Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | mastax's commentslogin

That’s like saying the solution to cigarettes is that tobacco shops must be forced to sell clove cigarettes as a not-addictive alternative.


I was just looking at these funny parts: https://www.vicorpower.com/products?productType=cfg&productK...

130A, 48V -> 1.2V @ 94% efficiency! Except:

- $100 ea.

- Fixed 1/40 voltage ratio, regulation done by upstream regulator.

- Look at the minimum specs for efficiency…


This is a very strange part, what with the upstream regulator circuit.

My guess is that their efficiency stats dont include losses in the upstream regulator.

100 usd per unit doesnt seem that excessive.


Language changes could help for sure. There’s a library implementation we can use right now though: https://facet.rs/ Basically a derive macro for reflection. Yeah it’s one (more) trait to derive on all your types but then users can use that to do reflection or pretty printing or diffing or whatever they want.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZL_M-15_Belphegor

The M-15 is still uglier. Also intended as a cropduster, though unlike the AirTruk it was really bad at that job in every way.


You are off your rocker dude; the Belphegor is weird, but certainly not ugly. You want certified ugly? You'll find it under the synonym DFW T.28 Floh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFW_Floh


I dunno about ugly, I'd call it a "Chibi Biplane".


Looks like a sun fish.


here is a great video documentary on the m-15

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlyO9cJ8hiQ (Alexander the ok: PZL Mielec M-15: One of the Aircraft of All Time)


I have a lot of fondness for the AN-2 that this airplane aimed to replace.

That is, as well, an ugly plane, but once I parachuted out of one a couple of times, it grew on me.


I'll raise you the Blackburn B-54 [0] and the Fairey Gannet [1].

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackburn_B-54

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Gannet



I think this one is winning the inverse beauty contest.

It looks like it really wants to scoop up a large amount of plankton mid-cruise.


See also the Caproni Transaero, which isn't totally ugly but is messy in a "maybe more wings is better? some pushing engines at the back?" kind of way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caproni_Ca.60


> pushing engines at the back

Weird aircraft with a pusher engine? Curtiss-Wright XP-55 Ascender, right this way:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss-Wright_XP-55_Ascender

(and check out the list of similar aircraft)


I had a bloody die-cast toy of that as a kid for some reason, I thought it was just a fake plane they'd invented to justify a toy!


Fairey who also came up with the Rotodyne, a cool part-plane, part-helipcoter, part-autogyro:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Rotodyne

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkJOm1V77Xg - video by 'Mustard'


The fairy gannet looks like two smaller airplanes clipping into each other. It looks like an AI from ten years ago generated an image of an airplane. It looks like they hired engineers who got their degrees in Kerbal Space Program and then paid them by the hour. "Even if it's broke, it doesn't have enough features yet."

The Belphegor is still uglier though.


Now that I googled more pictures of it, I agree, the one in Wikipedia is obviously it's most flattering angle, looks almost... Rutanesque.

This photo though, I see what you mean.

https://old.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/z3envi/the_pzl_m1...




Yeah, bless the Nimrod AEW, WORST RHINOPLASTY EVER.


Yeah they improved it on the AEW, looks far less bubonic.


I was half expecting to see the SNECMA C-450 'Coléoptère' in the article, with its office-tea-trolley wheels:

https://altitudepost.com/the-plane-without-wings-what-happen...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coleopter


I don't know, it's kinda slick looking - if you ignore the pylons.


That image made me smile. Yeah, it would be bad at being a plane with poles attached to it like that. I'll see myself out now


Was the Nuscale cost estimate somehow worse than AP1000 or EPR(2)? That seems very unlikely to me given the history of those programs.


Out of all the SSO login flows Microsoft has to have the buggiest. It’s the only one I can remember routinely having issues with. Why are there so many redirects? And why doesn’t the “remember me” checkbox ever work?


It is also the only SSO flow I have ever seen that fundamentally cannot work if you have more than one account remembered on your device. So far the only way I’ve found to get it to let you log out of account A and then log into account B is to clear all cookies otherwise it gives you permission denied errors. Have no idea how it can be this horrible


Yeah I have had this experience too. Woe betide ye if your company gets bought by another company with pre-existing Azure AD.


Would container tabs solve that? They're pitched as helping separate work and personal logins.


I just run completely separate browser profiles to separate work and personal stuff. And I still sometimes need private mode or a throwaway profile to get some random thing to work.


I use temporary-containers on firefox and they are a marvel for working with microsoft's stuff, which absolutely doesn't anticipate two accounts working on one browser.

Of course "open in incognito mode" works for this as well, just less automatic.


I am not sure how, but at one point even private browser mode would still have me logged in to Entra ID. Couldn’t log out of main browser and same session would follow me to private.


Firefox's? Yep. Edge's? Bloody hell no.


I haven't seen it in a while (perhaps mostly because I'm in Google stuff way less than I used to be) but for years multiple Google sites would get in a state where its auth would route me through about twenty redirects in a loop and never actually finish authenticating me. Clearing cookies and re-logging-in from scratch was the only fix.

Youtube was always involved, somehow, for some reason, even when what I was doing wasn't connected to Youtube at all or the account I was using had never even been intentionally used with Youtube. It'd route me through a few Youtube domain names.

(Microsoft's is indeed even worse, on some of theirs [Azure Devops, looking at you] I can't use them in pinned tabs because somehow they manage to get into a totally broken state where the page won't load due to whatever's happening with their auth flow in the background, and no method of reloading the tab fixes it, and it does this every couple days—but copy-pasting the same URL to a new tab does work)


And then sometimes the "switch user" prompt doesn't work but it automatically logs you in with the wrong account to a system that account doesn't have access to, then drops you in a non-interactive "you're not authorized" screen. You have to find a working page, log out, then go back and try logging in...


I've always assumed the billions of redirects are setting cookies so all the various systems "work" but I have given up trying to understand it.


Why, 20% when logging in, do I actually get logged out? I'm sorry if I was already logged in, why the hell are you asking me to log in again?

Having Microsoft on your resume is a huge red flag.


Speaking of redirects, I haven't been able to use Outlook 365 in Firefox for years – every single time I get redirect after redirect, only to then end up on yet another log-in screen. Meanwhile, in Chromium-based browsers everything works fine.


It is still like this? I remember it being terrible trying to log into xbox.com 15 years ago.


Remember me checkbox is the biggest lie. Okta is the same. I want to cry every time I see that login screen. It's few times a day. #security


Ah so it’s not just me and my company!


The modern Atari has no relation to the original Atari. They’re essentially copyright trolls. I do not believe we owe them any moral obligation for the works they bought from the original Atari via a series of many intermediaries.


Uniqlo offers a few 3D knit items, I’ve been meaning to try them out. Pretty basic styles though.


Only 92 of the 842 peers are hereditary currently, so it’s not really necessary to convince them to agree; the deal only needs to be seen as fair enough by the other peers. Or really, it only needs to be seen as fair enough to the House of Commons.


> Only 92 of the 842 peers are hereditary currently, so it’s not really necessary to convince them to agree;

As I understand it, it was necessary (in order to pass the bill without the delay the Lords can impose) to secure a deal on the hereditary peers (not with them), because the Conservatives (the largest Lords faction) and many of the cross-benchers among the life peers, a sufficient number in total to delay the bill (the Lords can't actually block it permanently) oppose the bill, not just a group among the existing hereditary peers.


I assume the TensTorrent TT-Ascalon is one of the CPU designs.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: