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

The rising height of headlights in North America is compounding the issue as well. At this point a good proportion of vehicles have headlights even or higher than the roof on a sedan.

At least in my state, there is a law that restricts the location of headlights to between 22 and 54 inches from the ground. 54 inches is quite tall, though, I think that a lot of cars have roofs that are shorter than 4.5 feet. I'd love to see a much lower upper limit.

I don't think there's a limit to how bright they can be. The law limits the lights to "70 watts", which I believe is intended to limit brightness but misses the mark. I bet the law was passed back when headlights were incandescent.


I'd go as far as to say that the height is the issue, and it's becoming global (although, yes, US is the leader).

It's ridiculous that an average SUV has headlights higher than an average semi (my own experience) given the latter's breaking distance is much greater.


Personal opinion: Alpacas are cute, llamas are mostly huge and menacing.

I carried my iPhone (4?) in an iPod sock for a good while. It was great to protect pants pockets from cutting against the metal bezel.

That got me curious. My Github username is three characters but includes a hyphen.

Turns out it's a valid single-character name as well on GH:

https://github.com/-


I suspect a lot of the comfort preferences come from there.

The average monitor has a brightness level equivalent to screaming in a study room, and a color calibration that assumes fluorescent office lighting.


The first feature paragraph on the Photopea landing page:

> There are no uploads. Photopea runs on your device, using your CPU and your GPU. All files open instantly, and never leave your device.


I'm pretty sure the point is that anything clearly generated will result in an instant ban. That seems rather fair, you want contributors who only submit code they can fully understand and reason about.


The language clearly says "If you use an LLM [...] to make any kind of contribution".


[I was wrong and posted a link to an earlier policy/discussion overridden by the OP]


The part you are quoting is being removed. The policy used to state "If you contribute un-reviewed LLM generated...", now simply states "If you use an LLM to make any kind of contribution then you will immediately be banned without recourse."


you seem to be reading that backwards, that's the content that was removed. it now just says "if LLM, banned": https://github.com/twpayne/chezmoi/blob/master/.github/CODE_...


I'm a designer with enough front-end knowledge to lead front-end dev when needed.

To someone like me, especially on solo projects, using infra that effectively isolates me from the concerns (and risks) of lower-level devops absolutely makes sense. But I welcome the choice because of my level of competence.

The trap is scaling an org by using that same shortcut until you're bound to it by built-up complexity or a persistent lack of skill/concern in the team. Then you're never really equipped to reevaluate the decision.


My issue with the article's repeated use of a Title + List of Things structure isn't that it's LLM output, it's that it's LLM output directly, with no common sense editing done afterwards to restore some intelligent rhythm to the writing.


And they don't spend money, they take debt against their existing assets to fund projects and investments. So long as they can service the loans across economic downturns, they don't particularly have to feel the effects of a recession, outside of the mentioned opportunities to buy the market at a discount.


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

Search: