Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | dgoldstein0's commentslogin

Well also when they are they are small parking lots. This regulation specifically is for big public parking lots.

Also the "surrounded by high rises" locations are more likely to be built as parking garages in the first place.


1500 mile range is questionable in practice I've read - drones require remote control for maximal value and that's a capability that may not extend nearly as far as the paper range of the drones

They can’t be used for moving targets but for infrastructure they can be effective. At the cost of only a few artillery shells send 10 and maybe 3 will hit.

Another advantage is because of simplicity and cost it allows quick iteration and adaptability. Use honeycomb patterns to lower radar signatures, use specialized antijamming gps/glonass antennas. Engine is too slow? Add a small turbojet. Color too light and visible at night? Paint it gray, etc. That can happen at the speed of weeks and months. Try doing that with Tomahawks, artillery pieces or HIMARS.


A quick Google gives me that a 737 typically lands between 144 and 180 mph. I think that's quite a lot faster than most people are watching out for. Good news is they are bigger than cars and so easier to spot at a distance but I'm still skeptical that "look before you cross the runway" is sufficiently safe. Keep in mind that the planes may not even be on the ground yet - at the top end in 30s they could go from a 1.5 miles away in the sky (and up to 300-400ft in the air) to plowing through your position (iirc runways are about 2 miles long for jets).

I wonder if it'd even be reliable to see such a plane coming fast enough.

Now multiply that by the dozens of planes in your vicinity, and by the 100ish big US airports.


> I think that's quite a lot faster than most people are watching out for

That isn't even beyond the top speed of a car, which non-trained humans are very well capable of tracking by sight - to talk of airport workers that are specifically trained to look for air traffic. It really is not that hard to tell that an aircraft is on short final if you are actually looking at it.

With four miles of visibility in light rain at night, the aircraft should have been perfectly visible (in a vacuum); what remains to be determined is why the ARFF crew did not see it. The answer to that could range from "they didn't look at all" to "the orientation of the runway relative to the surrounding neighbourhoods meant that the CRJ's lights got lost in the city lights".


so every inflation number has to be understood by following (a) when is it measuring and (b) what is it measuring. For when: a lot of economic data is lagging indicators, e.g. last quarter - and inflation is usually % more year over year, whereas a lot of people seem to care about inflation on the 2-5 year time frame instead of just 1 year. For the what - we'd have to dig into whether it's national averages, state averages, or local; what percentage of the measurement is rent vs housing prices vs groceries (and what grocery items) vs clothing vs computers vs utilities etc etc. It's very likely that the idealized basket of goods that they are measuring the cost of doesn't actually match your expenses or even the average household expenses for your area. Or possibly even, for the whole country.

The meta problem is that price data - assuming we can even reliably observe it - is super high dimensional, and we're trying to reduce it all to a single number.


But it only asks for the pin on boot which probably isn't that helpful


Sure it is, shut down the phone when its "quitting time" and then if they turn it back on, thats ok, internets disabled


So I looked up and discovered that bicycle helmets became a common thing in the 1970s. Perhaps motorcycles were earlier. But either way I have to ask - what did people wear helmets for in 1909? Im thinking that most helmet usage came later.


Helmet usage, as in protective headware for general melee war and one on one fighting, dates back to the bronze age.

Hard hats, of assorted kinds for general protection while working, date back to the 1890s and became more commonplace ~1920 (ish) onwards in construction, mining, and ship building industries.

* Helmets: https://www.battlemerchant.com/en/blog/the-evolution-of-hist...

* Hard Hats: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_hat

I suspect there are more early European hard hat examples to be found than are cited in the wikipedia article.


I think they were fairly common for things like gladiatorial games, jousting, etc.


My take, as an American: the outcome seems to be good - Maduro is out of power, his number 2 seems much more willing to play ball and from what I've read Venezuela's economy is now improving as money flowing in has turned around their previously out of control inflation. It managed to not flare into a full scale war, no Americans died - so I think approval is middle to high on it.

That said the justification for it made no sense to me and many others. Trump accused Maduro of narcoterrorism - profiting from the drug trade and violence. Where's the evidence? And the whole bit about the oil ... Usually that's the critique of US actions, not the reason we give; we should be moving full speed towards adopting renewables so an oil grab really doesn't make sense. Though Trump's energy policy has always been entirely backwards.

And we should probably also worry about the example we've set - that we'll just intervene when it suits us with a cooked up justification certainly incentivizes dangerous behavior - how many countries are now thinking about the deterrents they could acquire? But most Americans don't think about unintended consequences of laws or government actions.

One last thought re oil - the smart move would probably be to invest in Venezuelan oil not for sale in the US but for export to India and maybe Europe - try to use it as a replacement for Russian oil. That would in turn hurt Russia's economy and thereby reduce their efforts to wage war in Ukraine. But if that's the plan, Trump has never said that. And it also doesn't really fit his worldview that the Ukraine war should be Europe's problem and not the US's problem. But maybe it'll end up happening anyway, if Venezuela's oil production picks up and the US doesn't actually have the demand for it.


And thenb potentially suffer from integration hell.

The benefit of using off the shelf software is that many of the integration problems get solved by other people. Heck you may not even know you have a problem and they may already have a solution.

Custom software on the other hand could just breed more demand for custom software. We gotta be careful how much custom stuff we do lest it get completely out of hand


First they have to hire a developer with knowledge of how to do this right, as they might not even have one. Which could easily eat 10k+ of dev time as hiring good people takes a lot of time.


You could probably take any user at random from this discussion alone and they'd have the knowledge needed to make the switch from http to https. I'm certain that AMD has all the knowledge they need right now, but even more certain that it wouldn't be hard to hire someone new who does as well


Ok, but this ultimately just comes down to a debate over the amount of the cost. The principle is the same. Even if we double or triple the cost, it's a drop in the ocean for a company like AMD.


More details from a guy who has thought this through https://taranis.ie/datacenters-in-space-are-a-terrible-horri...


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: