• 1 Post
  • 23 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: January 6th, 2024

help-circle
  • I loved reading your insights on the tech! E ink is such a fascinating tech… Pity about the NDA though, I would love to hear a lot more!

    The title is mentioning e-paper though and if I have understood correctly that could imply a different tech is being used here. So here’s what (I think) I know, e-paper is a broader category that includes other tech that is not e-ink but very low power screens, such as the screen used by the old smart watches Pebble, which had a color memory LCD that could achieve something like 20 fps or something like that? Just enough to create nice animations and fluid UI. Of course changing the screen meant higher consumption, but the LCD could keep the image by using a very low but non-zero energy.

    Although it seems that e-paper and e-ink are commonly just mixed as if they would be the same, while to me e-ink is a type of e-paper. Do you feel my understanding is correct on how the tech is categorised and maybe the screen from the article could be memory LCD or something else that is not e-ink?


  • It’s so great to be able to find comments such as yours, unfortunately it feels uncommon in Lemmy specially when certain names are mentioned, the bias and willfulness to shit on those are making people a bit blindsided and easy to guide through bad data usage. My first thought reading the title was about the statistical value of the numbers given, which doesn’t detract from the actual quality or lack thereof of the vehicle. At the moment using elon musk or tesla in a title of an article will increase the traffic automatically. Which is why we constantly get every single shitty comment made by him reported with useless data.



  • Yeah, it makes it better and more reliable in harsh conditions, I agree, but driving has always been based on people looking where they go, so camera imagery is enough for driving. If it is not safe for a person, then it’s not safe for a car with only cameras. Plus only having cameras doesn’t mean you cannot use special equipment, IR cameras can improve visibility on harsh conditions too. Not that I mean they are used, but you know, it’s a matter of what we mean with “enough to drive”. Again, I want to emphasize that I agree, having LiDAR or other tech would be much much better.



  • There’s two points of consideration here, let’s see if I can make my point without a wall of text, I’m prone to those…

    1. Anonimity: the fact that where you connect cannot know who exactly you are. This should be straightforward, anonimity should not be taken away, it is a core part of the internet in my opinion. It’s extremely important that we can express ourselves freely without fear of being persecuted. Despite the negative sides that it has, as those with ill intent will be harder to find (but not impossible). In this the common quote attributed to Franklin applies well in my opinion: Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

    2. Proof of personhood: basically the difficult task of making sure that the other end of an internet connection has a real person, and together with that, proof that it is different than others, the ability to know you are you and not someone else.

    This is incredibly interesting as a technical problem to be solved, and I do agree with you that the internet as we know it is at risk if we don’t solve it properly. It is specially hard to solve if you try to guarantee anonimity (like I believe it should be).

    The wikipedia has an article about it that I think gives a good idea about the topic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_personhood

    Personally I have been quite carefully interested into the whole World ID solution, using a device called orb with open specifications that captures some data from your iris that should be unique per person, storing only an encrypted piece of information in a blockchain and on your device locally so that you can use it to identify yourself as a real unique person and only once, but wherever you use it, cannot know anything about you except that. There’s a lot of possible criticism to such a system, but insofar as I have checked and can understand, it seems like a legit solution. But I leave here the link for anyone interested enough to check it themselves: https://world.org/world-id



  • I find it kind of ironic how you complain about downvotes while supporting democracy. I’m not saying whether I agree or disagree with you, I’m not saying either if I think you are right or wrong. But just like in a democracy votes represent the opinion of those who decided to vote. Being right won’t mean you get the votes. You should just accept them and stop complaining about them.



  • Yprum@lemmy.worldtoFuck AI@lemmy.worldIt isn't worth it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    But the reason the planet burns is because of how we generate the energy, not because of using energy. I’m not defending all these fucked up greedy corporations and their use of AI, machine learning, LLMs or whatever crap they are trying to get us to use want or not, but our real problem is based on energy generation, not consumption.


  • But is it the tool that has the negative impact or is it the corporations that use the tool with a negative impact? I think it is an important distinction, even more so when this kind of blaming the AI stuff sounds a lot to distraction techniques, “no don’t look at what has caused global warming for the last century, look at this tech that exploded over the last year and is consuming crazy amounts of energy”. And saying that, I want to make sure its clear, that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be handled, discussed or criticised (the use of AI I mean), as long as we don’t fall into irrational blaming of a tool that has no such issue.

    I didn’t know about the mod stuff, but also not sure why you mention it, am I going to find myself mod of some weird shit now? X)


  • Yprum@lemmy.worldtoFuck AI@lemmy.worldIt isn't worth it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    But then the problem is how google uses AI, not AI itself. I can have an LLM running locally not consuming crazy amounts of energy for my own purposes.

    So blaming AI is absurd, we should blame OpenAI, Google, Amazon… This whole hatred for AI is absurd when it’s not the real source of the problem. We should concentrate on blaming and ideally punishing companies for this kind of use (abuse more like) of energy. Energy usage also is not an issue in itself, as long as we use adequate energy sources. If companies start deploying huge solar panel fields on top of their buildings and parkings and whatnot to cover part of the energy use we could all end up better than before even.



  • Yeah he worked in Microsoft before that and when he ended in Nokia the path was quite clear what it would be. But I’ve had the chance to talk with many engineers that were working at Nokia back in the day and the problems didn’t start because of Microsoft.

    Basically Nokia had the whole management divided between symbian, maemo, and windows mobile, and as they couldn’t agree on a future path all the efforts were divided. Symbian was quite a disaster at the end and it wouldn’t have gone far most likely, those that wanted to continue with it didn’t have a clear view of the changes coming in the mobile world.

    Maemo was great, really advanced, based on Linux, and working really well, maybe too advanced even, specially for your common users back then. The whole system was constantly put down and delayed and the first devices sold wouldn’t even work as a phone, only the 4th ended up with mobile connection, which didn’t help at all to make it useful (wifi was not as big as it is now) and sold.

    Finally there was Windows Mobile which was still starting basically then and had far less strength, but with the support of Microsoft behind it it was easier to push it out. I don’t understand why it still has such support when it comes to the UI, I personally never liked it and it felt too simplistic and boring, but the more options the better I guess. Of course once Microsoft managed to plant his own guy inside Nokia they managed to favor the balance towards Win mobile and the other two were left behind more and more.

    So Microsoft was a key part in what ended happening but they were not the ones that put Nokia in trouble. That was a lack of direction in the management level.