Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | chha's commentslogin


You never get to hear what these planes sound like in these promo videos


Electric aircraft that use normal propellers are significantly quieter than their combustion counterparts. Here's a short video of some takeoffs and landings from both.[1]

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXm4TnaXDWc


Thanks for this!

My local airport is so freaking annoying with all the Cessnas flying over our heads. I can't wait for electric to be the better choice.

I don't think most pilots realize how annoying they are in disturbing the peace.


I live near an airfield that has been in operation for over a century. If I found airplane noise particularly annoying, I would have chosen somewhere else to live. I find loud cars & motorcycles to be worse, so I prioritized being away from busy roads.

I think pilots are of a similar mindset. New airfields are rarely built near populated areas, so what usually happens is that nearby land gets developed, people move there, then they try to get the airfield restricted or shut down. It's a similar story for other noisy businesses like outdoor gun ranges or race tracks. I can see how that creates resentment for those who enjoy such hobbies. They're probably thinking something like, "We were here first. Why should we have to change or leave?"

I do dislike that leaded gasoline is still common in general aviation, so I look forward to a future full of electric aircraft.


Funny (stupid) story.

Denvers original airport was built in the "middle of no where", for noise reasons. Continue on for 30 years and lots of housing built up around it. People start complaining about noise. City decides to move the airport. Moves it 30 miles away, in the middle of no where (now DIA). Yep, you guessed it. People start building close to the airport, and then complain about the noise. I fully expect it to move again in 15-20 years


Laguna Seca, a fairly famous California race track, was opened in 1957 built out in the middle of nowhere. In 2024, people that moved near the racetrack sued to get it shut down.

I know there's some level of caveat emptor when buying a house, and realtors are guaranteed to not have any showings when it's noisy, but maybe just spell it out and the purchaser needs to be made aware.


> Laguna Seca, a fairly famous California race track, was opened in 1957 built out in the middle of nowhere. In 2024, people that moved near the racetrack sued to get it shut down.

“I swear, the race track just materialized out of nowhere!” -A wealthy liar living in California

I assume it was dismissed immediately since Laguna Seca is almost 70 years old.


It was not


Hey! I’m one of the people who moved to that area. I could sit on my back patio and watch a line of planes land at night.


One of the electric flight niches might be landing at night in areas that otherwise would be restricted for noise reasons.


I'd be more worried about all the leaded gas that GA planes use.

Oh no, there are all these old engine that can't use unleaded gas. The hobby pilots just have no choice but to continually dust the surrounding area with lead vapors. They certainly can't be forced to update their engines/aircraft. Cry me a river.


The reason they use old engines and leaded fuel is mostly due to FAA rules, not personal preference. Pilots spend a lot of time around airfields & avgas, so they want to get rid of lead additives as well.


Truth, they could have totally taken the opportunity in that video to demonstrate how much quieter it is, but unfortunately it has a soundtrack on it.


...or that the satellite network connection disconnects for some reason.



In Norwegian; gives an overview of how much artists made from your Spotify usage.


The EU already has. GDPR and the AI Act puts a lot of limits on what you can do in the open space, although it doesn't always go far enough.


And barely gets enforced


2775 fines for a total of €6.8B since July 2018. It's not A LOT (I would hope for A LOT MORE fines), but it's not nothing.

https://www.enforcementtracker.com/


It’s very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

But also kinda weird. There seems to be a lot of fines for hospitals for example.

Some Portuguese hospital was fined €400,000 for ‘Insufficient technical and organisational measures to ensure information security’


Medical, banking and insurance are three industries that the European data privacy watchdogs are much more strict about because of the potential for damage.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDPR_fines_and_notices

Top 5 fines:

1 - Meta - Ireland - €1.2 billion

2 - Amazon Europe - Luxembourg - €746 millions

3 - WhatsApp - Ireland - €225 millions

4 - British Airway - UK - £183 millions

5 - Google - France - €60 millions

I wish every law barely got enforced this way.


pretty pathetic, but people keep insisting you can regulate capital


I'd say the numbers listed here prove the GPs point of poor enforcement. The largest fine is roughly 0.97% of Meta's 2023 revenue, the equivalent of a $600 fine for somebody making 60k / year. It's a tiny-tiny cost of doing business at best, definitely not a deterrent, given Meta's blatant disregard for GDPR since then.


> the equivalent of a $600 fine for somebody making 60k / year

I don't know about you, but on that income I would certainly not brush off such a fine as a "cost of doing business". Would it cause me financial trouble, or would it force me to sacrifice other expenses? Absolutely not. But would I feel frustrated at having to pay it, feel stupid for my mistake, and do my best to avoid it in the future? Absolutely yes.


My bad, a better analogy would be a dealer making 60k / year selling drugs, gets caught by police and is fined $600. I wouldn’t expect them to change much.


Fair enough. In that sense I do see value in the analogy.


Would you still do your best to avoid it if that involved taking a pay cut of more than $600/year?


1% of Meta's global revenue is a tiny-tiny cost of doing business? At that point, I think I can stop even trying to argue here. It's a massive fine any way you put it. Especially when you consider the ceiling hasn't been reached and non compliance is more and more costly by design.


Their net profit was $60billion in 2024. This is peanuts. It can fluctuate by multiples of this fine in a month, depending on whether or not they've had a bad or good month, nevermind year. This pretty much is just a cost of doing business.


It's not even 1% of their annual revenue, let alone the entire multi year period they've been in breach before and since. It's nothing to them.


The interesting part is that it keeps going up. You seem to believe we have somehow reached a cap where Meta can just expense it as a cost of doing business. That's not how European law works. The fine maximum is far higher and repeated non compliance keeps making the fines higher and higher. It's a ladder not a sizing precedent.


Unfortunately it doesn't in practice. Meta's total revenue since 2018 when GDPR came into force is just shy of $1T. Even with all the smaller fines combined, the total amount of GDPR related fines is in the range of $3B. It's a rounding error.

There isn't a trend of increasing fines, nor has any fine even reached the cap, let alone applied multiple times for the recurring violations. Even more with the current US administration's foreign policy towards the EU.

While GDPR as a law is fine, with the exception of enforcement limitations, enforcement so far has been a complete joke.


Maximum GDPR fine is 4% of global revenue in the previous year. If a company has 30% profit margin then they can, in theory, treat is as a cost of doing business, indefinitely.


It's 4% per fine. Each violation is a fine and Meta owns multiple companies that can be fined. But 4% of global revenue already can't be treated as just a cost of doing business. Their shareholders would murder them.


So true. Can't wait for NIS2 to be implemented in my location (EU); the new directive allows authorities to hold board members and CEOs personally responsible for cybersec fails (although only as a last resort, after trying other means).


The belt packs typically do a lot more than to amplify ambient noise, they also handle RF, depending on the model decryption of the audio signal, EQ as well as other stuff. All while typically running on 2x1,5V AA batteries.

Audio gear isn't made to last long on batteries, it's made to be reliable for the hours a show typically lasts. I worked part-time as a sound tech (paid hobby) for 15+ years, and I never started a show without fresh batteries, regardless of what the indicators on the transmitters/receivers told me.


Been a while since I looked into this, but afaik Maven Central is run by Sonatype, which happens to be one of the major players for systems related to Supply Chain Security.

From what I remember (a few years old, things may have changed) they required devs to stage packages to a specific test env, packages were inspected not only for malware but also vulnerabilities before being released to the public.

NPM on the other hand... Write a package -> publish. Npm might scan for malware, they might do a few additional checks, but at least back when I looked into it nothing happened proactively.


npm is run by github / microsoft now, which also sells security products...


It depends. If they simply ignore the ruling, my guess is that whatever trade agreements are in place have a mechanism for escalating such violations so that an Israeli court can enforce the order. I also take for granted that it depends a lot on the political climate and the strategic value for the governments of Israel and the US...


Similar to the Shai Hulud attack, but with more sofisticated C2 (blockchain, Google Calendar). It also uses Unicode characters to hide source code in IDEs, harvests ecosystem credentials to infect and publish new versions of packages you have access to, and more.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: