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

From what I see the code downsamples video to 5 fps, so 1 hour of video is 3600 seconds * 5 fps = 18,000 frames. 18,000 frames * $0.00079/frame = $14.22. A couple dollars more with the overlap.

(The code also tries to skip "still" frames, but if your video is dynamic you're looking at the cost above.)


you're right that the code uses ffmpeg to downsample the chunks to 5fps before sending them, but that's only a local/bandwidth optimization, not what the api actually processes.

regardless of the file's frame rate, the gemini api natively extracts and tokenizes exactly 1 fps. the 5 fps downscaling just keeps the payload sizes small so the api requests are fast and don't timeout.

i'll update the readme to make this more clear. thanks for bringing this up.


Thanks for the details and correction.

Jamming is a good way to make sure everyone knows exactly where you are.

Not so much when dealing with radar sats. A jamming signal directed at a paticular sat can blank out hundreds of square miles from the SAR radar.

https://defence-blog.com/russia-is-jamming-european-space-ag...


I find it odd that there's a custom of blurring or obscuring exactly the thing I'm interested in when I show interest in it by mousing over it.

Fair, I was fine going this direction because you're a click a way from get the full view and with the hover there isn't much more "preview" to show. My number one priority with the hover was making it obvious the given thumb is interactive.

Since this post is a dupe, here's a video demonstrating a similar but different app I made: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjH0kMEz4YY


This went from #2 on the front page to the bottom of page 2 very quickly. It's unfortunate.


Or one person types 76 pages. This is a thing people used to do, not all that infrequently. Or maybe you have one friend who will help–cool, you just cut the time in half.


Typing 76 pages is easy when it's words in a language you understand. WPM is going to be incredibly slow when you actually have to read every character. On top of that, no spaces and no spellcheck so hopefully you didn't miss a character.


Seems like a job for an LLM


Quite the opposite if you want to trust the results


It's happening again. Spoofing is in progress, rendering another image. ADS-B Exchange has blocked access to the ICAOs/hexes in question--if you try to look at their history you get redirected to the base map.

https://x.com/TheIntelFrog/status/2016841289556168990


A transponder in a car is not an "aircraft station" (§ 87.5), therefore it is not covered by aircraft "license-by-rule" (§ 87.18(b)), so transmitting would be operating without a valid authorization (§ 1.903(a)). https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D...


That's not true. And if you click almost anywhere else on the spoofed track it will show as Source: ADS-B.


Maybe not "rely" on, but some definitely use public ADS-B aggregator sites.


I highly doubt any ATC on duty is looking at a public ADS-B aggregator as a real time source of information for his or her job.


There are non-radar towers that don't have scopes. They may have a traffic display, or maybe not. They might choose to use a public ADS-B aggregator site because it gives them situational awareness, but they don't use it to provide radar services to aircraft. That's my understanding from listening to a lot podcast episodes with air traffic controllers, anyway. I think it's an unofficial, non-FAA approved kind of thing that can make their jobs easier.

See https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc_html... for non-radar ATC procedures.


> They might choose to use a public ADS-B aggregator site because it gives them situational awareness

I do not understand what the upside is, aside from saving a tiny amount of effort and cost -- they could get the same data with more reliability by just running their own ADS-B receiver, without having a dependency on a third-party.


> they could get the same data with more reliability by just running their own ADS-B receiver, without having a dependency on a third-party.

Setting up an ADS-B receiver is indeed very cheap. Less than 100$. That's what many people, both aviation enthusiasts and ham radio operators, do for fun.

The problem is, do that on an airport? You'll now need permits to install the antenna (needs to be covered in the lightning protection system and even if it's just a passive receiver probably someone needs to sign off on an antenna being added). Fire code means you'll need approval and specialized people to run the cable (you need to drill holes in fire walls). Maybe there's some law or regulation requiring approval or causing a paper trail (e.g. in Germany, all electrical appliances have to be isolation-tested and visually inspected every two years by an electrician). Doing that the proper way is an awful lot of work. And by that point, someone will notice "hey, a Raspberry Pi? An RTL-SDR stick from eBay? No way that is certified to be used in a safety critical environment", killing off the project or requiring a certified device costing orders of magnitude more money.

In contrast, a privately owned laptop, tablet or phone with the Flightaware app? No one will give a shit about it unless someone relies on FA too much, causes an incident and that is found out.


All good points. I'd set it up very near the airport but not on it and then access it using the same web browser that I'd use to go to ADSB Exchange.


> I'd set it up very near the airport but not on it

The problem is, you need to have a good height for the antenna - "height is might" in radio, particularly above VHF bands. I actually can see this with my own ADS-B receiver - I'm in a valley and precisely can see that effect when plotting received packets.


I get good distance from my ground level antenna, but while I'm in a valley, it's very wide and long. My assumption is that most airports are going to be in fairly flat areas.


Why? You would almost certainly get better data with higher reliability and no effort and no money spent from airplanes.live, adsbexchange.com, etc.


The original point was that you become reliant on a public service, probably run by volunteers, for something halfway critical to your operation. Doing it yourself is easy and then you control the reliability, not someone else.


You're just saying things that don't have basis in reality.

It's not something halfway critical to the operation–why would the FAA allow that? ADS-B Exchange is not run by volunteers–it's run by employees of JETNET LLC, an aviation intelligence company. Doing it yourself almost certainly gives you less information–you're not part of a global network of receivers. It almost certainly gives you less reliability–receivers in the big networks typically have a fair amount of overlap which gives redundancy your single receiver doesn't have.

It's also not FAA approved!


I'd assume it's more to see "whats the latest ETA for this aircraft that's scheduled for 1 hour?". Their own ADS-B receiver is unlikely to pick it up.


Upside may be just that the equivalent first-party system doesn't exist or performs worse? ATC tower isn't a SCIF, they probably get their real-time news from Twitter like everyone else, too.


> they could get the same data

They could get uncensored data too - you dont want billionaires jets crashing into other planes because they didnt want to be tracked.


airplanes.live, adsb.lol, ADS-B Exchange, adsb.fi, etc. do not censor the data.


Imagine your boss doesn’t like you looking at ADS-B sites because it’s not data from an FAA approved system but as long as you’re discreet and not actually breaking a reg they don’t yell at you. Then they come in and see that you installed an antenna, RTL-SDR, and raspberry pi in the tower.


if there is any critical aviation service using a 3rd party website that relies on volunteer reporting of data, they deserve whatever happens


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

Search: