adapiz · HackerTrans

2 เดือนที่ผ่านมาdiscuss

Compared to xz and even parallel xz, gzip and parallel gzip are just better if speed is more important. The compression is not superior but already good if you consider just the uncompressed data. For long term storage, it makes sense, to invest the extra time for better compression but if it's about transfer time, you might end up with a overall longer processing time instead of just a longer transfer time because of a worse compression ratio. It's like with image formats: Pick the right one for your use case.

adapiz

2 เดือนที่ผ่านมาdiscuss

True. Reading code needs some experience in how coding actually works. I feel confident enough to read code in programming languages I've never coded in as long as they are imperative because the the pattern will be similar so that an abstract static analysis is possible. I don't mind the usage of AI agents but review the code, understand and improve it. Every other prompt I don't even need to run the code to see that it won't work and I'm tired of the "oh sorry, you're right! Here's a fixed version" excuses. I've already noticed, how AI usage makes people not think anymore. There's a problem? Ask the AI. Run whatever the AI returns. It declares solutions as dangerous and explains why but I saw enough people solving their problems with --force until it caused real damage or failed. And the explanation is filling with indignation: "Just use --force" - "why?" - "It does not work otherwise" - "why?" - "I don't know". It was a npm telling, it cannot resolve the dependency tree anymore.

adapiz

4 เดือนที่ผ่านมาdiscuss

Yes, it is. I've been on a long distance train and there was some guy watching a movie on his tablet. Sleeping. In the quiet zone.

Rude, loud people usually don’t react kindly when you call them out on their behavior. It’s practically asking for trouble. That may be one reason why many people avoid conflict, even if it bothers them a lot.

adapiz

5 เดือนที่ผ่านมาdiscuss

Damn that's scary. I like that guy. He said everything necessary to that topic. Never rely on something you've found working for your case but not designed to be used like that.

adapiz

2 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

People talk a bunch of stuff about malfunctioning, bugged software and so on. We can assume, the car was just trapped in some infinite loop so it'll never reach it's goal for some reason but also wasn't able to realize that and call the routine for that. Fine.

It's not a dangerous situation for the passenger but it definitely something that makes you feel very uncomfortable which could lead to panic because you're trapped. The doors are locked and even if they weren't you cannot simply exit the car. That's okay. Trains don't allow this either to open the doors on a track section. You need a supervisor to do that. In case of an emergency you can still unlock the doors mechanically. So after pulling the emergency brake you can still do that. It would be interesting how these cars behave in case of a fire inside or something which leads me to my final thought:

In case of issues on or with a ride in a theme park, there are usually operators. So in case of a technical malfunction there's an emergency stop which should make disarm systems in a safe manner and bring the ride into a safe position or at least make sure it stops safely. Of course it's not possible to trigger an e-stop as passenger but an operator can do that in case you can somehow make clear that it's needed right now.

The situation in the video is a very bad experience because a phone call from the passengers device is needed and he was asked to do something in the app. Probably to identify the car and enable the remote control. Elevators handle this much better. There's an emergency system in the cabin which transmits all important information to the service center, so it's immediately clear where the emergency call originated from. An app on a smartphone should never replace this installation!

adapiz

2 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

Thanks to the article I now have the proper word for it: Bossware. I feel reminded of Ploito. It got advertised on HN. 6 months later I'm sure: It was an ad to gain attention. Idk what happened but it seems that the poster and their business owner became very silent 2 months after their pitch. It's still worth to quote the BO > "weed out the lazy and deceitful, thereby forming a healthy and efficient team." It's bossware disguised as a "cool" product to connect teams. You could say it's a Trojan horse. Sure the monitoring is all "optional" but the mentality is baked into the product.

For me it's just right to reject every potential company installing bossware alone for your personal health. People burn out under constant monitoring forced to be 100% productive all day. Have a bad day? Sad for you, it lowers your numbers. Sick leave instead? "Oh what a weak person, how unreliable". People with utilizing computers to effectively slave-drive people should be held responsible for the damage they cause. They should pay for the treatment if they drive people into depressions and burnout and neither health insurances or the society.

adapiz

2 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

Really depends on what you expect for 1 Euro. A single CPU core of an Intel Xenon Gold 6230R isn't much but it handles small loads very well. 1 GB memory is okayish. 10 GB SSD? Meh. A dedicated IPv4 address? That's hot! The uptime is flawless and it's fine to host or forward requests and serve as VPN gateway for my personal stuff or host a few small services. For 1 Euro/month it's a good offer. I used it to encode videos for months. No complaints or something from them. But according to Reddit, once you get into trouble, the support is the biggest weakness. I'm just parroting what other people probably also parroted.

adapiz

2 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

Initially I had the same thought: I'm not using their services, how can I break TOS? But this explains it. If a device cannot be controlled locally and need their cloud connection to work, it's in a high risk of becoming e-waste at some point of time. That's why I would never pick such devices.

adapiz

3 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

You could lock it away so people start messing with their cars to unlock it again. Yes. I wish people would realize how dangerous it is to be so much faster than the adjacent lane.

adapiz

3 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

It's just: I can go faster, if I want to (or for some reason need to). I'm really not a fan of doing the Apple thing and to infantilize the user by disallowing sideloading because it's dangerous. The discussion got dragged to compare force and impact but similarly to train tracks, highways are usually a place of motion. People don't walk around and cars are usually also fast. We counter the emergency situation such as the infamous end of a traffic jam by adding brake assistants that warn the driver to brake and then hit the brake on their own. This kind of technology seems to reduce traffic incidents so that the most danger comes from older cars without this technology.

I completely agree, that we don't need hyper cars or racing cars on the road. But the 100 mph limit wouldn't help at all in cities. There are better ways like obstacles that force a driver to slow down or routing with curves instead of straight lines.

adapiz

3 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

I see that, too. It's not even 130 km/h it's often between 100 and 130 km/h. Depending on the speed limit, traffic, lanes available and routing I would say that there are about 5-10% of cars that go faster and maybe 20% that want to go faster but cannot because of traffic. I would agree with a general speed limit of 160 km/h. If you drive around conurbation area "Ruhrpott" you rarely have the chance or aren't allowed to go faster than 100 km/h. Personally I've set my car to alarm me on 200 km/h, just to remind me, that I'm about to do something stupid. When someone is with me, they are also alarmed because it's the usual cockpit beep that tells you, something important popped up like engine failure or tire pressure. I once drove a Ford Focus with an electrical speed limit of 160 km/h in place because it was a company car. But because of this I ended up in a dangerous situation where I was overtaking a slower car that started accelerating. With enough engine power I could accelerate faster up to the point where the limit kicked in and we were at the same speed. As usually I've monitored the situation behind me and I've noticed that there were faster cars approaching. In conclusion I was mislead by the engine to have enough power to handle the situation with ease but the electric limit just cut it of. My foot said: There's more available, but the car suddenly locked it away. Stupid situation. yes. In driving school they teach not to accelerate when someone is overtaking you. Of course this rule changes a bit on the Autobahn, but in this case, speculative driving forced the cars behind me to hit the brakes which is weird when you think that everything will be fine because the slower car just accelerates and overtakes. Stopping the maneuver of all sudden and let the car on the right lane pass you again is is the worst outcome for everyone behind you.

That's why I suggest to not limit the car's acceleration curve so the driver notices that the engine is on its limit. Rather I would implement an audible signal at 160 km/h and a repeating signal for over 190 km/h. Because to be honest: It's rarely possible to drive that fast for just a minute. I would also suggest to get these street legal racing machines like Audi RS-models off the road. There's absolutely no sane use for such overpowered cars on public roads. And finally: Company cars should be limited or regulated in some way. Most aggressive and fast drivers seem to be representatives. They don't pay the high prices for fuel and don't care about wear of the car (especially brakes).

adapiz

3 ปีที่แล้วdiscuss

You might want to read this: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/06/clearly-predatory-we...

I had 4 WD Red 4 TB HDDs like WDC WD40EFRX and 2 out of them already failed SMART long tests and hat uncorrectable errors reported by the kernel after about 25000 hrs powered on. I've messed a lot with the drives bought 3 other used drives and it turned out that one of them had the same failure just undetected.

I was able to "fix" the issue by running testdisk in read-write mode forcing the disk to overwrite the bad sector. That's how I forcefully fix pending sectors on desktop drives. But it seems that WD Reds don't want to replace sectors because the data is still readable. The drive just needs a second or two.

I'm not happy with that but I'm also glad, I could confirm that's not an issue caused by my setup. One would say, I should replace the drive immediately but I trust in ZFS and my backups. I would put the drive on my shelve and maybe reuse it as temporary buffer storage because why would someone buy such a used drive for a high price? In my eyes, it's still okay.

comments