I'm biased, but I feel like if they really cared about the environment they would encourage licensing this instead of keeping it to themselves.

Patenting often precludes licensing. Lowering fuel costs is not synonymous with environmental concern.

> Patenting often precludes licensing.

Don't you mean "precedes"? You can't license something you don't have the rights to.

Good catch, my grammar is off.

Licensing is precluded by a lack of patenting.

Who said they cared about the environment? They wanted lower fuel costs to save themselves money, which makes perfect sense.

The article mentioned carbon dioxide output: "the company overhauled the design to address rising fuel costs and cut carbon dioxide emissions"

Though I imagine the fuel costs are a primary consideration and the environmental aspect is mostly there to push press opportunities.

Cutting carbon emissions is a separate goal because the EU seems to have a directive that seeks to reduce carbon emissions among the ships that service the EU market (somehow). I don't seem to be able to search the web effectively to find discussions of this directive. It came to my attention while reading about some other maritime silliness. There seems to be mention of something here: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/shipping/index_...

But then the maximum would probably be 255.

WARNING - Did not RTFA, but I think I get the gist.

If they use an 8 bit counter, then the detection is basically the axle count % 256. Axle #256 crossing would reset the counter to zero, indicating a safe track, when if wasn't.

And 256 would be 0

Because it creates an implicit expectation that your review should be positive.

Yeah, I'm kind of torn on this. I was asked at a previous company to write a review on GlassDoor (I never did).

Let me rephrase that last sentence: GlassDoor was brought up literally at every monthly update meeting.

But back on target, I'm torn: On the one hand I understand the need to actively recruit and attract talent to join your workforce and I definitely understand GlassDoor is something used by many people to benchmark their expectations on working environment, management and peers. I get that completely.

Where I break off though is when you have to ask your employees to write a review (even if you're adding the qualifier "Be honest, we wont penalize you") instead of creating an internal feedback environment that can go into recruitment, retention and employee/manager review platforms.

I would say there's already a power imbalance inherent to the workplace, especially if you're in one of those "at-will" states. So putting in front of your employees "Hey, can you go write a review of working here on this site?" understandably makes some people shift in their seats.

Go with your gut on this one. Obviously being part of a tribe means trying to attract the best talent to ensure it's success, but it sounds like you don't necessarily want to join a tribe that's "encouraging" signals to a market when there wouldn't normally be any.

I don't really see how. If I'm unhappy, I'm not going to lie just because I want to anonymously live up to an unspoken expectation.

Unless you think people fear being ID'd... but that's a problem with the whole model.

Anyway, I'd imagine many glassdoor reviews were generated this way. If employers didn't ask, it would be mostly bad reviews from ex employees. Few others would bother.

The same would apply to App Store reviews also then. Essentially the review system is broken.

They wil sometimes remove reviews that are too negative. They removed mine of my previous employer.

So are the documents customers were allegedly asked to sign real, or fabricated? This post calls Mr. Niedermayer everything short of a liar, and yet they didn't answer the obvious question. I am still withholding judgement.

I agree, if it is true they executed even a soft-NDA in exchange for repairs (ala hush money), regulators rightly need to start looking alot closer at Tesla.

Nothing illegal about it but it would definitely be a symptom. Fanboys will be fanboys, and haters will be haters but auto safety is not something to take lightly.

We have had auto manufacturers and parts suppliers outright lie to regulators and the public about safety issues. It seems to be a recent pattern in the industry.

The post claimed that such documents exist but do not contain language preventing the signer from contacting government regulators.

The cause of this has always been known (within the Rust community), but it is not considered a problem. For most users, the advantages of static linking and using jemalloc significantly outweigh the cost of a 0.5mb constant overhead on binary size. Those users under different circumstances can configure their build using the tactics in this article to make a different trade off more suited to their circumstances.

I don't understand the article's point about ISP speeds. Really if you're on a slow enough ISP that a <1MB file is too large for someone to download, then practically speaking they won't be able to download anything smaller either.

Because it's not that single ~1MB file that's a problem, it's the cumulative effect. There are people on dialup and GPRS and even people who pay by the megabyte.

Have you considered that some applications might have more than one executable?

Of course, said key is a liability if it is found in your possession.

Encrypt, hexdump, render in green font on black background, set as wallpaper. Nobody will ask :)

Theory: Wright made promises that he would use his weight as Satoshi to overcome current political conflict within the Bitcoin community in a way that would satisfy Gavin. Gavin sees him as an ally and has vouched for him. A distasteful ally, but for the greater good.

Given how swiftly people are attacking Wright, chances are this would fail before the political situation can be resolved.

This seems extremely unlikely for several reasons, not least of which is that of course the bitcoin community would demand simple cryptographic proof of identity.

As others have pointed out in previous threads, citing James Randi, you don't have to be stupid to fall for a con. It's quite easy to be tricked even when you think you're being skeptical.

I feel like there should be some way for Gavin to conclusively demonstrate that Wright = Satoshi. Something in an email, a person preference for something, his favorite song. Some kind of unique information that was shared between the two that only they would know.

The site is clearly designed for people who work in the field, and even then it only took me a moment to find a download link for some data. It even has a workable search function.

I'm not saying it couldn't be better.

I adore this. Good work!

There seems to be a bug that is crashing the rooms. I think it might have something to do with consecutive 90 degree turns.

I'm glad this got unflagged. Thumbs up to the HN mods.

Hey there, glad you like it! We had a lot of fun building it out in a nice little 12 hour sprint. :)

For some reason the sockets seem to hang unpredictably and I don't have time to debug at this instant, so I've just set the server to be killed and restarted every 10 minutes - you were probably playing during one of those restarts. Refreshing the page should work fine.

I'll push an actual fix in the next couple days.

Thanks to the mods for unflagging! Not sure why it was flagged in the first place, but we'd love to receive constructive feedback from whoever flagged it.

>Not sure why it was flagged in the first place

Probably because it's a tinyurl. I'm surprised submitting it was even possible. I almost flagged it myself but I saw there were some comments.

Is there a more detailed/technical article available?

After a few links in the article pointing to other Verge articles, I found this:

http://www.nasa.gov/feature/mission-manager-update-kepler-re...