skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are a number of companies and people working on potentially innovative ideas, but it's not an easy thing. Serrated trailing edges and vortex generators are easy enough to test (reduced noise from one, increase energy from the other). Others such as shrouded turbines, or multi-segment blades are difficult.

Another thing vendors are doing now is purposefully running generators beyond their design at higher wind speeds (getting 2.2 MW from a 2.0 MW generator, for example), provided that other operating parameters are measured to be within range. This is usually driven by cooling requirements.
Furthermore, this idea that nobody's studying the number-of-blades problem is bogus too. When I worked abroad as a research assistant in the Wind Energy Project Group at the TU Delft (biggest tech university in the Netherlands), one of the researchers showed me a very interesting wind turbine that had a massive, elegantly curved blade on the one side and a big blob on the other. He explained, "We've been doing some simulations on these one-blade designs, even though they look goofy. This blob is just a counterweight, it is very cheap to produce because you don't need any advanced materials to use it. So the question is, if you had three times the budget to spend on just one blade, could you make it so good that it would outclass the three-blade model completely?"

In fact I asked why he wasn't going with 5 or 7 or 9 blades (he explained that even numbers tend to be Bad News) and he explained that the big problem was, as you increase the number of blades, the proportion of the rotor disk that consists of blade gets higher, which means the force on the tower component gets larger -- it goes something like the third power of wind-speed. Every few years or so, hurricane-force winds batter parts of Europe, and therefore there is a massively important design requirement that the wind turbine not completely be obliterated during these violent storms. An airplane with a funky propeller can of course be stored indoors when this happens; a turbine would require maintenance technicians to disassemble each one the day that the high-wind forecast was received.

Googling some of these related issues brings me to the page:

http://mstudioblackboard.tudelft.nl/duwind/Wind%20energy%20o...

However I cannot say with great certainty whether this is the same person that I heard these things from, or just a peer in the same field with the same general conclusions.
Understood, but the contact link could be maliciously changed through a MITM attack (which would be prevented if the whole domain was accessible through HTTPS).
It seems like "Scuzz" introduces some side bands. Maybe through something like ring modulation, or additive synthesis. Then there is the delay effect, which will naturally add some additional frequency content when the time isn't a multiple of the sine period.

But with all of those turned down, there are some interesting shapes in the frequency view. Maybe some sort of stereo spread effect that get mixed to mono for the FFT display?
>I've come across it in a few other contexts and I take it like a football chant.

Finally, someone who fucking gets it.

HN is such a Mecca of sperglords that the can't even understand a sports chant.
java.util.logging can be bridged into SLF4J using the jul-to-slf4j bridge.
That study doesn't necessarily contradict anything I said. I agree that cats are now the largest predator species of birds, but we've killed most the other predators. It also credits unowned cats as doing more than half of the predation, so keeping owned cats indoors wouldn't fix it.
> Anyhow, the upshot of this is that US rocket scientists spent literally tens of billions of dollars developing hyper-locally-optimised rocketry schemes, most of which failed outright. For the remainder, for every dollar of kerosene they didn't have to buy, they probably spent upwards of $1000 on exotic aerospace hardware. Finally, they gave up and just bought kerosene-based engines from the government.

What do you mean by this? The Mercury Atlas launch vehicle used kerosene / LOX in its first stage. The Saturn V used kerosene / LOX in its first stage and LOX / LH2 in subsequent stages.

Also, for the majority of spaceflight, both manned and unmanned, "US rocket scientists" were the government, right? Especially after WWII.
Can't you just delete /usr/bin/git and symlink /usr/local/bin/git to it?
I think they should include training and teaching manners, as recently for both Uber and Didi there have been many reports of harassment during late hours... and even a murder of a teacher by a driver.
I'm a lot bigger than a bullet but it can still punch a hole through me.
> Why is there so little moral left in this world?

You can buy moral pretty much everywhere nowadays ;-)
Yeah I forgot to address the LSD part that I saw in the links you gave me.

So all bets(and my opinions) are off, when LSD enters the game :)

I was only discussing pure hypnosis, so I can concede whatever you want if you put LSD into the discussion.

My standards are a bit high, but not unattainable. In general, I stick to what is the current scientific consensus. I appreciate any research in all directions, but until that research produces tangible and specific results, I'll abstain.

Mostly because I've seen what happens when people run wild with their assumptions and imagination. e.g. homeopathy, various other medical conditions(leaky gut syndrome) and other less worrying stuff, like aliens or super-secret technology.

Add on top of it various funny facts, like that CIA has also experimented with telekinesis, telepathy, etc and all kind of crazy loony-baloney that, of course, resulted to nothing, and you've got an explanation about my strong stance against extraordinary claims.

Also keep in mind, just at the back of you head, that no government agency that sunk gazillions of dollars into crazy shit, would like to admit that it was all for nothing. Ain't saying that it's all fabrication, but if it were... it wouldn't be the first time. Better to get caught doing "despicable" acts, rather than spending tax dollars that amounted to nothing. And of course, don't forget that you must terrify your enemies.

My 2 cents, and I'm off for now. See you later.
In space it uses nitrogen thrusters to orient. Once in the atmosphere it uses grid fins to orient. The entire liftoff and return is piloted by Falcon's flight computers -- no humans involved.
> It is the government responsibility, in their mandate as representatives, to address the problems perceived as important by the citizens

But it is the citizens' responsibility to make clear to their representatives the problems they consider important. For a couple of examples of this principle in action, see the civil rights movement of the '60s, or the marriage equality movement of the noughts and teens. No politician would've dared approach those issues until the citizenry made its voice heard.

As a rule, on issues that we as peoples consider important, we lead our politicians, they do not lead us. This is partly because of the incentives in play in modern democracies and partly because, as you say, they are merely our representatives, not our dear leaders.
For reference, see the posts at https://aphyr.com/tags/Redis
Being on a fixed income is a valid complaint when inflation is high. Your salary will rise with inflation, but the bond/pension income does not which decreases buying power for those on fixed incomes.
And of course, the anagram software they used (as mentioned in the commentary) was most likely NAMEGRAM, an old DOS program.
> objectively non-constructive

"non-constructive" is always subjective, so this is an oxymoron.
Whoa, wasn't expecting to see this, it's been a while.

Phrack has a technical depth you don't often see on HN, it's a shame there aren't more people producing content like this.
Erm, I don't know if I trust Cringely when it comes to this sort of thing. He sold a reality show to PBS, "Plane Crazy (1998)"[1] with the promise he could design and build a small plane in 30 days that was unlike any other that had ever been built.[2]

His engineer just flat out refused to produce any plans for this design. He tried to make something like his plane happen anyway, going without sleep for weeks, and had a meltdown on camera. The show eventually had to be about him giving up on his cherished design and building a throwback to biplanes, with a family of artisans who are experienced in building them.

I had the feeling that Cringely was trying to channel Steve Jobs and it didn't work out. (Note: Jobs drives other people to do impossible missions without sleep, not himself, and doesn't display his work until it's ready, giving the appearance of effortless superiority).

Anyway as for this wind farm idea, the evidence of his friend's alternative propeller design is interesting. But let's also note that that this friend chose not to pursue wind farms, maybe for a reason.

[1] http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/1998/pulpit_19980724_0005...

[2] EDIT: I am not an aviation person, and my memory of this is poor, but from Googling I see apparently he wanted to make it out of unusual materials, have foldable wings, and put the engine behind the pilot. I have a memory of his design requiring the pilot to straddle the drive train to a front-mounted propeller. I don't know how problematic that is, but I remember it as being presented as a major problem.

EDIT 2: To be honest I feel a bit bad now about this being a top-voted comment, as Cringely learned a lesson on camera that many startup people learn behind closed doors – confidence is great, but trying to innovate in too many directions at once will kill you. Maybe that means that he is more cautious now, so perhaps he's really sure this thing will work. On the other hand, it was the first thing I thought of, that maybe he doesn't have a great track record with aviation iconoclasm.
I wish there would be a Panama Papers leak, why do only a limited amount of people are allowed to see these things, who's deciding what to publish? (I know, they always quote privacy as a reason but just as John Doe said: Those who use the vehicle of an offshore account has most often something to hide...)
> Universal unique canonical names are not a good thing because the problem of name squatting exists.

They're not a good idea when they are user-friendly, because of domain squatting.

But `ebbfed3a54f82da274b51df5c5f1fcd8644edc0b5beb86643a0e177f1cb4ad60` is a perfectly good universal, unique, canonical name, and `(ebbfed3a54f82da274b51df5c5f1fcd8644edc0b5beb86643a0e177f1cb4ad60 foo)` is a good relative name, rooted in a universally-unique name.
Interestingly the prototype Bf109 had two blades.

I wonder if it was a carry over from the first world war when guns fired through the propeller, so the more blades the more chance of shooting it off? (There were systems which regulated when the gun would fire to prevent this happening)
I think it's bookmarks ("Save for later"). If I bookmark an article with a low number, I can see Feedly adds 1 to the number beside that little flame.
> the people who are negatively affected by this are people who have already decided to move.

"Decided to move" is not a reasonable description of the reasons for people to move into cities - they want jobs, they want to live among their peers, they want to take their place in the world. They didn't "decide to move", as if somehow they could live in their hometown all their life achieving their dreams.

> the people who are negatively affected by removing rent control will be people who don't want to move but are forced to move by rising rent.

I want a pony. And a boat. But I don't get those things, and I'm certainly not going to demand that I get to buy those things at a price far-below market rate. It might be nice to allow a group of people to not have to move "because they don't want to" rather than because they can't afford to stay - but it's unjustifiable when it comes at the expense of locking an entire generation out of the rental market and locking out younger people from living perfectly reasonable lives.

You can't defend a privilege that seeks to entitle one group to live according to their whims, isolated from the economic realities in which everyone else is forced to live. Rent control is a zero-sum game, it only provides benefits to one group by screwing over another.

> it seems that people having to leave their neighborhoods because of rising rent is a larger negative impact (both to them personally and to society as a whole) than people who are already moving having to pick a neighborhood that is not their preferred neighborhood.

You're trivialiaing the problem. This isn't about satisfying people's whims or preferences. An entire generation is being locked-out of living where they work, with many being shut out of jobs because of that. The person who can't afford to move to SF doesn't live in a less desirable neighbourhood of SF, because they can't afford to live there either, and they don't move to Oakland anymore, because that's expensive too now (guess what, they have rent control too). So is Richmond, and Almeda. So they move where? Concord? The commute alone is going to eliminate them from many potential jobs in SF. Meanwhile you defend single-earner part-time worker older couples living on Nob Hill (and who likely have ample savings) working irrelevant jobs which could be anywhere because they "don't want to move". One person's whim does not outweigh another's necessity.

Never mind the issue that rent control is probably harming the very people it aims to protect by putting so much pressure on the rental market that they can never afford to move, and so much knock-on pressure on the housing market that they can never afford to buy. So even if you're convinced of its social value, it's still non-sensical.

A fair market and a livable minimum wage would seem like an infinitely better solution.
If it's not extinction, what's the issue? We accept that millions of birds die every year. They have to or the population would explode. Everything from cell towers to glass windows kills ridiculous amounts of birds, and no one cares. Why are wind turbines, which don't even make a dent in that, somehow special?

I don't see why the numbers would be significantly different on bat death rates than bird death rates.
China just cut off some of Apple's services without any warning:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/22/technology/apple-no-longer...

> Last week, Apple’s iBooks Store and iTunes Movies were shut down in China, just six months after they were started there. Initially, Apple apparently had the government’s approval to introduce the services. But then a regulator, the State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television, asserted its authority and demanded the closings, according to two people who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The biggest threat may be a security/encryption related court case similar to the one the US just backed down on. Apple would be put in a very tough place.
Thanks. Nor do I. You made a fair point to question how prohibition helps or hurts the situation. My comment may have implied I was against legalization, so I just wanted to clarify my main point.
The previous attempt literally did make a big hole in the deck.
What exactly is this an answer to?
Anywhere high-wage workers live, there are high-price businesses. What services will those executives and software developers be missing?
No, see [the previous post](http://rachelbythebay.com/w/2016/04/17/unprotected/)
Hey, we've realeased this Android library which provides you with an unified API to integrate Dropbox, Google Drive, MS OneDrive and Box in your app. We'd love to get your thougts on it.
You are not wrong, it is written by the CMO of Gradle.
It is a legitimate question but it could simply be the case that the US has laws that made it impossible for Americans to exploit the services of this particular law firm.
> His engineer just flat out refused to produce any plans for this design
Do you know why? I'm thinking maybe it's because it was dangerous for the pilot?
Since the code is open source, what's stopping someone from releasing zerocoins before it's release in July?
> Conversely, they really really hate when government bureaucrats show them that democracy can be a farce and people's choices are worthless.

Yap, it is a valuable lesson of how the real world works. The people can only choose as long as they choose what those in power let them choose.
In the last housing bubble rents detached from housing prices pretty severely. Back in the 80s, it was generally cheaper to buy than rent - the 20% down saw to that. But things completely flipped with the more recent financial ingenuity.

In a way, I see rising rents in SF as a return to normalcy.
Oh my god. We've reached peak smugness.

Close it down boys. HN is over. No more fun.
Flint's water is NOT government approved, it is well above the legal limit for lead. I don't really know what point you're trying to make here.
co-founder here, happy to answer any questions!

We've been working on making ephemeral client certificates easy to use, and bridging SSH & RDP to things like Google Apps authentication is an example of what you can do once you get to make new identity attestations every few minutes.
There are copying, and there are shameless rip-offs
How one could help millions
It could be worse: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2VXyfvZxSU

(Warning: contains strong language. Hilarious strong language, from The Onion)
The daily standup ("scrum") did make some sense in the context of agile development. The idea is that you embrace the unpredictability of software and respond to change. So you take on a task, but you accept that the task is likely to not go as you expected. You may need to change direction. You may need to take a different approach. Or you may need 10 weeks instead of 1, and even that is getting fuzzy… under these circumstances, it can be useful to remain in frequent contact with the development team and business/end users users.

But as you pointed out, daily scrums can essentially devolve into what is essentially a policing of developers to make sure they are staying the course and are reminded daily of their deadlines.

It's actually just an unusually unfriendly version of waterfall. Why? Cause at least in waterfall, the business users are forced into something unfair and impossible as well. It's impossible for developers to accurately estimate completion dates, but it's also impossible for business units to accurately and fully spec out a software application. "You didn't meet your estimate"... "Yeah, well, you changed your mind".

It's a nasty business, but there you go. Best to avoid the entire thing and work on projects that are very high value but aren't deadline dependent, where the value of a developer is measured by working software at reasonable intervals rather than daily discussions of sprints, stories, and deadlines.

Actually, in some ways, that sounds more like what agile is supposed to be than all this scrum/velocity/stories stuff that isn't in the manifesto in the first place.
Will Yahoo Become a Patent Troll?
I loved the section on mercaptans -- they persisted way longer than they needed to on experiments with some of the worst smelling chemicals anywhere.
> I always thought it should be called USRT when strictly synchronous, but indeed, everyone else called it USART, so I called it the "USART controller"

Because the chips that do synchronous serial IME also do asynchronous, hence USART. Which makes sense: asynchronous is a far more widely accepted and used protocol, so one chip-placement covers connecting to those devices as well.
Airliners don't land on their tails either. If that's your model then Adeline is the correct approach.
Our Service's Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day
Encrypted Releases: Adding Secrets to the DevOps Automation Workflow
That's fine.

Now try to do a retrospective to figure out how the mistake was made, so it doesn't happen again
https://gnunet.io/ looks down from here, maybe due to the HN traffic.
I want to help too!
> It's also untrue, US rocketry kept varied propulsion types throughout its history including both RP1-only and LH2-only as well as mixed stages, HTPB and Aerozine.

My account was simplified, but the tangent was long enough already. It's true that in the early days of US rocketry (through the 1960s), there were a large variety of propulsion types that were experimented and deployed. The stasis didn't really set in until the 1970s.

Since then, it's also true that solids and hypergolics continued to have a role, both as strap-on boosters (because gravity losses) and in military systems (and their derivatives) where cryogenic liquids aren't advisable. (The military was always more whole-systems and pragmatic about their approach to rocketry.) Finally, it's also true that non-LH2 legacy rockets (and their closely-related derivatives) continued to fly (because switching costs).

However: in civilian rocketry (eg. NASA), as far as new developments were concerned, the picture is as I described. I was peripherally involved in that scene during the 1990s and had many people at NASA and LockMart tell me personally, quite explicitly, that specific impulse was very nearly the sole determinant of rocketry, and that therefore no fuel other than LH2 would ever be considered. Feel free to look at the kind of arguments cited during the fuel-density wars on sci.space.policy if you want a feeling for the kind of vehemence with which this opinion was expressed.

So, yes, I stand by my story. From the mid-1970s through the mid-2000s, US rocketry development was wholly paralysed, due in very large part to these kind of attitudes and overly-narrow optimisations. As evidence, I present the NASP, X33, and SLI, amongst dozens of smaller, equally failed initiatives. Feel free to counter with some examples of successful new rockets (as opposed to derivatives like the Pegasus, Taurus, and Delta III) developed during that period. The only examples you'll be able to find are Delta-IV -- which switched to LH2 at frankly mind-blowing expense, has had an uninspiring career, and is about to be axed -- and the Atlas V -- which gave up and just bought LOX/RP1 engines from Russia, since the US had lost the expertise to develop decent LOX/RP1 engines itself.

I'm not saying that the US civilian aerospace industry was a confederacy of dunces, just that for 30+ years it had the productive output of one. It was certainly well-supplied with smart people, but yes they were absolutely unable to get a grip on tradeoffs, and it showed.

> is not only inane it's insulting bullshit.

You've got a lot of HN Karma, but you haven't yet learned that people here prefer evidence-backed arguments to ad-hominem attacks?
Ian MacDonald in 1994, at the ending of Revolution in the Head:

> Arguably pop music, as measured by the singles charts, peaked in early 1966, thereafter beginning a shallow decline in overall quality which was already steepening by 1970. While some will date this tail-off to a little later, only the soulless or tone-deaf will refuse to admit any decline at all. Those with ears to hear, let them hear.

After a couple more decades of continuing (though not uniform and consistent) overall decline, the broad truth of this looks more evident than ever. In much the same way that classical music probably peaked roughly around the death of Beethoven, with the shallow decline in overall quality becoming steeper some time in the late nineteenth to early twentieth century.
Higher body fat is one of the reasons women are lighter than men. Muscle is higher density than fat.
Chicago’s Secret Society of Death-Obsessed Journalists