• 21 Posts
  • 148 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 20th, 2023

help-circle




  • I think it’s worth thinking about this in a technical sense, not just in a political or capitalist sense: Yes, car companies want self driving cars, but self driving cars are immensely dangerous, and there’s no evidence that self driving cars will make roads safer. As such, legislation should be pushing very hard to stop self driving cars.

    Also, the same technology used for self driving is used for AEB. This actually makes self-driving more likely, in that the car companies have to pay for all that equipment anyway, they may as well try and shoehorn in self driving. On top of this, I have no confidence that the odds of an error in the system (eg: a dirty sensor, software getting confused) is not higher than the odds of a system correctly braking when it needs to.

    This means someone can get into a situation where they are:

    • in a car, on a road, nothing of interest in front of them
    • the software determines that there is an imminent crash
    • Car brakes hard (even at 90mph), perhaps losing traction depending on road conditions
    • may be hit from behind or may hit an object
    • Driver is liable even though they never actually pressed the brakes.

    This is unacceptable on its face. Yes, cars are dangerous, yes we need to make them safer, but we should use better policies like slower speeds, safer roads, and transitioning to smaller lighter weight cars, not this AI automation bullshit.







  • I was having a chat with someone about how they are more “Star trek future rather than Solarpunk future”, and I found something off about it but didn’t really think about it, but it’s this. It’s the idea that the key conceit of Star Trek being they are exploring for the hell of it can’t really be true, and that exploration in itself is to try and get some dividend off it. Any “Star Trek future” which is not colonial is necessarily a Solarpunk future first.





  • I’m just using it as a space heater for my study, which is also where I work from. While using the computer in Winter I just switch on f@h for both CPU and GPU (AMD 5700x and 6700xt), and this heats up the room. It’s a good 300-400W. I have home assistant telling me the temperature in the room and it bugs me to turn it off if it’s too hot. That’s my “temperature control”. I didn’t build anything, the computer is just under my desk and it heats up my room.

    Originally my plan was to have F@H automatically turn on and off based on temperature, but it turns out the power is low enough and the lag is high enough that you switch it on in the morning, and then once the room is upto temperature you can just switch it off and the room will stay warm the rest of the day.


  • I do this. If you want to actually want to use or donate the processing power, this is kind of a good thing. However, there are a lot of downsides:

    • Computers are generally much lower power than a heater. This makes them very slow to “react” to heating needs. Heating a small room, even with a 500W PC, could take an hour or maybe more.
    • Heaters have a thermostat, which computers don’t, so even though they are very laggy, they also don’t stop heating when the temperature is right. This means they can overshoot and make the room uncomfortably hot.
    • You could set up an external thermostat but then you need a load which can be switched on and off.
    • I was using folding@home, but the work items take a long time, and switching them on and off will increase the time taken to resolve the work item, which in turn means the system could get annoyed and use someone else’s computer to resolve the work item faster, or worse, blacklist your computer.
    • Using your PC to generate heat will use up its maximum lifetime. The fans aren’t built to be running at max speed all the time, the CPU & GPU could wear out, and the power systems will also wear as time goes on. You sort of have to align that lifetime against usage. This is likely fine if you see the computation as a donation or if you have important stuff to compute, but it’s probably not worth just wasting the cycles.


  • Toll roads aren’t bad, it’s all in the details. The problem is that the government is often “captured” and therefore has no incentive to have a fair contract, so they’ll add clauses like

    • If the company loses money because the government does something, the government will pay them. This often prevents the government from reducing or removing the toll road / other privately owned resource.
    • The government can’t “compete” with the toll road, either with another road or (sometimes) through public transport.
    • The government will often, as a form of pork-barrelling, offer people reimbursements for the toll road usage, thereby funneling tax payer money into the private company.
    • Toll roads are tax deductible.

    Ideally, toll roads encourage people to take the train.