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

Well duh, the purpose of Privacy and Security was never Privacy or security. The purpose is to lock you into Apple's ecosystem and prevent you from installing your own software.

Putting a UPS in a rack is a prosumer/corporate IT thing, it’s not done in real datacenters.

They typically have their own UPS in another room and multiple power lanes. And it’s going to be much more reliable than a laptop battery.


I didn't really think that any of what I wrote would be taken seriously to the point of needing a retort. I mentioned blade servers and knew rack unit measurements which as context clues would have suggested I was familiar with actual data center equipment.

I read the reply to your comment not as much as an answer to your statement but a general warning to anyone who might be reading.

A laptop battery would be a huge liability if it caught fire.

And yet most homes and offices are full of them. Laptop batteries don't usually catch fire. At the colos I am familiar with (which have pretty strict rules, generally), you can have equipment with batteries as long as you regularly inspect them.

Well, it exists, but it exists if you’re willing to buy server hardware on eBay, hustle to get old parts working together, negotiate a good deal on a cabinet, get space from ARIN and announce it and so on. There are probably 10-50x cost efficiencies vs. renting 5 year old CPU families on AWS at huge markup.

A laptop isn’t the way to do that though. And your typical VC-fueled startup isn’t going to know how to do it either. It takes a very narrow slice of competence to be able to do that correctly.


the one guy I know who has worked with colo at scale (unfortunately in the crypto space) is now an EM at Goog

They’ve also started auto-translating and cross posting Japanese X content, which has been the coolest cross-cultural thing I’ve experienced on the Internet since I started using IRC.

HN is still great but it’s in decline, I still hear about AI developments on r/LocalLlama and X sometimes weeks before they make it here if even at all.

And all the commentary here is negative, skeptical and mean. It’s like Slashdot when Apple started ascending and everyone was complaining that iPods will never catch on.


You haven't seen negative AI sentiments until you visit Lemmy =)

Can you recommend any particular community on Lemmy for those negative sentiments?

Just pick anything tech related and post something that's even mildly ambivalent about AI.

Unless you're curbstomping AI for being "slop", you'll get an instant deluge of downvotes.

FSM help you if you post something positive =)


> FSM help you if you post something positive =)

Ramen


We already have this in Utah with Utopia with 53% coverage across the state (A state 5 times the size of Switzerland) so kind of weird the post is acting like Europe is special or something.

And there are lots of ISPs to choose from, several with 10Gbps symmetrical. Because it's dark fiber that you can literally purchase (I was quoted about $3k to purchase the fiber to the CO), there's nothing stopping you from putting 25Gbps optics on both ends if you are super determined.


Ooo, does everywhere in Sugarhouse have access to this now? We've been up in Park City relying on wireless point-to-point but are about to move back down to the valley and that is very exciting.

> my belief that it is intended to be little more than a quick, dirty, and vainglorious Apollo repeat by a failing government.

If the USA successfully sends people to the Moon, achieves all of NASA's technical goals, and the astronauts make it back in one piece, isn't that literally the opposite of failure?

It might be expensive and you can argue that it's wasteful. But even to that point, the $11B cost of SLS is nothing for the US Gov. For example the F35 is a >$1T government program. That doesn't seem a lot to explore a new frontier and expand the scope of humanity.


Its not Pork and its not science. Its a strategically costly land grab rather than a political vain-glorious stunt.

Same as Mercury/Gemini/Apollo except this time China instead of Russia.


> its not science. Its a strategically costly land grab

Step away from your screens. Framing everything exclusively in these hard terms isn’t healthy (or true).


Jumping in late here. I think both can be true, that it's an inspirational moment and the idea of humans exploring and visiting other worlds is amazing. That a society's ability to do so implies its scientific prowess. And that we are in competition with other top nations to "have a seat at the table" if/when those nations start trying to put controls on the use of those celestial bodies.

> That doesn't seem a lot to explore a new frontier and expand the scope of humanity.

There is no gain in knowledge from this mission. It's more like cheering for your favorite soccer team.


> There is no gain in knowledge from this mission

This is wrong. We’re learning a lot about the new life-support systems. (Courtesy of the ESA.) We’re also going to learn more about the heat shield on 10 April.


Yes true, but these are all technologies required for humans in space. Toilets in space, as intriguing the topic and discussion are, are only needed because we decided to go there. I think the tech is interesting but the human unification vibe is tainted at the least.

Global rates of poverty are 83% lower than they were in 1969 when we landed on the moon.

So actually, millions of lives have massively benefited from science and technology. To be cynical in the face of all that is a personal take, not a reflection of the facts.


So landing on the moon triggered a reduction in global rates of poverty? do you have any research or citations for this claim?

Vaccines, Mobile Phones, Internet, GPS (How do you think container ships navigate), High yield seeds/fertilizers and the Green Revolution, Weather Satellites, I could go on.

It's really getting tiring repeating this stuff over and over again to the anti-space crowd.


It’s not the anti-space crowd.

You’re arguing against the misanthrops. To them, nothing humans could do would be good enough. We could end slavery in the West and they’d accuse us of not ending slavery enough.


Vaccines were invented during the moon landings? High yield seeds and fertilizers are due to the moon landings? The internet was invented due to the moon landings?

You didn't provide any citations that show any of the above has lifted people out of poverty. Please go on, and maybe tell us how ships navigated the seas before GPS, sounds impossible.

There are no causal connections between going to the moon and lifting global poverty. In fact, the money spent on going to a dried up satellite could have lifted people out of poverty.


> Global rates of poverty are 83% lower than they were in 1969 when we landed on the moon.

Obvious post hoc fallacy


It’s only a fallacy if the purported facts are fallacious.

And in the case of lifting most of humanity out of poverty, two things are responsible: capitalism and technology.

You can argue that China is a communist state, but it’s the allocation of capital to things that matter that has enable China to thrive.


> It’s only a fallacy if the purported facts are fallacious.

These don't appear to be the words of someone who understands what the post hoc fallacy is.

In any case, the subject is not "capitalism and technology" generally but rather manned Moon missions specifically.


Just because one thing happened after another thing, doesn’t mean the first thing caused the second thing.

Happy now?

However, sometimes it is true that the first thing caused the second thing.

Therefore, it’s only a fallacy when it’s fallacious.

My argument is that going to space was an allocation of capital that mattered in driving technology forward and improved the lives of everyone.


> And in the case of lifting most of humanity out of poverty, two things are responsible: capitalism and technology.

You alleged above it was due to the moon landings that people were lifted out of poverty. Do you understand the difference here?


Was not the space race, and the cold war context it happened it, a driving force in pushing technological advances forward?

I'm sorry, so now it's not capitalism, technology, or the moon landings, but the cold war context? Could you pick a specific "event" you believe lifted so many people out of poverty, and provide research or supporting documentation?

At least the US still has energy infrastructure, while the EU is forced to financially support Dictators in Tehran and Moscow to keep their economy from collapsing.

Oil is (close to) fungible, which means the higher prices in US fuel pumps are just as much financially supporting dictators in Tehran and Moscow as EU fuel pumps.

Ironically, the "close to" part is just enough to prevent the USA from isolating itself from the world market by refining and using what it currently exports.


Pretty sure the US does not buy energy from natural gas pipelines to Russia, neither are we shutting down all of our Nuclear Power Plants (like Germany) because it's green to import more gas ?

As an American I couldn't tell you what their logic is exactly.


> Pretty sure the US does not buy energy from natural gas pipelines to Russia, neither are we shutting down all of our Nuclear Power Plants (like Germany) because it's green to import more gas ?

Irrelevant. Natural gas isn't the only fossil fuel, the US trades oil on the global market, that oil trade cannot help but support all other petrostates.

Also, if you're talking about Germany in particular, renewables have significantly exceeded the peak share of nuclear power: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:StromerzeugungDeutschlan...

(Kernenergie == nuclear)

To use the table that the chart is supposed to be based on, the peak of nuclear production in Germany was only about 60% of 2025's renewables, 284.6 TWh renewables in 2025 vs 169.6 TWh nuclear in 2000: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stromerzeugung_in_Deutschland


This article is literally about Europe rapidly building out its sovereign energy infrastructure?

Didn't trump remove sanctions to russia?

Correction: 350,000 years being riddled with parasites, fending off wild animal attacks, and avoiding being eaten alive by cannibals when your tribe runs out of food.

Parasites are my main go-to when I meet someone complaining about the modern world. In the history of multicellular organisms on earth, only (some) humans—and only in the last ~100 years—have had the luxury of not being completely infested with parasites.

Even now we have more parasites than we probably know or care to admit.


This was / is likely a factor in the "kernel of truth" with the whole "deworming tablets cure covid-19" thing, the chances of survival of people in certain areas infected with the virus increased if they were administered deworming medication because they also had a parasitic infection.

Yes my friend took ivermectin recently because he grew up in he Virgin Islands and realized he had likely been harboring parasites his whole adult life. I don’t know if it is placebo but his eating habits changed significantly after his dose

And just like that we just learned that parasites may have been good for us [1]

[1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8162934/


The fact that low-grade parasite-infections dampen autoimmune diseases isn't that big of a win. Presumably our immune system is as aggressive as it is in part due to the parasite-load our ancestors were exposed to.

We solved the parasite problem and at the same time changed the ecology we were accustomed to. The irony of dynamic systems.

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

Search: