the_sisko

joined 2 years ago
sorted by: new top controversial old
A Cybertruck Owner Says He’s Thrilled that Tesla Sold Him a Defective Truck. He adds, “I Can Now Return the Truck to Tesla at Full Price & Buy a Brand-New Cybertruck for $30,000 Less" in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 29 points 3 weeks ago

Stories like Reid Tomasko’s - and others who’ve had Tesla buy back their defective Cybertrucks - highlight how the EV ownership journey can take unexpected turns.

I wish they wouldn't conflate these dumpsters with EVs as a whole.

Why aren't shields up by default? in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

I like this idea a lot, it might become my new head cannon!

Why aren't shields up by default? in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Possibly. But how much more wear & tear would this be compared to the wear put on the warp drive, which gets incredibly frequent use? If that warp drive can withstand it, why not the shield emitters?

Why aren't shields up by default? in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah, I think the power-saving argument (#4) is potentially strongest, especially if the plot needs it to be for a given episode.

But I'm having trouble thinking of a situation in the shows where the maneuverability was limited by the shields. Certainly there are plenty of cases where power was routed to shields, maybe even the power that was meant for propulsion. But I think in general, those would be cases where power was already limited, or the need for defense was much higher. In general, I don't think I recall a trade-off where shields restrict maneuverability or speed.

38
Why aren't shields up by default? (startrek.website)
 

So, this may be a frequently discussed topic, and I'm sorry if so. But I was watching S1 of SNW and there was a scene where an early "shields up" saved the ship from serious damage. And now that I think of it, I just can't come up with a good reason why shields aren't up all the time, with a few obvious caveats.

  1. Yes, shields must be down to transport, this seems like the most obvious reason to have them down. But we see plenty of episodes where shields are brought down momentarily for a transport. Why not do that always?
  2. One reason brought up frequently is that raising shields could be taken as an act of aggression. But if you arrive with shields already up, then you're not doing anything aggressive, you just arrived that way, so I don't think this makes much sense in a world where most Starfleet ships just keep their shields up.
  3. I don't know for certain, but it seems possible that shields may not be usable at warp. I don't remember any specific episode where that happened, but it seems possible. But even then, a ship could just be programmed to bring them up as it drops out of warp.
  4. I guess it could be possible that the power usage of the shields is too much for the day-to-day use. But again, it seems like a lot of missions clearly begin with "dropping out of warp into an unfamiliar area" and those are the times where your shields should just be up by default.

Of course, I know the answer is that "shields up" is great dramatic dialogue, but I guess I wondered if there are any more satisfying answers than that?

Tawny Newsome Says Live Action Star Trek Workplace Comedy Will Explore Life Outside The Federation in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I totally agree that I love the variety of options! But I would be very happy if one of the options was that we get filler/bottle episodes for a few weeks per season, but every season is 26 episodes long. They could just spread the budget for 10 episodes across all 26, and make the VFX less... shiny.

(Of course, I don't actually want actors to be worked to the bone like they were in the 90s...)

Episode Discussion | Star Trek: Lower Decks | 5x10 "The New Next Generation" in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

A pretty cool episode. Top takeaways:

  1. I'm going to miss Captain Ransom. I think it would have been fun to have a season or two of him. Only Discovery has had the balls to hand over the Captain's chair to another during its main run, and I think that is a good thing.
  2. Starbase 80 is now set up as a new DS9-style show. A starbase guarding a dimensional portal. God I hope that happens. I just hope they pull off the ensemble cast that made DS9 such a classic.
  3. I hate the tease for Rutherford x Tendi, it's so mean to tease it in the finale :'( But really it's so cute.

Plenty more I missed of course.

Episode Discussion | Star Trek: Lower Decks | 5x09 "Fissure Quest" in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Rewatching in preparation for the finale, and I keep feeling that the voice of Curzon Dax sounds quite similar to the voice of Odo in DS9. I'm quite aware that Rene Auberjonois passed away not that long ago: may he rest in peace. And I guess he was voiced by Fred Tatasciore (Shaxs), which I can hear too. But I keep hearing Odo which is really nice.

Linus Torvalds Begins Expressing Regrets Merging Bcachefs in c/[email protected]
It's a good thing they aren't in charge of adult toys... in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The idea is that the string of lights has a male end and a female end. That way you can have several daisy chained and just plug the one with the male end into the outlet. But if you plan it wrong then you may end up with the wrong end in the wrong place, in which case yeah, use an extension cord or hang the lights all over again.

Oh and it's actually relatively safe this way... Each string of lights normally has a fuse in it, so it prevents the cords from carrying more current than they are designed for.

It's a good thing they aren't in charge of adult toys... in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Yep! That way you can daisy chain several in a row.

Accurate? in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That makes about as much sense as saying that pip, gem, npm, cargo, or nix should called be the default package manager on Mac OS...

The default package manager is the default because it manages the system's software. RPM, Deb/apt, pacman, etc. Homebrew is like pip or docker or cargo or snap or whatever else. You can set it up if you'd like but it's certainly not a default. (Though I'm not trying to dispute that it's good 😊)

Mac OS doesn't have a good default package management solution (though they would if they just opened up the app store and added a CLI). It's ok to admit it, and say that third party folks (who Apple does not support unless I'm missing something) are powering a pretty good third party experience. If only Apple cared about people who wanted a truly free an customizable computer, they could make a great OS :)

this AI thing in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

The closest analogy is specific tech skills, like say DBs, for a small firm its just something one backend dude knows decently, at a large firm there are several DBAs and they help teams tackle complex DB questions. Same with say Search, first Solr and nowadays Elastic.

Yeah I mean I guess we're saying the same thing then :)

I don't think prompt engineering could be somebody's only job, just a skill they bring to the job, like the examples you give. In those cases, they'd still need to be a good DBA, or whatever the specific role is. They're a DBA who knows prompt engineering, etc.

view more: next ›