I don't think it's a money thing really. IIRC the regular XZ creator/maintainer had a regular job and enough money already, and it was more of a burnout thing from dealing with the usual hassles of OSS. Which means what it really needs is to be taken over by an actual business organization, with a team of developers and professional project managers and customer support people etc so no one person gets too burnt out and if anyone does, they have plenty of backup.

If you wrote a science fiction novel around the idea that we make computing devices by blasting fine drops of tin in a vacuum with a laser exactly 3 times at exactly 100,000 drops per second, nobody would believe it. Truth is crazier than fiction.

What's even crazier is the technological pursuit of EUV and what a moonshot it was. Chip wars by chris miller chronicles it and it is absolutely crazier than sci fi.

Why not lean into it instead of becoming a wet blanket? Just look at the trench every few hours or so, and if it gets too deep, tell them about and help them with setting up some shoring.

That's what it means to mitigate the hazard, right?

This gets near something I was thinking about. Most of the numbers seem to assume that injuries, injury severity, and deaths are all some fixed proportion of each other. But is that really true in the context of self-driving cars of all types?

It seems reasonable that the deaths and major injuries come highly disproportionally from excessively high speed, slow reaction times at such speeds, going much too fast for conditions even at lower absolute speeds. What if even the not very good self-driving cars are much better at avoiding the base conditions that result in accidents leading to deaths, even if they aren't so good at avoiding lower-speed fender-benders?

If that were true, what would that mean to our adoption of them? Maybe even the less-great ones are better overall. Especially if the cars are owned by the company, so the costs of any such minor fender-benders are all on them.

If that's the case, maybe Tesla's camera-only system is fairly good actually, especially if it saves enough money to make them more widespread. Or maybe Waymo will get the costs of their more advanced sensors down faster and they'll end up more economical overall first. They certainly seem to be doing better at getting bigger faster in any case.

The best way to understand why it isn't widespread is to spend 10 minutes attempting to use it to actually chat with some people you know. I don't know which issues you'll run into, but it's virtually guaranteed you'll run into a variety of incredibly dumb and inexplicable ones.

Have you checked whether the work laptop's bad battery life is due to the OS, or due to the mountain of crapware security and monitoring stuff that many corporations put on all their computers?

I currently have a M3 Pro for a work laptop. The performance is fine, but the battery life is not particularly impressive. It often hits low battery after just 2-3 hours without me doing anything particularly CPU-intensive, and sometimes drains the battery from full to flat while sitting closed in a backpack overnight. I'm pretty sure this is due to the corporate crapware, not any issues with Apple's OS, though it's difficult to prove.

I've tended to think lately that all of the OSes are basically fine when set up reasonably well, but can be brought to their knees by a sufficient amount of low-quality corporate crapware.

I think a VPN likely hurts more than it helps. Maybe they can't tell your IP address anymore, but they have a ton of ways of tracking through it anyways. It probably hurts more by marking you as someone willing to shell out too much money for snake-oil security products.

Lol. I use a vpn every day to access geofenced content abroad. It also provides extra layer of anonymity by giving you a different address which is the same for everyone going through that server. Which was what the question was about. Other types of tracking can be mitigated on your end.

It's only discussed in a similarly ambiguous way - like that they know noise is a potential problem that they're working on. Though to be fair, the designers probably have no idea themselves, since apparently nobody has built a prototype engine that could be run at the rated thrust level in a way they could check the real-world noise and vibration on.

I would assume that these days you can simulate that increasingly accurately before you need a full-scale prototype.

They could also use active noise cancellation, which is already used in some turboprops like the Q400.

I have a feeling it's too little, too late, even if it's completely true and sincere, which I doubt at this point.

I can't help but wonder if they're in the process of losing an entire generation of tech enthusiasts to Linux and maybe MacOS. And the rest of the world tends to slowly follow the tech enthusiasts.

I don't think I'd want to take much from such a statistical result yet. A sample size of 1 accident just isn't enough information to get a real rate from, not that I want to see more collisions with children. Though this is also muddied by the fact that Waymo will most likely adjust their software to make this less likely, and we won't know exactly how or how many miles each version has. I'd also like to see the data for human incidents over just the temperate suburban areas like Waymo operates in.