mshook

2/3 of Norway homes use heat pumps...

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/23/norway-h...

The B-52 and SR-71 had star tracking systems for that exact reason. Not sure about the B-52 version but the SR-71 worked in daylight.

https://www.glennsmuseum.com/items/b52_astro/

https://theaviationgeekclub-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/theav...

That's my experience as well in 2 different companies where we went from 2 E15K to 2 E25K because it was "cheaper" than rewriting who knows how much code, for how long and at what cost

At the other one, we jumped from 2 25k to 2 M9000-64 for the same reasons...

Concorde holds the world record in both directions actually.

F-BTSD did it:

- westbound in 32 hours 49 minutes and 3 seconds on 12/13 October 1992, LIS-SDQ-ACA-HNL-GUM-BKK-BAH-LIS (Lisbon, Saint-Domingue, Acapulco, Honolulu, Guam, Bangkok, Bahrein, Lisbon)

- astbound in 31 hours 27 minutes and 49 seconds on 15/16 August 1995, JFK-TLS-DXB-BKK-GUM-HNL-ACA-JFK (New York, Toulouse, Dubai, Bangkok, Guam, Honolulu, Acapulco, New York)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concorde_histories_and_aircraf...

Well Concorde showed pre-orders don't mean much... :-D

Fair enough...

My take is it's not even an economic problem. Unless you fly really fast (like Mach 3++), flying east sucks.

Let's assume we have a plane capable of Mach 3+: the SR-71 holds a record for flying from NYC to London in 1h54 and it could do well over Mach 3. Let's assume our plane can do the same in 2 hours.

If you take off from NYC at 10am, you will land at 5pm local time in London. Sure it's a lot faster than a regular flight but you didn't gain as much as flying west bound.

With the same 2 hour flight (because when you fly that high, wind doesn't make such a big difference), you could leave London at 10am and land in NYC at 7am local time, that's so much better.

But that's for a plane doing Mach 3+. Boom is planning to fly slower than Concorde (Mach 1.7 vs Mach 2.02).

Concorde did that in 3 hours FYI.

I'm not sure why you're being downvoted because you're right: they have the technology, they don't have an engine, and this just looks like a civilian version of a fighter jet pretty much (except it has 3 turbojets).

And what people always fail to mention when it comes to supersonic flights is one of the main issue is neither a technological nor an economical one nor a supersonic boom one.

Traveling west bound is great: you leave in the morning and you arrive, local time, before the local time of your origin point. But traveling east bound isn't that great: you still have to leave in the morning and you land in the evening, so the only thing you gained is a shorter flight time but not a full day of work or shopping or what not.

So on regular flights (because Concorde was profitable, at least on the French side, thanks to charter flights), people would fly Concorde to go to NYC and fly back on a red eye...

As someone who worked for and flew on Concorde, I think what they're doing is amazingly cool though and I hope they succeed. But I'm still unsure what the long term plan is...

This is correct, reheat / afterburner was used from Mach 0.9 something to 1.7, after which they'd were off. So yes, Concorde could supercruise.

As far as I know (source, I still patch the LTS kernels), the fan control of the POE hat for the Pi 4 hasn't been merged yet.

This thing was announced on May 2021...

So not so good is really an understatement.

https://www.raspberrypi.com/news/announcing-the-raspberry-pi...

At this point, probably never it seems...

The issue with (software) raid is you have no idea if what you're copying isn't actually corrupted. If the filesystem isn't checksumed there's no guarantee.

I don't understand the point of the script, it's nothing more than:

  du -h --max-depth=1 "$@" | sort -hr

Pretty much but that's my experience as well, I made the same comment above...

The issue here is with your auditors. I mean if RH tells you a CVE has been fixed with a backport, sure you can challenge that fact but at the same time and with the same standards, it'd mean your auditor would also have to check the actual source of your patched Ubuntu packages to make sure the new versions fixed the security bugs.

The bottom line really is plenty of auditors I've seen don't know how to check for vulnerabilities other than by checking a version... That's it.. Their tools or reporting only know package must have a version greater than x.y.z.

You are, on a 8086 the address width is 20 bits, hence the 1 Mo limit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_memory_segmentation

It's more like a PC 8086 emulator (or at least it tries to be). I mean the example is a call to the BIOS...

http://www.ctyme.com/intr/rb-0210.htm

Long time no see Ralf Brown's Interrupt List...

There was a study which focused on pilots...

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/carbon-diox...

The results are very interesting to say the least:

The findings showed that the pilots were 69% more likely to receive a passing grade on a maneuver when CO2 levels were 700 ppm compared with 2,500 ppm. When CO2 levels were 1,500 ppm, the pilots were 52% more likely to successfully perform a maneuver than when CO2 levels were 2,500 ppm. When the researchers compared the difference in pilot performance at 700 ppm and 1,500 ppm, the difference was not statistically significant, but they did find that pilots were more likely to successfully perform some of the most difficult maneuvers at the lower CO2 level. The study also found that the negative effects of CO2 on flight performance became more pronounced the longer the pilots were in the simulator.

You're right but I'm sure both companies had good reasons for their schedules (for instance noise restrictions at night).

And realistically, from your plane at JFK to Manhattan, that's got to be a least an hour and a half (immigration and cab/limo). And assuming you'd have to be at JFK just an hour before your flight (and for an international flight that's ballsy), plus with transportation still taking an hour, you just wasted 3.5 hours commuting forth and back to the airport.

That schedule wouldn't work unless you flew to Manhattan. And even then, it'd be tight.

For AF, my understanding (and my source actually worked that side of the business) is Concorde got profitable with special flights (aka people renting the plane to travel the world) not from just your regular scheduled flights.

But keep in mind neither BA nor AF really paid for their fleet...

Except it doesn't really work. It could almost work flying west then east to get home but regular Concorde flights couldn't give you the option to fly back the same day.

BA001 LHR 10:30AM -> JFK 09:25AM

BA002 JFK 08:30AM -> LHR 05:15PM

AF002 CDG 10:30AM -> JFK 08:15AM

AF001 JFK 08:00AM -> CDG 05:45PM

That's why flying westbound supersonic is less of an advantage. Because as you can see, flying west, your day is still wasted, even if you leave early.

Still, flying westbound fast makes tons of sense as you can arrive "before" you took off (local time) and thus you get a whole day in front of you.

But eastbound makes a lot less sense, unless you're just trying to save time. Because flying at night eastbound won't make you gain much compared to a regular red eye and flying during the day, you'll land at night...

Well past Mach 1 actually, reheat was cut off at Mach 1.7.

If you're into that kind of stuff I recommend:

- watching https://www.youtube.com/c/CuriousMarc

- reading Ken's blog/twitter http://www.righto.com/ / https://twitter.com/kenshirriff

That's a good point.

Not only people tend to drink less nowadays but also when people mention these kinds of development (like movie theater decline and so on), they forget to mention all of these are just different kinds of entertainment.

And there has never been so many ways to entertain oneself so the competition is stiff.

Until I watched a video on YouTube about it a year ago, I didn't even know it was a thing. I'm in France fyi.

https://youtu.be/R-mDqKtivuI

Rewiring the pins doesn't necessarily do much these days as there are devices which will figure out the input pinout and route signals to the proper output pins. Think of it as a MITM device.

A better way is to use a different kind of connector but you'll have to build yourself an adapter and to keep in your place or something.

Same here. And the rower was the right stuff in rowing clubs back in the 90s and still is today.

I guess there's a reason they're being used during World Rowing Indoor Championships: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/2020_Wor...

The spectrum is different in Europe and might be one reason why there are fewer problems in Europe. And the aviation impact was taken into account. Deployment was more of a joint effort...

https://www.barrons.com/articles/5g-europe-airlines-51641398...

Europe Has 5G. Here Is Why It Hasn’t Messed Up the Airlines.

One thing is for sure: a green light for 5G in Europe doesn’t come from a lack of caution among regulators. After all, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) last month warned about the potential risk of interference from 5G near airports—in the U.S.

The EASA said at the time that “no risk of unsafe interference has been identified in Europe.” Instead, the regulator cited the Federal Aviation Administration, which saw specific risk in the U.S. due to the implementation of potentially higher 5G ground station power emissions early this year.

[..]

George Holmes, the chair and CEO of Resonant (RESN) a 5G industry player, told Barron’s that the difference between the U.S. and Europe stems from allocated frequencies for 5G, and their proximity to the defined band for altimeters.

Resonant is a Nasdaq-listed company that designs radio frequency filters, which are used to isolate signals from the right band while blocking unwanted noise from elsewhere in the radio spectrum. These filters are critical in 5G applications.

In the U.S., 5G is allocated to a range of between 3.7GHz and 3.98GHZ, which is closer to the 4.2GHz-4.4GHz frequency for altimeters than in Europe, which has allocated the 3.4GHz-3.8GHz range for 5G. Holmes said that in Europe altimeter filters will be better at stopping 5G signals, which will result in less potential interference.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/01/19/business/5g-aviation-safe...

Europe rolled out 5G without hurting aviation. Here's how

Why is there a potential problem in the United States, but not Europe? It comes down to technical details.

Mobile phone companies in the United States are rolling out 5G service in a spectrum of radio waves with frequencies between 3.7 and 3.98 GHz. The companies paid the US government $81 billion in 2021 for the right to use those frequencies, known as the C-Band. But in Europe, 5G services use the slower 3.4 to 3.8 GHz range of spectrum.

The aviation industry is worried that US 5G service is too close to the spectrum used by radar altimeters, which is between 4.2 and 4.4 GHz. Europe does not face the same risk, according to the industry, because there is a much larger buffer between the spectrum used by radar altimeters and 5G.

What France did

There are other differences in how 5G is being rolled out, according to the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Some countries are using lower power levels, restricting the placement of 5G antennas near airfields and requiring them to be tilted downward to limit potential interference with aircraft.

In France — cited by telecom carriers such as AT&T (T) and Verizon (VZ) as an example of 5G and aviation working seamlessly together — the height of a 5G antenna and the power of its signal determine how close it is allowed to a runway and the flight path of an aircraft, according to a technical note from France's National Frequency Agency (ANFR).

Antennas around 17 major French airports are also required to be tilted away from flight paths to minimize the risk of interference, the agency's director of spectrum planning and international affairs, Eric Fournier, told CNN.

And it's GPLv3 and on GitHub. And yes, when I migrated, it offered features G Auth didn't have, haven't checked since...