It's certainly not crazy to imagine that you could cut the costs of a helicopter-like aircraft that was purpose-made for relatively short, relatively low-speed, relatively light load duties.
The energy cost during operations is very relevant, too, which is why you see things like tilt rotor designs with wings/bodies to generate lift.
When Airbus was doing the math on these a few years ago, the pilot cost was also one of the main concerns, so it was "autonomous or bust", and they ended up investing a lot on the autonomous side (not just the aircraft but also urban traffic management, etc).
I don't think it's completely irrelevant. Can we admit some nuance where the UK's fast ramp up of arrests for previously legal speech is genuinely concerning, but also that raw number of arrests (not even convictions!) is not the only basis for comparison?
I understood the situation here to be that the same private owner owned all of the private squares in this particular area. I would assume that most private owners won't be interested in buying squares deep in the checkerboard for access reasons.
The Wikipedia user based his drawing off of this sculpture from 1711, so it seems the american continent was actually already quite well mapped back then.
The armorials of the South Sea Company, according to a grant of arms dated 31 October 1711, were: Azure, a globe whereon are represented the Straits of Magellan and Cape Horn all proper and in sinister chief point two herrings haurient in saltire argent crowned or, in a canton the united arms of Great Britain. Crest: A ship of three masts in full sail. Supporters, dexter: The emblematic figure of Britannia, with the shield, lance etc all proper; sinister: A fisherman completely clothed, with cap boots fishing net etc and in his hand a string of fish, all proper.[61]
The artifact you link shows a map of the Americas in which California is an island and either Tierra Del Fuego is huge or the bottom of Argentina is an island and the northwest of the continent trails off into nothing, and Florida is sort of a stubby nub (other maps from this period show a more accurate Florida, so this might be a small-size-of-the-object problem).
They had a decent view onto the east coast of the Americas, but after that things got quite inaccurate. It's like... I don't know what anyone's expectations are, but it certainly isn't the perfect world map that's shown in the main image of Wikipedia's article.
My experience with AWS is that they are extremely, extremely parsimonious about any information they give out. It is near-impossible to get them to give you any details about what is happening beyond the level of their API. So my gut hunch is that they think that there's something very rare about this happening, but they refuse to give the article writer the information that might or might not help them avoid the bug.
If you pay for the highest level of support you will get extremely good support. But it comes with signing a NDA so you're not going to read about anything coming out of it on a blog.
I've had AWS engineers confirm very detailed and specific technical implementation details many many times. But these were at companies that happily spent over a $1M/year with AWS.
Nah if your monthly spend is really significant than you will get good support and issues you care about will get prioritized. Going from startup with 50K/month spend to a large company with untold millions per month spend experience is night and day. We have Dev managers and eng. from key AWS teams present in meetings when need be, we get issues we raise prioritized and added to dev roadmaps etc.
Because credential stuffing relies on the user reusing a username + password from another site. If you provide the user with a username they don't select, it won't be reused.
But then they have to remember the username AND the password? This doesn't help with users already having the password re-use problem. This would only work for those with a password manager, but then they are also less likely to re-use a password.
Also, wouldn't this prevent lost password recovery? if you can't identify a user by their email?
> But then they have to remember the username AND the password?
The commenter already acknowledged that the solution has drawbacks. The only claim made was that it solves credential stuffing, not that it doesn't inconvenience the user.
> This would only work for those with a password manager
It would also work for those without a password manager, because they'd have no choice.
> Also, wouldn't this prevent lost password recovery? if you can't identify a user by their email?
They're not mutually exclusive. You can have both. A compulsory unique user ID to login, and an email based password recovery mechanism.
I haven't used it for 45 years, but my CompuServe user ID was [72175,1425]. I like that they assigned it themselves with no input from me. (I'm cursed with a good memory for useless things.)
Yes, there are clear ergonomic reasons why we don't do this "assign a username" thing. But it would stop password stuffing.
You'd presumably do username recovery the same way you do password recovery, so it would only be accessible to an attacker who compromised the user's email.
Lobbyists work for money, not the love of the game or ideological conviction. There's really no inherent reason why a former lobbyist will retain a loyalty to a former employer now that they've moved on.
the problem is if the money they get isn't as simple as "the current salary"
also the chance that they a) don't have a sentiment about meta, b) ex-colleges they have good relations too and c) now about some internal workings is close to nothing
a) a is bad no matter if it's a positive or negative
b) is very bad, it pretty much guarantees some degree of non objective actions. Like in positions like lobbyist it's never "just bussiness" it's always about positive connections reinforced by positive interactions not "big" enough to be bribes but also not nothing. Which might be related to how they got this job.
c) is a potential even bigger problem, if the sentiment is negative this insider knowledge could be used to harm meta, which in turn gives meta munition to sue and hinder regulatory actions and for a positive sentiment they might subtle change decisions because they know how they "happen to unluckily collide with how meta does things" and similar. But they really shouldn't do that.
Worse even if the person acts perfectly neutral meta can try to fight/delay legislation just by "claiming" this person did abuse insider knowledge.
Lastly how do you know that there isn't an unofficial deal that meta will pick them up again with a superb salary after they happened to do subtly meta friendly politics.
Like don't get me wrong, the person might be cable to act neutral and there might not be any under the table agreements. It's even quite likely. But it's a pretty bad idea anyway because it stinks of corruption no matter if it actually involves corruption.
And it's not like Irland has a problem with decisions biased in benefit for big US tech they have even been sued over by the EU....
I mean positive sentiment between people they worked with might literally have gotten them the job (as they most likely worked with people which have influence on this hiring decision during their time as lobbyist. And a huge part of lobby work is to create positive personal connections with people from the other side through whatever mean is possible which doesn't count as bribe. You could say positive personal sentiment is the WD40(lubricant) of smooth manipulation of political outcomes)
I remember reading (here's the trigger for some people to stop reading) Paul Krugman's writing about Greek politicians and the Brussels set: if the Greek leaders just follow what Brussels want, they can guarantee their spot in some cushy position afterwards, and what Brussels set (lobbied by German banks) wanted was austerity for Greeks in order to repay the loans the German banks gave out freely, knowing that because the country was in the Eurozone, the ECB will bail them out.
Meanwhile the socialist Syriza party were obviously former activists who were going to fight for the Greek people, and Brussels knew they won't be persuaded to follow the script...
