rrmm

Doctors carry malpractice insurance.

It's a pedantic point admittedly, but I think it's important to be realistic and clear that Rust isn't a panacea.

If this could be done it seems like the ideal compromise. Everyone gets what they want.

That said eventually more modern languages will be dependencies of the tools one way or another (and they should). So probably Debian as a whole should come to a consensus on how that should happen, so it can happen in some sort of standard and fair fashion.

to introduce certain common vulnerabilities ...

not vulnerabilities in general.

Does it seem that way? It happened at least once (but could have happened many times without "taking over"), and certainly one sort of life seemed to successfully out-compete all others. But none of that says single-origin to me.

Early on I would expect a whole lot of "horizontal gene transfer" sort of things to have taken place. So for example in addition to actual horizontal gene transfer, there are mechanisms like one organism enveloping another to eventually become organelles, co-opting products from each other, etc. All of which would act to homogenize life and make certain process ubiquitous.

Finally, there's an outside chance that "there's only one way to do it".

You are right: this is indeed no smoking gun (and it isn't hyped to be one). This is more like "we can't rule out life having created this, but there are alternate explanations which have also not been ruled out".

Unfortunately most of the evidence is going to be like this. The chances for better evidence would probably require a sample return of some sort, and even then I wouldn't expect a smoking gun (either way).

I think the building blocks of life are so common in the universe it might be a case of "easy come, easy go". It wouldn't be surprising if simple life happened anywhere it was given half a chance at all, but one would equally expect that it would die out just as quickly when conditions changed (which they certainly did on Mars).

And of course nothing is ruling out life in the nooks and crannies of Mars.

Was lead paint as widespread in Europe as it was in North America?

Allison Hayes is another person who campaigned against lead--this time in vitamin supplements--which lead to a change in FDA rules. She was a frequent actor in Roger Corman's B-movies which is where I first encountered her. She suffered disability from the lead in Calcium supplements.

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

Presumably you'd follow the same regulations regarding actual animals in testing regarding inflicting pain or distress. Usually IRB's weigh whether the scientific results offset the risk of harm and emphasize minimizing pain (doing things under anesthesia, providing analgesia, or not letting animals regain consciousness). The ethical bars you have to clear get higher the "higher" the animal you use.

If you're doing it via simulation, physical pain issues become a lot easier to fix and more over you can probably simulate subsections of the brain rather than the whole thing. You can also limit simulation time to prevent perception of harm, and you can arbitrarily limit negative feedback in the whole simulation (stress hormones, etc).

I would also imagine one should act conservatively to the question of whether you should treat a simulated "thing" humanely.

Coming together to form a single object sounds like the work of a gravitational force.

Second this suggestion for anyone working through parasitic draw issues. He has a very solid, logical process for working through this (among other issues). I always enjoy watching the videos because it's like watching a who-dun-it where you're trying to guess the cause as he gathers evidence.

Location: Atlanta

Remote: Yes/only

Willing to relocate: no

Technologies: C/C++, Python, Embedded/Low-level

Résumé/CV: BS/MS CS Georgia Tech, 15 years of experience at Veteran's Administration designing software and hardware for Research and Development purposes. https://arcsin.org/resume/

Email: rm.resume@arcsin.org

From what I recall of the last set of bank failures this is pretty much the FDIC's SOP. They swoop in on Friday with little notice, close the bank, work through the weekend and open up for business on Monday. It apparently made for some interesting work environments.

Location: Atlanta

Remote: Yes/only

Willing to relocate: no

Technologies: C/C++, Python, Embedded/Low-level

Résumé/CV: BS/MS CS Georgia Tech, 15 years of experience at Veteran's Administration designing software and hardware for Research and Development purposes. https://arcsin.org/resume/

Email: rm.resume@arcsin.org

Although it wasn't explicitly prescribed, one action that was taken was quickly delivering some truth to the stakeholders. The customer was informed the original schedule wasn't possible and given an alternative (more realistic) timeline.

I imagine many teams won't have that access or flexibility, so delivering truth may be first going back internal to the company and giving them a schedule, (and not just saying the original schedule won't work which in his story only elicited, "make it work").

The new poll has finished with "unban now" winning with 59%

And the new poll has finished with "unban now" winning with 59%

Wow...is there a big move towards it individually?

The new poll also has a 24 hour timer, so 'now' is effectively a 1 day ban. I kind of suspect the length of time has other motivations (but that's really just me being cynical).

Musk actually ran a poll already, but the people got the wrong answer (unban now). So he's running another poll.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603600001057185792

Musk is trying to walk it back because he created such an epic cluster.

He was paying a premium. Shareholders wanted their payout.

I've been using XFCE for many years now (currently though Xubuntu). It stays out of the way. I'm glad to see continued improvements without forcing a complete remake or overhaul for the sake of change.

Obligatory Manley video on the situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbK-6VkTFw8

Yeah, I imagine the conversation as more of a "could we make this work if we had no other choice" sort of thing. I don't imagine it would be considered under anything other than a dire emergency.

I don't think NASA would have a problem having fewer seats available for egress than crew for a short time as long as they were moving to rectify it.

Post Columbia accident, most of the shuttle missions were focused on the ISS where the crew could have taken refuge had there been a problem during ascent which prevented safe re-entry.[1]

As you note the Hubble mission (STS-125 with Atlantis) wouldn't have that option available due to its orbit, so NASA had the shuttle Endeavour ready to fly as STS-400 as a contingency.

[1] The plan would have been that crew stranded on the ISS would be picked up by a later shuttle, so NASA was obviously comfortable with the contingency of leaving a crew without transport off for a period of time during an emergency. These were designated STS-3xx missions and would have launched within 40 days of call up. The ISS could have supported the additional crew for 80 days.

Roscosmos & NASA disagreeing with each other on the integrity of the Soyuz would be very on brand for everyone.

Root cause and the next steps are going to be very interesting.

Luckily it seems everyone is safe for the time being.

I could see them making a contingency for stuffing everyone on dragon as an absolute last resort and moving some launches around to get a vehicle there asap. In anycase it'll give NASA an occasion to review their planning for these sorts of situations.

I'll be interested to see if they make any changes to station procedures or the vehicle complement they choose to keep on orbit.

The coolant is (appears to be) low velocity wrt to the ISS. Everything appears to be stable for now (and isn't causing a major impulse or torque to the ISS).

My guess (with no expertise to back it) is that it should dissipate quickly and will not be an issue to anyone.