You are joking but working on making decentralization more viable would indeed be more healthy than throwing hands up and accepting Cloudflare as the only option.
Hola is the big one, but in practice, if we hypothesis that no one's running a VPN as a charity, free VPN products need to make money someway, and if you're not paying to use it, how else are they gonna make money?
So basically be suspicious of every single "free" or suspiciously cheap VPN. Go with known brands that come recommended by mulitple people, especially from people "in the know".
Though PirateSoftware (a person) has a good bit on why he doesn't advertise for VPNs on his channel.
Hola's worst division got spun out into a separate company, Bright Data. Bright Data's worst innovations since "Free VPN" are using those "Watch this ad for 30 seconds for bonus in-game currency" things in many, many awful mobile games and using those as a "opt-in" signal to use the user's device for those 30 seconds (or however long) as an exit node for whatever scanning/botting processes they resell.
If you had a company whose core business proposition was Quite Obviously Shady, would you expect them to be scrupulously legit in other areas?
Quick question for you - rhino poaching is a huge problem in Africa, with poachers getting a surprisingly small amount of money per rhino they shoot, because the buyers only want the horns. Do you think paying the poachers more to not shoot the rhinos would solve that problem?
Add on top of that the latency of the operator's equipment and the latency of the robot itself, and tasks like putting dishes in the dishwasher could get quite challenging
Considering what type of sensors that would need to be are already on these robots, would it not be possible to teleoperate within VR? So the motion and control can be more fulid but there is a lag before it is applied to real robot. Like how mosh[0] works.
It i possible to have a digital twin which simulates the real physics of the robot and gives instant feedback based on that. It might help a bit to make the teleoperator work within the capabilities of the robot, be more in sync.
But is peobsbly not realistic to simulate the real world physics faithfully, in such a way that operators can use it as actual feedback. Especially in sensitive scenarios like grabbing a glass, there are tipping points (sometimes literal), where a few millimeters and 100 milliseconds is the difference between close call and full smash.
Thinking about it now, if one would deliberately add much more latency (a few seconds), it might be possible to use real-world simulation as aid. At least for operations which can be decomposed into sequences of transitions between stable/safe states. Say moving dishes from dishwasher to cupboard. Picking up is critical, but holding in hand is (presumably) safe, placing in cupboard critical, once placed it is safe. Then one could let teleoperator do the entire critical move virtually, act it out in simulator only. See what the outcome is. If high risk of failure, deny operation. If good chance of success (per simulation) can allow to execute in the real world.
More autonomous operation will need ability to simulate actions, project alternative approaches into the future, and a world model strong enough that can also plan and execute based on it. So there are potential synergies in a full-teleop, to hybrid teleop to autonomy transition.
Note, this approach would also assume the relevant environment to be static. So it would not help handle the pet or toddler...
Wait, are there timezones where the DST change doesn't happen at midnight? That's news to me.
Now this article makes sense to me; I was wondering what made 02:00 and 03:00 special, since the DST changes would be from 00:00 to 01:00 and from 00:00 to 23:00, as I'm used to since childhood here in Brazil. Perhaps some other countries change DST from 02:00 to 03:00 and vice versa?
In the UK we move forward at 1am and they go backward at 2am. Doing it at midnight adds the extra complexity that now the day is different. Doing it in the early morning doesn't change the day.
My guess is that in the US they do the same but shifted by one.
Most timezones change time when there's a minimal amount of people working, as these people would have to work an extra hour, and doing it at around 3am is the most reasonable from that point of view.
Better to think of it that it changes at 01:00 UTC, which takes care of the parts of Europe that are 2 or 3 hours ahead (instead of CET's 1 or 2), and the UK going "forward at 1 and back at 2"
"Europe DST changes at 01:00 UTC" - much simpler ;)
Brazil not only had DST at midnight, but until 2008 they also had no standard rule for when DST would begin and end, setting the dates by decree often just a few weeks in advance.
reply