But don’t all pilots have to lodge their flight plans? Surely hiding a plane in a hangar is not that easy since you would know which airport it is located in.
2,678 karma · joined April 13, 2010
One only has to look at an article in different languages, clearly authored by different sets of people. For example, if you look up "Kosovo", the English version states "Kosovo ... is a country in Southeast Europe with partial diplomatic recognition" whereas the one in Serbian states (which I will translate):
"Република Косово је званични назив једнострано проглашене државе на територији Републике Србије, противно Уставу Србије.[5] Према Резолуцији 1244 Савета безбедности УН цела територија Косова и Метохије, правно гледано, налази се у саставу Србије док не буде постигнуто коначно решење"
translated as:
"Kosovo is a formal name for a one-sidedly declared country on the territory of Republic of Serbia, to the objection of Serbia. According to the resolution 1244 from the Security Council of the UN, the entire territory of Kosovo and Metohija, in terms of the law, belongs to Serbia until a final resolution is reached."
Wikipedia is essentially a he-said/she-said website on politically charged matters, and I really wish people would stop treating it as the source of truth.
So yes, the line was very obvious because these are events that happen in real life, risk that you say you wanted to eliminate by absolutely playing it safe: "_anything_, there is no such thing as excessive 'playing it safe'"
I can only assume that your original comment was reactionary and hyperbolic, but then got upset over where that kind of hyperbole lead in the past.
This comment was meant for the normal folks who spend a lot of time in our vehicles and are willing to accept a level of risk that comes along with having some sense of comfort.
We spent months agonizing over an interior temperature sensor, which was only used to display the information to the user on a smartphone app. We built both the hardware and software, and it was offered as an add-on at the dealerships. After months of negotiations, after the hardware was already built and the packages assembles, they decided temperature sensors were too inaccurate (+/- 5 degrees F) to use, and that it could present a legal liability. Again, this was nothing else but displaying the information on the app - and the user could then make a decision whether to remote start the car to cool it or heat it (no automatic process took place either).
This was at the height of "unintended accelerator" issue in Toyotas, so everyone was walking on egg shells playing it ultra safe to not invite any more lawsuits.
What surprises me is that this culture of "playing it safe" remained to this day, some 10 years later (but maybe it shouldn't).
You will know no fury as when your kids intentionally mix up all the pieces for fun. We have hundreds of LEGO people, and my kids intentionally dismembered them into their individual pieces (including HANDS!). But how can you get angry at kids playing??? twitch
“If they can, they will.” The past 20 years has been a steady march towards desensitizing users towards making users give up their privacy.
On the technical side, it’s probably a lot easier to gatekeep, but even HN has degraded significantly since its early days. Lobster.rs is the only truly technical one that has kept that spirit (to this day I am still not a member, which kind of proves its gatekeeping abilities hah).
p.s. love the username!
What I meant to say, wrist straps were not even on my radar of aesthetics, and I was shocked to learn it’s a $1B business (for Apple alone?). So clearly, I missed how much they mean to people.
Obviously, I (and pretty much everyone else) do buy things at least partially influenced by aesthetics (clothing, sunglasses, furniture, to name a few). Wrist straps were a huge surprise for me, though. Another one is paying a premium for different colored phones (and I admit I was first in line to pay a premium for a jet black RAZR phone back in the day)
Just goes to show that all my assumptions about what makes a product popular/profitable are wrong.
P.S. I do have the Apple watch anyway. My strap requirements are: breathable, can be removed easily, doesn’t pinch arm hair.
Music (and other arts), on the other hand, is yours forever and exists forever, and it’s a way for future generations to connect with their ancestors and even pass on a legacy.
One of my favorite interviews (as an interviewer) was when a SDET candidate provided a link to their website. When I visited it there was an issue loading some page. So I asked him about it and how he would troubleshoot, then asked him to come back on Monday with a solution. On Monday, the site was fixed, and he explained to me what happened in AWS, how he figured it out, etc. So he was hired, going on 2 years now and doing very well.
I don’t need robots who can recite what a b-tree is (ChatGPT can do that). I need people who will work hard, can understand the big picture and how to approach problems, while being a good personality on the team.
Oh, and I wonder how long the $5/month pricing will be in effect - when they'll raise the prices.
For Adobe, at least, the actual monthly rate is way higher.
FWIW, I’m in your boat too. Logic is a PERFECT DAW for me the way it is. I would be so sad to have to switch to Reaper or something, and have to go hunt for plugins..
Logic is the only thing tying me to the Mac, so I guess that’s a plus.
Examples include: becoming a de-facto beta tester for new features, having UI elements change non-intuitively at a critical moment, software becoming incompatible with older input, etc. You also have to choose between paying for the software or discontinuing its use permanently.
With an old version, I can just go use whatever VM or machine I need to convert files, modify them, perform last-minute changes on my paper that’s due in the morning or whatever.
I’ll also point out most of the subscription plans are annual, lump sum plans, otherwise your monthly is even higher. So you get the worst of both worlds: having to pay a de-facto lump sum (which renews automatically annually), and not having the right to use it once you cancel it.
In the same vain, I paid $200 for Logic Pro X three years ago and it still does what I paid for. I’m about to spend $300 on Final Cut Pro.
If Logic Pro went subscription only at, say, Photoshop prices at $20/mo, that would be the equivalent of $720 so far. Even though Logic is seriously awesome, I would not pay it and just go with something else.
Edit: the $20/mo is the price only if you pay for a whole year. Otherwise it’s actually $31.50 per month. So you are either paying a lump sum of $240 (committing to a full year) or $31.50/month.
This is the real problem, Adobe made kick ass software that was so good it cut off their future revenue stream, so they decided to rent it out instead of letting people own it. Fine, that’s their decision, just like it is mine not to continue paying for something I use once a month as a photography hobbyist.
The ultimate goal, then, is to find an intersection between those two concepts that makes sense for both the environment and profitability.
"Reduce, reuse, recycle" is the order in which this is achieved, from least to most expensive. Recycling has become incredibly expensive [1] and it's hardly making financial sense anymore. "Reducing" is the least expensive because it doesn't require any energy, but we (consumers) like to buy stuff, so once a product is in a person's hands, "reduce" is out of the equation. That leaves us with "reuse," which not only helps reduce new products from being made, but also has the potential to make money for companies. This is actually a win-win scenario, and should be encouraged rather than frowned on.
The issue is that "green marketing" has been in vogue since the mid 2000s, and companies (apparently shockingly!) lie in their messaging to sell their products. But Dow, in this case, is actually doing their part in being environmentally conscious. You can even call this a white lie or something like that. Nobody would buy new shoes or donate old ones if the marketing said "In order to reduce waste, we are going to resell your used shoes in Indonesian flea markets". (There is one "reduce" idea, ha!)
As for companies not caring, I point to the whole purpose of a company's existence - to make money. Everything else is irrelevant. If environmental impacts are an issue, and legislation is forcing their hand, then they must find a way to remain profitable or simply go out of business.
The linked Planet Money podcast highlights this predicament. It's important to remember that not everything is black and white as it's made to be in articles like this.
[1] https://www.npr.org/2019/07/12/741283641/episode-926-so-shou...