I've seen some things suggesting they're testing it, I'm not seeing that they've deployed anything.

Honestly, I'd expect AI to make the same mistake as their current systems, though, for a similar reason

You're talking about a few different things, here.

• AI could potentially use that info, yes. Teslas don't use AI to drive
• Self driving cars do have the potential to be significantly safer, this is true. Telsa's cars, through a series of missteps, are not anywhere near that potential, and in fact are hazards on the road. This is bad for developing true self-driving cars!
• The only obstacle to progress being discussed is covered by a picture of a road...

Human drivers can pull in environmental and other cues though, like "why is there daylight on the road inside a building?"

"Hey, are you in-office today?"

Been asked several times as a newer employee on a hybrid schedule.

Also gives them a polite heads-up to expect a visitor.

Isn't Brit a British term originally? I'd guess that'd the reason it's considered different

Isn't the next line usually: "And then he picked up his hammer and saw"

Yeah, this seems more like marketers worrying about leaving money behind.

Any game where I can stop and think for a moment will work perfectly fine when I'm retired, from factorio to final fantasy.

Hah, I debated saying something about that, but decided that was a separate conversation

Thanks! Wish I could remember where I saw an animation describing it this way - it was some educational software from the nineties, I'm pretty sure.

A bit late to the party, but I'll try anyway!

So, first, speed is distance over time. Miles per second, kilometers per hour, whatever.

Consider a person rocketing by a planet in a little spaceship at a good fraction of the speed of light. To amuse themselves, they're bouncing a ball between two paddles on opposite walls of their craft. The ball describes a path like:

O--------O

--O----O

-----O

Of course, to a person on a planet they're blasting past, the path looks different - the ship moves a long way between each bounce, so they see:

O----------------------------------O

-------O------------------O

----------------O

The thing is, both of these are correct from each point of view - from each reference frame. For the shipboard person, the ball moves the width of the ship, and for the planetside person, it covers the distance the ship traveled in the bounce (plus some for the width).

Now, swap the ball for a photon, which always moves at the same speed. The distance the photon travels from the two points of view - the two reference frames - is different, so the time component of the photon's measured speed must change as well because the photon's speed remains the same! Each side sees the photon moving at the same speed, despite the difference in distance traversed each pov sees - which means each must also have a different measurement of the time involved!

So, time is compressed on the spaceship relative to the planet - from the ship, the planetside observer is moving very fast, while to the planetside observer, the space pilot is moving in slow motion. The speed of the photon is universal - it's the distance it travels between bounces, and therefore how long it takes to bounce, that differs between their perspectives.