skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ship class designations are weird. Russia keeps a ship or two designated as "battlecruisers" (in the WWII era, that would have meant a lightly-armored, probably fast, very large ship with battleship-class guns) that would just be called cruisers in most other navies, now. I've seen British ships with tonnage that would put them nearly up to a WWII-era heavy cruiser (step under a battlecruiser, the smallest thing generally regarded as a "capital ship" in that era) called a destroyer (formerly that would have been a much smaller size of ship), these days.

From their design, the ship class in question seem to be some kind of largish general-purpose missile cruisers with substantial armament and decent anti-air/anti-missile defenses, but not intended to survive sustained fighting (their weapon placement suggests that—all those missile tubes on the deck can't possibly be safe, but it might let them cram more weapons on there cheaply)

[VERY LATE EDIT] The TL;DR here is that "cruiser" and "destroyer" and all that are nearly meaningless without context of who's doing the labeling, and when.

[ANOTHER LATE EDIT] I overstated the degree to which the Kirov class' designation is misleading: its displacement is roughly in the range of WWII-era battlecruisers (~1/2 the displacement of an Iowa class battleship—armor is really, really heavy). It lacks battleship-class guns, but so does everything else these days and it'd be kinda silly if it had them.
> After the event, russian ships started keeping greater distance from Ukraine.

Because it was the primary air defense for that entire area. If it can be hit by anti-ship missiles, the rest of the fleet definitely can.
It would still need a rocket to prevent the waste from coming back around and striking the launch site. To not have it come back, it'd need to be shot out at Earth escape velocity (there's also the option of shooting it out fast enough for the Moon to offer an assist to put things into orbit).

Although of course that fast of a throw from within the atmosphere is probably not practical.
Setting aside the gross misunderstanding of the actual article here, even if that were what the title said, you really don't understand wealth distribution in America if you think that number would be too high. There's an estimated $150 trillion in total household wealth in the united states, and the 400 richest Americans own $3.2 trillion of that, or 2.1%. But also realize that the wealth of the super rich is growing faster than the wealth of the bottom 90%, meaning that the income difference is actually much larger than this. Even with a flat tax, the top 400 Americans should be paying at least 3.4% of all income taxes in America. But given that a flat tax is morally abhorrent (the next $10,000 in income is meaningless to the standard of living of a billionaire, but life-changing to someone in poverty), it should be more than that.

You, like so many, vastly under-estimate how much richer the ultra-wealthy are than everyone else. Vastly.

https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/
A missile cruiser is going to have a lot of hypergolics on board. If you don’t know what you’re doing that’s an easy way to blow yourself up, like what happened with the submarine Kursk.

So it’s plausible that it wasn’t the Ukrainians, but then again it would surely be more honourable to get blown up by a Ukrainian missile than by your own incompetence. So if Ukraine is falsely claiming credit they should be taking it as a propaganda godsend.
> Take the pronouns thing

oh boy.

> Why are you putting your pronouns up?

To normalize people being open and explicit about their gender identity so that people with non-obvious gender identities can feel less conspicuous sharing theirs.

> they/them

They and them have been neutral-gender pronouns forever.

> And yet dissent and mockery of this abject stupidity is largely censored.

Because most of it is thinly veiled transphobia. You can still disagree with the censorship but to act as if it's mostly good-faith arguments being censored is just naive.
A River Lost: the life and death of the Columbia is another book about the social, civic and environmental impacts that damning the rivers the PNW has had.
> there are plenty of curated playlists

I've had issues with these. There's so many spammy, garbage playlists, that it's impossible to pick out the good ones (and I have found gems, but it's a lot of work).
Compal BreezePro concept laptop is designed for enhanced cooling
The assertion is that officials from the CDC have vastly overestimated the percentage of the US population that is still susceptible to Covid infection.
> He followed it up with a brief explanation of how he'd done one if his routines that night using suggestion, including photos of billboards/posters outside that guided attendees down certain thought paths before the show started. It was a revelation.

This is all for show. That's not how any of these tricks are done. Brown is famous for giving fake explanations for his effects.
As per my other comment: vastly, vastly, vastly, VASTLY underestimating the size of the wealth gap in America.

https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximate_and_ultimate_causati...
note the very first example is a sinking ship
The cruise missile tubes are right there on the deck; I don't doubt they exploded after getting hit with a Neptune or two. Neptunes are only rated to take out 5k tonnage ships, and Moskva is 12k tons. I bet you Moskva's own ordnance exploding after being hit by Ukraine's missiles is what actually killed it. Still a point for Ukraine for sure.
Why is there no image of the sinking ship? Because at sea in war zone? Wouldn't Ukrainian army want to show image from their drone after hit? New satellite image coming soon?
For non-tech folks, I have been at loss to figure out how to convince them to use a password manager! Easy passwords repeated over and over again, and saved in plain text on one of the apps which itself has a simple password is the workflow that I'm seeing all the time. And tried many different ways to convince using a password manager and then forgetting about passwords but to no success. There's always this reluctance to change the workflow that they've been using for a decade or more
It's an unfortunate, but sometimes necessary, waste. The world isn't a nice place, a fact that most of us in the West can happily ignore most of the time.
There is more information about the reason for this here^1 Below is an excerpt

> As in Non-recursive Make Considered Harmful: Build Systems at Scale, we can build a better make. This commit mostly imitates Shake as described there, but in a Racket style and called "Zuo" (based on the Chinese word for "make"). The Zuo implementation started at https://github.com/mflatt/zuo, but here it's in the intended long-term home, racket/src/zuo.

> The goal is for Racket to be be just as easy for end-users to build as now after converting scripts from make and /bin/sh to zuo. So, make should work in Racket's top-level directory, and configure plus make plus make install should work in a source directory or distribution, all with no new pre-installed packages required. The new makefiles will be small, however, just ensuring that the zuo executable is built and then handing off to Zuo scripts.

1. https://github.com/racket/racket/pull/4179
Native Russian speaker here: translation „military“ is correct, because this is how it is positioned in official Russian sources - an operation conducted by military forces (the term operation comes from FSB, meaning that according to Russian propaganda it is more like police or counter-terrorism operation).
The cost of materials is often only a small part of the final cost - there's the cost of manufacturing and all the other costs of running a business.

Grossly underestimating these other costs is a major reason why new businesses fail.
> none of whom can make the transition to so-called green tech in-time to avoid that outcome

The Germans brought it upon themselves with their anti-nuclear views.
There is no perfect market for "Arizona ice tea". Arizona Ice tea is available in most locations, has a consistent flavor, and is easy to access.

The customer isn't deciding which tea to buy based on price, they are deciding whether it's worth buying an Arizona ice tea at the current moment of time. Changing the price of Arizona ice tea will influence this decision, but so will marketing, and shelf placement.
And you are actively ignoring any evidence that's inconvenient for your rosy picture of United States. From both of your parties[1] perspective you're a perfect citizen.

See, here's the thing: nobody is claiming China is perfect. But you assume US is, or that it's at least better than China. Despite the million people killed just because your president wanted reelection, or the fact that your law doesn't quite apply to wealthy people, or the fact that the police is murdering people for their skin color with impunity.

Ever wondered why?

1. Two parties is fundamentally different from one party, right?
Kind of unfair really, they can get free unlimited currency via the Federal Reserve, Musk does not have the luxury
Ukraine announced the strike before Russia announced anything was wrong though.
5 Points and 1 Resource – Bitcoin's Elliptic Curve Cryptography
The list under "A Wider Diversity of Bachelors Degrees" presents the universities where current professors in the US and Canada originally did their undergraduate studies. All three Indian universities that made it to the list are IITs (Indian Institute of Technology) - IIT Kanpur, Madras, and Bombay (in that order).

I didn't realize that the contrast between IITs and other universities was so stark that none of the rest of them made it anywhere close. Is it an artifact of this being laggy data - since it's about professors who've since done graduate and PhD programs, and so the undergraduate data being from several years ago - or is it still the case that there's no close competition to IITs? Put another way, in 10 years' time, is there another university that might make it to the list that's not an IIT?
In modern usage it's mostly just about size. Naval non-carrier surface combat vessels have a bunch of roles and weapon systems, but tend to be generalists and not specialists. So everything has cruise missiles and SAMs and radars and antisubmarine helicopters, etc... If it's big it's a "cruiser" and if it's small it's a "frigate" and everything else is a "destroyer". And there's a bunch of overlap and ambiguity.

These ships are big-ish soviet-era vessels designed primarily (as I understand it) for anti-ship cruise missile focus, but they fill all roles.
Ask HN: If you start a company today, what tech stack would you use?
Just curious to see the different answers. I find myself constantly thinking about what the best way to quickly build a good + scalable product from the get-go is. With things like Supabase, Firebase, AWS, Vercel, Netlify, Hasura, etc, I find it hard to make up my mind.

I'm currently defaulting to React + Next.js + Vercel for the FE, and Node.js + GraphQL + Dynamo + Lambda for the BE (All TypeScript).

I feel like there might be other stacks that people find better to quickly build stuff out, so just wanted to gauge that.
Use a laptop, leave the charger at home. Get your work done before the battery dies. Depending on the computer this could be stress inducing or no big deal.
All ships can go under water. Some can resurface.
That sounds good for any kind of HFT platform matching buyers and sellers. I don't see how that is an "insane advancement" or has anything to do with blockchains.
> so I can't understand why that would be a commercial move.

In my experience, "monetization" people Just. Can't. Bear. To. See. Anything. Not. Making. Money.

It seems to be something that causes them physical discomfort, and they regularly destroy so many good things, by trying to make money from them.

Call me a cynic.
You've vastly oversimplified the politics of the American left and right, which are themselves varied. Just because Trump criticized NATO member states and potentially weakened NATO with his rhetoric, does not mean it was ever actual policy of the mainstream Republican Party, or really even the Trump administration, to dissolve NATO. In fact, Trump himself now claims that, if not for him, there would be no NATO [1]. Trump is a president that ran on no clear platform (e.g. his 2020 presidential campaign did not even publish one) or real coherent policy.

With that in mind, here is an article from 2018 in Jacobin, a left-wing magazine, saying that, regardless of Trump's comments, NATO's continued existence remains a valid question [2]; in fact, the Democratic Socialists of America (the primary progressive/socialist/labor party in the US) has calls for the US to immediately withdraw from NATO as part of its stated policy, even after the Russian invasion of western Ukraine [3]. These are among the most well stated positions regarding NATO skepticism on the American left, but similar opinions were expressed throughout left-wing independent media in the months leading up to the invasion (and earlier).

1. https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-seeks-rewrite-role-bolsterin...

2. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/07/nato-donald-trump-putin-c...

3. https://www.dsausa.org/statements/on-russias-invasion-of-ukr...
Originally cruisers were pretty much the largest ships in a fleet, capable of independent long range cruising missions. Battleship was a broader term.

The development of HMS Dreadnought heralded a revolution in big gun capital ship design and modern battleships were sometimes referred to as Dreadnought class battleships, though for a long time that’s been the only kind. Particularly large or capable cruisers are sometimes called battle cruisers.

This ship doesn’t have big guns because it’s a missile ship so it can’t be a battleship, but it is a capital ship, which makes it a cruiser.

As all programmers know, naming things is hard.
Not a metallurgist, but it really seems like zero-g alloys will give us some amazing materials.

https://www.google.com/search?q=zero+gravity+alloy+site%253A...
> I just think that's not true of contemporary Western culture at all. People denigrate authority all the time without any knowledge of the subject-matter.

Not authority that delivers tangible results. Nobody is like "those aerospace engineers don't know what the heck they're doing."

> It's become a real problem in this culture.

I would say a worse problem is practitioners of non-rigorous fields demanding the deference accorded to rigorous fields. For example the recent kerfuffle in Virginia about parents versus "expert" teachers.

> I also don't know why you think authority and expertise need to be tied to "doing".

Because that's the only way to separate what's real from quackery and avoid recreating the clerical classes of yore.

> And, on both points, I can assure you lawyers can't "do" anything particularly interesting and also that what narrow expertise they do have is constantly denigrated--it definitely does not automatically draw anyone's respect lol.

At the end of the day, when the government knocks on their door, people call the most expensive lawyer they can afford. Yes, that expertise is narrow, just like a carpenter or electrician or a mechanic. But within their narrow expertise--writing briefs or making a case to a jury--they can deliver tangible results for their clients.

> I see a lot of people denigrating and dismissing reasoned articulations of why some laws are x, why you can't automatically blame y government official for z outcome, etc.

Which is great! It would be profoundly anti-democratic for lawyers to point to their credentials and say that someone makes them "experts" in fairness, justice, and governance. But that's exactly what you see people in non-rigorous fields doing. Teachers think that because they have expertise in how to teach Phonics, that means they should be broadly untrusted to decide what children should learn and how they should be socialized. Epidemiologists think they should be making calls on whether bars are more or less essential to society compared to churches.

Society has lots of debates about very important things: how to socialize children, what's fair and w hat's not fair, how to treat people who are different from the majority, how to make tradeoffs between safety and freedom, etc. You can't have a healthy society where these debates are being monopolized by people saying "do what I say because I have a PhD."
I'm no Navy expert. But, here's my understanding of today's Navies.

* Corvette/Frigates -- Smaller ships with smaller munitions. They're just missile platforms. Anything smaller than a Corvette basically is ignored for most discussions. Frigates are slightly larger than Corvette.

* Destroyers -- Bigger than Frigates. Not only do Destroyers have significant missile capacities (like Corvette / Frigates), Destroyers are big enough for major sensor suites. SONAR, RADAR, etc. etc. Maybe enough for a CWIS (aim-bot with a gatling gun, designed to automatically shoot down enemy missiles as they approach).

* Cruisers -- Bigger than Destroyers. More missiles, more sensors. While a Destroyer might have 1x CWIS and 1x RADAR, you might be seeing 2x or 3x CWIS or RADARS on the larger Cruiser class.

> In these days and age where all war ships seem to be essentially floating missile launch platforms, what is the difference?

Defense. You need a lot of power to run those RADAR systems, which are constantly scanning the skies for enemy missiles. Corvette/Frigates are too small to have a CWIS / anti-missile defense system, so they need to hang around larger ships (like Destroyers or Cruisers) for defense.

Multiple Destroyers could be stationed next to each other to increase their defenses. But if two Destroyers were just going to sail together (for better RADAR coverage and/or defenses), its a better idea to just make a slightly bigger ship, but with twice the RADAR / twice the defense of a singular Destroyer.
this is a margin loan
it’s not a new concept
It's always seemed very doubtful to me that a layered defense of the type mounted by U.S.N. carrier groups would be effective in a real war against a sophisticated opponent. It's obvious to me that every capital ship would be at the bottom of the ocean in the first hour of a war with China. The useless Russian ship we are discussing was, after all, equipped with a modern anti-missile system and yet it sank. Perhaps their CIWS readiness was not optimal, but that has also happened to the U.S. in the case of the Stark.

Ships are expensive and missiles are almost free by comparison, so this seems like a fundamental problem for naval warfare.

What I'm really wondering is why the Russians even staged this ship into the Black Sea. What possible capabilities could it have been providing that the Russians could not also get from land units?
Unless they are also planning to nuke the rest of the planet, there is no "victory" in that scenario.
Ukraine has perhaps the most advanced space industry in the world among countries who don't have their own spaceports. Some modern US and Canada rocket startups have a notable involvement of the Ukrainian expertise.
Certainly wouldn't be the craziest thing that has happened in the past 6 years.
I haven't seen Scott Manley's video; but if the mass cost of a heatshield is so significant that's a problem.

However, there's a benefit in this case: heat shield probably scales with area (often something like mass^(2/3)), making it progressively less significant compared to fuel mass (which is roughly a constant fraction, i.e. it scales like mass^(1)). I think a high altitude launch site could make a significant difference as well (although that creates other logistic inconveniences). Atmospheric pressure approximately halves every 5km, and air resistance is roughly proportional to pressure.
One of the goal of mathematics is to introduce tools that represent problems in a way that is easy to grasp for a human mind. For example, geometry is a good tool to get some intuitions on the problem of classifying sets of data. Also, a well written proof is, by design, easier to check by a human than by a computer.

On the other hand, programming languages are designed first to be easily parsed by computers. With supercomputers, exascale computing [0] is now possible. Yet it is still hard to use fully the power of such computers because what is intuitive for a human mind is not always easy to program. For example the video proof of the inversion of the sphere [1] is checked more easily by a human than by a computer.

Finally instead of using only the power of computers, or only the power of human brains, it is also possible to combine both. This requires to improve the interaction between computers and human beings. In a video on thinking the unthinkable [2], the author notably remarks that the introduction of symbols in algebra allowed human beings to extend the problems they could think about. With better interfaces, the computers could help us to write fuzzy or explicit proofs, but more importantly, they could help us to think.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exascale_computing

[1]: https://youtu.be/OI-To1eUtuU

[2]: http://worrydream.com/MediaForThinkingTheUnthinkable/
Become a teacher to understand what life is all about. You don't even have to leave your current job. Just teach wht yu have learnt to the new gen. They will thank you for the rest of their lives.
Why Germany won’t keep its nuclear plants open
Is this parody?

> Creating a blog from scratch requires quite a lot.

Quite a lot of what? If I want to create a blog then there are many existing systems that are essentially plug and play.

Perhaps this is an article teaching me about composable whatevers, but I'm not sure this is a great example, or even if it is perhaps a different tone could have helped set the scene. Nobody in their right mind would want to build a blog this way in the real world, I hope.
You don't have to transfer ownership of the apps. I'm not 100% certain but I believe that you can just login to the phone with both your real account and the Cloud Identity account, install the apps from the Play Store using the Cloud Identity account, and once they're installed you can use them with either account. That's how it works with other Google accounts. And of course you only need to do this with paid apps previously owned by the Cloud Identity account. New apps or free apps you can just get in your real account.
Tesla must pay ex-worker $15M for “disturbing” racist abuse, judge rules
The condensed story is that Bellevue city council wanted the rail line to more closely follow I-405 and I-90.
There are scams on DNMs. But there are also high quality vendors. And there are also scams that are part of regulated markets. So yeah still failed argument.
It sounds like you are talking from a user perspective and the parent is talking from a vendor perspective, no?
Please don’t call Ukraine Russia’s slavic brother. That’s how russians justify the war - “we are protecting our brothers from the nazis”. Ukraine is a sovereign nation. Let’s not perpetuate russian propaganda.
You're in a place I'd like to get to: not being dependent on external sources for income. You're in a place most would want to get to I suppose (I'm ever so slightly older than you). How about reaping the reward instead of spending more time inside the loop? I can only speak for myself, but when I get to your position, I'll be taking a small backpack with my laptop and a spare T Shirt, and me and the Mrs will go travel the world without any plan beyond the first destination. What we'll need beyond that we can buy on the way.
There is a whole planet out there waiting for you to see it, and you CAN do it.