HN user

jetbooster

235 karma
Posts0
Comments66
View on HN
No posts found.

Well without a stable home to do so in we aren't comfortable trying to start a family. We (me and my partner) are genuinely trying to follow the same playbook my parents, grandparents and great grandparents did, but even with a household salary about 3x median we're not yet able, at 30 years old.

We're not "not starting families", like its a choice. It's not economically feasible.

Global CO2 Levels 3 years ago

It's still misleading. a naive glance would make someone think co2 levels had risen to 800% of original value, when it's only 150% of original (which is obviously still terrifying)

We might still have mathematicians, but there was a job that was eliminated by calculators:

Calculators!

We have over time abstracted away the hard-for-people-easy-for-computers tasks to the point often people just do the hard-for-computers stuff, like interpretation of results, and coordination of next steps

I guess you could argue that in order to get correct/useful haptic feedback the full-dive interface has access to your nerves? And the interface is as counter-hackable as anything else in this world?

Thinking in-universe here, where this sort of system exists, wearing an equivalent of a full-dive-condom which prevents the feedback you speak of, would maybe make an operator too slow in responding to countermeasures or make the whole process the mental equivalent of walking through treacle. A skilled operator is more effective without it, despite the higher risk?

All of the above is pretty moot though in the real world, computers can and always will operate at a million times the speed of a person, I can't really see the value proposition of being "in" the computer, when all you'd ever really be doing is deploying icebreakers out ahead of you and waiting for the response

I feel like DevOps should be a skill to mention you have experience in (Ops with experience of Dev or vice versa) but somehow morphed into a job description all on its own, defeating the objective of the term completely

Without concentrating the sunlight, the max efficiency of a solar panel is about 68% conversion. With 1kW/m², and a solar panel the size of a 0.01m² phone (6.1 inch, 16:9) that's 6.8W to play with, at the theoretical maximum.

A quick check states a Raspberry Pi 4B at 100% CPU draws 6.4W, so in perfect conditions with a perfect panel, it's just about approaching feasible to run a chip on a phone sized panel.

However a Gameboy is much simpler than a Pi. It seems the Gameboy draws about 70-80mA@1.5V, or 0.1W, which is very impressive. I would say that would 100% be physically feasible to power with a gameboy sized solar panel in our lifetime.

I think the mantras above might be important for a person who struggles with criticising things they can't change about themselves, height, beauty, hair loss, age, that sort of thing.

I agree that it comes across defeatist using these mantras in relation to things you can change, like skills, outlook, fitness, number and/or quality of relationships.

If said employee were actively defrauding the company and covering their tracks, they would be unable to make any fraudulent transactions or track covering in those 10 days. It's probably more like 16 days ultimately since it's probably business days, so there are 3 weekends as well. This would show up as a statistical difference in rejected transactions, contract overshoots, expense claims, something like that, I don't commit fraud.

It would also potentially expose any conspiritors, because the locked-out employee's responsibilities+communications would be forwarded to someone else for those 10 days. This wouldn't help you if the locked-out employee contacted conspirator's out-of-band to warn them however.

At least, that's the explanation. I guess the logic is that to avoid this, you would need to be making _larger_ fraudulent moves, less often. This would show up stronger against the background trade. Alternatively, simply the existence of these very obvious anti-fraud measures discourages people even if it's entirely possible they are a placebo. Similar to Lie Detectors, which only work on people who believe they work.

I think it's value for company resilience doing forced hit-by-a-bus tests on their employees on the regular is far more valuable in the long run.

Thanks for reminding me why I shouldn't go to my computer right now and try getting this working with my 2070!

It was my understanding that in those cases the immune system overreacts because it hasn't been correctly calibrated by being properly challenged.

It's not that it's too strong, it's that it lashes out at things that aren't actually threats because it's ability to recognise what is and isn't a threat is diminished

It is also making the assumption that adding cameras to your house makes you unburglable, which is far from true. Not that it doesn't reduce the likelihood.

All the camera allows you to do is point at some vaguely humanoid figures in your house to the police (who will likely not be able to do anything about it) and to your insurance (who likely would have paid out anyway)

What I'd like to know is if turning your house into a fortress makes you _more_ of a target to a specific subset of professional high-end thieves, as they know you have valuable stuff that you would like to protect.

Nightdrive 4 years ago

I somehow feel the simplicity of everything only being paired lights giving an _impression_ of something somehow adds to the charm

You'd still need to get your spaceship pair into an orbit (or at least a sharp sub-orbital hop) in order to excecute your plan though. the spaceship pair wouldn't just hang there in space. Also, it's simply not possible to mechanically push the two ships away from each other with sufficient velocity, and I imagine the explosives needed to blast your two ships apart would be better used in a smaller slower controlled explosion, often called a rocket engine.

There isn't a 'hack' for defeating orbital mechanics sadly. It takes expenditure of energy, and significant amounts of it.

(Edit: these two paragraphs assume you want to put your rocket into earth orbit, which I realised you might not be attempting.)

No matter how you spin it, if you want these two rockets to go in exactly opposite directions and meet up again, The point at which they meet would _not_ be partially sideways and partially "up" (away from the earth). at the point where they meet, they would be going 100% parallel to the ground, and 180degrees from each other (ie, direct head-on collision).

This is ignoring the fact that minimal stable orbital velocity (the minimum speed for your rockets to go 'around' the planet, is about 7.8km/s, or 17 thousand miles per hour. and because they're going in opposite directions, thats 34 thousand miles per hour of effective collision speed.

Now, if you're suggesting instead, a full 'escape' velocity from the earth that allows them to both enter parabolic trajectories, and meet at some arbitrary point in the distance, I hope you've thought of a way to allow your two spacecraft to survive an explosion that launches them from 0 m/s relative to each other to roughly 22km/s relative to each other (49 thousand mph), in some semi-instantaneous event. If we assume this 'push' from each other happens over 10seconds (this is generous), that's gaining 2.2km/s/s, which is 224G for 10 seconds.

In artificial hip definitely makes you a cyborg, and I like to imagine by contact lenses as cybernetic vision enhancement devices, though I can see people err-ing on that. But I don't think I would consider my glasses to be 'cybernetic'. In my opinion the difference is whether it sits inside the body (imo, inside the eyelids counts). Pacemaker, insulin pump, cochlear implant. Otherwise, you could claim our phones are cybernetic memory and knowledge enhancements (which isn't entirely wrong)

Though I think many of these simply bring you back towards 'baseline healthy human'. For many, the term cyborg requires you to _exceed_ baseline human to be worthy of the term.

So if he implanted this device that made him inhumanly good at chess, I think it would count. This is just using a very inefficient keyboard.