That was one of the suggestions to help the overall situation at JPL, not one specifically for Psyche.

Isn't a big part of this because of things going sideways at JPL? Last year a report was commissioned by NASA on the problems leading to the delay of JPL's mission to the asteroid Psyche, only for the report to conclude that the problems weren't just with that one mission, but rather endemic to all of JPL.

One of the problems identified was that JPL's staff is spread too thinly across too many missions, especially the programmers and engineers. IIRC the decision was made to review each JPL mission, and cancel or delay any that hadn't reached a given milestone, to free up programmers and engineers for the missions that were closer to their launch dates. Which also has the side effect of buying time to resolve the deeper structural problems that've cropped up at JPL over the last few years.

https://spacenews.com/psyche-r...

What actual, important contributions to *any* project has ESR made? He seems like a perpetual hanger-on who occasionally inserts himself into conversations on mailing lists to start flame wars. (a racist, sexist, misogynist hanger-on at that)

Mayyyybe this would be OK if, and only if, the private company has to buy the telescope at full price and pay for any US government resources it uses to communicate with it. Otherwise it's another case of taxpayer-funded infrastructure being given/sold for pennies on the dollar to companies who then turn around and charge more for it that what it was costing taxpayers to maintain in the first place.

And if the $14 million/year that NASA is saving is less than what government-funded scientists (and NASA themselves) would have to pay the company for time on the telescope then it should most certainly not be handed over.

This is no different than letting Snapchat do it or anything else. Developers can't do it without the user's knowledge, and it isn't giving apps a detailed map of your individual face.

Yeah, this is definitely not a "Me too!" thing they created after seeing Apple's Core Machine Learning framework. Nope, nothing to do with CoreML at all... *rolls eyes*

Just like when Qualcomm said 64-bit mobile processors were useless after being caught flatfooted by Apple's A7 CPU announcement, then rushed to design their own 64-bit mobile CPU.

Haven't there been a bunch of retailers that were officially listed as PCI compliant that still wound up getting hacked, customer CC#s stolen, and then had their PCI compliance status retroactively revoked? Target, Home Depot, etc?

You demonstrated to your mother-in-law that you can steal the ApplePay credentials off of somebody's iPhone? Better submit it to Apple's bug bounty and get a big payout, then.

Oh wait, you don't actually know what you're talking about.

ApplePay is not available on iPhones before the iPhone 6.

They have published white papers on the security of TouchID, the Secure Enclave, and ApplePay, which are available for anyone to read. Go educate yourself.

Those older phones can't be used with ApplePay. And all your ApplePay credentials are stored in the phone's secure enclave, which can't be cloned.

Apple has published a number of white papers on the iPhone's Secure Enclave and ApplePay, and I've not heard of any security experts call them out on mistakes or design flaws in either of them.

That's not how it works at all. If they have Touch ID set up, it requires your fingerprint to pay with ApplePay. iPhones that don't have TouchID can't be used with ApplePay.

Even if they have an ApplePay-capable phone but don't have TouchID set up (which means they have to enter a passcode to pay), unless you also steal their phone then what you described won't work. It's linked to their phone specifically. ApplePay doesn't show credit card numbers or anything like that on screen.

It stands to reason, though, that if they want to make phones from reused materials then they have to strip everything down to the raw materials so they can reuse them, no?

> After sorting, the materials are sold and used for production stock in new products. No reuse. No parts harvesting. No resale.

Sounds like they're recycling the raw materials, just not the parts. Not 100% ideal, but it beats them winding up in a landfill.

I can't tell if you're complimenting the Doom 2016 programmers or trying to say this stuff is easy compared to Back In The Day.

I *can* tell you that this stuff is not easy *at all*, and the fact that the game gets such good performance across such a wide range of hardware, while still maintaining a high level of visual fidelity on lower end machines, is impressive in its own right.

That they put in the effort to write a Vulkan renderer is itself proof that they're trying to squeeze as much performance out as possible, and not just lazily relying on the hardware to make up for slow/lazy/incompetent programming.

"The world's most powerful telescope just discovered 1230 new galaxies"

C'mon, they couldn't discover 4 more?