I don’t even understand what the term "tech sector" really means. It seems to be exclusively companies that sell or provide a software (platform) as their main product, plus chip/electronics manufacturers, but excludes defense contractors, aerospace (minus spacex maybe), automotive (minus Tesla maybe), biotech/pharma, and finance (aside from "fintech" startups).
Well, as the aphorism goes, the best defense is a good offense. Of course Microsoft and Google have security projects which aim to disrupt organized hacking groups, but maybe they need to go further? Like using honey pots to back-feed zero-day exploits (maybe even ones that have been engineered into Google/Microsoft/et al.'s products) to attacker's machines? Go full black-hat (with some sort of plausible deniability) and ransomware the ransomwarers.
As I type this, I realize it sounds a bit like some of the evil all-powerful corporations in sci-fi, although they usually also go to the lengths of assassinating their enemies.
It's a silly sort of comparison. Is reaching the programming competence necessary to hold an average software engineering job easier than attaining a PhD in mathematics? Yes, 100%. Is becoming a well-regarded software engineer by building large, complex systems or contributing significantly to projects like the Linux Kernel easier than getting to the top of your field in academic mathematics (tenured professor, high-impact papers)? I don't think so, or at least, it's not obvious to me that one is more "difficult" than the other. They take different skills and personalities, and I don't think that talent in one would necessarily translate to talent in the other.
It would only "blow up" on reentry, don’t think there’s much risk of an actual pressure vessel rupture or hypergolic explosion. So no space debris at least, just littering the ocean.
Yes, you would burn up because after the chute slows you down just a little bit, you’ll quickly smash into the atmosphere at a fairly steep angle. One way you might be able to avoid burning up is by firing a rocket downwards to slow your fall while dragging the giant (like, tens of square km) parachute behind you to reduce velocity. Then, maybe, it would be possible to reenter at a gentle speed, eventually shutting off the rocket entirely. Of course, this would probably require something close to a weightless and infinitely strong chute.
With a really big parachute, you could I suppose. Although it would need to survive getting peppered with high velocity debris, and have a way of opening up without sufficient air drag.
QEMU isn’t cycle-accurate, but would be a good start (and probably good enough). Just run some benchmarks and whatnot there, and use a tracing tool like Cannoli to capture instructions.
If you need real instructions (without an emulator like qemu doing its own translation and messing up timing), you could use a simulator like Gem5. That’s a bit more work and a lot more compute per simulated instruction.
Won’t even pretend to have read the article, but I’ll recommend the last book to really make me existentially happy and which helped me out of a bout of depression: The Cyberiad by Stanisław Lem. If you liked Gödel, Escher, Bach then I suspect you’ll enjoy it. It’s whimsical but quite deep.
Well, would he still be alive if he’d published similar quantities of info on Russia? That’s a pretty simple explanation, he thought his chances of survival were better with Western leaks.
This is true, but at this scale, aren’t we looking at a moderate portion of the visible universe? This is hundreds of thousands or millions of galaxies appearing with some strong correlation, I believe. There are only a few trillion galaxies in the observable universe, so it’s not like we have 10^20 chances to observe random chance correlations like this.
I’m just talking without actually having done a close reading or done the statistics for myself, so I could be quite wrong.
The similarity to Johansson feels more like a cover for the actual complaints I’ve seen, which are that the voice is far too breathy and flirtatious. It made the demo videos, with somewhat dorky men being complimented on their dress and whatnot, pretty damn uncomfortable. They either should have toned down the flirtation, or else added a more suave and seductive masculine voice to at least balance things out.
Given that video is 7.5 hours start to finish, and Parker is moving at several hundred thousand mph relative to that vortex, is it on the order of the diameter of the sun?
Military/police power that doesn’t depend on actual humans following orders does sound like a scarily stable system. Can’t exactly carry out an insurrection if all humans are outgunned 100 to 1. At least today, the threat of a coup or mass uprising exists.
Looking back at HN F-35 posts is interesting. Up until the Russian invasion of Ukraine, almost all press coverage and popular opinion was that this aircraft is an expensive boondoggle which can’t dogfight. I think that since Ukraine, the need for advanced fighter aircraft has been made. Additionally, the unit cost of the F-35 today is a bargain, cheaper than the Rafale, and even the Chinese J20 (allegedly).
30 years from now, I think this program will be seen as a massive success. Countries are lining up to order these, which is a massive geopolitical benefit to the US. Drone warfare will be increasingly important, but at least in this decade, I don’t think we’ll see autonomous fighters that have the sorts of capabilities 5th gen fighters have.
What you’re suggesting sounds like an ICBM effectively. Launching one, even if it’s a falcon 9 launch vehicle, anyway close to a nuclear power is not reasonable.
I’m guessing that most of Ferrari’s market value comes from the brand compared to future revenue or IP. Apple is just not that elite of a brand, I don’t see how selling million-dollar vehicles would significantly change their brand (assuming an Apple logo hood ornament).
In general, smaller organisms tend to consume more calories or resources per mass of body weight than larger ones. One reason, for mammals especially, is that maintaining homeostasis means scaling energy input with surface area, since that’s what radiates away heat. Surface area roughly scales with square of height, while mass scales with volume (cube of height).
I think a model that is historically 100% accurate demographically, while also reflecting current or maybe even slight optimism about demographic balance when giving results not bound to a particular historical period, would be acceptable to the vast majority of people, especially if that can be rigorously shown through statistical sampling.
In the case of Disney, how much of the frustration comes from the fact that their entire success was built on “borrowing” European folk tales? So that now when they lazily remake those same stories with non-white casting, it causes an uproar? I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be focussing more on actually storytelling over DEI, but I also don’t think white people get as upset over movies based on non-white source material, or created whole-cloth.
Ha, apparently I’m the uneducated one. I’d assumed it was an anglicisme that happened to work nicely, but it came to English from Middle French. However, the modern tech-related usage certainly first showed up in English, and then was upstreamed to French I assume? That’s kind of amusing… I’ll leave this as a testament to my hubris as a non-native French speaker.