Netflix used to make its money on physical media, mailing DVDs to customers, and it looks like the company’s trending toward the analog once again. The streaming giant has, strangely, decided to open a number of brick-and-mortar retail locations, called Netflix House, as originally reported by Bloomberg.

The stores will sell merchandise based on hit Netflix shows, so you can finally snag that Lincoln Lawyer coffee mug you’ve always dreamed of. Netflix House establishments will also offer dining and curated live experiences. To the latter point, the two initial locations are going to feature an obstacle course based on Squid Game. This seems to miss the point of the show’s brutal satire of modern capitalism, but that’s been par for the course since it took the world by storm back in 2021.

Netflix House will also boast rotating art installations based on hit shows and live performances to excite fans. Additionally, the in-house restaurant will serve cuisine and drinks originally featured on the streamer’s many unscripted food-based reality shows. The menu will range from fast casual to high-end dining.

The first two locations should open up in the US some time in 2025, though Netflix hasn’t said where, with more global outlets to come at a later date. Why the big global push? Josh Simon, the company’s vice president of consumer products, told Bloomberg that its customers “love to immerse themselves in the world of our movies and TV shows, and we’ve been thinking a lot about how we take that to the next level.” Want to really take things to the next level? Let us play real-world versions of The Circle and Is It Cake?

Of course, this isn’t Netflix’s first stab at brick-and-mortar nirvana. In the past, it’s opened a number of pop-up experiences throughout the world to celebrate shows like Stranger Things and its spate of cooking reality programming. Netflix House, on the other hand, will celebrate the streamer’s entire stable of content, though we doubt there will be any live experiences based on Real Rob, Flaked or The Ranch anytime soon. We wouldn’t mind, though, snagging some sweet Bojack Horseman merch.

The company’s still finalizing details regarding menus, locations and just about everything else. It has more than a year, after all, to set up shop.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/netflix-to-open-branded-retail-stores-for-some-reason-184331296.html?src=rss

Source: Engadget – Netflix to open branded retail stores for some reason

Threads is now rolling out a pair of useful updates as Meta tries to give the app some more momentum. One of the new features is an edit button, which will help folks avoid having to repost something when they want to correct a mistake.

X (formerly Twitter) took 16 years to add an edit button, and then it placed it behind the Twitter Blue/X Premium paywall. Threads took just over three months to introduce a similar option, which is free to all users and will be available on mobile and the web.

After you post something on Threads, you’ll have five minutes to edit it, as 9to5Google points out. That’s a reasonable enough timeframe (X users have up to an hour to tweak their tweets). On the downside, Threads doesn’t show the edit history for a post. That’s bad for transparency, especially if someone significantly changes the substance of a post that gains traction very quickly.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg also noted that Threads is adding the option to post voice clips. That’s another welcome update, especially for those who prefer speaking to typing (or using voice-to-text features). Meanwhile, it appears that Threads is working on a trending topics feature.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/threads-is-rolling-out-an-edit-button-that-you-dont-have-to-pay-for-180341726.html?src=rss

Source: Engadget – Threads gets an edit button, no subscription required

The combustion engine is a marvel of engineering, but has also majorly contributed to air pollution. After all, there are over 1.4 billion combustion engine vehicles roaming the planet. That’s a whole lot of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide and hydrocarbons being released into the atmosphere.

While we wait (and wait) for the eventual rise of electric vehicles, some areas have taken it upon themselves to solve the issue of air pollution related to combustion engines by, well, banning the vehicles entirely. Stockholm, the capital of Sweden, just announced a ban on diesel and petrol-powered vehicles throughout its city center, as reported by Semafor.

The ban goes into effect sometime in 2025, so you still have more than a year to race around Stockholm in your old beat-up Dodge. The new policy will, however, continue to allow hybrid vans in the city center, in addition to combustion-based ambulances and police cars. Additionally, if you have a documented disability you’ll be able to drive whatever you want, wherever you want, as indicated by The Guardian.

The ban doesn’t impact the entire capital city. This is just for what’s called the city center, an area comprising 20 blocks at the heart of the city. Stockholm’s vice mayor for transport, Lars Stromgren, announced the move and said current conditions represented a “completely unacceptable situation,” noting that the city’s air “causes babies to have lung conditions and the elderly to die prematurely.”

Electric vehicles will, of course, be allowed to drive in the city center with no restrictions. Stockholm’s new policy joins other low-emission zones (LEZs) in cities throughout Europe, including London, Madrid, Berlin and Paris, among others. Stockholm goes further than any of the other European cities with this near complete ban. London, for instance, charges combustion vehicles to drive through its low-emission zone while Paris, Athens and Madrid just banned diesel vehicles.

Detractors are calling Stockholm’s policy too extreme. The Swedish Confederation of Transport Enterprises said that the city’s ruling political party is in “far too much of a hurry” to further reduce combustion-based emissions.

Conventional wisdom about coin flips may have been turned on its head. A global team of researchers investigating the statistical and physical nuances of coin tosses worldwide concluded (via Phys.org) that a coin is 50.8% likely to land on the same side it started on, altering one of society’s most traditional assumptions about random decision-making that dates back at least to the Roman Empire.

The team appeared to validate a smaller-scale 2007 study by Stanford mathematician Persi Diaconis, which suggested a slight bias (about 51 percent) toward the side it started on. The authors of the new paper conducted 350,757 flips, using different coins from 46 global currencies to eliminate a heads-tail bias between coin designs. (They also used a variety of people to rule out individuals with biased flipping techniques corrupting the results.) Regardless of the coin type, the same-side outcome could be predicted at 0.508, which rounds up perfectly to Diaconis’ “about 51 percent” prediction from 16 years ago.

The researchers found no evidence of a heads-tail bias when excluding its starting position from the data. In other words, if you pay no attention to which side the coin is on pre-flip, the odds of the outcome are equally likely to be heads or tails. 

Coin flippers in the study selected their starting position randomly (or according to an algorithm), flipped the coin, caught it in their hand and recorded the landing position. (If they flipped it over in their palm before revealing it, the opposite side it started on had 50.8% odds.) All participants videotaped and uploaded recordings of their flips to simplify collection and coding errors. “Our data therefore provide strong evidence that when some (but not all) people flip a fair coin, it tends to land on the same side it started,” the authors wrote.

The paper notes there was a high degree of variability between coin flippers. “Some people appear to have little or no same-side bias, whereas others do display a same-side bias, albeit to a varying degree.” But taken on the whole, it leads to those 50.8% odds favoring the starting side. 

The findings could even lead to (slight) financial gains. The researchers say that if you bet $1 on 1,000 separate coin flips, always betting on the side it starts on (and catching the coin rather than letting it roll on a surface or flipping it over in your palm), you’d make a $19 profit. The authors note that this is better odds than a casino’s built-in advantage for six-deck blackjack against a high-level player. They suggest that anyone making a high-stakes decision based on a coin flip would be wise to conceal its starting position.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/coin-flips-dont-appear-to-have-5050-odds-after-all-171556415.html?src=rss

Source: Engadget – Coin flips don’t appear to have 50/50 odds after all

Earth’s orbit is getting crowded.

Last year, a record 2,409 objects were sent to orbit, the bulk of which were satellites settling into the increasingly cluttered region 1,200 miles above our planet’s surface known as low Earth orbit. Another 2,000-plus satellites have joined them so far this year, according to the UN’s Online Index of Objects Launched into Outer Space. As the presence of artificial objects in orbit grows, so too does the accumulation of debris, or space junk — and the risk of collisions. Dealing with existing waste and preventing its unchecked growth has become imperative, but it’s a problem that doesn’t have one simple solution.

Currently, the US Department of Defense’s Space Surveillance Network tracks more than 25,000 objects larger than 4 inches wide, most of which are concentrated in low Earth orbit, and there are an estimated millions of smaller objects still that are trickier to pinpoint. This includes everything from defunct satellites and spacecraft fragments to things as small as a paint chip, all of which can cause damage to other equipment due to the extreme speeds orbiting objects travel at. As yet, there have been no successful missions to remove extant debris from orbit. Proposals for removing this debris fall into two broad (and imperfect) categories: pushing them further from Earth into graveyard orbits where they pose less risk, or pulling them towards Earth where they’ll deorbit and burn up in the atmosphere.

One such system is being developed and tested by Astroscale. The company, headquartered in Japan, demonstrated a magnetic capture-and-release tactic in 2021 with its ELSA-d mission, which simulated the strategy using an extra satellite it brought with it as mock debris. In a real-world scenario, its magnet would lock on to debris floating through space and drag it down to deorbit. Astroscale is selling its own docking plates that satellite operators can affix to their equipment ahead of launches, so it can easily be removed after a mission’s end. It’s partnered with UK-based OneWeb to test how this will work, and plans to execute a full removal demonstration using one of the company’s internet satellites in 2025 under the ELSA-M mission. 

Astroscale will also soon launch its ADRAS-J spacecraft in partnership with Japan’s space agency, JAXA, to demonstrate the ability to safely approach and inspect a real target ahead of future removal attempts. And, it’s gearing up for a separate mission dubbed COSMIC that will use a robotic arm to grab objects in orbit, this time aiming for a pair of dead British satellites. That is expected to launch in the next few years.

The European Space Agency similarly commissioned Swiss startup ClearSpace for a junk removal mission that’s slated to launch in 2026. It’s expected to be the first mission to actually remove a real piece of debris from orbit, rather than perform a simulated capture. Ironically, the target of the ClearSpace-1 mission — an approximately 250-pound defunct rocket upper stage dubbed Vespa — was struck by untracked debris in August. The event created more debris, but ESA says it left the object intact and still in position for capture. ClearSpace will attempt to grab onto Vespa using a giant robotic claw, and the two will deorbit together, ending with them both burning up in Earth’s atmosphere.

Researchers have also experimented with the use of harpoons and nets to catch objects floating through space. The first mission to demonstrate these active debris removal techniques was one called RemoveDEBRIS, which launched in 2018. In 2018 and 2019, the craft successfully performed simulated debris capture by firing out a net and ensnaring a mock target, and by shooting a harpoon at a target to pierce and hook onto it. The company behind the project — Surrey Satellite Technology — does not appear to have any follow-up missions planned.

A cost-benefit analysis released last year by NASA noted that the benefit of space tugs like these could surpass their upfront costs in a matter of decades, but using space- or ground-based lasers to nudge debris out of orbit could break even much sooner. Lasers can move objects either through the momentum of their photons, or through a process called ablation, in which thrust is generated when the laser vaporizes bits of debris. The latter especially could be used for both large and small objects, either to deorbit debris or move trackable pieces out of another satellite’s way to avoid a collision.

“The process of laser ablation and photon pressure induces a change in velocity in the target debris, which ultimately alters the size and shape of its orbit,” said West Virginia University engineer Hang Woon Lee, who NASA recently granted up to three years of funding for research into this tactic. Doing so could mean “avoiding potentially catastrophic events,” he said. Using multiple lasers at once, instead of a single beam, could produce even greater effects.

Others yet are looking into means of recycling space debris, both to cut down on junk and to limit the reliance on reentries for its removal. While reentry is among the preferred disposal methods, it doesn’t come entirely without side effects of its own, which haven’t yet been well studied. Scientists have begun to speak up about the potential ozone-depleting effects of having large numbers of satellites disintegrate in Earth’s atmosphere, which releases pollutants like aluminum and nitrogen oxides. There are concerns about harmful pollution in the ocean, too, where spacecraft parts that don’t fully break apart end up.

Companies like Neumann Space and CisLunar Industries are developing the means to melt down metal parts from debris in space and reuse that material as fuel. The former’s Neumann Drive converts metal rods into plasma to generate thrust, and was just recently integrated into a satellite for the first time to begin tests of the system in space. CisLunar, on the other hand, is building the technology to create those metal fuel rods, along with other materials that could be repurposed to support other missions.

In the US, policymakers are starting to clamp down on commercial entities contributing to the pollution. The FCC handed out its first-ever fine for space debris in early October, and revised its guidelines last year for operations in low Earth orbit, with a new mandate that states satellites in LEO must be transitioned out of orbit within 5 years of completing their missions. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is also eyeing more stringent policies, and proposed a new rule in September that would require commercial launch operators to have a plan in place to remove rocket upper stages from orbit within set timelines, from 30 days to 25 years depending on the circumstances.

Thanks to the rapid acceleration of commercial space activities in the 2020s, we’ve seen an unprecedented number of new satellites arrive in orbit, and there are many more yet on their way. With more launch providers on the scene and innovation in reusable launch systems, led by SpaceX with its Falcon 9 rockets, launches have become less costly and more attainable. And competition to provide space-based internet connectivity by way of satellite “megaconstellations” is intensifying; SpaceX’s Starlink fleet is now at about 5,000 and counting, Amazon just launched the first two prototypes of its eventual 3,200 Project Kuiper satellites and OneWebb has placed over 600 satellites in orbit as of early 2023.

Scientists have long warned about the potentially catastrophic chain reactions that could be caused by space junk if it’s allowed to get out of hand. In the 1970s, NASA scientists Donald Kessler and Burton Cour-Palais argued in a paper that rampant debris could spur collisions that in turn create more debris, and cause more collisions. The risk of impacts between satellites increases, too, as more are pumped into orbit. We’ve already seen a glimpse of how disastrous that could be. In 2009, a commercial Iridium 33 satellite collided with a long-defunct Russian military satellite, Cosmos 2251, creating nearly 2,000 pieces of large debris.

Satellite destruction on a mass scale would have grave consequences both in space and on Earth. It could interfere with science activities and space exploration, and threaten the safety of astronauts aboard the International Space Station. It would also disrupt communications on the ground, removing major sources of internet and cellular connectivity, and GPS. Weather services we’ve long relied on would be interrupted.

More than half of all satellites that have ever been sent to orbit are still up there, a lot of them inactive. “Imagine how dangerous sailing the high seas would be if all the ships ever lost in history were still drifting on top of the water,” ESA Director General Jan Wörner said in 2019, when ClearSpace-1 was announced. “That is the current situation in orbit, and it cannot be allowed to continue.”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/theres-no-easy-answer-to-being-a-space-janitor-170011469.html?src=rss

Source: Engadget – There’s no easy answer to being a space janitor