How so? I don't see how hovering makes any difference at all... it's just a waste of fuel, increasing gravity loss. It's nicer from a controllability standpoint, but SpaceX has clearly perfected the hoverslam maneuver and once you have that down it makes more sense than to waste fuel hovering and translating. Bolting itself into the deck helps with rough seas, I suppose, but it seems unlikely you'd want to try landing in very rough conditions anyway.

Nah. They do it when it makes sense. They don't do it for Starlink launches because it's cheaper to launch a slightly lighter load and shorten turnaround time, to avoid waiting for the droneship to ferry the rocket back to land. Plus their launch cadence is so high that they'd need a big fleet of droneships. So they reserve those for paying customers who need the greater capacity. I don't think anything about New Glenn's capabilities changes those calculations.

The AI is significantly more aware of other cars around it. Unlike a human, the self-driving system has continuous 360-degree visibility.

While I agree that it *should* always be safe to hit the brakes, the truth is that when you're driving on busy roads most of the time it's not safe to brake hard. People follow too close more often than they maintain proper separation.

I also agree that drivers should always have sufficient situational awareness to know whether or not it's safe to brake, they often don't, and they often react without considering the consequences. This isn't a "man vs woman" thing, it's a human thing.

AFAICT, people with ink generally have more kids than those who don't.

It's worth noting that the way you remove them is by making them stop just sitting there, to the degree they do. The various approaches ultimately just try to break the ink up into smaller pieces that can be absorbed into the bloodstream and carried throughout the body... hopefully to get filtered out by the kidneys and liver and then excreted, but who knows? It seems likely to me that tattoo removal may create exactly the same effects as tattoo application, but moreso.

Have you ever been rear-ended? I have, twice. Both times while I was stopped at a red light, so fault was absolutely incontestable. It's their fault, but you end up without a car. Sure, their insurance has to pay, but they only have to give you what it's worth, not what it will cost you to replace it, and the difference is significant. Not to mention that you could be injured. Your hospital bills will be covered, but you were still injured and have to deal with pain, the recovery, and maybe even some amount of permanent damage. My neck has never been quite right after the second time I was rear-ended.

They would have done that after slamming on the brakes in a vain attempt to avoid hitting the dog, possibly losing control of their vehicle, and possibly causing a collision with other cars or objects. If their reaction failed to cause a serious accident, then maybe they'd have sped away.

Until last month, Waymo only allowed their cars to drive on city streets, no freeway driving. Even now, freeway usage is limited, only for selected riders (I'm not sure what the selection criteria is).

So, basically all of Waymo's millions of miles are on streets that often have animals on them.

Sure, there would be concern, but unless you're dumb you will still pick the option with the 90% lower mortality/harm rate. Yeah, it's good to investigate and fix the problem (assuming fixing the problem doesn't increase the mortality rate), but you should still use the provably better option.

Also, why it didn't attempt to stop (if it didn't). If it didn't attempt to stop because it correctly determined that attempting to stop would risk causing a more serious accident with other vehicles on the road, that's not only good, it's better than the vast majority of human drivers.

Ingress NGINX controller is being retired.

A viable, maintained alternative is NGINX Ingress Controller.... Totally different project....

To make his suggestion at *least* vaguely closer to reasonable, even if not there, could just say text will be in the phonetic scripts. So maybe not Kanji, but sure, Hiragana and Katakana.

If it is true that no one will reasonably provide fonts for cheap to cover the thousands of Kanji, you could still be in native language with a manageable scope by sticking to the phonetic scripts.

I had heard that conceptually, they couldn't find a benefit for having the FPGA on-package but it was a big thermal/power challenge. So the integrated case was actually worse.

On the Omnipath side, similar story though they actually shipped a version... It got watered down to PCI-e attached even while on-package and so it was just a pain with zero benefit for being on-package. Very weird board/cooling design needed to let cable go straight to CPU, having to share the TDP budget between the loosely logically coupled, but tightly physically coupled functions...

But yeah, Intel doesn't seem to know what to do except processors, and they've squandered even that by now...

Particularly striking as they started from a pretty solid premise, that mismanagement broadly is the cause. Especially citing Boeing, which was *well* documented that the changes can be traced back to acquiring McDonnel Douglas, which was ripe for the taking after being mismanaged into failure and Boeing having the genius idea that the best thing they can do with a leadership team that tanked their former company is to put them in charge of the still viable Boeing. People who wanted to scream DEI pointed to DEI initiatives that started *after* the troubled MAX program was already in the air.

I wager engineers are willing to agree, as they see their work as solid but the business mismanaging things to make good engineering infeasible.

"We (the broader company) doesn't know how to engineer, but *I* still do" I could easily imagine being the takeaway. I think most of us can relate to being part of a broader mismanaged whole.

I'd say the big thing is they took their core product as granted, and focused a great deal of their income on almost anything else, aiming/hoping for some horizontal growth instead of investing to preserve their processor market share. Intel is flush with cash and could either invest in CPUs, or, say, buy McAfee, a brand that had lost most of it's value a decade prior. Or maybe acquire some HPC products to try to build an in-house all-in-one HPC solution to compete with their partners, then decide that was a bad idea and mostly abandon that expensive effort. Or maybe buy an ethernet switch chip company, and then promptly do nothing with it. Since it worked out so swimmingly the first time, do the exact same thing with another ethernet switch chip company and again just shrug and never do anything with it. Maybe spend a boat load of money trying to make "Optane" a thing, including heavy evangelizing to try to convince people to fundamentally rework core concepts of how they work to justify the apparently awkward in-between of PCM which was never going to be as fast as SDRAM nor as cheap as NAND. Along the way spend money on all sorts of weird random projects someone had without any target customer expressing interest in the hopes they stumble upon some unexpected Model T moment in a new market segment.

Intel just assumed their position in the market was unassailable and went about trying to start *something* else because protecting their core business wouldn't deliver adequate growth (they pretty much had the market cornered). So you have a lot of big 'lottery ticket' investments with inconsistent execution on top of dubious justifications in the first place. They failed to coalesce around a common accelerator/GPU strategy leaving them critically disadvantaged compared to AMD and nVidia, their CPUs surpassed by AMD, their fabs long passed by TSMC and none of their gambles paid off, so now they are just boned. I suppose on the upside, *now* they have growth opportunity in their core competency since they ceded so much ground...