2024-09-07


etc

  • How the FAA Is Keeping Flying Cars in Science Fiction - FEE

    The Department of Transportation (DOT) sets strict safety requirements for cars, but manufacturers are allowed to release new designs without first getting the DOT to sign off that all the requirements have been satisfied. The law is enforced ex post, and the government will impose recalls and fines when manufacturers fail to follow the law.

    The FAA, by contrast, enforces all of its safety rules ex ante. Before aircraft manufacturers can do anything with a design, they have to get the FAA’s signoff, which can take more than a decade. This regulatory approach also makes the FAA far more risk-averse, since any problems with an aircraft after release are blamed on the FAA’s failure to catch them. With ex post enforcement, the companies that failed to follow the law would be blamed, and the FAA rewarded, for enforcing recall.

    This subtle difference in the ordering of legal enforcement is the major cause of the stagnation of aircraft design and manufacturing.

  • The Moon had volcanic activity much more recently than we knew

  • Small asteroid creates ‘spectacular fireball’ while burning up over Philippines.


Rank Propaganda / Thought Policing / World Disordering

Tenet

Electric / Self Driving cars

  • Self-Driving Cars Get Help from Humans Miles Away

  • Europe Surpasses 900,000 Public EV Charge Points

  • Yangwang U8 First Test Review: Meet the 1,200-hp Chinese Electric Super-SUV

    Yangwang is a BYD subsidiary, sitting above sister companies Denza and Fangchengbao as the most luxurious automaker in the BYD family. The U8 is its first vehicle, a Land Rover Defender–looking SUV (it measures 209.4 inches nose to tail, just shy of the current Defender 130's 211.7 inches) with four permanent-magnet electric motors, as well as a 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder gasoline engine that doesn’t drive the wheels but instead works as a generator to feed power into the modest 49.1-kWh battery. Plug-in hybrids with gas-fired engine/generators are all the rage in China, where they’re known as EREVs, or extended-range EVs. The U8 tested here is a 2024 Luxury Edition, which retails for the equivalent of $153,720 in China (if it were to magically appear in the U.S., it would require a 100% tariff) and is at its core a 7,628-pound, 1,180-hp super-SUV.

    Despite its heft, the U8 achieves a 0–60-mph time of 3.2 seconds and a 125-foot stop from that same speed. Considering the test track surface in China had less grip than we’re used to back home, the fact that the Yangwang came to a stop in the same distance as an Xpeng G6 compact SUV weighing 3,200 pounds less strikes us as a small win. Clearing the quarter mile in 11.4 seconds at a trap speed of 121.7 mph is a major victory that puts this luxobarge in the same league as BMW M and Mercedes-AMG utes.

TechSuck / Geek Bait

  • Open Source undefined, part 1: the alternative origin story | Dieter's blog

    ’ve been active in Open Source for 20 years and could use a refresher on its origins and officialisms. The plan was simple: write a blog post about why the OSI (Open Source Initiative) and its OSD (Open Source Definition) are authoritative, collect evidence in its support (confirmation that they invented the term, of widespread acceptance with little dissent, and of the OSD being a practical, well functioning tool). That’s what I keep hearing, I just wanted to back it up. Since contention always seems to be around commercial re-distribution restrictions (which are forbidden by the OSD), I wanted to particularly confirm that there hasn’t been all that many commercial vendors who’ve used, or wanted, to use the term “open source” to mean “you can view/modify/use the source, but you are limited in your ability to re-sell, or need to buy additional licenses for use in a business”

    However, the further I looked, the more I found evidence of the opposite of all of the above. I’ve spent a few weeks now digging and some of my long standing beliefs are shattered. I can’t believe some of the things I found out. Clearly I was too emotionally invested, but after a few weeks of thinking, I think I can put things in perspective. So this will become not one, but multiple posts.

    I can’t decide which is more wild: OSI’s audacious outcries for the whole world to forget about the trademark failure and trust their “pinky promise” right to authority over a common term, or the fact that so much of the global community actually fell for it and repeated a misguided narrative without much further thought. (myself included) I think many of us, through our desire to be part of a movement with a positive, fulfilling mission, were too easily swept away by OSI’s origin tale.

  • Linux man-pages project maintenance

    I've been maintaining the Linux man-pages project for the last 4 years as a voluntary. I've been doing it in my free time, and no company has sponsored that work at all. At the moment, I cannot sustain this work economically any more, and will temporarily and indefinitely stop working on this project.

AI Will (Save | Destroy) The World

Gubmint / Poilitcks / Law Making

  • CA Governor seeks to harness the power of GenAI to address homelessness

  • Voters' Yearning for a Dictator Is a Danger to the Country

    Democrats are more likely than Republicans to believe that presidents have "total control" or "a lot of control" over gun deaths, abortion access, and poverty rates, pollsters found. Republicans are more likely than Democrats to believe the presidency exercises such vast authority over issues including foreign policy, national debt, and tax rates. Majorities of both partisan groups see the president exercising dictatorial authority over foreign policy, military operations, judicial appointments, and natural disaster response. But Republicans are more likely than Democrats to view the president as a near-monarch. Worse, whatever powers partisans think the president has, many want the office to wield much more.

  • The "Need for Chaos" Voter - by Brian Klaas

    New research has discovered a new personality trait called "need for chaos." They just want to watch the world burn and they're happy to help democracy end in flames. We must understand them.

    the researchers wanted to know how Need for Chaos interacts with partisanship. To study that in the American context, they split research participants in two groups—Republican and Democrats. What they found was, as you’d expect, that Democrats were more likely to spread baseless political rumors about Republicans and Republicans were more likely to spread baseless political rumors about Democrats. Here’s the interesting twist: this relationship breaks down once a person scores high on the Need for Chaos index. At that point, the person just wants to spread everything that could cause damage, regardless of partisan affiliation. It’s not about political agendas; it’s about destruction.

  • Tyler Tech’s Odyssey Software Took Over Local Government and Courts - Bloomberg

  • Newsom vetoes bill to help undocumented migrants buy homes

Trump / Right / Jan6

Law Breaking / Police / Internal Security

External Security / Militaria / Diplomania

  • White House doubts Hamas wants Gaza deal with Israel after hostage killings

    Biden and his top advisers were shocked after Hamas killed six hostages, among them U.S. citizen Hersh Goldberg-Polin, and have started to rethink the way forward in the negotiations over the deal. At the same time, Hamas' new demand to increase the number of Palestinian prisoners released as part of the deal raised even more concerns and questions among U.S. negotiators about whether an agreement is possible, U.S. officials said. "We still think the deal is the only way to save the lives of the hostages and stop the war. But the executions not only increased our sense of urgency but also called into question Hamas' willingness to do a deal of any kind," a U.S. official said.

  • Planning for a Post-American NATO | Foreign Affairs

    Europe may soon find itself in a tight spot. By the end of January 2025, the continent’s most important partner, the United States, could be led by former President Donald Trump, who has said that he would encourage Russia to do “whatever the hell it wanted” to European countries that did not do what he wanted: spend more on defense. The previous Trump administration strained the transatlantic relationship, and the next iteration would almost certainly be worse. Freed from the influence of the traditional Atlanticist Republicans who staffed his cabinet in his first term, a second-term Trump would face fewer obstacles to making good on his threats. The U.S. election is far from decided, but the magnitude of the change that a Trump victory could bring is far too great for Europe to sit by and hope that the former president loses at the ballot box. Trump has warned that he would immediately cut all U.S. aid to Kyiv and demand a quick end to the war, which would likely require Ukraine to cede a significant part of its territory to Russia. And that could just be the start. Trump has long questioned the value of NATO, so it is not inconceivable that he would strip back the U.S. commitment to defend Europe.

Environment / Climate / Green Propaganda