Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ej3's commentslogin

The only thing that peaks my interest is the "LGA-style" connector for the raspi. Does anyone have photos of this or the part number?


It looks like it's a ton of individual LGA pins. I don't think they're intended for this exact purpose... but... they work. https://imgur.com/a/iLFtNGh


Is there any advantage to doing it this way over just using a compute module?


Why chiplets? Can anyone explain to me why I'd want chiplets as opposed to a processor embedded in a Field Programmable Gate Array? Seems like development would be infinitely cheaper and the possibilities far more dynamic? Chiplets seem slow and expensive to develop. Once built they'd be completely static and probably necessarily replaced by the subsequent version in 3-5 years.


If an FPGA can get the job done, it's usually the right answer. However FPGA programmability comes with a 25x-100x penalty in terms of area, cost, power, performance compared to application specific devices. Sometimes 100x matters...


Sample size 1, but I've got a kid. I've got an ipad. I put the two together in with supervision, and what I've got now is a 4 year old that reads the walls in the bathroom stall while she's pooping.

I don't know if this is "better" or what you had in mind as "gains", but it's certainly entertaining for me!


Its great that you are able to supervise your own two kids while they engage in screentime, I’m talking about in school, where in a lot of cases, a teacher is trying to supervise 20+ kids. Its great if there are laptops for students who maybe cant afford a computer and wordprocessor software at home, but textbooks and lectures seem to work effectively.


My daughter could do the same at that age, and basically never got screen time. I don't think screen time has anything to do with it, it's just dependent on the child, parental involvement, and how much you read in the house.


In my youth, I was familiar with the facility that came before NIF, built in the 70's the goal at the time was to use a smaller target to demonstrate that the foundational principles that would underpin the success of NIF would work. As far as I know, they never succeeded. NIF was built anyway because this type of device is well suited to allowing access to certain types or demonstrations of physics that are otherwise unaccessible and important in a specific field of research not directly related to the flourishing of our race.

The article is old news before it was written. The article mentions the previous 'success' (yield was higher than previous experiments), and that was over a year ago now. They haven't been able to reproduce the previous experiment even knowing as precisely as they can what they perceive to be the preconditions necessary for an effective reaction. It also seems that this article was written about a single experiment. They will not be able to intentionally repeat the experiment. The manner in which they're exploring the pareto front is like groping in the dark to find a light switch that has an unknown texture and conformation. It's a classic monte-carlo simulation but they have one iteration every several weeks or months, and they cannot even possibly identify all the controlling parameters, nor do they have the necessary throughput or bandwidth to succeed in their pursuit without windfall.

The low hanging fruit providing the basic harmonics of the solution were discovered well before I was even introduced to this technology (in the 70's and 80's. Coincidentally around the moment of the genesis of many of our modern treaties on weapons testing).

You are overly optimistic, a 40-60% increase in nearly nothing is still nearly nothing. The PR campaign around this event is I think more significant in its political convenience, and in white washing the purpose of the facility. There are significant discoveries that still need to be made to even make the reactions consistent, and they will not come conveniently or quickly. Once the reactions are better understood and the mechanisms can be manipulated with intent the distance between the science and a practical industry / commercial product will require even more hurdles that stretch the imagination to be overcome. For instance I cannot conceive of a practical mechanism for actually utilizing any fraction of the massive amount of energy released in a fraction of a second in a chaotic murder of wavelengths and particles. The most practical way we've yet discovered for converting neutrons to electricity is through boiling water. Grossly inefficient in other contexts, I'm not sure that has even marginal utility in this scope.

I for one am 100% sure I barely know what I'm talking about. My disclaimer is that I'm not a physics guy, and high energy density physics was only a hobby of mine at one brief point in my life. Through perspicacity and access to papers and people, this is my honest mental model of the whole thing. You're welcome to your perspective, but although you seem well informed you sound very inexperienced.


My father worked for what was basically a bootstrapped startup at the bleeding edge of computing in the late 80's. Eventually his company, through a series of exchanges was part of Nortel Networks.

He'll tell you a different story. When you mention the "espionage / sabotage" he doesn't laugh or shake his head, it actually just outright infuriates him. Such a naive narrative only angers him because it seems to absolve the people who managed the company of outright incompetence and corruption, which is how it should be remembered.

For example: one story I vividly recall because I could never fully fathom it involved a specific female executive who was traveling for business - first class overseas. She never made her intended engagement because she was immediately arrested upon disembarking the plane. She had got drunk and (although married) decided to perform overt sexual acts with the gentleman sitting adjacent to her. On the plane. In her seat.[1]

At some point the culture of the executive at Nortel, for whatever reason, became completely incompetent and outright immoral. Rather than Huawei underhandedly perpetrating the perfect crime, it was simply the people at the head of the organization that solicited the crime to pursue their own benefit above all else.

[1] https://www.theregister.com/2000/04/06/former_nortel_exec_fi...


Sorry to point out, but your father had no special insight into Huawei's espionage at Nortel. I could say the exact same criticisms of my employer, but I wouldn't know anything about espionage going on.

Huawei's espionage was well documented at Nortel, it's not within any level of dispute.


You're implicit assumption is that the system's response to ever increasing CO2 is indefinitely linear and proportional?

If you believe that I've got some beans you can buy.

This equilibrium you're chasing is much more transient than you'd like to think. Especially in the face of more and more accurate/precise observations.


I think you misread my comment, I made no such assumption.

The commenter I replied to said "I’m unsure about if ... the earth [is] finding a new equilibrium point potentially on the order of hundreds to thousands of years..."

I pointed to NASA measurements showing that atmospheric CO2 is increasing linearly and has been for some time. Whether its increase accelerates or decelerates or remains flat depends largely on many unpredictable factors (primarily humans).

Consequently (I tried to answer) - no, the climate will not find an equilibrium ("a state of rest or balance due to the equal action of opposing forces") as long as one of the primary forces driving the system out of balance continues to change (i.e., we keep dumping more CO2 into the air) without some countervailing force changing at roughly the same rate. Today there is no countervailing force, so there will be no equilibrium.

I don't see how your comment ("this equilibrium you're chasing"?) relates at all.


CO2 may momentarily be one of a convoluted set of factors that contribute to the dominant harmonic component of the system with the output "global temperatures", but it is not in and of itself stable in it's relation to the output of the system. Clearly due to the afore mentioned "convoluted set of factors" having their own internal period/fluctuations/harmonics of convolution.

CO2 will rise, but it will eventually necessary uncouple from it's relationship to temperature at which point some other factor we are wholy unaware of will probably do something as equally disturbing to our environmental "equilibrium".

If you transform the system in respect to time, you'll find that from some perspective almost nothing ever happened, and from another the whole thing was wildly unstable and unpredictable.

It already doesn't matter what CO2 levels are doing now. Up and to the right and how hard is probably completely irrelevant. What matters is the flux of the system, and everything points to the fact that weve already left the station. There's no unwinding this thing, and it's not going where anyone thinks it's going.

The truly conservative thing to be doing would be to prepare ourselves for the most violent future, but instead what we're trying to do is grip onto the past with our already dying hand. Weakening our heart at the very moment we need to bolster it.

Everything is going to be fine, but you and I will be dead. I assure you of that.


I'd also like to add that how easy an egg is to peel has nothing to do with how you cook it. Truly fresh eggs will not peel wonderfully. If you have some week old Kroger eggs, more than likely those things are several weeks old which changes the chemical composition of the egg. The shell/skin becomes more alkaline which somehow causes them to release from the white more easily.

If you have fresh eggs, boil them with some baking soda in the water.

For hard boiled just put cold eggs in cold water and boil them. When it boils, shut off the heat. When you can stick you hand in the water and pull them out they're done.


Thanks for that. I hate to nit pick, but the issues surrounding the dams in the Columbia river basin are so complex and frustrating.. I honestly don't even know who or what is right at any given moment. I've torched friendships debating culling - not even sure I was right or they were. It's just horrible. Everything about it.

The dams are hugely beneficial to society. The produce energy and expedite inland commerce, and that makes us all better off. At the same time everything comes at a cost, and the costs are easily just as catastrophic.

I've seen rivers three times the size of the Columbia that have no dams. They are like the arteries of the Earth. They wend and breathe through existence itself. Heave and fall feet in hours. To see this, to be near it is to feel everything upstream. It's like looking into the night sky, but instead of making you feel small it connects you.

The Columbia is dead. I get itchy about it because we've lost that and no one even knows anymore. We long ago muted a voice that used to sing to us, but people will only consider the loss in economic terms - salmon fisheries. We can't even talk about things like humans anymore.


I appreciate your words. The passion and the way you write about nature is great. I connect with it. It does remind me that humans have become numb to the world around us. That we are just animals dependent on the ecosystem and we disturb it at our own peril.


> The Columbia is dead.

And you haven't even mentioned the Hanford Nuclear Reservation yet.

I volunteered at Audubon's WetNet (Wetlands Conservation Network) for most of the 90s. Their mission was to save the salmon from going extinct. So doing stuff like saving habitat (waterways, wetlands, shorelines, etc), keeping water cooler, opposing new fisheries (the final nail in the coffin for wild runs), etc.

People just don't get how bad things have become.

When GWB was selected President, I just couldn't continue.


> As the salmon fisherman will tell you...

This is objectively false. Salmon populations are more often than not considered in decline. The fish haven't "figured it out". They marginally persist solely due to intensive management that plainly consists of atrocities for species less popular in the media [0][1], millions spent on fish ladder theatre, and hatcheries.

The dominant mechanism in support of the fisheries being hatcheries that are basically a strangely laundered welfare program for indigenous, sport and professional fishermen each to their licensed proportion.

If you live in the Dalles, and you don't know the Columbia basin damns are an ecological nightmare.. it's unconscionable.

Not to mention the displacement of indigenous peoples from important traditional regions, the complete loss of stochastic annual flows feeding nutrient cycles in the river... etc etc.

Im no eco-activist. I don't necessarily think removing the dams would improve anything for anyone at this point, but if we're going to advocate for doing things a better way in the future - let's be honest: dams are horrible. The dams on the Columbia will eventually result in no salmon, no matter how hard we try. It's inhospitable. They used to run all the way up the snake into Idaho. Into IDAHO. Never again.

It's ok to advocate for energy, and the things you believe in, but let's not be belligerent about it - be honest.

In the Astoria maritime museum (several years ago now) I remember reading a passage that was proud of "..taming the wild Columbia, and turning it into a beautiful series of lakes and streams to wonderfully facilitate shipping and recreation.."

Some hutzpah, to think we know what we're doing.

[0] https://www.audubon.org/news/the-corps-cormorants-and-cull [1] https://www.marinemammalcenter.org/news/response-to-columbia...


Just in case anyone who isn't from the PNW is wondering at the energy and number of replies OP has gotten about this:

Water quality and the salmon-centered river/stream ecosystem is, like, the local environmental thing everyone gets slammed with in school. Your biology class has you go look for arthropods. Your chemistry class has you go test for pH and dissolved oxygen and fertilizer contamination. Way more species (including plants) rely on the salmon than you'd guess but oh boy do you learn about it in a PNW school system.

And on the other side, the history of the dams is the history of the growth of the Northwest -- "your power is turning our darkness to dawn, so roll on, Columbia, roll on" is in the Washington state folk song and it's not even an aberration re: the region's folk songs / culture. ("Skagit Valley, Skagit Valley, / They would turn you to a mud pond / To run the Coca Cola coolers in Seattle, U.S.A.")

I just thought this would be interesting to contribute because I've found people from other regions sometimes have an ambient awareness more on the level of "Um, I guess there are fish in the water? And runoff seems bad?" and that just isn't possible for locals here, so that's why it's all somewhat heightened.


That's an interesting song in its own right. It was written under commission for the federal government by Woody Guthrie, and it was really about two of his favorite topics: improving the lives of workers and stopping fascism.

    "Now in Washington and Oregon you can hear the factories hum,
    Making chrome and making manganese and light aluminum
    There goes a flying fortress, to fight for Uncle Sam
    Spawned on the great Columbia by the big Grand Coulee dam"


"[Woody Guthrie's] 30 days at [the Bonneville Power Administration (the relevant hydroelectric institution)] is considered one of the single most productive bursts in his fruitful songwriting career."

https://www.bpa.gov/news/AboutUs/History/Guthrie/Pages/defau...

It's salmon all the way down!


From South Louisiana, it's the same for us growing up only instead of a dam it's the offshore drilling. We learn about the ecology of the delta, then go cheer the Saints in their black and gold jerseys (Who dat!).


> I don't necessarily think removing the dams would improve anything for anyone at this point

It's early days yet, but at least on the Elwha some of the signs are very promising: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/the-el...


I don't always express myself clearly, but I meant that in a more holistic sense. If you were to construct a Venn diagram of remove vs stay in the case of many of the dams in the Columbia river basin, it's hard to objectively weigh the costs and benefits without a perspective. Within that perspective is an implicit number of assumptions that fashion a bias.

The problem is the Columbia is immensely powerful, and as such it's impact on our society or environment with or without the dam create such a incomprehensible web of dependencies that it predicting the outcome would be akin to seeing the future. You can't.

The Elwha is an amazing story, but that dam was in disuse long before it was dismantled. The case for removing it was one-sided.


Back in middle school we went on a trip and saw them doing the deconstruction of the elwha dam. They were around halfway done. We stood on the banks and saw the process of the reservoir turning back into a river. There was around 50 feet of sediment with old flooded trees sticking out. It is hard to overstate the effects these dams have on nature. Seeing the photos of the elwha coming back to life is always awesome :)


Another problem of dams is the accumulation of heavy metals and other toxic sludge behind the dam itself (usually washes downstream in minimal quantities) and the deoxigenation of the watershed due to lack of flow.


On that note (interestingly and anecdotally) many of these dams are inundated with ash and sediment that should have flushed downstream from Mt St Helens!

The impact of these dams is just incomprehensible.


> The IRS knows what you owe and could just tell you if they wanted to.

I must admit I've always sort of blindly believed the same thing, but here I am year after year accumulating and submitting my own absurd set of turbo-tax button smashes.

Honestly I have trouble figuring out how much I owe myself. I would believe that they have some core set of data linked to my SSN, and every time I submit they run some sort of markov-chain statistical model that says - "meh, looks pretty close. No need for further review. Please pay the refund to the latest identity scam." or "red flag for actual review".

100% chance the IRS is understaffed, running legacy spaghetti, managed by folks just trying not to be the next scape-goat so they can go home to their family and watch the next episode of what everyone at work is talking about.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: