We've probably answered wrongly. Even money aside, how many more people die in traffic accidents due to the extra miles driven because of delays in construction?
Some regs are worth it, certainly, but being overly cautious is in itself unsafe.
How many of those traffic accidents could have been prevented if traffic engineering was a serious engineering profession and road deaths were not simply accept as a 'fact of live'.
How many lives would have been saved if a bridge for trains instead of cars were designed?
Sure and sometimes you just need to actually issue safety equipment and install a fall net.
The historical comparisons are complete BS: they wind up at "if we sacrifice enough people to the industrial god he will reward us" rather then discussing anything real.
What is it then? What is real? It has to be environmental and safety regulations, long running environmental studies, general bureaucracy and NIMBYism holding construction and infrastructure back right? That’s what held up the high speed rail in California (along with funding factors). We’ve always had unions so that shouldn’t be it.
A lot of people on this site clearly have never tried doing anything in California that involves more infrastructure than a laptop. Can easily be 18 months or more to get a permit to 'do things the right way'. If they'll even deign to give you one.
First: Get a 3d printer, if you don't have one. No quicker way to turn ideas into physical objects for prototyping and iteration.
Second: Pick a project with modest but not trivial goal. Something that exists within the state of the art on at least most axes. e.g. make a quadcopter, make a 3d printer, or make an automated cat food dispenser. The project can be special on an axis, e.g. I want the break the drone speed record, or make the best battle bot for a weight class - but stacking too many novelties into a project compounds the difficulty.
Three: Break down the project into manageable sub tasks, starting simple then working towards integration. E.g. step 1, make a drone motor spin. Step 2, make a drone motor spin at exactly 2503rpm. Step 3, design a housing to fit four drone motors/control board/battery, etc. It's perfectly natural/common/fun to play this by ear, many projects will go back and forth between biting off more than you can chew and isolating model systems for testing.
Four: Integrate the subsystems, test, debug and most importantly repeat.
[0] The Bambu a1 mini is a perfectly competent entry-level product. And Fusion360 is a solid CAD for design side.
Likewise, I was considering trying Polaris until I saw that example. The pandas example is a good approximation of how I think and want to transform/process data even if it is ugly under the hood. I do occasionally find numpy and pandas annoying wrt when the return a view vs a copy but the cure seems worse than the disease.
Setting expectations and thinning the herd. If even half of items had a well hidden air tag, and the cops successfully followed up even half of tagged thefts:
There would a. be less dumb criminals around to repeat offend and b. The smarter would-be criminals will do the calculus and and not steal items which could have tags.
Or do you believe it’s only one party? What’s your take on the 4 years Biden was in office wrt investigations and prosecutions of Democrat rivals? Clean hands, all legitimate?
For reference I’m not a Trump supporter, since that seems to be relevant to up/down votes here.
Oh, so is what-aboutism what we're doing today? Deflect the legitimate and obvious with 'the other side might've done something bad too once upon a time'? No, I don't think anything the Democrats have done at the federal level wrt to the DOJ comes close to what Trump has.
Depending how the costs of AI detection vs doctor, that genuinely might be enough to shift the math and be a net positive. If it is cheap enough to test 10x the current tested population, which would have lower, but non-zero rates of breast cancer, then[0] AI would result in more cancer detected and therefore more aggregate lives saved.
Given that every positive case needs to be verified by a doctor anyway because the patient has breast cancer, and every negative case has to be checked because it does a worse job than traditional methods... It only costs more.
Depends on the false positive rate. Hypothetically one can 'just' tune the model so false positives are low. This will increase false negatives but those are 'free' as they don't require follow ups. So long as the decrease in cost per real positive[0] goes down there's a benefit to be had.
[0] accounting for false positives, screening costs for true negatives, etc. etc.
> This will increase false negatives but those are 'free' as they don't require follow ups.
Increase in false negative rate significantly reduces survival rate and increases cost of treatment. We have huge multiplication factor here so decreasing false negative rate is the net positive option at relatively low rates.
> Depending how the costs of AI detection vs doctor, that genuinely might be enough to shift the math and be a net positive.
Based on my very superficial medical understanding, screening is already the cheap part. But every false-positive would lead to a doctor follow up at best and a biopsy at worst. Not to mention the significant psychological effects this has on a patient.
So I would counter that the potential increase of false-positive MRI scans could be enough to tip off the scale to make screening less useful
Pretty much zero chance of that. The complexity (moving parts, machined parts, number of generators, number of electrical interconnects (etc.) is so much higher per kilogram basis compared to pumped hydro. Much of the country does half of pumped hydro (storing potential energy in water towers) and delivers it to your door for fractions of a penny per kg, a price that includes a complete distribution network and sourcing/purification of the water.
My understanding is that water towers mostly exist as something to “pump against”, rather than being a vessel that gets filled and emptied repeatedly like a battery would. It does vary in level a bit, often with a circadian rhythm (but also randomly pulsatile). I just don’t think it’s a significant portion of the total water flow that its pressure supports.
reply