Actually, I suspect he’s implying that nobody’s trying to assassinate Harris because all the democracy-hating assassins are on her side, or she’s the one setting them up, or something to that effect.
It’s still the sort of slander which in a reasonable world he’d be called on, but that seems unlikely
It’s unlikely to cause anything to outright fail, but it will certainly be creating bottlenecks and inefficiencies
They certainly won’t be bored. Astronauts time on the ISS is a precious resource, and work will have been found for them even if they weren’t expected to be there
Third party, sure, but Starlink is absolutely a US corporation. They have joint projects with the US military, even
That’s going to be a problem whatever solution you come up with, because of the federated nature of the lemmy system.
There’s no central authority to hand out usernames, so if two people sign up to different instances with the same username, any design which didn’t attach instance name to each username would fail. The only way around it would be for each instance to contact every other instance which exists, including the ones which haven’t federated yet, and negotiate ownership of the new username, and that’s just not possible
Can anyone explain to me what the exemption actually is? The article keeps mentioning “minimum steering angle”, but I’m not sure what that means. Is it as simple as saying the steering wheel must have at least some particular range of travel?
While that sort of analysis probably isn’t impossible, it is computationally unrealistic to do in realtime on a language which wasn’t designed for it.
It’s the sort of thing which is simple in 99% of cases, but the last 1% might well be impossible. Sadly it’s the last 1% you need to worry about, because anyone trying to defeat your system is going to find them
Oh, sure. It’s not likely to be a serious threat, but not for the reason people keep saying
People keep saying that, but it isn’t true that the leak being in the disposable part of the vehicle means it’s not a safety problem.
It’s the pressurisation system for the thrusters. If that fails, then they won’t be able to control the capsule until it hits the atmosphere. That could mean they get stuck on the ISS, in the most extreme case, or it could mean that they lose thrust mid-manouvre and they re-enter the atmosphere incorrectly. That could be anywhere from inconvenient (they miss their landing spot and someone has to come get them), to dangerous (they land so far away that they’re in danger of sinking or being eaten by bears before anyone reaches them) to outright fatal (they skip off the atmosphere, or tumble their way into reentry and burn up)
It’s a matter of perspective. To someone who’s job is to write the system which interprets ASM, ASM is high level
You declaring a debt isn’t meaningful because you don’t have legal authority to do so.
A licence statement is describing in what way you’re granting permission for something you do have the right to control, which makes it meaningful
Nah, we’re alright. I don’t think anyone has clearly defined the requirements of earth citizenship, we can assume it’s like Ireland who hand it out like candy
No it wouldn’t. Whoever touched it last is responsible for it, that’s entirely consistent with the metaphore
I’m pretty sure it means exactly what it says, but you lot are all misreading it.
I interpret it as “all rights, except the right to commit, are reserved” (which doesn’t mean you surrender the right to commit, but rather that it’s the only right you aren’t depriving everyone else of)
Well it’s definitely alive, that’s not a terribly high bar (plants and sponges qualify, after all).
The ethics question is whether it’s a person yet (or should be treated like one)
GNU Terry Pratchet
The Artemis 1 launch was also staggeringly expensive, and yet to be repeated.
In the time it’s taken to develop that rocket, SpaceX has gone from it’s very first real flight (by which I mean actually achieving something, rather than a pure test flight) to launching far more every year than the entire rest of the world combined. Note that by that definition, Artemis hasn’t had a single “real” flight yet.
Also, it’s probably possible to fix the partition so that it’s as big as it used to be. It’s likely that some of your data is corrupted already, but the repartitioning won’t have erased the old data except here or there where it’s written things like new file tables in space it now considers unused
What they’re suggesting is to back up the whole disk, rather than any single partition. Anything you do to the partition to try and recover it has the potential to make a rescuable situation hopeless. If you have a copy of the exact state of every single bit on the drive, then you can try and fix it safe in the knowledge that you can always get back to exactly where you are now if you make it worse
For an emergency ascent, they’d probably have dropped more than two. They also probably wouldn’t have taken the time to type a message to the surface if it were going wrong that quickly.
It seems more likely to me that they were controlling their rare of descent. I’d expect them to lose a little buoyancy as the vessel compresses, so it seems reasonable that they’d drop the occasional weight as they descend.