skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> We already have ion drives

Yes, indeed.

> Your burn rate will increase dramatically depending on Mars/Earth alignment.

Why? I am not talking about keeping trip time constant. I am just talking about significantly reducing trip time compared to free fall. That is easily done with a low thrust ion drive; even a hundredth of a gee makes a significant reduction in trip time, and the longer the distance, the more the reduction in time even holding the thrust constant (since the trip time now increases only logarithmically with the distance instead of linearly). And that makes trips more feasible even when the planets aren't in alignment.

> even with the best technology we can see ourselves building within the next decade or so we're talking 3 months on a good alignment

Now it's you who aren't conferring much confidence in your knowledge. Below are some numbers (travel times are one-way). I've even included numbers for 1/1000 gee to show that even those numbers are much better than the free-fall numbers.

Closest approach: about 60 million km (6 x 10^10 m)
Free-fall travel time: 180 days
1/100 gee travel time: 18 days
1/1000 gee travel time: 57 days

Furthest away: about 400 million km (4 x 10^11 m)
Free-fall travel time: 1200 days
1/100 gee travel time: 47 days
1/1000 gee travel time: 148 days

The free-fall transit time for closest approach is taken from the Wikipedia article on free-return Earth-Mars trajectories; I have used the shortest time that appears to have a reasonable return trip (though the return trip transit time is longer). [1] Free-fall transit times for furthest away are taken by multiplying the closest approach time by 6.67, which is probably somewhat of an underestimate (it assumes straight linear dependence of trip time on distance, without confirming that there actually is a viable transfer orbit with that transit time).

1/100 gee and 1/1000 gee transit times are obtained by using the formula t = 2 sqrt(d / a), where d is the distance and a is the acceleration. This formula assumes constant acceleration to the halfway point, then turnaround and constant deceleration the rest of the way. (I also adjusted the units in the answers above to days instead of seconds, which is what the formula I just gave gives; I rounded up all fractions.)

I have ignored orbital maneuvers and takeoff/landing at both ends for all travel times.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-return_trajectory#Earth%E...

> Columbus was on the sea for 36 days

Which was by no means the longest, or even a particularly long, voyage for the time period. Vasco da Gama was at sea for more than three months at a time during his voyage around Africa to the Far East and back. So was Magellan during his round the world expedition.
(2016)

previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11078471
"Apple software engineer" is just a guy doing what he's been told.

He has no decision making power.

Lots of things related to privacy and security are part of a way bigger multi-billion dollar game than what companies are trying to mislead public with.
Yeah this is true. Apple's brand new state of the art campus cost $5 billion. That's a lot of money, but Apple printed ~$60 billion in profit last year alone, and will do a bigger number this year and the next and so on.

$5 billion one time really is just a rounding error in that context.
Looks like anything anti-ccp is getting downvoted to hell.
That's why it's a case-by-case thing. If there IS a well-maintained, well-documented etc. FOSS solution, of course use it (and contribute back!).

But npm has the popularity/quality/maintenance metrics for a reason; a lot of smaller FOSS projects become abandonware once their original use case is dealt with, or developers turn over, or whatever. There's a lot of smaller packages/solutions/projects that just don't see much love anymore.

I'm not against using FOSS or commercial. Just think there should be a case-by-case cost-benefit analysis. A $10/mo service should be evaluated differently than a $1000/mo stack, and labor value should be compared against both.

Case in point, my boss recently asked me to build a new project that wasn't a part of our regular stack in a somewhat emerging field (web mapping). I did a brief market analysis and let him know that different vendors could probably get it done in about 2 weeks at about $2000. He said that was too much, I warned him that building it in-house would take several months and be very buggy because we have no specialists in that field on our team. He said to use FOSS software to do it, so we did... it ended up taking about 9 months and a few hundred hours of dev time. Now it's built, but with minimal features and lots of bugs. And nobody else can maintain it. The project was in turn open sourced, because we built it from open source software and wanted to give back, but honestly it's shit code. And we're considering abandoning it already due to the high overhead. But you know, someone else is going to run into the same situation at some point, and maybe find it and fork it because it's open source... then probably go through the same rigamarole... well, now we have a proper abandonware factory.

shrug At the same time, I use (and thoroughly appreciate) redis, apache, varnish, chromium, brew, react, etc. Some of those are vendor-supported, some aren't.

It's just a mixed bag. I'm just saying that choosing something just because it's FOSS so you save $10/mo is a lousy reason. There's a lot of great commercial software out there, just like there's a lot of great FOSS software out there.
Besides Bytecode Alliance, CNCF has accepted WasmEdge as a sandbox project. https://github.com/WasmEdge/WasmEdge
Wow this thread and article are a gold mine.

I have struggled my entire life with various disorders. ADHD, many symptoms of autism, depression, extreme loss of energy and lethargy. For a long time I thought that I had chronic fatigue syndrome after I grew very sick from a viral infection.

Everything everyone is saying here resounds very strongly with a mitochondrial energy problem.

Diet helps me a lot. I have tried many diet approaches, recently a high protein diet has really been working well. I dont know what is wrong with me, but something isnt right.
RedHat can still make life hard for this project. They can stop publishing srpm metadata or pull non-gpl software entirely. Thinking back at how long we used to wait for CentOS releases following a new version of RHEL, this is pretty amazing cadence. But with IBM management it seems risky long term without an official endorsement.
A very well written article with tons of useful information. Thanks for sharing.

However most of it still applies to other vendors who have access to your data that needs to be protected. Companies need a robust vendor management program that reviews vendor compliance regularly.

Volkswagen breach is the best example of ignoring whether your vendor has sufficient security controls.

http://www.vendormanagementoffice.net/2021/06/lessons-from-v...
> The alternative is worse for everyone in crypto, because if the long-term future is multi-chain (ie. pushed out usecases don't go back to ethereum once it's scalable enough, and activity spreads everywhere looking for low fees) then the whole space has almost no ability to extract rent. That would mean the stable fee level is some small margin over actual running costs. Which means total crypto market cap <$10B.

I don't think this is the case because on chain protocols can give a lot a discretion torward how fees are done (i.e on a decentralized options exchange that allows anyone to create/govern their own liquidity pools that sets their own pricing/pool parameters, people may be willing to pay a premium for pools that have better parameters than others, people may be willing to pay a premium lower levels of margin requirements than others, manage risk better than others, etc)
The video directly addresses this…
> every app likely won't be responsible for drawing its UX onto the user's vision - it will probably submit some graphic or model to the OS, which will then anchor that model "onto" reality and handle the user moving their head around it. Much like how every Windows app is not responsible for resizing or moving its window, that's the window manager's job to do. In AR we would probably have a reality manager or something.

I don't think this is true. The problem with an app just giving 3D data to the OS is then no apps can compete on quality. There's a reason Cyberpunk 2077 (or whatever the top graphics game is) looks different than Wii Bowling. Even with 2D windows each app does its own rendering using the GPU and provides the results as a rectangle of pixels that the app computed. Some apps look amazing because they used 100% of the GPU power. Some look so-so or maybe they have a great aesthetic (Animal Crossing?) but they aren't spending power on rendering. Now, add that across apps. Your virtual pet app wants to render photo realistic fur where the fur appears to bend in relation to things in the real world, your virtual fashion app wants to show you're friends outrageous auto-reactive clothing, but your navigation app just wants to draw some solid more mostly solid colored lines. The virtual pet app will hog all of the GPU just to draw its fur bogging the entire OS down.

It won't be a simple as it was for desktop PCs because you can't let any app slow down the system (which is what happens on PCs) since you need the system to always run at 60 or 90 or 120fps. At best you could maybe make a preemptable GPU (not sure any current GPUs are preemptable), or use 2 GPUs, one for the OS, and one for apps.

I think Apple or someone will ship an AR device without solving these issues. I think it will fail just like the Apple Newton failed. Too early. Running AR glasses with an iOS like OS that runs one app at a time is just not a useful paradigm for AR and solving the problem of letting 5 to 20 apps all run at the same time, each using as much GPU as possible for their specific idea of quality, AND have that all run fast enough to keep up with latency issues to actually have the virtual stuff not swim over the real stuff just has a long ways to go. Maybe an M17 but not a M1
>Why does the USDC portion of IRON tokens need to be locked in the smart contract based on TITAN price anyways?

It doesn't need to be. It's basically a bug in the code. They didn't consider TITAN price being 0 to be possible, so they didn't write their code in a way to handle it correctly.

A random guess for why they had the price > 0 check. They might have had code like this:

// Returns (usdc_to_withdraw, titan_to_withdraw)
def GetWithdrawalAmounts(iron_to_withdraw):
usdc_price = 1 // guaranteed: USDC price in USD (aka USD/USDC)
titan_price = GetTitanPrice() // TITAN price in USD (aka USD/TITAN)
iron_price = GetIronPrice() // IRON price in USD (aka USD/IRON)
usdc_to_withdraw = iron_to_withdraw * iron_price * 0.75 / usdc_price
assert titan_price > 0
titan_to_withdraw = iron_to_withdraw * iron_price * 0.25 / titan_price
return (usdc_to_withdraw, titan_to_withdraw)

If you look at it like that, it's pretty obvious why they have the assertion that titan_price > 0. Without that assertion there's a divide by 0.

If you want to handle the ability to withdraw USDC even if the TITAN price is 0, you have to make the code more complicated. Likely not just this function, but the system as a whole, because it'll mess up all the accounting.
More detail here: https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/news/first-patient-dosed...
I want to help. I can call you if you want, or offer my phone number for you to call me.

It's not bad. You don't feel ANYTHING. If you've ever been to the dentist and had a cavity filled then that is the extent of the horror. The sounds are no worse, just different.

There is no reason to suffer. Let's talk about this.
(It's 23:15 Eastern, I'm going to bed soon. But we can also talk tomorrow.)

Here's the number you can reach me at: 313-524-1974

My name is Matt.
Ask HN: Why doesn't MS bring Tabs to the file Explorer?
I've seen previews of Windows 11 and I'm shocked that Explorer has received the least amount of change. While new icons are refreshing, lack of tabs is still anti-productivity.

Is this because MS wants people to just open new windows of Explorer (hence the name, Windows), or is it because of a silly patent by Apple or someone that prevents them from bringing tabs to the Explorer?
The NCAA exists to cheat them out of worker's comp. The whole Stu-dent Ath-o-leet farce is just a CYA operation that got way out of hand.
I don't think the passengers would appreciate getting back up via plate tectonics.
Over a long enough term, it’s cheaper to not piss away all your money on rent. Early-2000’s real estate mania aside, crashes in price are not all that common. Building equity is preferable to building nothing at all. Plus you don’t have a landlord telling you what you can’t do.
I've had a number of surgeries and in my experience they give you a number of sedatives before even wheeling you into the OR.

Not sure how many you would need to overcome deep seated phobia, but probably doable.

The hard part would be convincing you to go through with it.
This was the "free" upgrade to 10 from 7. It only offered in-place upgrades. I didn't want to go through the pain of an actual fresh install. I don't really understand why Microsoft couldn't (didn't) give the option to install to a new drive while upgrading.
This would be detectable a long ways away from the source. Acoustic energy like this attenuates slowly. In marine seismic exploration for oil and gas we use airgun source arrays that develop about 1000-2000 psi. You can watch your hydrophone array and see other crews operating tens of miles away and in the past, before source separation techniques allowed processing of data from surveys where simultaneous acquisition was occurring in close proximity, crews worked together to avoid having their data step on the other party's data so they operated withing time windows to minimize interference.

Nowadays with very precise clocks and event timing down to the gnat's ass fraction of a second it is less necessary since records can be correlated between source sensors and remote receivers with extreme accuracy.

An event that registers as a 3.9 earthquake on a land seismometer far from the source tells you nothing about the energy near the source. That wave traveled thru the water column and into the sediments on the seafloor then into the crust beneath before being recorded at distant stations. It suffered attenuation at each interface due to Snell's Law. Some is transmitted, the rest is reflected across each impedance boundary. The true measure of the energy of this event comes from the near-field hydrophones. I bet they don't release that data. With that you could determine how loud it was at the source. Water doesn't attenuate acoustic signals very well though they do reflect at internal temperature and salinity interfaces. Navies take advantage of this lack of attenuation in their subsea communication strategies which allow communication over huge distances through subsurface water layers. Interesting stuff.

This event will show up on seismic records from hydrophones as a broadband signal with a large bubble pulse and multiple collapse peaks. The initial blast creates a huge bubble that collapses back in on itself and re-forms and collapses several times reverberating. It is huge and will affect marine life many miles from the test location. It would be interesting to see a decibel graph of the energy and power spectrum.

Even though modern seismic surveys are timed to avoid important seasons for known marine life there is no way to minimize the impact this will have on marine life that is currently nearby and "out of season" or out of the public eye.

I mentioned to a fellow geophysicist that submarine echo sounders were likely the cause of marine mammal beachings and this person, a PhD in Geophysics, told me that I was wrong because he had studied the issue for the industry and the energy from those tests was too low, the wrong bandwidth, etc. He said he would buy me lunch and show me the data to back that up.

I'm glad I have had the means to purchase my own lunch since that offer was made.
This just isn't true. Office culture requires people and regularity. The ability to go and tap someone on the shoulder is priceless.

WFH makes businesses less effective.
There are no home chargers that can supply 65 kW to anything. That's 270A of 240VAC current (which per most codes would need to be on a 340A circuit), where even large homes have a 200A circuit from the utility for the entire building. Home charging is AC charging, and peaks out around 48A/11kW.

The term "fast charging" refers to DC chargers that skip the transformer in the car (which is sized only for 11 kW or so) and do it in the charger device, supplying high voltage DC directly to the battery. And this gets into the dozens and hundreds of kW. Tesla's early superchargers were 75 kW, most CHAdeMO in the US is 50 kW, etc...

It's faster than some "fast chargers", yeah.
> I disagree that TUF is too complicated for most projects. While our documentation, tutorials, and tooling can be better, the setup is about just as complicated as ...

I've heard great things about TUF but if you want people to adopt it then it seems like the documentation/tutorials/tooling should be a first class citizen
I've read a few hundred m2 to a few hectares of land are needed per person to be self-sufficient. I guess it depends on what you are growing, your climate, and what you plan to do outside the growing season.

I have a friend with a couple of basic hoop greenhouses (around 8x2m) and for 6 weeks in summer they have more than enough tomatoes and cucumbers to provide for themselves to eat, to preserve and to give away to friends.

I think with a little planning, and only eating whatever is in season that week, you could easily grow enough in a 100m2 garden to provide all the vegetable needs for a family during summer. Planning is the important bit though, as some crops like broccoli need to be planted the year before. Oh and it's gonna be a hell of a lot tastier than what you get in the supermarket.
That’s it. It didn’t win because of some mysterious social network effect. It won because it is superior. It is beautifully designed. It does everything that it needs to do the right way. People had confidence in it because they knew that was what the kernel developers use.
Unsprung mass always surprises.
If you’ve always used power assisted brakes and you’re not expecting to have to press really hard on the brakes it could easily lead you to rear end the car towing you if it stops suddenly. Also, without power assisted steering, modern cars are surprisingly difficult to control.
Mercurial was slower on every possible metric (albeit faster than the competition). Git felt like magic. git-svn probably helped out too, it made the transition from svn way smoother
Why single people smell different
No. It needs to be in park.
> Funny enough the move away from stack ranking was very unpopular at Microsoft

I would imagine that nearly every change in performance review structure at nearly every company is unpopular:

People who were let go (or who left voluntarily of low bonuses/raises/refreshes) aren't there to complain!

Everyone who is left, who knew how to game the system (or was so good they didn't need to) now has to optimize to a completely new metric.
It depends entirely on what you're doing. I've worked in shops were I helped setup a golden way of building software.. and it worked great. We could take in junior engineers with no clue how to code and have them writing really good stuff in like two weeks, basically impossible to screw up. The tradeoff was that all of our tasks were.. basically the same kind of task. It was rare to do "revolutionary" work.

I work now in a situation where every single case that comes across my desk is actually unique. I still have a toolbox, but I need a really big variety of tools and picking the wrong tool is very easy. Suddenly instead of a golden way I'm actually focusing on testing designs quickly and in isolation to make sure we're picking the right tools for some given design.
It's my understanding that the bulk of the vulnerabilities in question are not present to near the degree on AMD and ARM. If AMD and ARM could do things mostly properly, why couldn't Intel?
Tesla does use LiDAR for calibration and testing of their vision systems. But they also have a million cars on the road with radar which also gives fairly accurate depth information. They use the depth information provided by the radar to automatically label their data and then they can check their vision based estimates against that data. Karpathy has mentioned this approach in a few different talks.
What kind of vehicles are you using? I’m always interested in how newer model vehicles are behaving after so many miles. With the new tech like so many cars having turbos fleets are really the only chance we get to see long term reliability in a short time period after introduction
Wouldn't something like https://example.com/correct/horse/battery/staple look like a real link and be very trackable?

Or even, https://correct.horse.battery.staple.example.com/

I mean, you could add rules, but the second your rules turns something like Slacks "magic link" into a thing that can't be used, users will rightfully be upset.
of the same/similar job(s) that has been offered by this company (including the past).
Building equity isn’t “losing” money. It is tying it up, sure. If you have enough free cash so that investing beyond rent gives you a decent rate of return, great. In high-rent parts of the country, rent sucks enough you don’t have that. And, your landlord can kick you out in the middle of a school year if your lease is up.
Finally, a use for the hyperloop
For the record, it was Volkswagen that cheated the emissions test, not Volvo
neither of them strike me as great but taking down the solar farm is probably cheaper and easier than rebuilding a mountain.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politic...
Thank you for your response. In some ways I have a reverse experience: I grew up elsewhere and then moved to Canada (I did get to go to school for a few years). I was blown away by how accepting and open the Canadian society was. Trust me, you have a very good thing going. Even with the examples you give, you realize that teaching about racist historical mistakes in school is far from the norm in many other countries.

Let me offer an analogy. You might think that some aspects of the Canadian government are corrupt, while I on the other hand would grant that there might be some issues but would emphatically agree that “Canada is NOT a corrupt country”. Would you still say something like: “Supporting the idea that you (individual, organization, country, whatever) are not corrupt makes it convenient to ignore efforts to combat corruption ("why should we combat corruption when there isn't any") which should be universally supported.”? Would you still agree that it’s right to cancel someone over saying that “Canada is NOT corrupt”?

Because I see very little difference between the two situations.
Yes, so Microsoft has to make the decision for them. I'm not sure "we're going to make your computer 30% slower because there's a 0.0001% chance someone could steal your password" is the right decision.

(These numbers are completely made up. Any decision would depend on getting the right numbers, but this appears to be easier said than done. I've seen very different estimates.)