Morphit

When in doubt - C4!

Plus it did land on the barge. Most of the debris should be there, though the remaining fuel would have mainly gone overboard. Probably the flight termination explosives also.

I don’t think that’s what ‘market share’ is trying to represent, but without any context - yeah. You can lump in android phones and set-top boxes and signage and industrial controllers while you’re at it.

Is OP adding the Android share to Linux? That would certainly do it.

• Android (all platforms): 45.19%

Only makes sense if you know their definition of ‘Linux’ though.

I think what you want is in Firefox nightly right now: https://blog.nightly.mozilla.org/2024/08/07/firefox-sidebar-and-vertical-tabs-try-them-out-in-nightly-firefox-labs-131/

That expands and compacts based on the sidebar state and can be flipped to the right side of the window in the ‘customise sidebar’ settings.

1xx: hold on
2xx: here you go
3xx: go away
4xx: you fucked up
5xx: I fucked up
6xx: Google fucked up

A balance has to be struck. The alternative isn’t not getting anything better, it’s being sure the benefits are worth the costs. The comment was “Why is [adding another decoder] a negative?” There is a cost to it, and while most people don’t think about this stuff, someone does.

The floppy code was destined to be removed from Linux because no one wanted to maintain it and it had such a small user base. Fortunately I think some people stepped up to look after it but that could have made preserving old software significantly harder.

If image formats get abandoned, browsers are going to face hard decisions as to whether to drop support. There has to be some push-back to over-proliferation of formats or we could be in a worse position than now, where there are only two or three viable browser alternatives that can keep up with the churn of web technologies.

I mean, the comic is even in the OP. The whole point is that AVIF is already out there, like it or not. I’m not happy about Google setting the standards but that has to be supported. Does JPEGXL cross the line where it’s really worth adding in addition to AVIF? It’s easy to yes when you’re not the one supporting it.

I think it’s more that they haven’t tested the software changing mode mid-mission. At least that’s Scott Manley’s impression(@5:50ish).

Given the software issues thus far, I can see they’d be a bit wary that flipping that switch could cause problems.

I would think they could set it back to autonomous mode but that they have to do the testing and validation to prove the system will tolerate the change with no issues.

https://xkcd.com/927/

Adding more decoders means more overheads in code size, projects dependencies, maintanance, developer bandwidth and higher potential for security vulnerabilities.

Will you be able to handle all these panels as it becomes economically reasonable for people to replace them?

I’d love to have human editors to fix up stories, but we have the technology now. There are FOSS tools like redpen that will help with spelling and grammar. AI tools ought to do a somewhat reasonable job of appraising a piece of text and yeah, a second human ought to sign off before publishing. I’d have thought content management systems would have review stages like software development. Authors could accept or override suggestions, but be required to acknowledge them. Like why isn’t journops a thing?

I think you might be right. Another article by the same author seems like it could be entirely made up, only citing Wikipedia for things like the definition of the word ‘confidence’. I don’t know what would prompt it to leave these ‘fill in the blank’ sections though.

I understood [reference] and am continually amazed how news sources don’t have some kind of automated review process to stop stupid errors like that.

You wouldn’t print a mouse.

Back in my day, mice had balls.

I don’t think it’s ‘user error’ exactly. Maybe when this has occurred, something in the frunk has obstructed the closing of the hood so it almost latched, but the deformed switch is detecting it as closed. I think they might be adjusting the switch sensitivity in software (maybe it uses a Hall effect sensor and a magnet?) so that this almost-closed condition will be reported as just being open.

The only thing I can think of is if the sensor is a hall effect sensor that detects something (the switch?) being depressed by the hood. The sensitivity of the hall effect sensor might be tuneable. They may be able to reduce the sensitivity so it still detects a properly closed hood, but reports an improperly closed hood as open.

It’s annoying that the report just says it’s fixed in software without explaining how.

I guess the funny thing is that each Git commit is internally just a file. Branches and tags are just links to specific commit files and of course commits link to their parents. If a branch gets deleted or jumped back to a previous commit, the orphaned commits are still left in the filesystem. Various Git actions can trigger a garbage collection, but unless you generate huge diffs, they usually stick around for a really long time. Determining if a commit is orphaned is work that Git usually doesn’t bother doing. There’s also a reflog that can let you recover lost commits if you make a mistake.