Since I added the rule about a decade ago, we've never once hit the 3 game limit. Just having the rule made them rethink if it was worth learning a new game or playing one we had a lot fun with already.

People gaming the content based algorithms will eventually cause their own downfall.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34506222

Points: 3

# Comments: 1

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33865516

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

That isn't 100% accurate. There is 1 example from 1947 where we had two consecutive quarters of negative GDP, but positive jobs, positive industrial production and positive consumer spending and NBER doesn't consider it a recession.

2001 was the opposite. It was called a recession without consecutive 2 quarters of negative GDP growth. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession#/media/F...

It would strike me more as "feeling it out", but they are not in a rush to announce it is or is not a recession until they have a better feel. Everyone seems to be rushing to call it a recession as early as possible. The economist I heard talking had a "wait and see" attitude on the podcast which was refreshing to hear.

"The NBER's definition emphasizes that a recession involves a significant decline in economic activity that is spread across the economy and lasts more than a few months. In our interpretation of this definition, we treat the three criteria—depth, diffusion, and duration—as somewhat interchangeable. That is, while each criterion needs to be met individually to some degree, extreme conditions revealed by one criterion may partially offset weaker indications from another. For example, in the case of the February 2020 peak in economic activity, the committee concluded that the subsequent drop in activity had been so great and so widely diffused throughout the economy that, even if it proved to be quite brief, the downturn should be classified as a recession." [1]

Planet Money (podcast on NPR) did an episode [2] a little while ago about it that I recommend listening to. They talk with one of the 8 economists. It was honestly refreshing hearing the economist talk about it, I got the impression that it was a more neutral take on the circumstances rather than pushing a narrative.

[1] https://www.nber.org/research/business-cycle-dating

[2] https://www.npr.org/2022/06/24/1107581150/recession-referees

Median usual weekly real earnings adjusted for seasonality - https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q

Almost all of them have similar stories from what I've seen. To be fair, most of these were developed before I was born so I certainly could be missing some context from that time period.

[1] https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a21587/197...

Virtually every single aircraft program has been flogged by the press for being too expensive and less capable than the aircraft it replaced. This included the F-111, the C-5, the F-14, the F-15, the B-1, the F-16, the A-10, the F-18, the C-17, the B-2, the V-22, the F-22, and now the F-35. Overall the track record for these aircraft turned out to be outstanding, far exceeding the capabilities of their predecessors.

The actual track record for the F35 has been very positive. Most the reports I've seen from pilots are generally very positive [1].

Other countries continue to buy it over other platforms [2].

Most the major complaints are around costs compared to the aircraft that are being replaced, but this isn't a fair comparison.

As for the cost to fly the F-35, a unit measure the Air Force terms “cost per flying hour,” today the F-35 costs around $35,000 per flying hour. Comparative aircraft in this class are generally in the mid $20,000s, a target the F-35 is slated to hit by 2025. However, it must also be remembered, as the F-35 pilot’s above comment highlights, far fewer F-35s can accomplish far more with fewer aircraft than legacy aircraft types. It does not require a math major to understand this yields far lower real-world total costs to achieve a particular mission result. [3]

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/italian-pilots-raved-about-f...

[2] https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2019/5/24/i...

[3] https://www.forbes.com/sites/davedeptula/2020/07/20/f-35-pro...

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26438267

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/connectivity/ethe...

2. Yes, although in my experience this is very minor. On my network - good wifi has a 3ms latency and good ethernet has a .3ms latency. While that is a 10x improvement, in the scheme of things I don't notice 3ms of latency. I live in a high rise condo with lots of interference in a major city and can't say it's caused me any issues.

"Gregory Travis, a veteran software engineer and experienced, instrument-rated pilot who has flown aircraft simulators as large as the Boeing 757"

I know a few veteran software engineers that are instrument-rated and frankly I'm not sure I would listen to any of them over the FAA or aeronautical engineers. Probably good for some perspective, but not exactly a great source for determining if an airplane is "aerodynamically flawed by design".