- Member for
- 6 years 51 weeks
- View recent blog entries
|4 days 6 hours ago||My profession||
is writing/testing/shipping software. As such, I'm painfully aware how hard it is to make a complex system free of impactful bugs. Depending on the implementation (following tags in roads, or trying to perceive arbitrary environments, etc), this can range from really complicated to incredibly complicated.
So here are some of things I would use "autonomous" driving for:
- Proximity warnings (lane changes, rear/front/side prox)
- Backup warning (different alert than rear prox when moving at speed)
Things I would never, ever use:
- cruise control (even the very simple cruise control is buggy as hell, both mechanically and "software")
- Arbitrary environment - IMO, this is basically impossible to get right. A road environment is an incredibly complex one. Control steering and speed to traverse the intervening roads from origin to dest is the beginning of the beginning of the problem. Static and dynamic weather conditions, other vehicles, construction, animals, pedestrians..Just the start of the complexity.
- More controlled - Installed tags - Less impossible, but unless you are going to separate roads and everything else, many of the above problems remain.
- automated parking - The current implementations are an insurance companies nightmare and a body shop guy's dream. This gives you limited value for substantial risk.
I may sound like I'm suggesting that autonomous cars get off my lawn, but really, they feel to me like a more informed person's version of flying cars. :) Totally impractical, but cool enough sounding (and of course, real people are working on it) that it will be perpetually 5-10 years away.
Important point - The best counter I've heard to the above is: Ok, yeah, there will be problems, but haven't you heard? Auto accidents kill lots of people all the time now. This is absolutely true, auto travel is already pretty frickin dangerous. I want to be clear: The problems I forsee with anything that's been proposed or is being worked on would (IMO) cause problems substantially worse than the current level of stupidity, inattention, incompetence, stubborness, anger, and random awfulness that comprise the driving experience.
Why? As I said: I don't think we're far enough along that a software/hardware system can be contructed to deal with this hard a problem. Further, the problem can't be simplified without ENORMOUS changes to our road infrastructure and the relationship between that infrastructure and everything that surrounds it.
|1 week 5 hours ago||Yes and no||
It's more complex in terms of understanding the inner workings of the person and their motivations. It's still simple in terms of impact on victims in terms of their own ability to have relationships, drug use, suicide, etc etc. It's a bomb going off in a child's life, and the motivations of the bomber don't change that.
|1 week 5 hours ago||Hmmm||
You say, rightly:
>Now if Jabrill Peppers or Aubrey Solomon (or Tom Brady, Charles Woodson, et al) didn't go to >Michigan, then that would affect the value of the football team (or Glen Rice, Trey Burke, et al >to hoops). Affecting that product would start to cost the school money.
My question is:
What if Ben Braden didn't go to UM? What if Henry Poggi didn't go? Drake Harris? How about Jared Wangler? Drew Dileo? Wilton Speight? How about Derrick Green or Will Campbell? How about Ryan Glasgow?
The answer is probably a bit different for each, and I'd say radically different than the answer about Peppers/Brady/Woodson/Denard. The answer for some varies WILDLY depending on whether it's when you sign them or after the first year, or second...
Do they get paid the same? If not, how much different? When do we decide? The simple answer is..Well, everybody gets the same amount. Do you think Solomon will be happy to get the same money that Kurt Taylor gets? Personally I don't.
Look, this is not a gotcha email (or even an attempt at one). But this ain't easy, not even close to it. Would it be more fair? Yeah, I think it probably would.
That said - I do think these questions (re: once you are calculating the value a student adds, where does it begin and end?) are important. As the father of several of the students that you've deemed worthless to the university, I suspect the money I will pay over the next few decades will probably be at least of some value, even if in your opinion, their presence adds nothing.
PS - Reading some of your other posts, I think you're being pretty reasonable - I'd really like to hear a fairly aggresssive "pay the players" guy like Brian (in whose opinion, it seems, anyone that disagrees is doing so from the worst kind of motives) put forward a more complete proposal that tries to address some of the serious real world difficulties inherent in this. The crazy part is, I'm not really against paying players - I'm just not clear that any approach I can think of would actually work well. It would be more fair, but in the end, might destroy the thing that created the value in the first place.
|3 weeks 6 hours ago||Weirdly,||
this doesn't seem to matter for me. Generally, their arguments are so poor, and statements so ill-informed that even those that "agree" with me make me sad.
|3 weeks 6 hours ago||I'm not going to demand||
anything of sportswriters. That said, it's very simple - I have no interest in a sportswriters opinion of politics. I had no interest when it was their opinion of President Obama. I have no interest in their opinion of President Trump. If I'm going to read politics, I'm attempting to find informed sources, and 99% of sportswriters don't fit the bill.
So no demands, I'm not mad at them, I don't think they are bad people... I just don't read it. If they would like me to read their stuff, they may want to try sports, since I'm more likely to read their sports material. Quite possible they don't care. :)
|3 weeks 6 hours ago||Thanks!||
It certainly seems super late in the day for that...Much appreciated!
|3 weeks 8 hours ago||Magnus||
Do you believe UM will flip somebody (OL somebody) who might otherwise be a marginal dude in order to put another bullet in the chamber? Obviously time is short...
|3 weeks 8 hours ago||Alternatively||
you could be a strong, agile, muscular 6'6" 250 lb guy who will make millions of dollars playing football, in which case all those around you will assume your ancestors liked Archery, and will say nothing else.
|3 weeks 2 days ago||100% agreed, it started with||
100% agreed, it started with the bigs dominating, and we have a chance to do that tomorrow against MSU.
I'm not sure I agree that the difference was Walton/Maar being "aggressive" vs "jacking threes'. They jacked some threes that went in against Indiana, esp Walton. Maar took good threes, and this game, they went down. But yeah, they were more aggressive off the dribble, esp Walton the last couple of games. When Walton decides he can beat people off the dribble, Michigan is just tranformed.
Then I go back to agreeing - If Walton is part of the offense, not the 1st option, Michigan is a FAR better basketball team. When he's a change of pace, he's a million times more effective.
Best case, tomorrow looks like Indiana - Michigan's size is exploited (!!!) against MSU's undersized bigs, we have some trouble staying in front of them, and we hit the open threes we get (I hope), plus Irvin reins in his urge to "take over".
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Torchdowns!||
|3 weeks 4 days ago||Order||
My order of "do want" is:
Solomon - Confluence of 5*/Screw Saban/Need
Becton - Gots to have OL guys, specially OT guys. specially BIG OT guys with impassive faces
Gay - Better player than Becton, and really exciting Don Brown weapon
Collins/Martin - Yes to more WR, but other 3 are higher combo of need/talent, IMO.
Now - CROOTIN universe: Bend to my will!!!!!
|5 weeks 6 days ago||Harbaugh == awesome||
That said, I'd just be amazed if Speight was "one of the best QBs in the country" (top 10?) in 2017. That given his performance this year, plus a substantially worse O-line, plus the likelihood our running game is inferior to this year (mostly due to losses on the O-line).
FWIW, not a Speight slam - I'd also be amazed if Peters was top 10 in the country, since if he wins the job, he'll have the same situation to deal with.
|6 weeks 3 days ago||Alimentary||
my dear conrad.
|6 weeks 4 days ago||So my question||
is, what does that even mean? "Unacceptable"? So if Michigan loses 18 starters, Peppers, Newsome, and OSU has a 5th year senior in Barrett, and we lose. You do what? Fire Harbaugh?
At this moment, it looks like that game is damn hard to win, even at home. OSU loses good players, but keeps their QB, and their o-line is a year older. I'm not saying it's unwinnable, but it's a very tough game to predict a win, IMO.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||Ok, help me out.||
Are these things good or bad? Baller, pimp and drop the mic? So Harris has bad hands, and he has problems with the law? Do not want.
PS - Do i really need to?
PPS - Yes.
PPPPS - /s
|7 weeks 4 days ago||Wow||
Drew Sharp posting from beyond the grave?
|8 weeks 6 days ago||I would say||
it will take roughly 2015 minus 2008 years to stop being funny. :)
|8 weeks 6 days ago||This is||
exactly correct. Anyplace where I'm concerned about Michigan is now in the rarefied air of competing with the absolute best.
While I'm not as convinced that MSU is done as many, I don't see them as competing with the absolute best anytime soon, and as you say, their struggle is to be relevant again, period.
|8 weeks 6 days ago||Your lack of reading skills||
do not equate to my having said that we should sound the panic alarm. Indeed, I said clearly that Michigan is an excellent program and bids fair to remain that and even get better. In the context of competing with the top 2 programs in college football, that recruiting event makes it harder. I stand by that statement, and don't believe that it in ANY way suggest "panic".
But enjoy your inability or unwillingness to actually read what I wrote.
|8 weeks 6 days ago||SEC teams||
have mythical (or not so mythical) hordes of gorgeous co-eds descending on potential recruits. I have a James Bond clip in which a woman says a name that sounds very vaguely like part of the recruits name:
That, plus Jim Harbaugh, equals CANNOT MISS!
|9 weeks 3 days ago||It's amazing||
how fast we've gone from "potential huge OL haul" to "good grief, we may have problems on the OL for the next few years". This isn't a shot at the coaches at all. The competition is super fierce here. I'm just seriously concerned that we're not going to be able to put together an offensive line to play with the big boys at this point. I had assumed we'd have trouble next year pretty much no matter what (I wasn't assuming Wilson/Leatherwood/etc would help us in 2017), but I did believe this was a foundation to build a series of outstanding lines on.
At this point, this class is starting to look potentially like a problem OL wise, unless some of these lower ranked guys massively improve over the next few years. Cause now it looks like we maybe get one or two top 100 linemen. While that is a fantastic accomplishment in any other context, in the realm of "We want to compete with Alabama/OSU", it worries me. Understand, I'm not suggesting any stupid crap like Michigan isn't going to be a good to excellent program, but man, the margin for error is really small at the top..
I'm just astounded a failing, floundering program like Georgia is able to compete for recruits of this calibre.
|9 weeks 6 days ago||Wow.||
That mistype is what you take away? Please say I didn't..what? Make a mistake? Sorry, can't say that. It was a mistake. It's just a mistype dude. Not sure how that manages to be such a big deal for you, but whatever.
Without looking it up.
|9 weeks 6 days ago||I realize that most folks||
I realize that most folks have their minds made up, but I'll give it a shot at arguing the other side.
First, my POV - I moved to Ann Arbor when I was nine and attended my first college football game in seeing Ricky Leach and the boys destroy Wisconsin 56-0. Harlem Huckleby was hurt that day, but it didn't matter. Michigan was ranked #1 in the nation after that game, but was shut out by Minnesota on the road the next week. I've been to a bunch of games and watched or listened to (when I was doing my paper route or collecting tailgate cans at the golf course) every game since.
So if I'm not a Michigan fan, I'm impersonating one pretty well.
My take: When a Big 10 team goes up against the SEC (esp), or any rival conference, I root for them. I'm not saying I suddenly love OSU or MSU, that's crazy. But I still want them to win.
Why?: For the honor of the Big 10, that's why! To put it in more mgobloggish terms: The more successful the Big 10 is in interconference play, especially extremely high profile interconference play, the more it means when Michigan beats Big 10 teams! If the Big 10 dominates other conferences, Michigan's success means more, and there is less chance that the discussion nationally will denigrate our accomplishments when trying to get into the playoff.
This is true in the regular season (last year, NW beats Stanford, this year, Wisc beats LSU) at the beginning of the year, and true in the bowls, and super true in the playoffs. MSU getting their butts utterly kicked by Bama last year did us no favors. Do I enjoy the pain and suffering of Spartan fans? Well of course, I'm a Michigan guy. But I'd still rather have them beat Alabama, so when we play them this year, and whack 'em, people understand how good a team we have.
So that's my approach. I think I'm a true Michigan fan. But yeah, I'm hoping OSU beats Clemson and at least makes it a game against Alabama. Perhaps "roots" is a strong word for my emotion at that point - I coldbloodedly want them to win for the greater glory of Michigan and the Big 10.
|11 weeks 7 hours ago||I know||
your point was to show Luck going to Stanford, but it also shows how radically superior Michigan's current recruiting is to what JH was able to get at Stanford. The first recruit is similar, after that, next guy is a 3*. Literally not one other 4* or above. And yet he won..
|11 weeks 7 hours ago||I am fairly||
certain we take a substantial step back in the o-line next year. Assuming for a moment that true freshmen are very unlikely to help, we're losing three starters (RG, LG, RT). I think Onwenu is the only guy on the roster with a substantial shot to replace a player (RG?) and be roughly as good.
I wrote an absurdly long email about this to some friends recently. Probably firmly in the tldr category, but what the heck..Summary-
If Cole stays, and is at Center:
LT - Newsome
If he moves to RT:
LT - Newsome
This, of course, assumes Newsome is healthy.
Lots of good material on mgoblog, but some of the most interesting is how effective linemen (especially OL) are as their careers progress. Freshmen OL are rarely (very rarely) of any use whatsoever. In the last 5 years, Michigan has had two guys that were able to play any substantial snaps as true freshmen and be of value, and really, only one was a starter who was decent (Mason Cole). You're talking a lot of guys, and only two (the other is Ben Bredesen this year) were of any value. Bredesen filled in after multiple injuries, but was pretty mediocre to poor. Which (btw) predicts that he will probably be an excellent OL in the future, but he was not that as a freshman. Why do I stress this? Because it is HIGHLY unlikely that any OL that we recruit for next year (and we're in on some excellent ones, though none are committed yet) will be of value in next years line.
For information's sake, there are currently 4 (!) guys committed to UM as offensive tackles. One 4* and 3 3*. I see no chance that any of the currently committed guys play useful snaps next year. None are as good as Cole/Bredesen.
This link is one I'm leaning on for some of the remaining talk.
It just so happens that the only guys we have back next year that played substantial snaps are Mason Cole (average 4*, 2017 Senior), Ben Bredesen (very high 4*, 2017 Sophomore), and maybe Grant Newsome (high 4*, 2017 Junior). I say maybe Newsome because he had a knee injury this year that took him out for the year. Not just any knee injury, but one that had him *in the hospital* for 38 days. It's questionable whether he ever plays again, much less is an effective OL at the most important spot, left tackle.
Let's assume we get lucky and Newsome is healthy and back to full strength. We'd probably do:
LT - Newsome
Who else is out there who might take one of the remaining (at minimum) two slots?
Tackles: We need to replace Erik Magnuson, who played RT. While not a great player, Magnuson is projected to go in the 5th round of the draft, so that makes him a solid to good college tackle.
Juwann Bushnell-Beatty - JBB was a mediocre 3* project guy who is going to be a junior next year. In 2014/2015/2016, he's been a non-factor. They tried him at LT when Newsome went down, but it was a disaster. That's in his third year in the program. There is literally 0 chance that JBB will be better than Magnuson (RT) or Braden (who moved from guard to play the remaining games at LT) was this year.
Nolan Ulizio - Ulizio was a 2* tackle that Harbaugh grabbed in the month after he took over, so will be a junior. He has played mop-up time the last two years, and has never had his name mentioned in a UFR. The best thing I can say about Ulizio is that he's a big guy that Jim Harbaugh wanted on his football team. No other signs that you would ever want him as a starter on a big time college football offensive line. It would be an amazing upset if Nolan Ulizio was as good in 2017 as Magnuson or Braden.
Patrick Kugler - High 4* who will be a senior in 2017.. It's conceivable that Kugler could replace Cole at center, and Cole could move to RT. Or Cole goes to LT and Newsome to RT. I think Newsome is a more natural LT. I don't think Cole/Kugler/Newsome would be better than Cole/Magnuson/Newsome, so again, no upgrade here.
That's it. Nobody else recruited as a tackle. Ben Bredesen has played LT briefly, and it didn't go well, so they swapped him with Braden to his natural position, guard. So either one of the two guys above takes over as RT, or it's a freshman.
Guards: We need to replace our RG, Kyle Kalis. This year, Kalis was a good to very good RG, consistently among the most effective run and pass blockers according to the UFRs and to PFF. He's projected to go 6th round.
David Dawson - Dawson will be a senior (2013 middling 4* recruit) who has basically never played meaningful snaps. Given our line play in 2014, the fact that he couldn't crack the line in his sophomore year is pretty scary. I don't think it's as clear that he would be a disaster as JBB, but again, he's going to be a senior, and he doesn't ever play. This indicates something about his skill relative to the guys who are playing. Expecting him to be an upgrade over Kalis is not reasonable.
Stephen Spanellis - High 3* who will be a sophomore in 2017. Very, very large. Not highly regarded, but is a Harbaugh guy. It would not be awful if Spanellis played, but it would mean the ceiling for RG was lowered substantially from Onwenu. I can't imagine Spanellis being a superior RG to Kalis in 2017, or anywhere close to as good.
Patrick Kugler - High 4* who will be a senior in 2017 - Kugler has seen more snaps in replacing injured guys in non-garbage time than Dawson, but he is another guy who hasn't really played in 3 years in the program. He was highly regarded, but just never beat anyone out. If he was going to be a superior RG to Kyle Kalis, then why didn't he do it this year?
So IMO, rational best case (where a freshman isn't magically excellent) in 2017 is this:
LT - Newsome
LT - Newsome
If you see Dawson beat out Onwenu, then things are even worse. If Newsome is done, and we need to replace two tackles, then we're taking a flyer on a true freshman, and things are MUCH worse.
|11 weeks 5 days ago||Perhaps it's the||
|11 weeks 5 days ago||Perhaps it's the||
home loss to NORTH DAKOTA STATE?
Or the home loss to Northwestern?
Or getting crushed by Penn State (on the road, admittedly)
Yes, they beat Michigan, and pounded on Nebraska, and to be fair, S&P has them at number 22.
That said, I think their losses are really damning when looking at their overall body of work, and overshadows their two good wins. I don't think they are a top 25 team..
|12 weeks 6 hours ago||This is just||
100% right. Look, I love Michigan. I love how we played this year. It's a team that will have a place in my heart forever. That said - I don't think it's the right thing for a 2 loss Michigan team to be in the playoff over a 1 loss Power 5 team that won their conference. Here's part of the reason:
Let's say Michigan plays Alabama. They beat them. So Alabama is 12-1 and we're 11-2.
Do we deserve the NC?
If I were an Alabama fan, that would piss me off. We lost to Iowa. They didn't lose their close games. There should be a clear consequence to that.
If we beat Iowa, I'm 100% behind rooting for Michigan to be in. If we beat OSU, even more so.
This year, for all these great players, for all the crazy reasons, it just didn't happen that way. As much as it is a bummer, I don't think it's the right thing for us to be in the playoff.
|12 weeks 6 hours ago||After an amazing return||
the cutback was a mistake, plain and simple. He should have stayed outside. He had that guy easily, and cutting back brought other tacklers into play. My belief is that Peppers was 100% sure Lewis was staying outside, because there was SO much space.
Another one of 10 things that by itself, wins the game.
FWIW, hear me - Not beating on Lewis. He made a superb play to get that play to where it was - I do think that the cutback was a mistake in the heat of battle.
|12 weeks 2 days ago||The Samuel play||
with Samuel (the third down) was so bad. Jabrill has played without fear his whole career, and he had Samuel lined up and went for the contain in stead of the play. He puts Samuel on the ground there, it's a long field goal and we probably win. Dude has been so great, and that play...
Yes, the spot.
Yes, the PI that wasn't, somehow.
That Samuel play was the worst.