Article doesn't seem to have anything new to add to the discussion. It's just a bunch of links to previous anti-AI articles the author has written on stories we have all read before such as the collapse in new stack overflow questions.
The Antonov An-70 has been in service with "open rotor" engines for 30+ years. It's superior to its western counterparts in every way. i.e. greater speed and payload with less fuel consumption than a C-130 or A400M.
Huh? Only two An-70 prototypes were ever built so it's not really "in service". The early propfan designs, while efficient, were too loud for widespread civil use. Newer open rotor designs are much quieter.
So it's set by scientists. But the article fails to mention it's an art project. The clock itself being an art piece, and the setting of it a performance.
Umm no, at zero degrees AoA as the first diagram on the page shows, a flat plate does not generate lift.
But nobody actually questions that a flat shape can generate lift; we all made paper planes as a kid.
But every airfoil has an equilibrium angle of attack (not always stable with velocity) where it generates zero lift. The chordal angle of attack is for convenience because it depends only on airfoil geometry and not ambient velocity, but it isn't a fundamental physical property of the airfoil.
If we treat the angle where zero lift is generated as the base angle for an airfoil, then all airfoils generate lift depending on their angle relative to that, including a flat plane. As the GP says, other properties are the dominant factor in airfoil geometry.
When introducing airfoils I think it is more useful to start from a plane than a traditional airfoil shape; the math and intuitions are much clearer from there.
And with steady level flight symmetrical airfoils are flown at an angle, a cambered airfoil shape being flown at 0 degrees angle of attack vs its chord line would be an unusual coincidence. Wings are mounted at a small angle relative to the direction of thrust and what one would define as a flat line on the fuselage.
Uncambered airfoils also don't generate lift at zero degrees. What constitutes "0" for curved airfoils is convenience. You want lift, you put a flat plate on an angle, anything fancier is for Lift/Drag, Thrust/Weight, etc.
There are about a million places incorrectly "explaining" that airfoils create lift because the top path is longer and this means the air has to go faster. A flat plate would not create lift in that case. The fact that paper airplanes obviously can fly somehow never stops people from repeating this.
The premise is absurd. Imagine if coders decided to stop working "on principle" because AI agents "learn from your work"
People would rightly call it out. Somehow gets a pass because its about translation instead of coding?
"Almost 4,000 defendants have been convicted in courts in England and Wales in the last two weeks for failing to identify the driver of a vehicle under police investigation, leading to fines ranging from £1 to £1,000."
"Tesla has been convicted at least 18 times"
So, Tesla are 1 of 4000. I feel the article is missing a bigger story here to make it about Tesla.
The difference is (presumably) that they are the only auto finance company doing this and therefore should have a more rigorous standard applied than the individuals who make up the remaining 3982 cases.
I think most companies at this point learned that no launch date is set in stone. Sure, if you're doing AAA games, you might not want to launch right next to GTA, but for most others? Matters way less than people think.
> Tell that to the indie developers that launched games alongside the surprise release of Silksong.
Huh? Is your argument that it would be bad for Silksong to surprise release next to GTA? Or that indie developers should have planned around the surprise release of Silksong? I really don't understand what argument you're trying to make here.
The argument is that Silksong will completely absorb any potential market for you new indie game had during that period. People will be too busy playing another game, leading to poor numbers during launch. It's hard to recover from that.
Right, but what does that have to do with "every other developer has to time their release and development around GTA 6", especially considering that Silksongs release was a surprise, so what exactly could you even plan for?
My original point that there is so many things at play, GTA 6 launch date, which may move, together with other things outside of your control, that "planning your release and development around GTA 6" doesn't make sense, unless you're a big company doing a AAA release.
This implies Silksong was the stronger title, either in gameplay, marketing; or both. If the indie game was better, people would be playing that over Silksong. Isn't this just market forces applied to games?
reply