Completely agreed. Cal Newport proposes in So Good They Can't Ignore You that valuable (and therefore rewarding) specialties are only accessible by expanding your "Adjacent Possible" - you can't jump straight into truly niche topics because they are the top of a pyramid which requires a wide base.
It's also worth pointing out that no energy pathway acts alone. You're always using all of them in some degree, but a particular activity will use one of them over the others. You will strengthen them in conjunction, though what you focus on will improve the most.
I'd like to put my hat in to support the 5/3/1 approach over traditional 5x5s. I managed to get my way to a ~317 wilks on a 5x5 program and after taking a few years off and getting back in with 5/3/1, I wish I had had the patience to leverage a more well rounded approach like 5/3/1.
I've driven this area plenty of times, and something that is misleading about the YT video is that there are around two dozen cars driving around lighting that area up. I agree that the dashcam video makes it look very dark, but this video is on the other end of the spectrum and does not represent how dark that stretch gets when there isn't another car.
The moment another car passes the driver to the left is where the accident was. That part is typically very dark and has plants as a backdrop - I can see where it would be difficult to distinguish a human form under specific conditions. Regardless, the LIDAR and backup driver failed miserably here.
The YouTube video has plenty of sections in less well-lit areas. For example: https://imgur.com/a/9L53u
No cars, a light only one one side, and you can still see much further than the Uber video makes it seem. If the Uber car's sensors can't get a better idea of its surroundings than a smartphone video, Uber's management should be liable for criminally negligent homicide for letting them out on the streets.
I find it peculiar that you would quote the police department saying the crash was "unavoidable" when I'm unable to find such distinct phrasing used in any news articles. The most damning phrasing is: "it’s very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision in any kind of mode (autonomous or human-driven) based on how she came from the shadows right into the roadway".
So I've read the article and watched the videos - I haven't seen any actual quotes where any spokesperson had said it was unavoidable outside of the headline and first paraphrased sentence. I only mentioned this initially because it seems like a sensationalized headline of a statement.
It depends on where you are. The AZ version - Fry's - is almost 100% grocery. Whereas other parts of the country I've seen their stores be close to 50/50
This street in particular is weird at night because the street downstream rises up, and the light from those lamps is cast at a higher point. The place she was hit is extremely dangerous because there are no lights on her, and no lights behind her.
