I would love it if was possible to download the rendered chart, ideally headless. In peak traffic I would prefer to switch to a pre-rendered version, have the pre-rendered version available encase of an error (i.e. data retrieval), or for users not using JS.
After the most minimal Google-foo, I see echarts-python [1] which has not been updated in 9 years. pyecharts [2] is looking pretty well maintained though.
Years ago I tried my hand at writing a simple bar/line plotting filter for Pandoc that embeds itself into documents via an SVG in a URI [3]. If HN is permitting, you can past links like so [4]. I think writing a stand-alone tool to display the data you are interested in is a good idea for anybody.
You can easily download a rendered chart by using the chart's getDataURL() function. Then just create a new element in your document and set that element's href to the return from getDataURL() and bob's your uncle.
Unfortunately it is not an April Fool's joke, but it should be.
> Donkey Kong champion wins defamation case against Australian YouTuber Karl Jobst
The title sounds as if he is still recognised as a Donkey Kong Champion, where clearly in the first sentence:
> A professional YouTuber in Queensland has been ordered to pay $350,000 plus interest and costs to the former world record score holder for Donkey Kong, after the Brisbane district court found the YouTuber had defamed him “recklessly” with false claims of a link between a lawsuit and another YouTuber’s suicide.
They describe him as a former world record score holder, but don't go as far as to state that it was revoked based on allegations of him cheating.
I don't think that Karl did $350k+ worth of damages to Billy, to be honest I wasn't really aware of the suicide allegation anyway.
Does anybody have materials regarding how you would go about writing an autorouter? I was thinking to maybe use something like this [0] as a starting point?
I have a few major nags about current autorouters:
1. No way to prioritise connections.
2. Handling of differential pairs or buses is terrible.
3. Does not use best practices for high-speed signal lines.
4. No way to add arbitrary rules to the autorouting process, i.e. block a trace from going through an area. For example, maybe you don't want a power trace being autorouted under your IMU, but some low voltage signals are fine.
I've use freerouting [1] in the past but it has a somewhat difficult time of being maintained. Freerouting seems to really struggle with larger designs, it seems to be greedily routing traces and spends ages trying to fix those early placed traces.
> Virtual machines still suck a lot of CPU and bandwidth for nothing but emulation. Containers in Linux with cgroups are still full of RCE (remote command execution) and priviledge escalation. New ones are discovered each year. The first report I got on those listed 10 or more RCE + PE (remote root on the machine). Remote root can also escape VMs probably also.
A proper virtual machine is extremely difficult to break out of (but it can still happen [1]). Containers are a lot easier to break out of. I virtual machines were more efficient in either CPU or RAM, I would want to use them more, but it's the worst of both.
If the Excel file is just a snapshot of the financial situation and it doesn't feed back into the main system, I find it harder to see the issue. Essentially it sounds like a manager takes the Excel file, makes some small changes, writes some equations, produces tables/graphs and then writes a report.
Maybe there is an error in the reporting, but it can always be corrected. The idea isn't to explain where $16.129626356 bn dollars went, it's to explain where ~$16 bn dollars went.
I can think of many processes just off the top of my head where commercial software outputs something like a CSV file, I add my data to it, then generate a report. I don't think the process is insane at all. We catch errors by predicting the data to be entered and flagging if off by 10%, and then also looking at the distribution of the data entered (it should look like a skewed bell curve). We then have a stand-up meeting where we review the outputs and then have a process for later correction. Of course it's possible for errors to creep in, but the errors are very unlikely and have somewhat limited scope.
My point is that the situation in NZ seems entirely resolvable, and they shouldn't just throw it out if it was somewhat working. The whole "Excel" thing seems like a nothing-burger.
If you spend a billion and a couple years redoing the generally working system to (maybe!) increase the number of significant digits on a dashboard for no good reason, you may have screwed up even more.
> The judges who provide the last, best hope of constraining the President and the richest man in the world face a historic wave of threats.
The role of the judges is not to contain the President. It's exactly this idea where each department think that it's their role to stop the President which has lost them their job. You cannot operate a government successfully where large parts of it are actively trying to sabotage you.
What President Trump is trying to achieve is to take politics out of the permanent unelected state. Additionally, at the same time he is trying to find cost savings, because US debt is out of control [1]. The UK [2] and many other Countries are in the same boat. US spending on national debt is about $1 trillion a year [3], and it raises about $4.4 billion a year in revenue [4]. This is okay, as long as the US maintains growth [5]. Encase it wasn't obvious by now, we are scheduled for a massive economic downturn, and it is extremely prudent to reduce spending so that the US can still afford interest payments.
> The role of the judges is not to contain the President.
The role of judges is to maintain the rule of law under the constitution. If the president is outside that, the role of judges is to contain the president, just as it is their role to contain anyone else who is outside it.
Sure, but there is a lot of interpretation to be done (hence the need for a judge) - and at the point where judges see their role as interpreting the law maximally in favour of stopping the president, then something is wrong.
>>Op argues that some idiot is trying to undo dept "Find cost savings" by posting graphs of same idiot pushing dept into explosive leaps higher during their previous term.
The US debt is out of control in large part from Trump himself. He cut taxes without cutting expenses. He needs to either put the taxes back, or cut something real (medicare, social security, military). And thats just to stop the bleeding.
But based on his current trajectory, hell continue his pennywise strategy and just like last time, will raise the debt more than his predecessor.
Simplistically it looks like that, but the US (or any other Country) never used to tax so much. The idea is to go back to a time of high GDP growth and lower taxes. Part of that is spending reduction (i.e. inspecting each arm of the government), and another part is growth hacking.
Another thing to remind ourselves of is that we don't want politicians to make decisions purely from market reactions to policy.
> The Boeing 737 MAX 8-200 had already descended to around 850ft (259m) when the disruption occurred. Instead of landing, the plane was forced to climb back into the sky and divert nearly 400km (250 miles) south to Warsaw, Poland. Lithuanian air authorities later confirmed the aircraft had been affected by "GPS signal interference".
GPS is incredibly flimsy. Normally it operates by taking the average of 1000 observations to generate a noisy signal. It's not that difficult to be louder than something shouting from space. You can pick up cheap GPS blockers easily about the size of a walkie-talkie (handheld radio).
> By carrying a group of atoms cooled to -273C on the plane itself, rather than relying on an external signal, the technology can't be interfered with by jamming.
Last year I was on a plane where if the engines were not running, it entirely went into darkness. They hooked the plane up to the airport and tripped the airport electrics too. Now imagine if your plane loses power momentarily, and suddenly your GPS stops working entirely.
> Henry White, part of the team from BAE Systems that worked on the test flight, told BBC News that he thought the first application could be aboard ships, "where there's a bit more space".
> Quantum clocks, gyroscopes and accelerometers are large, bulky and incredibly expensive, with an accurate quantum clock costing around £100,000. Yet military research is allowing the creation of smaller, better and cheaper systems.
Likely a minimum of 10 years from being viable. Mt White of BAE is politely saying as much.
Apparently they're not even export-protected, despite their obvious use in GPS validation schemes and in RTK.
> The SA.45s CSAC has an Export Commodity Control Number (ECCN) of EAR99. This means it is not ITAR-controlled and does not require a special license to ship to most nations. The SA.45s CSAC classification is controlled by the Bureau of Industrial Security (BIS) within the US Department of Commerce.
The article talks about quantum "optical clocks" but doesn't really explain the concept.
It’s true that optical clocks will improve the accuracy of our measurement of time, and it’s true that GPS depends on time, but there are several steps between primary frequency standards (ie, optical clocks) and GPS, and several more steps between GPS and navigation applications.
So optical clocks cannot, in fact, have any effect on the end-user perceived reliability of GPS.
For that, the best solution is to revive LORAN which is much less susceptible to jamming. (And would also benefit from better atomic clocks.)
You can do about 5x worse (in accuracy terms) than a Cesium clock in a smaller package using a rubidium atomic clock. Average ~4 of these and you get to the same accuracy as a cesium clock. They aren't export controlled because they aren't that special in terms of what you get.
To improve instrumental accuracy by 5x in a single dimension when fighting against random uncorrelated drift/noise, from what I recall of statistics you require 5^2 = 25x as many instruments.
Yeah, I think you're actually right. I was thinking you double them with 2 (experimentally), so you double that again to get 4x, but my curve was pretty off.
High quality dead reckoning over a long duration + an initial fix solves the reliable instantaneous absolute fix. So different technically but OP is correct it would be relevant to the problem of solving GPS jamming.
It absolutely does not. Dead reckoning has error that accumulates over time, and even "high-quality" dead reckoning will be beaten by a crappy GPS fix very quickly.
The dead reckoning I’m referring to (and I suspect op is too and seemingly you are as well), is the work being done by the military in the usage of submarines that stay submerged for extremely long periods of time. The error accumulated is many orders of magnitude less than traditional accelerometers + gyroscopes over the same time frame. The point is you can dead reckon within your error bounds even when GPS is unavailable and the accuracy from fusion will beat GPS by itself (not that that matters for the applications we’re discussing). For the duration of a flight it should be well within the capabilities of such sensors to dead reckon accurately from a last GPS fix before blackout and OP is correct this would be a complementary solution to more accurate clocks making it harder to jam GPS in the first place.
Indeed it’s being examined precisely for this application:
I don't really understand why the plane was diverted because GPS was jammed; I get that it's important for navigation, but not how it's required for landing when they're that close. There's (iirc) close range guidance systems, and of course visual ones (lamps, stripes, etc).
Not all types of approaches are available at all runways (or airports), and sometimes they are down for maintenance. Specific runways may be required due to wind, aircraft weight and runway condition and length. Most airlines ban "circling approaches" (using an approach to one runway end and then circling visually to land at a other) for safety reasons. ILS, which is probably the "close range guidance" you are thinking of, must be installed, maintained and calibrated individually per runway end. Visual aids cannot be used for approach if there is low cloud.
It is usual to be able to abort an approach and try again at the same airport using a different approach technology. But if the journalist wanted to find the most extreme example, it's not surprising that it happened at least once that an alternative wasn't available. This is probably "sampling bias"!
Note that final operational decisions are made by the aircraft commander. Aircraft do not "get diverted", except by decision of the "captain".
My understanding is it depends on the amount of visibility, plus what type of approach they were on. One type of approach, an ILS, has big radio transmitters pointing from the runway into the air and allows the plane (either pilots or autopilot) to get close enough to the runway without visibility, and with enough precision, to land. In many circumstances ILS isn't available and an alternative is Required Navigation Performance (RNP) which uses GPS plus a ton of other inputs to give some amount of precision to the same end. If they're on an RNP approach but suffer a reduction in navigation accuracy then I imagine it's a policy 'go-around'. Even if there's enough visibility it allows the pilots to brief a 'visual' approach before attempting it.
Considering it's below 1000 feet, losing GPS could indicate an "unstablized" approach and require a go-around, as opposed to losing it at a higher altitude where the pilot could have more time to safely switch to alternatives (other navigating aids or go to visual?).
Source: my guess after watching a lot of aviation YouTube videos......
For anybody who doesn't know, a "stabilized approach" is an approach with a constant angle and speed as the plane descends and lands. This allows the plane to keep consistent control settings (flaps, throttle, etc).
It's best practice/policy for all major airlines to use stabilized approaches and most/all require a go-around if the stabilized approach is interrupted (there are edge cases and exceptions).
Commercial air travel is very risk-averse. Best practice is that if something unexpected occurs, and you have plenty of fuel to spare, you go and and find someplace else to land.
Memes are shared because they are both funny and relatable, and get their message across concisely. In order for any joke to land, the audience has to already be somewhat receptive.
> These communities attribute social events to hidden plots and the manipulative power of a shadowy elite.
It's not a conspiracy, shadowy elites acting in groups with hidden agendas do exist everywhere. Just to pick one secretive group embedded everywhere with large amounts of power, the Masons [1]. From 1999 to 2009 in the UK it was required that Masons declared their membership if working in positions such as judges and police officers, with a concern that there would be bias. I think that people in these positions should have to declare all potential significant conflicts of interest. I have personally seen how Masons have financially favoured one another.
Secretive elite groups exist everywhere you care to look, but rarely cross paths with the likes of academia. I know of one that doesn't even appear on the internet but is at least several hundred years old. If there is a measurable force acting but you cannot see it, it's either random chance, an emergent behaviour or it literally is a force acting against you.
> Meme of a woman yelling at a cat, one of the most recurrent, with a sexist message related to the coronavirus.
Just because the meme happens to be a woman, does not make it sexist by default. The message is essentially pointing out the possible hypocrisy of caring about your respiratory health and not your sexual health. It would be somewhat akin to eating healthy whilst knocking back a cocktail of street drugs. The underlining claim of the meme is essentially "you don't actually care about this, but you're trying to convince me that you do".
> Another purpose of these messages is to attract new members, explains Brit Davidson, associate professor of analytics at IDSB and co-author of the study: “The humor in memes is likely a key factor in attracting new members to these groups, including people who may not be aware of the full context and impact of the misinformation.”
I think what we actually witness is an international decentralised grassroots ideology. I think there is such an interest because they are not coming to the conclusions that are wanted by long standing establishments (academia, finance, governments, etc). Worse still, these incorrect conclusions appear to be internationally agreed upon.
After the most minimal Google-foo, I see echarts-python [1] which has not been updated in 9 years. pyecharts [2] is looking pretty well maintained though.
Years ago I tried my hand at writing a simple bar/line plotting filter for Pandoc that embeds itself into documents via an SVG in a URI [3]. If HN is permitting, you can past links like so [4]. I think writing a stand-alone tool to display the data you are interested in is a good idea for anybody.
[1] https://github.com/yufeiminds/echarts-python
[2] https://github.com/pyecharts/pyecharts/blob/master/README.en...
[3] https://gitlab.com/danbarry16/pandoc-highlight-filter/-/blob...
[4] (removed link as it was too long for the comments section)
reply