The only issue I have with this is the people that are wrecking the planet are not getting criticized at all IE BIG OIL. Somehow I think they are the winners in all of this.
The author explained in a comment why Tesla wasn't included. tl;dr They reported 0 miles and agree that they shouldn't be included.
> "I see Tesla as being in a separate category. Right now Tesla's autonomy stack has much more limited functionality than Waymo's (or Cruise, Argo, Zoox, etc.). And it's overseen by ordinary customers, not professional safety drivers. That means that Tesla doesn't get the kind of annotated feedback Waymo gets. If a customer deactivates Autopilot that _might_ mean that it made a mistake, but it also might just mean that the driver decided to pull over to buy a cup of coffee. Tesla agrees with me—they reported 0 miles of on-road testing in California in 2018.
"I think you can see Tesla as pursuing a third strategy alongside the Waymo/Cruise taxi strategy and the Voyage/Nuro 'low-speed services first' strategy. I'm personally not optimistic about Tesla's strategy but I can't rule it out."
This is like some expert explaining how Apple's approach to smartphones is not good as Nokia's. The tech is in its infancy. There are no experts other than the players themselves.
Macronutrients shift by minor amounts (single digit percentages), but there is more overall food. CO2 causes a more efficient use of water in photosynthesis and improves overall crop yields. The last time CO2 was in the thousands of PPM, the ancestors of birds...AKA dinosaurs...thrived and grew to enormous sizes.
The author should go to India and see the space program. Might offer a different perspective. I myself coming from an Asian country have seen many girl study engineering. It is considered a carier path and nothing more. There is no stigma attached.
In poorer countries there tend to be more female engineers because engineering is a good career for anyone (including women), and in poorer countries, having a good career is proportionally more important. The prevalence of female engineers in India is frequently used as support for the natural preference theory.
To add to this, in countries with low equality and weak social safety nets, having a lucrative career is far more important for survival. It's western countries where women are more free to choose a career based on interest.
This cannot be a correct assumption. In western countries also most Enginnering jobs pay well above what other female-dominated (medical care) jobs offer. Then why don't select these well-paying jobs over ones that don't pay as much?
Because their survival is not dependent on their career choice. Tech may pay more, but being a nurse is still perfectly fine. There are also more women entering the MD profession than men, and that pays better than tech, so there's even more room for people to move between fields based on a "natural" preference (if such a thing exists).
