Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.strips,rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: xkcd: CrowdStrike
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2024 09:19:41 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 92
Message-ID: <kht1bjd3n03e355n7rhid5vtp31o03rgdb@4ax.com>
References: <v8ff6o$22pco$1@dont-email.me> <dr8vaj5v10bfe8ck5nepjn903q47pk6a7i@4ax.com> <v8oq8o$86fk$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2024 18:19:45 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6189a48b6ccdb5cc2ef411bb21c82116";
	logging-data="921908"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19AQmAOoB20AdDjqmfTs64nS9DgQwu/lQc="
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Dde4UNdk35r3vzR5LNUuZZ6VOZs=
Bytes: 5080

On Mon, 5 Aug 2024 09:02:17 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:

>On 2024-08-04 15:54:51 +0000, Paul S Person said:
>> On Sun, 4 Aug 2024 18:14:35 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On 2024-08-04 03:14:42 +0000, Lynn McGuire said:
>>=20
>> <snippo mucho>
>> <Musk is being attacked, and this brings out a defender>
>>=20
>>>> Musk is the most successful rocket launcher ever.  He just had his>>=
=20
>>>> first failure in over several years of weekly launches.
>>>=20
>>> Musk's rocket and cars work despite him, not because of him. They=20
>>> are>the work of hundreds of people - he does nothing except supply=20
>>> the>money and spout off his big mouth.
>>=20
>> So it's a personal beef you have with him.
>
>He's a braindead, druggy, lunatic, plain and simple. He's known as Elon=20
>Muskrat for a reason.  :-p
>
>
>
>
>>>> He has sold almost ten million electric cars.  Find me a single=20
>>>> person>> or country that even meets ten percent of his records.
>>>=20
>>> Tesla cars are all horrible and unreliable (with numerous recalls),=20
>>> and>the "self-driving" is a dangerous joke that should be banned from=
=20
>>> use>in any sensible country.
>>=20
>> A recent article indicated that, in some areas, driving autonomously
>> with no human supervisor /is/ against the law. The idiot who was
>> failing to supervise his vehicle will be facing vehicular homicide
>> charges, apparently.
>
>Being illegal to use silly "self-driving" while not still paying=20
>attention / being in control, that does not stop idiots not paying=20
>attention and doesn't stop accidents happening. Only a coupe of days=20
>ago a motorcyclist was killed thanks to some idiot using Tesla's=20
>"auto-pilot".

This may be what I was referring to. Or not, as the case may be.

 With any luck and a good prosecutor, that idiot will be in the
Greybar Hotel and so unable to use Tesla's anything for the forseeable
future.=20

Maybe a law requiring "auto-pilot" to activate flashing green lights
and have a top speed of, say, 5 MPH would help. Mostly by driving it
off the market. I've /never/ been a fan of this sort of thing unless,
of course, the vehicle is firmly attached to the ground by a rail and
under the control of a centralized system not connected to the
Internet.

>Much of the blame also should go to the moron Elon Muskrat, who keeps=20
>telling everyone it is "self-driving" when it is definitely NOT! Even=20
>his own Tesla emplyees tell him it's crap. He also insists that the=20
>Tesla cars only use cameras while every other company is using things=20
>like lidar too (not that it makes their self-driving any better either).

The same could be said of using "3D" for "stereoscopy" when they are
clearly distinguishable.=20

I realize that the terminology here is very confused: I am using "3D"
here to refer to what we (well, most of us) see with our own eyes when
we look around as opposed to stereoscopy and also to 3D animation
which produces some fine effects but is not stereoscopy. My favorite
illustration of the difference is this:

if you watch a stereoscopic film in which, say, a paddle-ball ball is
sent directly into your face "out of the screen", it will be aimed at
your face no matter where you are sitting

if a /real/ paddle-ball ball were sent out to the audience, some would
see it coming at them, others along side them, and some above (or,
when balconies existed, below) them -- you would see different things
depending on where you are sitting

Another difference, of course, is that just seeing the world in 3D
doesn't make most people throw up. Sterescopic films are known the do
that. Although, to be some Cinerama/Cinemiracle films did as well, at
least when projected so that all you saw was the film (no screen
boundaries visible).
--=20
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"