Both Boeing and Airbus are spending a lot of time evaluating the next engine options. Last year there was an article that Airbus is more optimistic about CFM's open rotor designs while Boeing thinks the next generation geared turbofan models will win out. That is entirely based on leaks and no-one actually knows how true those assessments are.

The 737 Max was designed with the expectation that the 8 variant would be the sweet spot. Since that time it is clear that there is massive demand for up-gauging and the A321neo is dominating and there is significant demand for the Max10 variant despite it not being certified yet.

I would expect that both Boeing and Airbus are looking at that size (maybe slightly larger) for their next narrowbody with some flexibility for shrinks and/or stretches.

This is not a response to any existing planes. The A320/321 family is very old (50 years mid 2030) and it is expected that both Boeing and Airbus are going to be introducing new airframes to fit the new engine technology.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44730256

Points: 30

# Comments: 14

As you point out it was forked a number of years ago so it started from the same place (7.10). Elasticsearch is now on 9.0+ and has 27,000 more commits than OpenSearch. So I doubt it is a drop-in replacement anymore.

I have no idea how many of those 27K commits are key features, but it is clear divergence.

Look, maybe the Twitter dataset and control over the algorithm is worth $45 billion. But I've seen the state of ads on Twitter these days and it is clearly not worth anything close to that from advertising income.

These IMO are relatively useful things. But probably (in their current state) will not justify the valuation of the companies involved and the massive investment occurring right now.

I don't know how the future will unfold. I do think it is reasonable to be somewhat bearish on what has been promised vs. what has been released.

I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else to use this. It just was pointing out you don't need Apple accounts or devices to participate opposed to something like Facebook events.

> There are hundreds of simple meeting/event webapps out there

Okay? Go crazy using those! But don't claim that this requires an Apple device to create or join events (like the OP I was responding to). And don't claim that this requires an Apple Account to join events (like many other commentators are).

You are. I explicitly created a burner email and invited it to an event.

When I navigated from the invite email I was prompted to sign in which I declined. It then allowed me to join the event after I confirmed with an emailed code.

On joining the event I was able to set my name and send a note.

You do not need to own an Apple device to either create events or join events.

> I'll send an email for free, thankyouverymuch.

This seems fine! There are open protocols (email, ics) if they work for you, but Apple specifically developed this in a way to neither require an Apple device or Apple Account to interact. Which is better than some of the competitors! (Facebook and Google tend to create social tools which explicitly require everyone to have accounts.)

You can create events from the web iCloud interface without an Apple device.

I've scanned some of the DOGE stuff and the fact that I have seen pretty much no mention or discussion of the big budget items: social security, military, medicare, and medicaid does not make me optimistic that this is going to do anything about government spending...

For example, this is an extremely commonly recommended for serious beginners that is sold by them: https://www.highpointscientific.com/apertura-ad8-8-inch-dobs...

$55 billion in 2010 is $80 billion in 2024 dollars. I kind of feel like my original point was pretty clear.

I'm agnostic to whether this is some important or stark economic indicator. But I think the media should write articles that use rates not absolute values when they choose to write these articles.

The record 2010 number is ~$80 billion in 2024 dollars vs $46 billion this year.

We might be on the cusp of a collapse, but the media (and HN commentators!) continue to predict 3465 out of the last 2 recessions.

It is clear that delinquencies have ticketed up over the last year or two. But this article does not do a particularly good job about contextualizing if this is actually concerning.

Here is the actual rate:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CORCCT100S

Pretty tough to look at that and determine if this clearly concerning or an moderate adjustment to a changing post-covid environment.

Regardless, my criticism is towards the evidence presented in the article and the framing of the article.

I don't consider 24 hour forecasts "medium range". And I don't really view MetNet-3 a competitor to GFS or ECMWF at all (currently).

> Specifically, NOAA's global model, the UFS, is now in third or fourth place behind the European Center, the UK Meteorology Office, and often the Canadians.

Would love to see evidence of that. It is well established that ECMWF is top in the game. I don't think it is reasonable to just state that Canada and UK are better without evidence.

With that said, I agree the US should improve.