First: Get a 3d printer, if you don't have one. No quicker way to turn ideas into physical objects for prototyping and iteration.
Second: Pick a project with modest but not trivial goal. Something that exists within the state of the art on at least most axes. e.g. make a quadcopter, make a 3d printer, or make an automated cat food dispenser. The project can be special on an axis, e.g. I want the break the drone speed record, or make the best battle bot for a weight class - but stacking too many novelties into a project compounds the difficulty.
Three: Break down the project into manageable sub tasks, starting simple then working towards integration. E.g. step 1, make a drone motor spin. Step 2, make a drone motor spin at exactly 2503rpm. Step 3, design a housing to fit four drone motors/control board/battery, etc. It's perfectly natural/common/fun to play this by ear, many projects will go back and forth between biting off more than you can chew and isolating model systems for testing.
Four: Integrate the subsystems, test, debug and most importantly repeat.
[0] The Bambu a1 mini is a perfectly competent entry-level product. And Fusion360 is a solid CAD for design side.
Likewise, I was considering trying Polaris until I saw that example. The pandas example is a good approximation of how I think and want to transform/process data even if it is ugly under the hood. I do occasionally find numpy and pandas annoying wrt when the return a view vs a copy but the cure seems worse than the disease.
Setting expectations and thinning the herd. If even half of items had a well hidden air tag, and the cops successfully followed up even half of tagged thefts:
There would a. be less dumb criminals around to repeat offend and b. The smarter would-be criminals will do the calculus and and not steal items which could have tags.
Or do you believe it’s only one party? What’s your take on the 4 years Biden was in office wrt investigations and prosecutions of Democrat rivals? Clean hands, all legitimate?
For reference I’m not a Trump supporter, since that seems to be relevant to up/down votes here.
Oh, so is what-aboutism what we're doing today? Deflect the legitimate and obvious with 'the other side might've done something bad too once upon a time'? No, I don't think anything the Democrats have done at the federal level wrt to the DOJ comes close to what Trump has.
Depending how the costs of AI detection vs doctor, that genuinely might be enough to shift the math and be a net positive. If it is cheap enough to test 10x the current tested population, which would have lower, but non-zero rates of breast cancer, then[0] AI would result in more cancer detected and therefore more aggregate lives saved.
Given that every positive case needs to be verified by a doctor anyway because the patient has breast cancer, and every negative case has to be checked because it does a worse job than traditional methods... It only costs more.
Depends on the false positive rate. Hypothetically one can 'just' tune the model so false positives are low. This will increase false negatives but those are 'free' as they don't require follow ups. So long as the decrease in cost per real positive[0] goes down there's a benefit to be had.
[0] accounting for false positives, screening costs for true negatives, etc. etc.
> This will increase false negatives but those are 'free' as they don't require follow ups.
Increase in false negative rate significantly reduces survival rate and increases cost of treatment. We have huge multiplication factor here so decreasing false negative rate is the net positive option at relatively low rates.
> Depending how the costs of AI detection vs doctor, that genuinely might be enough to shift the math and be a net positive.
Based on my very superficial medical understanding, screening is already the cheap part. But every false-positive would lead to a doctor follow up at best and a biopsy at worst. Not to mention the significant psychological effects this has on a patient.
So I would counter that the potential increase of false-positive MRI scans could be enough to tip off the scale to make screening less useful
Pretty much zero chance of that. The complexity (moving parts, machined parts, number of generators, number of electrical interconnects (etc.) is so much higher per kilogram basis compared to pumped hydro. Much of the country does half of pumped hydro (storing potential energy in water towers) and delivers it to your door for fractions of a penny per kg, a price that includes a complete distribution network and sourcing/purification of the water.
My understanding is that water towers mostly exist as something to “pump against”, rather than being a vessel that gets filled and emptied repeatedly like a battery would. It does vary in level a bit, often with a circadian rhythm (but also randomly pulsatile). I just don’t think it’s a significant portion of the total water flow that its pressure supports.
> “Our officers will respond to investigate the nature of the call,” OPD said in a statement. “If our officers determine this is a landlord-tenant issue, the case will be referred to the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office for further investigation.”
People unlawfully squat and the official position of the Police is shrug.
Small wonder people are unhappy with the system and there's a market popping up for extra-judicial evictions.
Would probably be much cleaner all around if in such cases the law dictated possession back to the property owner with ~ treble damages/attorney's fees/statutory damages/reversion of possession in the cases where the alleged squatter was lawfully occupying. Basically enough to entice a lawyer to take the case on contingency and make it unequivocally in the favor of a hypothetically wronged tenant, while not allowing squatters to abuse the existing legal process.
Treble damages don’t matter when the opposing party has nothing to lose. The arbitrage exists because one party has nothing to lose and the other party has a lot to lose.
That sounds like a mostly reasonable approach from the police though. Do you want want a police raid just because you did something the landlord doesn't like? Do you want the issue decided on the spot with little actual knowledge? Unless the place is being actually damaged, it's likely better to take the time - there's too much possibility for harassment otherwise.
> Do you want the issue decided on the spot with little actual knowledge?
Oh so after a ~week long prompt investigation, the police, now well informed, act decisively? Strange then how the landlord in the story would rather pay $12,500 to this swordsman than wait one or two weeks.
Legal process and approved enforcement not working correctly is a separate issue. Neither that nor the original problem will get solved by allowing police to intervene in all rental disputes and be the immediate judge and enforcer.
I gave my hypothetical to point out your "on the spot" was a strawman, and here you strawman again. Nobody demanded "immediate", and after the police verified that you are the lawful owner, and that there is no tenancy contract notarized/registered with the state, the squatters should be kicked out. But this is as ridiculous as the police refusing to remove someone from, say, your server farm, because that someone claims he's your employee and allowed to be there/actually he's the owner, prove he's not in a protracted civil procedure, during which time he dismantles your servers and sells them for parts. A year later when you get your judgment and can finally kick him out, a second squatter appears and you have to start all over again.
Trespassing and theft are criminal matters, and the police should treat them as such, even if the thief/trespasser says "actually, I'm not stealing/trespassing, this is mine/I live here".
Should really be some sort of government process and speedy trial in court. Say inside a week. Show a lease or get year in free accommodation by the state. Both sides win. Property owner frees the property and squatter gets free government paid housing for longer period.
Police are not in the business of reading contracts and determining who is in the right or wrong.
They'll remove trespassers but these squatters will usually claim that they have a rental agreement, or that they've lived there long enough that there is a de facto agreement.
The working homeless are worse at contributing to natalism than the working housed and there are too many Americans for the global aquifer budget to support. A mass fertility reduction can only really happen through a decline in prosperity. Ideally, the American housing policy framework should be exported globally as much as possible, too.
I mean of course they could, and should[0] how is that a question?
[0] Shouldn't - classic example of a tactical win being a strategic blunder. Killing the American president and would solidify American public support for the war - which would probably be undesirable in the balance.
Of course I do? Across all my utilitarian devices, e.g. phone, desktop, laptop, I already find updates to be a large net negative except for the vague and nebulus 'security'. If a car 'needs' updates then it isn't doing its job.
I can't imagine the expletives that'll come out of my mouth the day I'm running late for a meeting and my car won't start because its in the middle of an update.
Second: Pick a project with modest but not trivial goal. Something that exists within the state of the art on at least most axes. e.g. make a quadcopter, make a 3d printer, or make an automated cat food dispenser. The project can be special on an axis, e.g. I want the break the drone speed record, or make the best battle bot for a weight class - but stacking too many novelties into a project compounds the difficulty.
Three: Break down the project into manageable sub tasks, starting simple then working towards integration. E.g. step 1, make a drone motor spin. Step 2, make a drone motor spin at exactly 2503rpm. Step 3, design a housing to fit four drone motors/control board/battery, etc. It's perfectly natural/common/fun to play this by ear, many projects will go back and forth between biting off more than you can chew and isolating model systems for testing.
Four: Integrate the subsystems, test, debug and most importantly repeat.
[0] The Bambu a1 mini is a perfectly competent entry-level product. And Fusion360 is a solid CAD for design side.
reply