clothes

I won't be using these features, but I'm not sure there's cause for concern. The implementation seems very sensible and legitimately privacy-centric. The LLM runs locally and is meant as an very basic email proofreader. The crypto wallet is a likely an extension of the password management tech they've already developed, with transaction features that some people care about.

I can see why some people want these features, and I'm glad there are new alternatives.

What a weird situation. I suppose it's nice those workarounds exist, even if they're not ideal.

Interesting! I assume it involves a smart plug and an automation script that monitors battery level?

Wow, Graphene really doesn't have charging limits?

I assume this is the discussion you referred to, and I think it broke my trust in the project.

Edit: As far as I can tell, many of the frustrating parts of that thread are from random posters and not devs. I'm still annoyed that such a basic feature is considered controversial.

I expected to roll my eyes at this article but it's actually quite compelling and well written. The Kagi website's lack of nuanced privacy discussion already turned me off, and now I'm just going to pretend the service doesn't exist.

What scanners do people recommend?

Woah. I assume Thunderbolt will still have latency benefits. For example, we're not going to have wireless eGPUs, surely? I hope I'm wrong, because wireless PCIe lanes would be amazing.

It's worth pointing out that they're now a publicly traded company.

Just wait, soon we'll all be editing documents using tiny scalpels.

Yeah, the concrete storm wasn't great last time. They did have some engineering reasons to believe it would work for a single launch, but it seems like there was more subsurface damage to the concrete than they realized. As far as I know the only property that was significantly damaged was related to the company, but I'm sure there were some smaller residential insurance claims for the dust.

Part of the reason Saturday's launch was delayed was so that more environmental assessments could be performed. A few weeks ago there some government scientists taking samples at the launch site for a baseline measurement to compare against in the future, and the entire project was reviewed by environmental regulators. So, those agencies were very involved in approving the launch license and SpaceX can't just do whatever the owner wants them to. I guess my point is that it's not strictly PR-speak, there really are qualified people making these decisions. But I agree that it's not great to have the facility in the middle of a sensitive wetland, and no doubt there was backdoor politicking. I wish SpaceX would do more to offset the harm they cause, but I still think the StarShip project does more good than harm.

But isn't the key aspect here "orbit"? I get that the FTS would lengthen the trajectory of some of the debris, but would it be enough to create a stable orbit? The original trajectory was going to splashdown near Hawaii.

I certainly agree that there are lots of environmental downsides to space exploration that are increasingly overlooked, I'm just not sure that there's anything extra egregious about this flight.

They made a bunch of really cool changes to address the issues from last time, and they seem to have worked almost perfectly. For one, they built a giant water cooled steel plate under the launch mount (affectionately called the Booster Bidet), and the engineering behind it is pretty neat.