? And, conversely, what don't we have that, 50 years ago, people expected we would have?
The problem is different people 50 years ago had different expectation, but I think in 1970 most people expected a much faster developing space programm, so at least regular visits to the moon with a moon base. Travel has been much slower than was expected. We have no passenger supersonic travel. And many people would have expected widespread personal 3d transport such as jet packs or air taxis.
While the computer networking has developed as well as most people could wish for, things like delivery of products is little better for the consumer than it was 50 years ago (I admit that the behind the scenes logistics for the delivery companies have improved massively).
Also on a tangent, but one that SeanT might find interesting from his travels, a piece from CNN about the huge synthetic drug production in the Golden Triangle of SE Asia:
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
I'm not sure what you mean by longer term, but let's say 50 years for the sake of argument. What do you think we now have that wasn't envisaged 50 years ago? And, conversely, what don't we have that, 50 years ago, people expected we would have?
The problem is different people 50 years ago had different expectation, but I think in 1970 most people expected a much faster developing space programm, so at least regular visits to the moon with a moon base. Travel has been much slower than was expected. We have no passenger supersonic travel. And many people would have expected widespread personal 3d transport such as jet packs or air taxis.
While the computer networking has developed as well as most people could wish for, things like delivery of products is little better for the consumer than it was 50 years ago (I admit that the behind the scenes logistics for the delivery companies have improved massively).
Yes, I was thinking along similar lines. Things like air and space travel, as well as AI (HAL, where are you?) have, I think, fallen a long way short of what people imagined they would be like 50 years ago. I'm rather struggling to come up with any examples to support Nigelb's assertion that people underestimate the long term. Rather the contrary, it seems to me.
Edit: Mind you, the development of a coronavirus vaccine in 9 months flat would probably have surprised us 50 years ago!
It's like the testing, will start out small but get there eventually. Not a worry.
I’d also suggest that even if we had 30 million doses by the end of the year, we’d struggle to use more than 10 to 20% of them. Happy if it’s a decent amount by March tbh.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
I'm not sure what you mean by longer term, but let's say 50 years for the sake of argument. What do you think we now have that wasn't envisaged 50 years ago? And, conversely, what don't we have that, 50 years ago, people expected we would have?
The problem is different people 50 years ago had different expectation, but I think in 1970 most people expected a much faster developing space programm, so at least regular visits to the moon with a moon base. Travel has been much slower than was expected. We have no passenger supersonic travel. And many people would have expected widespread personal 3d transport such as jet packs or air taxis.
While the computer networking has developed as well as most people could wish for, things like delivery of products is little better for the consumer than it was 50 years ago (I admit that the behind the scenes logistics for the delivery companies have improved massively).
Space 1999, made in the mid 70s, is a good example.
Space travel and a moon base.
With a single computer and with people still using typewriters.
Really interesting video about how electric cars will interact with classic cars in the future.
TL:DR almost everyone buying an electric car now, is doing it for the tax advantages. Classic cars that drive few miles have almost no effect on CO2 emissions.
Harry is a dreadful old poseur but he's right about classic car values going to the moon.
My 'investment' picks:
E36/E46 M3 (these are already getting rare, if you seen one then buy it) E39/E60 M5 (wish I had one of each) 964 911 (maybe a 3.3S, there is no value left in the RS or Cup cars) Honda S2000 Ferrari F430 (this was peak V8 Ferrari as it was the last one with a gated manual but didn't have a derivative of the 50 year old Dino engine)
1st gen Gallardos are on the move upwards but a) relatively poor aftermarket support (unlike the Porsche and Beemers) and b) Johnson had one so fuck that.
Usual rules: no mods, manual, no sunroof, never red
The issue with classic cars is going to be how do you get fuel for them once nobody else uses fuel?
Petrol stations will go the way of Kodak film retail and processing shops.
Same way preserved railways still get coal for steam trains.
There will be a niche market for small-scale heritage hydrocarbons for decades to come.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
I'm not sure what you mean by longer term, but let's say 50 years for the sake of argument. What do you think we now have that wasn't envisaged 50 years ago? And, conversely, what don't we have that, 50 years ago, people expected we would have?
The problem is different people 50 years ago had different expectation, but I think in 1970 most people expected a much faster developing space programm, so at least regular visits to the moon with a moon base. Travel has been much slower than was expected. We have no passenger supersonic travel. And many people would have expected widespread personal 3d transport such as jet packs or air taxis.
While the computer networking has developed as well as most people could wish for, things like delivery of products is little better for the consumer than it was 50 years ago (I admit that the behind the scenes logistics for the delivery companies have improved massively).
Interesting discussion. Near-universal internet were not that widely-predicted - I was 21 50 years ago and remember individual PCs being non-existent (my university computer filled a room) and little sense of the coming internet. 10 years later, there were still serious commentators predicting that the internet would only be used by scientists and businesses.
But arguably it's sexual values that have changed most in the west. I was warching Industry last night, and reflected that my parents, who were reasonably open-minded, would have been incredulous that two blokes having sex would be shown fairly graphically on a BBC channel. More generally, the idea that virtually everyone likes to have had lots of varied sexual experiences with different people and marriage is something that comes and goes fairly easily were very much fringe theories then.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
A self-driving car is utterly useless until it can take me to work, then go back empty and take the kids to school, then pick me up from a bar in the evening and deliver me home.
“We have gone from punching above our weight to bragging above our weight,” says a former cabinet minister. “Serious people around the world don’t like braggarts. I get the feeling people are sad for Britain, not angry. They know there are wondrous institutions and people — many want their kids to go to university in the UK — but they view our politicians as lower grade hucksters. Everyone knows Covid has been handled badly; they see Boris Johnson as cut from the Trump cloth but without the power, they think Brexit is being done without a clue. All of them think Britain is in trouble and don’t see where the renewal is coming from.” As for Joe Biden’s incoming White House team, “they all think Johnson behaves like a cad”.
If the trade discussion differences are insurmountable then what was the walk out and return of a few weeks all about ?
The walkout happened because the EU said that they were not going to compromise anymore and it was for the UK to compromise.
The talks resumed when the EU said they could compromise afterall and were willing to start working on a legal text (which they'd refused until then).
However the official policy since walkout, as still maintained on the gov.uk website, is that the UK will be trading on WTO terms from January and business needs to prepare for that.
Really interesting video about how electric cars will interact with classic cars in the future.
TL:DR almost everyone buying an electric car now, is doing it for the tax advantages. Classic cars that drive few miles have almost no effect on CO2 emissions.
Harry is a dreadful old poseur but he's right about classic car values going to the moon.
My 'investment' picks:
E36/E46 M3 (these are already getting rare, if you seen one then buy it) E39/E60 M5 (wish I had one of each) 964 911 (maybe a 3.3S, there is no value left in the RS or Cup cars) Honda S2000 Ferrari F430 (this was peak V8 Ferrari as it was the last one with a gated manual but didn't have a derivative of the 50 year old Dino engine)
1st gen Gallardos are on the move upwards but a) relatively poor aftermarket support (unlike the Porsche and Beemers) and b) Johnson had one so fuck that.
Usual rules: no mods, manual, no sunroof, never red
The issue with classic cars is going to be how do you get fuel for them once nobody else uses fuel?
Petrol stations will go the way of Kodak film retail and processing shops.
Same way preserved railways still get coal for steam trains.
There will be a niche market for small-scale heritage hydrocarbons for decades to come.
You might even get it Amazoned to your door.
I am going to resist to my dying breath Amazon becoming a verb.
If the trade discussion differences are insurmountable then what was the walk out and return of a few weeks all about ?
The walkout happened because the EU said that they were not going to compromise anymore and it was for the UK to compromise.
The talks resumed when the EU said they could compromise afterall and were willing to start working on a legal text (which they'd refused until then).
However the official policy since walkout, as still maintained on the gov.uk website, is that the UK will be trading on WTO terms from January and business needs to prepare for that.
I doubt many businesses have prepared for WTO trade because they think the politicians are playing the usual pantomime and will agree a deal.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
I'm not sure what you mean by longer term, but let's say 50 years for the sake of argument. What do you think we now have that wasn't envisaged 50 years ago? And, conversely, what don't we have that, 50 years ago, people expected we would have?
The problem is different people 50 years ago had different expectation, but I think in 1970 most people expected a much faster developing space programm, so at least regular visits to the moon with a moon base. Travel has been much slower than was expected. We have no passenger supersonic travel. And many people would have expected widespread personal 3d transport such as jet packs or air taxis.
While the computer networking has developed as well as most people could wish for, things like delivery of products is little better for the consumer than it was 50 years ago (I admit that the behind the scenes logistics for the delivery companies have improved massively).
Space 1999, made in the mid 70s, is a good example.
Space travel and a moon base.
With a single computer and with people still using typewriters.
Kubrick's 2001 was a little better - with a fair stab at an Ipad IIRC.
Really interesting video about how electric cars will interact with classic cars in the future.
TL:DR almost everyone buying an electric car now, is doing it for the tax advantages. Classic cars that drive few miles have almost no effect on CO2 emissions.
Harry is a dreadful old poseur but he's right about classic car values going to the moon.
My 'investment' picks:
E36/E46 M3 (these are already getting rare, if you seen one then buy it) E39/E60 M5 (wish I had one of each) 964 911 (maybe a 3.3S, there is no value left in the RS or Cup cars) Honda S2000 Ferrari F430 (this was peak V8 Ferrari as it was the last one with a gated manual but didn't have a derivative of the 50 year old Dino engine)
1st gen Gallardos are on the move upwards but a) relatively poor aftermarket support (unlike the Porsche and Beemers) and b) Johnson had one so fuck that.
Usual rules: no mods, manual, no sunroof, never red
The issue with classic cars is going to be how do you get fuel for them once nobody else uses fuel?
Petrol stations will go the way of Kodak film retail and processing shops.
Same way preserved railways still get coal for steam trains.
There will be a niche market for small-scale heritage hydrocarbons for decades to come.
You might even get it Amazoned to your door.
We have my grandfather's Norton that he raced at Brooklands in 1930s. It runs on methanol and the only place we can get it is from a bloke in Terrington St Clement.
But you're right, a market for this stuff will develop.
If the trade discussion differences are insurmountable then what was the walk out and return of a few weeks all about ?
The walkout happened because the EU said that they were not going to compromise anymore and it was for the UK to compromise.
The talks resumed when the EU said they could compromise afterall and were willing to start working on a legal text (which they'd refused until then).
However the official policy since walkout, as still maintained on the gov.uk website, is that the UK will be trading on WTO terms from January and business needs to prepare for that.
In practice, trading on WTO terms will make many businesses non-viable, so preparing for WTO means winding up the business.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
I'm not sure what you mean by longer term, but let's say 50 years for the sake of argument. What do you think we now have that wasn't envisaged 50 years ago? And, conversely, what don't we have that, 50 years ago, people expected we would have?
The problem is different people 50 years ago had different expectation, but I think in 1970 most people expected a much faster developing space programm, so at least regular visits to the moon with a moon base. Travel has been much slower than was expected. We have no passenger supersonic travel. And many people would have expected widespread personal 3d transport such as jet packs or air taxis.
While the computer networking has developed as well as most people could wish for, things like delivery of products is little better for the consumer than it was 50 years ago (I admit that the behind the scenes logistics for the delivery companies have improved massively).
Interesting discussion. Near-universal internet were not that widely-predicted - I was 21 50 years ago and remember individual PCs being non-existent (my university computer filled a room) and little sense of the coming internet. 10 years later, there were still serious commentators predicting that the internet would only be used by scientists and businesses.
But arguably it's sexual values that have changed most in the west. I was warching Industry last night, and reflected that my parents, who were reasonably open-minded, would have been incredulous that two blokes having sex would be shown fairly graphically on a BBC channel. More generally, the idea that virtually everyone likes to have had lots of varied sexual experiences with different people and marriage is something that comes and goes fairly easily were very much fringe theories then.
I remember a guy who was studying computer science when I was at university (2004) and iplayer was rumoured, rubbishing the idea because there would never be sufficient data bandwidth for people to stream video into their homes. Very smart guy, now making big bucks at Google, but he couldn't comprehend, despite having expertise in the area, the massive advances in both bandwidth in residential networks and improvements in video compression. Must tease him about that... iPlayer launched the following year.
I actually thought it probably would be possible, but only because in a physics lecture the year before we'd worked through the bandwidth savings of a digital TV signal compared to analogue and that kind of mind boggling efficiency advance made me realise that huge changes can happen quite quickly. My lack of understanding of the difficulty of the task made me more confident it could happen than someone with much more expertise.
“We have gone from punching above our weight to bragging above our weight,” says a former cabinet minister. “Serious people around the world don’t like braggarts. I get the feeling people are sad for Britain, not angry. They know there are wondrous institutions and people — many want their kids to go to university in the UK — but they view our politicians as lower grade hucksters. Everyone knows Covid has been handled badly; they see Boris Johnson as cut from the Trump cloth but without the power, they think Brexit is being done without a clue. All of them think Britain is in trouble and don’t see where the renewal is coming from.” As for Joe Biden’s incoming White House team, “they all think Johnson behaves like a cad”.
If nations see the value of the UK they will continue to deal with it even if our politicians are crappy. This is just another whinge which vastly overstates the impact of perception of individuals.
If the trade discussion differences are insurmountable then what was the walk out and return of a few weeks all about ?
The walkout happened because the EU said that they were not going to compromise anymore and it was for the UK to compromise.
The talks resumed when the EU said they could compromise afterall and were willing to start working on a legal text (which they'd refused until then).
However the official policy since walkout, as still maintained on the gov.uk website, is that the UK will be trading on WTO terms from January and business needs to prepare for that.
In practice, trading on WTO terms will make many businesses non-viable, so preparing for WTO means winding up the business.
We currently export 19% of our exports to the USA, so more than the 13% proportion of the global economy of all those nations combined so no we would not.
However unless Boris scraps the internal markets bill or gets a trade deal with the EU to minimise its impact we are unlikely to get a trade deal with the Biden administration anyway
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
I'm not sure what you mean by longer term, but let's say 50 years for the sake of argument. What do you think we now have that wasn't envisaged 50 years ago? And, conversely, what don't we have that, 50 years ago, people expected we would have?
If nations see the value of the UK they will continue to deal with it even if our politicians are crappy. This is just another whinge which vastly overstates the impact of perception of individuals.
The whole point is the value of the UK is perceived through our politicians.
BoZo is prepared to rip up a deal he signed last year. His Government is prepared to break International law.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
I'm not sure what you mean by longer term, but let's say 50 years for the sake of argument. What do you think we now have that wasn't envisaged 50 years ago? And, conversely, what don't we have that, 50 years ago, people expected we would have?
The problem is different people 50 years ago had different expectation, but I think in 1970 most people expected a much faster developing space programm, so at least regular visits to the moon with a moon base. Travel has been much slower than was expected. We have no passenger supersonic travel. And many people would have expected widespread personal 3d transport such as jet packs or air taxis.
While the computer networking has developed as well as most people could wish for, things like delivery of products is little better for the consumer than it was 50 years ago (I admit that the behind the scenes logistics for the delivery companies have improved massively).
Interesting discussion. Near-universal internet were not that widely-predicted - I was 21 50 years ago and remember individual PCs being non-existent (my university computer filled a room) and little sense of the coming internet. 10 years later, there were still serious commentators predicting that the internet would only be used by scientists and businesses.
But arguably it's sexual values that have changed most in the west. I was warching Industry last night, and reflected that my parents, who were reasonably open-minded, would have been incredulous that two blokes having sex would be shown fairly graphically on a BBC channel. More generally, the idea that virtually everyone likes to have had lots of varied sexual experiences with different people and marriage is something that comes and goes fairly easily were very much fringe theories then.
I remember a guy who was studying computer science when I was at university (2004) and iplayer was rumoured, rubbishing the idea because there would never be sufficient data bandwidth for people to stream video into their homes. Very smart guy, now making big bucks at Google, but he couldn't comprehend, despite having expertise in the area, the massive advances in both bandwidth in residential networks and improvements in video compression. Must tease him about that... iPlayer launched the following year.
I actually thought it probably would be possible, but only because in a physics lecture the year before we'd worked through the bandwidth savings of a digital TV signal compared to analogue and that kind of mind boggling efficiency advance made me realise that huge changes can happen quite quickly. My lack of understanding of the difficulty of the task made me more confident it could happen than someone with much more expertise.
I think (and hope) that the electric car and renewables revolution will happen quicker than currently expected.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
I'm not sure what you mean by longer term, but let's say 50 years for the sake of argument. What do you think we now have that wasn't envisaged 50 years ago? And, conversely, what don't we have that, 50 years ago, people expected we would have?
The problem is different people 50 years ago had different expectation, but I think in 1970 most people expected a much faster developing space programm, so at least regular visits to the moon with a moon base. Travel has been much slower than was expected. We have no passenger supersonic travel. And many people would have expected widespread personal 3d transport such as jet packs or air taxis.
While the computer networking has developed as well as most people could wish for, things like delivery of products is little better for the consumer than it was 50 years ago (I admit that the behind the scenes logistics for the delivery companies have improved massively).
Interesting discussion. Near-universal internet were not that widely-predicted - I was 21 50 years ago and remember individual PCs being non-existent (my university computer filled a room) and little sense of the coming internet. 10 years later, there were still serious commentators predicting that the internet would only be used by scientists and businesses.
But arguably it's sexual values that have changed most in the west. I was warching Industry last night, and reflected that my parents, who were reasonably open-minded, would have been incredulous that two blokes having sex would be shown fairly graphically on a BBC channel. More generally, the idea that virtually everyone likes to have had lots of varied sexual experiences with different people and marriage is something that comes and goes fairly easily were very much fringe theories then.
I remember a guy who was studying computer science when I was at university (2004) and iplayer was rumoured, rubbishing the idea because there would never be sufficient data bandwidth for people to stream video into their homes. Very smart guy, now making big bucks at Google, but he couldn't comprehend, despite having expertise in the area, the massive advances in both bandwidth in residential networks and improvements in video compression. Must tease him about that... iPlayer launched the following year.
I actually thought it probably would be possible, but only because in a physics lecture the year before we'd worked through the bandwidth savings of a digital TV signal compared to analogue and that kind of mind boggling efficiency advance made me realise that huge changes can happen quite quickly. My lack of understanding of the difficulty of the task made me more confident it could happen than someone with much more expertise.
Great story.
People naturally have an element of inertia and its often easier to see reasons why things can't change than reasons why they can.
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
I'm not sure what you mean by longer term, but let's say 50 years for the sake of argument. What do you think we now have that wasn't envisaged 50 years ago? And, conversely, what don't we have that, 50 years ago, people expected we would have?
The problem is different people 50 years ago had different expectation, but I think in 1970 most people expected a much faster developing space programm, so at least regular visits to the moon with a moon base. Travel has been much slower than was expected. We have no passenger supersonic travel. And many people would have expected widespread personal 3d transport such as jet packs or air taxis.
While the computer networking has developed as well as most people could wish for, things like delivery of products is little better for the consumer than it was 50 years ago (I admit that the behind the scenes logistics for the delivery companies have improved massively).
Space 1999, made in the mid 70s, is a good example.
Space travel and a moon base.
With a single computer and with people still using typewriters.
Kubrick's 2001 was a little better - with a fair stab at an Ipad IIRC.
Hitchhikers Guide had a mobile with an internet of sorts.
Traditionally people say it died in 1997. I suspect it was a myth anyway.
Not in Scotland it didn't. The Scots were utterly horrified at the scenes of hysteria being beamed north by the BBC. Though it must have been great if you were a florist in London
If nations see the value of the UK they will continue to deal with it even if our politicians are crappy. This is just another whinge which vastly overstates the impact of perception of individuals.
The whole point is the value of the UK is perceived through our politicians.
BoZo is prepared to rip up a deal he signed last year. His Government is prepared to break International law.
Who wants to sign another deal with him?
Shit happens Scott. We've done it before, we'll do it again.
People around the world are more understanding than you are of the concept of independence and shrug away the EU/UK spats as what they are and not relevant to them. Only days after muppets like you were chorusing to say "who would sign a deal with him now" the Japanese did exactly that. Then the Canadians did.
The wheel of time turns, you need to play catch up or be left behind like a Japanese soldier in the wilderness still fighting the war long after it finished.
Really interesting video about how electric cars will interact with classic cars in the future.
TL:DR almost everyone buying an electric car now, is doing it for the tax advantages. Classic cars that drive few miles have almost no effect on CO2 emissions.
Harry is a dreadful old poseur but he's right about classic car values going to the moon.
My 'investment' picks:
E36/E46 M3 (these are already getting rare, if you seen one then buy it) E39/E60 M5 (wish I had one of each) 964 911 (maybe a 3.3S, there is no value left in the RS or Cup cars) Honda S2000 Ferrari F430 (this was peak V8 Ferrari as it was the last one with a gated manual but didn't have a derivative of the 50 year old Dino engine)
1st gen Gallardos are on the move upwards but a) relatively poor aftermarket support (unlike the Porsche and Beemers) and b) Johnson had one so fuck that.
Usual rules: no mods, manual, no sunroof, never red
The issue with classic cars is going to be how do you get fuel for them once nobody else uses fuel?
Petrol stations will go the way of Kodak film retail and processing shops.
Same way preserved railways still get coal for steam trains.
There will be a niche market for small-scale heritage hydrocarbons for decades to come.
You might even get it Amazoned to your door.
I am going to resist to my dying breath Amazon becoming a verb.
You can pick up a copy of 'my dying breath' by Ben Reed on Amazon for delivery in the next few days, so you may not resist for long
Traditionally people say it died in 1997. I suspect it was a myth anyway.
Not in Scotland it didn't. The Scots were utterly horrified at the scenes of hysteria being beamed north by the BBC. Though it must have been great if you were a florist in London
It died in Scotland too as the scenes at the 2014 referendum of emotionally hysterical Yes voting Nats would have confirmed, the stiff upper lip largely died with the British Empire and the end of the War apart from a few pensioners who remember the war years and a few diehard monarchist Unionists
CBA will employ around 50 people in Amsterdam by June, European director Wilco Hendriks told Dutch financial daily FD, while its London office would remain open with a four times bigger staff.
CBA will employ around 50 people in Amsterdam by June, European director Wilco Hendriks told Dutch financial daily FD, while its London office would remain open with a four times bigger staff.
Not exactly disastrous.
Many companies are doing the same thing. Opening a PO Box HQ in Europe and keeping the work done in London.
As it is 8 December, and there is still some tasty 1.06 -1.08 about re presidential markets, does anyone know what what legal challenges are outstanding which could theoretically change the final ECVs ahead of 14 December?
If nations see the value of the UK they will continue to deal with it even if our politicians are crappy. This is just another whinge which vastly overstates the impact of perception of individuals.
The whole point is the value of the UK is perceived through our politicians.
BoZo is prepared to rip up a deal he signed last year. His Government is prepared to break International law.
Who wants to sign another deal with him?
Shit happens Scott. We've done it before, we'll do it again.
People around the world are more understanding than you are of the concept of independence and shrug away the EU/UK spats as what they are and not relevant to them. Only days after muppets like you were chorusing to say "who would sign a deal with him now" the Japanese did exactly that. Then the Canadians did.
The wheel of time turns, you need to play catch up or be left behind like a Japanese soldier in the wilderness still fighting the war long after it finished.
Traditionally people say it died in 1997. I suspect it was a myth anyway.
Not in Scotland it didn't. The Scots were utterly horrified at the scenes of hysteria being beamed north by the BBC. Though it must have been great if you were a florist in London
It died in Scotland too as the scenes at the 2014 referendum of emotionally hysterical Yes voting Nats would have confirmed, the stiff upper lip largely died with the British Empire and the end of the War apart from a few pensioners who remember the war years and a few diehard monarchist Unionists
Oh, the rioting British nationalists were keeping the stiff upper lip were they?
CBA will employ around 50 people in Amsterdam by June, European director Wilco Hendriks told Dutch financial daily FD, while its London office would remain open with a four times bigger staff.
Not exactly disastrous.
Many companies are doing the same thing. Opening a PO Box HQ in Europe and keeping the work done in London.
Except that's not how it will work, many countries will not allow that, they insist any company holding a banking licence must be a well capitalised company in that country. It is why I posted yesterday a link on why several UK banks are pulling their EU consumer operations for that very reason, with resultant job losses in the UK, and damage to UK GDP.
But you can tell you know more about the financial services sector than say me, who shall be very shortly entering his second decade in the sector.
Really interesting video about how electric cars will interact with classic cars in the future.
TL:DR almost everyone buying an electric car now, is doing it for the tax advantages. Classic cars that drive few miles have almost no effect on CO2 emissions.
Harry is a dreadful old poseur but he's right about classic car values going to the moon.
My 'investment' picks:
E36/E46 M3 (these are already getting rare, if you seen one then buy it) E39/E60 M5 (wish I had one of each) 964 911 (maybe a 3.3S, there is no value left in the RS or Cup cars) Honda S2000 Ferrari F430 (this was peak V8 Ferrari as it was the last one with a gated manual but didn't have a derivative of the 50 year old Dino engine)
1st gen Gallardos are on the move upwards but a) relatively poor aftermarket support (unlike the Porsche and Beemers) and b) Johnson had one so fuck that.
Usual rules: no mods, manual, no sunroof, never red
The issue with classic cars is going to be how do you get fuel for them once nobody else uses fuel?
Petrol stations will go the way of Kodak film retail and processing shops.
Same way preserved railways still get coal for steam trains.
There will be a niche market for small-scale heritage hydrocarbons for decades to come.
You might even get it Amazoned to your door.
I am going to resist to my dying breath Amazon becoming a verb.
Fair, although it might end up being as futile as resisting hoovering.
CBA will employ around 50 people in Amsterdam by June, European director Wilco Hendriks told Dutch financial daily FD, while its London office would remain open with a four times bigger staff.
Not exactly disastrous.
Many companies are doing the same thing. Opening a PO Box HQ in Europe and keeping the work done in London.
CBA will employ around 50 people in Amsterdam by June, European director Wilco Hendriks told Dutch financial daily FD, while its London office would remain open with a four times bigger staff.
Not exactly disastrous.
Many companies are doing the same thing. Opening a PO Box HQ in Europe and keeping the work done in London.
Except that's not how it will work, many countries will not allow that, they insist any company holding a banking licence must be a well capitalised company in that country. It is why I posted yesterday a link on why several UK banks are pulling their EU consumer operations for that very reason, with resultant job losses in the UK, and damage to UK GDP.
But you can tell you know more about the financial services sector than say me, who shall be very shortly entering his second decade in the sector.
Though that is what CBA have said they're doing (not in such terms), 20% of the jobs to Amsterdam, 80% in London.
Have any banks closed down their London operations?
Traditionally people say it died in 1997. I suspect it was a myth anyway.
Not in Scotland it didn't. The Scots were utterly horrified at the scenes of hysteria being beamed north by the BBC. Though it must have been great if you were a florist in London
It died in Scotland too as the scenes at the 2014 referendum of emotionally hysterical Yes voting Nats would have confirmed, the stiff upper lip largely died with the British Empire and the end of the War apart from a few pensioners who remember the war years and a few diehard monarchist Unionists
Oh, the rioting British nationalists were keeping the stiff upper lip were they?
You certainly didn't this level of aggression in 2014 from No campaigners
CBA will employ around 50 people in Amsterdam by June, European director Wilco Hendriks told Dutch financial daily FD, while its London office would remain open with a four times bigger staff.
Not exactly disastrous.
Many companies are doing the same thing. Opening a PO Box HQ in Europe and keeping the work done in London.
Where is the tax paid?
I'm sure they'll do it wherever its most tax efficient to do it.
Traditionally people say it died in 1997. I suspect it was a myth anyway.
Not in Scotland it didn't. The Scots were utterly horrified at the scenes of hysteria being beamed north by the BBC. Though it must have been great if you were a florist in London
It died in Scotland too as the scenes at the 2014 referendum of emotionally hysterical Yes voting Nats would have confirmed, the stiff upper lip largely died with the British Empire and the end of the War apart from a few pensioners who remember the war years and a few diehard monarchist Unionists
Oh, the rioting British nationalists were keeping the stiff upper lip were they?
You certainly didn't this level of aggression in 2014 from No campaigners
Could. I suggest we have a self imposed limit of only posting the same thing three times in any 24 hour period these constant identical postings and individual spats are ruining the debates.
CBA will employ around 50 people in Amsterdam by June, European director Wilco Hendriks told Dutch financial daily FD, while its London office would remain open with a four times bigger staff.
Not exactly disastrous.
Many companies are doing the same thing. Opening a PO Box HQ in Europe and keeping the work done in London.
Except that's not how it will work, many countries will not allow that, they insist any company holding a banking licence must be a well capitalised company in that country. It is why I posted yesterday a link on why several UK banks are pulling their EU consumer operations for that very reason, with resultant job losses in the UK, and damage to UK GDP.
But you can tell you know more about the financial services sector than say me, who shall be very shortly entering his second decade in the sector.
Though that is what CBA have said they're doing (not in such terms), 20% of the jobs to Amsterdam, 80% in London.
Have any banks closed down their London operations?
Yes and a few have pulled their entire UK operations.
If nations see the value of the UK they will continue to deal with it even if our politicians are crappy. This is just another whinge which vastly overstates the impact of perception of individuals.
The whole point is the value of the UK is perceived through our politicians.
BoZo is prepared to rip up a deal he signed last year. His Government is prepared to break International law.
Who wants to sign another deal with him?
The whole point as you put it is crap. Some value perhaps. Its just a self pitying whinge.
Traditionally people say it died in 1997. I suspect it was a myth anyway.
Not in Scotland it didn't. The Scots were utterly horrified at the scenes of hysteria being beamed north by the BBC. Though it must have been great if you were a florist in London
It died in Scotland too as the scenes at the 2014 referendum of emotionally hysterical Yes voting Nats would have confirmed, the stiff upper lip largely died with the British Empire and the end of the War apart from a few pensioners who remember the war years and a few diehard monarchist Unionists
Oh, the rioting British nationalists were keeping the stiff upper lip were they?
You certainly didn't this level of aggression in 2014 from No campaigners
Uber’s fraught and deadly pursuit of self-driving cars is over
Uber is selling its autonomous vehicle business to Aurora Innovations, a San Francisco-based startup founded by the former head engineer of Google’s self-driving car project, the two companies announced Monday.
Full self driving cars are still miles away, despite the $10bns spent on the research on them.
So now they’re nothing but a massively loss-making taxi company.
The sell off of the self driving car business, to another company with the same major shareholders, looks to me like the investors putting their hands in their pockets to prop up Uber for another year.
I’ll stick my neck out and say we’ll not see self-driving cars for years, except in very controlled environments.
I’m not sure if it Was it here or elsewhere that I pointed out that self driving cars isn’t a 98/2% problem but a 99.99998% / 0.00002%
Because automation beyond a point removes the needs for the driver to concentrate the actual point at which you can say an automated car is safe is actually far, far later than everyone thought.
Not everyone. Quite a number of us on this site have been pointing out for ages that automated cars are, for exactly this reason, still a long, long way off other than in controlled environments (e.g. motorways, perhaps). What I find it hard to fathom is why the people tasked with working on these projects and their investors seem to take so long to reach the same conclusion.
You have this the wrong way around. What most people have failed to fathom is that an automated car does not have to work on every road in every circumstance to hold a multi trillion valuation and to provide the associated level of customer utility / societal disruption.
Tesla’s current autopilot offering requires you to hold onto the wheel and stay alert and there’s plenty it still doesn’t even attempt to do. And yet an estimated third of new Tesla owners still buy the software at a price of $10k. Just wait until it “only” allows hands off - no observation driving on motorways. Quite a game changer for the value of those vehicles, and for global logistics you will agree.
Personally I think almost everyone has this wrong. I have a long standing bet that we’re going to see driverless vehicles approved somewhere before the 2022 World Cup kicks off. I expect I’ll probably now lose that bet but not by much.
There are other issues too, though, concerned with the commercially-driven overestimation of how far AI has come more broadly. The 1970s and early 1980s saw something quite similar, before expectations settled down into a more realistic pattern.
I don't think there'll be a 'settling down'. People overestimate the short term, and massively underestimate the longer term.
I'm not sure what you mean by longer term, but let's say 50 years for the sake of argument. What do you think we now have that wasn't envisaged 50 years ago? And, conversely, what don't we have that, 50 years ago, people expected we would have?
The problem is different people 50 years ago had different expectation, but I think in 1970 most people expected a much faster developing space programm, so at least regular visits to the moon with a moon base. Travel has been much slower than was expected. We have no passenger supersonic travel. And many people would have expected widespread personal 3d transport such as jet packs or air taxis.
While the computer networking has developed as well as most people could wish for, things like delivery of products is little better for the consumer than it was 50 years ago (I admit that the behind the scenes logistics for the delivery companies have improved massively).
Interesting discussion. Near-universal internet were not that widely-predicted - I was 21 50 years ago and remember individual PCs being non-existent (my university computer filled a room) and little sense of the coming internet. 10 years later, there were still serious commentators predicting that the internet would only be used by scientists and businesses.
But arguably it's sexual values that have changed most in the west. I was warching Industry last night, and reflected that my parents, who were reasonably open-minded, would have been incredulous that two blokes having sex would be shown fairly graphically on a BBC channel. More generally, the idea that virtually everyone likes to have had lots of varied sexual experiences with different people and marriage is something that comes and goes fairly easily were very much fringe theories then.
I remember a guy who was studying computer science when I was at university (2004) and iplayer was rumoured, rubbishing the idea because there would never be sufficient data bandwidth for people to stream video into their homes. Very smart guy, now making big bucks at Google, but he couldn't comprehend, despite having expertise in the area, the massive advances in both bandwidth in residential networks and improvements in video compression. Must tease him about that... iPlayer launched the following year.
I actually thought it probably would be possible, but only because in a physics lecture the year before we'd worked through the bandwidth savings of a digital TV signal compared to analogue and that kind of mind boggling efficiency advance made me realise that huge changes can happen quite quickly. My lack of understanding of the difficulty of the task made me more confident it could happen than someone with much more expertise.
Great story.
People naturally have an element of inertia and its often easier to see reasons why things can't change than reasons why they can.
And being close to things mean that your mind is awash with all the detail and cannot take a holistic view.
It’s the same reason why almost every opinion on a company’s share prospects that I have heard from people actually working there has turned out to be a dud.
Comments
Way to go!!!
Before the end of the decade is a near certainty, IMO.
My 'investment' picks:
E36/E46 M3 (these are already getting rare, if you seen one then buy it)
E39/E60 M5 (wish I had one of each)
964 911 (maybe a 3.3S, there is no value left in the RS or Cup cars)
Honda S2000
Ferrari F430 (this was peak V8 Ferrari as it was the last one with a gated manual but didn't have a derivative of the 50 year old Dino engine)
1st gen Gallardos are on the move upwards but a) relatively poor aftermarket support (unlike the Porsche and Beemers) and b) Johnson had one so fuck that.
Usual rules: no mods, manual, no sunroof, never red
https://youtu.be/fBkvcQEGq9k
Petrol stations will go the way of Kodak film retail and processing shops.
But would we accept the compromises on sovereignty ?
https://twitter.com/yicaichina/status/1336216941460066305
A veritable arachnid.
Yes it would be an acceptable compromise on sovereignty. Its an FTA which the UK is OK with, not a political union like the EU.
Can't think that's the way to worm their way into ones confidence. Are they getting desperate?
https://twitter.com/ProfTimBale/status/1336224204627320832
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13413274/william-shakespeare-covid-jab/
While the computer networking has developed as well as most people could wish for, things like delivery of products is little better for the consumer than it was 50 years ago (I admit that the behind the scenes logistics for the delivery companies have improved massively).
If the trade discussion differences are insurmountable then what was the walk out and return of a few weeks all about ?
Edit: Mind you, the development of a coronavirus vaccine in 9 months flat would probably have surprised us 50 years ago!
Space travel and a moon base.
With a single computer and with people still using typewriters.
So in fact it is some aristo pretending to be a pleb who has jumped the queue.
Is there a current Earl of Oxford?
There will be a niche market for small-scale heritage hydrocarbons for decades to come.
You might even get it Amazoned to your door.
But arguably it's sexual values that have changed most in the west. I was warching Industry last night, and reflected that my parents, who were reasonably open-minded, would have been incredulous that two blokes having sex would be shown fairly graphically on a BBC channel. More generally, the idea that virtually everyone likes to have had lots of varied sexual experiences with different people and marriage is something that comes and goes fairly easily were very much fringe theories then.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/wholl-want-to-do-a-deal-with-us-after-this-dn9t37ltz
https://twitter.com/GMB/status/1336228418149625858
The talks resumed when the EU said they could compromise afterall and were willing to start working on a legal text (which they'd refused until then).
However the official policy since walkout, as still maintained on the gov.uk website, is that the UK will be trading on WTO terms from January and business needs to prepare for that.
I am sure the Faragists are very emotional right now
But you're right, a market for this stuff will develop.
I actually thought it probably would be possible, but only because in a physics lecture the year before we'd worked through the bandwidth savings of a digital TV signal compared to analogue and that kind of mind boggling efficiency advance made me realise that huge changes can happen quite quickly. My lack of understanding of the difficulty of the task made me more confident it could happen than someone with much more expertise.
'“Oh, is that your whippet?” someone asked on a work call recently. “Yes,” I lied. “He’s very playful, sorry.”'
However unless Boris scraps the internal markets bill or gets a trade deal with the EU to minimise its impact we are unlikely to get a trade deal with the Biden administration anyway
BoZo is prepared to rip up a deal he signed last year. His Government is prepared to break International law.
Who wants to sign another deal with him?
People naturally have an element of inertia and its often easier to see reasons why things can't change than reasons why they can.
https://www.sportbible.com/football/news-the-incredible-moment-swedish-side-aik-kick-another-ball-on-the-pitch-20201208
Would any conceivable deal the US might agree to actually improve that significantly ?
People around the world are more understanding than you are of the concept of independence and shrug away the EU/UK spats as what they are and not relevant to them. Only days after muppets like you were chorusing to say "who would sign a deal with him now" the Japanese did exactly that. Then the Canadians did.
The wheel of time turns, you need to play catch up or be left behind like a Japanese soldier in the wilderness still fighting the war long after it finished.
More than that - she provided more accurate figures:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebekah_Jones#Alternate_COVID19_dashboards
Not exactly disastrous.
But you can tell you know more about the financial services sector than say me, who shall be very shortly entering his second decade in the sector.
Some sort of 19th century nostalgia mixed with a misunderstanding of Thatcher probably lies behind it.
Have any banks closed down their London operations?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYdp-BgGkr8
Same as any multinational ever.
It’s the same reason why almost every opinion on a company’s share prospects that I have heard from people actually working there has turned out to be a dud.