So… Over the phone doesn’t count? Texting doesn’t count? Email? Those don’t count? I would think that in this day and age texting would be the normal way to ask a girl out for a first date.
You know it’s REALLY hard for someone not super social to ask a girl out in person. I’m 50 and i think I’ve never asked a girl out for a first date in person… But then again, I am an introverted nerd so that’s probably to be expected. Hell, I asked the girl I ended up marrying out over email…
Hey, you do you. I have no problem with it if it comes naturally. But any sort of expectation here just gives me the cringe-shivers. If the woman expects someone to open the door for her, yikes! If the man expects that he’s the one to open the car door for the woman, yikes! And the basis of this thread seemed to be more around a woman expecting to have the car door opened for her which is why I wrote what I wrote.
I always found the concept of a man opening a car door for a woman exceptionally insulting to women. I’ll open doors for people when I’m walking with them, man or woman, but running ahead of a woman to open the car door for them is cringeworthy * 10. I get second-hand embarrassment shivers just thinking about doing it on a first date.
I like strong, independent, and capable women who are perfectly able to open car doors for themselves. Women who can hold their own in a conversation, are comfortable splitting a check, who are smart and educated, and who don’t need to me protect them like they are delicate flowers. I have never been with or talked with a woman in my social group (that I know of) who expected a man to open a car door for them.
Because, in reality, peaceful protests don’t work. We’ve been taught that they do, but they don’t.
The most successful protest going on right now is against Tesla. A bit of anonymous property destruction and a boycott, crashing the stock price, those things actually work. Getting together and holding signs doesn’t actually do anything, especially in some place like California.
Human vision is great, human attention is not and neither is their reaction time. Computers are 100x better at both of those. If you throw lidar into the mix, then a car’s vision is now much better than a humans.
IMHO self driving cars have to be statistically 10x better than humans to be widely implemented. If it passes that threshold them I’m fine with them.
I’m assuming it’s a cost because it makes sense to me. His goal was to build full-self-driving (FSD) into ever car and sell the service as a subscription.
If you add another $500 in components then that’s a lot of cost (probably a lot cheaper today but this was 10 years ago). Cameras are cheap and can be spread around the car with additional non-FSD benefits where as lidar has much fewer uses when the cost is not covered. I think he used his “first-principles” argument as a justification to the engineers as another way for him to say “I don’t want to pay for lidar, make it work with the cheap cameras.”
Why else would management take off the table an obviously extremely useful safety tool?
He didn’t think they were better. He thought Tesla could get away without the more expensive lidar. Basically “humans can drive with just vision, that should be enough for an autonomous vehicle also.” Basically he did it because lidar is more expensive.
Honestly all the fails with the kid dummy were a way bigger deal than the wall test. The kid ones will happen a hundred times more than the wall scenario.
Some sort of radar or lidar should 100% be required on autonomous cars.
Why do you think lidar is not mature? It is radar, except it uses light and can get much more resolution than an RF radar. Or was that a joke… That was probably a joke… if it was then nm.
It’s crazy how few times in an average man’s life he gets real compliments on clothing or looks. It happens so rarely most of us can tell you about the times even when they’re 20 years ago.