It just needs an email client.

- Jamie Zawinksi

I never claimed to be a medical doctor. But possibly an advanced degree in reading comprehension ... perhaps.

That's a pretty big assumption at this point. What if it wasn't a mistake? It's interesting to note that the event timing published in the preliminary report fails to note the timing for the 'switch off' events and subsequent CVR comment. While other events are timed to the second (the EAFR time resolution is actually better than this).

Both switches failed? That's a highly improbable dual failure without some external influence. Two influences, actually. About a second apart. And the cited MCAS failure was control surface movements (not cockpit controls) initiated as designed by the system following a _single_ failure.

Post yours. I have a degree in reading (third paragraph).

The proper containment response appears to be: administer antibiotics when a case is found. Since there is no vaccine and prophylactic treatment with antibiotics is an absolute no-no (breeds resistant strains of bacteria).

In other words, the proper response is to do nothing different. Having hissy fits about Kennedy and Noem is also counter-indicated.

Because, assuming that returning the switches to 'run' was sucessful, an incident report would have been filed, the guilty party fired and his name disgraced for all time.

Think about how one would "accidentally" bump two switches, approximately one second apart. Even if the "accident" occured as a result of one of the crew guarding the throttle position (see the video in a previous post) and then bumping the switches to off, that would occur nearly simultaneously. The approximate one second delay suggests that one switch was lifted over its detent followed by the other.

... an idiot. Still back in the era of 'the Internet is a series of tubes.' My ISP supplies me with _no_ information on their own. Only that which is provided by actuall information services, like Wikipedia, Amazon and Slashdot for subsequent transportation to customers. Actually the 'series of tubes' description comes a lot closer than what these judges cooked up.

The credit cards that banks (like JPMorgan) offer their customers. "Alternative payment platforms" can coexist within the same clearing and settlement system as physical cards. And with the same data requirements. Transactions only need a yes/no verification for the amount entered at the point of sale. They don't need my banking and financial history.

Right to repair is unrelated.

That movement is mainly about requiring manufacturers supply to consumers and independent repairers the same repair parts, access to information, and tools such as diagnostic programs used by their authorized manufacturer repairers.

Right to repair does not have anything to do with making a device continue to run after termination by the manufacturer of availability of cloud services or an app they designed the device to depend upon.

Right to repair has also been co-opted by the large manufacturers and their lobbyists by getting major concessions written into the right to repair laws that essentially make them useless. For example Apple won't have to supply their individual specialized chips on a module, and they can make it available only as an entire assembly for order which will cost more than the phone.

They can still avoid supplying necessary tools to calibrate a new lid angle sensor for "security reasons".

Essentially: Right to repair was a great idea, but it has essentially failed because it has been co-opted and rendered ineffective, and it did not apply to this particular issue in the first place. For these reasons you need a new movement on this issue that you could think of as proximate to Right to repair, but it's still out of the scope of what Right to repair proposals have sought to accomplish.

We need a Stop killing electronics movement to complement the stop killing games movement. Concerning the design of electronics that cannot be operated at some random time in the future when the manufacturer decides to shut down their cloud servers.

In this case, if you've connected them via HomeKit then they'll carry on working without issue.

Unless you need to rebuild your home network or factory reset the device for some reason to troubleshoot it, Then it will be bricked.
The unit also effectively lost its resell value as the new owner won't be able to set it up on their new Homekit network.

Yeah, we did. Write out a pseudo-code (English language) description of what you want done. A _complete_ description. Hand it to a machine which generates and compiles the code. Done. Back in the 1990s.

But what we had in the 1990s was a group of middle managers that realized that their status and income depended on the number of warm bodies they had reporting to them. So they fought the move to technologies that would reduce their headcount from 500 to 5. Those people are retired and, increasingly dead. And we have Wall Street investors asking where all that expense money is going when you could just buy a beige box to do the work.

Not once the investment community realizes that they are being taken for a ride. Current AI is garbage because it's envisioned as a general purpose tool. We have great AI that can model protein folding or do many specific tasks. But the GPAI push is just designed to part suckers from their money.

A choke knob is an excellent anti-theft measure.

I see.. Well this is unlikely to affect installs of Ubuntu then, unless you actually install it as a graphical desktop environment. Containerizing Chromium may be a very smart decision for them; however.. the program is a huge security risk, since it interacts with untrusted websites and likely has 0day vulnerabilities yet to be discovered. Sandboxing Chromium's file access to a container could help mitigate some potential exploits.

I just have no need, since there are several other perfectly robust solutions, and snapd or whatever they call it is late to the party. QEMU-KVM with a separate virtual machine window for each of my Chromium sessions. plus Qubes OS.