skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Perhaps it's the nature of your bursts that make other feel they need to interrupt, lest they fail to get a word in edgewise: a fire hose of information tends to overwhelm people.

Also, if your audience isn't following you, they may want to interrupt simply to get things back on track. I've seen this happen where devs may be saying things that are technically correct, but the (usually non-devs) just don't follow and start interrupting. Heck, even I feel the need to interrupt devs when they are going on a tangent, even if that tangent is technically correct.

If I had to give one piece of conversational advice in general (not just for you but for anybody), it's to make short pauses on a regular basis, and immediately cede the floor to anybody who begins to interrupt. It will make them feel better that they can get their opinion heard, and you can always "steal" the floor again if necessary.
Journey to Kubernetes Release Team
Eh, I'm a skeptical of how Eletrek is interpreting the data; they're talking a very broad approach of total fires in ICE vs EV, which leaves next to no room for understanding why. The National Fire Prevention Association published analysis that's more nuanced to me:

-------------------------------------

Figure 10 shows that roughly three-quarters of the highway vehicle fires reported in the US in 2017 that were caused by mechanical or electrical failures (77 percent) involved cars with model years of 2007 or earlier. This was true for only 54 percent of the fires resulting from collisions or overturns. As vehicles age, parts wear out, extended maintenance plans expire, and maintenance can be overlooked. Consequently, it is not surprising that vehicles that are at least 10 years old are at greater risk of a fire started by a mechanical or electrical failure or malfunction.

--------------------------------------

- Source: https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/News-and-Research/Fire-st...

On EV's, their opinion was mostly summed up as such: "Mechanical and electrical fires, the most common fires in ICEVs, become more common as the vehicles age. EVs have not yet reached the ages where these conditions are more commonly seen."

So at least for me, I'd be somewhat hesitant to take Electrek claim's at face value.
Betting upon other countries' excessive interest in tulips has, however!
Lost count of the number of devs who think a whole function inside a 'try' block with print(e) as the exception handler is the gold standard.
That's not wisdom of the crowds. That's just a big sample size

Also, the video you posted points out a critical part of it working: diversity

I think that's why an aggregation of independent pollsters, as few of them as there might be, often ends up giving us a more accurate prediction than the millions of users that engage in PredictIt or similar betting websites
Do you have any recommended reading (maybe even something you wrote yourself) about what it's like to live like that?
Agreed. I've witnessed incredibly rude behavior at my university well before covid.
That’s why people HATE studio monitors, because they love a flat frequency response?
Not... yet :-)
> I'm saying "norms" are different for each person.

We’re using the word “norms” differently, then. Norms are what you use with people you don’t know. They’re based on cultural contexts. The rules of conversations are observations about how people tend to expect conversations to unfold in a particular culture and context.

You can approach the norms as descriptive or prescriptive. Both approaches are useful, but you’ll (IMO) get more mileage out of the descriptive approach. If you think of norms as prescriptive rules that you must follow in order to have a good conversation, then they won’t work very well. The same is true if you look at conversations on a smaller scale—we also have rules for grammar and vocabulary, and those rules can also be approached from a descriptive or prescriptive angle.

> There's no choice but to use your intuition.

This part is flat wrong. You do not have to use only intuition. Human nature is not somehow inexplicable, it is not somehow beyond our power to describe how good conversations work, or what friendship is, or what the nature of love is.

Our intuition about other people and our relationships is extremely powerful but it is not all-powerful. This is why people write in to relationship advice columns (or modern analogues like Reddit). People ask for help with their relationships because intuition is not enough. Some things need to be explained with words.

You do not need to follow these rules like a robot. They are just there to help you understand how to interact well with other people. The rules are not there so someone who is distracted or careless can more easily make better connections with other people; the rules are there as an explanation for how people who are paying attention will make connections.

Again, if you look closer you’ll also find that the grammar we use follows rules too. There are entire sections at the library full of books that explain the grammar of the English language. This isn’t really any different. The books can either explain the rules as directives that you must follow (the prescriptive approach), or explain the rules as observations about how native speakers write and speak English (the descriptive approach). Someone who’s fluent won’t need to think about the rules because they’re internalized, but they’ll still mostly follow the rules anyway. Someone who is clumsy and new at English will generally benefit from studying the rules.
Liquids are harder to keep contained than solids. That's mostly it, but also, all the extra complexity of ICEs adds risks too (e.g. lubricant fire are quite common too).
We can make it to Mars if we put enough effort into it. The question is whether now is a good time or if we should wait for progress in robotics and other areas. I think for now a permanent moon base makes way more sense.
> Real evidence that would justify putting him in prison?

The bar for putting someone in prison is higher than the one for not voting in that person. Not sure why you keep conflating the two.

Thinking Lula is a great or even serviceable candidate is unfathomable to me.
Ask HN: Do other people keep developer diaries?
For a long time, I didn't have a cohesive way of keeping track of thoughts, ideas, TODOs, design process, etc. I had source code TODO comments, random screenshots of things I found online, and so on, littered throughout my code base and a "working" folder. Eventually I started keeping everything chronologically in a single Word document.

I think the closest I've seen others do is blogging the development process, but that's usually a bit more polished and focused on the end result of the thought process on each decision, rather than - for lack of a better term - going on a journey with the author.

Does anyone else do this, in raw, unpolished form? If so, how do you store that (notes app, document, blog draft posts, etc.)?
> If we cannot survive on earth it's impossible for us to survive anywhere else.

sure, this is the case right now, but by increasing technology (through research and development), making space (or mars, or moon) habitable is an achievable goal.

May be not in the short to medium term (as all of these habitats would require materials from earth to sustain), but in the long term, it should be possible to produce all required materials for survival and be independent from supplies send from earth.
My mistake here — they do have higher scores on verbal, but on math they lag boys. However, girls with high math scores tend to have higher verbal scores than boys, which makes them more well-rounded and attractive to colleges.
"Writing Solid Code" pushes this type of checking and I have been using it for at least 20 years with similar effectiveness as you. I don't understand why such a simple and pragmatic method is so overlooked.
ChatGPT is microsoft in background.
Unless you have a plan that involves using violence at a time of your choosing, the temporary advantage you get from deploying a new solution is mostly just peace of mind for a very small group of space force nerds until the adversary adapts.

And the sort of "worst case" imaging we're talking about here, the kind that makes you think the MEO sats that are part of the nuclear early warning system will be attacked in the first place, _absolutely_ compels you to assume the adversary will adapt in time.

Another important point here is that "systemic risk" here really only means "risk to US space systems of dubious utility", and nothing so grand as international deterrence or even international stability: jamming can a perfectly fine solution to ensuring the space based information is not timely available to US forces, and it's not like the timelines SIBRIS gives you are competitive with what good humint around intentions can give you.
Well, one of the feature of the Mercedes is a very smooth suspension. It is much more convenient to type on the mobile keyboard while onboard of such a car. I think Gen X really should notice that.
"It would no more open a new era of spaceflight than a Phoenician sailor crossing the Atlantic in 500 B.C."

That would have been AWESOME if it happened tho!
Betting against China going exploring, though, has been a sure thing through most of history.
> A vehicle fire with an EV is much more dangerous than an ICE.

No, sorry. A blanket statement likely that isn't meaningful. The failure modes you're comparing are very different and both have aspects that are either more or less "dangerous" than the other.

Liquid fuel can spread and ignite very rapidly, whereas damaged batteries tend to smolder for a time before erupting into a large fire. Lithium Ion cells produce large quantities of toxic gases (hydrogen fluoride, in particular, which attacks mucous membranes.) Liquid fuel can be ignited by static electricity from clothing and whatnot. Battery cells can conceal damage from both manufacturing and later events that lead to ignition at unexpected moments.

I could go on and on. And for everything I claimed someone else can find an analogous risk with the other. There is no definitive analysis here. Anyone that claims otherwise is talking out of their ass. We won't have answers until there is a fleet full of 20+ year old, neglected electric cars running around getting into wrecks. Even then we'll have to parse the truth from whatever agenda driven narratives prevail at that time.
Hey, please don't respond to a bad bit by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes everything worse.

I was with you on the "nope nope nope" but personal attack and putdowns are not the way to make this point!

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
What's nihilistic about liking Earth? All my stuff is here, all my friends are here; the food is good.
This method, in the form of swappable batteries, seems to be working well for electric scooters/mopeds. See Gogoro, whose battery swap stations will apparently outnumber gas stations in Taiwan soon.

Obviously there is a scale problem since an electric car battery is 50-100 kWh compared to 1.7 kWh for a scooter battery. It still seems like a promising technology though, especially if someone can figure out a form factor that makes the battery swap easier.
Having had snow tyres on previous cars I can confirm that these tyres are no better than regular tyres if you hit a patch of black ice. There's basically no traction available. Now, if you've invested in studs for your winter tyres then it's a bit of a different story. But the parent is mostly correct.
Both Bush Jr and Trump actively played dumb as political theater. That is not the same as the narrative switching to Elon being dumb (and totally not even an engineer, can’t even code lol) the second it became clear he held right wing opinions and planned to act on them.
There are no foreseeable risks to Earth unless we fuck it up ourselves. Going to Mars right now would cost an insane amount of money we would better spend on Earth. And Mars is way more hostile to life than even a messed up Earth would be.
Yeah, I was really confused when the author followed that by writing, "If that’s the response I get, I’m totally done and moving on."

If that's the response I get, it sounds like the other person wants me to tell them more. I might follow up with, "have you ever done anything like that?" or a million other things.
We can and should spend money on other exciting and useful problems!
Do you have any evidence to suggest mRNA research was slowed by regulation that was loosened up in the face of COVID? My understanding is 1) it builds on decades of publicly funded research, originating in military programs, and 2) it was being developed nonstop and every prior attempt had serious adverse effects (specifically serious allergic reactions).
A guitar amp isn’t reproducing sound - it’s making sound. The amp itself is an instrument being played by the guitarist.
That's fine with me!
> Why can't we spend a trillion dollars on a mission to do THAT?

because it's mostly a solved problem. It isn't really engineering, but economics that stops this from being a reality.

And to the contrary, i do think food production automation is being researched (by private entities, rather than gov't organizations) and slowly will become more common. You just don't hear about it, because it doesn't sound as exciting as space exploration.
Maybe the people going there aren't overly concerned with bone and eye health. Perhaps the goal in life isn't to do everything in one's power to stave off death.
That's not a reason not to. That's a reason to also send out robots.
I think that Venus makes more sense as a next step than Mars does.
I got a result when asking for an average price that included an ad tag-line for a the company whose landing page that number came from.
Also something I would never see living in Los Angeles.
My recipe for success would be something like:

1. Send a lot of people (15?) and give people some flexibility in who they spend time with.
2. Give people a lot of space. I mean a _lot_ more than you think you need. Inflatable habs could be one approach, but if Starship gets going we might not even need that.
3. Let people escape. Loads of video games, books, creative projects, etc.
4. Help people anticipate the destination. Include remote control (obviously not real time) of robots at the landing site as one of the ongoing training exercises. Regularly simulate missions you'll be undertaking on the surface.
5. Give people lots of space at the destination. Cut and cover enormous living areas, and let people customise them. Give the crew something to look forward to.

People survive worse, and some people are better suited to it than others. We'll start by sending the people who are expected to fare best.

I suppose I am just some random on the internet, but I think a lot of people unjustifiably think "human factors" are insurmountable. Yes, it'll be hard, but the kind of people who plan these missions are used to solving hard problems.
Agreed. The average user owns zero servers.
Those were not corporate whistleblowers
Being possible for us to make a habitat is also a requirement. You can't just drop that requirement because being somewhere other than Earth sounds nice. A successful Mars colony attempt is centuries away.
> To most people, we wouldn't be ruining anything ecologically important or otherwise sacred by colonising it and bending it to our needs.

I would 100% disagree with that. If you explained to people that Mars was a habitat untouched by humanity, possibly filled with life, most people would absolutely be against anything that would ruin it. People value preserving nature because they find it beautiful, not because they find it useful.
The advantage of snow tires on ice is that they are designed to have a stiffer sidewall. Studded snows are better, yes, but even regular snows are a step up on icy road conditions.
Nio has hundreds of battery swap stations. Nio cars can swap a 100 kWh battery in 6 minutes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmWL1hZQmD0

Nio's plan is to have 4,000 stations by 2025:

https://www.nio.com/news/nio-announces-nio-power-2025-batter...

They've recently done a deal with EnBW to install swap stations at EnBW's charge parks:

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/nio-in...
Mars is on (or above) a wiped out Earth level of difficulty already
Not to mention the massive amount of unexploited natural resources below the 80th parallel. There would be huge oil rigs and mining companies all over Antarctica if it were allowed.
There's a comment higher from here that expensive car is a good proxy signal of wealth. Preferring wealthy people may feel unjust and even obnoxious, but it is definitely not superficial thinking. I personally would too steer clear (pun intended) of people like that, but just discounting them looks like the same behavior, isn't it?
That is a strange psychological state. Being unaware of why something is impossible but desperately waiting for someone to tell you why it is.

History is full of millions of examples of things that were asserted as impossible by smart people in eloquent speeches and essays that we do today regularly without a thought.
From the website:

FatFs controls the storage devices via a simple media access interface shown below.
disk_status - Get device status
disk_initialize - Initialize device
disk_read - Read data
disk_write - Write data
disk_ioctl - Control device dependent functions
get_fattime - Get current time

For your use case, you'd probably have to implement the disk_read method to dynamically generate and return your content based on the start and end sectors provided as parameters.
> The worst conversations are those where both parties are waiting their turn to talk, saying as much as they can before getting interrupted, and then being forced to listen to the other.

I have a client who turns every conversation into this. It’s very difficult to communicate any information to him. He easily speaks for 40 minutes moving from topic to topic without letting anybody break in. And if somebody interrupts with a point or question his default is “No, that’s not the point” without having heard anything that was said.

5 minutes of this is exhausting in itself.

But the work is fun.
What's the point if no one is allowed to visit?
I don't believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God, so this book wouldn't 'help' me. Thanks for the tip though.

Also, this is again irrelevant to the discussion of Musk's business/engineering prowess.
Malarky like this is why I am a nocoiner.
Being trusted or respected doesn't mean they uncover absolutely everything that's ever happened before everyone else. They break tons of news but they aren't going to run a background check on the literally thousands of candidates for office every cycle.
This should NSFW tbh.
I'm not following the reasoning here: we should explore Mars because, unlike the Mars-like places on Earth, we stand no chance of rescuing explorers on another planet?

The GP's point, as I understood it, is that we haven't even figured out how to make missions 1/1000th as complex as a Mars mission on our own planet viable.
It is a problem if the device does not expose any unique ID and you somehow need to depend on the device path enumeration.

For instance, I used to work on a project where I needed to control multiple Epson thermal printers from a single Raspberry Pi. Each printer was assigned to a customer kiosk, so I needed to know where I was sending the print job to. Unfortunately, the Epson thermal printers did not expose any unique ID over USB, so I had to rely on the USB device enumeration, and I label my cables and printers accordingly.

A USB-C port like in TFA would cause extra headache.
Western media has been aesthetically challenged for a while now, thanks to an over-reliance upon CGI and uh, evolving standards of beauty. It's no surprise that the country that coined the term "uncanny valley" would not be lining up around the block to consume the latest greenscreened subcontracted-to-death capeshit flick.
I don't find it the least bit interesting. Rust is good for reducing memory related bugs, it's not like many of these projects require that and it's not like you can't have the same level of safety using other languages if you have quality code. I'm not hating on rust, it's a plenty fine language with great safety and features. It's just irrelevant to most of the projects listed.
This is such a good point. Whenever I read about a technology that's supposed to make Mars livable, I ask myself "why aren't people doing this already on the Balleny Islands?" (a lovely but remote as hell archipelago off of Antarctica). Usually there's no good answer; something about the exoticism of Mars makes people think problems that are hard on Earth get easier to solve there.
Bro just do oral exams. Abolish homework. Essays and homework are abusive.
Car infrastructure and draconian zoning laws destroying civilization. A tale as old as... the early 1900s.
I'm assuming they were trying to imitate a child's manner of speech - i.e. children tend to lack the experience with language to know about a lot of special cases with the English past tense, leading to "eated" and "fighted", etc. The website name is just a play on words based on this.
The Moon is 100X closer. And orbit is 100X closer than that.
The Moon or even something in LEO make several orders of magnitudes more sense than Mars given our current technological and geopolitical capabilities.

I get it, colonizing other planets is romantic and awesome. I love science fiction too. But we are in the realm of reality, not fiction, and we have to learn how to crawl before we can walk, let alone run.

Let's figure out how to get permanent LEO human habitation going first, then figure out how to do that on the Moon. Then we can talk about colonizing other planets.

So far we've gotten short-term LEO habitation figured out, albeit with issues concerning expenses and trying to justify it all to the taxpayers.
Bad news for house flippers?
Thankfully this essay does discuss Venus, briefly, in a footnote. I'm a big proponent of exploring that planet, partly as contrarianism against the Martian cultists, mostly because of this discussion on HN alerted me to the idea - even Mercury colonization is worth considering!

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5734333
Is this a direct clone of languageguesser.com?
Radio syncing isn't available in my country (no local transmitter and too remote to pick up other countries) so phone sync is preferable for me.
AND...the tweet has been deleted.
> I think this comes from attaching their ego to their opinion, so if they're wrong, then they're "worse" of a person, so they really don't want to be wrong. Perhaps it's also a form of sunk cost fallacy.

Mmm. I've seen similar things but I interpret it differently. People literally can't think that quickly - it takes a few days (!) ideally involving a some good sleep to really synthesize new ideas.

That time required to think implies that even if someone is convincing it still makes sense to plow ahead with disagreeing with them in the here and now.

1) It is possible that their certainty is convincing but not their argument. In my early days on HN that happened to me a few times - I got convinced in conversation because someone seemed confident despite having clearly understood what I'd said. Later I swung back to my initial opinion later after reviewing the arguments carefully and deciding that the compelling part was flawed.

2) Even if the argument is compelling, it still makes some sense to just throw out all the arguments you have, shotgun style, to find out what the appropriate counters to them are in the future.

Regardless, I'm pretty sure people do change their minds, it just happens a bit slower than people expect so nobody notices it happening. Of course, there is a particular style needed to achieve that - if they get threatened or attacked while changing their mind they will not do it.
You don't have to get an online one. There are offline ones like KeePassXC which are a lot more convenient to use than a file.