skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I find it hard to believe that truly self-sustained residential solar (solar panels + batteries all local) is going to be net cheaper than centralized grid generation. The maintenance costs should be significantly higher, particularly for the batteries.

It’s not propaganda. The reason it’s freeloading is that you’re still connected to the grid and thus the T&D costs are still there as they’re largely fixed. Utilities have done a poor job of pricing T&D costs correctly (your hookup cost is massively subsidized on the assumption that you will consume an average amount of energy from the grid). Additionally, for a long time (at least in California) utilities were forced to buy back your excess electricity at retail instead of wholesale rates (even if they didn’t need it & they can’t really control electricity you generate like they can with power plants).

Residential solar is a greedy tragedy of the commons solution that is subsidized by everyone else. And if everyone had residential solar + batteries + no grid hookup, someone would have to do the analysis if the maintenance cost vs T&D.
Yes, but those parts in question exist only on the MAX 9, which is no longer flying. Right now the answer to: "Is my plane a 737 MAX 9?" is "no, it isn't"
There's a good comment right here on HN that illustrates this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15659076

>> "Entrepreneurship is like one of those carnival games where you throw darts or something."

>> "Middle class kids can afford one throw. Most miss. A few hit the target and get a small prize. A very few hit the center bullseye and get a bigger prize. Rags to riches! The American Dream lives on."

>> "Rich kids can afford many throws. If they want to, they can try over and over and over again until they hit something and feel good about themselves. Some keep going until they hit the center bullseye, then they give speeches or write blog posts about "meritocracy" and the salutary effects of hard work."

>> "Poor kids aren't visiting the carnival. They're the ones working it."
>> we aren't honest about the downsides of our current model of capitalism?

1930's United fruit. I dont think we're gonna argue that they were "good" but their impact was bad in the face of weak governments.

In the US we have our 3 branches. We also have Adams 4th branch (jury nullification). There is the 4th estate / first amendment. And then there is corporations. Corporations having some influence on government is good but the US is leaning into too much territory, and Europe too little. Change isn't hard in the US, it's motivating people out of apathy to get it done that is hard.

Shockingly most capitalist countries have it easy. There is a famous story about a grocery store and how it killed the USSR: https://www.chron.com/neighborhood/bayarea/news/article/When...

If you want change it isn't about "honest about the suck" its about motivating me and everyone else to buy into something enough to put down the phone and get off the couch and make that change happen.
Maybe this is the beginning of the end of the 'Max' naming convention...
> doubt people are that afraid of 737 Max that they'll cancel a flight (and forfeit their ticket) over it

Nobody rational will. But there are plenty of people with an understandable fear of flying who will create a customer-service kerfuffle over it. On the margin that might not do anything. But in aggregate it could affect how the airlines negotiate settlements from Boeing.
Conway's law gives a good framework for understanding this lack in the US. In certain countries, everything needs to be under a single careful eye. In the US, it is preferred to have many different companies sprouting at once all around the country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law
It turns out reality is slightly more complicated than raw game theory, which is basically just what you described.

To be honest, it sounds like you might be internally cynical and externally giving, and exhausted seeing the results.

Most of us quite frankly weren't raised to optimize our own social networks, but over time I've realized it's not that difficult to create a mutual understanding from which everyone can better respect/build themselves and each other up. (e.g. this favor you asked requires a lot more of me than it saves for you, therefore, it's an impolite ask and it's a no)

Frankly though most people don't think that far ahead. Without "training" or manners, the common man is generally prone to his selfishness. It's never been a secret or a revelation, but people enjoy their extremisms.
I really want to like hydro but it has clear negative effects on ecology (namely fish). I am really hoping wind and solar don't affect local ecology as much.
Did you comment on the wrong story?

The submission doesn't seem to try to assign blame to either Boeing or Spirit AeroSystems, but tries to just give you a true/false depending on if they airplane you're going with is a 737 Max.
I said this before in another thread about the MAX a few months ago and got downvoted but I'll stand on this: I won't actually fly on any 737 MAX and actively avoid Boing airplanes altogether. I understand statistics but already hate flying and this whole debacle doesn't help.
I don't have a prepared script.

I basically fill them in on the kinds of stuff that we all take for granted.

But the folks I Serve, with my software, tend to be a wee bit more tinfoil than most. It's a long story, and not one for this venue.
Pandas Profiling: A Detailed Explanation
uh what? https://nixos.wiki/wiki/KDE
People think I'm overreacting, but I don't care. I'm not stepping on a 737 Max in the next three years.
Definitely one of the greatest screenshots that I've ever seen.
I wonder if you could design a rack or half rack that has a connector for attaching a minisplit refrigerant line directly to it, instead of cooling the entire room.

Problem is that’s how you sell 1-3 racks not an entire room of them.

Ethylene lines might be more practical, easier to wire into existing systems.
Why would I care about per mile stats? What matters to me is the safety of the contraption and crew I'm putting my faith in each time I step foot into the machine. Airplanes shouldn't get a higher safety rating simply because the trips are 100x longer on average.
FWIW, English Wikitionary (appears to!) have fewer words than German Wiktionary. I've run into this trying to extract words from eBooks (then converting to the "base" form, to essentially de-duplicate). I think it's mostly compound or more niche words, but I imagine you'd still run into them at least occasionally with most written works.

There's a nice project for converting and extracting the data from English Wiktionary into JSON but it doesn't support any other languages, AFAIK, which is a bit of a shame but also not very surprising - Wiktionary is a lot more complex, technically, than I expected!
And the door either has a goat or a car. But before the event takes place (opening the door), it is perfectly reasonable to do risk analysis with odds and fractional goats.

Chances of dying because you flew on a MAX are still insanely low. Maybe worse than if it was an A320, but the absolute numbers have so many zeros between the decimal point and the value that they're basically the same: 0.
residential solar freeloads on the grid because it doesnt reduce peak need, and home generators have historically been paid at a price equivalent to generation plus transmission rate. This means other consumers have to pay generation + 2X transmission for any home solar power they consume.

The economics of home solar are terrible. There is some value in home battery, but even then it still makes far more sense for industrial scale battery than home.
A minimal-part-count way to connect an SD card to a 68K
> It's not surprising to me then that a bunch of engineers who spend all day thinking in this way do the same in different contexts where it may be less appropriate because they are less knowledgeable

Bingo! On HN, the "I am very smart" often becomes "I can reason about any unfamiliar ${complex field} from first principles in the time it takes to write a 2-paragraph comment based on only TFA". Such comments elicit confirmation bias from other non-experts and you may have a completely wrong (or not even wrong) comment at the top. It's a frustrating failure-mode of HN.
> safety is getting worse, not better or even staying the same

The only death in US major commercial aviation in ages was when a woman was partially sucked out of a window in 2018 when an engine failed and blew apart, breaking the window open.

Before that, we have the Asiana flight which crashed after landing short at SFO, striking the undercarriage on the edge of the floating platform and cartwheeling. Everyone survived the crash, but a woman was killed when a fire truck ran over her amidst the firefighting foam.

Prior to that we have to go to 2005 when a plane overran a runway and hit a car, killing one occupant… of the car.

We have to go all the way back to November 2001 to have a serious accident where an American plane crashed on takeoff, killing all on board. Technically this was due to pilot error due to over-responding to wake turbulence, breaking off the vertical stabilizer. But it’s arguably an engineering issue that the pilot was able to induce catastrophic structural failure through control inputs.

There has definitely been a worrying trend lately in operational error with pilots and ATC nearly causing accidents due to runway incursions, nearly landing on taxiways, etc. But it’s really hard to say with a straight face that major airlines have anything other than an exemplary safety record the likes of which has been completely unparalleled before now. We have had one single death aboard a major commercial aviator in the U.S. in more than twenty two years.
The trick is to work out who is going to reciprocate when you give. If you realise someone is a “net taker” then stop giving to them.

That way you end up with lots of reciprocal relationships where both parties give.
> The trend is heading the wrong way.

Contrary to this sentiment, air traffic safety continues to improve: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_accidents_and_inciden...

If anything, air travel is so safe now that non-fatal incidents such as this weeks' stand out more than they would have in previous decades.

And in comparison, driving is getting much more dangerous (at least in the US).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_safety_in_the_U...
That looks great. Is there a list of these types of sites?
IMO China's competitiveness would be pretty crippled if they were classified the same as the US, Canada, Germany, etc.

It shouldn't be cheaper to ship something from China than from the next town over.
But even with this scrutiny glaring issues like the current ones have been missed.

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeings-o...

(The most recent problem is missing yet)
Yeah, the data source is imperfect. The flight information pulls the "nearest" (live, scheduled or landed) flight that matches that flight number, to give you a sense of the aircraft on that route.
Can someone tell what stack is used to build this website? I am new to FE and looking to understand how to create simple websites like this, where is the database, how are they connected/hosted, and how much it takes to run them monthly.

Thanks in advance
What you're describing here is still CPU emulation (same as the Crusoe), not system emulation.

The Amiga equivalent for what I'm hypothesizing exists here, would be something that allows you to throw out the entire guts of your Amiga and replace it all with a freshly-printed PCB that has all the same ports/socket, but just one (modern, easy-to-source) chip on it, that internally emulates not only the 68000 but also all the other chips on the Amiga motherboard. And then anything you plugged into the original Amiga, would plug into this replacement board and work the same.
Databases and why their complexity is now unnecessary
Okay, but I'm not sure fearmongering is the way to go. There are already people in this thread afraid of taking a flight in one of these machines.[0] My mother is terrified.

A subthread about the actual personal risk when flying the MAX is perfectly valid.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38929336
When jumping in to suggest how this violated Wikipedia guidelines, note that this predates WP's current Policies and guidelines page (1, 2010) and the COPO essay describing core content policies (2, Nov. 2007).

The Five Pillars page has changed quite a bit since 2007.[3] My favorite change, and only slightly tangential to the topic, is replacing this from 2007:

> [[Wikipedia:Be bold|Be '''bold''' in editing, moving, and modifying articles]], because the joy of editing is that, although it should be aimed for, [[Wikipedia:Editing policy|perfection is not required]]. And do not worry about messing up. All prior versions of articles are kept, so there is no way that you can accidentally damage Wikipedia or irretrievably destroy content. But remember — whatever you write here will be preserved for posterity.

with this in the current policy:

> [[Wikipedia:Be bold|Be bold]], but not [[Wikipedia:Reckless|reckless]], in updating articles. And [[Wikipedia:Editing policy|do not agonize over making mistakes]]: they can be corrected easily because [[Help:Page history|(almost) every past version of each article is saved]].

An unintentionally accurate transition in how it felt to participate then and now, subtly excising any mentions of the joy of publicly but safely messing up and replacing them with assurances that you and your contributions can simply be erased from history if you make any mistakes.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Policie...

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Core_co...

3: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Five_pi...
> For me, failure would have been catastrophic.

Perhaps that's objectively true or maybe that's just your perspective (ie, what your level of resilience can handle)

Like your classmates I joined a risky startup as employee 1 during the great recession, but unlike them I didn't have any backstop. Failure would have hurt but it wouldn't have been catastrophic - including rent and income-based college loan repayment my monthly nut was maybe $1k. When I was short on cash I took a job at nights doing phone tech support and later building websites for local businesses in my spare time. That isn't to say there weren't bumps (had my first run-in with the IRS -- and debt collectors) but to me there was always a way to make ends meet. Of course i owed some of that to being young and healthy without dependents, and the availability of $600/month apartments...
Boeing is the one delivering the product, right? Why would it be not boeings fault they don't qa the bolts on their parts? If a cars doors kept falling off Noone would accept ford saying sorry it's the factory we bought it froms fault
> 2000 couldn’t run many games because (being a descendant of the NT line) it didn’t support all the 9x graphics APIs.

I don't dispute that Microsoft used DirectX support to push XP sales, but I played at least Quake and Half-Life on NT4, and Unreal Tournament and StarCraft on W2k.
People are concerned because it seems irrefutable that there is corruption and a culture of cost cutting causing these issues.

Incompetence is understandable, improperly modeling the physics due to lack of experience or knowledge is understandable, but repeated instances that point to corruption at the government regulator and bad culture at the manufacturer lend to fears that the situation will get worse for a while before it gets better.

It’s the same reason you might avoid flying on an Eastern European/Russian airplane. The perceived risks move from unforeseeable error or bad luck to systemic error.
Yes you can. People take minuscule amounts of risk everyday, by driving or even walking. While I agree there's a point where the risk isn't worth it even if the expected value is positive (eg. russian roulette to win a billion dollars), but we're nowhere near that point with 737 Max risk.
This might be true in Europe, but not in America. In Europe, nobody uses iMessage, because WhatsApp got there first. iMessage is locked down and therefore less useful than WhatsApp. Despite the fact that iMessage is pre-installed in iPhones, and you can't change your default messaging app, and everything about the iPhone encourages you to use it, people still download WhatsApp instead. That's how things are supposed to be; the more useful, more open, more technically capable service won out. And no, WhatsApp does not have ads, nor does it collect your data due to its E2E encryption.

In America, iMessage got there first. Even though it's technically worse than WhatsApp, enough people use it (a majority) that it doesn't matter that it handicaps its own users with SMS and green bubbles. People think it's all the other phones' fault rather than the iPhone's fault. It's a massive driver of iPhone sales, and Apple execs are on the record acknowledging that.

That's not how it's supposed to work. The better messaging platforms should be competitive. Apple stock would tank if they were forced to open up the iMessage API.
Final aircraft assigned to the flight can be changed until the last minute. The info is most useful when booking. Presumably people might switch if the price/schedule is reasonably close while very few would turn away at the gate if they discover a max (I sure wouldn’t and I belong to the tiny minority that even think about aircraft models ever). So the info is most useful when booking.

Flying an airline that doesn’t operate a specific model is the most (and almost only) reliable way to avoid one.
https://web.archive.org/web/20240109170221/https://lproven.l...
That's breakage you'd have to tread carefully on; and given the 2to3 experience, there would have to be immediate reward to entice people to undertake the conversion. No one's interested in even minor code breakage for minor short-term gain.
I don’t disagree but generally I would avoid using “ The fact that this is an actual concern”.

People are prone to being concerned about a lot of things that aren’t a real risk to them. People aren’t logical.
Someone should alert archive.org to make sure they have a complete mirror.
> But at that point it's too late. I doubt people are that afraid of 737 Max that they'll cancel a flight (and forfeit their ticket) over it.

Luckily the airlines I travel with only use Airbus, but if they were using 737 Max, I'd definitely book tickets that I can change at the last minute, and refuse to board if it turns out to be a 737 Max.

Yes, that's probably illogical. And probably much of life is illogical. But I rather have to wait some hours for the next flight than take the risk to die because of Boeing.
Example in UK, offshore (with higher costs than onshore) are about 60 pounds/mwh (lcoe, so all included). That's 6 cents /kwh and this is offshore

But UK has lots of offshore wind. Still the 10cents upper range is probably quite a bit higher than the real number here.
It's possible for quality of the 737 MAX to be significantly below the typical bar for aviation standards while still being significantly above the bar of things people should be personally concerned about. Demand aviation standards stay high if you value it, by all means, but don't become part of a hysteria around worrying if your plane is a 737 MAX purely on the basis it made the news instead of thinking about how unsafe it actually has been or is compared to your normal safety baseline.
> It is nearly impossible to bring innovation to market because of panic and fear.

No, it's because of greed and managerial and executive rot. They could innovate as much as they want, nearly as fast as they want, and still be safe - as they and other airliners have done in the past! - but then they wouldn't save the "max" amount of money doing it. How dreadful.

Boeing's failures are all Boeing's fault alone. They rightfully deserve the pillorying.

> If a car has an issue we don't blink and we loose nearly 40k people a year in the US alone

That is more of an argument for stricter requirements around automobiles and that entire industry than anything else.
https://www.rockstargames.com/careers/openings/position/5761...

"Scrum", "Agile", "Lean".

The devs were may have been too busy "sprinting" and getting their assigned tickets done to think about higher level concerns like "is this good? can we make things faster or better?".

I think your points also stand though.
Thanks for sharing.

The world needs more examples of perseverance leading to success. I think a lot of people think success should come without perseverance. Maybe it works that way for some people but it sure doesn't for me.

Cheers
Anyone that's owned both Samsung and TSMC fabbed chips in phones in the past 5 years just knows the Samsung ones run hot, are inferior to TSMC. They are the company you fallback to if you can't get it done on TSMC due to shortages.
Nah, that's bullshit. If someone interacts with your team on whatever medium you go out of your way to be respectful and shouldn't act like stuck up, condescending neckbeards, whose presence is a gift to humanity. I run many open source repos myself and you can bet that when people take the trouble to interact with me I make it my mission to listen to what they say and treat them with respect. I don't expect them to act like robots and neither should you. The way you've all answered here makes me think that you're a bunch of code monkeys incapable of understanding that software is created for human beings and not machines.

>In this case it seems highly unlikely that anyone can add additional information that will allow a faster resolution

Heaven forbid. Sounds like Mozilla is a wonderful and fun place to work. Lmao.

>of disrupting our normal workflows, and taking attention away from fixing either the problem at hand

People aren't going to die if a few off-topic comments are posted. Holy fuck, what is wrong with you.

>To me that significantly outweighs the potential upside of leaving it open to "make people feel welcome".

That's exactly the problem. Acting like regular users have no worthwhile input is unbelievably out of touch and just plain insufferable. Maybe if you listened more to the user you could build a browser that wasn't such a piece of shit. Lmao.
At least for BLE one could use advertising packets to transmit the data, sensor beacons tend to do this with e.g. a temperature.
There is also the scan-response mode, initiated by the device scanning for others. And you can use plain GATT without any authentication, but that would be fully unencrypted iirc.

Rangewise it might be possible to reach 100m in an open field under very good conditions, especially when utilizing coded PHY, but not with default power levels I think.

There is a lot more to know, one place to start is 'Intro to Bluetooth low energy' by Mohammed Afaneh
Fallacy of Relative Privation in this case. The correct question is: “Are you less safe on a 737 MAX than any other commercial aircraft?” The answer to this question for a properly functioning airline industry should always be “no.” Given the recent incidents, the answer to this question is, unfortunately, “yes.”
That is a big statement. Since 2019 there have been 32 fatalities connected to commercial aircraft. Most of those were iv very small aircraft like seaplanes and helicopters. 32 deaths in 4 years compared to ~40k/year in cars. We need to keep things in perspective.
> Custom system alerts over SMS?

Can't speak for the guy you asked, but I'm approximately his skill-set, and that's what I've used it for.

Long time ago, though; I can't speak to the developer experience now. $20 and contact customer support... What? It used to be easy. Like, create an account and ten minutes later your in business, easy. I used them for a number of (free-tier, I think) personal and (paid-tier) professional projects, and was a very satisfied customer.
Cheaper digging would be the breakthrough.