NASA believes it understands why Ingenuity crashed on Mars

Engineers are already beginning to plan for possible follow-on missions.

Eleven months after the Ingenuity helicopter made its final flight on Mars, engineers and scientists at NASA and a private company that helped build the flying vehicle said they have identified what probably caused it to crash on the surface of Mars.

In short, the helicopter's on-board navigation sensors were unable to discern enough features in the relatively smooth surface of Mars to determine its position, so when it touched down, it did so moving horizontally. This caused the vehicle to tumble, snapping off all four of the helicopter's blades.

Delving into the root cause

It is not easy to conduct a forensic analysis like this on Mars, which is typically about 100 million miles from Earth. Ingenuity carried no black box on board, so investigators have had to piece together their findings from limited data and imagery.

Read full article

Comments

Report: Google told FTC Microsoft’s OpenAI deal is killing AI competition

Microsoft gatekeeping OpenAI models saddles AI rivals with costs, report says.

Google reportedly wants the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to end Microsoft's exclusive cloud deal with OpenAI requiring anyone who wants access to OpenAI's models to go through Microsoft's servers.

Someone "directly involved" in Google's effort told The Information that Google's request came after the FTC began broadly probing how Microsoft's cloud computing business practices may be harming competition.

As part of the FTC's investigation, the agency apparently asked Microsoft's biggest rivals if the exclusive OpenAI deal was "preventing them from competing in the burgeoning artificial intelligence market," multiple sources told The Information. Google reportedly was among those arguing that the deal harms competition by saddling rivals with extra costs and blocking them from hosting OpenAI's latest models themselves.

Read full article

Comments

New congressional report: “COVID-19 most likely emerged from a laboratory”

A textbook example of shifting the standards of evidence to suit its authors’ needs.

Recently, Congress' Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic released its final report. The basic gist is about what you'd expect from a Republican-run committee, in that it trashes a lot of Biden-era policies and state-level responses while praising a number of Trump's decisions. But what's perhaps most striking is how it tackles a variety of scientific topics, including many where there's a large, complicated body of evidence.

Notably, this includes conclusions about the origin of the pandemic, which the report describes as "most likely" emerging from a lab rather than being the product of the zoonotic transfer between an animal species and humans. The latter explanation is favored by many scientists.

The conclusions themselves aren't especially interesting; they're expected from a report with partisan aims. But the method used to reach those conclusions is often striking: The Republican majority engages in a process of systematically changing the standard of evidence needed for it to reach a conclusion. For a conclusion the report's authors favor, they'll happily accept evidence from computer models or arguments from an editorial in the popular press; for conclusions they disfavor, they demand double-blind controlled clinical trials.

Read full article

Comments

E-Fuels: EVP will Verbrennerverbot wieder kippen

Die größte Fraktion im Europaparlament will das geplante Verbrenner-Aus wieder rückgängig machen. Elektroautos würden unangemessen begünstigt. (Elektroauto, Auto)

Die größte Fraktion im Europaparlament will das geplante Verbrenner-Aus wieder rückgängig machen. Elektroautos würden unangemessen begünstigt. (Elektroauto, Auto)