Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | no-s's commentslogin

here’s a heretical thought: you should have some idea what uniquely distinguishes a entity in your database before you give it a key.

Because if the only thing is a arbitrary number you probably should just be using a symbol table instead.


what a lovely resource...


> If you had two space stations like the ISS with ascending nodes 180 degrees from each other it would be about as expensive to transit between them as it is to launch a rocket from the Earth to begin with.

1+1 = 2 2/2 = 1; technically halfway.

To interpret “halfway to anywhere” that way is missing the point. Going from LEO to LEO wasn’t the point of “halfway to anywhere”. Yes a bit exuberant but not far off.


I want to build a low cost but comfortable small earthen house in the Sonoran Desert. Currently conducting a series of experiments to discover process that will be effective for my build:

- Comparing lime versus Poland cement for stabilizing poured earth. These mixes have a cure time measured in days and multiple experiments are in progress... - Research into latex cement for panelized wall and roof coverings over exterior insulation, mostly for temporary shelter structures. - Modular forms lined with geotextile fabric to minimize surface cracking in poured walls. - Other techniques to assure reliable performance of earth structures. - small mechanical projects to help make DIY practicable, e.g. auger mixers I can run from my tractor PTO, DIY trommel for grading materials, etc.


A tear came to my eye when I read this. When I learned to read, Webster’s and Encyclopedia Britannica were my touchstones. I would roam the pages for hours discovering powerful and cogent associations. Most modern readers of English are not fond of nuanced prose; they cast a suspicious eye towards it and assume for the author a trivial fustian intent…


> a lot of things that "have no place at a programming language conference", but surprisingly these are not included in that draft. Why?

Rly. Why should petty tyranny or totalitarianism have a seat at a programming language conference?


> The danger is well known, not unknown: it's people with guns.

well, apparently not well known to you. The danger is criminals with guns. Law-abiding people carry guns everyday and demonstrably present no significant additional threat to the public. The thesis that law-abiding people could suddenly become dangerous gun criminals at a Rust event simply because they possess a firearm seems unsupportable.

Apparently the Rust Foundation wants us to accept the premise that lawfully armed people are intrinsically dangerous to fellow Rust enthusiasts, doubly so if they dissent.

I’d like to know what is it about Rust that makes lawful behavior and public dissent over Rust foundation dicta so hazardous...? Can someone address this directly?


Dude would be praying to all gods known and unknown that there's a law-abiding person with a gun around to save their ass if someone who doesn't give a single flying fuck about the conference's gun rules shows up to shoot the place up, someone who could respond before the police finally show up also armed with guns but too late to do anything but drag their dead corpse out.


I stressed over this and finally gave in and got a P365, which I tore down and measured various things to assure it wasn’t as naughty as a P320. I wouldn’t even carry (EDC) a nice Glock which some PD reverted to, because of the unfortunate possibility of inadvertent discharge when re-holstering. For the P320 there was no real visibility of the risk from a slight trigger movement - for the Glock you know anything that moves the trigger safety opens the envelope.


Where do you go to read up on this?


Product reviews, trigger specifications, and such. It really is just a matter of personal preference. Firearms like Glocks don't have "active safeties" where you enable/disable them with a lever, but they do have a variety of "inactive safeties" which prevent the firearm from discharging when dropped/rattled/whatever.


> Firearms like Glocks don't have "active safeties"

gosh, there’s always some argument about the defn of “safety” when discussing Glock. A Glock trigger has a little spring-loaded tab which is depressed when you hold your finger on the trigger. When it is visible the Glock can not fire. This they call a “safety”, seems a little sketch but ok, I get the point. There’s some other internal features backing it up, but the trigger is most obvious.

The P320 had an internal lock-out widget that would disengage when you pull the trigger a wee bit and a spring loaded sear (? do they call it that for strikers?) one trivial whack away from releasing even if the trigger was not pulled to the break (the expected release point). I would call that absurdly wrong. The upgrade fixed this similarly to the P365.

The P365 has a similar lock-out widget to the P320 (they call it an internal safety in the manual), but it doesn’t disengage until the trigger is pulled into the break. The “striker” has a tab on it which is blocked to that point by the widget. You can disassemble it all and measure the distances the parts move to release, but I actually looked at a SolidWorks 3d model someone in the aftermarket industry shared with me and verified my pistol had the same dimensions at a critical point. I think if the striker tab or the widget broke it could fail silently. I check it about weekly or less.


Is trying to be the “essential CRDT”? CRDT didn’t spring from the quivering Internet jello fully formed in 2006. I feel this should go further back. I recall doing CRDT-like things for distributed message threading in ’97, and I’m pretty sure it wasn’t original work. E.g. I recall some reading some paper[1] at the time which referenced Lamport’s 1978 note on distributed time[2].

The Awesome CRDT[3] references earlier material too.

[1] https://fileadmin.cs.lth.se/cs/Personal/Amr_Ergawy/dist-algo... [2] https://www.ics.uci.edu/~cs230/reading/time.pdf [3] https://github.com/alangibson/awesome-crdt


This is a list of research papers on CRDTs, published on the main open source reference site about CRDTs, curated by Martin Kleppmann, Annette Bieniusa and Marc Shapiro.

That’s about as canonical as you can get.

The papers obviously reference the prior work.

What’s interesting to me is to see how much new work continues to build on CRDTs and push the boundaries of what’s possible for AP, causal and mixed consistency systems.


> EFF is one of those exceptions.

For me too. Though they test my patience regularly with leftist shibboleths. I’m pretty arch-conservative too, but we’re all in this together…my zeal knows no limits when it comes to defending against overbearing government.

In my mind it doesn’t matter if they’re innocent or guilty. If the government wants the privilege of treating people as guilty before due process then the legitimacy of government is automatically in disrepute. I’d rather let all the prisoners go free and let vigilante justice prevail than put up with this.


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

Search: