Had zero intentions of defending Boeing (or anyone else) here. I made a mistake about the meaning of “stranded” in my comment. What I should have said is “they are not stranded in space like how the two main characters in the film ‘Gravity’ were stranded”.
Mistake made, lessons learnt. Apologies.
As per the article, the SpaceX vehicle due for launch later this month will only carry two of the four astronauts originally planned. The two empty seats will be used by the two delayed-return astronauts when the vehicle returns in February.
Tried to copy/paste some excerpts for context, but weirdly, the bulk of the text content on that page is not text, but are part of images.
I was curious to know what was meant by "small data". From what I understand it goes something like:
* most often, only recent data is useful,
* single computers are enough to deal with the volumes of such recent data,
* local development is better for this (since individual computers are 100 times more powerful than when "big data" hype/trend emerged).
To add some context: the astronauts are not "stranded" in space. They are in the international space station. They were supposed to get back on this capsule after a few days stay, but they are now expected to stay in the ISS and get back only in February on SpaceX capsule/vehicle.
The article doesn't mention how or what kind of location data will be collected/used. There is no explicit mention of tracking location using smartphones or laptops.
It is mentioned that the firm already uses location data in connection with billable hours (verifying/approving the billable hours, I'm guessing). Again, no mention of how/what location data is collected.
It is mentioned that EY does something similar (office attendance tracking) using swipe card data.
Summary: "Plan with AI" then offered me a timetable that tried to ensure I get to watch all the chosen films over the week, with no screening time conflicts.
Longer walk-through:
Took an initial 10 seconds to figure out what I should be doing. The confusion happened because all the films were selected by default and therefore the "Plan with AI" button did not do anything.
But it told me in the tooltip/infobox "select 12 films or less". Good. But wasn't clear how do I change the selection individually, or even the fact that all films were selected by default.
Tried the "Unselect all". Then it all clicked.Randomly selected around 6 films. Saw on the calendar that the same film has repeat screenings on multiple days.
"Plan with AI" then offered me a timetable that tried to ensure I get to watch all the chosen films over the week, with no screening time conflicts.
There may be edge cases I'm not aware of, but overall, this was impressive to me.
"Planning" really feels like an area where AI can offer so much of meaning and value.
Suggestion:
How about either enabling "unselect all" by default, or limit default selection to 12 random films.
Curiosity question:
How did you arrive at the number limit 12?
> Our central question is whether there is a “STEM crisis” or a “STEM surplus.” The answer is that both exist. Our analysis yields the following findings:
The STEM labor market is heterogeneous. There are both shortages and surpluses of STEM workers, depending on the particular job market segment.
During the curation, how do you deal with problems for which some solutions exist but that some users are not aware of yet?
I would guess that social media will be so noisy with people complaining and thinking up tools/solutions. What level of signal-to-noise ratio would this service be able to manage?
Also, at least a preview of one week's newsletter would be appreciated.
>Councillors say they see what Phorest is trying to do, but that it’s not what the city overall needs.
“I definitely empathise with the CEO and company, said Eoin Hayes, a Social Democrats councillor with long experience in the tech industry. “It’s an effort at creative problem solving, but it’s going against the grain of what we’re trying to do with housing policy.”
Reg. Gmail marking Ente verification emails as spam and showing the "Similar messages were used to steal people's personal information" warning.
Not an engineer/experienced with email deliverability, but, I _did_ feel something off when I received the Email verification code email (which too was marked as spam by Gmail). Thoughts/observations:
1. The email body is very minimal, which could be a good thing, but,
> it did not have the usual trust markers/indicators - no brand logo or name at the top,
> a generic envelope/letter icon/image as the largest visual item in the message
> just a single "Use this code to verify your email address" line in the message body (except the "ente.io" link at the footer)
2. I did a quick comparison between the Ente verification code emails and some recent verification code emails from other products (Backblaze, Google, Instagram, IBM Security..)
> none of them were as barebones/non-descript like the Ente emails.
> They had descriptive text that provided a bit of context ("you recently signed up for an account at XYZ with PQR email address, and this code is required to...")
> They had the brand identity (Name / Logo) prominently somewhere in the beginning of the message
> AND most of them had the company name, registered address, and contact details in the footer. (Adds accountbility/trust?). Some even had links to privacy and support pages.
3. I believe you must have already explored the BIMI, VMC route for the "gmail blue tick".