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


Yeah this is very common. You might see the headline "Scientists prove X causes Y", and when you click through all the pop-science journalism until you get to the paper, you'll find "We found a weak positive correlation between X and Y and it's surprising because the prior research found the opposite".


I think other explanations replying are on point. I live in a town that's surrounded by a lot of farm traffic, and most of those roads are in good shape. But there are also routes used heavily by trucks servicing fracking sites, and those roads are TRASHED.


My grandma used to live close to a road servicing an oil derrick, back in 90's Romania (so 0 infrastructure investments for probably 10 years).

At one point my family was in a Dacia 1310 (crappy and very cheap Romanian car) and we literally went very slowly (probably 10kmph) through a section where the road was basically sunk, there was a "pothole" probably 10-15m long and 80% of the road wide (both lanes), about 1m deep, I think.

The funny thing is that there were potholes inside the uber-pothole :-)))


It took only 17 Space Shuttle flights before a crew-member threatened to kill themselves causing them to add additional locks to the hatches. I think a few seconds considering what a malicious actor could do would be worth it.


We're not discussing a malicious actor, we're discussing someone having a bad trip on LSD. It is a completely different thing.


The unpredictability means they might as well be a malicious actor.


Not really. Someone panicking on acid would do different things than a sober person trying to knock the ISS out of orbit. Obviously.


'Not really' - best not bet the lives and a huge amount of money on 'Not really'


I don’t know what argument you’re trying to make. The question is: should the ISS be hardened against someone on LSD. My answer is: that is fucking absurd, and generic hardening against malicious actors is tangential at best.


It's a terribly unclear name, though. I had no idea what "No X in Brazil" referred to. I had to clink on the article to find out I don't care.


There are plumbers who make a living but whose work results in leaks in people's homes. They're making a living, but I don't consider the way they work "a good idea".


SpaceX is pretty open about optimizing for many iterations, a bit like the philosophy in software of shipping an MVP to get user feedback sooner for future iterations. Boeing has an established culture that's more like traditional waterfall development. When you watch their launches, they have tiers of objectives that get less and less likely to succeed - they plan to push even if failure is likely tlso they can learn from both their successful objectives and the eventual failure.


If you do, in fact, need H100s, they can be very hard to get. Even the smaller flavors of A100 you sometimes request, wait days for, and then 1 node might show up during a weekend. And for the reasons described in the article and the fact that large training jobs can be network-limited, nicer networks can be a big deal.


Was it Hans Reiser who decided to randomly clean his car interior with bleach while there was a manhunt going on for his wife? Same vibes.


His dad testified in court that it was a Reiser family tradition to hose out the interior of your car to clean it (when Hans was arrested in the car there was an inch or two of water in it )

Hans also claimed to have misplaced the passenger seat (it was missing from the car)

After trial he admitted he threw the passenger seat in a dumpster.


There's an even closer parallel: he'd recently purchased the books Homicide: Life on the Killing Streets and Masterpieces of Murder.

https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2008/03/06/update-hans-reiser-b...


And would anyone be surprised if asking to be removed was also a way to get subjected to additional screening in future?


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

Search: