That said, metacritic and Opencritic Gave Mina the same score. So… Regardless of where you look, the outcome is essentially the same.

Yeah, a general understanding is enough. But I think yeah, actually skim over the code, at least get a basic idea about how the internal methods work. Depending on what you’re using the library for, it could be prudent to know more about how data structures are handled.

Honestly, you’ll probably learn something in the process.

Maybe if instead of pegs they used little wheels you could turn revealing 1 color at a time. Everything built in, no parts to lose.

Think of the game “guess who”, you just flip the portraits down, but they stay attached, that’s the design philosophy to match.

Also, there are definitely mastermind mobile games. I actually really like a deductive mobile game called “crossme”.

That’s fair, I made an assumption there. I’ll just delete the comment.

deleted by creator

Seriously, that’s is the actual alternative. It’s not theoretical - people are definitely buying (and they pay better).

Has Microsoft forgotten why they do these bug bounties? This is why. Because if they don’t pay, other people will. They’re actively turning the white hats into grey and black hats, selling to intelligence agencies and criminals instead of responsible disclosing.

This is on them.

I don’t like to use libraries I don’t understand. Probably part why I’m not a professional developer, but it’s the principle of the thing - don’t put out code you can’t vouch for.

I mean, yes, it’s way easier to just use the library, trust it works; but by that logic, it’s also way easier to just let an llm code for you.

Well, I think it’s legit to use software without understanding the code or use hardware without understanding the specifics of the logical mechanisms of the silicon. But when you’re writing software, you really should know what’s in your own code. Anything else is bad form in my opinion.

the Java developer said that Anthropic’s Claude AI code tool flagged the malicious instruction without following it.

Darn. So how do you beat Claude these days?

Well it did a simulated landing in the sea. (And then exploded)

We know that was the plan all along and that it landed on target because there was a camera buoy sitting in the ocean waiting to record the landing. Which it did.

Yeah they blew an engine, but that’s kinda what redundancy is all about.

Do you know how many times the Saturn V had to make early shutdowns on one of its engines? It’s easier to say how many times it didn’t have early shutdowns: 0. On every single launch they had to shut off at least 1 engine early as the combustion became unstable; this is just part of the game.

Attacked? No this post alone doesn’t make me feel attacked.

Though it’s about weekly that we see a post saying essentially “there’s no reason anyone should still be using Plex…”, or “jellyfin is superior to plex because of x and y”. And honestly, it’s tiring and it feels forced. Like if jellyfin were so perfect, would it really need this many posts propping it up?

Anyway, what bugged me about this post was the level of smugness. “Does Plex even count as self hosting?”, “is this really in the spirit of the community?”… God damn, that sounds like the least bearable person in the homeowners association.

I’m going to shame people for using something that used to work well. This will help me by making me feel superior, and it will help others by shaming them. What a good idea I’ve had!

Oh yeah, I mean all of the wind’s energy comes from solar heating. If you want to point a finger, it’s the sun’s fault.

I mean that’s not super helpful, but that is definitely the source of the energy.

Yep, it looks like that new much larger downcomer may really be the thing to thank, now they can actually feed all those engines fast enough.

Pulling out is super easy. Just don’t release a compromised version of the app. Done.

If the app in its current form doesn’t comply with Canadian law, then the play store can’t legally distribute it. So, problem solved.

So basically Signal can pull out of Canada by doing nothing different than they’re already doing.

As for the users who already have the app installed, well that’s just too bad for the Canadian government isn’t it.

Yeah they also lost a sea level raptor on the booster towards the end of the accent. That’s honestly not a big deal, losing 1/28 engines at a point in the flight when they’re already probably throttling down a bunch.

But still, they’ve got some kinks to work out with the raptor 3.

That said, did you see how much faster it left the launch pad? They’ve seriously increased the thrust with these new raptors.

I believe the expression is:

I hear you that such a large rocket is not “needed” very often, but it can still be used. I believe the plan is to ramp down falcon 9 production and go to starship launches for everything, even smaller payloads, simply because it’s cheaper and more sustainable. As long as they launch regularly, the price should still be lower than falcon 9. And at least on paper, it is more sustainable, burning methane results in cleaner exhaust than burning kerosene, the only major exhaust products are CO2 and water. And not letting an upper stage burn up or fall into the ocean is an ecological plus too.

but it also requires a much larger space economy.

…

In this world, starship is a waste of time and money.

Well I don’t think I agree with these statements at all. The thing is, if/when they get starship to work, not only will it be able to lift significantly more mass to orbit than the falcon 9, it will likely be cheaper per launch. Not cheaper per kg to orbit, but cheaper overall than launching a falcon 9 (remember, they need to build a new falcon second stage for each launch). That is such a significant improvement that I’d argue that its development is totally worthwhile even if the demand for launches were to stay stagnant.

And honestly, we definitely need some heavy lift rocket. The Saturn V doesn’t exist anymore and the SLS is… economically unrealistic.

Well I think you’re not exactly wrong, the idea to do starlink was definitely about their rockets, but I’d say it was clearly more about falcon 9 than about starship or jump-starting a bigger satellite industry.

First off, starlink works, it’s essentially done and it never used the starship to get its satellites to orbit. So in that light, it clearly wasn’t about starship because it didn’t use it (though it surely will at some point).

But you can just look at what they did with the falcon 9 to see that this was really the reason behind starlink. The thing is, they were designing this reusable rocket and it had never been done before. As a result nobody thought it would work. Nobody trusted it, nobody wanted to put their payload on a rocket they didn’t trust, and no banks would insure these payloads as they had low expectations for success. As a result, spaceX could build a reusable booster, but they couldn’t get anyone to buy it.

SpaceX was basically left with 2 options: They could continue to launch rockets with no real payload to prove the reliability of their reused boosters, essentially wasting a whole bunch of launches. Or they could create their own payloads to launch, accept the risk themselves, demonstrate that the reusable boosters worked fine, and not waste every launch.

The advantage of taking that second option was that they could continue to iterate and make constant changes and upgrades to their rocket. Normally, making big changes would put your vehicle back into the “untested and untrusted” category, but if they continued to have their own payloads to put up, they could continue to demonstrate its reliability.

I will say though, I think starship is absolutely about jump-starting a larger space industry. I think completely reusable rockets are a necessary first step to any larger, more permanent utilization of space.