> This plane cannot be used on any route longer than about ~200 miles. Which can be driven in 2 hours.
Huh, perhaps then it wouldn’t be suited to places where people drive at that speed. In the US I doubt people drive 200 miles routinely in 2 hours. It would be closer to 3.5 h I think going by the routine 6 h it takes SF to LA which is about 350 mi.
I think if you have very high speed road/rail transportation that dominates this across fixed routes. Road at 100 mph average definitely wins for flexibility.
There's a small but real market for < 120mile flights where geography makes a road between the two destinations impossible. "Puddle jumpers" is the standard term.
However, the real market is for connecting flights to nearby small cities. For a transfer, you're already at the airport, you're already through security and you don't have your car. I'd never fly from Ottawa to Montreal (200km), but I do that flight quite regularly when I'm going to Europe.
Okay, well, that seems like a natural problem. I could understand if he went from one of the Gemini Flashes to the next (when they rebranded Flash to Flash Lite and came up with a new much more expensive Flash). Now that would be a mess.
The street conditions on Market St. are awful for bicycles though. I've biked that route very often and it was always a jangle machine. Now I have a trail bike with big tires and suspension and that's much nicer on it with the added bonus that I won't fit in the rails like that poor girl who died a couple of weeks ago on the scooter.
I think whoever the bike lobby is (SFBC?), they've succeeded in making things much more bicycle friendly than they used to be. Valencia, and even the new Folsom bike lanes are pretty cool. The Howard lanes are not so great but the fact that they exist is fantastic. The fact that the bike infrastructure is better in places where people didn't live (Treasure Island, the newer Mission Bay areas) points to the primary constraint here, I think, which is that most San Franciscans would prefer to keep things as they are. A city's ability to adapt to these things is mostly a function of its population age distribution and SF is mostly older people and few children and optimizes for that population primarily.
I remember I found an old video I took on a Sony action cam (useless device, it fogs up) and while all these places are still pretty bad, nearby Alemany does have green paint which is better than nothing. https://youtu.be/cYoJ4S7G5tc?t=98
Seems tough. The Ikea Saluhall is not far and since we live nearby we walk by[0] and it makes sense that that location lost many of its food places. There just isn't enough foot traffic. Alternative locations are much more popular. Stonestown is a much more popular mall for non-adults just because it's generally safer. For the SF Centre to become something like that it would require enforcement actions that I suspect would be unpopular in the city.
We were rescued from that dot org scam by the fact that ICANN is a California non profit. I wonder if the AG can lean on them again. This is an outrageous thing to do.
MagicMoonlight was [dead]ed for not knowing what "dot org scam" refers to. Since I can't reply there right now and it's not reasonable to expect everyone to know what this refers to:
ICANN, a 501(c)(3), proposed to remove the price cap on .org registration, commonly used for non profits, so PIR, the 501(c)(3) registrar for .org, could then announce it planned to sell .org operations to private equity investment firm Ethos Capital.
Thankfully the overwhelming response caused the proposal to be scrapped.
> MagicMoonlight was [dead]ed for not knowing what "dot org scam" refers to.
This is a very hn thing (shadow-banned accounts should not be able to comment though and should be treated differently than "dead" because I could see the comment). I was accused by a fellow hn'er just a few days back I was performing ignorance because I didn't know something very US specific legal term and had asked in a sub thread. Another person said I could just google that, or ask an AI.
Coming back to the scam - it's bizarre to think ICANN could begin to do that! TLDs are such a basic aspect of online identity today and just to think that an outrage, i.e an overwhelming response, caused the proposal to be scrapped, is unsettling.
I am not sure but we should rather move to something else or remove this power from such for profit companies or non-profits that often behave worse than for profits, or at the behest of them.
I wonder how long that'll last. If the regulators in Califonrnia keep forcing them to act in the public's interest, won't they just move to a more favorable jurisdiction?
This crossed my mind too. At least such a move could serve as an indication to the international community that ICANN is not a good steward of name and number resources. If they're paying attention. I know our (the US) governance is full of crap like this.
Mail in ballots don’t get rid of secrecy, unless the system has been tampered with, which you could also do with illegal cameras at in-person voting etc. Anonymous envelope-within-envelope is a pretty standard way to keep secrecy, and many states do it, like mine.
Is that really a problem? Since there will be lots of evidence and criminals tend to fuck up quite a bit this should be well documented. Unless you think that those election fraudsters that buy tons of votes from civilians have better opsec than drug dealers and the like.
Haha, entirely my fault but the default font greys out the text so I always just click through to the site instead of reading the Launch HN / Show HN copy. Regardless, I will take my well-deserved brickbats.
The path to RonanRx is fairly unconventional. During the pandemic, I built one of the largest mask manufacturing factories in the US. We could make a million masks in a day. We converted raw polypropylene pellets into finished pallets of masks.
You know what I'm curious about? Whether you have brand guidelines inside the company, a Claude skillset, or the blog post author makes the charts in line with the brand colours and so on.
Ah thanks for the solid info, too bad. I'd seen them come up as a pretty good price for 6000 RTX's in the past, which seem generally pretty available, good source for those?
Yeah, they're good source. But the price for those GPUs is 5 figs even with the nvidia startup program nowadays. Also, I went back and looked. Most of my GPUs are actually from Central Computers who were great, but Exxact is real too. So "lots of" was inaccurate.
Also, the lead time I quoted was for individual 8x nodes.
Huh, perhaps then it wouldn’t be suited to places where people drive at that speed. In the US I doubt people drive 200 miles routinely in 2 hours. It would be closer to 3.5 h I think going by the routine 6 h it takes SF to LA which is about 350 mi.
I think if you have very high speed road/rail transportation that dominates this across fixed routes. Road at 100 mph average definitely wins for flexibility.
reply