skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>> People want to see 100% success in all things. But that isn't very economical.

That sounds logical, but isn't really a thing in aerospace/space. Complicated high-energy systems have thousands of failure points. So to have any chance of success each failure point needs to be engineered below, by way of example, a 0.0001% chance of failure. That costs lots of money. But say one decides to accept more risk for less cost. Ok. So you switch from 0.0001 to 0.001 failure rates. You risk is now 10-fold higher at each failure point, but with thousands of failure points adding up you are now essentially doomed. And you haven't saved anything. The cost of 0.001 components isn't fundamentally different than the 0.0001 components were. SpaceX can save money though different business practices, by trimming people/money/contracts/compliance and such, but if you look at their rockets they are not fundamentally any less-perfect than anyone else's. They cannot afford to be. This is why rocket failures, like aircraft failures, are taken so seriously. There is an extremely fine line between "works ever time" and "never worked twice" with very little money to be saved between the two.

Across many areas, risk-v-cost math never really happens. It is either go or no go. Take CPU production. Intel spends billions at each of hundreds of fabrication step to push down miniscule error rates because any of a million errors can destroy a chip. There is no money to be saved by allowing any one process to become less than as perfect as it can possibly be. A detected slip from 0.0001 to 0.001 at any step would result in an entire fab being shut down in order to diagnose the problem. The marginal savings of a less-than-perfect process isn't worth the exponential increase in the risk of total system failure.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Check out the "In Comments" section.
It almost blew up on the launchpad (see the debris flying after a few seconds), then at around 30 seconds you can see some explosion at the bottom, throwing away some surface parts. Multiple failed engines. Then it went into an unsurvivable "tailspin" if there was any crew around. Cheering for failure was the topping.
FAA will be wanting to talk to that Range Safety Officer. Waiting for it to break up on it’s own can’t be a best practice.
One, if there are great, intuitive, affordable alternatives, they are not widely known.

Two, the downsides of Salesforce and Jira are at least well known and widely discussed. If you have an issue, probably somebody else has had the same issue, and a workaround may be known.

Three, "nobody got fired for choosing..." used to end with "IBM", now it ends with "SAP", "Salesforce", "git", "Quickbooks", or "Jira". None of them are so great, but they all work well enough to get the job done (since many reasonably successful companies use them).

I agree they aren't that great, though.
Jeb will be back.
This is a bit of spin by SpaceX. Blowing up the pad would be a serious failure and would be a large and costly setback. But they obviously didn't achieve the goal of the test flight here. It is a test flight, so it's not a complete failure and not entirely unexpected. But it's not a full success either, significant parts that were planned to be tested could not be tested because the rocket failed early.
There is no reason to go into the comments of every post that shows a price of the fee a company paid in order to express why you think a company that is fined should be crippled because of it, the point is to deter people not to lay nuclear landmines for companies to be destroyed over. 99% of these comments are just maliciously lashing out about 'corporations' and no consideration that chomping into 5% of net profits has an effect greater than some bonus packages of the management teams (less cigars to chomp!)
> nowhere near as widespread outside the US

Except they are but they are just ignored because of lack of knowledge and money. Many countries don't even recognize ADHD so the kid never goes to college and doesn't reach their full potential.
Counterfactuals could help Spotify pick your next favorite song
"Don't let the fox guard the henhouse." (English proverb)

Since we're trading proverbs.
TV and movies don’t reflect reality.
No, it is like comparing 4 stroke engine from 1960 and 4 stroke from today. Still same concept despite the fact that engine from today has ECU.

N1 was only rocket attempting this setup before Starship. And failed miserably.
The VPS was like $60 a year. At the end it was like $100 a year from ads.

At one point in the early 2010's there were a few $1,000 months when there was a car model released with torrent in the name!
Tim Dods camera van got crunched by some large debris... seeing the damage in the area is going to be interesting.

Also 'hoppy' got some of its cladding ripped off.
"a rapid unscheduled disassembly" - what a phrase for an explosion
Better headline: SpaceX successfully launches the biggest rocket in history.
He is clearly still contributing dates for launch.
And dogs that had previously been used to their owners going into work got accustomed to them being home all day and needed time to adjust.

Before I was approved for permanent WFH, I was gradually increasing the amount of time I went into the office, in case I wasn't approved. It was clear after a few weeks that the one-month deadline we were given wasn't going to be enough time for the dogs to re-adjust. I think two months would have been enough if I kept it gradual, but then one day I got held up much longer than expected and my older dog had a freak-out and ripped the doggy door out of the door and then proceeded to rip off about 3 inches of (fiberglass shell, foam core) door surrounding the hole. It was almost a month after that incident until I could leave to do errands without her having anxiety.

I'm glad I didn't have to re-adjust her since she doesn't have much longer to live. I don't know what I'm going to do about the dog we adopted as a puppy during covid, who has never known anything else. I personally think hybrid is the worst of both worlds, but will start increasing my time in office once the older dog has passed so he can get used to me being gone for longer time stretches.
> mistake it made with the USSR of allowing...

I fondly recall all the iPhones made in USSR that we used to buy.
This would be fabulous to share, if you are able to.
How is it not engineering? They engineered it to clear the launch pad, and it did.
SLS is at $100 million apiece and has no realistic path forward for improving that. Fail-and-iterate was never even an option for them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS-25#Space_Shuttle_program ("contract extension to manufacture 18 additional RS-25 engines, with associated services, for $1.79 billion")
Regrettably, I was unable to watch the launch live. I'm looking forward to seeing the footage and hearing about all the analysis that will go into understanding what happened.
The more barriers to entry the less likely someone is to buy a gun on impulse or "just to have." When they're not common on the street it's not needed to carry one for defence either.

You say that drugs busts etc. outside the US will often have guns involved. Yes, criminals can still find ways to get them but ordinary people won't be bothered with this.

The Netherlands for example has Europe's biggest port in Rotterdam and sees an incredible amount of drug-related smuggling. It has 3.9 guns per 100,000 people (107th in the world) while the US has 88.8 (1st in the world).

The rate of murder is 73 times more than the Netherlands.

Sources here: https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Netherland...

Look at the murder rate: https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Violen...

See how high the US then see how far you have to scroll down before you start seeing European countries appearing there.

Sources for more control leading to reduced homicides and guns on crime scenes:

1. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-an...

2. https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/7/3/184
Would you have appointed someone to lead an institute if you knew that there would be a PR fiasco the moment his name was announced? No, you would have told them, "I can't do this unless you sort out this other thing". Which the man has been trying to do for 15 years.
> China is not inherently hostile to the US

The US does not, and will not allow a "near peer" nation to exist, ever. It will use all the tools at its disposal to avoid that situation from ever happening, that's one of its own very core tenets for national security

Japan, China, Brazil, etc it does not matter if it's actually aggressive against the US or not
Your downvotes prove your point.
After getting a call from the CIA to leave their honeypot alone, they left without taking anything ;-)
Seems to me like it's a kinda medium result.

A failure would've been "oh shit we discovered another problem with the launch sequence, guess we're a few weeks behind where we wanted to be."

A catastrophic failure would've been "oh shit we didn't discover a problem with the launch sequence and it blew up on the pad and damaged our ground facilities."

A huge success would've been the planned mission.

This seems like, "Well, some thing went well, some went poorly."
This is a confusing take to me. So my ISP which has my billing information is trying to find out who I am by calling Google? They know who I am.

The inverse is what you're trying to prevent. Service ABC has malicious activity and calls Google to ask which accounts are accessing from that IP address. However this has two main problems.

a) Why would Google give this info over willingly.

b) Most VPN's assign the same outbound IP address to multiple users. So it's not a 1-1 mapping.

c) People who are using a VPN for something malicious are not also signed into Google.. I'd think.
you're echoing congress woman eshoo.
Ask HN: Why do people want you to plug your API key for GPT into their site?
Why not just charge for usage on your site?

I've got to figure $X/mo is way better than enter your API key.
It's a difference between "definition of success" and "the plan". They can't just say "we want to get off the pad and whatever happens afterwards, meh", they have to point it somewhere. So they plan out a whole flight to maximize useful data per additional success, but consider some subset of the plan to be an overall success.

I might go to the grocery store with a list of five things, but I only really need two things. Coming home with 3 things would be a success.
If it is solvable, where are the already "fixed" societies?
Public perception matters (it eventually drives whether a businessman can do business, since all business is trust-based), but Musk buying Twitter has had a lot more effect than any journalist writing about him ever could.
You write parents in plural at the beginning of your comment but your specific example is about one parent. Have you experienced this with multiple working parents?
If you’re going off the idea that the fine is based on the value of the gain, then you need to go off of the profit made (bit trickier with staff working multiple projects but hard disks aren’t 100% profit)
Man my heart goes out to you.

I owned and operated an adult website for 18 years. For 15 of those years it was primary source of income. It was completely lawful and above board, no user-generated-content so I never once had any issues with controversial content etc. One day last year we get a notice from our bank telling us that we were deemed "high risk" and they were closing our commercial accounts. For months we tried to find any bank or credit union that would take us but they all turned us down.

Someone actually posted our story to HN but it's not really tech related so didn't get many upvotes or engagement.

So I know how devastating it is for ignorance and stupidity on the part of the others to shut down something that a) you worked hard to create yourself and b) was such a huge part of your life for so long. Extreme empathy.
The BBC News report (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/65333115) says that it was character.ai. They don't say how they know that though (presumably it's disclosed in the magazine itself?)
It has to be a significant part of the total because it’s being used as an argument against introducing new treatments for PTSD.
unless you have a hankering for benson&hedges cigarettes.
> clearing the tower was all we hoped

All, really ? What about the flight plan ?

I like the American philosophy to see the good part of experiences even when thinks don’t go as planned, but IMHO I feel like it's drifting more and more from « there’s good in failure » to « let’s call everything a success ». May be wrong, just my European point of view through the transatlantic optic fiber.
Every country limits trade, in general, but especially to countries that are aggressively working against their interest and trying to become a peer competitor when it comes to technology.
Well it is supposed to flip, but only one flip, not a tumble.
Yep. But you'd expect that we'd have more given how much technology has advanced and how bigger the economies are now. The recent progress is mostly due to Billionaires now.

Another possibility is: Space is too hard. So instead the focus is to analyze (ie: James Webb) instead of sending a human there.
Nah it's the nominal KSP launch trajectory. You forget to add first stage fins, launch up to the gravity turn, do the cartwheel, separate and continue to orbit. Seems like they forgot to check their staging though.
I was under the impression the socks feature no longer works, are you currently using it?
No, because normal people see a huge explosion and think "well, that didn't go to plan." It has nothing to do with space billionaire man: bad.
More info on why that's necessary here: https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/17878/why-does-the...

Edit: "that" = one flip; not the many we saw today.
A "flip was part of the flight plan.
You can hardly blame them. So little is known about the brain.
It's inherently and explicitly hostile to democracy. As such, it is hostile to the democratic world, which includes the US.
I don't like the chronological timeline. It favors those who post the most instead of surfacing the most interesting content.

I want an algorithmic timeline, but I want one that works for me and not for the bottom line and KPIs of the company.
Any guess as to how big the debris field is and what risk there is to people on the ground? Does the flight plan just take it over largely uninhabited land?
Thinking gun policy isn't good is different then dealing with ptsd. That same survey, if you ask how many people have ptsd because of guns in America, maybe you get one,if that.
It did some pretty sick acrobatics.
I hope it wasn't hydraulic steering that failed, because that's the part that was already obsolete = nothing to learn. Ah well.

It didn't destroy the launch tower, and that's what counts!
Maybe the offline world just ends up retreating to remote areas and going for a more self-sufficient setup ? IDK, who knows?
This is pretty hyperbolic. In the shuttle era, these contingencies were thought of and planned for. The amount of preparation NASA would do before shuttle launches was incredible, including flying medical and rescue teams to the chosen launch abort sites.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_abort_modes#Tran...

"Preparations of TAL sites took four to five days and began one week before launch, with the majority of personnel from NASA, the Department of Defense and contractors arriving 48 hours before launch. Additionally, two C-130 aircraft from the space flight support office from the adjacent Patrick Space Force Base (then known as Patrick Air Force Base) would deliver eight crew members, nine pararescuers, two flight surgeons, a nurse and medical technician, and 2,500 pounds (1,100 kg) of medical equipment to Zaragoza, Istres, or both. One or more C-21S or C-12S aircraft would also be deployed to provide weather reconnaissance in the event of an abort with a TALCOM, or astronaut flight controller aboard for communications with the shuttle pilot and commander."
I agree with you. "clearing the launchpad" we did back in the 60' with 60+ year old tech. Sure starship is bigger but not that mutch.
For any given law there may be a preceding reason, but that reasoning is ultimately derived from some kind of base morality, hence my use of the term 'expressions'.

>One answer is that these dietary and clothing restrictions exist as a discipline that perfects its practitioners spiritually.

And what is the need to perfect oneself spiritually?

>Catholics abstain from meat on Fridays not because it is intrinsically immoral to eat meat on Fridays, but because canon law includes this restriction as an act of penance that is binding on all Catholics.

Penance is described by catholics as 'good', which is a moral judgement.

>We sacrifice lower goods for higher goods.

Right, but trading a lower good for a higher good is still an expression of morality, you're just preferring the greater good of the two.
Wouldn't an AI generated interview be cheaper than paying an author to make one up?
There's not really a conflict between land- and space-based telescopes. They have very different capabilities. There are things you can only do from space, and things you can only do from the ground.

To give you an example, using adaptive optics, you can get higher resolution on small fields of view from the ground. That's because you can build much larger telescopes on the ground, which therefore have a smaller diffraction limit, and you can use adaptive optics to correct for the atmosphere in a small field of view. However, if you want high resolution over a large field of view, you have to go to space.

Other advantages of space: extremely stable calibration (because you can control conditions more precisely, and because there's no atmosphere) and ability to view parts of the spectrum that are unavailable from the ground.

Other advantages of ground-based telescopes: larger and heavier instruments, ability to do repairs and upgrades.

Robots vs. manned spaceflight is much simpler. Robots will almost always give you more science return for the same price. I still think manned spaceflight should be pursued, but for other reasons (it's cool, and we should be pushing the envelope of what's possible).
Somewhat related anecdote --

Executives at my company in a non-tech industry who are running a skeleton crew in the IT department are using the economy and tech industry layoffs to try and withhold bonuses and treating employees like disposable garbage.

They seem to think that the 2-3 people doing the work for 10 is OK and that somehow low key insinuating that current tech industry changes like chatGPT will replace our jobs, even though they don't know the difference between IT roles vs Software Engineer's roles and responsibilities.

I wonder if this is true for other non-tech company's IT departments where the execs are clueless in terms of how technology actually works.

If I had the financial stability to quit today and take a year off I would, hoping I can get there by end of year.
I am happy that they had a partial success. I remain unconvinced that it was a success as defined by other things they said.
I don't get it. It's Emacs installed on Linux. So what?
A screen reader won't 'tho', and even if it did, that's not better?
Things are, they don’t fail or succeed in a qualitative sense. You can only fail against some objective measure. If you do nothing, you still haven’t failed. But you haven’t done anything either. If you try something and you establish an objective measure to achieve and it fails, you and your efforts _have not failed_. The positive action of doing still is, and the positive action of analyzing the failed objective still is, and it opens the way to another action as an evolution of the original action.

But things just are what they are. They aren’t good or bad. Good or bad is your interpretation of the way things are. If you consider doing nothing good, then you succeed by not trying. If you consider trying good, then you succeed by simply trying.
It shows temperature and altitude... would be very interesting if it also displayed pressure.

EDIT: and curves.
The plan for Starship’s separation from the Super Heavy booster stage does include a 180 degree flip!
The forced/unnatural feeling clapping/cheering from the video feed is so weird. It seemed like there would be a short silence in the room when something bad happened, then the "APPLAUSE" sign would go on.
Again, I don't know who that is, sorry. I'm not in the US so I don't follow American politics so closely and I'm unsure what point you're making or how to respond.
Microprinting
LOL they are still salty about the 'publicly funded' tag
Yeah, antidepressants are way more complicated, they have more side effects, and have to be monitored carefully to not make the underlying issues that caused the patient to take them worse. Suicidal thoughts plus antidepressants that give you energy can give you the motivation to go through it. And despite not being categorized as addictive you can't stop taking them without wrecking your mental health until your body readjusts. If you don't refill your Rx of antidepressants your doctor will be notified and reach out to you because stopping has such pronounced effects.

While at the same time despite being a controlled substance because they're supposedly so addictive people with ADHD forget to take adderall and with normal use you don't take it every day.

We got this this shit so unbelievably backwards because we haven't shook the puritanical bullshit of "oh no someone might experience euphoria if they go out of their way to abuse it." Like bro, people with real medical issues shouldn't suffer because of this crap. If everyone who is buying cocaine from their dealer switched to medically supervised stimulants we would be unquestionably better off.
Seriously though, why haven't we banned TikTok yet? There is no legitimate reason to allow them to keep pushing disinfo here. There are already tons of replacements lined up ready to replace it, it would not hurt anyone in the US at all to ban it.
In addition to what @rascul noted (WithKnown.com), there are some other services listed here (and maybe even more beyond what is listed there): https://indieweb.org/Getting_Started#IndieWeb_Services
If you are planning on several y and z anyways, absolutely. On the most recent SmarterEveryDay video on encasing a Prince Rupert's drop in glass, sculptor Cal Breed talks about the moment when a process fails. He could stop there and restart, saving some time, but instead all the pressure is off, and he "makes as many mistakes as possible" for the rest of the build.

Quote is towards the end, but the whole vid is worth a watch.

https://youtu.be/C1KT8PS6Zs4

https://www.calbreed.com/
> The fact that some comments are defending Google is insane to me. My only guess is that they are all from USA and have a very "american" view of things.

This is Hacker News; the readership has a lot of temporarily embarrassed monopolists raised on business models that assume that the regulations that apply to others, don't apply to them.
"Europe" is many very different countries.
Vite 4.3 – Up to 3x faster dev cold starts
Interestingly, Vite itself is written in a slow interpreted language (JavaScript/TypeScript) while using compilers that are written in fast native languages such as ESBuild (written in Go).

It's a nice showcase of successfully applying the strategy of focusing on hotpath performance instead of blindly making every line of code "fast".

Also, Vite being written in JavaScript is much friendlier to the ecosystem. I myself made many PRs to Vite which I would have done much less if it involved a more complex language.

Shameless plug: I'm the author of https://vite-plugin-ssr.com which is a Next.js/Nuxt alternative but with a "do-one-thing-do-it-well architecture"[1].

[1]: https://vite-plugin-ssr.com/architecture#do-one-thing-do-it-...