To purists, rabbit-free racing is real racing. Pat Butcher makes that case in his book “The Perfect Distance,” which details the rivalry between the milers Sebastian Coe and Steve Ovett. Pacers, Butcher writes, are ruining athletics “because they are effectively being paid to lose.” A new phenomenon? Hardly. Butcher’s book was published in 2005.
In other words, pacers are not going anywhere — especially in the current era of super spikes and super tracks, twin pieces of technology that have helped milers run even faster. Athletes want to chase records. Fans want to watch them do the unthinkable. And meet directors are happy to oblige.
“It’s so much easier to run behind someone to take the edge off mentally and physically,” said Mark Coogan, an Olympic marathoner and the coach of Team New Balance Boston. “If you have a good pacer, you can try to relax for as long as possible before you have to take the race on yourself.”
https://youtu.be/nMdEjn-I28E #healing
Toshirō Mifune
Kid makes an informative video on how to make “Hot Dr Pepper”
Rashida Jones Remembering a Conversation with Tupac Shakur
protect yourself and have supplies.
(Source: The New York Times)
Bonnefon and co are seeking to find a way through this ethical dilemma by gauging public opinion. Their idea is that the public is much more likely to go along with a scenario that aligns with their own views.
So these guys posed these kinds of ethical dilemmas to several hundred workers on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk to find out what they thought. The participants were given scenarios in which one or more pedestrians could be saved if a car were to swerve into a barrier, killing its occupant or a pedestrian.
At the same time, the researchers varied some of the details such as the actual number of pedestrians that could be saved, whether the driver or an on-board computer made the decision to swerve and whether the participants were asked to imagine themselves as the occupant or an anonymous person.
The results are interesting, if predictable. In general, people are comfortable with the idea that self-driving vehicles should be programmed to minimize the death toll.
-If I designed a self-driving car and you were riding in it and the car ended up in a life or death situation–where you die or a pedestrian dies– would you want me to base what the default mode is (kill you or kill pedestrian) based on what a few hundred people on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk thought?
I’m almost certain the answer to that question should be “No,” but, you know, think about it.
This rad looking class pointed me toward this video about deep learning. if you want to get excited about it, check out this vid.