Please Apple, no. Making cars is absurdly complex and very difficult to be profitable. Finding a location, building a plant to make the cars, crushing workers rights to make it profitable. Tesla lucked out getting an old Toyota plant for basically free. I just hope they have developed a platform that then a large OEM like Ford might pick up to use.
You think Apple doesn't have what it takes to create 3/4 of a billion dollars in valuation but Tesla does?
I see this as yet another tech field that leverages Apple's IP and knowledge to increase their valuation, revenue, and profits even more
Yes, of course. Millions of financially affluent people can and will afford it. People already pay $50-$100K for all types of vehicles. The Tesla Model X is around $120K.
Ohhhh, you’re talking about the unwashed masses, the middle class. Well, they have the Leaf and the Bolt, Android and Samsung, Sony and Huawei. Cheap and good enough for them.
And all of that is just the tip of the iceberg. Having something a every single layer of the automobile stack from cloud to car and vehicle surroundings and interaction surely signifies that things are moving along the right lines.
"I politely asked Huawei’s Vice President of Communications how he’d explain the reports on Huawei developing facial recognition that would trigger ‘Uighur alarms’ in Xinjiang. “I can’t, which I why I have resigned” he just responded."
Huawei digging a deeper hole...
And the car connection is…?
I think his point is that you come to this forum acting like Huawei's cock holster despite some extremely egregious actions against humanity. I'm sure you'd gladly buy from Huawei since they pay you, but many here aren't so indifferent toward human rights.
The only “next level” battery technology worth talking about is one without lithium.
It makes me want to puke when self-righteous “environmentalists” drive around in their stupid BEVs pretending to save the world, while they destroy a unique eco system and the livelihoods of many indigenous people.
BEVs based on lithium batteries are a disaster, lithium batteries in general are a disaster, but the sheer volume of those going into cars make them particularly unsustainable.
EVs are not bad per se, that’s why there are either FCEVs, which would be best, because they also get rid of the charging problem, or BEVs with non-lithium batteries.
I strongly hope that Apple isn’t the next billion dollar company greenwashing BEVs with lithium batteries.
Asteroid and moon mining is within our sights now, who knows what rare earth elements might be in abundance out there.
It’s an absolute necessity that we get to this type of resource acquisition ASAP, but humanity is unmotivated... at the top, where the wealthy and the powerful are more interested in maintaining the status quo. I highly doubt we will see even the start of this infrastructure in our/my lifetime (I’m 45).
This is stuff we would have been doing long ago if the “space race” hadn’t been purely about showing up the USSR on a once & done political gamble...
Have you considered the massive expense of 1) establishing a mining operation on the moon, and 2) the "astronomical" expense of ferrying shiploads of ore back to earth, much less the expense of lifting those same empty vessels back off the Earth, into orbit and back to the moon?
Yes, of course. Millions of financially affluent people can and will afford it. People already pay $50-$100K for all types of vehicles. The Tesla Model X is around $120K.
Ohhhh, you’re talking about the unwashed masses, the middle class. Well, they have the Leaf and the Bolt, Android and Samsung, Sony and Huawei. Cheap and good enough for them.
And all of that is just the tip of the iceberg. Having something a every single layer of the automobile stack from cloud to car and vehicle surroundings and interaction surely signifies that things are moving along the right lines.
"I politely asked Huawei’s Vice President of Communications how he’d explain the reports on Huawei developing facial recognition that would trigger ‘Uighur alarms’ in Xinjiang. “I can’t, which I why I have resigned” he just responded."
Huawei digging a deeper hole...
And the car connection is…?
I think his point is that you come to this forum acting like Huawei's cock holster despite some extremely egregious actions against humanity. I'm sure you'd gladly buy from Huawei since they pay you, but many here aren't so indifferent toward human rights.
Human rights have nothing to do with this. It was just a drive by potshot. It had no place here.
My point added some much needed contrast to the absurd claim I was replying to. Yes, it was about Huawei because I know Huawei (and Apple!) and every link proves how out of whack with reality the OP was. But each to their own, no? People can read and form (hopefully) more informed opinions. I think that is the whole point of a discussion.
However, I am independent. I do not work for Huawei or Apple even though I know both companies to a similar level.
I think it wise to try and stick to things we know about unless we are speculating. So I tend not to spout off about other companies I know less about. I think that's reasonable.
Throwing politics in just for the sake of it makes little sense. In this case it is politics mixed with ethics and he definitely hasn't read the document in question. He just picked up on a since deleted tweet and probably the WP article.
Facial recognition has always had ethical issues. ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE. This is just one more and the facial recognition software in question was not even created by Huawei! It was tested on their platforms and ethnicity was just ONE of many parameters.
Thirty years ago I worked in the UK government and met someone from the 'subversive' department. I kid you not! Her job was to watch VCR tapes of people in protest marches and use a very crude method of facial recognition, simply picking out faces that appeared with unusual frequency on those marches. Do you doubt that department has moved with the times? Including a name change.
Yes, it was confidential but probably not for the reasons many would like to think. And you would be foolish to think the exact same research is not being carried out anywhere facial reconignition is being developed. Also with confidential tags.
Ethnic identification is NOT an issue in itself, it is just another parameter. How it is employed could be a problem but that has nothing to do whatsoever with the subject at hand.
It would be better if people didn't make absurd claims that didn't need balancing out a bit in the first place, but that's life.
Please Apple, no. Making cars is absurdly complex and very difficult to be profitable. Finding a location, building a plant to make the cars, crushing workers rights to make it profitable. Tesla lucked out getting an old Toyota plant for basically free. I just hope they have developed a platform that then a large OEM like Ford might pick up to use.
Looks like someone hasn't read, or kept up with, any news in the automotive industry in the past few years...
Yes, of course. Millions of financially affluent people can and will afford it. People already pay $50-$100K for all types of vehicles. The Tesla Model X is around $120K.
Ohhhh, you’re talking about the unwashed masses, the middle class. Well, they have the Leaf and the Bolt, Android and Samsung, Sony and Huawei. Cheap and good enough for them.
And all of that is just the tip of the iceberg. Having something a every single layer of the automobile stack from cloud to car and vehicle surroundings and interaction surely signifies that things are moving along the right lines.
"I politely asked Huawei’s Vice President of Communications how he’d explain the reports on Huawei developing facial recognition that would trigger ‘Uighur alarms’ in Xinjiang. “I can’t, which I why I have resigned” he just responded."
Huawei digging a deeper hole...
And the car connection is...?
No car connection needed. He is simply pointing out what a POS Huawei is. What is it about Huawei that triggers you when that POS is attacked for what it is?
Yes, of course. Millions of financially affluent people can and will afford it. People already pay $50-$100K for all types of vehicles. The Tesla Model X is around $120K.
Ohhhh, you’re talking about the unwashed masses, the middle class. Well, they have the Leaf and the Bolt, Android and Samsung, Sony and Huawei. Cheap and good enough for them.
And all of that is just the tip of the iceberg. Having something a every single layer of the automobile stack from cloud to car and vehicle surroundings and interaction surely signifies that things are moving along the right lines.
"I politely asked Huawei’s Vice President of Communications how he’d explain the reports on Huawei developing facial recognition that would trigger ‘Uighur alarms’ in Xinjiang. “I can’t, which I why I have resigned” he just responded."
Huawei digging a deeper hole...
And the car connection is...?
No car connection needed. He is simply pointing out what a POS Huawei is. What is it about Huawei that triggers you when that POS is attacked for what it is?
But he didn't trigger me. I gave a one line response to keep things on topic. I basically ignored him.
I was responding to your absurd comment which at least was in line with the topic although your 'unwashed' classist tone was somewhat questionable. I just delivered you some knowledge you clearly didn't have because Apple doesn't even have a single product in this industry yet.
Facial recognition has always had ethical issues. ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE. This is just one more and the facial recognition software in question was not even created by Huawei! It was tested on their platforms and ethnicity was just ONE of many parameters.
That is at best a very naive thing to say in this context; and actively defending Huawei with how it was only tested on their platform, and how ethnicity was only one parameter, imo pretty much takes away the naiveté defence.
It's like playing the "would you kill baby Hitler if you went back in time?" philosophical discussion with someone that instantly, and with way too much passion, turn the whole thing around to being about defending the freedom of speech of Mr. H.
Facial recognition has always had ethical issues. ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE. This is just one more and the facial recognition software in question was not even created by Huawei! It was tested on their platforms and ethnicity was just ONE of many parameters.
That is at best a very naive thing to say in this context; and actively defending Huawei with how it was only tested on their platform, and how ethnicity was only one parameter, imo pretty much takes away the naiveté defence.
It's like playing the "would you kill baby Hitler if you went back in time?" philosophical discussion with someone that instantly, and with way too much passion, turn the whole thing around to being about defending the freedom of speech of Mr. H.
I am not defending anyone nor am I attacking anyone.
I have given some factual information.
You will find similar (or dare I say identical) ethical debates playing out across the world.
In this case China, for better or worse, is proving to be the main testbed for the technology and Chinese companies are leading the field. There is no getting away from that.
From a research perspective the parameters are what they are. How and why the resulting technologies are employed and monitored is another story.
Ethnicity is an issue in facial recognition. There are many other issues of course.
Facial recognition has always had ethical issues. ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE. This is just one more and the facial recognition software in question was not even created by Huawei! It was tested on their platforms and ethnicity was just ONE of many parameters.
That is at best a very naive thing to say in this context; and actively defending Huawei with how it was only tested on their platform, and how ethnicity was only one parameter, imo pretty much takes away the naiveté defence.
It's like playing the "would you kill baby Hitler if you went back in time?" philosophical discussion with someone that instantly, and with way too much passion, turn the whole thing around to being about defending the freedom of speech of Mr. H.
I am not defending anyone nor am I attacking anyone.
I have given some factual information.
You will find similar (or dare I say identical) ethical debates playing out across the world.
In this case China, for better or worse, is proving to be the main testbed for the technology and Chinese companies are leading the field. There is no getting away from that.
From a research perspective the parameters are what they are. How and why the resulting technologies are employed and monitored is another story.
Ethnicity is an issue in facial recognition. There are many other issues of course.
Please Apple, no. Making cars is absurdly complex and very difficult to be profitable.
Please Apple, don't do it because it's hard. 🙄
Sometimes a short post is the most powerful kind of post. Quite often I write a post with multiple sentences then after reading it I decide to delete one or two of the sentences because they aren't as good as the others.
Yes, of course. Millions of financially affluent people can and will afford it. People already pay $50-$100K for all types of vehicles. The Tesla Model X is around $120K.
Ohhhh, you’re talking about the unwashed masses, the middle class. Well, they have the Leaf and the Bolt, Android and Samsung, Sony and Huawei. Cheap and good enough for them.
And all of that is just the tip of the iceberg. Having something a every single layer of the automobile stack from cloud to car and vehicle surroundings and interaction surely signifies that things are moving along the right lines.
"I politely asked Huawei’s Vice President of Communications how he’d explain the reports on Huawei developing facial recognition that would trigger ‘Uighur alarms’ in Xinjiang. “I can’t, which I why I have resigned” he just responded."
Huawei digging a deeper hole...
And the car connection is…?
I think his point is that you come to this forum acting like Huawei's cock holster despite some extremely egregious actions against humanity. I'm sure you'd gladly buy from Huawei since they pay you, but many here aren't so indifferent toward human rights.
People forget that gasoline is a battery - a chemical battery. Gasoline can even be constructed at home using water and carbon dioxide. The reason we drill it up from the ground is because it's free down there and doesn't require electricity to create it by modifying the chemical bonds of H2O and CO2. Water isn't a pollutant. Some people say CO2 is a pollutant, but actually it won't count as a pollutant in this case if the CO2 is already pulled out o the atmosphere in the first place to create your fuel. That makes this fuel carbon-neutral. This technique isn't theory, it's fact. One company, Carbon Engineering, is already making gasoline this way and the price is only $4/gallon, which is pretty close to the world price of oil already.
<--
Yes, instead of putting electricity directly in the car, lets use electricity to create "gasoline" with whatever % energy loss there is, which I would assume is fairly significant like the production of Hydrogen is. Then we put that in your car, which then loses another 12-30% of that energy through energy loss(heat/friction). Best case scenario, your losing bare minimum 15%(realistically closer to 30%) of the energy in creating the fuel, then another 12-30% when burning the fuel, not including the transportation cost of the fuel unless you propose that it is created at every gas station. Then you have the equipment cost that goes along with that. Or we can just take the electricity(really easy transport, infrastructure already in place, minimal energy loss), put it directly in a car, and only have the energy loss in that vehicle, which is already more efficient that a combustion engine.
Facial recognition has always had ethical issues. ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE. This is just one more and the facial recognition software in question was not even created by Huawei! It was tested on their platforms and ethnicity was just ONE of many parameters.
That is at best a very naive thing to say in this context; and actively defending Huawei with how it was only tested on their platform, and how ethnicity was only one parameter, imo pretty much takes away the naiveté defence.
It's like playing the "would you kill baby Hitler if you went back in time?" philosophical discussion with someone that instantly, and with way too much passion, turn the whole thing around to being about defending the freedom of speech of Mr. H.
I am not defending anyone nor am I attacking anyone.
I have given some factual information.
You will find similar (or dare I say identical) ethical debates playing out across the world.
In this case China, for better or worse, is proving to be the main testbed for the technology and Chinese companies are leading the field. There is no getting away from that.
From a research perspective the parameters are what they are. How and why the resulting technologies are employed and monitored is another story.
Ethnicity is an issue in facial recognition. There are many other issues of course.
"Such technology has in recent years gained an expanding role among police departments in China, human rights activists say. But the document sheds new light on how Huawei, the world’s biggest maker of telecommunications equipment, has also contributed to its development, providing the servers, cameras, cloud-computing infrastructure and other tools undergirding the systems’ technological might."
You will find similar (or dare I say identical) ethical debates playing out across the world.
In this case China, for better or worse, is proving to be the main testbed for the technology and Chinese companies are leading the field. There is no getting away from that.
From a research perspective the parameters are what they are. How and why the resulting technologies are employed and monitored is another story.
Actually, the story is the misuse of surveillance technology, and Huawei is complicit.
Facial recognition has always had ethical issues. ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE. This is just one more and the facial recognition software in question was not even created by Huawei! It was tested on their platforms and ethnicity was just ONE of many parameters.
That is at best a very naive thing to say in this context; and actively defending Huawei with how it was only tested on their platform, and how ethnicity was only one parameter, imo pretty much takes away the naiveté defence.
It's like playing the "would you kill baby Hitler if you went back in time?" philosophical discussion with someone that instantly, and with way too much passion, turn the whole thing around to being about defending the freedom of speech of Mr. H.
I am not defending anyone nor am I attacking anyone.
I have given some factual information.
You will find similar (or dare I say identical) ethical debates playing out across the world.
In this case China, for better or worse, is proving to be the main testbed for the technology and Chinese companies are leading the field. There is no getting away from that.
From a research perspective the parameters are what they are. How and why the resulting technologies are employed and monitored is another story.
Ethnicity is an issue in facial recognition. There are many other issues of course.
Technology is never developed in a vacuum where everyone involved can just claim innocence all while knowing the pain that their work causes.
You ARE defending helping implement and improve technology used to target ethnic minorities.
I will repeat. There is nothing ingerently wrong with designing technologies to discern race or ethnicity. That is happening ALL OVER the world as I speak. The problems arise with how the resulting technologies are used and monitored.
I am working on a project at a supercomputing centre (visualisation) and ethnicity is simply a mechanism that is necessary for research purposes. There is no facial recognition going on but ethnicity is a requirement in analysing results. And that is where the above (BBC) link comes into play. Systems need to be better at balancing their effectiveness when I comes to facial recognition and that, I'm guessing here, probably entails being able to better discern between the possible subsets of 'race/ethnicity'. I'm not even sure they are the correct terms.
And I am not defending a stance one way or another.
Let me highlight something else. All Chinese ID cards include information on ethnicity. 56 I believe. All Chinese people have an ID card and I believe that most, if not all, adults are in the government's facial recognition system. There is possibly little real need for ethnicity 'alerts' as simply recognising the individual would give you their ethnicity anyway.
That's my guess on the ID situation in China. I do not have first hand knowledge. It's simple speculation.
Databases make the world go around. Linking faces to information in those databases is something that can be cause for concern. I've worked on a DNA database in a Barcelona hospital. All legitimate but clearly if people can be identified down to their DNA, the linking of databases could be concerning. Hence the link to the article on the Pentagon's use of facial recognition.
Let's not forget that some countries even require your religion to be detailed on your ID card.
Facial recognition has always had ethical issues. ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE. This is just one more and the facial recognition software in question was not even created by Huawei! It was tested on their platforms and ethnicity was just ONE of many parameters.
That is at best a very naive thing to say in this context; and actively defending Huawei with how it was only tested on their platform, and how ethnicity was only one parameter, imo pretty much takes away the naiveté defence.
It's like playing the "would you kill baby Hitler if you went back in time?" philosophical discussion with someone that instantly, and with way too much passion, turn the whole thing around to being about defending the freedom of speech of Mr. H.
I am not defending anyone nor am I attacking anyone.
I have given some factual information.
You will find similar (or dare I say identical) ethical debates playing out across the world.
In this case China, for better or worse, is proving to be the main testbed for the technology and Chinese companies are leading the field. There is no getting away from that.
From a research perspective the parameters are what they are. How and why the resulting technologies are employed and monitored is another story.
Ethnicity is an issue in facial recognition. There are many other issues of course.
Technology is never developed in a vacuum where everyone involved can just claim innocence all while knowing the pain that their work causes.
You ARE defending helping implement and improve technology used to target ethnic minorities.
I will repeat. There is nothing ingerently wrong with designing technologies to discern race or ethnicity. That is happening ALL OVER the world as I speak. The problems arise with how the resulting technologies are used and monitored.
No one is claiming that out of context work on a technology is inherently evil; helping/working on it knowing that it's used for ethnic cleansing very much is.
And you are going out of your way to defend and support that.
I will repeat. There is nothing ingerently wrong with designing technologies to discern race or ethnicity. That is happening ALL OVER the world as I speak. The problems arise with how the resulting technologies are used and monitored.
Sorry, yes, there is something inherently wrong about that. What possible purpose would that serve other than racism? And I find it really suspect that your work requires that racial identity be known.
Comments
I see this as yet another tech field that leverages Apple's IP and knowledge to increase their valuation, revenue, and profits even more
My point added some much needed contrast to the absurd claim I was replying to. Yes, it was about Huawei because I know Huawei (and Apple!) and every link proves how out of whack with reality the OP was. But each to their own, no? People can read and form (hopefully) more informed opinions. I think that is the whole point of a discussion.
However, I am independent. I do not work for Huawei or Apple even though I know both companies to a similar level.
I think it wise to try and stick to things we know about unless we are speculating. So I tend not to spout off about other companies I know less about. I think that's reasonable.
Throwing politics in just for the sake of it makes little sense. In this case it is politics mixed with ethics and he definitely hasn't read the document in question. He just picked up on a since deleted tweet and probably the WP article.
Facial recognition has always had ethical issues. ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE. This is just one more and the facial recognition software in question was not even created by Huawei! It was tested on their platforms and ethnicity was just ONE of many parameters.
Thirty years ago I worked in the UK government and met someone from the 'subversive' department. I kid you not! Her job was to watch VCR tapes of people in protest marches and use a very crude method of facial recognition, simply picking out faces that appeared with unusual frequency on those marches. Do you doubt that department has moved with the times? Including a name change.
Yes, it was confidential but probably not for the reasons many would like to think. And you would be foolish to think the exact same research is not being carried out anywhere facial reconignition is being developed. Also with confidential tags.
Ethnic identification is NOT an issue in itself, it is just another parameter. How it is employed could be a problem but that has nothing to do whatsoever with the subject at hand.
It would be better if people didn't make absurd claims that didn't need balancing out a bit in the first place, but that's life.
I was responding to your absurd comment which at least was in line with the topic although your 'unwashed' classist tone was somewhat questionable. I just delivered you some knowledge you clearly didn't have because Apple doesn't even have a single product in this industry yet.
It's like playing the "would you kill baby Hitler if you went back in time?" philosophical discussion with someone that instantly, and with way too much passion, turn the whole thing around to being about defending the freedom of speech of Mr. H.
I have given some factual information.
You will find similar (or dare I say identical) ethical debates playing out across the world.
In this case China, for better or worse, is proving to be the main testbed for the technology and Chinese companies are leading the field. There is no getting away from that.
From a research perspective the parameters are what they are. How and why the resulting technologies are employed and monitored is another story.
Ethnicity is an issue in facial recognition. There are many other issues of course.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-48222017
https://onezero.medium.com/exclusive-this-is-how-the-u-s-militarys-massive-facial-recognition-system-works-bb764291b96d
You ARE defending helping implement and improve technology used to target ethnic minorities.
'Huawei's cock holster'
🤣
Yes, instead of putting electricity directly in the car, lets use electricity to create "gasoline" with whatever % energy loss there is, which I would assume is fairly significant like the production of Hydrogen is. Then we put that in your car, which then loses another 12-30% of that energy through energy loss(heat/friction). Best case scenario, your losing bare minimum 15%(realistically closer to 30%) of the energy in creating the fuel, then another 12-30% when burning the fuel, not including the transportation cost of the fuel unless you propose that it is created at every gas station. Then you have the equipment cost that goes along with that. Or we can just take the electricity(really easy transport, infrastructure already in place, minimal energy loss), put it directly in a car, and only have the energy loss in that vehicle, which is already more efficient that a combustion engine.
https://www.wired.com/2015/03/apples-new-battery-tech/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/12/08/huawei-tested-ai-software-that-could-recognize-uighur-minorities-alert-police-report-says/
"Such technology has in recent years gained an expanding role among police departments in China, human rights activists say. But the document sheds new light on how Huawei, the world’s biggest maker of telecommunications equipment, has also contributed to its development, providing the servers, cameras, cloud-computing infrastructure and other tools undergirding the systems’ technological might."
Actually, the story is the misuse of surveillance technology, and Huawei is complicit.
Then there's WeChat;
https://www.wsj.com/articles/wechat-becomes-a-powerful-surveillance-tool-everywhere-in-china-11608633003 ;
You seem fine with whatever the fuck China, Huawei, WeChat, et al do as long as you get your 5G and IoT on time.
Even the EU is getting off its ass and doing something about it;
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20201211IPR93641/human-rights-breaches-in-china-iran-and-egypt
"The text was approved by 604 votes in favour, 20 against and 57 abstentions. For all the details, it will be available in full here. (17.12.2020)"
I am working on a project at a supercomputing centre (visualisation) and ethnicity is simply a mechanism that is necessary for research purposes. There is no facial recognition going on but ethnicity is a requirement in analysing results. And that is where the above (BBC) link comes into play. Systems need to be better at balancing their effectiveness when I comes to facial recognition and that, I'm guessing here, probably entails being able to better discern between the possible subsets of 'race/ethnicity'. I'm not even sure they are the correct terms.
And I am not defending a stance one way or another.
Let me highlight something else. All Chinese ID cards include information on ethnicity. 56 I believe. All Chinese people have an ID card and I believe that most, if not all, adults are in the government's facial recognition system. There is possibly little real need for ethnicity 'alerts' as simply recognising the individual would give you their ethnicity anyway.
That's my guess on the ID situation in China. I do not have first hand knowledge. It's simple speculation.
Databases make the world go around. Linking faces to information in those databases is something that can be cause for concern. I've worked on a DNA database in a Barcelona hospital. All legitimate but clearly if people can be identified down to their DNA, the linking of databases could be concerning. Hence the link to the article on the Pentagon's use of facial recognition.
Let's not forget that some countries even require your religion to be detailed on your ID card.
Either way, not relevant in this thread.
I watched a Black Mirror episode last night where every car on the road was an iCruiser or looked like one.
And you are going out of your way to defend and support that.