gmanley

>Since the inception of the program, there has never been an accident involving a naval reactor nor a release of radioactivity

None of the theories put forward about the loss of the USS Scorpion have involved the reactor. Maybe they didn't discuss it because it wasn't relevant?

Correct, they should. If there are zero days out there, then they should be able to be found by everybody, instead of only being found by the select elite that this model is available to. Though, I very much question the truth of said ability.

It's a bit convoluted to get to but you can also "rent" a license for $30 a month through Blackmagic Cloud. As with many, I'm not a fan of subscription licenses but it was valuable for me to use for a month to evaluate if the Studio features warranted the investment in the permanent license. Specifically some of the Fusion effects are Studio only.

It's twofold, these are laws that are delving more and more into regulating the personal lives of its citizens and as a side effect forcing the de-anonymization of the internet. This in a way that makes it easier for the government to track your internet usage and if we're talking OS level verification, maybe even more than just internet usage.

If you really want to go after abusive capitalists, then go straight to the source. Regulate the things that are making this ban look like a good idea.

We've already had reports of the UK's Online Safety Act resulting in a convenient uptick in defamation lawsuits. Certainly not because the government can now easily track who posted a tweet that ruffled the feathers of someone important. So yeah, at the cynical end, I question the motivation of these laws and at the charitable end, I worry about the direction these laws are moving and their impact.

It feels like you are constantly moving goal posts here. Your original statement was it will die a slow and quiet death. Are you now saying that this mobile use case will start to switch back to IPv4? It may not kill IPv4, like was initially planned, but it's not going away.

The majority of their foundries are in Taiwan and South Korea which, to avoid politics, is outside what most people mean when they worry about tech made in China (they think about the PRC).

Does it really matter if they take these consumer friendly actions because they know it will get them good press and dedicated consumers? The end result is the same.

Like you touched on, for whatever reason, most large enough companies haven't seemed to figure out this obvious truth. I tend to believe it's because it's harder than it looks, once a company reaches a certain size. Now sure, they are by no means perfect, but I'd like to at least give them credit for being far better than any of the competition, no matter the rational behind it.

What if the action, it is responding to, is some sort of input other than directly human entered? Presumably, if it has a cameras, microphone, etc, people would want their assistant to do tasks without direct human intervention. For example: it is fed input from the camera and mic, detects a thunderstorm and responds with some sort of action to close windows.

It's all a bit theoretical but I wouldn't call it a silly concern. It's something that'll need to be worked through, if something like this comes into existence.

Define small business, because unless you are talking a mom and pop shop, my experience is severance is still a thing and definitely not big tech exclusive.

I mistyped, as this was Canada it wouldn't be the NTSB but the Canadian equivalent at the time: Canadian Aviation Safety Board. The report is a good read.

I would hesitate to chalk it up to just theory, given it was in the NTSB report and they don't really mess around with throwing baseless stuff around. I'd be interested to take another look at it. They likely go into the material science and physics behind this very thing. They're usually filled with gems.

You also have to keep in mind, it wasn't just rubber against asphalt, it was rubber on a wheel that spins. I'm not sure if the front nose gear on a 767 has any brakes but even if it did, I can't imagine it would be sufficient at the speeds they were going.

That example is so well known due to how exceptional it was, especially how the pilots handled it. Robert Pearson, the captain, was a very experienced glider pilot. That's something that not many commercial pilots have.

There were also two factors in the landing, that allowed for this to happen. You're going to be coming in really fast for a landing, when gliding in a commercial jet, and you don't have access to your thrust reversers to slow it down. There was a repurposed runway, that they used to land, that just happened to have been used as a drag racing track and had a guard rail. They were able to slow down by scraping across that. It also just so happened the nose gear didn't deploy fully so scraping the nose of the plane against the ground also helped slow it down.

Needless to say it was a bunch of very fortunate events that allowed it to not end in disaster. In any case I would consider it very risky.

OK, but then by that logic, solar and and wind shouldn't be categorized as clean energy either. Clearly it's a matter of degrees and meant as a useful segmentation for taxation, etc.

Except it generally is shallow, for any advanced enough subject, and the scary part is you don't know when it's reached the limit of its knowledge because it'll come up with some hallucination to fill in those blanks.

If LLM's got better at just responding with: "I don't know", I'd have less of an issue.