HackerLangs
トップ新着トレンドコメント過去質問紹介求人

VorpalWay

756 カルマ登録 8 か月前

投稿

The Cost of Concurrency Coordination with Jon Gjengset

youtube.com
1 ポイント·投稿者 VorpalWay·4 か月前·0 コメント

AI is destroying open source, and it's not even good yet

jeffgeerling.com
422 ポイント·投稿者 VorpalWay·5 か月前·356 コメント

コメント

VorpalWay
·一昨日·議論
Even in other industries it is common that spare parts and consumables have a very high margin (while the initial purchase has a much smaller margin or in some cases is even subsidised).

The most well known example is probably printer ink/toner. (Razors is another often quoted example.) But this applies to car parts too. I needed a new small plastic clip to my Dacia. I was quoted 100 SEK (about 10 USD) for that. I 3D printed a sturdier version that will last longer for less than 5 SEK in materials (less than 0.5 USD).

From that you can estimate the approximate margins many companies have for spare parts. Of course being able to prevent cheaper third party parts will seem enticing if they want to maximise shareholder value. And this is why we need regulation.
VorpalWay
·4 日前·議論
That is interesting (and I recommend you flash stock openwrt instead, I did on mine). But no, the parent comment I replied to claimed Israeli / IDF connections.
VorpalWay
·4 日前·議論
Source? A cursory check on their website shows a Hong Kong and a US address. Some people seem to be claiming mainline China associations as well, which could be true, can't find anything on that in either direction.

But Israeli, no can't find that. Sure you didn't confuse it with some other company?
VorpalWay
·5 日前·議論
I happily own a car with nothing fancier than a bluetooth radio. No touch screens and no Android Auto is a blessing.

But from this and sibling comments it seems that CoMaps have nothing to offer me (except possibly better search).
VorpalWay
·5 日前·議論
Hm, I guess there is no law. But why would so many manufacturers include this unless there is some legal reason or other pressure on them to do so?
VorpalWay
·5 日前·議論
This is interesting, but it seems to be a crowdfunding campaign only. I wish them the best of luck (the cause is worthy for sure), but buyer beware at this point.

(I myself don't 2D print enough that an ink based printer makes sense for me. Ink tends to dry, so for me a laser printer that can sit for months at a time makes more sense. I use the scanner as well as my 3D printer far more often.)

I wonder how they will handle the nonsense around yellow tracking dots[1] etc. Hopefully that doesn't become a problem.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printer_tracking_dots
VorpalWay
·5 日前·議論
I have been a happy user of OsmAnd+ for over 15 years at this point, I can strongly recommend it if you need power user features.

(Yes the OsmAnd+ is the paid version, but it is the old pay-once version and I have definitely got my money's worth at this point, and it supports an open source project.)
VorpalWay
·5 日前·議論
I have used OsmAnd+ for well over 15 years by now, which also uses OSM data, just like these. And I have used JOSM on my PC to fix the OSM data myself.

Does Organic maps / CoMaps offer anything OsmAnd+ doesn't for someone who uses it for car navigation (especially on back roads in the wilderness) as well as hiking? (All in the Nordic countries.) I also record tracks with it.
VorpalWay
·6 日前·議論
Well sure, but that isn't what my original comment that you were replying downthread of said. I specifically recommended safety critical embedded. :)
VorpalWay
·6 日前·議論
The issue with AI isn't that it can't write embedded code (though it is noticeably worse at it), the issue is specifically with the safety certification of code the AI produced. There is a lot of paper trail to show that you followed all relevant standards, a lot of which pertains to your development process.

It is not just what you do or don't do in the code (e.g. MISRA or CERT C) but there is also a lot about how you test, review, show that your tests cover everything relevant (not just code coverage, but also specification coverage), show how you check that everyone involved followed the process, etc.
VorpalWay
·6 日前·議論
One idea to consider might be going into safety critical embedded work (e.g. brake controllers, critical systems for airplanes/trains, medical devices, some industrial systems, ...). AI hasn't penetrated much here yet. It isn't at all clear how or if you would be able to certify the process for example.

That might change with time, but for now, all I see AI used for is additional code review and side scripts/tooling that don't need to be safety rated.

Of course, that might mean entirely switching language (C, C++ or increasingly but still in minority Rust), learning entirely different skills (control system theory, real time systems, possibly formal verification but usually not), etc.
VorpalWay
·7 日前·議論
I did some ACPI reverse engineering on an old Toshiba laptop some years ago, with the goal of improving the Linux ACPI drivers. Learnt a lot from it, and wrote a blog post that you might find interesting: https://vorpal.se/posts/2022/aug/21/reverse-engineering-acpi... (100% human written, and I hate that I have to specify that these days).
VorpalWay
·7 日前·議論
Not if it causes contact allergies with your mouth, as soy milk does for me. Same with coconut milk. I have to stick to oat, almond or animal milk. (Goat milk tastes pretty good too by the way.)

And non-homogenized full fat milk is delicious.
VorpalWay
·7 日前·議論
For baking: depends on the recipe. In one recipe of a sort of muffin style bread that uses egg to rise (no baking powder, yeast, etc), oat milk makes it not rise properly and you get dense bricks instead. Other recipes have been fine. YMMV.

(Though, I quite like the non-homogenized full fat milk with bits of thick cream floating on top too. Oat milk, while pretty good, got nothing on that. Perfect on the porridge for breakfast.)
VorpalWay
·10 日前·議論
I don't care about aesthetics in factory games (which is a reason I prefer Factorio to Satisfactory, there is way less focus on building pretty factories), that probably helps. I'll happily build a massive factory with very few pillars to hold it aloft, with a bunch of train stations on the side. And to be fair, many machines in Satisfactory are also massive.

I found that the way the resources are spread out in the games and the amount needed for various recipes and the amount of scale you needed to beat the game lead to more trains in Satisfactory. In particular it made it such that spread out smaller factories near resources that then transported intermediate products to big central factories made more sense. In addition, since resource nodes are infinite you don't need to keep moving the mines all the time like in Factorio, so building additional local infrastructure is more viable than in Factorio.

Because the world is hand crafted and more rugged it also means running belts all over the map is less viable, building one long difficult rail that can be used by a bunch of separate transports makes even more sense than in Factorio.

So in summary, I think it is a bunch of small things that all nudge me more towards trains in Satisfactory than in Factorio.
VorpalWay
·10 日前·議論
I haven't played the space expansion, but from old vanilla I only used trains for bringing ores to the main base. For rare low throughout recipies the flying bots (I forget the name for them) worked well, and towards the end of the game they got pretty fast as well.

As a longtime fan of trains in games like OpenTTD, it always felt like there wasn't enough of a focus on trains. Arguably this is something that Satisfactory did slightly better, there was more reason to use them there (that game certainly has other weaknesses though, and overall I prefer Factorio).
VorpalWay
·10 日前·議論
There is a lot of useful information on how things work out there, if you want to learn. YouTube videos took the place of popular science magazines largely, and perhaps it will be some different medium tomorrow. But the knowledge is there, and just like in the past you have to go and look for it, just in different places.

There are also still courses you can take to learn practical skills, I for example took a short blacksmithing course a few years ago. A lot of fun and way harder than it looks (at least if you want to get good at it, my goal was just to give it a try and have fun, and 5 evenings was enough for that).
VorpalWay
·10 日前·議論
I partially disagree. I know the basic high level concept of all those. Would I be able to reproduce state of the art results on my own? Obviously not.

But a core part of the engineer or scientist mindset is curiosity for the sake of curiosity. Just the fact that I don't know something is enough reason for me to poke at it or otherwise learn more. Same reason I still take apart broken electronics as an adult and try to find the fault (and sometimes even repair it).

By the way, mining silicon is particularly easy: it's basically sand. The difficult part is purifying it, especially to the levels needed for modern nm scale chips.

A more useful question than making high end silicon would be: could you with reasonable tooling reproduce basic electric components? I'm talking things like light bulbs, resistors, generators, perhaps capacitors even? Just the basics crappy versions, not modern highly optimised surface mount components. And I think the anwer is yes (for me personally) if I had access to metal wire and sheet stock and industrial revolution era tools.
VorpalWay
·10 日前·議論
> They will have a tool that does everything and asks for nothing, and they will be as easy with it as you are with the light switch you never once thought about.

Oh come on! Of course I wondered how a light switch work, and I then learnt. I remember taking apart broken electronics as a kid, and that later morphed into also trying to repair things. Including the computer (both hardware and software wise). I remember ending up reinstalling the OS so many times as a kid on the computer I had access to when I broke it in various ways past what I was able to fix.

Sure, not everyone will have that drive to understand how the world around them works under the hood. But for engineers and scientists I would expect a far higher percentage to have that sort of personality.

It doesn't matter if it isn't "pushing back", just that I don't understand it is enough to catch my interest and a reason to go poking at the thing.
VorpalWay
·10 日前·議論
When I took software focused computer engineering around 2010, we still had courses that took us all the way down to transistors and even the physics of P and N junctions and how that applies to CMOS. (And even some basic analog electronics.)

Did I end up an expert at those layers? Of course not, but I know the basics and I know enough that if I need to I know where to start learning more. Just like I wasn't a C++ or hard realtime expert after university either, but now a decade and a half later I am pretty good at those (and a bunch of other skills that ended up relevant to my line of work).

Basically, none of the layers are "magic" to me. Even if I don't know the details of it, I know the general principle and I know I could learn more if I need it.

(I think you naturally end up an expert at the layer(s) you work in, and the knowledge tapers off as you go down (or up) the stack. For example, I know a fair bit about how the CPU works (cache coherency, pipeline stalls etc), I can passably read x86 assembly, etc. Because they affect the layer I work at (hard realtime systems C++ and now also Rust). I know far less about web dev than hardware.)