Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | SteveNuts's comments login

Libel as a Service.


True, I wonder if the cladding could have flanges on the backside that could be bolted/welded though, which would by invisible from the outside of the vehicle

I think the surfaces are mated on the edges, there would be a bend on the edges if you were to install a flange there. That would probably look weird. It's cold rolled steel which has nice properties but makes it difficult to install flanges. It's a hard look to achieve which makes it technically impressive but does require such compromises such as using glue.

While I don't like the Cyber Truck design aesthetically or technically the manufacturing techniques used to create it are impressive. I do wonder if the manufacturing was done this way to have an option to make cheap military vehicles at scale, like how VW factories are now considering being repurposed to produce military vehicles.

Personally the Toyota Hilux Champ 2.4L diesel is more my speed.


>It's cold rolled steel which has nice properties but makes it difficult to install flanges.

I know nothing about materials science, but I'm curious if it could then be stamped at the corners/edges to create some sort of surface that could be used to attach using rivets/weld/bolts


I think it would be hard to do that and keep the aesthetics - there would be a curve on the edge wherever the stamping is done. Glue is a workaround that has it's own tradeoffs but is not without president.

> I do wonder if the manufacturing was done this way to have an option to make cheap military vehicles at scale

... I mean, while it would be very _funny_, I'm not sure that there's much market for self-disassembling tanks.


I think due to drones there will be a trend towards very lightly armored vehicles that spend most of their time loitering with short periods of shoot-and-scoot. When even tanks can be destroyed by drones it doesn't make much sense to keep pursing stronger, heavier, and more expensive armor.

The versatility of the CyberTruck manufacturing chain would make it pretty easy to pump out many variants for different roles and easily change the variants as tactics progress.


Microsoft and Azure, Bing, Office 365

Amazon (the retailer portion) and AWS, and probably their logistics wing


For AWS we should split the platform and the managed services (no one should have to compete with "the platform". See elasticsearch, redis).

This also works for Amazon retail, they should not be allowed to sell on their own marketplace (they have to choose, they are either a marketplace or a seller)


I've always thought is should be Azure, Office and XBox, and each should get their own copy of Windows that they could focus on different things while still being largely compatible. Don't know if XBox could survive on it's own.

This would kill xbox

Xbox has been nothing more than a budget, low-spec, walled in gaming PC for about 1.5 console generations. It no longer has exclusive games, and the hardware (console and peripherals) are mediocre.

(PlayStation is almost in the same boat, except they have significant sales in regions where PC gaming is much smaller than in the US.)


Xbox has killed Xbox... have you not seen the sad state of affairs there for, I don't know, the past generation or two of consoles?

I don't disagree with your sentiment, other than the fact that it isn't literally dead… yet.

Xbox is now a cross platform brand, and arguably bigger on PC than in the console market.

Huh, why? Xbox is a great example of a business unit that should be self-sustainable.

Not that it matters.,Microsoft has done a spectacular job of killing Xbox even with its ability to sustain setting money on fire for the past decade. Xbox has been an unmitigated disaster since Xbox One.


None of those are owned by Google

And? We were talking about other businesses that should be split up in addition to Google. It would be weird if the only answers were Google-owned ventures...

Not in the context of my question. You are welcome to start your own comment thread.

The US hasn’t been isolationist since WW2, quite the opposite once we were relatively unscathed by the conflict and rose to the worlds #1 military superpower.

"Since"? US was isolationist for a large part of the war. It's their underlying policy. Sure they do sometimes deploy to get oil from the middle east and such, but that is quite different. As was the whole libya thing, concerned about the gold dinar, not some leader figure.

It seems to me Trump is following the logic that the current danger to the US is China, not Russia. Approaching Russia may be a strategy to ensure China and Russia (and maybe all BRICS) are not aligned against the US. He probably believes that Europe is not a threat, and won't become one even when the US behave in ways that go against its interests (Which I would say is correct).

I have to say that while that world view may be misguided, and certainly is not a worldview Europeans would agree with, it is nonetheless a rational view, and is almost certainly correct in that Russia alone is not a serious threat to the US, and won't be in the medium term at least (it can barely win in Ukraine, to think it could win against NATO and then go on to take the US is just delusional).


There is absolutely no rational reason for the US to align itself with Russia at the cost of its relationship with Europe.

In my experience Samba is just a slow protocol due to its chattiness.


Samba is not a protocol. It's an implementation of dozens of services and a dozen protocols, including SMB (Server Message Block).


This is just wrong. Tuned properly SMB is much faster than SFTP.


Frustrating that the US will still apply income tax even if you're working abroad (I want to say over $130k/yr, but that could be wrong)


It does but most western countries have a double-tax agreement with the US so you won't end up paying any tax to the US


> the chronic inflammation that is patriarchal domination via semi-martial law

What does this mean?


> The Go crowd, like the Rust crowd, likes to advertise the language their software is written in.

Probably because end users appreciate that usually that means a single binary + config file and off you go. No dependency hell, setting up third party repos, etc.


> Probably because end users appreciate that usually that means a single binary + config file and off you go. No dependency hell, setting up third party repos, etc.

Until you have to use some plugin (e.g. cloudflare to manage DNS for ACME checks), now it's exactly "dependency hell, setting up third party repos, etc."

I also fully expect to see a few crashes from unchecked `err` in pretty much any Go software. Also, nginx qualifies for `single binary + config`, it's just NGINX is for infra people and Caddy is for application developers.


Fortunately I don't think any of that applies to Rust ;-)


Actually, all of it applies to rust. The only stable ABI in Rust is C-ABI and IMO at that point it stops being rust. Even dynamically loading rustlib in rust application is unsafe and only expected to work when both compiled with the same version. In plugins context, it's the same as what Caddy making you do.

However, Rust Evangelical Strike Force successfully infiltrated WASM committee and when WASM Components stabilize, it can be used for plugins in some cases (see Zed and zellij). (Go can use them as well, rust is just the first (only?) to support preview-2 components model.


Yeah, I don't really do dynamic loading in my corner of Rust. And I can always target some MSRV, cargo package versions, and be happy with it. Definitely beats the dependency hell I've had to deal with elsewhere


Don't get me wrong, I love rust and use it almost every day. Doing `cargo run` in a project it handles everything is good. This gets lost once you start working in a plugin context. Because now you're not dealing in your neatly organized workplace, you're working across multiple workplaces from different people.

IIRC it's more than just MSRV or even matching version exactly. It also requires flags that were used to compile rustc match (there is an escape hatch tho).


> Our investigation is still in progress with regard to deprecated functionality for Slack features such as workflows, threads, sending messages and API-related features.

I'm not sure what their status page is talking about, is sending messages a deprecated slack feature?


Pretty sure that's a typo for "degraded". But it's funny.


And someone, somewhere, has further mangled "deprecated" into "depreciated" when reading it aloud, I'm fairly certain.


Me! I'm the notorious mangler!

Just kidding. But there was a sizable fraction of time where I really hadn't heard the word "deprecated" and read it mentally as "depreciated" like an asset.


What do you mean messaging has been depressed?


Yes, it's been replaced by an LLM.


Their status updates look clearly like AI-generated blurbs saying the same thing with varied phrasing, hour after hour. Thanks for the slop? I know writing status page updates is annoying, but “a human is paying attention to this” is the specific thing that status updates are trying to convey, so trying to get info from this page felt dispiriting today.

Edit: this would also explain why some details of the updates were nonsensical.


>but I've had to bring it in a couple of times for updates to safety systems.

Personally I'm completely fine with that, anything with the ECU/lower level safety control-by-wire systems should not be accessible to the OTA system.

It's only a matter of time until hackers remotely shut down cars and cause chaos though.


https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-hig...

It is, in fact, a matter of ten years ago that hackers were able to remotely shut down a moving vehicle


Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

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

Search: