[darawk]

> Depends on whether it’s the right data, or meaningful data.

Street level mapping data isn't relevant or meaningful? Basically every company working on this problem seems to pretty strongly disagree with you.

> But to your point, the assumption that this is even a problem of “not enough data” is questionable at this point. How to turn that data into results is something no one has come close to figuring out yet.

This is trivially false. Given infinite data, all possible situations would be represented in the data, and the solutions applied in those situations could be copied exactly, something that existing algorithms are completely capable of doing.

[YeGoblynQueenne]

>> This is trivially false. Given infinite data, all possible situations would be represented in the data, and the solutions applied in those situations could be copied exactly, something that existing algorithms are completely capable of doing.

In principle. In practice, you'd need infinite time and infinite storage.

Btw, do you have to add stuff like "This is trivially false" to your comments? It doesn't make your comments sound more right, only less well considered.

[darawk]

> In principle. In practice, you'd need infinite time and infinite storage.

That is irrelevant.

> Btw, do you have to add stuff like "This is trivially false" to your comments? It doesn't make your comments sound more right, only less well considered.

Trivial in the mathematical sense. As in, there is a trivial counter-example to your point. Citing infinity is a 'trivial' case. I'm using 'trivial' to describe my counter-example, not his error.

[YeGoblynQueenne]

If I may be frank: don't use language in the mathematical sense if you are not in a maths classroom or you dont' know maths.

[mijamo]

Given infinote fata, infine storage and infinite computing you would be right. In practice it means you are wrong. Feeding more data does not necessarily help given a finite amount of computing power.