As I understand it, it is fundamentally possible, but at this point one of the worst bottle necks is the physical processing power required to analyze the video feed. Millisecond paced analysis of multiple aspects of multiple HD video feeds in real time by “AI” still takes some pretty heavy duty computational hardware at this point, which is impractical in a real world vehicle. It is prudent to do the research now though to be ready for the day when the hardware catches up. That said, I reckon that Waymo is in a much better position to do this research than than Tesla. Being under Google/Alphabet, they have access to the nearly 2 decades worth of Google Maps and Google’s machine vision training work, among other things, like not being a meme stock company headed by an emperor whose clothes are beginning to dissapear.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-voter-bachir-atallah-detained-border-agents-2060893 and he voted for Trump apparently… 🤦‍♂️

So basically he’d rather they just die than live with “stuff we don’t trust”. If “everybody has to die”, then why care about what’s in a vaccine in the first place? Extreme cognitive dissonance to support an ideology.

That is an insane amount of data. I’m trying to fathom what 82TB of text files looks like and I can’t.

Ok cool. Apparently nobody likes being called out, do they. Welp, I accept your answer, and since you act in such good faith, I won’t be surprised to see a disclaimer from you on any post or comment that contains the name of a for profit company here on Lemmy because it’s likely shilling. They will feel your wrath!

Lol likewise.

I am talking to you in the best of faith I can have with someone that seems like they’re harassing people that in my opinion are just here providing good content. It seems ridiculous. I wanted to make my opinion known. I have no agenda I’m trying to push. I don’t work for kagi or google, or any other company that would benefit from something like this.

If this is going to devolve into a deposition on whether I’m talking to you in good faith or not, then I think we’re done. I’ll be on the lookout for any possible shilling.

I’m not ignoring it. It just seems disingenuous. To me, it comes off as, “hide the source if it comes from an entity that makes money, because someone may be accidentally advertised to. Reduce context in order to avoid supporting a profitable entity. Professianal journalism is bad because the journalists get paid via subscriptions or ads. Fuck them for wanting a career in journalism.”

I hate ads as much as the next guy but realistically, how are they going to support themselves. Should I not post The Guardian articles (hope I’m not shilling here) since they make money to pay their journalists?

Yes, I think we do have to accept that mentioning a company’s name can have the effect of keeping them in the public consciousness, but so long as they exist and provide services that we interact with, we are going to need to refer to them somehow.

I agree that actual shilling is bad, and is something I do not want to see here, but I just don’t understand or agree on your criteria for shilling apparently. At best, it could have possibly been shilling. But then by that same logic, it would apply to such an enormously broad range of conversation. Now we’re just walking talking shilling machines.

And then you want to call it out every single time? With no reasonable proof that they were intentionally shilling? I just think that’s going too far.

So by your logic, if I post information I found on Wikipedia and list it as a source, cool. But if I find information on Yahoo and list that as the source, then I’m shilling for capitalism and must be called out?

Back to my original comment, I just don’t see how it was intended as a promotion. It was supportive to the comment to add context to the information contained thereof. It was literally one word in a long comment. No hyperlink. On top of that, most people don’t even know what Kagi is and there was no discernable effort to introduce or promote it.

What about that makes you so sure that they’re being used by a corporation? Should they have just listed the source as “internet search engine”?

If they “shill” for a not for profit search engine will you call that out as well?

It was a joke, mate.

I briefly looked through user tal’s comment history, and found that they also italicized Google as a source of info in another comment. Does this mean they’re also shilling for Google? Imagine how pissed Kagi would be if they found out…

Ok man. I get it. Anything that costs money is bad. Let’s never speak the name of any for profit company or business as it may give them free advertising. Thank you for keeping us all safe.

Lol now we’re going to debate and call people out over their post syntax and use of italics? Is this what belongs on Lemmy? I guess it’s funny content in a way…

To begrudgingly answer your question, no I do not usually notice people italicizing titles in casual news aggregator comments. I do however notice it done in professional journalism. Neither of the cases trigger me either way.

Well yeah, italicizing it denotes that it’s the title of the source.

The “ad copy” was just them explaining why they personally like using Kagi, after you called them out for it.

With all that said, I think you’ll just end up Streisand effecting it in the end if you call it out over and over. 🤷‍♂️

Calling that an advertisement for Kagi seems a bit hyper reactive to me. I think they’re just including it as a source along with the info for transparency’s sake. I appreciate it for the context it provides.

Paying for the privilege of using AI to sift through the vast bleak sea of AI generated garbage. What a time to be alive!

You’re right, definitely couldn’t hurt to have some Narcan around. I’ve called 911 when I see people that look like they’re in danger, and the emergency services have come pretty quick each time. Many of them tend to use in tents, or place covers over themselves though. This makes it pretty difficult to tell if they’re ok. Its very common to see people completely passed out but not dead. You can usually tell if they’re actually danger by their skintone. Purple/blueish = bad.

Yeah I wish more cities in this country could devote the same amount of resources that SF devotes to these issues. Many of the addicted people I’ve talked to are actually from out of state, particularly red states. It shouldn’t be up to certain cities to take most of the burden of this national problem, but it seems like that’s what is happening. Income inequality is definitely out of control and I agree it seems to be a huge factor in pushing people into these situationss. Multi billionaires just should not exist when we have shit like this happening to to our people.

Thank you for actually answering this. This answered a lot of questions for me. I actually work in a nasty part of the SOMA district of SF and have seen stuff there that I will never forget. 3 ODs have happened outside of my work while I was there so far. I’ve opened the door to leave and had somebody unconscious just fall in. A 16 year old girl’s corpse was defiled after she died from an OD down the alley. People screaming covered in feces and peeling off their own skin. Some of my smaller coworkers have been harassed and chased when trying to enter the building. I’ve talked to some of the addicts there of course, and many of them have told me they don’t care if they die. Most of them are not bad people, just mentally ill and disabled. Some of them definitely get the free needles but they all use outside. There is a needle disposal box around the corner and I’ve actually seen people breaking it open to steal the needles multiple times…

It just seems like none of this stuff works and we are all bending over backwards to cater to them, and then they end up dying anyway. Many of them are severely mentally ill or damaged from the drugs and it’s pretty obvious that they are never going to be anything near functional ever again. It’s like letting a 4 year old kid in an adult body addicted to opiates just go out on to the street to fend for themselves. They are not going to make choices that are beneficial to them in the long run, they’ve literally lost that ability.

After years of putting up with this stuff, I think your average person in the city just gets to the point where they’ve had enough, and people end up voting to try something else.

Not disagreeing, just curious. How can they safely inject the kind of fentanyl that’s out there now? When milligrams can kill you? What if they prefer to smoke it? Do the safe injection sites provide the drugs or do the users just bring their own stuff there and do it under supervision?