Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | kfury's comments login

Thanks!

-----


The real Bender's eyes have square pupils.

-----


Though there's no Neopixel library at the level of the current one for Arduino, you could drive the whole system off of the Imp.

Mozilla built two RGB LED tickers, driven by an Imp, and installed them on their blimp: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz3fEYFDl2o

-----


It's spinning in the right direction if you're a satellite in a mid-altitude equatorial orbit.

-----


Their 'Mentors' page is... interesting: http://socraticlabs.com/Mentors.html

-----


The mentors have no name, and they have a bunch o anons, strange

-----


A google image search brings up 9 out of the 12 identities. But yes, strange.

-----


That looks totally legit. :|

-----


The Kepler analysis team has only gone through the first two years worth of data.

There are still two more years worth of exoplanets for us.

-----


Some Ekranoplans (like the Lun mentioned in the article) have the ability to fly above the ground effect zone, though less efficiently.

If rogue waves (or other rough sea) can be spotted far enough ahead, the plane could increase altitude over brief rough spots, settling back on to its ground effect cushion once calmer waters were reached.

Because it's travelling so much faster than surface waves, the lidar (or whatever scanning system) would only have to consider a relatively narrow field of view in front of the craft.

-----


These seem to be very low resolution (~500px). Are there high resolutions available? I tried finding one for Van Gogh's 'Irises' and couldn't.

-----


Yeah, the download of Irises is only 998x768 px.

And many of the others are similarly sized, almost all I've looked at under 1000px in either direction.

-----


Large version here: http://search.getty.edu/museum/records/musobject?objectid=94...

-----


There is a high resolution download link on each item page directly under the thumbnail. In the case of Irises, the image is 4264 x 3282.

-----


Thank you! Wow, on a Retina display this looks just amazing.

-----


Does SpaceX document all their tests publicly? Or are we just seeing the successful ones? (If they've all been successful ones, will we see unsuccessful ones if they come in the future?)

-----


Well, it's kind of hard to keep the tests secret: http://youtu.be/i9n6rYoSGNQ

-----


Ahh, yes. A little digging shows that these tests are done at their McGregor, TX test site, and McGregor is well within hearing and visual range of the tests.

https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!q=spacex&data=!1m4!1m3!...

-----


Forgotten the unsuccessful Falcon 1 flight 1,2,3? They are available online on youtube

-----


A launch is completely different from a private short-range test on a closed site.

You could watch a launch live, and they are very public about the timing, purpose, and location of launches before they happen.

The Grasshopper tests (to my knowledge) are not open for public observation, and I haven't seen any media coverage prior to tests, so if there was an unsuccessful test it wouldn't be as obvious as an unsuccessful launch attempt.

My question was whether this is by design, and if there was an unsuccessful test whether they would showcase that as well, in the manner that unsuccessful launches are well documented public 'learning experiences'.

-----


Pretty sure there is no company in the world that would publicly showcase their R&D failures. I think I understand where you're coming from, that you don't want to be misled about the safety and reliability, but it is still in an early testing stage.

I think posting a video of a rocket crashing would be way beyond any reasonable expectation. That's not contributing to any public learning. That's just doing significant damage to your brand with extremely small upside (gaining "honesty" cred with some small subset).

-----


Oh the edge cases will be so angry. There are a very few engineers at Google who have Gmail account names shorter than 6 characters. It's not the norm, but they exist. Their addresses can't be validated.

I'm sure there are special cases all over the place. It would be nice if Mailgun differentiated between 'this address is just malformed' and 'from what I know of [ISP], this address oughtn't exist'.

-----


Well, you are not forced to reject the email, you can just stick to the unobtrusive spellchecker, that just suggests in case if something suspicious. So the end decision is up to your app.

-----


The spellchecker doesn't actually kick in all that often. The better solution is to give flags back differentiating between 'unlikely' and 'impossible' email addresses.

-----


I concur. You've got to wonder whether or not the trade off between denying the edge-cases outweighs the benefits of "better" validation.

-----

More

Applications are open for YC Winter 2016

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: