godson_drafty

I agree, the improved version is worse. At first glance, it looks better than the original, but then numerous artifacts become apparent. For example, check out the little girl's face. It's jumbled in the "improved" version, but very clear in the original.

It looks like most of the perceived improvement comes simply from the upgrade to 60fps, which is achieved trivially through interpolation.

I wonder if the video would have gotten as much attention had AI not been mentioned.

Friendly reminder:

it's == (it is | it has)

It's my responsibility to correct grammar. it's been tough for the Lions this year.

its == (the thing belonging to it) You should always judge a book by its cover.

I did that, and then afterwords it told me that the article was being gifted to me buy a paying member. After that I just closed the tab. It is kind of a stroke of genius, encouraging me to sign up by showing me that I'm enjoying the largesse of a paying customer. On the other hand, if letting me read the article is such a huge imposition, I guess I don't want it.

"Sire. Shall we hunt in the valley, in the forest, or in the mountains?"

We shall hunt in the forest.

"Sire! Our scouts have just returned from the mountain. They report that the herds are not there at the present time! Shall we try the valley, or continue on to the forest?"

A) Stick to the plan, and hunt in the forest B) Hunt in the valley instead

The developer carrying it out still using 2015 MBP

> When intranet webapps came along everyone breathed a huge sigh of relief.

Not entirely. Sometimes they were replaced by applets, which are just native application wrapped in a thin layer of html. This causes its own set of problems. At one place I worked (a large government agency), a critical spreadsheet ran as an applet which was only compatible with IE9. They couldn't upgrade anyone's PC's because they risked an auto-update of IE, which would break the ability to run that app.

At another job, a certain time tracking application ran as an applet, requiring a specific version of the jvm to be installed.

Deploying an application that runs in the browser using the browser's native capabilties - js, html, css works great. Using it to embed an applet doubles the misery, as in the short term management thinks they've purchased a portable, always-compatible "web-app", while what they've done is bought a native binary they can no longer properly provision their workstations to run.

It could work where a large number of AI's are constructed. A small subset of these AI's--those that can only be used for good--are used as a training set. A number of AI's that can be used for bad are added to the training set. The AI builder is exposed to this training set for a period of time, and on each exposure he is rewarded if he correctly categorizes each AI by its ability to be used for good or bad. After the AI builder demonstrates an ability to properly differentiate the AI's that can only be used for good from those that can be used for good or for bad, he is set loose on constructing a new AI, after which he is compelled to render (and publicize) a judgement on its potential use for good or bad. Alternatively, the builder can also be tasked with choosing only-good AI's from larger mixed set of good/bad AI's.

Why is there not a regulation that states an airline must return its passengers safely home before being allowed to shut down all operations?

Omitting automatic registry backups is a defensible policy. Telling the user that a backup was completed while a 0 byte file was saved is lying. Seems like a criminal act under the circumstances.

Not sure that's correct though. For banks, deposits are liabilities, while assets are loans and cash-on-hand, which they are required to hold fractionally against the total amount of their deposits. In this example, the bank is holding $200, has assets of $800, and liabilities of $1000. Adding it up, you have ($200 + $800) - $1000 == $0.

* an iron core that produces a magnetic field surrounding the planet, which allows the atmosphere to remain in place, rather than being blasted off the planet by solar winds.

One huge factor that could help students enter the workforce without crippling debt would be to expand the scholarship counselling programs available at the high school level. Perhaps state governments could set aside funding for more guidance counselling, or even funds aimed at training existing guidance counsellors to better aid motivated students towards plentiful scholarship funding that often goes unclaimed.

Another important, yet often overlooked duty for nervous flyers is monitoring the engine sound. Signs of trouble are when it's loud, too soft, or too grindy. I also find pilots frequently slow the plane down too much on initial descent.

But if they put in a warning light, then they would have had to add an item to the emergency checklist for what to do when the warning light came on. This would entail explaining about MCAS. Which would have led to discussing how a single AOA sensor could control the horizontal stabilizer of the plane.

Not only is Boeing too big too fail, it's too big to succeed.

This issue of the AOA-disagree warning light keeps getting brought up again and again, which is unfortunate because the presence of such a light would not have saved those 346 lives. Imagine you are a pilot and your airplane's nose keeps getting pushed toward the ground no matter how much you pull back on the stick. You try everything. Now you notice a little warning light 'AOA disagree'. How does that help you, exactly? The lack of this warning light is completely irrelevant. The problem is that they allowed the readings from 1 single sensor to force the nose of the aircraft toward the ground.

Muillenberg's assurances that they will fix everything on their own are not very convincing. The existence of such a terrible design -- a single sensor that has complete control over the horizontal stabilizer -- points to one or more teams or management chains within Boeing that are turning out shoddy work. They have undoubtedly turned out other shoddy work, and will likely continue to produce more shoddy work that will kill more people. An outside team needs to be brought in to investigate engineering and management. Immunity against lawsuits and job losses need to be assured, but we need to discover exactly what led to this so more terrible engineering ideas don't find their way into the next crop of airliners that we will be trusting our lives to.

Would it be possible to completely remove MCAS, and simply train pilots that this version of the plane stalls more easily? Stalls are a known phenomena that all pilots are very competent to manage.

There's the reassurances about the broken and deadly MCAS system. But what is there to assure us about the engineering team within Boeing that allowed such an egregiously bad system to be put into production and hidden from regulators and pilots? Here is a system that exercises full control authority over the entire extent of the plane's horizontal stabilizer, so much that it cannot be overridden manually, and is controlled by a single sensor that alternates every other flight. Management then hid this system from airlines and the FAA. How can they show that the individuals within Boeing that created such an atrocity have been corrected, and that the same clowns did not engineer any other surprises into the aircraft?

That flimsy tail design bothered me as well. Even if the center wing and wing roots are incredibly strong, there's little reason to place them under stresses that could be alleviated with a single-stabilizer tail design, as other commenters have pointed out. The fact that they did not do this suggests this aircraft is designed to launch millions in contributions into the designers' pockets, and not so much rockets into space.

To avoid FAA scrutiny, Boeing developed and deployed MCAS covertly. This was done because they feared scrutiny would have led to huge losses in the face of competition from Airbus. Had Boeing management just laid all their cards on the table, potentially the FAA could have still approved the design, with small but crucial improvements. These changes might have included: using both AOA sensors, using a 3rd AOA sensor, not switching between left and right sensors each flight. Instead, the covert nature of the development and deployment of this feature allowed flaws in its design to go unchecked.

This is incorrect. The engines are not too powerful for the airframe. The problem is that the engines themselves create lift at high Angles of Attack, pitching the nose of the plane up.

"This new location and size of the nacelle causes it to produce lift at high AoA; as the nacelle is ahead of the CofG this causes a pitch-up effect which could in turn further increase the AoA and send the aircraft closer towards the stall."

http://www.b737.org.uk/mcas.htm

Thank you. I've been meaning to look that up for years.

For a billionaire, that is quite a humble home.

What about releasing a genetically altered strain of the malaria organism itself?

I wish we legally purchase a copy of the original theatrical release of episodes 4-6.

Here's a thought: If and when a kid wants to make in-game purchases using real money, allow them to earn that money through real-world work: housework, chores, etc. That way they can get a real sense for how valuable the purchases really are to them.

You might even offer a choice: Here, take this $5 bill or I can spend the $5 for you in the game.

I noticed the punishing error sound that these devices emit when the transaction is successful and it's time to remove the card. I thought I was alone in noticing and being annoyed by it. Why not make two sounds - one for successful transaction -> remove card and the other for unsuccessful transaction -> remove card ???

Another seemingly unsolvable problem for about 15 years with these machines is choosing whether to use credit or debit. In order to use credit, you have to press "Cancel" when it asks for the pin. Obtaining the answer to this very simple question has and continues to be beyond the technical ability of these imbeciles for nearly a generation.

Whenever looking at these pictures, it's worthwhile to consider how white (or any other color) Americans living in Japan were treated after war was declared.

Oh, that's right. There weren't any! The American government had some unique challenges in maximizing their chances of winning the war against a zealous and absolutely ruthless enemy (Japan). It would have been extremely irresponsible not to at least attempt to neutralize the threat posed by the population of first-generation citizens.

American authorities acted within their rights in making a reasonable effort to neutralize domestic saboteurs or collaborators by interning these people. Of course it's sad that it happened, but remember that battles such as Midway were won through superior intelligence and code-breaking. A single Japanese acting as a spy might have overturned that. It would have been very bad for east Asia had Japan won. They were committing numerous, documented war crimes and would have continued to do so.

The situational comparison originally used by Linus for a sha1 collision was all the members of your development team being killed and eaten by wolves. I'm not sure if he gave a time-frame that would need to occur in.