Prickle

We really don't. The majority of desert is not sand. Only around 20% is sand, and around 3% consist of sand dunes. Transportation in deserts is complex due to the rocky terrain that usually fills the rest of the desert.

It is economically cheaper and easier to take beach and river sand. (Especially since some countries designate sand dunes as protected areas)

Why would it be useless? Boeing's update for the Max8 MCAS (to make the FAA happy), was to make the system validate the two values.

If there is a mismatch, the system outputs an error and MCAS will disable itself.

In fact, that is literally one of the requirements set by the FAA to begin flying the Max8 again

> FAA Airworthiness Directive approved design changes for each MAX aircraft, requiring input from two AoA sensors for MCAS activation, elimination of the system's ability to repeatedly activate, and allowing pilots to override the system if necessary.

> that in the thousands of flight hours the Max had, no pilot had even noticed it.

This is false. At the time of the incident (>1month) The FFA and NTSB found 23 reports of uncommanded pitch down attitudes during takeoff.

Quick Google gave me this.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/it-pitched-nose-down-us-...

Minor correction about the Max8 that makes it worse.

Turns out the Max8 does have two angle of attack (AoA) sensors.

But the MCAS system only read from AoA1, and never validated it against AoA2. It was recieving info from AoA2, but never used it!

I googled the pixel buds and yea, that is a very weird and unique thing they have going on. It is definitely not the "usual" method here, as I have never seen anyone pairing via the case in my life.

I have never paired earbuds via the case either, but I guess there is a first time for everything.

The case is usually just a case, or a charging device/battery for the ear buds.

The earbuds themselves are connected to your device via bluetooth.

Depends on the ear bud brand / cost. But they either both connect to your device separately, or only one of them connects to the device, then relays the information to the other bud.

I thought capital in this context meant investment money. Not finished products.

A investor can quickly move capital from one industry to another, but the worker cannot.

His job was to debug the program though, so wouldn't that literally be all about poking around holes?

His job was to solve a problem with a database's log files. He found another second database. "Maybe this second database is causing duplicate log files?" so he goes in and looks.

It makes sense to me. Based on the german article: (machine translated to english)

> The software of Modern Solution had a database of the defendant's customer "fully littered with log reports," says the defence lawyer. His client was then given the order from his customer to solve this problem.

> The defendant then determined that the software from Modern Solution established a MySQL connection over the Internet to the servers of the Gladbeck company. ...the defendant has first assumed that the software on his customer's server will connect to a Modem Solution database that was only intended for his customer and contained only his data. From the read-out database name, this sounded quite plausible.

> However, the defendant quickly discovered that the corresponding database contained much more information. It later turned out that the data here was included Modern Solutions customers and from all end customers whose online shops were included. According to his own statement, the defendant had directly separated the database connection when he discovered that he had access to other customers' data.

> the programmer contacted the affected company with the help of a tech blogger, which then closed the security gap and displayed the programmer at the police.

I think an electronic keypad works better as a example.

You get to a door, and there is a postit note on the door saying "Keycode is 2424".

You know your job is in the building. Your keycard let you into the room with the door. Therefore, if this door lead to a "high-security" area, surely they wouldn't put a postit note there? Maybe, as the bug exterminator, or maintenance person, it is expected that I should be able to enter that room?

It wasn't hidden though.

Lets pretend the guy was a pest exterminator, hired to kill some bug infestation. He is given a keycard to access most of the building. As he is hunting down the nest, he finds a hole in the wall. Bugs tend to come through holes in walls, so he goes in to figure out whether what he is looking for originates there.

He enters the room on the other side, and looks around for other holes that might have bugs. He then notices a file with big red letters saying "TOP SECRET". Turns out he accidentally entered the maximum security file room. So now he leaves the room, goes to security and tells them what he found. Then gets arrested for 1 count of trespassing and 1 count of breaking and entering.

How is that fair?

Well yes. That is Windows (Or Macintosh) 's whole shtick.

People get Windows/Mac for the convenience of 1 click solutions and the understanding that most things will work with one click, or at most a few clicks and a login.

It also comes with the expectations that such massive companies won't completely annihilate their computer with a buggy update.

Did microsoft change that, or does Windows 10 Home still force users to install the latest updates immediately?

I am already paying them.

If they decide to add advertisements after the fact, I am allowed to stop paying.

After all, they are degrading the service.

The 5 minute airplane ad is nightmare fuel for me. How long until they kick up the brightness to wake you up. Imagine you are stuck in the window seat, forced to watch an ad you can't turn off?

I am exaggerating obviously, but I do find it egregious that they would dare show more ads when ticket prices are already extremely high.

I would be more afraid of X banning my account for posting something that violates a random British, Saudi or Chinese law.

Fundamentally, no one should want banking and social media being in the same place. All it takes is one belligerent government to apply pressure.

We already saw Canada freeze bank accounts of people who were protesting in the capitol. I don't need the possibility of my speech locking my account.

I always get slightly confused with "AI Super Intelligence" as a defining word.

To my understanding, an AI super intelligence wouldn't necessarily be an AGI. It just needs to have a goal, and the means to infer/figure out ways to reach that goal. AKA the paperclip machine. It doesn't need to have the intelligence of a dog.

I assume I am missing something, but I don't really know what.

I want to throw another perspective here. I had a friend on a voice call earlier this month. He lives in California, which in theory has very strong gun control laws.

While on call, his house alarm goes off, so he grabs his shotgun out of the safe and goes to find out what is happening.

We, on the call, waiting for him to come back, heard three distinct gunshots.

Turns out some guy, high on some substance was trying to break into the house, and opened fire when our friend showed up at the door.

This is to my limited understanding, a "strong gun control" state. So from our perspective, it looks like you must have a gun to be safe; that the law does not help.

And this is after California banned body armour, which he was complaining about.

A decent amount of that meme has come true. At least, in the sense of printer ink.

Depends on location. Underground costs more and is harder to repair.

So for earthquake prone areas, you will find above ground power pylons everywhere simply because that is safer and cheaper than the alternative.

Where disasters are unlikely, they tend to be underground.

I was fully expecting cost or safety being an issue, but I did not expect this: (Specifically for the "Land of Giants" project.)

> A proposal in Norway faltered after a local mayor - spotting the visitor attraction potential of the structures - agreed they could be built in his town, as long as they weren't built anywhere else in the country.

Quite sad that alternative shaped (?) Pylons do exist, and some of them are really neat; yet are hampered by politics.

Failure comes before success. If you fear failure, and are unwilling to face it, then you have no business striving for success.

I thought everyone here knew about this. Every software bug is a failure. Going through and squashing every one is the path to success.

I am watching it here: https://www.youtube.com/live/6na40SqzYnU?si=t8iwk8rO3lAtF6wj

Everyday Astronaut on youtube.

I wonder how this would work relative to Microsoft's 'genuine' services. I remember having a whale of a time on XP. Our officially purchased Japanese CD of WindowsXP got "caught" as a non-genuine product by Microsoft.

I assume the same/similar risk exists here for this user.

If you purchased the legal copy, and it doesn't work. Then a official agent uses a illegal copy and activates your account. Then you login to a microsoft account. Do you risk losing your entire account due to a TOS violation?

Links to previous related (not the same source) threads:

YouTube's Ad Blocker Crackdown Spurs Record Uninstalls

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38128765

YouTube crackdown leads to ‘hundreds of thousands’ of ad blocker uninstalls

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38130447

Original source from NASA:

https://blogs.nasa.gov/osiris-rex/2023/10/20/nasas-osiris-re...

They are actually removing the ability to control ads in the near future. To my understanding, the only ads creators will have full control over are midroll ads.

They will be improving ads on the platform by removing the creator's control over them.

> optimizing creator revenue and taking the guesswork out of which ad formats to use by removing individual ad controls for pre-roll, post-roll, skippable, and non-skippable ads on newly uploaded videos.

https://support.google.com/youtube/thread/233723152/simplify...

Thank you for that information. This will be a fun dive into one of my more favorite games.

Here is the direct link to the original source (BBC), which this blog references : https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-66108009

> Man who took crossbow to 'kill Queen' given nine-year sentence

> He entered Windsor Castle's grounds dressed as a "Sith Lord", wearing an iron mask made at a forge, and with a loaded crossbow, the court hears

> The court also heard the former supermarket worker was encouraged in the plan by his AI "girlfriend"

Agreed. Back during the Dave chappel Netflix protest, an AP photographer got caught writing false defamatory captions on some of the photos.

They didn't issue a correction, but they did edit the photo caption to reflect reality.

I would definitely prefer the AP over many other sources.

> As evidence it applies in Gaza, you are citing an Israeli air strike on Gaza’s water supply infrastructure. I’ve never heard Israel attempt to justify such attacks as enforcing its laws on wells. Rather, it seems clear the attack was justified as a reprisal for a Hamas attack on Israel. Whatever the rights or wrongs of that reprisal, it has nothing to do with water policy in Gaza during those periods when the Gaza Strip and Israel have been (relatively speaking) at peace.

This doesn't change the simple fact that Israel sites the lack of a building permit as an excuse to destroy anything built in Gaza. (Or the WestBank)

There are far more instances of this, including some where they just pour concrete into the wells. Unfortunately, English speaking outlets don't really report on these incidents. So the only english "sources" that can be found are heavily slanted Muslim propaganda articles.

The other sources are actually reports from the Knesset, which I also can't read without a translator. (Which is why I didn't link either) Specifically, the source I am referencing here are IWA (Israel Water Authority) reports on illegal water well drilling. They release a report every year. They tend to get referenced by NGOs in articles relating to Gaza or the West Bank.

In my opinion, what matters here is enforcement. Israel does enforce their rights on water sources. Even water sources inside of Gaza/WestBank. The lack of targeted strikes in Gaza doesn't mean they don't claim control over all water sources in the territories. (IE: China and the South China Sea debacle)