Sauron

Not viable for something that's supposed to substitute a train. For a spaceship the numbers are quite different. The railway it was supposed to substitute would not have been underground. Subway systems don't generally span thousands of km. Even a few cm thick steel tube that is multiple metres wide over thousands of km would get expensive quickly compared to literally a couple of beams and a few power poles.

Uh... again... I never said it's impossible, I said it's expensive and impractical. If your mundane high volume public transport option is being compared to spacecraft in terms of technical and economical feasibility then you have a problem. Roller coasters go much slower, have direct contact with the rail allowing for high efficiency physical braking, only start when the operator decides it's safe for them to start, automatically slow down when they get close to the finish. They aren't on a specific schedule so individual small delays aren't a problem. They (generally) don't have multiple stops. Normal trains have emergency air brakes triggered by the tracks if they aren't enabled for passage afaik, or something similar. It's a physical mechanism that wouldn't be possible, or at least would be much harder, to implement on a maglev.

It's been used primarily for biometric authentication for at least a decade: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_recognition In phones for certain since about 2016, so if it worked on a 2016 phone I'd expect it would be no issue for a 2024 phone in computational terms. CNN inference isn't that computationally cheap either to be fair. Interestingly enough it's been made obsolete as a biometric authentication method by AI voice synthesis.

iirc apple's titanium version was actually more prone to bending than the aluminium one due to the titanium being too thin... might not be the case here but at the very least it's more expensive without a real reason. Speaker recognition is also not new, it has existed for a long time without "AI"; it was just never integrated into widespread voice recorders (afaik) and I suspect the reason is that it's not that useful. Summaries probably benefit more from being done with generative AI, although personally I wouldn't take my chances and risk completely misunderstanding what someone wanted to tell me due to the AI messing up. I mean, yes... sort of. I don't use spell checking. It's not even that I always expect my spelling to be perfect, but I hate it when a system changes my input - I know what I'm trying to type, thank you very much. I don't know why you'd take what I said to mean I find these features offensive... I just don't find them very useful. I won't pretend my opinions aren't biased... they're opinions after all. I don't think it's inherently a problem to be more or less cynical in your opinion of something, as long as you're not demonstrably incorrect. Maybe to you these features seem quite handy and I'm certainly not going to call you wrong for that, it's not an objective parameter. I look at this and my impression is that someone in a board room said something like "we need more AI in our products" and the engineers had to come up with a use case that didn't arise organically, but of course I can't know that for certain.

I guess we can't help ourselves but copy every stupid idea Apple has The AI stuff seems to be... little more than yet another marketing gimmick. Voice transcripts aren't new, tone change may be somewhat useful in some scenarios but it almost sounds like they expect you to be illiterate. The selection search is, well, just a slightly better reverse image search and OCR... likely with some baked in "sponsored" templates to better recognize products from brands that worked with samsung/google. Getting xbone "TV" vibes lmao

Even if you laid millions of KM of maglev or hyperloop they could never reduce the cost per km of a bunch of giant electromagnets to anywhere near the price of laying two steel beams, wood planks, gravel and copper wire. Just the raw resource costs would far exceed the total costs of traditional railway construction, whereas I suspect the cost of laying traditional railway mainly comes from the labor required.

It still extracted money from the state which could have been invested in finishing the HSR project sooner. Although yes, ultimately it did not succeed in having the project scrapped. I was certainly paraphrasing in that he didn't use the word "sabotage", however the meaning of what he said seems in line with that description to me. Regardless I don't think it makes much of a difference... he campaigned against a public project using a counterproposal he never really intended to build, using numbers pulled out of his arse to support it. This is completely incomparable. Individual passenger planes require at a minimum a couple of hours between a landing and a subsequent takeoff, generally longer. Airports are able to deal with the traffic because the plane does not remain on the runway while it's loading or unloading. Further, while a large airport may have overall throughputs like you describe, they include planes going in completely different places. It's not like there are planes departing for, or arriving from, the same destination every couple of minutes. For a correct comparison you need to look at subway systems. The train arrives, it simultaneously unloads and loads some passengers, then departs without ever leaving the track. If another train arrived before the previous one was able to depart they'd collide (or rather, the oncoming train would be stopped to avoid disaster). That's the promise here. If you're just going to build a gigantic train station with dozens of parking tracks for the trains to move to during load and unload you're "cheating"; you get much faster turnover with regular trains as well when you do that. A normal passenger train going multiple stops only waits at any given station for about 5 minutes anyway, and it's mostly to allow passengers to enter and exit. I don't agree that it's just the development cost. No matter how streamlined you make the process it's absolutely impossible to make a vacuum tunnel with a maglev rail for a cost in the same order of magnitude as standard rail. I consider the 100 million / Km (without even accounting for inflation!!!) of existing maglev to be the absolute lower bound for this if you want to make it safe and anywhere near as fast as promised. Still a very small margin. Figure of speech, but my point is that you need to control the airflow to avoid structural damage. Just opening the flood gates would not end well. I'm skeptical of that number considering you need to levitate the train. https://www.space.com/how-long-could-you-survive-in-space-without-spacesuit it says "immediately" here so maybe my estimate was too generous

But a hyperloop would also have these costs (most likely much higher) on top of the base infrastructure so that's irrelevant to the conversation. I took nord stream 2 as an indicator of what it might cost just to lay the tubes, compared to complete high speed rail tracks a train could already run on. All the control infrastricture would also be present, and likely be much more expensive, on a hyperloop system. Yes, you got me, I care about things being feasible in real life. This assumes seatbelts and you facing forward. Normal train carts don't do that because it would cost them capacity and passenger comfort. Also again this assumes a system reaction time of a handful of seconds, which is no guarantee in case of partial system failure, which is the hypothesis here. You have to immediately detect that the train has stopped or is slowing down significantly and send the emergency brake signal to all following trains. Again a case of something that may not be completely impossible but definitely complex and extremely expensive. Also bear in mind the required system-wide power surge to brake multiple trains at the fastest speed a human can tolerate. Not that I actually believe a system like this could operate with such low time tolerances, you can't expect dozens of people to reliably exit and board a train in less than a minute. You'd get extreme congestions following even the slightest delays. An airliner is not flying in a vacuum. It also only needs to descend to reach a breathable atmosphere. The hyperloop would need to pump air in the tube at a sufficient rate to fill it quickly but not fast enough to risk damaging the integrity of the tube itself or the train. In case of sudden, total loss of cabin pressure in a vacuum you're looking at a really bad embolism in seconds. IF your lungs don't burst.

I'm sorry but how does that contradict what I said? He wanted it canceled so he pushed and lobbied for a competing project he knew was bullshit, or at the very least wasn't well thought out. Insisting that it would cost less than $10 billion is either an intentional lie or evidence he had no idea of even the ballpark cost of something like this (again, existing maglevs without the vacuum tube have costs in the tens of millions per Km, never mind the fact that the original "idea" was an even dumber concept with people driving their teslas into the tubes which would have been completely impractical). You can either believe him on his given reasons for doing this or suspect that he did it to avoid a viable public transport alternative to buying electric cars, but either way the fact remains that sabotaging california's high speed rail project was his stated goal. This is just from reading the text in the image, not the poster's interpretation.

Your link is talking about "small diameter, low pressure pipelines", maybe double check before linking? I doubt these are even underwater.

Nord stream 2 is a pipe with a pump. The vast majority of the cost comes from manufacturing and laying the pipe itself. Don't you think factoring in the cost of the trains, train stations etc. would be dishonest in a comparison? I've never argued that it's completely impossible. If you make the walls thick enough you can probably make an arbitrarily large vacuum chamber. That doesn't mean it's feasible in practical terms, and in engineering the cost of a solution is part of the parameters. My point is that it's impossible to make it a viable solution and that much was obvious from the start. How do you propose emergency exits would work in a vacuum tube? If you exit the train, you die - even assuming there would be enough space around the train for you to reach the nearest exit. You'd have to repressurize the tunnel before anyone could exit the train, which could likely not be done quickly enough. Oh, and you'd have to be able to act and stop the following train within a few seconds to avoid a catastrophic crash, if the numbers you gave were real.

Interesting. I wonder if it's just not fully compatible with your specific laptop, sometimes that happens.

To prevent a severe derailment on a normal railway you only need to maintain two steel beams. The risk is orders of magnitude lower. A train can derail without necessarily slamming into anything or toppling. This would be surrounded by thick steel on all sides. Once again there could also be no safety exits to reach in case something like that happened, whereas even in an underground metro system there are safety exits along the tunnels. Just because we understand what a fire is doesn't mean it can be addressed in all scenarios. It's no coincidence that the worst train fires happened in tunnels. By necessity a hyperloop would make it almost impossible to douse a fire or for the people in the shuttle to escape. Well, let's find out... Nord Stream 2 is 1200 Km long, 1.2m in diameter (way too small for a shuttle and of course does not contain a magnetic railway, also it does not have a vacuum pump) and it cost 9.5 billion dollars. The upper bound cost for 1 km of brand new, double track high speed rail is $1,650,000 (source), meaning laying 1200 Km would cost you about 2 billion total. Roughly half as much for single track (with a hyperloop each track would need its own tunnel/pipe unless you want to increase the diameter, which would make it even more expensive and difficult). One of the very few maglev systems that were actually built cost about 100 million per Km, I'll let you do the math on that one. Not to mention the extreme difference in maintenance expenses of both the tracks and the trains. So yes, compared to normal rail it's prohibitively expensive. Pipelines like that are built because the economy of scale makes it worth the investment. Not so with passenger rail, which even if it were twice as fast would never justify such ludicrous costs. In theory you could make almost anything safe enough, but you're ignoring the costs. This would already be much more expensive than normal rail and every safety system you'd need to add that is not just regular old brakes and safety exists would add to that difference... and for what? A train that isn't even that much faster than regular maglev, which I remind you was a huge flop due to extreme costs. One (1) modern US submarine costs around $2 billion. Are we done with this comparison yet? I've seen no evidence of this for the larger pipelines like Nord Stream 2. In fact it was full of pressured gas despite not being into service when it was sabotaged.

The problem isn't just achieving the vacuum or maintaining it, although it would be expensive and largely a waste of energy and money. The problem is that any failure would be catastrophic. If any part of the tunnel structure fails and the tunnel is decompressed it's likely to implode, in which case you die. There can be no emergency exits because of the vacuum so in case of, say, a fire on the shuttle, you die. If the shuttle is damaged and is no longer air tight, you die - compare this with a plane where having air in your lungs during a decompression event would not result in them bursting, meaning you can still survive the flight by using the built in oxygen masks. Also with a plane you only need to maintain the plane itself for it to remain safe to use, not hundreds of kilometers of tunnels. Of course submarines can withstand higher pressures, but submarines are not kilometers long. Even if it's physically possible, it would be prohibitively expensive to make a large, airtight structure as strong as a submarine body over hundreds of kilometers.

Sorry but I'm a little confused - you said the 660p also has this problem, so was it present from the start or did it only begin after you changed the drive and now happens with the old drive as well? Also as far as I know the 660p is an nvme drive, not sata. Just to check all options, does the "shallow" sleep state work? Hibernating to disk could also be a good alternative, with an nvme drive wake-up should be pretty fast regardless. Finally, you could check whether linux 6.6 works. As far as I can tell, debian testing is on 6.5.

It WAS always a stupid idea, and Musk knew it. He has admitted it was just a way to delay and sabotage california high speed rail.

Could you specify the distribution you're using? Which drive came with the laptop and which drive did you swap in? (I see you've specified others you tried but not the original one you wanted to put in) "Suspend" can refer to a variety of states in Linux, as mentioned in the arch wiki: Do you know which one you're using? As a workaround you could try using a different suspend state.

chatgpt doesn't know what it's talking about, it's a coin toss whether anything it gives you is going to work. It seems to me you have your if statement the wrong way around. if (X2 < secondRoom.X1 || secondRoom.X2 < X1 || Y2 < secondRoom.Y1 || secondRoom.Y2 < Y1) { return false; //<-- RETURN FALSE HERE } return true; //<-- RETURN TRUE HERE

There could be ways of getting at least a hint as to who is behind it. It's possible further investigation will also offer clues... who had access to detailed descriptions of this undocumented hardware? Where did the attack messages originate? As far as I can tell we don't really know exactly who was affected, we just know people at Kaspersky where - and they would be among the few who were specifically looking for something like this. Apple is certainly not above scrutiny, but again since there is no evidence either way I wouldn't point the finger just yet. You can generally assume that if the US government really wants access to your phone, they can have it... with or without Apple's cooperation.

The russian government isn't really a solid source for anything and, if anything, the russian government claiming something is often indicative of the opposite being true. With that said, kaspersky is not the russian government, even though they may have ties to it, and as far as I know they have a fairly solid reputation in the field. And this shows when you look at which claims come from where: It was the FSB that claimed the NSA was involved, likely with absolutely no evidence. Kaspersky has not made these claims. @WillyW I would suggest updating your post to reflect that NSA involvement is not "likely" but merely "alleged with no evidence by adversary agencies". - Looking at the article the thing that pops out to me is the initial attack vector: the truetype vulnerability is whatever (although I suppose that's what you get for adding your own proprietary and undocumented instructions to a common format), but the fact that imessage processes attachments automatically seems absolutely insane to me. It's pretty much begging for a no click exploit like this.

What does the video you linked have to do with the topic..?

did you put in the placeholders or did you just copy and paste this as is from somewhere? if it's the latter then you should substitute the placeholders like "NasIP" with the right values. If you just updated the system then you should also try rebooting, maybe the kernel was updated but, without rebooting, the kernel modules for cifs may not be loaded.

As funny as that would be, if the MSRP is the same then there wouldn't really be any profit to be had there. Which... I mean they might as well? It was a lot worse when they were being bought en masse for shitcoin mining

45° isn't anywhere near a temperature you should be worried about. There's no reason for the fan to ramp up if the processor isn't hot. The pi is designed to run fine without heatsinks or fans, so it won't easily overheat. You can read more about what you should expect in terms of thermals here: https://www.raspberrypi.com/news/heating-and-cooling-raspberry-pi-5/ Here is a description of the default fan curve for the fan you have, which is perfectly in line with your observations: https://github.com/raspberrypi/documentation/blob/develop/documentation/asciidoc/computers/raspberry-pi-5/cooling.adoc As for custom curves... theoretically the fan can be controlled via normal PWM but I couldn't find any specific guides on how to address the dedicated fan pins and I don't have a pi 5 to tinker with to find out. Here's a start, if you can figure out how to "point" the program to the dedicated fan pins you should be set. Although I should stress this is highly unnecessary.