laythea

Early returns are good because they also save a lot of indentation.

Is this why third world state airlines seem to be first in line to test the new models (Ethiopia etc). They get an extra good deal on them. Makes me sick really, that this is the world we are in.

I wonder what would be unearthed should they also choose to look at Boeing's other planes in such similar scrutiny.

The car industry is not as advanced as the aviation industry. It will come a time, where the level of complexity of a car means that in order to build and test it properly, it will be a ever-increasing easy business decision to take shortcuts.

Yes but what about petrol (elec) stations? When will we see a similar surge of charging points that make it practical? Can have all the cars in the world, but unless some serious investment is made in the infrastructure, its a bit premature I think.

Yes. This is what we want. Touch controls that involve the sensation of touch! :)

I agree with what your saying. As they optimise more and more, they "fly closer to the sun". That would be ok as long as the models/sim tools were accurate, but as you say they are not so much, which means there is not as much room for error.

Sounds to me like the main failure here is that Boeing went too far with optimising cost, in the sense that MCAS was not properly designed.

I'm certain correctly designed software can safely control critical functions, otherwise failure in a large category of aircraft systems would result in many more MCAS unrelated accidents.

This particular MCAS control philosophy seems to be a flawed control system. With reference to the the graph (link provided by obituary_latte):

https://i.imgur.com/WJuhjlO_d.jpg?maxwidth=1640&shape=thumb&...

With only one sensor being "looked at" at any time, and with the system not having the sense to know to stop commanding pitch down after 26 times with attempted pilot overrides, it would seem almost beyond belief that any competent team of on-the-ground engineers (as per Boeing) would not see that the system is flawed.

Would be interesting to see if this was the case, and how the likely good engineering decision was overridden by the commercial aspect.

With increased tech, comes increased scope for this kind of cost optimisation, and we must be careful in many more industries. Eg Automotive self driving cars.

I'm not a fan of this essay type thing being on twitter, split into lots of little tweets.

"...high CO2 concentrations in the helmet can be really dangerous to an unconscious person's brain function"

Yes but no helmet is even worse for an unconscious person's brain function :)

Is that not code, for me?

It would have been cool to have screenshots on the front page. It gives so much more sense as to what the thing on github actually is, because I didn't understand it (without further time) from just the github.

Given that the money is a fiat system, without the backing of actual gold, this money effectively goes back into "the ether".

Wow, so much marketing voodoo for a text terminal!

I'm not disagreeing with you but that does not take away from its importance. There are lots of crappy important things :)

I watch his live CEOing youtube occasionally. Is quite interesting, but at some point I feel like I am stuck in a work meeting, with no real objections (understandably) being posed to Wolframs proposals.

I also think the word computation is used a bit too grandiosely by Wolfram. Which is evidenced in the writing here.

I do admire Wolfram for even advertising his CEOing meetings though. He goes into the detail to a level you would not necessarily think a CEO would do. Credit where credit is due, he is not shy. Many CEO's would not bother.

I mean, technically, everything is a computation, but we accredit actually complex things to that term, not everything. To use it "whilly-nilly" deflates the words impact.

This is kinda like what they did in the graphics API world. Moving from OpenGL to Khronos in order to "cut the fat" between the user program and the hardware.

NanoGUI + live data custom controls = happy days

Agree with all you say. the people who have a "higher multiplier" indirectly enact value rather than directly "at the coal face".

It takes a certain kind of person, to be able to extract self value from seeing others directly create it, rather than directly creating it. Not everyone prefers that and some find more satisfaction when directly responsible for the added value.

It's the self consumption of a direct-value vs indirect-value effect that drives whether you will be good at one or the other.

The problem is that the mainstream mantra sways people into chasing indirect-value type roles, when they ought not to be (for the good of the individual).

This is probably a very efficient mentality, but I find it equally depressing.

Agree there are, but that's why you can usually spot the ones who aren't, quite readily.

To get contracts as a contractor, you need to differentiate yourself from the market as best as possible.

One way is to try and get some sort of security cleared job. Once you do, you immediately elevate yourself away "from the crowd" of developers in the market and you will find major global companies want you and they pay well. And when you get your first gig, you can be sure that another company will want a security cleared engineer, so it's good for job security.

Just be careful how you say no when they ask you if you want to join on a perm basis :)

be warned: the government does not like it if you are an employee and then go directly into contracting for said same company.

you become an "employee under guise" and then you will be taxed as such. then you get the worst of both worlds.

I got fed up of ImGUI when I wanted to route events to my application instead of the GUI. Its good "out the box" ut when you need to get down and dirty to customise, it can be awkward.

Nowadays I do a hybrid approach, so I have use NanoGUI and create my own "live data" "retained mode" controls. Now I have either the best of both worlds or the worst of both worlds. I think the best:

Pros: - I don't have to bother with data binding. As the control is passed a pointer to the actual memory for he value, it can "go get it" when rendering, rather than my application setting its state. - I still have classes to represent elements and state, so its conceptually simple to build controls on controls. I found this difficult with Imgui.

Cons: - renders 100% full speed, but I am working on way to speed up and slow down render loop depending on user activity, so that when sitting idle, the cpu is not burning.

It seems by focusing on 2D and not 3D applications, Matrox have successfully "dodged a bullet", in terms of the competition out there for 3D. Good move.

"Remember that most women apply to positions only where they 100% fit the requirements."

Errm....citation required please? otherwise I may take offence.

Then again, when I was growing up, we did boys and girls sports separately :)

It is very cool tech and will be very useful in parking the new range rover in the supermarket car park.

Yep, I agree with you. There are "bigger picture" problems for us here.

The website says "free forever".

This reminds me of other software package that was "free forever" but then became popular and lost its "free forever" title. (I forget the name)

How will this not happen here?

I'm just sceptical of wild claims like these. Surely if this software grew legs the devs would have to charge?