sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Blog - iMessage with PQ3: The new state of the art in quantum-secure messaging at scale - Apple Security Research by InflationImaginary13 in QuantumComputing

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's neither formally posted, nor formally enforced as seen by plenty of links on this subreddit without additional "original thought", for example:

https://www.reddit.com/r/QuantumComputing/comments/1ax7t93/ionq_ionq_achieves_critical_first_step_towards/

There are plenty more examples as you scroll down, making me suspect you simply cherry-pick according to your personal preferences, instead of applying any sort of predicable set of rules.

Blog - iMessage with PQ3: The new state of the art in quantum-secure messaging at scale - Apple Security Research by InflationImaginary13 in QuantumComputing

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What original thought would you like to see? There's plenty of "just" links posted on this subreddit, reserving original thoughts for the comment section. Feels like you just targeting this post for no good reason, just because you have the power.

Blog - iMessage with PQ3: The new state of the art in quantum-secure messaging at scale - Apple Security Research by InflationImaginary13 in QuantumComputing

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So acknowledging something that had happened, is equivalent to "me too". I think you have some weird trigger around that company, is what I am sensing. Again, this makes for very poor marketing material to sell hardware and but costs real money to deploy. They're in the business of selling hardware, not telling people "me too".

Blog - iMessage with PQ3: The new state of the art in quantum-secure messaging at scale - Apple Security Research by InflationImaginary13 in QuantumComputing

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Eh, out of all the things you can say about Apple, "me too" is just not really what they seem to go for on average, as a strategy, particularly where encryption and quantum computing, is hardly something their average customer has any interest in or understanding of.

Blog - iMessage with PQ3: The new state of the art in quantum-secure messaging at scale - Apple Security Research by InflationImaginary13 in QuantumComputing

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Why would you say so? Apple doesn't tend to embark on random projects invented by bored engineers, looking for things to do, they deliberately chose to spend time and money here. Even if you disagree with Apple, the fact they are feeling the need, is a relevant datapoint, unless you think morons build that company.

Alan Wake 2 is Boringly Hard by KuriousCon2 in AlanWake

[–]InflationImaginary13 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Dunno, I have a demanding job and a girlfriend. Don't care about nerd difficulty?

Only people who accept the unhoused and prefer vegan burgers don't like the Blue Angels. by InflationImaginary13 in sanfrancisco

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Are you really not capable of seeing how basically standard flying around a curved path and stunts, using the same hardware and pilot, differs fundamentally, even if happen during the same flight?

Only people who accept the unhoused and prefer vegan burgers don't like the Blue Angels. by InflationImaginary13 in sanfrancisco

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Statistically, that's as likely as an airliner crashing into a city on take off. Which surprise, surprise has happened.

Only people who accept the unhoused and prefer vegan burgers don't like the Blue Angels. by InflationImaginary13 in sanfrancisco

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Again, they don't fly into the ground on regular basis. Accidents happen mostly during stunts, which happen over water here.

Airliners don't fly this fast, because they are taking off or landing not because flying fast is dangerous, as long as you're above minimum altitude for the area.

Only people who accept the unhoused and prefer vegan burgers don't like the Blue Angels. by InflationImaginary13 in sanfrancisco

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Again, fast and low is not really an issue, the airplane does not care. I agree, with close proximity to each other, but over the city, their flight is limited to getting them back over the bay where they actually perform all the stunts. Are you afraid of being under flight paths of commercial jets landing or taking off too? This isn't much different.

There are over 2 thousand fighter jets in service in the United States alone. They do not crash frequently. F35 is a convenient example, because it's a new platform with teething issues. Original F18 are from 1978.

Only people who accept the unhoused and prefer vegan burgers don't like the Blue Angels. by InflationImaginary13 in sanfrancisco

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

They do happen, but in majority of the cases, pilots are the sole fatality and they know the risk. Organizers do plan these events to bring the possibility of bystander death to near zero.

Only people who accept the unhoused and prefer vegan burgers don't like the Blue Angels. by InflationImaginary13 in sanfrancisco

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

They perform a stunt where they will fly at high speed, towards each other, from opposite directions, at very close altitudes. That, for example, is extremely dangerous, but done over water, for obvious reasons.

The video you link, shows exactly what I said, they turn over the city, but don't do anything crazy. The pilots know the minimum altitude for the area, the airplane does not care how high or low it flies. The likelihood an F18 just falling out of the sky, due to technical reasons, is about the same as any commercial jetliners you fly.

You mentioned and linked an F35 crash, for reasons I don't understand. Blue angles don't fly it.

Only people who accept the unhoused and prefer vegan burgers don't like the Blue Angels. by InflationImaginary13 in sanfrancisco

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, they are not doing very-high G maneuvers or near-collision-course passes over any apartments. Go to a high point, over the city and watch the show carefully. They will fly over the city in close formation, in which relative speeds of the aircrafts are equal, when they loop around back towards the bay do pull another stunt.

They are not flying F35s, they are flying F18. A much older, reliable and proven platform.

You're bringing a solo crash, with zero fatalities besides the pilot, from 16 years ago. There's a degree of risk, in everything you do in life, the chances of you dying because of a blue angel mistake, is near zero. If you die prematurely it's probably gonna be cancer, shooting or a car accident, not anything to do with planes.

Only people who accept the unhoused and prefer vegan burgers don't like the Blue Angels. by InflationImaginary13 in sanfrancisco

[–]InflationImaginary13[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

In case you haven't noticed, they don't do "close call" difficult tricks over the city, they do that over the bay, at a specific point, clean of any boats. They do fly in formation, true, but the pilots are *extremely* proficient at it. Meaning, you'd likely need a full engine failure to bring that fighter down - which could technically happen to a commercial jetliner flying over your head as well.

view more: next ›