HN user

dbelford

28 karma
Posts0
Comments11
View on HN
No posts found.

The AS400/OS400-like interfaces always seem like they should be more popular super-user interfaces. They seem best at navigating tree-like data but most OS level interfaces feel tree-like these days. I think the affordances work a little better than vim-keys sometimes. A vim-mode option or command palette would be straightforward.

But it would require people to use full size extended keyboard (function F rows, numpads, etc). Which shrinks the user base quite a bit.

The recent movie Perfect Days (2023) seems to reflect this as well.

From wikipedia: "[Director Wim] Wenders was invited to Tokyo by Koji Yanai to observe the Tokyo Toilet Project, a project in which Japanese public toilets were redesigned in 17 locations throughout Shibuya with the help of 16 creators invited from around the world. Wenders was invited to take a look at the uniqueness of each of these facilities. At first, the producers envisioned Wenders would make a short film or series of short films on the facilities, but he opted for a feature film"

Is there a word/map for the transit accessibility for each point (1m^2?) on the map and drawing that? (maybe an integral of the isochrone?)

E.g. pick a point on a map, sum the area of the isochrone (30minute area? weighted sum?) to get a value at that point. Then redraw a heatmap of those points.

Wonderful, ISO-128 is exactly it and the wiki explains it perfectly. This seems like a fantastic sizing for pen sets.

The 0.10, 0.13, 0.18, 0.25, 0.35, 0.50, 0.70, 1.0, 1.4, and 2.0 scale with √2. I couldn't tell if other sets were just rounding or dropping the hundredths place. The rotring and staedtler both offer sets in those increments. I suppose this is just common knowledge to those who need it.

In another comment you mentioned easy scaling in a photocopier. And cylinder714 linked to a description of iso-paper that mentions an ISO (ISO 9175-1) for pens.

Is there a term or place to search for pens sets that scale with A*/B* paper? Using the ISO or "technical pen" doesn't return obvious matches (from my US based search at least).

Are there fields (architects, engineers?) that take advantage of the the technical pen scaling? Or scanning software that is aware of the pen/paper ratios? This seems like a great way to have some consistency in analog/digital conversions. It would be nice to have 10 years of digitized notes that all have consistent sizing after scanning.

I'm curious about this too.

Every once in a while I try going through the editor setups in this chart - https://github.com/rainbyte/haskell-ide-chart. But I run into lots of friction in any one I try. Between using the REPL, getting harmony in the project libraries and the IDE engine libraries, and learning a new editor, I run out of energy to also learn the language ecosystem (libraries, concepts, idioms, package managers).

An IDE that that surfaced everything the language encodes seems like it would lower the learning curve of Haskell. And every year it seems a little closer. Is there anything close to a jetbrains/visual studio/xcode yet?

It seems like all the type safety would be valuable enough that companies would pay for/invest in the ecosystem. Learning the ecosystem has been more challenging than learning the language at this point for me.

Why did the gig economy pick up tipping culture? Why did Instacart need to?

I've read about why tipping exists in the restaurant industry and what happens to businesses that try to avoid it. But for these new businesses without established mores, I have to do moral calculus to decide whether to use them and how to tip. I wish they had avoided this. I tend to avoid them instead.

Did customers ask for this? The people providing the services?

Was it for the price discrimination? price discovery? Or to deflate the sticker price?

The phenomenon of adding lanes not reducing congestion is generally a reference to the "Downs-Thomson Paradox"(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downs–Thomson_paradox) or "Triple Convergence" related research.

The general idea is that congestion dissuades some amount of commuters from using the road at congested times. When additional road capacity is added, those people will shift their commute time, or commute mode, or commute route to re-congest the road. (Time, mode or route is the "Triple Convergence" or latent/induced demand.) But in certain contexts like LA or London it's not possible to build enough road capacity to eliminate congestion. So building additional road capacity has the effect of (a) not reducing congestion and (b) reducing usage of public transportation. And (b) causes additional problems for the efficiency that public transportation.

The counter-intuitiveness is why it's a paradox. And the context probably matters for when this theory applies. But supposedly it happens to lots of developed cities. The original study on London was looking at when ~80% of commutes happened by transit. But LA is trying to improve its transit infrastructure because partly because this problem.