HN user
My next keyboard will be columnar/ortholinear. It just makes so much more sense compared to the staggered layout on a standard keyboard and it doesn't require you having to learn a whole new layout like dvorak.
When I learned to touch type a few years ago, I found it really useful having the letters on the keys so that when I messed up I could look down and make sure my fingers were in the right places and get going again quickly. Eventually after a week or so practicing, I had the hang of it and no longer needed to look at the keys. So I'm not really sure what blank keycaps achieves.
He's served that time already. He's now being held awaiting extradition to the US.
I also saw a documentary about this, but it was called "A pharaoh to remember". Unfortunately in this one, the fake funeral just made the guy feel worse.
I totally agree that a combination of physical controls and touchscreen is the way to go. However there are ways to improve the design for touchscreen. Virtual knobs in my experience are pretty difficult to use on a screen, however sliders work reasonably well in their place.
Most industrial touchscreens I've seen are resistive which makes them much more difficult to use, especially for dragging motions, so that may be compounding the problem. Capacitive screens are generally much easier to use.
I already do my part for the environment by not having kids. That's a much bigger impact than trying to reduce the amount of meat I eat. So I'll eat whatever I like, thank you.
Note that you can only fit 1.38MB on a standard floppy.
The crew dragon is designed to be completely autonomous. 99% of the time, the astronaut is just a passenger, so there is less requirement for physical controls.
In terms of mission control telling you to press X button, it is almost certain that mission control would have a simulation of the cockpit running that would show them exactly what the astronaut is seeing on their display. So they will always be able to direct the astronaut correctly.
I definitely think a touch screen in this situation can be safer, because it can display information in a way that makes it quicker for the astronaut to understand the situation. It in theory requires less training because there is less requirement to remember the position and function of every single switch.
Have you seen the F-35 cockpit? It's just one giant touchscreen.
The cost will come down. 20 years ago, the cost of sequencing one person's genome was over $100 million. Today it's $1000.
The pilots were trained on how to deal with a runaway trim stabiliser. The procedure hasn't changed from the old 737, the only thing that has changed is that it is that the failure mode is more likely to occurr on the 737 MAX.
From the article: “A properly trained pilot should be able to solve an MCAS anomaly or any uncommanded flight-control input through procedures that are taught to all 737 pilots,” said Menza, noting that the emergency information Boeing distributed in December reiterated those procedures.
Here's a video of a competent 737 pilot showing those exact procedures: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xixM_cwSLcQ
Obviously the MCAS system is badly designed, but any automation system can fail and pilots need to know how to deal with it.
I'm not a professional web developer, but in the experience I've had building a couple of JS heavy sites, I've actually found the Edge developer tools to be the best. If there's one thing microsoft knows how to do well, it's build developer tools.
For many, owning a car to commute will make as much sense as owning a cell tower to scroll Instagram.
This is total rubbish. I don't believe for a second that taking a self-driving uber to work and back everyday will be cheaper than driving my own car.
VW has already shown pre-production models, and the timeline is 2020. There's more info on the VW website: https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/electric-hybrid/id
The VW ID supposedly has up to 372 mile range according to that site.
Proteus (https://www.labcenter.com/simulation/) can do this, but it's not free. It's really great though, you just draw out your circuit, load in your compiled firmware and it will simulate it all.
Well, I guess you have to start somewhere. I'm sure his goal is to make a machine where you can just dump clothes in and they come out folded. But the technology isn't there yet and it takes time to develop. He's probably hoping he can sell a few of these useless machines and keep funding his R&D until he can build a fully functional version.
It's the opposite way around. If you read it closely they say on windows 10, some customers may see a decrease in performance, but for windows 7, most customers will see a decrease.
An article in the verge states "Windows 7 and Windows 8 will be the worst hit simply because these older operating systems have features like kernel-level font rendering that will be impacted by the Spectre and Meltdown mitigations even further than Windows 10."
Well, the Surface Pro 4 had the same thing 2 years ago.
I've printed finer threads on my cheap 3D printer, although it took a few tries to get them the right size.
It's possible that he used acetone vapour to smooth out the surface of the threads.
With milk, the measurements used seem to depend on the type of milk sold. If it's regular milk, it will be sold by the pint. If it's UHT or filtered milk, it seems to be sold by the litre.
A quick bit of research shows that the speed of light in air only 0.3% less than the speed of light in a vaccuum. So that works out to 298,896km/s. This is significantly faster than the speed of light in an fibre optic cable (around 200,000km/s). Combine this with the ability for a microwave link to have a shorter path than optical fibre, and it's easy to see why a microwave link can be lower latency.
Nobody is disputing the fact that fibre optic can handle much higher bandwidths, but that is irrelevant in this application. The amount of data required to make a trade is probably in the order of kiloBytes or MegaBytes, easily handled by the few Gbps limit of microwave links.
The reason why satellite internet is so terrible is because a geostationary satellite sits 22,236 miles above the surface of the earth. So for a roundtrip journey, a packet of data has to travel nearly 45,000 miles.