• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


  • check
    Agree 994
  • info_outline
    Informative 268
  • tag_faces
    Funny 152
  • thumb_up
    Thumbs Up 483
  • thumb_up
    Likes (Old) 162


This user doesn't have any awards

About leadeater

  • Title
  • Birthday 1987-09-23


  • CPU
    Intel i7 4930K
  • Motherboard
    Asus Rampage IV Black Edition
  • RAM
    16GB G.Skill TridentX F3-2400C10-4GTX
  • GPU
    Dual Asus R9-290X
  • Case
    LD PC-V8
  • Storage
    4 512GB Samsung 850 Pro & 2 512GB Samsung 840 Pro & 1 256GB Samsung 840 Pro
  • PSU
    EVGA Supernova NEX 1500 Classified
  • Display(s)
    Dell U3014 30"
  • Cooling
    Custom EKWB, 3x 480 RAD everything cooled inc ram (why not?)
  • Keyboard
    Razor Black Window Ultimate BF4
  • Mouse
    Mad Catz R.A.T. 5
  • Sound
    Custom build speakers, home theater sound
  • Operating System
    Windows 10

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    New Zealand
  • Occupation
    Systems Engineer | IT

Recent Profile Visitors

3,472 profile views
  1. Catch me outsi.... *head explodes*
  2. Sorry wasn't trying to be aggressive.
  3. A lot of people watch Netflix here in NZ along with other TV on demand services. Those require 9Mbps for HD and if two people want to watch different things on different devices that's 18Mbps minimum but you actually need slightly more, then if another person wants to browse the internet and watch youtube more again. The minimum speed offered on our UFB network is 30Mbps which is well reasoned and basically calculated from the above usage scenario. If you look at any internet usage data of NZ and it's more than a year old it's useless and irrelevant now, we also have a ton or rural houses that if excluded would change the results significantly. Statistics and data is a wonderful thing but you need to be aware of what it means and what it is showing and not showing. Edit: Also that source, thanks @Belgarathian, doesn't even show data usage and it's just purely population. What is that supposed to show? We already know Australia has more people, it doesn't give any information on how NZ or AUS use their internet and I can assure you people in NZ use a lot more than AUS do now.
  4. Talk to them about a contract free or 6 month contract installation. It'll cost a lot more to get installed but I've never seen a company not allow this, all the contract does is ensure they make a return on the install cost so if you just pay the upfront the issue goes away.
  5. Do you have the Domain Controller server role installed on the server? Do an iperf network test between the computers to check actual network speed. Setup a RAM disk and do a file copy to and from that. Doing the above will give a little more information on how to track down your issue.
  6. There is already a thread dedicated for this and pinned.
  7. Also notice how short of a time span the graph is over? So short it's meaningless and if you project the shown trend forward a year you might be in the 2000 miles per critical intervention.
  8. Actually I wouldn't say the damage is all that light. Both cars are very new and having seen a number of accidents involving new and old cars at city and highway speeds the actual impact speed of this crash is about what you said. Impact speeds of crashes in towns is typically much less than the speed limit, probably around 10-15 mph, due to breaking. Here you can see significant deformity to the side and roof of the ford, the sunroof has been bent and pushed out due to the roof structure being deformed. Sides of cars and roofs are extremely strong in modern cars and are not part of crumple zones, they are designed to transmit the energy around the cabin and not encroach in on the cabin space. If the Ford was a 1990's Honda for example anyone in the rear passenger seat on the impact side would likely have significant to critical injuries. Here is a great example of what I'm talking about and cars are even safer than this now. Don't let the lack of visible damage to the front of the Volvo fool you.
  9. https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/us-dot-advances-deployment-connected-vehicle-technology-prevent-hundreds-thousands
  10. Read the edits I made, NTSB does do highway where needed. Edit: Also the NHTSA is already investigating that Telsa crash.
  11. There is it's called the Police and the Serious Crash Unit or what it's locally called, NHTSA and the NTSB.
  12. Programming error is also failing to take something in to account or just plain bad coding. On the point about the sensors being a large factor in the problem that means it's a hardware issue and nothing to do with AI at all. That crash a while ago where the Tesla hit the truck trailer was caused by the front facing sensor being blinded, the crash would not have happened otherwise. Sun-strike for humans is rather common too and causes many accidents. The other sensor, the radar, detected the trailer height as being a road sign due to it's height and angle from the sensor. https://electrek.co/2016/07/01/understanding-fatal-tesla-accident-autopilot-nhtsa-probe/ Either your argument is about AI not being ready, hardware not being ready or both and right now I from what I can tell you think it's the AI component where most of the issues are around the sensors and the processing power to process information.
  13. That's cool, not going to stop you from thinking that but for me personally if I was driving down the road and there was a car waiting to turn I would trust the AI car far more than a human to not turn in front of me. I'd feel safer knowing the cars around me are AI not less, not everyone feels the same and a 15 minute debate online isn't going to change that.
  14. BUT WHEN!!! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WHEN?!?! Waiting sucks.
  15. Actually we are very good at decision making and judgement, extremely good. Where we fail at is the ability to do this to our full capacity 100% of the time and that is where a computer surpasses a human, if we could there would be zero crashes caused by drivers and only from mechanical error. AI doesn't need to 'think for itself' why would it need to? Avoiding a crash is only a math problem, as long as you can see and track everything around you all that is required to prevent a crash is a giant math crunching computer (GPU) and probability modeling of what might happen. Once you know what is happening and what might happen the car can react to that, but if I as a human decide to purposefully drive in to the AI car their isn't anything it can do to prevent me for doing so other than exploding/vaporizing. Edit: Also most of the high profile crashes of AI cars have been due to limitations in the sensors and not programming error.