Electric cars still require mechanical engineers, and probably a similar number of them to an IC car. Except for the engine itself, most things are not engineered in-house, suppliers like Bosch/ZF/etc provide components to specs.
Most car companies today are really engine companies. They stamp and weld the bodies and build the engines and everything else is out sourced. EVERYTHING ELSE! So the original commenter is correct they would have to lay off half their people to convert to electric motors.
The OSHA investigation did no such thing, and in fact the article included a direct quote from OSHA: "A Cal/OSHA spokeswoman said the investigation found four other “injury recording violations that fell outside of the statute of limitations.”"
"Outside of the statute of limitations" is very different than "proved wasn't true."
I run Selenium integration tests inside a docker container every 5 minutes or so and attach the results to a sentry.io logger. I put up a boilerplate version on github: https://github.com/mikedh/selenium-simple
This is almost literally what I used as an inspiration for the site transaction monitoring part of https://checklyhq.com, as in a browser emulation feeding a monitoring system at regular intervals. Selenium was always a bit of hog so I jumped on Puppeteer when it came around.
If the Model X in your example had LIDAR, it would have been able to build up a decently accurate collision model of the world, which it could have then used to say "there is an object in the path I'm on, maybe I shouldn't plow into it." As opposed to relying on implicit and apparently unreliable cues like lane markers. That particular fatal crash seems like a sensors and geometry problem.
"Nothing about our current world has been designed for lidar and radar. It was designed for binocular vision."
Really? Was the world designed for binocular vision, or is it just three dimensional?
Having more sensors, especially when they have different failure modes seems like the only possible way to create a reliable system. LIDAR isn't super dense, but generally has accurate returns. Binocular vision sucks on untextured objects, like the side of a white truck in the fatal Model S collision. Why wouldn't you want the crutch of both types of measurement?
> If the Model X in your example had LIDAR, it would have been able to build up a decently accurate collision model of the world
No it wouldn't. The whole problem with avoiding stationary objects is that they are _everywhere_. Do you really think radar and vision didn't "see" the barrier? Should it have known that it was in it's path? For sure. But that has nothing to do with sensors. Stationary objects are in our paths constantly while we drive, but we tend not to hit them because they are usually only temporarily so. At 80 mph the difference between a parked car being in our path and not, at the stopping distance of over 300 feet, is only a degree or two of wheel turn. We have enough information. Acting on it appropriately every single second of operation is the problem.
> Really? Was the world designed for binocular vision...
Yes. That's why we have road signs, stripes on the road, reflectors, lights on cars, lights hung over the road which light up in different colors to indicate right of way, etc. LIDAR is useless with all of the most important signals on our roads.
Well the fact that demand and prices were higher during the evacuation of Florida meant that airlines were incentivised to have more flights out. It seems like this directly resulted in the huge volume of flights headed to and from Florida, which meant more people were able to evacuate by plane. And those people weren't clogging up the highway so people who couldn't afford tickets also ended up better off.
How was the "price gouging" in this case not an unequivocal good on the macro level? It seems the alternative is that the airlines held prices fixed but ran out of supply immediately.
