HN user
For email, use the HAL algorithm:
echo fua@tmrrv.bnl | tr '[a-y]' '[b-z]'
Really bad HN title "Same Energy Density at Half the Weight". That is nonsensical; "density" should be elided in the title. The actual goal is to double the energy density so that the battery can provide the same energy at half the weight.
"Simply, the energy density would be doubled. So same energy, same volume base, kind of half [the weight]," Aoyama said.
(2018)
P.S. Most web sites use Google analytics, which relies on JavaScript so, as a bonus, I'm in Google's blind spot.
Yes, I'm browsing with JavaScript disabled by default. It cuts out an incredible amount of crap. With JavaScript, web sites (especially "news" sites) are unusably slow due to all the crap advertising pushing GB of crap JavaScript at you.
Sturgeon's law is understated. 99.987% of anything in an iframe is crap.
If you read with JavaScript disabled, she says
Hey NoScript peeps, (or other users without Javascript), I dig the way you roll. That's why this page is mostly static and doesn't generate the list dynamically. The only things you're missing are a progressive descent into darkness and a happy face who gets sicker and sicker as you go on. Oh, and there's a total at the bottom, but anyone who uses NoScript can surely count for themselves.
Rock on!
Love it!
How about Google hires talent that actively tests, discovers and mitigates vulnerabilities
That's Project Zero: https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/
Most/all of the legacy "name brand" companies sell their logo to third party manufacturers. For instance, GE does not make any of the consumer products that bear their logo.
To the two parts to your question:
a) Yes.
b) No. Your example of the weird English in the manual is witness to the fact that Philips does not care at all about the product, only the licensing fees they collect.
If you click to bring up the "start menu", you can then right-click on the "live" boxes that come up with the start menu and remove them. This doesn't remove the bloatware, but does remove the distracting crap that Microsoft is pushing in your face.
Text version: https://spacenews.com/software-problem-blamed-for-ispace-lun...
tl;dr: The landing site was changed late in the mission planning sequence (after the Critical Design Review). As a result of the landing site change, the lander went over a crater which caused the distance to the surface to change significantly. This was detected by the laser altimeter, but the altimeter reading was discarded because of the rapid change (assumed to have failed).
As a result, "the lander was still about five kilometers above the surface when the lander’s computer believed it was on the surface. The lander continued to descend at a slow rate of about one meter per second under its thrusters until it exhausted its propellant. The lander then went into freefall, crashing into the surface at a speed of more than 100 meters per second."
Geocaching is a good way to find "local knowledge" type of interesting places.
More information on Habitat 67: https://www.archdaily.com/404803/ad-classics-habitat-67-mosh...
The tanks are held in supporting cradles when horizontal so that their weight is distributed properly. Sometimes the tanks must be pressurized when transported horizontally or they would be damaged.
I interpreted Musk's comment to reflect the fact that rockets generally will be destroyed if the tanks lose pressurization and/or the rocket tumbles. The (load bearing) tank walls usually cannot support major side loads. The Starship stack needs to be a lot stronger than "usual" rockets to withstand the rotational forces and aerodynamic forces involved in landing them.
Ref: https://headedforspace.com/why-and-how-rocket-fuel-tanks-are...
His point had nothing to do with the termination system.
The rocket tumbled for four complete revolutions. Most rockets will be destroyed by inertial and aerodynamic forces well before the first revolution (they are designed to withstand forces along the major axis, not significant side forces).
It was helpful from an aerodynamic force POV that the rocket was well over 100,000 feet before it started to tumble. Still, the inertial forces when the full stack started rotating must have been huge.
In the SpaceX feed they were waiting for the second stage to separate and light, and it didn't do either. So first question is why didn't it separate?
T+00:16 - Shortly after liftoff, when the engine graphic first appears, three engines were out. https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2721
T+00:28 - Sparks are seen in the engine exhaust and some flashes. https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2733
T+00:40 - A fourth engine is marked out. https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI
T+01:02 - A fifth engine is marked out (just after the announcer says "we're throttled down and throttled back up") https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2766
T+01:08 - More sparks (streaks) come from the engine https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2773
T+01:16 - There is a shot of the aft of the rocket and it looks like six engines are out https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2781
T+01:19 - MaxQ is called https://youtu.be/-1wcilQ58hI?t=2783
My totally uninformed speculation is that the first stage did not achieve the target velocity (and trajectory?) due to the 6(?) engine failures so the first stage continued to burn and the second stage never separated because the separation conditions were not met (velocity/trajectory).
Afterword: Within twenty-four hours of sending this message I received a response from someone in "Executive Relations" at Amazon apologizing for the spider and giving me a $10 credit. I guess they figured with the ten bucks I could buy a new spider.
$9.99 https://www.amazon.com/PARNIXS-Rubber-Box%EF%BC%8CHandcrafte...
Free shipping since she has Prime.
As long as the trajectory of the vehicle stays within the "safe trajectory box", the range safety officer has no reason to blow the rocket up.
SpaceX acquired a huge amount of data that would have otherwise been lost if the RSO was "quick on the trigger."
Example of a different rocket failure where the range safety officer let the rocket survive until it exceeded the safe trajectory box:
"Astra Rocket 3 LV0006 drifting launch & failure (NASASpaceFlight footage)" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxVoBlgzZlQ
Webcam footage with narration of what the ships are doing: https://youtu.be/8s18O_iAlKE?t=366
Infinitely far, imo.
A LLM can minic a person, but it is all artificial and not at all intelligent. We humans anthropomorphize everything so we fool ourselves into thinking mimicry is the same as personality.
The flaw in "LLM will become intelligent" thinking is that it supposes that, if only we load enough data into the LLM, it will become intelligent. Intelligence uses data; LLM merely mimics intelligence (with random errors which we overlook since we anthropomorphize it).
Case in point: George Hotz has said "Tesla is going to win Level 5 [...] because it is collecting data on a scale that nobody else is." Yet, four years later, Tesla is still struggling to make self-driving work reliably.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQ6Xk3ZHso4 (Aug 14, 2019)
How come none of the Engineers ever get rich in these schemes?
"These schemes" were fraud. It is better, and wiser, to eschew fraudulent riches and stay out of jail.
The twitter post simply links to a Facebook video which is a link to a YouTube video (Red Side). Use the source, Luke.
(2009)
"Why did the projected explosion of technological growth everyone was expecting—the moon bases, the robot factories—fail to happen? There are two possibilities. Either our expectations about the pace of technological change were unrealistic (in which case, we need to know why so many intelligent people believed they were not) or our expectations were not unrealistic (in which case, we need to know what happened to derail so many credible ideas and prospects)."
Physics is a harsh mistress; our expectations that the laws of physics could be overcome by technology was unrealistic.
The line is broken (double-pasted): https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/28/23659191/amazon-sidewalk-...
The inverse of "startup" is "shutdown."
"September 29, 2022"