The value derived and average usage of a car has increased too...
Also the financing around cars have made it smoother to buy one.
Also Electric can demand a premium because they save on gas costs.
You need share holders' approval to join the board. Today's markets immediately punish a company which supports union.
So forcing your way is the only practical way to get a union board seat
The null hypothesis is that market forces takes care of it. Like your airline ticket prices. The onus of proof is on you to market forces aren't enough.
Waymo and Cruise have burnt through money like no one else. They want to make their own cars, thier own Ai chips/lidar, their own self driving tech. Delusional at best, malicious at worst. They made a hard SW problem into hard HW+SW problem. They are zombies unless some magic happens in the world of nn (which is not unlikely tbh)
Whereas comma is taking the right approach of a nimble team, iterate fast and ship a working product (even if not L4-5), get cash flow, next milestone.
Simple explaination of the general idea using nearest neighbor search as example:
1. You want to calculate the l2-nearest neighbor to y from a set of x1, x2, ... xn. Where each point is a d-dimensional vector.
2. Naive approach will take O(nd) computations. For very large d, say 1e4, this is very expensive
Multi-arm bandits idea:
3. Estimate the distance of y to each point (xi) by sampling only along log(d) dimensions.
4. Keep the nearest n/2 points (throw away the rest)
5. Repeat step 3 and 4 until you have one point left
6. The total run time = nlog(d) + nlog(d)/2 + nlog(d)/4.... = O (nlog(d)log(n))
This is a huge improvement over O(nd) for large d (which is usually the case today)
This paper (https://ar5iv.org/abs/1805.08321) from Stanford pioneered this idea for nearest neighbors and many such household problems. It also theoretically proves that the above approach gives the right answer and empirically gets huge (100x) speed boost on large datasets.
You have to play silly games and try to fix the system simultaneously.
You always keep your foot on the brakes in case someone is drunk driving on the road. At the same time, you'll try to fix those issues via legislation (DUI) and technology
My point was that the existing tools and infra was enough for svb customers to secure themselves. At a high level, they didn't bother getting an insurance and now they beg for bailout.
The banks don't want you to split the money because they will have to pay higher insurance to FDIC. This will eat into their margins. The business and the customers interests are not aligned in this case.
Until the law changes, you have to look out for yourself and not beg for bailout. Also, this is not complex since software takes care of it behind the scenes. Our company did it from day 1.
Also more than half of deposits by volume are FDIC insured so the system can handle the whole volume if the customers choose to do so