Thervicarl
At that time there was a reference port for the Hercules development board available on-line. It was mostly working straight out of the box. I just had to fix a few issues with the Halcogen generated files (since then, TI has fixed the bugs), configure the lwIP options (to have DHCP and only use UDP). Since then (7 years ago), I have not touched the code once.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_Next_Generation
But on the development side, the situation is less clear. There is no major development project anymore since A350 is in operation. And there are no signs yet of an upcoming major program based on their research activities for hydrogen-powered of more electric airliners.
So there could still be layoffs or downsizing due to hiring less engineers than the ones that go to retirement.
Gwynne Shotwell
Disclosure: I work on satellite design and in the recent years on a program that is part of the NewSpace. I have an intimate knowledge of how what I help design works but a limited knowledge of what others may be doing.
A couple of insights:
* I started working on satellites in a large industrial group where, while not being handled by world class cybersecurity experts, secure communications with the satellites rely on a sane use of proven encryption protocols
* I am not sure when this level of security became standard and what was done to secure the satellites before hardware-level encryption with modern algorithms became available
* I was astounded when I discovered the level of casualness for everything related to security on scientific satellite projects, with even recent projects led by major agencies considering that always encrypting command and monitoring is overkill
And my main grip is that the study relies on asking universities that have the lowest bar in terms of caring about security (they already struggle enough to build a working thing) and then extrapolating from a specious argument that it must be worse on commercial spacecrafts.
> One surprising result was that the larger the satellite, the more vulnerable it was. Larger machinery typically used more commercial off-the-shelf components and was thus more vulnerable since the code base was public, whereas smaller CubeSats tended to use custom code.
Also
> a satellite should be designed so that TCs do not compromise the satellite’s stability without further validation
Says who ? What validation ? If an operator had the right to have a telecommand sent to the satellite, who or what aboard the satellite should decide if this telecommand was legitimate.
From experience, there is a myriad of things that you think are usually not a good idea to make your satellite do and then, when you need it as a workaround or mitigation for an unexpected condition, you are happy you have not implemented a list of authorized actions that is too constrained.
PS: It reminds me of the guy that was able to capture the GPS coordinates of an airplane broadcasted to the In-Flight Entertainment systems and got a lot of press coverage by extrapolating that it meant he could also take control of the aircraft from his seat in the cabin.
It has been for quite some time (at least it was already dragging this reputation for the EU constitution referendum in 2005).
To the point that the schematic vision for EU organization is the EU parliament expected to represent EU citizens vs. the EU commission expected to defend private interests.
And Ursula von der Leyen has a horrendous track record when it comes to doing anything remotely positive. But having Margrethe Vestager defend this appointment was more of a letdown.
And all of them have deemed you a suitable fit for their incompetent and stupid team or organization.
The main criteria should be: who has hardware in space ? So the answer is, despite all their problems, OneWeb.
> more like 4 years for ONE
That is disingenuous. The message you pointed to says "4-4.5 years from when we order material" which is comparing the manufacturing of an assembled item with the full length of the supply chain.
Even assuming that this could be done once or twice for some stupid novelty effect stunt, there is no way in hell that this can become a viable business practice.
In France I think the price of electricity for professionals has been multiplied by five in the past few months. The price of electricity for residential customers and small businesses has only increased by 5% because the French state and EDF are shouldering the difference.
This is the core of Softbank / Vision Fund investing thesis. The current events seem to show that this is not so easy to achieve even with tens (hundreds ?) of billions to burn in the process.
If they run out of steam, a lot of companies will have been over-bloated and then run to the ground in the process, but this will not have caused any new monopoly.
So there will barely be an entry fee for people coming for the day too. For a measure targeting people coming from thousands of kilometers away, I do not see how this is even going to make a dent in the tourist influx.
Looking for relatively similar cases like Machu Picchu or Tanzania national parks, I would have expected a fee between 50$ and 100$ to curb the tourism.
Residents seem to have come to the same realization as it looks like they are going to outlaw selling drugs to tourists and move the red light district out of the city.
That being said, as long as there is still the museum/culture tourism and the many wealthy expatriates coming for the quality of life, I do not see the prices dropping back enough to make a difference for regular/local people.
It was good training for supply chain management and manufacturing. And they were selling them (illegally, obviously) and sharing the revenue between students and teachers.
Over the years and hundreds of decoders sold, they probably contributed to a significant loss of revenue for Canal+ in my hometown.
It is underlining that lots of people are focusing on conflicts between scooters, bikes and pedestrian have to use walkable areas and fringe of streets/roads for moving and parking.
But overlooking that probably 90% of the space is dedicated to cars (driving and parking) and that is not up for debate.
But the important thing is that anybody with two eyes (or at least one) and some basic cognitive abilities can understand what is going on and make sure that there is nothing shady going on.
Basically any citizen can take a sandwich, a bottle of water and spend the day in his local voting place from beginning to end and have a reasonable certainty that the voting process was fair.
I think this is very important for democracy. It does not solve other problems (fair access to media...) but at least the voting part is reliable.
Early in the OneWeb project Greg Wyler was coming with his O3B background and positioning himself as the mastermind for the constellation aspects (satellite production and operation) with Elon Musk and SpaceX handling the launches.
Then Elon started questioning Greg Wyler decisions (which turned out to be a correct assessment) and OneWeb went its own way with Arianespace assuming SpaceX would never invest seriously and catch-up for the design and mass production of satellites. History has proven them wrong.
For Arianespace, no idea. It will probably keep a number of lawyers busy for the coming years.
Besides that, it is hard to get a balanced view of the question because SpaceX zealots paint a rosy picture of the benevolence of the company toward what is still the only constellation that may look like a competitor to Starlink (even if it is a weak competitor).
Also, most of the news reports focus on OneWeb buying Soyuz Russian rockets. But the reality is that OneWeb bought launches from Arianespace that buys Soyuz rockets / Baikonour access through its subsidiary Starsem co-owned with Russia. So Arianespace/ArianeGroup may be on the hook for the breach of contract and possibly loss of 36 satellites.
And they are in deep trouble with the planned end of Ariane 5, no more Soyuz, Vega with no Ukranian upper stage and an uncertain progress of Ariane 6.
Disclosure: I have been involved in the OneWeb project but not a OneWeb employee.
It is not magic. You signal from the user terminal has to reach a ground station / gateway connected to the Internet. Either there are inter-satellite links and the signal can be routed to a gateway far away. Or there are not and the gateway need to be at most a few hundred kilometers away if you satellites are in orbit at 400km.
> Afghanistan not being able to do anything against their citizens using Starlink apart from “shaking their fists at the sky”.
Or sentence to death people caught with a Starlink dish on their roof.
If the GPS is integrated with inertial navigation systems, the effect of GPS spoofing on the computation of the position (that could be observed by ADS-B) might prove tricky to anticipate.
https://www.arianespace.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Soyuz...
Legally, you have to pay if you have a television in you home and you are subject to paying the residence tax (which will soon be applicable to less than 20% of homes anyway).
> And it's significant
No, it's not. It's like less than 0.5% of the tax you are paying (considering income tax, social tax, residence/homeowning tax, VAT...). They just keep it because they can rile up /distract people when they increase the TV tax by 5 euros.
And it is a way for the government to pressure public TV/radio into some obedience (since the government can basically cut a large part of their funding of these TV/radio by removing this tax).
Most of the time, people with large amounts of cash are workers (skilled construction workers...) that are able to get a significant part of their income in cash and do income tax avoidance. Or criminals (drug dealers...).
Having to deposit their hidden savings all-at-once is not good news for them. This is basically what happened when France switched to the Euro.