Do we even know that the child was injured? All I've seen anyone officially claim is that the Waymo made contact, the kid fell over, then stood up and walked to the side of the road. Assuming the Waymo was still braking hard, 6mph means it was about 1/4s and about 30cm from reaching a full stop, so it could be a very minor incident we're talking about here.
I'm not aware of any statistics for how often children come into contact with human-driven cars.
Your expectation is wrong in this case for almost all languages. The design of Pylance (as is sorta forced by Python itself) chooses to execute Python to discover things like the Python version, and the Python startup process can run arbitrary code through mechanisms like sitecustomize.py or having a Python interpreter checked into the repo itself. To my knowledge, Go is one of the few ecosystems that treats it as a security failure to execute user-supplied code during analysis tasks, many languages have macros or dynamic features that basically require executing some amount of the code being analyzed.
I did a pretty deep dive into this recently, although haven't yet started any implementation work. As far as I can tell, the best strategy that preserves Linux's open-source and user-empowering ideals as much as possible:
- The game obviously needs to run as root, at least until large amounts of this stuff gets upstreamed into the kernel.
- We're going to be leaving the kernel and boot as untrusted, but injecting a hypervisor underneath the running kernel that is responsible for protecting most pages of game memory. This allows users to still run whatever kernel they want.
- The hypervisor sets up two sets of page tables, one that's only active when the game's thread is running and in userspace, one that hides protected pages and is active when the kernel or other threads are running. Note that game code itself needs to get decrypted into protected ram.
- The TPM of the system gets involved when we jump into the hypervisor to attest that the hypervisor is actually running, and the hypervisor then provides attestations to userspace that certain memory regions are protected from kernel or other thread access.
- Any syscalls will fail if they require the kernel to read or write pages that are protected. The game needs to allocate data that should be shared with the kernel into non-protected pages.
- When the game is closed, we can remove the hypervisor and Linux will be back to bare metal operation. This should be unobservable to the rest of the system.
This architecture preserves the ability of users to run arbitrary kernel modules, but does mean a hypothetical attacker can observe data that passes through the kernel (like draw calls/pixels). It's likely that a more complete implementation would also want some way for the hypervisor to attest to the accuracy of keyboard/mouse input and interface with iommu configuration like Windows KAC does.
Doing some quick math, if your bike is using 3kw to climb a reasonably steep (15% grade) hill at 8mph, we can calculate the weight it must be carrying, which ends up being about 1,200lbs
To answer your question, the limit on motor power exists as a proxy for limiting the weight, speed, and acceleration of ebikes within safe limits, since having an ebike charging uphill at 20mph with 500lbs of payload would present actual safety risks. Trying to regulate payload/speed/slope combinations directly has practical problems (police officers don't really want to stop delivery drivers to weight their cargo), while regulating motor power is much simpler.
A friend of mine created something similar using a numerical optimization based approach to minimize distortion. He also made the artistic choice to split the water between Australia and Asia to get even lower distortion. See Elastic II here:
Elastic II is very neat by preserving drainage basins. But Antarctica looks really distorted, in a way that doesn't seem necessary? Could that be fixed somehow?
There's a lengthy, and quite good, deep-dive into Alpha School by a current parent here, for anyone interested. Spoiler, "AI" isn't that big a portion of what they're doing, but some of their insights and systems around student motivation are actually interesting and very effective.
I heard one of the founders interviewed on the Hard Fork podcast[1] (which confusingly is primarily concerned with AI, rather than crypto.) I went in with very negative expectations, but came away with a positive impression and optimism that they might be onto something. As you say, AI is not core to the project. Instead, the focus is on using technology to facilitate individualized learning. It is true that teachers are 'replaced', but by humans whose job it is to keep the students focused and motivated, rather than to convey information.
>Instead, the focus is on using technology to facilitate individualized learning. It is true that teachers are 'replaced', but by humans whose job it is to keep the students focused and motivated, rather than to convey information.
I have good news for you. Tell your kids to get into a few fights, or get caught smoking weed in school too many times. They will be sent to an "alternative school" as punishment that uses this same insight - let the kids sit in front of a computer all day "learning" while a teacher nags them to quit falling asleep. In fact, they can do it for around 6 hours a day, three times better than this charter.
I've had the same opinion since I was a TA. Most of the stuff the students learned was from the textbook. The value the instructors provide should above all be the motivation , the enthusiasm and the instilment of meaning into what the students are learning.
If your child took the MAP Growth test in Fall 2024 or Spring 2025, you can compare their RIT scores to the mean score of an Alpha School student in the same grade:
Assuming a normal distribution, this will indicate whether your child is above or below the median Alpha School student. This may be impact your view about how well Alpha School is doing vs whatever school your kid goes to.
Feeding random inputs to a crypto function is not guaranteed to exercise all the weird paths that an attacker providing intentionally malicious input could access. For example, a loop comparing against secret data in 32 bit chunks will take constant time 99.99999999% of the time, but is still a security hole because an attacker learns a lot from the one case where it returns faster. Crypto vulnerabilities often take the form of very specifically crafted inputs that exploit some mathematical property that's very unlikely from random data.
The original groupcache is basically unmaintained, but there's at least two forks that have carried on active development and support additional nice features (like eviction), and should probably be preferred for most projects.
I highly recommend revup, it allows managing and uploading stacked (or arbitrary trees of) PRs to Github, including adding a comment that shows approximate revision-to-revision diffs if you want it to. I don't actually think that per-commit reviewing obviates the desire for stacked PRs, for example I often have some PRs in my stack that are not yet ready for review or merging.
I believe it's a 360deg planar lidar mounted on a vertical plane, with a motor to rotate it around and slowly cover a full 4pi sphere. There's also a fisheye camera integrated in. This is a pretty common setup for scanning stationary spaces (usually tripod mounted)
I'm not aware of any statistics for how often children come into contact with human-driven cars.
reply