Okay I was stumped about how this works because it's not explained, as far as I can tell. But I guess the sensor array has its long axis perpendicular to the direction the train is traveling.
Readit Newsjeffbee commented on Line scan camera image processing for train photography daniel.lawrence.lu/blog/y... · Posted by u/dllu
jeffbee commented on The US Department of Agriculture Bans Support for Renewables insideclimatenews.org/new... · Posted by u/mooreds
While that’s technically correct, they could have put them back
This is what Google says when asked about why the panels were removed:
“President Ronald Reagan had the White House solar panels removed in 1986 as part of his administration's broader opposition to government involvement in renewable energy and a belief that the free market, not the government, should drive energy policy. While the administration cited cost as a reason for not reinstalling them during roof repairs, the decision reflected Reagan's philosophy and his administration's cuts to renewable energy funding”
Not sure about the sources though. So I guess it’s debatable
Still interesting to realize that the US govt can zigzag so much, and that it’s not necessarily progressing in a specific direction
If I ran this board I would instantly and permanently ban people for quoting a discount robot. Why would you expect someone to engage in a conversation by proxy with Google AI Mode search results?
jeffbee commented on The US Department of Agriculture Bans Support for Renewables insideclimatenews.org/new... · Posted by u/mooreds
It was pretty shocking to me, learning that the White House had solar panels in the 70s!, and Reagan removed them when he came into office
While this is true, it's also true that they were pretty awful early thermal solar panels and Reagan removed them not to own the libs but because the roof was leaking. I doubt that this was politically motivated by Reagan, or that Reagan was generally cognizant of anything in 1986.
jeffbee commented on Waymo granted permit to begin testing in New York City cnbc.com/2025/08/22/waymo... · Posted by u/achristmascarl
its interesting. at beginning in SF the waymos would just stop cold anytime they saw a person or a bicyclist. now they're acting a lot more like a person. if I'm in the crosswalk they've started playing chicken just like a normal driver would, starting to go into the turn while watching to see if you're going to stop and give them the right of way. if you keep going, they will stop.
There are still plenty of humans in SF who are on to the nature of the game. A few of the shambling lunatics who inhabit the vicinity of 6th and Jessie know that they can just harass a Waymo and it will stand there forever.
jeffbee commented on Leaving Gmail for Mailbox.org giuliomagnifico.blog/post... · Posted by u/giuliomagnifico
How do I get my family to move off of Gmail?
I keep telling them that Google spies on you, but they don’t care because it is free and it works.
How reliable are these providers and what are the chances these providers emails would bounce or go to spam when sending an email?
Maybe because when normal people hear you say "Google spies on you" they think you are a crank. Perhaps try to reduce it to a statement that conveys valid information.
jeffbee commented on Waymo granted permit to begin testing in New York City cnbc.com/2025/08/22/waymo... · Posted by u/achristmascarl
The game-theoretic aspect of this is interesting to me. A lawful robot will never make progress in Manhattan because the people will just walk across its path continuously, forever. To be an effective driver in Manhattan you have to intimate that you're willing to hit people, without ever hitting them. If humans believe that the Waymo will categorically never hit them, then the Waymo will never get a turn.
jeffbee commented on How does the US use water? construction-physics.com/... · Posted by u/juliangamble
jeffbee commented on From GPT-4 to GPT-5: Measuring progress through MedHELM [pdf] fertrevino.com/docs/gpt5_... · Posted by u/fertrevino
jeffbee commented on How does the US use water? construction-physics.com/... · Posted by u/juliangamble
That's not the point, the question was whether an apartment building would use the same amount of water and clearly an apartment would consume substantially less water.
If you replace the area of that data center with apartments, as the question suggested, it would add half again to the local population, which could indeed use 30% of the city water.
jeffbee commented on How does the US use water? construction-physics.com/... · Posted by u/juliangamble
> People who oppose housing construction often invoke "but what about the water??" as their argument, while the fact is that California cities use less water per capita and overall than they did 50 years ago, almost entirely because of better toilets.
Those people aren't talking about water use, but all the infrastructure around water. If you take a plot of land that used to be occupied by a couple of single family homes and want to build a multi-story apartment building on it, you need bigger, stronger water supply infrastructure to support all those new sinks. You need bigger, stronger sewage infrastructure to support all the new drains and toilets. Not to mention better electrical infra, different garbage disposal infra, and so on. While I'm generally supportive of "moar housing" you can't just plop the housing down and say job done. You need more of everything else peripheral to and supporting that housing.
You, like them, are wrong, for reasons that I already explained. These urban systems were designed to deliver and were in fact delivering more water 50 years ago than they do currently. Much more. They are underutilized! Building the apartments only takes them marginally up in the direction of their design capacity.