I agree, I thought this was a weird example - but I'm not a Rust nor C programmer.
I assume this example is used because programmers of either language reach for asm when looking for raw performance. But to me, it's shouldn't even be a discussion point, since even I know both languages can be made to emit the same assembly.
Also, I think it side-steps the hard parts of the question - which is, what are the performance impacts of Rust safety?
Considering on the average 7/10 people either voted for Trump or didn't vote, (with Trump openly stating that he wants to neuter universities) Americans "think" they support science.
I don’t see how you can make this claim when the budget balance at universities is extremely tilted towards stem. The budget for the kind of programs you seem to be complaining about come out to percents. Hard to say universities are “more interested” in very very small parts of their budget. What is happening now though is the federal government holds back billions of dollars in medical research grants, punishing, in some cases even killing patients, over “ideological” issues.
Ok, there probably are folks who can't differentiate between the Physics department and the Sociology department. Or who can tell the difference but who attack both anyway.
The problem for science is those folks. Right? The universities are actually teaching and advancing science. They're not the problem. The Pol Pot types are the problem. We know this very well from history.
While i know better to argue with conservatives, I would just like to remind you that if the political tides ever turn, and somehow Democrats manage to take back control of the government, its going to be actually bad news for people like you. There are already several projects on the way compiling political associations (through buying advertising targeting data), and when it becomes socially acceptable to discriminate against anyone with conservative views, you are going to be in a world of trouble.
Bezos worst offense is meeting with Trump and donating to his campaign (and if you follow the leftist ideology, being a billionaire).
But based on personal experience with some very wealthy people, I truly believe they are just out of touch with the real world to understand what they are doing politically. Imagine if your days could be spent doing all the things you ever could wish, you would most likely not even bother reading stuff like reddit or HN, and certainly won't have time to look into any snippet of news in detail.
The problem is as soon as you go EV, you use a lot of utility from the get go. With a truck specifically, because its a brick aerodynamically. There is no reason to buy a Cybertruck or Lightning when you can get a gas or hybrid F150 (or a Raptor) for a little bit more, and be able to sit at 80 mph on highways without worrying about range.
The biggest suprise about the lightning is that Ford didn't put in a gas engine in it as a range extender. They have 3 cylinder ecoboost engines that would have been perfect for that.
My brother has one, it is an amazing vehicle with better range performance than Tesla. It's dramatically better in the snow. Towing of large loads is a valid downside, but reality is that most people don't tow, and people who do are probably fine with 80% of the use cases (construction trailers, lawn trailers, etc).
The business problem Tesla solved at Ford cannot is the dealer network. He pre-ordered his, and the dealer he was stuck with tried to rip him off like 4 different ways.
The other issue is that car guys are afraid of electric, as the entire supporting industry is essentially obsolete. It's hard to get excited about something that will take away your ability to pay your mortgage. Every car dealer employee and mechanic knows that.
Electric cars still need maintenance. They don't get regular oil changes, but they wear out tires sooner. They have more recalls in general than ICE (this will likely change, but manufactures are still learning how to make EVs reliable). The parts of a car that are not common with EVs don't break for the first 100k miles, and almost nobody is using the dealer for cars that old. There is plenty of other work that is common that dealers will still need to do.
Your argument hinges on any level of maintenance being enough to maintain our current level of investment. The truth is always more complicated.
Take for example DVD rental. The market completely evaporated, while there is still a small lingering community that could be serviced by rentals. My local library is proof that there is a market. But there are, bar some weird exceptions, no remaining DVD rental stores.
If an EV needs 50% of the maintenance, then it stands to reason that you need 50% of the staff. That's the easy part. But what about all the other staff? Can you afford as many staff in front of house when your main profit centre shrank massively? Can you keep the same amount of cars in the lot if you don't have the cash to pay the manufacturer fees?
I'm sure that some mechanics will need to go. However a lot of them will still remain because there are a lot of cars and a lot that can go wrong that is common. There are also potential new failure modes, though only time will tell.
It displaces well paid mechanic jobs with greasemonkey stuff.
It's not bad for consumers, but a significant amount of the economy is maintaining cars. It's the same thing that happened when emissions standards made cars more reliable. The corner repair shop was displaced by convenience stores, and repair consolidated.
This is dependent on how you drive them. EVs are fun, so you get a disproportionate number of people driving them aggressively. That's hard on tires. If you drive normal, you get normal tire life.
Yes, but typically by a small margin. Close enough that tire wear is dominated by driving style. The problem is that instant torque is simultaneously addictive and also maximally damaging to tire tread.
They weigh slightly more than a similar ICE vehicle. And why would drafting a big rig increase tire wear? The problem I mentioned was that EV drivers frequently drive more aggressively because it's intoxicating to be able to silently dust basically every other car on the road that isn't another EV. Those people do have tire wear issues :). And they're not drafting a big rig...
Here's a different aspect of utility: The F150 Lightning includes 120V and optionally 240V outlets, so it replaces the need to carry a separate gas-powered generator.
That's probably more relevant to fleet vehicles for construction and maintenance firms than to individuals towing boats. But just to offer an example of how the F150 Lightning is a great fit for certain uses.
I'm surprised it didn't sell based on that. 20 years ago when I was in construction the truck drove at most 130 miles per day (we made sure to work 14 hour days when we were going to spend an hour on the road - the crew hated those jobs), but typically more like 30. The the first thing we did was pull the generator out of the truck and started it. If would could just plug into the truck that would have saved a lot of space/weight in the truck, it seems like a no-brainer.
Then again, all the construction sites I see these days have mains power on a post, which we never had back then (I don't live in the same state so I don't know if this is universal or just this area has always been different).
I just read about the hybrid F150. I didn't know about it until recently I guess because of all the press the Lightning received. The hybrid works the best for me. My state also charges a lot less yearly registration for a hybrid compared to an EV.
7.2kW could run most of my house for days, and it wouldn't be very loud I guess.
The only question is range when those rural folks go to the big city (if less than an hour they do this once a week because groceries in the suburbs of a big city are so much cheaper. If farther than that they still go once a month because of things they can't get. Though I don't know anyone who lives so far out that they can't get to a city and back in a long day.
Otherwise rural folks often have something to fix on the other side of their property that needs tools. Cordless tools do a lot but sometimes are not enough.
The thing is, charging an EV in todays age is something that takes planning. Its not as easy as getting gas. For most people that end up at their house every night. For people that use their vehicles more, it becomes more of a problem. If you are going somewhere overnight, you have to make sure that place has charging.
For fleet vehicles this is the same story. You have no idea what kinda bullshit circumstances you are going to run into, and investing in EVs is just not worth it at this point when a F150 XLT or XL + Honda generator suffices.
Until that trend flips where fast charging takes the same time as gas station stop (or automakers start putting small gas engines in their vehicles) EVs are always going to lag behind gas vehicles.
> Here's a different aspect of utility: The F150 Lightning includes 120V and optionally 240V outlets, so it replaces the need to carry a separate gas-powered generator.
A small generator costs few hundred bucks and fits comfortably in any truck actually used for work. It's a small perk that some pro users would probably pay for, but it's not a selling point for a radically different car design.
it's a few hundred bucks, an extra thing to remember, takes up bed space, requires bringing gas, and is loud and annoying to use. It's not the biggest thing, but it's a pretty nice value add.
I mean, if you bought a Cybertruck, you've already given up on a ton of bed space. I'm not saying that a built-in power source isn't nice, but I doubt it swayed any minds.
You have one reason listed, which is going 80mph (which is illegal in most states). They also can't tow long distances easily, but are superior in nearly every other way.
Most of the places where you would realistically use a truck have highways that are at least 75 mph. And its not the 80 mph thats important, its the fact that the faster you try to get to the destination, the more the range drains, which conversely takes you longer to get to the destination if you consider charging time.
Calling out does nothing. Everyone is aware of the issues.
The problem is nobody is willing to use their constitutional right to fight for justice, because everyone is deathly afraid of losing even a little bit of their comfortable life.
If people were more willing to use the rights given to them by a specific amendment, none of this would happen.
If we need to fall back on that one it's going to suck. It isn't going to be glorious or something to celebrate being a part of - it's going to absolutely suck to live through and where we end up at the far end is very much up to chance @see myanmar.
Absolutely, but you can't make someone believe that things like trans athletes, DEI, multi race populations, and whatever else are all extremely minor things compared to how good your life is, until that good life goes away. Its exactly the same thing as with all the anti vaxxers who were dying on respirators saying that they were wrong and begging people to take the vaccine. Everyone needs a reality check.
And on the other side of the isle, people need to realize that is not just political opinions, some people are truly just evil.
Most people in the industrialized world zealously believe what they are told to believe, even if it goes against what's in front of their own eyes. So making things true just by saying or writing them is not that odd.
I think the commentor was talking about Adams's support for Trump. While maybe not normal on Reddit, HN or San Francisco, it's normal enough that more than half the voters agreed with Scott Adams.
Man, its like everyone is blind to the current state of things.
Here is the truth:
* Everyone with above sentiment always votes for anyone libertarian, which is necessarily conservative, and all conservatives are pretty much liars.
* These same conservatives that champion against government overreach, for law and order, and for personal freedoms do the exact opposite once they get into office. Nor do they give a shit about the law.
So yea, the whole libertarian ideology is pretty much dead. Its pretty obvious that the best course of action is to sacrifice personal freedoms and elect a government that can keep a tight rein over the populace and keep things like Nazi ideology from spreading.
Totalitarianism has the same end state whether it comes from the left or the right. It always results in suppression of the truth, broken feedback loops that lead to poor decisions by government, economic failure, and finally either bloody repression, war, or revolution.
It’s possible to move through this to a place of stability. After all, China only had to kill 15-55 million people in the Great Leap Forward and a couple thousand more in 1989. Today they are fairly stable and prosperous, even with tight controls on information. Perhaps the UK will have a similar path!
Both extreme leftism and extreme rightism are composed of the same people - more focused on ideology rather than truth, and authoritarian control rather than voice of reason.
In the middle, there is an acceptable range of compromise. Social media is the new town square. People shouldn't be able to post stuff on there without recourse for lying and spreading misinformation, just like they shouldn't be able to do this in public. History shows that this leads to bad outcomes. Also, history also shows that we can't just have personal freedoms unrestricted.
And just because that "freedom" is being taken away, doesn't mean that the leftists are in charge.
Historically, at least in the US, people are indeed explicitly allowed to lie or spread misinformation in the town square. This is specifically allowed by the first amendment and backed by court cases. Your mention of the “town square” here is interesting, as Marsh v. Alabama and Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins both center around this idea. In both cases the Supreme Court ruled that unrestricted free speech was allowed in the town square, whether it was a company town or a shopping mall, so long as the location was effectively serving as a surrogate town square.
Now of course this is about the UK. But to my knowledge and based on research there are no laws or cases about lying in public. As long as you aren’t committing perjury or slander, or urging violence, or inciting a panic, this isn’t illegal.
Everyone is missing the point, including Karpathy which is the most surprising because he is supposed to be one of the smart ones.
The focus shouldn't be on which sensor to use. If you are going to use humans as examples, just take the time to think how a human drives. We can drive with one eye. We can drive with a screen instead of a windshield. We can drive with a wiremesh representation of the world. We also use audio signals quite a bit when when driving as well.
The way to build a self driving suite is start with the software that builds your representation of the world first. Then any sensor you add in is a fairly trivial problem of sensor fusion + Kalman filtering. That way, as certain tech gets cheaper or better or more expensive and worse, you can just easily swap in what you need to achieve x degree of accuracy.
> ...just take the time to think how a human drives...
We truly have no understanding of how the human brain really models the world around us and reasons over motion, and frankly anyone claiming to is lying and trying to sell something. "But humans can do X with just Y and Z..." is a very seductive idea, but the reality is "humans can do X with just Y, Z, and an extremely complex and almost entirely unknown brain" and thus trying to do X with just Y and Z is basically a fool's errand.
> ...builds your representation of the world first...
So far, I would say that one of the very few representations that can be meaningfully decoupled from the sensors in use is world geometry, and even that is a very weak decoupling because the ways you performantly represent geometry are deeply coupled with the capabilities of your sensors (e.g. LIDAR gives you relatively sparse points with limited spatial consistency, cameras give you dense points with higher spatial consistency, RADAR gives you very sparse targets with velocity). Beyond that, the capabilities of your sensors really define how you represent the world.
The alternative is that you do not "represent" the world but instead have that representation emerge implicitly inside some huge neural net model. But those models and their training end up even more tightly coupled to the type of data and capabilities of your sensors and are basically impossible to move to new sensor types without significant retraining.
> Then any sensor you add in is a fairly trivial problem of sensor fusion + Kalman filtering
"Sensor fusion" means everything and nothing; there are subjects where "sensor fusion" is practically solved (e.g. IMU/AHRS/INS accelerometer+gyro+magnetometer fusion is basically accepted as solved with EKF) and there are other areas where every "fusion" of multiple sensors is entirely bespoke.
Its simpler then that - everyone is facing a hiring crunch because everyone is preparing to weather massive economic downturn as foreign investment pulls out of United States.
Not exactly, and I say this as someone on the boards of multiple companies and have previously been a hiring manager.
It's a employer's market now and new grads in a number of disciples are increasingly underprepared aside from a handful of target programs.
Furthermore, most companies can limit hiring to at most 15 target programs nationally and maybe 3-4 local programs and get by.
For example, a program like UIUC graduates around 1200 CS and CE majors a year from a program with a 4-6% acceptance rate. Just limiting hiring only to UIUC undergrads who pass hiring standards would be enough to fill an entire new grad class. Same with UMich (~1.5k CS/CE undergrads a year), Cal (~1k CS/EECS undergrads a year), and a handful of other target programs.
And if we feel those candidates are overpriced, we can arbitrage talent globally if needed.
I've mentioned this multiple times on HN as well.
Furthermore, the Econ hiring crisis has been going on for a decade.
The stock market (which determines overall hiring) is propped up by large cap Tech, which is currently riding on AI, which is currently riding on TSMC.
US politically is going down the drain. Its a fuse that can only be extinguished by Trumps health issues. China knows this, and is already doing preparations to invade Taiwan should US significantly weaken.
Every other metric that you are see is secondary to this. Big tech hired like crazy during pandemic to grow for cheap cost, and then fired a whole bunch of people later. Companies dgaf about standards, they can essentially brute force stuff with enough headcount and higher salaries.
And now, everyone is watching and waiting to see what will happen.
As I mentioned, I am one of those people who makes asset management decisions.
Political instability is annoying, but most funds are well diversified beyond mega-cap tech and our LPs don't have anywhere else to park capital. There is some opportunistic geopolitical hedging, but it isn't enough to tip the scales.
For example, in my specific segment of the industry (cybersecurity/DefenseTech), we continued to operate as normal in Israel despite having missiles rain down from across the Middle East, a couple attempted suicide bombings near our TLV office, and employees of our portfolio companies and in some cases our founders being deployed.
> Companies dgaf about standards, they can essentially brute force stuff with enough headcount and higher salaries
We did back when I was in BigTech before I entered PE/VC a couple years ago, and it still matters at the companies that I'm a board member or advisor for.
> And now, everyone is watching and waiting to see what will happen
Partially. A lot of diversification was already done.
> US politically is going down the drain. Its a fuse that can only be extinguished by Trumps health issues. China knows this, and is already doing preparations to invade Taiwan should US significantly weaken
In that hypothetical, where else do we go? In such a world, the EU+UK is likely to see a military confrontation with Russia in the 2028-30 timeframe, China is out of the picture, Japan/SK/Aus would be dragged into conflict, India is likely to see a military confrontation with Pakistan or China by 2035, and the Gulf would re-ignite.
I hope you realize that your entire premise is essentially assuming the fact that people are just going to continue showing up to work no matter what happens. This isn't the case. Economy is effectively the desire of people to show up to work and make money so then can spend it on things made by other people through work.
There are events that can happen that are Black Swan events - i.e the unknown, unknowns from an economic perspective, that essentially can fuck up the economy big time. Say Trump institutes martial law after declaring himself forever president. You are going to see significant economic downturn. What happens in a sinking market? Companies move money. Companies will surive. People won't. Its a tale as old as time.
> we continued to operate as normal in Israel despite having missiles rain down from across the Middle East
Thats because an attack by a militant group is much, much different than a economic grind into decline. Its akin to a natural disaster - it doesn't erase economic demand.
>In that hypothetical, where else do we go?
Pretty much WW3. All the ingredients are there, straight down to the ideology being more important than truth. Like you said, when dominoes fall, countries that want to make moves will make moves.
The UK hasn't been a significant option becuase LSE dealflow is dead, and China difficult because of capital controls, and much of the capital flow within China is dry powder from those investors who couldn't exit.
As such, we have nowhere else to park other than the US, though there is an opportunity for opportunistic hedging.
Those same asset managers are my LPs and peers. It's hard enough making a broad ExChina strategy. Making an ExAmerica strategy is even harder given how lopsided the global equities market is.
Furthermore, the articles you yourself provided are either marketing collateral for emerging markets stock (JPM) or opinion pieces by asset managers trying to vouch for their case.
I'd say this article [0] is probably a good enough overview of my thinking - there essentially is a rebalancing, but largely within American markets, with funds flowing into either Money Markets or sector speicifc funds.
Euronext, Deutsche Borse, and NASDAQ Nordic have a combined market cap a little under $10T and a little under $400B in monthly trade volume - it's too small to support an ExChina let alone an ExAmerica strategy. Heck, Euronext and DB's monthly trade volume makes the LSE look attractive.
There are opportunities that are relatively undervalued (eg. European defense majors), but there just aren't enough to make up for the entire US's public equity market. And don't get me started on exit opportunities for privately held assets (eg. PE/VC).
All the data you need is in the bullshit that comes out of the White House, daily. Companies are not pulling out yet because nobody is certain, but the writing has been on the wall. Tech sector froze hiring and did layoffs specifically after the insane tariff policy when everyone realized that its no longer just memes anymore.
For example, today, Jerome Powell just got indited. Its pretty clear that end of central bank independence is coming. Remember, higher up execs dgaf if US economy fails, they have their money bags. Once 2026 elections get cancelled and US goes full fascist, you are gonna see the shitstorm happen real time. On top of that, if US is in Tumroil, China will most likely invade Taiwan, since NATO wouldn't be able to respond, and bye bye all the stock market gains.
Save this comment if you think im being extremely hyperbolic, and make sure to read it again in 2 years.
Perhaps you're intending to say that "a claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" but that's a personal dismissal. The way this is phrased comes off a bit self-important; they don't really "need" that data because they don't "need" you to not dismiss their claim. I rather get the impression they don't care what you think and were just answering your question.
I mean its akin to me saying "hey there is a flood coming, people are preparing for it", and you saying you need to see stats on how many sandbags are being piled up.
If you chose to remain optimistic, thats your decision.
Sure, but the fact that he's willing to do create false/inappropriate charges against the FED chairman is itself a signal to foreign investors how far the US is willing to go to increase the money supply (whereby decreasing the worth of any debts/holdings in USD). It signals an asset previously viewed as safe is now less safe.
> Is Rust faster than C
> Example:
>... unsafe...
Its like Rust proponents can't even see the irony.
reply