Perhaps this is a reactionary question, but: shouldn't this be recall worthy? Or is it inherent to Lidar itself?
This has the potential to damage safety-critical sensors used in backup cameras or autonomous vehicles—and, obviously, inflicts damage on personal property like smartphones.
You risk a false equivalency (ex: look at what water did to cotton candy. Imagine the damage to a human. We'd dissolve) but your question is valid. Even on HN this has been discussed. According to past discussions, water, which is in the eye, blocks that wavelength. I'm sure enough of it is bad (because blocks really means turns into heat) but it seems animals, being water sacks, are well suited for this.
AS a Scientist with experience with lasers: everything that is strong enough to destroy a camera Sensor is strong enough to Hurt your eye. The Thing is: this wavelength may Not damage the Retina, but IT can "destroy" parts of your cornea or lens. Basically your cornea or lens can get hazy.
On the other hand, since cell cameras don't filter out infrared, you can use them to detect spy cameras in your airbnb, which are using IR to illuminate the room.
These counterfactual comparisons are a slippery slope and not as helpful as you think. I hardly think that you, I, or most others have an intuitive understanding for what happens when a 1 gram meteor hits earth. Have you ever witnessed that?
The average failure state of a battery is not similar to detonating a handful of TNT on an airplane, which is a more instantaneous explosion. Sure, some battery failure states are violent and would unquestionably be a cause for an airplane to call a mayday and land, but something like puncturing a soft-cell battery is still a slower release than TNT.
We should just expect people to get better at understanding useful units — I'd prefer someone learns Wh since it is indeed a useful metric—kWh is the usual major unit of energy at home, and Wh is just smaller than that.
I was trying to guesstimate a theoretical upper-bound on the damage. Looking at youtubes online, it seems a labtop battery explosion is still scary and more like a handful of firecrackers than TNT, but what actually seems worse is that the explosion is followed by the labtop being on fire and producing subsequent smaller explosions. So the worse case is that the fire ignites other stuff in the plane, which includes other lithium batteries.
I would like to see more DF on HN. The something rotten in Cupertino was a shattering post—people in my circle who do not read DF were discussing and sending it around, and I work at a place where so many dang people read HN. So I agree with Gruber’s concern.
To be clear though it is not some backend thing by dang etc. but rather users with enough reputation to get the flag button are flagging your posts just because they don’t like you. That is the likeliest explanation.
But the only post on the recent submissions list that is actually marked "[flagged] is this one. If it's because enough high-karma users are clicking "flag", wouldn't they all show up as "flagged"?
The only explanation I have heard that makes sense is: The [flagged] tag only appears after a certain threshold amount of user-flags, however each user-flag contributes to the down-weight of the story.
So if the [flagged] threshold is 10 user-flags, then 9 people can flag the article, burying it, and then only at the next user-flag, [flagged] shows up in the title.
Of course, nobody but HN staff truly knows if this is how it works.
That may be right. Unfortunately, while I have seen Wikipedia articles on HN, my memory is not sharp enough to recall for how long they stuck around on the front page.
Well, if John is correct, it's not too surprising that it is flagged...
I've noticed that being critical of Musk or Trump is a flag-magnet as well.. I guess either the owners of the site are cough "free-speech absolutists" or there's some concerted effort to prevent criticism of them - the former seems a lot more likely.
Do signs point toward Apple adopting a unique, new cell chemistry for what will be their high-volume budget product for the next few years? It would have probably been a marketing line if so, similar to the C1 modem. A bigger battery doesn't imply new tech.
(Yes, the phone expensive now, but these SE-tier phones typically get discounts pretty quickly after release through carriers/non-apple retail; and then a bigger & formal sale price decrease when the next phone generation comes out.)
The overlap of the “cares about battery chemistry” and “purchases the lowest tier device” is probably close to 0
The C1 modem gets a line because Wall Street has seen that expense for a decade now, so this is a “win” for them. Battery chemistry is completely 3rd party, so they’ll claim the battery life improvement
The C1 modem is also not a feature that users care about, other than the increased battery life (that Apple does advertise). In fact, there will be concerns that the modem isn't as good as the existing ones in some edge case.
Putting the new modem into the new "budget" phone reduces expectations so that the impact of any issues will be blunted. Only when all the problems have been ironed out, that will be when the mainstream iPhones will get the new modem.
This era of new experimental apps from Apple (Invites, Journal, Sports) has me excited about the future of app design. Vibrant colors, bold personality-driven typography, etc. The SwiftUI style onboarding screen that features the carousel is really fun. This approach feels very Apple'y, but gives me more freedom to explore designs for my own app to have its own unique voice on iOS, while still feeling in-family with Apple's other more experimental UI.
There are a few misses.
- I already declined a friend's invite, but that doesn't get auto filtered away, so my "decline" is still the primary thing the app has to show me. It's still my only invite, so maybe it gets filtered to the back of the card stack if there are multiple?
- I also don't seem to be able to see friends I know who were invited to the party (but have not yet responded). Perhaps it was because it was shared as an invite URL in a group chat rather than manually inviting everyone?
The lag between OTA broadcast and cable/streaming is insanely bad. We had several screens tuned in to World Cup, and the group watching the OTA broadcast would cheer 15-20 seconds before the cable/streaming screens would. Knowing it exists is one thing, but seeing it in that manner puts it on a whole other level
We used to use that to our advantage; put the radio on the ballgame, put the TV on MLB.TV, and if something exciting happened we could get over to the TV in time to watch it.
What's annoying is when you get an out-of-bound popup while you're trying to watch the game! I don't want to know that "opposing team hit a grand slam" whilst I'm watching the pitcher at 3-2 and bases loaded.
Where do you come up with 3 seconds when I said 15-20 seconds later?
The World Cup I was referring to was the infamous match where a player received 3 yellow cards, and the delay from cable was so long that the OTA viewers (a Spanish language broadcast) had time to come running in to ask if that made any more sense in English. But the English broadcast had not yet seen it.
It was just bizarre. It's negative because it's annoying AF. But since you want to minimize things by making up numbers to attempt to make a point instead of accepting the provided information, there's no way we'll ever see eye to eye.
3 seconds would not matter to me. As it is, latencies are much higher and afford time for my family group chat (WhatsApp) to "spoil" events that I have not yet seen. I don't want to ignore the chat. :(
This is really exciting—the 12-32b size range has my favorite model size on my home computer, and the mistrals have been historically great and embraced for various fine-tuning.
At 24b, I think this has a good chance of fitting on my more memory constrained work computer.
It's also just harder to support because of the sheer fragmentation.
I give my engineers different Android phones as their primary development devices and yet the weird Android issues that keep cropping up are near constant.
This is difficult, because the mess that is mobile(?) (Android?) development could be better in general, but that also sounds like your software just is poorly designed...
When it's a "works for me" on one platform but falls over with different hardware, that usually points to some serious issues (e.g. threading, contention, false assumptions) in your code/app.
Not to say that there probably aren't buggy areas in Android itself, however with an appropriate test budget you could determine which are likely hardware (different phones) vs OS (common across devices, with simple repro apps) vs your software (you have bugzorz).
In our case, the weird Android issues we encountered a lot lately has been due to the Jetpack Compose’s bugs. It’s amazing how buggy that framework is.
This has the potential to damage safety-critical sensors used in backup cameras or autonomous vehicles—and, obviously, inflicts damage on personal property like smartphones.
Volvo even states online that their sensors can damage cameras: https://www.volvocars.com/uk/support/car/ex90/article/47d2c9...