I read that entire article thinking it said driving instructor. Doesn't really change anything but it makes so much more sense that he's a part time diving instructor.
yeah, so many software engineers are not verify "ai search results". Hey people, llm generated search results aren't reliable, might well have hallucinations. You have to verify anything they say.
My favourite was a search result based ai digest suggesting that during storms large cargo ships could survive for days until eventually 'disappearing'; Perplexed (intended), I followed the citation, the source actually said that the storms themselves would persist for days until disappearing.
Removing the brown ones from a bowl of M&Ms is a 5 minute job that can be handled by anyone. I would expect a lot of people would go "well that's a bit eccentric, but if it makes the band happy, why not".
I doubt the band would say "you didn't redline this weird but inconsequential request, we can't work together.
If they wanted to be sure the redlining process worked, they should have put in something like "remove all fire extinguishers from backstage".
> To use a dog metaphor, a chainsaw tends to growl before it bites.
I believe the author is mistaken about why chainsaws don't cause more harm than they do. There are multiple of ways in which a chainsaw will kill or destroy, without any warning. Kickback is very quick. A tree falling in the wrong direction comes without warning.
Personally, I suspect there are 2 main reasons why chainsaws don't cause more harm.
A) They've been around for 100 years, and they've been causing fatalities and injuries for 100 years. People have invented ways to reduce the risk. Any chain you can readily buy is a low-kickback chain, and the saw comes with a chain brake. It doesn't completely remove the risk, but it substantially reduces it.
B) They've been around for 100 years, and they've been causing fatalities and injuries for 100 years. People are aware that chainsaws are inherently dangerous. Even someone without any training, and without looking at the safety instructions, understands that one of these will take off a limb without blinking.
What this means for the rest of the metaphor, I'm not sure.
This is why I need to have 10 different map apps on my phone. I hate it.
Google maps is good enough for find my way in a city, or getting to a destination by car. And when I get there, I whip out another app to pay the parking. If I forget where I parked, my car has an app with a map. To plan a longer trip with an electric car, ABRP is better. And when I'm just looking for a charge pole where my card will work, Plugsurfing. If I want to use car sharing, another app with another map.
If I want to go for a run or a hike, outdooractive has some routes. Komoot has some others. But if I want to find some rock climbing routes, I need 27crags. Meanwhile, my sports watch also has a map which can show me the route I just ran.
None of these are fundamentally different. All show a very similar map, just with other points of interest, other routes, other layers, other navigation algorithms.
But all of these apps have different UI, different features, and just behave slightly differently.
I wish I could just have a single map app, where I enable the layers I'm interested in.
I feel like if you had all the map apps in one, you'd end up with a Salesforce of maps.
I kind of like having separate apps for different activities. For sure, it's nice that they integrate eg. gas station search into Waze -- it's a car-related thing, and a likely option in the workflow of navigating a trip. I'll use a totally different app for route finding along mountain trails - here I'll be concerned about offline availability, topography data, terrain types, shelters, precise location and orientation, etc.
To OP's point, it would be nice to have a bike-centric app that responds to concerns cyclists have and others pay little attention to - eg, road surface quality, lane widths, grading, wind exposure, general safety rating etc. Google Maps does the token thing of indicating the total climb and descent for a planned route, but it doesn't give an option to optimize for that (eg, longer route with fewer climbs).
Linux's `make menuconfig` [0] and GDB's TUI interface [1] are the first ones that come to mind. Both are very powerful once you get to know them a bit, and are still valuable tools today.
I find menuconfig to be a not-very-great TUI (too much stuff per page for my taste), but the GDB tui is really nice/functional (tho also idiosyncratic).
From the article, Proba-3 has 10 thrusters, so that would bring the total to 150 Watt.
I don't know the power budget for the satellite, but we can make an educated guess : the occulter is 1.4 meter diameter, or a surface area of 1.54 square meter. That's an upper bound for the surface area of the solar panels - there's nothing sticking out beyond the disk, that would interfere with observations.
Solar power at earth is about 1.3kW/sqm, solar panels are maybe 20% to 30% efficient. That puts you in the ballpark of 400 to 600W.
150W on standby would be a pretty big bite out of your power budget.
Many observations of the sun's corona just use a disk attached to the telescope, as you're suggesting [0]. However, for Proba-3 they want the disk to be over 100m away from the telescope, which isn't practical. Also, one of the goals of Proba-3 is to develop formation flying technology, because it will be useful for many other missions in the future.
The goal is to have them a bit more than 100m apart. During observations they aim to maintain millimeter precision.
I'm pretty sure the risk of collision has been analysed to death. I would expect they've analysed what would happen if one or both devices suddenly stop listening to commands, and that even then there's essentially no risk.
From what I can see on wikipedia [0] the first FEEP to be used in space was in 2018. Proba-3's implementation phase started in 2014 [1]. The choice of thruster technology was probably made well before that. They wouldn't use a technology that hasn't flown yet, unless it was crucial for the mission.
