class3shock

"The purpose of a college degree is NOT a job"

Check the marketing literature for any college and you will find that is not true.

The only people doing degrees for knowledge and prestige are the filthy rich and while they may make up a significant percentage of students at the top 5 schools, they make up a tiny percentage of all college students.

The last point is where I end up aswell though and I think no matter how you look at it colleges are doing a disservice to young people and taxpayers pushing worthless degrees backed by government loans that they (the colleges) don't have to worry about repaying.

Just to add, the primary failure mode of critical jet engine components is fatigue. To see, and thus learn, from fatigue failures in the field you need thousands of components flying thousands of hours, this takes years or decades. And to learn from this in a way that let's you improve design you first have to get past manufacturing and maintenance induced issues. Which is to say, it takes time to get good at jet engines, on the order of decades when you are talking about the tightest margin sector of the field (big commercial engines).

It's kinda opposite in a way. More countries make military engines than commercial engines because military engines don't have to worry as much about efficiency, pollution, sound, and most importantly cost.

But unless you massively subsidize a company "cough Rolls Royce cough" then you can't compete at all with a generation or two behind commercial jet engine tech.

I strongly believe college is oversold but mostly because kids are told they just need to get "any degree", which is a blatant lie. It can totally be worth it if you are objectively looking at what outcomes a specific degree will get you.

But a big reason people only stay two years because we have had decades of companies gutting every incentive to stay somewhere longterm.

Whether or not companies should or shouldn't in their particular case is hard to answer generally. I am in an adjacent field to software and work on products that have lifetimes measured in decades. In that area short term thinking has been incredibly detrimental to organizations. I would also think investing in educating people that are going to work in an industry or are working in an industry will be a net positive to that industry. That is more a vibe based assertion than fact based though.

Weak junior hiring is due to:

- Longtime trends of companies trying to externalize training costs.

- Avoiding hiring in general due to uncertainty in the economy.

- Companies dumping tons of money into AI thus having to cut money from other places, particularly ones that don't add much value in the quarter (internships).

No, the average worker does not live to work. The average shareholder and executive lives to extract every ounce of work possible out of the average workers.

It seems like the outcome options are:

1. AI is developed to be smart enough to actual replace people, destroying the labor force and immensely concentrating power.

This seems like bs hyperbole but I am not an expert.

2. AI turns out to be a bubble of false promises and hype, bursts, and takes the stock market and economy with it.

I thought this was the most likely but I keep not hearing popping, so maybe the it's:

3. AI continues to be a tool that can substantially increase productivity in some areas and cause huge societal changes in others. The AI companies keep the hype train going or maybe it tapers off over time until talk meets reality but "real" AI never shows up and the bubble never pops because it's not one. Eventually there is 0-3 new FAANG companies with untouchable control of a tech we increasingly have to use to stay relevant.

Even if we avoid option 1 and 2, 3 doesn't exactly bode well either.

For people looking for an alternative, Proton Pass is one, Keepass + Syncthing is another.

Unfortunately and for certain.

It's funny that this is a question when every college STEM class is taught by people who have degrees that have absolutely nothing to do with being able to teach effectively.

When you underpay teachers, people who hate teaching, and hate being teachers, will become teachers because all the people that had better options did something else.

There's a post earlier linking to someone doing that for a Tacoma

Maybe a better way to say it would be, no one is talking to AI that isn't on company serves, managed by that company personnel.

My overall point being, no one is submitting design files to ChatGPT for analysis or emailing their friends in China test reports to get a second opinion on the experimental results.

Proton Drive works well and is from a company that supports privacy but does require a paid subscription.

The problem with this is gmaps. There is no alternative to it and by the nature of it knowing your location it removes anonymity. I would buy, or even pay a monthly fee, for something that is 75% as good as gmaps but respects your privacy but there is nothing out there I have found.

No one is "corresponding" trade secrets outside of their company. I recommend reading up on ITAR and the resulting culture it has created around aerospace info.

I thought they meant it as "lots of trade secrets in the jet engine field" not "lots of trade secrets in the article".

Considering most of those trade secrets are sitting in peoples heads or in documentation behind walls AI companies have yet to get over, not many.

Considering we are getting there without it... yeah, definitely not looking good.

"Again, we are not doing this because we want this to be the future. It is not because we want to expand to chain AI-run retail stores across the world. It is not for economic opportunity.

We’re doing this because we believe this future is coming regardless, and we’d rather be the ones running it first while monitoring every interaction, analyzing the traces, benchmarking how much autonomy an AI can responsibly hold."

I always enjoy how these AI companies try to take a moral high ground. When someone doesn't want something to be the future, usually, their instinct is not to try to be the first person doing that exact thing. If you don't want this to be the future than why don't you spend your time building a future you do want? Supporting people that want more AI regulation to stop this? Literally anything else.

Just be honest, you think this is the future and you do in fact want to be first doing it to be in a position to make alot of money. Do you think people don't know what and ad is when they see one?

If I may be allowed one nitpick. Without fully understanding the FAA doc you link to in the article, I think it would be better to say something like loss of a plane is a 1 in a billion event for commercial airplanes. Many types of parts used in airplanes and jet engines break at much higher rates though, they just don't necessarily cause a plane loss when they do.

The USN, specifically aircraft carriers, where designed to project power. No one on the world stage is looking at the USNs inability to open the Strait of Hormuz and seeing successful power projection.

The balanced view is Proton is a service that does not treat you as the product and does what I would describe as, the best it can, to provide privacy. They seem to avoid keeping data where they can but do cooperate with government when legally required to. The location they are in has more legal protections for privacy than most places.

If you are a normie wanting to not have your data sold and not have a company violating your privacy for non-legal reasons, they seem like a solid choice.

If you are worried about government level actors working against you or are the sort that gets put off at the idea of a service marketed as "privacy respecting" using any US based sub services, look elsewhere.

If you want references just start reading through comments on any topic here pertaining to proton.

The articles format is awful and designed to wast your time.

This article also just points out the use of Livekit but doesn't deliver what that means for your security. Maybe instead of writing a hit piece you could have dug deeper, talked to Proton?

I've seen alot of articles and posters here being negative on Proton, calling it "shady", regurgitating facts that are supposed to be gotchas but have tons of nuance if you dig and am beginning to think there is some coordinated effort to get people not to use it.

The point is a country like Iran can, in 2026, force the US Navy to keep an large stand off distance. How much further could a country like China keep the Navy back? What about in 10 years?

Eventually you are beyond the range of being able to project force or risking losing billions invested in one asset to a $50k missile. That is where reality is heading.

Founding principles = initial marketing strategy

Anduril has yet to deliver anything of consequence. I hope they shake up the industry but to say they are the next hot thing and write off the primes at this stage is premature.

Last gasps? The rent seeking class has literally never been more powerful.

"The Chinese open source model running on the box under my desk can pass the Turing Test. When you call, e-mail, text, or show me an ad, you’ll never know if it’s me or my model seeing it."

And the only thing they'll notice when you are replaced with that opensource model is the slight reduction in the required personnel budget going forward.

I hope. I only use Windows at this point because of CAD and FEA software and it gets worse every version. For FEA there are options on Linux but for CAD you have been SOL since most major CAD suites dropped Linux support over a decade ago.