bischofs

At this point, people in the Mac hardware engineering leadership need to start submitting their resignations or being forced out. This kind of sloppy engineering and lack of product focus is the antithesis of what Apple has stood for.

If I were Tim Cook I would fire Dan Riccio, and then resign myself and hand the company over to someone who cares about products and not supply chain optimization.

Also the whole executive Memoji thing is incredibly stupid and childish. Please take your jobs more seriously -> https://www.apple.com/leadership/

You have to admit that there is something to this meme, It seems like Fusion suffers from a lack of focus and direction. Ive heard all sorts of horror stories about physicists and engineers going off on fusion design tangents that pull funding away from more viable designs as far as energy-in/energy-out.

I understand that there is a level of experimentation and R&D that is guaranteed not to generate viable results but at some point you need to trim the fat, get everyone moving in one direction etc. This grand project has been going on for over 50 years at this point, It seems like we should at least have one design that everyone should be focusing on. If they had real, defined commercial goals (even if they miss the goals) it might be easier to secure funding because your average politician would see the benefit to them.

I'm not a nuclear engineer so take that all with a grain of salt.

Interesting write up on this, I think there are plenty of opportunities for better engineering and big private/public projects. Like you said though these are non-trivial for sure.

What I can say though is imagine all of those people at that University driving cars everywhere and parking at the Uni, and it quickly becomes a dystopian hellscape like LA. We should not let the perfect become the enemy of the good and forsake all public transit because it is difficult or expensive.

I recently took a trip to Bochum, Germany. They have a light rail system that goes to every small suburb, the university, and is centered at the Bochum city train station where there are cabs, bus lines and connections that get you to any surrounding city.

It is maybe 6-8 lines total and was incredibly useful because it was designed to be, I didnt need a car to get anywhere and it was clean and cheap (2 euros per trip) .

The new Q-line in Detroit is 1 line that is three miles total and is more designed as a tourist trap, most people dont work three miles away from where they live. You need to connect it to other systems like an airport or a bus station, and you need more than 1 line (duh).

If you gave everyone horses and only build a three mile road you wouldn't say that "cars are a failure, and roads lose money". For some reason in the States we build out a tiny one line system and then throw our hands up in the air when nobody rides it.

Where i'm at in Michigan, they always put any kind of transit funding proposal on the ballet. This obviously gets voted down because most people don't want higher taxes for system that will only benefit urbanites in the short term. And the politicians who don't want transit know this.

It becomes obvious what they are doing when more funding for freeway expansions just gets rubber-stamped. That is "an executive decision" by the politicians for "long-term success of the region".

The entire funding model is aligned where they can move money around for more roads, but any public transit funding should be "up to the people to decide"

This is the problem that real public transit will address, obviously if you have no density then it doesn't make sense.

But there are places in the US that do have density where people sit in traffic all day and think its normal. It doesn't have to be complicated -> 400,000 cars move up and down my local freeway during rush hour, so build a subway underneath and make stops every mile or so.

Go to the Ruhr/Cologne area of Germany, it is bunch of little and big cities all spread out across a large region and they have hundreds of transit options from high speed trains to trams to bus lines etc. Its very easy to get around and you don't have to sit in traffic on the autobahn.

We need better transit in the States, you can't bury your head in the sand and proclaim that AV cars will solve everything. You have massive urban centers and metro areas that will continue to grow and roads just don't scale that well (look at LA)

Doesn't seem like a good thing to me, with the cost of real estate, energy and labor in California, building sprawling manufacturing plants for cars probably won't work. Plus the margins on building cars are very low at high volumes - not something SV is used to.

Was warm enough for Henry Ford, The Dodge Brothers, William Durant, Herbert Henry Dow, Louis Chevrolet etc. Maybe some thicker skin and a harder winter would benefit folks ;)

There is a rebound, but it's very slow. The big issue is that automotive money has always been channeled outside of the city and there is little to nothing that will replace it.

Everyone is convinced of their ideas of what Detroit needs but I really think it needs to have some new industries and an economy that is diverse enough to support it in tough times.The problem is the only real industry to bring the kind of wealth the city was used to in the mid 20th century would be the tech industry and the Midwest is a bit too homey to be the next SV. People here deep down are still weary of sitting in front of a tube all day.

> Apple even has a page on it: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205662

If you have to hold your 15" computer like a restaurant menu with one hand and a compressed air tank in the other - it is a very bad design.

Jobs would not tolerate this.

What is the point of this if it doesn't support any GPUS with a osx driver? I was under the impression that PCI-E was supported by TB3 - the little squabble between Nvidia and Apple needs to stop.

"My career choices were amazing, it was hard to pick between all the fantastic options. I made a decision to pick the better option and am happy with what I chose. You should do all these things too"

FYI they are currently downplaying the contents of this article

https://www.thelocal.de/20180214/government-plays-down-free-...

Just like anything - the techies and first adopters tend to set the trends. If the HN crowd thinks its useless then it will start to trickle down to Normies, might take awhile though.

You work for ULA?

No because relative speed between the two vehicles is different then stopped objects.

These two things are treated differently by a radar system - imagine you are driving in semi AV mode and you come around a turn and there is a vehicle on the side of the road stopped (i've been in this situation). For a hot second the car is pointed right at that fixed object and is probably still processing the lane curvature (if it can at all, some adaptive cruise systems don't have lane monitoring). The vehicle will ignore the fixed object and keep going as to not slam on the brakes which can be very dangerous.

I think you are moving in the right direction - there is a strange and confusing double standard with gender diversity. Note that I am talking about averages here not individual women.

Women and men are different -> This justifies different outcomes in certain areas such as tech but promotes diversity due to the fact that they think different and could provide a much needed alternative viewpoint in a homogeneous environment. (this is mostly my perspective)

Women and men are the same -> Then there is a problem with the outcomes being different but the diversity argument goes away because men and women view and interact the same. If this is true we have to forcefully equalize all professions to 50-50. This also doesn't make sense in the context of leap - if men and women are the same why do we need environments that are for one gender or the other?

As far as bootstrapping less masculine communities I'm all for that but the execution of it might turn a bit bizarre when you start letting men in.

I am a bit triggered.

This segregation stuff does not make sense to me, it almost feels like prison rules - keep genders/races away from each other because if they interact it will probably be violent.

I wondered what would happen if I created a community where the core culture was set by women, and the software and product decisions were also made by women

-> This also seems strange to me and counterproductive. If we build a society where any interaction happens without confrontations against the people that may be causing the issues, in this case "men", then how are we to make progress? Do men and women think differently about the merits of different software technologies or not?

Even when members have opposing views, they’ve given each other the benefit of the doubt and continue to talk productively.

-> Are you implying that men are incapable of this? Or that an environment where men and women interact is incapable of achieving this? Seems regressive...

I see your point with electric pickup trucks, they will probably be the last to convert.

Also I would point out that 3.0 ford engine you are referring to has been around since 2009 as the lion engine in various international markets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_AJD-V6/PSA_DT17

It probably has a different calibration for the US market to meet stricter emissions but that's about it.

I'll wait till I hear they have a model actually moving to production.

The big oems across the board have been great at convincing people they are looking toward future tech while only releasing new combustion pickup truck and SUV models. They want the excitement for the investors and public that electrification brings but they also want to sell super simple 50 year old V8 motors in body-on-frame trucks, something has to give.

The 2018 auto show is a great example, the big three refreshed all of their pickup models without any news on production or prototype ev's. The "investments" dont mean much if they are minuscule compared to combustion development.

Granted its what people are buying right now but they are not really putting any compelling alternatives out in the market.

It's a better user experience

Ive found on my 16GB phone I can either have the facebook app or every other app that I want but not both at the same time . It takes up an insane amount of space for a mobile app and they for some reason need to update it once a week. Needless to say I use the browser now to check fb.

I dont mean to be terse, but why is this article on the front page?

This seems like a shameless money grab. Even the historical "enterprise" GPUs were never this expensive. Nvidia seems like they are just taking their new GPU design which is legitimate (Volta) and trying to cash in on the ML mania.

GPUS should be general purpose and with Nvidia throwing all their eggs in the ML basket and charging a fortune it might risk alienating their core users (gamers).

I work with engineers (mostly mechanical) who are in the same boat. We built a quick python app to do in ~30 seconds what their excel/VBA shit fest did in 45 minutes.

Excel and the like are better than nothing and for most non programmer numbers people probably fine - but if you need some real heavy lifting I would bring in the bug guns.

I am doing some python to go conversions for some performance gains in parts of my stack - I really like it so far because of how they brought some of the perks of languages like python into a compiled language. One thing I really miss though is ipdb.

The Delve debugger still doesn't let you run functions and I miss all the autocomplete fun with ipdb. I hope they can make go a little more friendly to debugging in general.

Interesting perspective. I am curious about why the country you are going to pays more than the one you are coming from in software.

Would it be too bold for me to say it has some cultural reasons? Perhaps the openness to innovation? or maybe the way people think about solving new problems? Why not try to instill these cultural mechanisms in the country you came from? I hope i'm not coming across as a cultural imperialist but I am genuinely curious.

Also I don't think people should migrate for purely financial reasons. There is a lot of rich and interesting cultures in this world - it would be a shame if people just abandoned them for the sake of money.

I completely agree, countries should not trap people.

But why is it "making it" in some countries to leave and go to America? Why not build up your own country and affect their living standards in a positive way?

Personally I have no desire to leave my country because I like it and want to make it better. I think that is a healthy way to think about your identity.

Hot stuff champ, pulling the old white nationalist insult sure shut down the conversation didn't it.

I guess you will sit in your camp and I will sit in mine; no reason to have a civil discussion about the complex topic of immigration.

That is a good point, however most of the immigrants in the 1920s were from europe. Now that is not the case, they are mostly from asia and southeast asia.

There is an argument that there is enough of a cultural difference for it to affect the country one way or another.