> DeepSeek can surpass proprietary models by “profiting” from open research and open source, why couldn’t the proprietary models do the same?
DeepSeek did something legitimately innovative with their addition of Group Relative Policy Optimization. Other firms are certainly free to innovate as well.
Doesn't seems so surprising to me. Most school shootings are perpetrated by those involved in the school community in some way. Similar domestic violence, humans are a lot more likely to commit these types of crimes against those they know personally.
You know what’s huger? The Indian Ocean. Add to that the lack of blue-water competition in it and it’s totally reasonable that any birds we have in the area are craning their necks north, not down.
“Nearby” is doing a lot of work there. The presumed flight path of MH370 went tens of thousands of kilometres from Diego Garcia, certainly outside the range of even the latest over-the-horizon radars. Meanwhile the tracking stations on that base are mostly focused on space activity and missile launches.
No amount of money can break the laws of physics and, like any sensor, radar has fundamental limits in range and resolution. MH370 flew into one of the most remote parts of the ocean it’s possible to reach, it would’ve been a miracle if it was tracked by any radar.
The presumed flight path at the time it went missing is perhaps relevant, and that was within the vicinity of Diego Garcia, as the flights last few known turns were heading toward it. It seems odd the US would not care nor have tracking ability.
I've seen analysis that showed the flight was within range of several over-the-horizon radars at the time of disappearance and for hours after, ie - someone should know more than we do. As often with such things, I can't find it again.
OTH radars are not operating all of the time, given the cost to operate them, and are not just covering large areas of ocean all over. They're typically focused specifically on areas of most importance which, for Diego Garcia, would be north toward China, not East toward Malaysia.
Nor do OTH radars always operate at maximum efficiency: They achieve their longest ranges by bouncing signals off the ionosphere, which is severely affected by prevailing space weather.
The only radar that it likely did pass through was Australia's JORN, but the western sector was not operational that night and isn't on 24/7 because of cost constraints.
Good points but neither of them rule out being reconfigured and used in an emergency, potential hijack situation to locate what could be a significant security threat. Airliners were used for the biggest attack on US ground since WW2. Priority number one.
Only if there’s enough forewarning, the radar is operational, the aircraft is within its range given prevailing space weather conditions, and that it’s pointing in the right direction. The latter is important because OTH radars are almost all fixed and can’t be steered.
Yes, governments would love to have global 24/7 coverage even over the open ocean. In practice that’s neither possible nor practical.
Given their strategic advantage, you can bet the military will have prioritised steerable.
I disagree with the general premise regarding global coverage. With the US military, capabilities, especially in surveillance, have historically been shown to be decades ahead of what the public thinks is possible.
Personally, if a post appeared tomorrow showing some HN had figured out how to trace the movements of any airliner, without using its adsb and relying instead on anything and everything else that's publicly available, from satellite imagery, to radio frequency data, to radar, even weather data (contrails are often detectable), it would seem cool, sure - but, not unbelievable.
That hypothetically believable scenario would be one person, with no budget, in likely a few weeks or months of their spare time.
The US military has trillions of dollars, the best talent in the world, and decades of dedicated effort in exactly this area, and a propensity to keep such advances secret for decades (as shown recently enough by the Trump photo).
> Given their strategic advantage, you can bet the military will have prioritised steerable.
This is not something you can really prioritise. OTH radar designs are a trade-off between range, angular resolution, frequency, and mobility. For the longest-ranged systems with good angular resolution you can't steer them outside their set beam pattern, because their sheer size makes that kind of steering impossible. So if you want steerable radars you necessarily have to compromise on range, angular resolution, etc.
> I disagree with the general premise regarding global coverage. With the US military, capabilities, especially in surveillance, have historically been shown to be decades ahead of what the public thinks is possible.
Again, there are fundamental limits here. As much money as the US military has, it can't break the laws of physics. We also have a good sense of what types of assets it has and where they are, including satellites.
> Personally, if a post appeared tomorrow showing some HN had figured out how to trace the movements of any airliner, without using its adsb and relying instead on anything and everything else that's publicly available, from satellite imagery, to radio frequency data, to radar, even weather data (contrails are often detectable), it would seem cool, sure - but, not unbelievable.
Doing so over the vast open ocean would indeed be unbelievable. Even doing so for an individual over an ideal location would not be believable, as available resources don't make this possible at any real scale with the necessary granularity.
> The US military has trillions of dollars, the best talent in the world, and decades of dedicated effort in exactly this area, and a propensity to keep such advances secret for decades (as shown recently enough by the Trump photo).
See my point above. As for the Trump photo, by which I presume you're referring to the satellite image of the failed Iranian launch, the displayed resolution was within what experts had already presumed was within the capabilities of deployed US satellites given all available information. The photo didn't display surprising capabilities, it merely provided an official confirmation about what was already widely assumed.
It's absolutely significant in at least some of the situations where you'd use this. A friend and I are planning on taking a small sailboat across the atlantic next year and were looking at communication options.
We had decided the normal starlink is just not feasible on a small solar-only boat so this caught my attention. It's still too high though. It would take slightly more power than all the other systems combined if it were DC. With an inverter it pushes it over and there just isn't that much prime panel space on a sailboat.
That bsd analysis. There isnt a magical contract fairy that creates infinite contracts for every company.
Yes there are more fixed price contracts, but if you fuck up like Starliner you are less likely to get another one.
And even if you could get it. Boeing peadership has clearly stated they are basically not really interested in that anymore. The have lost billions on fixed price contracts in space and military.
Boeing has not been able to get much new from NASA. Their moon lander was basically embaracing. They are in the nee private station buissness much.
One SLS gets finally mercy killed they will not be a prime contractor anymore.
In a pre-SpaceX world, there pretty much was no one else they could lose the next contract to. I think a lot of Boeing still lives in a world where they have a good reputation to milk.
This would make sense if the money was paid upfront.
It wasn't. As of right now, Boeing is massively in the hole on the project. The only way they get paid if they successfully complete the development program and then fly the 6 operational flights.
Nope, it's just a regular ATM operated by a 3rd party company. You get cash from it then give them the cash. The store will also often reimburse for the ATM fee.
The thing with Netflix is that they have such few open roles and there are plenty of other liquid high comp companies that pay similar. It was all about the original stock growth that just stuck I guess
WeChat is a 'super app' to the point that you don't need really a browser in China anymore. It's a mobile first based ecosystem (WeChat, XHS, Douban, Taobao, etc)
DeepSeek did something legitimately innovative with their addition of Group Relative Policy Optimization. Other firms are certainly free to innovate as well.