Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | k3lsi3r's comments login

Michael Laufer from the Four Thieves Vinegar Collective gave a talk that included a bit about this at a 2018 Defcon talk at the bio-hacking village. You can watch it here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzqEJM8B0h4&t=1935s. Entire talk is quite entertaining but this segment always stuck with me since I get cavities fairly frequently.


He gave a SkyTalk at DC30 on the same topic with a few more years of knowledge


Not OP but I agree with his sentiment. Maybe I'm not as "into music" as some people, but I do like finding new artists and songs, though probably only to the tune of 1-5 new artists a year and I buy on average about 5 new albums a year.

It's cheaper and better for me to own the stuff I want to listen to than sign up for a subscription in perpetuity.



The host revealing the door is irrelevant, right?

An equivalent offer would be if you had the chance to either: - keep your door OR - choose both of the other doors (since you know at least one of the other doors is a goat/non-prize)


> 3. He is an accomplished skydiver flying a controllable skydiving chute (not an emergency chute). He could have put that chute down wherever he chose, but instead of landing on clear flat terrain (in the riverbed) he chose to land in the brush on the mountainside. That was either the most incredibly stupid decision anyone has ever made in an emergency situation, or part of a deliberate plan. I don't see any other possibilities.

Yeah, this one seemed really silly. There is even a large open field at 5:36 pretty close to where he chose to "crash" land. Maybe not completely level, but as you said, many other options.


Could anyone who is a pilot comment on what you're _supposed_ to do if your engine completely goes out? From what I've read so far the answer is "keep trying to get the engine back".

Do you just try and glide it out and land? That's what I would imagine. What even would be the situation where you would bail?

Bailing sounds like more of a military thing to me. _Or_ a fire?


Fly. Find. Fix.

1. Fly: Trim the airplane for best glide speed (that is the speed that will let you travel the farthest before hitting the ground), which is a value you should have memorized. And don't forget to keep minding the stick and rudder - any unnecessary turns or aileron/rudder miscoordination costs you energy, and that means less time and less distance.

2. Find: Find the best place to put down the plane, and start maneuvering there. A road. A field. A river bed. Or even an airport; at cruising altitude there's one in gliding distance more often than you might think.

3. Fix: Try to get the engine running again. The engine can fail in a way the pilot is hopeless to get it running again, but more often by adjusting the throttle or mixture you'll be able to get it started again (it might have even been mismanagement of those things that caused it to fail - I accidentally turned the fuel off once).

Note that "call mayday" isn't even on that list. Its not like ATC is going to run out and catch you. While on a cross country VFR flight, you ought to have the radio tuned to a center controller, and have flight following so they know which blip on the radar is you. And if you don't do that, you ought to have the radio tuned to guard (the emergency frequency). And then when the "fix" step isn't working out, I would make a quick "MAYDAY MAYDAY MADAY, Center, $CALLSIGN, has an engine out, one on board, forced landing in a river bed to my east." But many people don't do any of those things. And for most of the airspace out there, you're not even required to have a radio, and planes of that vintage often don't.

And while lots of that video is fishy, I'm not reading much into his lack of communication. If I happened to be an experienced skydiver wearing a parachute, and my radio wasn't already tuned to a frequency where someone would be listening, in a panic I might skip talking to anybody in favor of getting out of the airplane while I still had enough altitude to safely deploy the chute.


> Fly. Find. Fix.

Also known as A, B, C (Airspeed, Best landing field, Checks).

Can add D, E (Declare emergency, prepare Exit).


I'm not a pilot, just someone who's been doing flight sims on and off for decades:

Here's a good take on what he could have done - gliding back to those fields clearly visible in the rear right quarter at the time of the "failure".

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VXaLiB70glE&feature=youtu.be

Author (not myself) also shows a simulated landing on the riverbeds below - heck, the 1940 Taylorcraft nearly landed there by itself! AFAIK the plane was designed to land off road, with a stall speed barely over 61km/h - it can land on a proverbial dime.

What a waste of a perfectly good aircraft.


This is slightly off-topic, but someone mentioned that it would be a good idea to check out BurntSushi's solutions after trying it yourself which seems like a fantastic idea.

It would be cool if there was some resource that linked well-written, idiomatic solutions for other languages as well. Anyone know if this has been done?


https://github.com/Bogdanp/awesome-advent-of-code

Not all repos are idiomatic, there’s at least one that isn’t (mine).

I found some of the repos useful for bettering my rust skills.


if you consider how doctors are happy to prescribe drugs that are not ideal (understatement) for their patients' health for money from pharmaceutical companies, your argument falls apart. consider the opioid epidemic


I don't fully understand the state part. Could someone provide an example of what the OP is talking about? thanks!


Say you write some software that manages a shopping cart.

a) You can "store" (even if it's in-memory) just the products and their quantities. Then each time you need to display the cart you go and compute the corresponding prices, taxes, discounts, whatever.

b) You can store each cart line, whether it has discount(s) or not, as well as its taxes and the cart's global taxes and discounts and whatever else you can imagine.

Option "b)" is probably more efficient (you are not constantly recomputing stuff) but you will be better off in the long term by going with option "a)":

- Your cart management and your discount/tax computation are less coupled now (the cart doesn't really need to know anything about them)

- You have less opportunities for miscalculation because everything is in one "logical flow" (computeDiscounts()/ computeTaxes()) instead of being scattered (some stuff is computed when you add an item or when you remove it, or when you change the quantity, or when you specify your location, etc..). The code will most probably just be simpler with option "b)".

The article argues that you should sacrifice the performance in cases like this. I agree.


Hah I get where you’re going with this example, but shopping carts in particular do want to keep the line in the cart as “local state” because the desired behaviour is that once a customer has added something to his cart, within a reasonable time limit is what he pays for, even if there are some sort of price flux. So probably not the best of examples.

Anyway I myself so wholeheartedly agree with the minimizing state idea.


yes it is annoying when prices change in your shopping cart at time of checkout. that has happened to me more than once after keeping it there past a store's midnight.


Well, more state in code usually makes it more difficult to do things like run the code concurrently. You have to worry about managing data races when there is a lot of shared state, whereas in stateless code no complex managing is needed


Although this is true of stateful code, I think an even more fundamental, but related, reason to reduce state is this: code that is stateless always behaves the same way so it can be characterized and reused more easily than code that changes behavior depending on the state. This is the reason it is good for concurrent programming, but it also means it has a more concrete/consistent nature.


While I disagree with your assertion that Honnold isn't "ripped" (a word for which we seem to have different definitions) it is worth noting that the primary muscles(/tendons) used in climbing are hand/forearm based and you can do quite well even with everything else being significantly weaker in comparison.


I'm guessing people are downvoting because of the implication that the software team should be held responsible?

Something does feel wrong about punishing them when the decision to put the car on the road in the first place was almost certainly not their own.

Though I agree Uber should be held accountable for it and it shouldn't be a token fine since the whole point of punishing an accident like this is to discourage them from occurring in the first place.

This sort of accident orchestrated by a group of people probably won't be gracefully handled by our legal system.


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

Search: