I have never found computers disappointing, and I have spent most of my career/life learning about them - from processor design through to distributed systems. Mostly I've been disappointed in the disparity between the number of interesting things I'd like to do, and the number of lifetimes I have available to me.

Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

Human beings don't empathize well with situations nor people they never have to personally face. That's a well-lit path to fascism. We're one step closer to 1984.

(FWIW, the business story for Waymo has never been about its hardware making its way to consumers. It's always been about whether Waymo continues to run its own taxi service or leases out hardware and operations to other taxi businesses).

We're still in the early days of self driving cars, and as much simulation and miles as they have, they're still constantly getting exposed to real world conditions that are new to them. The world is dynamic, so this will always remain true.

It remains to be seen where we'll converge on capability, incident rate, and acceptance.

I haven't tried out Junie yet, but the concept seems pretty compelling to me. I want a good IDE for the language I'm using, and I'd like an AI that's well integrated and trained on delegating to it for algorithmic/deterministic transforms (e.g. IDE-driven refactorings).

If you're stopping often or long, something is wrong with your setup.

Maybe 50 road trips? Usually hundreds of miles, with the longest at 1000mi. Literally the easiest road trips I've done in my life.

In addition, for superchargers, you can see real-time stall availability, so if a particular site was crowded, you could just opt for the next. (Easy enough to do since there are so many).

If you're annoyed by the braking lights on a Tesla, it's because you're following too (dangerously) closely.

I've been doing some language work recently, and I'm quite sympathetic to bidirectional inferencing. I think, though, that modern PLs need better solutions for adhoc overloading. It's notorious for its complexity, blowing up algorithmically, and confusing users with surprising results (why oh why did the compiler select this function over the one I intended). That said, I haven't discovered a good alternative (for my purposes) yet.

On second reading, I'm thinking this might mean, "since Apple only implements Face ID, biometrics on Apple devices is less secure", which makes more sense (to me).