skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"...the crew did not die in the tank explosion and subsequent ripping-apart of the orbiter by air loads. ...The crew was still alive in the orbiter cabin until it finally hit the sea, which is about a 200-gee stop, since it hit dead broadside."

Anyone around at the time vividly remembers this horrible tragedy. My memory was unexpectedly reinforced only days later when I came across a memorial to the crew in the Smithsonian museum.

Perhaps those in NASA were aware that the crew were (or would have assumed to have been) alive until they hit the water but if I recall that knowledge wasn't available to the GP.

I assumed, like I suppose many, the crew were killed outright at the time of disintegration and that would have been the most merciful outcome. That it wasn't even now fills me with horror and I shudder to think about it. The crew's final moments must have been sheer terror.
So because an incumbent exists ESA should give up, let their production and development pipeline rot away and "enjoy" the monopoly until it's too late to change something?
Show HN: Relive your early developer days by trying to exit Vim. Good luck
> for apples-to-apples you should compare to NASA rather than SpaceX

ESA is analogous to NASA. ArianeSpace is Europe’s ULA. Europe doesn’t have a SpaceX; Ariane 6 is a Yugo in the modern launch market.
Intel's lunar lake laptops won't let you upgrade your RAM. Here's why thats fine
probably also marketing, since "dumb-pipes" may seem outdated when all and everything is getting "smart"
> 6-10 years from now Ariane Next/SALTO will aims replicate Falcon 9 efficiency and the design will be very similar

…at which point it will be competing with Starship.
> The problem with using Direnv is that despite it being a very useful tool, its setup requires investing time and getting over the Nix ecosystem's learning curve.

I'm a bit confused. Direnv is rather simple, is it not.. ?

1. put env variables into .envrc
2. direnv allow

I don't use nix and I don't think I'm over its learning curve. I don't remember investing any time into it..
> 6-10 years from now Ariane Next/SALTO will aims replicate Falcon 9 efficiency and the design will be very similar:

And by then, SpaceX will be 10 years ahead of them with a next-gen platform.

Not a great sounding story.
I don't think it is that impressive anymore. We've been building rockets for decades. Making them return to Earth is peanuts compared to building a self driving car. You can even make a simulation that is 99% accurate without much effort. Also, rocket science is just Newtonian physics.

Of course, building a rocket requires a shit-ton of resources, so if anything is impressive then it's the management of those resources.
I think the Trabant was just fine when you compare it to the cars designed in its era - the 50s and 60s, I think it stands up to the Bug pretty well, its just they didn't bother updating the design for decades, and by the 80s, it looked like a relic out of time.
Ah, I can see you added JSON input. Tried it.

It looks like the "The user is allowed to:" part is the most important one and should be on top. The graph visualization does not make any sense on my random JSON policy I have just pasted.
My feed's been consistently good/crap (depending on the day), since way before the takeover, so I have not really noticed any big difference.

The only way I see it getting worse is generally nice and well intentioned people leaving because they don't like Musk, therefore making the space poorer.
Give it a try :)

I think it's early days and whyle AI can write code to deliver features it's not perfect. So someone who knows how to write code, deploy software has a basic understanding of software architecture and cyber security will have a lot more luck than someone who has to run everything through the AI.

It's similar to how computers in chess worked. At one point (around the 90s and 00s) computers could play very good chess, but they had weak spots. So the best chess player in the world was a team of humans and computers. But eventually computers got better and no longer needed any human help. I think a similar scenario may play with software development, and we're still not at the place where an AI can everything without technical input from a human.
What interferes with supporting “normal” builds is the effort required to actually support them. If that was a given, there’d be no justification for us having gotten ourselves in this mess in the first place. The realities of increasingly choose-your-own-adventure nature of Linux have come home to roost, and people are quite rightfully wanting to spend their effort elsewhere.

I say this as someone that was using Gentoo before lxc even existed. So this isn’t code for “I don’t get it”.
TLDR: it did
> So because an incumbent exists ESA should give up

No. But they should learn their lesson and try to run instead of plodding along at a glacial pace.

Oh but wait, they're govt funded with no success incentives other than some sort of vague sense of pride for a job well done.

My money is on they're not going to come out ahead in the race.
Starship has a payload 10x-15x larger than the smaller Ariane 6 variant.

It seems like for the cost to be lower you would be wanting to fit as much as possible thus impacting how often it is being launched. So not sure if the two have the same requirements.
It's not about the same experiment, unless I am mistaken, but it's a great comic nevertheless, thank you for sharing.
At least they do not name them after themselves.
I find IAM to be a great product. I cannot imagine how we could make it different, without removing some of its capabilities: after all, this is nothing but a list of <who, what, on which> permissions
> it is still essential that we have multiple actors building rockets. The competition

Twice the cost and at a small fraction of the frequency is competition in the way a rubber duck competes with a battle ship.

Ariana 6 isn’t meaningful competition. ArianeSpace’s sole value is in its potential of becoming competition if one day sensibly managed.
Baseline skill will be always required, you can ask ChatGPT to improve or correct your code, but if you have no idea where to start you can’t rely 100% on ChatGPT.

Sometimes the hallucinations it has can be dangerous, you can’t copy-paste all, you have to give a look to the code to avoid some nonsense operations.

This can be dangerous also because if ChatGPT writes an entire app and the app has a bug in the code, ChatGPT will replicate the same bug on all the other apps that rely on that code. And if one guy found a vulnerability in ChatGPT coding operations, it can be exploited on every app created with ChatGPT.

However it’s a super useful tool, especially when you have to write ripetitive code or change something like a variable, you can ask ChatGPT to do these repetitive tasks and it’s good at it.
I was drowning once when I was 5 or 6 years old, before I learned how to swim. It was exactly as described, I felt paralyzed, couldn't make any noise at all, I was terrified and was just trying to keep my mouth above the water. Thankfully some adult spotted me and dragged me out. Now that I have 2 kids, 4 and 8, whenever I take them to the beach, I never take my eyes off of them when they are in the water.
Fashion is traditionally not copyrightable[1] , and the fashion industry is doing rather well.

Similarly our IT infrastructure is now built mostly on [a set of patches to the copyright system][2] called F/L/OSS that provided more freedom to authors and users, and lead to more innovation and proliferation of solutions.

So even just in the modern west, we can see thriving ecosystems where copyright is absent or adjusted; and where the outcomes are immediately visible on the street.

[1] Though a quick search shows that lawyers are making inroads.

[2] One way of describing it at least, YMMV.
> … but apple sells ads too therefore every option is equally bad!

Yes.

It also doesn't help that said device vendor has been trying to destroy computing freedom while sabotaging open standards left and right.

> It’s funny to see people admit with the AI stuff that apple is getting it right, introducing privacy-protecting approaches and services, etc, yet refuse to admit that the same perspective and approaches have informed all their services for a long time.

It's funny that different people on the Internet express different and sometimes conflicting opinions?
Have you ever done DIY? Things like replacing a tap could be done very quickly using YouTube. Why do people still call plumbers? Because reality is never as clean-cut as YouTube videos. Sometimes, you find the connection parts have completely corroded, and you can't undo them with your standard DIY tools; other times, you discover you have odd-sized connections (metrics versus non-metrics and vice versa). The real skill of a plumber is to be able to handle real-life problems.

It is the same for coding. Yes, you can ask it to generate basic code, and it will work. But my job as a software engineer isn't to write code. It is to deal with messy humans. Sure, ChatGPT can write an app that does three things. Does it work reliably on all different mobile phone devices? And do you only need three things, or do you want 16? Most clients know precisely what they want; they can't express it accurately in words in a single iteration. When you have delivered those three things, they will often ask for more. They will often ask for a hexagon-shaped room after you have built them a perfect circular-based one and then complain heavily if you quote it will take several weeks to refactor.
Not if aging can be reversed in 100 years.
Yes I think any minor tweak would remove the effect. awsvizul, vizaws, awsvista.

It’s just a bit too on the nose at present.
The full quote.

The one-sided pattern matching seems to be a peculiarity of Elixir. The post above discusses an implementation of full unification without that restriction. To clarify, unification is not generally restricted to one-sided matching only.

I'm saying that, except for Erlang, the languages mentioned (Haskell, OCaml, F#, etc.) don't support one-sided pattern matching like Elixir does.

Elixir's pattern matching is more like unification. For example:

[a, a, b, a] = [1, 1, 2, 1]

This kind of pattern matching, where a variable can appear multiple times on the left-hand side and must match the corresponding parts of the list, can't be done easily in Haskell or OCaml. In those languages, each variable can only appear once on the left side of a pattern match.

the OP is saying that this style of one sided pattern matching is indeed a peculiarity of Elixir (and Erlang)
I don't disagree in principle but let's not conflate the trust required for proprietary software with the trust required for a service that is known to exfiltrate your data.
> Also, rocket science is just Newtonian physics.

Disagree.

The newtonian physics part of flying a rocket is indeed the boring part of rocket science in these days of Ghz computing.

But all the engineering (an altogether different - if related - discipline) required is anything but simple.

And engineering and all of its sub-disciplines (materials science, propellant research, iterative refinement, operational research, logistics, 3d printing, computing, simulation, structural engineering, etc...) is both where the complexity lives and where the greatest progress in rocket science has been made.

The devil is in details, as usual.
Why? Can you name a few example current alternatives and upcoming contenders?

Are we talking far-tech where plants and other biome actors are engineered to produce materials in a particular shape and manner?
> they're not going to come out ahead in the race

What race ? And if there is even one who cares ?

If EU pays 10x or 100x more to launch satellites the world isn't going to change all that much.
Intel learned from Apple. Not many people want to upgrade RAM, but Soc RAM is cheaper and faster - part of the Mx performance over Intel/AMD is from a 3x faster memory access (70gb/sec DDR4/5, 200+gb/sec Mx).

"According to Intel, this move will make the RAM use up to 40 percent less power."

On top of the performance gains integrated RAM uses less power.

On top of these two things, Intel has better margins if they sell the RAM.

And while it's not as fast as GPU memory, you can easily have more memory for AI in an unified memory model (64gb e.g.) - or rumored 128gb for Strix Halo.

See how Mx is faster, uses less power, is better for AI, and Apple makes more money?
I don't have many iron rules, but I have one that I refuse to bend on: You've either proved your bespoke multi-threaded code mathematically, or it is guaranteed to be Wrong with a capital W.

If you've proved it correct, you now have just a 50% chance of it being merely wrong when deployed on actual hardware.
I need 64GB, this Intel new generation will be useless to me. I think Dell XPS is the only laptop with Qualcomm Snapdragon X that offers 64GB currently.

I see upgradable RAM as on of the big advantages of x64 laptops over Apple and Qualcomm. Not sure Intel's current strategy to emulate their competitors, rather than play to it's own strong points is a good one.
The underlying question being, did these guys: https://elementzero.green/

{ steal | borrow | get inspired by } these guys: https://fortescue.com/sustainability/climate-change ?

Fortescue Metals | Fortescue Futures came up through the past two decades in the billion tonne per annum Western Australian iron ore industry and spent a lot of hard cash on the side with a commitment to make mining "clean" wrt climate side effects of mining, transporting, and processing large amounts of iron to steel.

That's pilot plants for all kinds of tech and wads of research cash to explore options (disclaimer: I've taken their cash at times).

Now that the laughing has died down a bit we have others, in this case former staff, spinning up green iron projects and asserting nothing of value left with them on their bounce.

Further fun, SMH and some other various Australian media outlets have owners | major share holders that absolutely detest Andrew Forrest, the Fortescue founder, and waste no opportunity to cast anything he does in the worst possible light.
Once again, it's opt out.
you can move the section to the top, just drag and drop.
I ditched rstudio. Now fully onboard vscode.
It needs to start somewhere, right? We can't "just build" a NX-class starship without sciencing it out and R&D.
You don't know that. Starship does not exist.
Why is it a race instead of being of public and international importance to have an alternative to a for profit company?
IoTBench: A community effort to evaluate and compare low-power wireless networks
It will still be building that knowledge inside Europe. Rocketry in general is deemed to be strategic so it's OK for any country to invest money in that, keep scientists and engineers on the subject, keep the industries alive, etc. It's not only about access to space, it's also about defense.
Ariane is one generation behind SpaceX, but that still puts them on second place. All while being independent from the whims of one single individual, ensuring independent launch capabilities for national security reasons.
What race? The race to the price bottom and who can get us to the Kessler syndrom first?
> On the other hand, the Communist and Socialist ideologies are primarily driven by much darker emotions of fear and envy.

I'll see myself out thanks!
China enacts export controls on tech including gunpowder and papermaking [pdf]
a thing which can get into orbit and deploy objects exists
Anole: Native Multimodal Models for Interleaved Text-Image Generation
tech.ml.dataset: A Clojure high performance data processing system
Your article makes no claims either way as to whether non-sugar sweeteners are more or less healthy than sugar.

I believe the general consensus is that they are healthier (but like vapes and cigarettes if you can avoid both from the start or use the harm reduction one to taper off entirely you're winning) so why are you trying to suggest otherwise without evidence?
I think it's actually very fair to count wood as a composite. Composite is the concept, and wood happens to be a natural occurrence of the concept. Keeping it qualified as a composite also helps expand the mind: composites don't need to manufactured how we're typically manufacturing it in the present. When you think of wood as a composite, it's an opportunity for ah-ha moments in students.
It would. And this is where some legislation "in the spirit of" would have helped. So Microsoft's huge legal arm can't just wiggle their way out on technicalities. Clearly, the law is not prepared to face the challenge of copyright violations on the scale created by the LLMs.

I also think it's not just copyright. It's simply not right to create a product on top of the collective work of all open source developers monetize them on the absurt scale Microsoft operates and never ever credit the original creators.
Could I use this kind of theming with Adguard for Safari on iPhone?

Update: I tried and it worked!
The little plane that did.
Dear landryracoon,

Unfortunately, I have no services to provide for the recovery of the resources. After seeing an increase in these kinds of scams in my social circle, I have compiled that book to share my professional knowledge to spread knowledge with everyone.

One of my readers has recently reached out to me about the examples and this has motivated me to start writing these articles for reaching out to more people.

I have no issues to get contacted and I would like to help as much as I can.
I think this is my biggest pet peeves when working on different projects. Plus port allocation conflict; if you have multiple docker databases or multiple project using the same default port it's not smooth and obviously changing port is not always an option on legacy projects :/
The options aren't meant to be realistic. They're only meant to tease out which side you personally have a preference for, by making you think about how these two extreme options make you feel. One probably feels worse than the other.
New Electronic Warfare Pod Turns Marine MQ-9 Reaper into "A Black Hole"
Which is, I suppose, why we need Bellingcat.
Yes, and the industrial base that we are discussing is the one that builds the M51.3 which is fundamental for Europe. Existence is worth a lot.
Sorry - I got that wrong. They got smaller so the overall price would be the same, when the tax is included.
Humans have been anatomically unchanged for 50,000 years, I'd imagine every generation lamented the young with their new technology, otherwise we wouldn't have seen so many examples in written history, it is just that we have no records from prehistory, by definition.
The competitive, zero-sum conquests of two empires were very real, as were the sphere of influence negotiations.

But that’s not the point either way. As I’m reading gp, the point is that if the leaders of the international order want to prevent nuclear proliferation (a worthy goal), they’ll have to do better to protect Russia and China’s neighbors from their territorial aggression. Else, the border states won’t have a better choice than deterrence if they want to survive.

How many Ukraines and Taiwans will it take before a dozen new hands hold their own red buttons?
Yes, I agree. I don't see much practical use in this. I was just surprised how (relatively) straightforwards this is to do, and thought it was more cool than useful
Unless Europe wants to build a moon base or new ISS, won't a Starship competitor be a bit overkill for most payloads?
I just shared a source illustrating how lower speeds dramatically affect outcomes for pedestrians (never mind that braking distance is way shorter for lower speeds) and you respond with a straw man about rural road shoulders?

Incidentally I tend to favor 30kph for urban cores, which is 18mph, so you’re not far off. Amsterdam recently made this change and it’s nice, but enforcement is so-so. I’m glad to see this come online in addition to enforcement. My six year old who bikes to school is too.
The main genius of SpaceX is the mass production. Hopefully they can replicate that in the future.
> I cannot imagine how we could make it different

This seems almost bait.
Well, for a start, you could have a recorder that actually shows all the relevant permissions for a particular API call so users can work out what they should set permissions on (including interactions with SCPs and anything else that could affect a decision).
Bamboo is one material that has seen some traction in replacing plastic, especially in kid food items etc. however they do break easier. Hemp is also finally starting to have a real comeback but still has a lot of roadblocks ahead because of almost a decade of “bad press”.
> will still be building that knowledge inside Europe

Ariane 6 cannibalises Europe’s chance at being more than an also-ran in space:

“An Arianespace manager pushing his company as the only solution to Europe’s launch challenges isn’t that noteworthy. However, the fact [Arianespace’s CEO] urges the need for a ‘reusable heavy launcher’ is notable, considering his previous noncommittal remarks about rocket reusability. The certainty of his statement leaves no ambiguity–Ariane 6 just won’t be able to compete in the global market. It will take a (single and expensive) reusable heavy launcher (manufactured by Arianespace) and (funded by) a unified Europe to compete (with SpaceX).

While [Arianespace’s CEO’s] admission of reusability’s future in Europe is surprising, his constancy in his attempts to keep European space activities hostage to Arianespace is not. To be clear, he wants European taxpayers to fund reusability development and manufacturing only through Arianespace. He believes Europe can’t afford more than one reusable heavy launcher and that if Europe were to pay for a reusable rocket, then Arianespace must manufacture it.”

https://www.illdefined.space/arianespace-the-only-fish-in-th...
Are the Europeans wworried that "between now and 2030s" the US will cut off their access to space?

I understand things can go wrong and it's good to have a backup plan in the long term... But that's not that many years out. You can go without access for a few years .. It seems like a tiny risk
To be fair to the author, there is a ton of inherent complexity to something like this that you can't really smooth over with "readable" code. I think you'd have to spend a lot more time familiarising yourself with the codebase before making a call on whether it's maintainable or not.
Absolutely, AI makes coding accessible to a broader audience. It allows anyone to start coding, but it's like driving a car without fully understanding how the engine works. You might find yourself constantly troubleshooting and revising your code. For example, building a simple website is quite straightforward with AI assistance, but when you dive into more complex, low-level programming, a deeper understanding becomes crucial to avoid major pitfalls.
I would rather work for the government than working to make someone so rich even more rich. To each their own.
Interview of Scientist by Mike Pawka (1998)
Book Review: 'The Singularity Is Nearer,' by Ray Kurzweil
I tend to agree with you that the idea of a list of "who, what, which" is straightforward and probably is the right way of doing things. I agree that permissions is inherently a hard problem.

I disagree that IAM specifically is a great product. It's great if you learn it, but learning permissions system never adds anything to the bottom line. It's an evergrowing technical debt at best. People interested in learning permissions system are typically people interested in developing one. Users are never happy with permissions systems because more often than not it's a nuisance.

In my view IAM is an incredibly overengineered list of who, what, which, suitable for corporate granularity but then too complex to be used by a startup or a project.
Problem is, once you dive deep in the rabbit hole, you will inevitably build another IAM.

The art here is knowing when to stop building, not what to build.