The photo of the woman wearing VR goggles with a shit-eating grin on her face while supposedly having a conversation with somebody really speaks volumes about how Apple envisions us to interact with one another in 2024. Good grief, I abhor absolutely everything about this.
poopkins
0 Post – 258 Comments
Joined 1 years ago
$150k, that'll teach 'em!
Calm down there, sugartits.
Last updated Jan 2, 11:20 UTC; this post is superseded here
JAL flight 516 (registration JA13XJ) Airbus A350-900 from Sapporo to Tokyo’s Haneda Airport collided while landing with a coast guard aircraft JA722A De Havilland Canada DHC-8-315Q MPA "Dash-8" that belonged to Haneda Air Base, which was awaiting departure to Niigata with aid following the New Year's Day Earthquake.
All 367 passengers and 12 crew members escaped the passenger plane, while five people on the coast guard plane were still unaccounted for, NHK reported.
The pilot of the coast guard aircraft had evacuated and contacted officials.
CNN reports that 17 passengers on board JAL516 were injured.
A later press statement from Japan Airlines SVP Noriyuki Aoki clarified that "only four" passengers went to hospital for "feeling unwell," of which two for smoke inhalation, while the pilots are now being interviewed about the final moments of the flight. Eight children were among the 367 passengers.
Regarding JA722A, CNN reports:
Five crew members died on the second aircraft, a De Havilland Canada DHC-8, according to Japan’s transport minister, Tetsuo Saito. Public broadcaster NHK said the plane’s captain was in a critical condition.
Airbus has also issued a statement that a team of Airbus investigators are joining the French BEA and Japanese JTSB.
Credit can be given to the excellent safety culture, but also the safety mechanisms of the A359: while only three evacuation slides could be used, these slides remained inflated and illuminated well after the evacuation completed and most of the fuselage was a raging inferno. Furthermore, the carbon fiber body held strong despite the impact and well into the subsequent blaze.
I believe there still remains an opportunity to improve, as the evacuation was only completed 18 minutes after the collision. JAL can consider themselves extremely fortunate that the cabin was not more severely affected by smoke.
I have provided sources for this in my detailed write-up on the incident.
This grinds my gears. Apple does the same: my work MBP nags me daily to enable iCloud backups but I have no way of doing it because Apple login is disabled by my administrator. Consequently, I cannot reach the settings page to tell Mac to fuck off.
How on earth did you reach the conclusion the blog is spam?!
I find it difficult to know if my flight will avoid 737 Max, so I've been avoiding airlines that have them in their fleet. Unfortunately, British Airways recently rebooked me onto an Alaska Airlines, and sure enough, it was a Max 8. Sometimes you just can't win.
That's not a fair example, because 5 Euros has an intrinsic value. The theft here is of intellectual property. Here's an analogy:
- When you take a book from a book store without paying for it, you are stealing.
- When you take a book from a book store without paying for it, make an exact replication of it and return the original, you are stealing intellectual property.
Win?
In case you don't want to give that shitty platform a click:
Apple is a real bully. Apple + Maximo met for partnership/acquisition talks but Apple had a secret plan (Project Everest) to steal the tech without paying. They even recruited 20 of Masimo’s team, doubling their salaries…. Apple paid their CTO $4M to come over, and in his 1st 2 weeks he filed 12 patents for sensors at Apple that were Masimo trade secrets… the worst part is that Apple fumbled the ball and the product doesn’t really work and Apple didn’t get FDA approval like Masimo did.
Joe Kiani, the immigrant electrical engineer CEO of Masimo seems to be fighting this as a vendetta - he’s spent >$60M fighting Apple so far & preliminarily seems to have won… most companies would not keep fighting.
Isn't that exactly what OP's screenshot is depicting?
Ah, so this is effectively identical to Apple's approach to repairability.
Apple doesn't care about your privacy. They care about their image of caring about your privacy.
Why is this linking to some oddball social network that in turn links to a broken CNET page?! Here, I'll save you the clicks and frustration with this TL;DR.
Use Google's privacy tools to be informed when your personal information is searched:
- Open your web browser and type myactivity.google.com/results-about-you.
- Select “Results to review.”
- Choose “Get started” and press “Next,” twice.
- Add your personal info: name, address, phone number, email. You can add multiple entries for each one.
- Confirm this is all your information.
- Choose the way that you want to be notified. You can choose email or push notifications, or both.
- Last, you will get a pop-up that says, “We’re taking a look."
Edit: adding a note that it's not available in all regions.
In my opinion, it's okay to aspire to change antiqued cultural norms that, through a modern lens, we no longer find ethical. By setting the bar so high that it's effectively "your objections to killing any animals are only valid if you eat no meat at all," there's no reasonable approach to reducing meat consumption.
As for myself, I lead by example and eat no meat at all, but that's not where I began. I first reduced red meat, then became pescatarian and only in my early thirties became fully vegetarian.
Similarly, I believe that identifying a wide range of reasons to justify change can help with taking the first steps to accomplish it, like recognizing dogs as companion animals and for their intelligence, the health, environmental and ecological benefits of reducing intake, and so on.
I believe it's more complex than this: governments have some obligation to create infrastructure that's safe for everybody. Simply slapping a speed camera to fine drivers doesn't make the road safer. By comparison, the Dutch have a terrific way of designing roads in such a way that drivers adapt to the conditions, for instance through the road surface and deliberately placing vegetation near the road to help drivers accurately perceive their speed.
It's odd that we should need to spell out that different devices are designed for different kinds of users with different use cases.
Chinese prison labor bad.
WesternUS prison labor good.
ftfy
I think a compounding factor is that the lifespan of phones has also increased. Phone manufacturers are no longer selling a new model to the same user each year.
Last updated Jan 2, 11:20 UTC; this post is superseded here
JAL flight 516 (registration JA13XJ) Airbus A350-900 from Sapporo to Tokyo’s Haneda Airport collided while landing with a coast guard aircraft JA722A De Havilland Canada DHC-8-315Q MPA "Dash-8" that belonged to Haneda Air Base, which was awaiting departure to Niigata with aid following the New Year's Day Earthquake.
All 367 passengers and 12 crew members escaped the passenger plane, while five people on the coast guard plane were still unaccounted for, NHK reported.
The pilot of the coast guard aircraft had evacuated and contacted officials.
CNN reports that 17 passengers on board JAL516 were injured.
A later press statement from Japan Airlines SVP Noriyuki Aoki clarified that "only four" passengers went to hospital for "feeling unwell," of which two for smoke inhalation, while the pilots are now being interviewed about the final moments of the flight. Eight children were among the 367 passengers.
Regarding JA722A, CNN reports:
Five crew members died on the second aircraft, a De Havilland Canada DHC-8, according to Japan’s transport minister, Tetsuo Saito. Public broadcaster NHK said the plane’s captain was in a critical condition.
Airbus has also issued a statement that a team of Airbus investigators are joining the French BEA and Japanese JTSB.
But I don't want to pay and I want everything for free! Make somebody else pay for my enjoyment!
Precisely; for context, it was recently discussed in Dutch media how some of these e-bikes reach 60 km/h. Together with a culture of people refusing to wear bicycle helmets, there's certainly some more nuance and middle ground.
There needs to be some kind of solution, but doing nothing is not really an option.
Oliver completely neglected to cover the fact that Hyperloop was a scam to defraud the Californian taxpayer out of high speed rail. (Elmo wins doubly: through the government grant in Hyperloop and through Tesla car sales.)
Connecting a classic (non-Google TV) Chromecast to a new WiFi (or heaven forbid a hotel WiFi with a capture portal) was always such a pain. And casting over networks without mDNS is flaky at best and otherwise downright impossible.
By contrast, I've loved taking along my Chromecast with Google TV to hotels, along with:
- A VPN client installed it already,
- An Android phone that can create a WiFi AP while connected to the hotel WiFi,
- A Bluetooth speaker and my Bluetooth headphones paired to it so I get great audio as well.
This has been a complete gamechanger and a genuine upgrade over yesteryear's Chromecasts.
The Media Integrity API is something that streaming video services want and applies only to Android apps that are built on web technologies. This has nothing to do with conventional web experiences or even the Chrome browser on Android: it's effectively a solution for when media is served on webpages that are embedded inside an Android app.
Typically an Android app will use native libraries like ExoPlayer to request and serve DRM content, for instance a video from a paid streaming service to ensure that the viewer is permitted to watch it. Chrome is built on top of open video codecs and doesn't inherently support DRM in this manner (as far as I'm aware), so if an app developer wants to use web technologies by leveraging a WebView, they are restricted to which codecs and DRM is available.
It's my understanding that this new library offers a solution to such developers. As a reminder, this doesn't apply to the web at large.
From my perspective, this is no different than DRM offerings that are supported natively in all operating systems, including Android, iOS, Mac and Windows.
Holy moly that comment took a turn.
Aircraft positioning
The aforementioned Live Cam video provides evidence that JA722A entered onto runway 34R at intersection C-5 and remained stationary until the impact. As a visual reference, other aircraft DAL276 and JAL545 are seen further to the right, queueing up to intersection C-1. The moment of impact is also captured in a passenger video from on board an aircraft taxiing past C-5.
Previous discussion that JA722A would have entered at C-1 can be eliminated for the stated reasons, but also noting that this intersection is too short of the touchdown zone of runway 34R, and this video (at 1:48) appears to show the burning collision site as seen from a plane that was holding short at C-1 of 34R. Here, too it is clear that there is some distance, about 3 taxiways between the camera and the fire, confirming that the collision must have occurred near to C-5. The Approach Lighting System (ALS) provides visual reference for runway 34R. Despite its name, standard operating procedure is that ALS is used both during takeoffs and landings.
In the press conference held by the Civil Aviation Bureau of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism and the Japan Coast Guard, where a collision diagram was shown to reporters [2]:
Here I've recreated that illustration that labels both intersections C-1 and C-5 on the updated 2022 RTJJ/HND airport chart:
JAL516 touched down on 34R, and while flightradar24 doesn't show any aircraft on the runway ahead of them, it should be noted that JA722A was not equipped with a modern ADS-B transponder (or its mode S was switched off):
It should be noted that JA722A cannot be reliably tracked by flightradar24 and here's an explanation why). Despite JA722A having an older model transponder, ATC should have accurately seen it on their ground radar.
By daylight, the resting positions of both aircraft are plainly visible:
Speculation
According to Japan's transportation ministry, JA722A was instructed to "taxi to holding point C-5," and read back that instruction. It nevertheless entered onto the runway without ATC clearance. JA722A had six minutes after the previous departure of JAL25 to maneuver onto the runway for takeoff, and it's possible that ATC wished to prioritize the departure of delivering earthquake relief aid by shortcutting it onto the runway ahead of the queue of commercial aircraft holding ahead of C-1.
This appears to be standard ICAO phraseology for holding short of a runway at an intersection, where the guidelines provide the following example [13]:
Taxi to holding point C, runway 27, Big Jet 345
It's possible that JA722A was under the incorrect impression that it was cleared to enter runway 34R at C-5 and hold for takeoff on the runway. The phraseology for doing so, however, is given as an example in the ICAO quick reference guide as:
Big Jet 345, Metro Tower, line up runway 27
The transcript does not include an explicit instruction from ATC to "line up."
A further insight is regarding the Autonomous Runway Incursion Warning System. According to a NOTAM bulletin, the Stop Bar Lighting at junctions C-1 to C-14 were unserviceable since Dec 27th, as per a NOTAM bulletin. [11, 12]. This stop line is where ATC expected JA722A to stop, ahead of intersection C-5 prior to the runway:
Please observe that currently no concrete evidence has been published to support any hypotheses. Therefore, remember to avoid jumping to conclusions as we do not have all the facts yet.
Open questions
1. Did JA722A enter onto the runway with unambiguous ATC clearance, and if not, why did they do so anyway?
Editorial notes: JA722A did not have ATC clearance to enter the runway, and it appears that ATC used standard ICAO phrasing to instruct the aircraft to hold short of 34R ahead of intersection C-5. [13]
2. Why did ATC radar not trigger an automated collision warning through runway incursion monitoring for JAL516 if JA722A was on the same runway?
3. Why did JA722A not react to and communicate regarding a stop signal from the Autonomous Runway Incursion Warning System (ARIWS)?
Editorial notes: Stop Bar Lighting at junctions C-1 to C-14 were unserviceable since Dec 27th, as per a NOTAM bulletin. [11, 12]
4. Did JA722A have its strobe lights illuminated?
5. Why did neither the tower nor JAL516 see JA722A on 34R?
6. Why didn't a collision avoidance system activate on board JAL516?
Editorial notes: TCAS is inhibited below 900 feet above ground level. [9]
Closing remarks
The official inquiry will likely focus on the ground radar, ATC transcripts and CVR recordings.
As a reminder, please do not to jump to conclusions as we do not have all the facts yet.
3,000 people clicked a button out of curiosity or by mistake. If this is statistically relevant for their install base, there really is nobody using Brave. I have as many users randomly come and go into my game on a daily basis.
I've reached the point where I will downvote anything relating to Elmo the muppet.
Regarding the sales process: in Tesla's early days, they received an exception to the requirement for needing to use dealerships. Generally this is very shady and is outright unfair towards other car manufacturers—even Rivian didn't get this same special treatment because lawmakers saw how Tesla abused it.
Tesla's growing monopoly on charging networks isn't something to be proud of, in my opinion, and neither is their proprietary charging cable. We need open standards.
Also, Tesla's mileage estimates are notoriously exaggerated. Perhaps technically you can get the claimed range if the entire trip is downhill…
I recently watched It's Quieter in the Twilight, a fascinating documentary about the shrinking and aging team of engineers at the JPL still working on Voyager.
Ironically, I've been downvoted for saying this in response to somebody sympathizing with my previous downvoted comment that was expanding in support of somebody's highly upvoted comment with some background.
I think the general sentiment on Lemmy is that any comment reply must surely be in disagreement and receives an automatic downvote. Mostly I visit the comments for discourse and upvote interesting threads of conversation.
In my opinion, really there should be no downvote button.
Stay tuned, it's coming in 2016!
I should, you're right.
But look at the way they dressed, they were basically asking for it! /s
This guy hated Japan so much that he joined an anti-Japanese extremist group to kill his countrymen, then only to live out the rest of his years in Japan and die there at the age of 70. What an odd species we are.
That's ironic, because the evolution of the human eye is a good example of a case where iterative change has led to a clunky and suboptimal design.
I suppose that analogy is oddly appropriate for Tesla Vision.
Or things like, that idiot's mattress is going to fly off his roof any second, I'm not driving behind him.
Last edited Jan 4, 12:25 UTC
Japan Airlines flight 516 (JAL516, registration JA13XJ) Airbus A350-900 from Sapporo to Tokyo’s Haneda Airport collided while landing with a coast guard aircraft JA722A De Havilland Canada DHC-8-315Q MPA "Dash-8" that belonged to Haneda Air Base, which was awaiting departure to Niigata with aid following the New Year's Day Earthquake.
All 367 passengers (including 8 children) and 12 crew members safely evacuated JAL516 after it stopped in the grass adjacent runway 34R. [1] Japan Airlines SVP Noriyuki Aoki clarified in a press statement that of the 14 injuries, "only four" passengers went to hospital for "feeling unwell," of which two for smoke inhalation. [2] The aircraft's nose gear collapsed and engines and wings were engulfed in flames immediately following the collision.
Of the six crew members on board JA722A, 5 crew members died in the collision or resulting fire, according to Japan’s transport minister Tetsuo Saito. Public broadcaster NHK said the plane’s captain was in a critical condition. [1]
The immediate seconds following the collision show both the Airbus (left) and Dash-8 (right) in flames:
Further insights
These are the aircraft involved:
Airbus has issued a statement that a team of Airbus investigators are joining the French BEA, British AAIB and Japanese JTSB. [3]
Japan's Ministry of Transport said on Jan 3rd that JA722A had received instructions to "proceed to a holding point on a taxiway to the runway," [4] noting that the coast guard captain by his own testimony however understood this instruction as takeoff clearance [5], subsequently lining up on runway 34R and setting the stage for the collision. The JTSB is investigating the occurrence.
Tokyo's Metropolitan Police reported they have opened an investigation for professional negligence into the accident.
The JTSB has recovered the voice recorder from the coast guard aircraft. [3]
Minutes after evacuation of JAL516, which completed 18 minutes after touching down [10], the cabin flashed over and the aircraft was reduced to just the engines, wings and parts of the tailplane and nose cone. Daybreak revealed the devastation of the inferno, despite the extinguishing efforts of more than 100 fire engines [2]:
A compounding factor is that the right hand number 2 engine was unable to be shut down and continued to run during the evacuation of the passengers [6], and a video recording shows it spraying sparks that inhibited the use of the rear starboard escape slide.
Videos and photos suggest that of the eight exits, only three slides were used in the evacuation (rear port side and both front exits):
Smoke was present in the cabin during evacuation (longer video) and one passenger stated in an interview that it smelled of "burning chemicals." [2]
This marks the first hull loss of an A350. JAL516 was newly delivered to Japan Airlines in November 2021.
The Dash-8 involved, JA722A, also called under its alternative registration, MA722 "Mizunagi," and was piloted by captain Genki Miyamoto (39), who has been the captain of the same type of aircraft since February 2017 with a total of 4 years, 11 months of experience as a captain and 3,641 fight hours. [14] Miyamoto pulled himself from the wreckage with severe burns and radioed his base, saying, "The aircraft exploded on the runway. I escaped. The [condition of the] other crew members is unknown." [7]
The victims were Nobuyuki Tahara (co-pilot, 41); Yoshiki Ishida (radio operator, 27); Wataru Tatewaki (radar operator, 39); and Makoto Uno (mechanic, 47), and Shigeaki Kato (56), the Coast Guard said in a statement. [14]
A direct impact from behind
Footage from the Tokyo International Airport HND Live Cam clearly shows JA722A enter onto the runway where the collision occurred at intersection C-5 roughly 50 seconds before the accident. The Dash-8's landing light appears to be aligned with the runway in preparation for takeoff. The Airbus had touched down on all wheels shortly prior to impact.
This is further supported by evidence of a direct impact from behind. Nose cone damage on the A350 suggest a direct impact with the Dash-8's aft fuselage or tail section, as evidenced by a user on Twitter by comparing schematics of both aircraft to scale:
Furthermore, the crushed remains of the Dash-8 appears to show relatively less damage to the front of the aircraft:
The user goes on to point out the engine cowling damage on both the number 1 and 2 engines, suggesting the Dash-8's wingtips were struck straight or nearly straight on from behind:
ATC clearances
Japan Airlines said its crew had been cleared to land by air traffic control before the collision. Audio from LiveATC.net (captured in this video) appears to detail the crew reading back a clearance order for runway 34, saying “cleared to land 34 right.” [1]
“According to interviews with the operating crew, they acknowledged and repeated the landing permission from air traffic control, and then proceeded with the approach and landing procedures,” Japan Airlines said. [1]
The ATC communication to JA722A is difficult to understand, but the transcript released to NHK records it as follows [8]:
From this point to the collision, ATC was not heard granting permission for JA722A to enter the runway.
While the LiveATC.net recording does not include JA722A reading back the aforementioned ATC instruction, Japan's transport ministry stated on Jan 3 that based on the transcript, air traffic control instructed the coast guard plane to proceed to a holding point on a taxiway to the runway 10 seconds after clearing JAL516 to land on 34R at 5:45 p.m., to which the coast guard plane repeated the instruction. [9]
Editorial notes: (1) There had previously much debate about the transcript, as some listeners heard "C-1" or "C-2" instead of "C-5." (2) The phrasing of this communication is further discussed in the section "Speculation" below.
In response to a question about whether the JA722A had been given permission to enter the runway, the head of the Civil Aviation Bureau of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism said at a press conference on Jan 2, "We are currently investigating and cannot comment on that at this stage."
[cont'd below]