mbreese

It failed.

But I think that they learned something really valuable. As a company, they don’t have a good understanding the server market or how to sell to it. Their premium product style just didn’t have a place in the race to the bottom server market.

We had two in my grad school lab that we used as web servers. But that was the problem - it was a premium designed product that wasn’t any better of a web server than a plain (cheaper) Dell 1U box.

Maybe things would be different now that they have a really unique chip. ARM as a whole ecosystem has more buy-in from other companies than PowerPC did. Their performance per watt and GPU design might make more of a difference this time around.

But I can’t see Apple being able to release and sell a data center centric server. I think others might have a better chance.

I do find it interesting though, that in the interest of transparency, every bugfix gets a CVE. Which ends up being a huge number… which will ultimately yield a more insecure environment as we’re getting conditioned to ignore/discount CVEs by the volume.

Over-reporting in this case seems to risk being counterproductive.

If NASA was having visible issues and difficulty in trying to get something like Hubble working in space, then perhaps the US’s spy agencies (known or not) also had the same difficulties. NASA employees wouldn’t need to have known about the NRO to help provide cover for their capabilities. Just publicly showing their struggle - for transparency - would have been enough.

(If NASA had a clue about the NRO capabilities or not, I doubt they would have cared. They still got their space telescope!)

This is more like alcohol apathy - not drinking, but also not explicitly anti-alcohol. That the more generational shift in Gen Z that I've seen. But, those sentiments can certainly change over time.

My personal theory is that they are scared of ending up on the Internet when they don't have control.

Even in the case where it’s an internal only Lu array, it can be complicated to refactor a library name.

I was going to make a comment earlier about how my kids travelled in car seats years ago before I realized you were talking about lap kids without their own seat.

The phased array antenna is also a function of this. Each satellite is moving so much that you need to have an antenna following the satellite across the sky.

So, once Starlink decided to have a low earth orbiting constellation (for better latency and bandwidth), the other features (quantity and a steerable antenna) became requirements to have a functional system.

1) you send a signal to the satellite

2) the satellite relays the signal down to a ground station

3) from here your packets go out on the Internet like any other ISP

The answer then goes in reverse: back to the ground station, up to the satellite and down to your dish.

Starlink’s special sauce is the low earth orbit. Older satellite internet companies operated in geosynchronous orbit. This meant they only needed one or two satellites to cover a large area. You also only needed a small number of ground stations. The satellite needs to be able to see your dish and the ground station at the same time. But this is very high up, so latency was horrible (the distance up and down before the packet even hits the internet). Bandwidth was also limited, but much less of an issue.

With low earth orbits, you have great latency. But, because you still need to be able to see the ground station and the customer’s dish, this means that you need more ground stations. This is just geometry.

Starlink adds one more feature that is relevant here - direct satellite to satellite communication. Instead of the signal going from:

Customer - satellite - ground station - internet

The signal can go from:

customer - satellite A - satellite B - ground station - internet.

This later setup might be what you were thinking about. You still want to limit the number of hops from satellite to satellite you have (latency again), but this should make the service more resilient to the loss of a single ground station.

For a marketing page, it’s not the worst UX I’ve seen, but still slightly annoying.

But please don’t try to redefine the Accept-Language header. These things are well defined for a reason and redefining things isn’t helpful. Trying to figure out protocols on the fly for LLMs is how we got into the current mess. For all of the cruft that W3C has, I think that working with standards committees could help the AI vendors here.

This is where we were with one of my kids' teams. Once they got older and split into the elite-national/regional club level (about U12), the parents were not healthy. Over time, the parents started to realize that their kid wasn't likely to play D1 college soccer, so there wasn't a point in being "those parents".

It also helped that a few of us that either coached, played, or ref'd would "help guide" the other parents. It is now to the point where I wouldn't want my kid to change teams because our parents are so awesome.

In my area, there are a number of leagues. Only one has a large number of teenagers in the ref pool and they only are center refs for the youngest players. For the more competitive leagues, you almost never have a ref crew made up of only teenagers. Here, young refs are generally protected by having older refs as part of the crew. There is a whole system behind referee scheduling that most people don’t know about.

(Also, this about soccer in the US, I have no idea how other sports schedule their officials)

The money is pretty decent for two hours of work (and you can work games back to back to back).

This is why the first remedy is to ask the coaches to get their parents under control. In general, if the abuse continues, the coach can be carded as that’s the only person the ref can discipline.

For this updated project, they effectively ran the earlier tool for all possible variants in the genome (3 billion bases in the genome * 3 single nucleotide variants = 9 billion). It’s a very useful project for people like me, but the major advance was already done (admittedly by the DeepMind team).

I'm not trying to discount the efforts involved here, just pointing out that they aren't starting from scratch. And much of the required features to support a dual-screen (triple-?) phone has been in the works for a while.

Or a smaller phone that is more expensive to produce. In which case, it won’t sell well regardless.

It’s easy to see how we got to this point of large phones, but it is not very clear how someone like Apple can make a significantly smaller phone and keep customers happy.

As you mentioned, other vendors probably will have better luck.

I’m very much in favor of things like OKF wikis for memory or knowledge storage/retrieval. So I too would love to know how well this really integrates into one of the coding harnesses (Claude code or Codex mainly).

https://nesbitt.io/2026/02/26/git-in-postgres.html

Following another recent theme, the answer for Forgejo seems to be - just use Postgres.

How does someplace like a GitHub/Gitlab go it? Are user accounts or repos sharded across different servers? Is there a different underlying scaling system? If one wanted to run Forgejo “at scale” what would it really require, or does this need to be factored into the design from day one?