Avatar for The_Seldom_Killer


Member since Jul 2008 • Last active Apr 2018

Most recent activity

  • in General
    Avatar for The_Seldom_Killer

    That's really going to depend on the actual pension fund first and foremost. You're going to have to speak to the fund management company about it.

  • in Miscellaneous and Meaningless
    Avatar for The_Seldom_Killer

    Today's effort is Kolach, a Bulgarian bread.

    It's supposed to come up as a ring so I think I may have gotten the yeast proportions a bit wrong from fresh to dried. Probably should have also made a bit of a bigger circle out of the dough before baking.

  • Avatar for The_Seldom_Killer

    I'm definitely too new to the game to answer that. I'll try and remember to ask the boss this evening.

  • Avatar for The_Seldom_Killer

    That's the trade off. The further you get from a long aged starter, the closer you get to a plain rye flour loaf.

    Our starter is pretty stiff and after about 6-8 hours we get a good flavour from it. We don't fridge ferment though. Might do if we do the sourdough version.

  • Avatar for The_Seldom_Killer

    The commercial version that I bake is done in a day. Make the starter in the morning, mix, proove, shape, prove, cut and bake in the evening.

    We are thinking of trialling a sourdough version which will take two days.

  • Avatar for The_Seldom_Killer

    "the answer"


    But there is a scenario where AVs are part of the answer. I realise humans are shit, but we are still capable of implementing multiple measures, at the same time, in conjunction with each other.

    AVs should be there to mitigate the risk of the driving journeys we can't eliminate.

  • Avatar for The_Seldom_Killer

    I don't think the ethical questions are that difficult really.

    This 90% isn't an end game position. This is a trolley problem in a scenario where the track continues and an endless sequence of trolley problems with multiple switching positions that, if managed well, will get us to as close to zero road deaths as we can ever possibly get.

    The question isn't "is it good enough?" when the alternative that we currently have is to leave those 90% to still die. In the balance of "good enough" questions, "is it good enough to sacrifice 9 people because we couldn't save the 10th?" should be the absolute loser every single time. I can't imagine why you're arguing the case against that.

    Where do we set the limit for robots? It's hard to answer that question without first establishing the parameters of regulatory control, liabilities and responsibility, standardised safety protocols, information sharing protocols and so on. But if 90% doesn't fit into that limit against our current piss poor performance, we have definitely fucked up. Honestly, I might balk at 5% or 10% improvement. Largely on the grounds that much of it may be very difficult to accurately attribute. At around 15%, I personally start feeling comfortable pushing the yes button.

    In my mind, the question should be; is this good enough for now? That's because, as stated, this isn't an end position. Achieving that 90% more doesn't mean you stop, it means you can have more resources to work on eliminating that other 10%. You can't actually work on that remaining 10% if you haven't dealt with the that starting 90% in the first place.

  • in Miscellaneous and Meaningless
    Avatar for The_Seldom_Killer

    Difficult question.
    The vast majority of deaths are either workplace or surgery related and therefore not in public.

    However, last year a test pilot for a Tesla AV was killed when his vehicle drove under a truck. Workplace on public roads.