Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | mpsprd's comments login

Asimov introduced me to this concept in I robot.

In his version there were multiple levels of speed for entry/exit of transit so the main highways were going really fast.

IIRC it required some dexterity to use and sounded a bit dangerous...


Requires dexterity and seems somewhat dangerous? Meet the Paternoster elevator:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternoster_lift


I used to regularly use these at the Uni of Leeds in the Roger Stevens lecture theatre building. Never saw an accident. Freshers were told that they turned upside down when going over the top but in fact they just slid sideways to the next shaft (we used to ride over the top sometimes to beat a queue going down) but they could apparently jam if too many people tried it so it was frowned upon by the porters.


Got to ride one of those in the Bat'a building in Zlin, Czech Republic. Supposedly that version had some sort of safety mechanism to keep you from crushing your arm off if you didn't have it tucked inside, but I didn't dare test it. We called it a "Mario elevator" due to the obvious similarities with the elevators in the original Super Mario Bros.


"Their overall rate of accidents is estimated as 30 times higher than conventional elevators. A representative of the Union of Technical Inspection Associations stated that Germany saw an average of one death per year due to paternosters..."

Wow - those were definitely different times in terms of acceptable risks in various aspects of life.

Modern times obviously improved a lot of it, but if you're at least a bit cynical, you also have to wonder how much, due to those measures, people are "prevented" from having to build out their awareness of surroundings, dexterity and overall "aptitude for life".


One death per year is literally nothing compared to cars.


I imagine if you compared the number of injuries to the distance travelled, or even trips taken, cars would come out way ahead.


In some instances (like suburbs) need for distance is increased by cars.


Sure, but that doesn’t really change the comparison of risks. Escalator rides, for example, are just plain old more dangerous than car rides regardless of why, just as car rides are just plain old more dangerous than train rides.


Of course someone had to bring up cars. You know how many people get striken by reckless cyclists?


Barely any relative to car accidents.

What is your point?


More or less people than the ones that get striken by reckless car drivers?


Feel free to show some comparable statistics.


It's like they took an obstacle from some Mega Man stage and implemented it in real life.


Are you sure it wasn't The Caves of Steel?


I think you're right, I misremembered the source. Reading online it's called the "robot series" and Asimov says he borrowed it from Heinlein.


As long as there aren’t any gaps, I guess it is just the difference in the belt speeds that you care about. Also the wind.


You also have to consider what happens if a 60mph belt breaks/halts while people are on it.


To me your selection is reversed.

If you hate ads so much you're prepared to pay fb to get rid of it, I don't believe you're one to click on them.


Do you think Coca Cola advertises to get you to go buy a coke right now? United Airlines expects a click-through to get you to book a flight right there and then with no planning or talking to your spouse? Think Audi expects you to click their facebook ad and order a car online?

No, they want to become ingrained in your mind. So to them, just exposing you to their ad is enough. Whether you click on it or not is irrelevant.

https://www.adroll.com/blog/brand-awareness-vs-direct-respon...


United probably wants the click now cola not so much. Airlines are commodities


most ads I see on Instagram don't want my clicks. They want me think of a Rolex watch or a new BMW car by injecting themselves between the content


I keep a low effort fuzzy mental list of things that advertise themselves in ways I find unpleasant. They are the first thing I think of when I go to buy something, but the last thing I'll ever buy.

An example: The North Face edited wikipedia to change the photos of famous hikes/outdoorsy locations with people wearing North Face jackets with the logos visible.


Wow, I hadn’t heard of this before but it’s actually disgusting and despite this happening some time ago they just got added to my shit list of companies I won’t buy from.

“North Face Brazil’s CEO said in a statement. “With the ‘Top of Images’ project, we achieved our positioning and placed our products in a fully contextualised manner as items that go hand in hand with these destinations.””

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/may/30/north-fac...


https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/29/18644158/north-face-wikip...

5/2019: The North Face, in a campaign with advertising agency Leo Burnett Tailor Made, hatched a scheme to get its products to the top of Google Images by replacing Wikipedia photos with its own product placement shots.

In the promotional video, the company notes how all trips begin with an initial Google search, and often the first image that shows up is from a Wikipedia article about the destination. ...

The video brags about how North Face cleverly hacked the results to get its products to the top of Google search, “paying absolutely nothing just by collaborating with Wikipedia.” Only, it wasn’t a collaboration at all; it was a violation of Wikipedia’s terms of service for paid advocacy. ...


> An example: The North Face edited wikipedia to change the photos of famous hikes/outdoorsy locations with people wearing North Face jackets with the logos visible.

I hadn't heard of this but it is beyond sleazy in my book. Though, to the company's credit, I cannot fault for the actions of likely one or a small group of marketing people. Though I don't know, maybe, that type of idea had visibility all the way to the top.


That speaks in favor of the value of personalized ads. Yet people will generally see it as a bad thing if asked.


It's not because I want something that I actually need something. I've wanted to build a UPS with lithium batteries for a while, my ads are all BMS, lithium cells, etc... This is definitely good for advertiser, but as one of the "people", all I see are hard-to-resist ads.

AliExpress is especially good at this for maker gear, I'll look at a reflow station and they will spend the next 6 months showing me reflow station ads until I cave and buy it, even though it is a purely frivolous purchase.

Personalized ads are extremely effective when your profile is good, but that does not mean that I don't see it as a bad thing.


I think personalized ads are way worse, because they entice you to buy products you actually want. Buying things is usually a bad idea, so personalized ads make this problem worse.


It connects you with products and services that are relevant to you. If you're buying things that you shouldn't, that's on you.


Value to whom? Certainly not to me.


It offers value to you if it improved your ability to discover products or services that you need.

If offers value especially to small local advertisers because it allows them to target a local audience on a very limited ads budget.


There is a type of advertising called "brand advertising" where the goal is more about brand awareness (e.g. think of a Coca-Cola superbowl ad) than "direct response advertising". Such advertisers don't really care if you click on ads, but they still want to reach high-value users.


I’m pretty sure most meta-originated ads are direct response. At least most of the ones I’ve seen. Most brand advertising shows up in places where engagement is hard (eg TV, billboards) while direct response is perfect for absentmindedly scrolling (you don’t feel bad clicking away).


This website ignores the big problem with enhancement medication: the health of participants.

A future where there is an incentive to juice up athletes as much as possible is a recipe for disaster.


Wikipedia has a list of premature professional wrestlers deaths, look for the ones that died of heart attack before 50: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_premature_professional... - the roid era really did a number, though of course, working through pain and injury with the help of pain killers and other drugs didn't help either.


Oh man, this is such a sobering read. There are a lot of suicides in those tables :/


They do address it here: https://enhanced.org/science-is-real/

Whether you like or accept their treatment of the subject is up to you


Aside from the normal risks of injury there is the simple fact that many athletes would take the risk. I think it's morbid but top level athletes probably already deal with things that would make the normie sports fan queazy. They'd do it happily for the status and adrenaline


Yep but that's true of many sports. In fact most sports at high levels involve a heightened risk of life-changing injury. It's a difference of degree rather than type.

Not that that invalidates your criticism but it does require it to be formulated in a more nuanced way.


The biggest problem isn't that the highest-level athletes would waste away their bodies (that's a big problem, but not the biggest); it is that below them, there will be thousands if not millions of second- and third-level athletes doing the same. With much less control.

Imagine if every kid out there that wanted to be the next Ronaldo or Neymar (and could afford it) started taking steroids and EPO. That's a huge cost, and what did we gain exactly? A slightly lower number on some clock?


I agree with you, the higher the level, the more athletes will destroy their bodies in the process.

My critism is about actively encouraging said destruction via promotion of stimulants. It's already bad as it is.


The participants ignore the health of the participants quite a bit already in many a sport. Let them do what they want, I say.


The argument that I’ve heard against this is that pro athlete training is already really dangerous - yet athletes are valuable enough that their handlers have some incentive to be reasonably cautious to not push things too far most of the time.

Of course, we also know of many many athletes that have been permanently injured during training, so it’s hard for me to know how true the above is.


If something is already really dangerous, why add performance enhancing drugs into the mix and make it even more dangerous?


recipe for death, ultimately


This made me nostalgic of the old ytmnd days


Can this tool help to simplify self hosting implems? K3s was recommended to me to replace my personal pile of systemd units starting docker compose configs and manual reverse proxy configs.

Im am completely oblivious to how k8s works.


Check out https://kamal-deploy.org, it just hit 1.0 and 37signals moved their whole Kubernetes stack to it. I was playing around with it recently for side projects and I think it's a nice fit for simpler products like that.


systemd units are fine. It's even pretty close to the recommendations for podman.

You can use something like Ansible to make it a bit easier, if that even makes sense in your use case.


People often say kubernetes is complex, or overkill for tasks.

But let's say you have many computers and want to put them to work. Suddenly, kubernetes becomes the simplest of all options.

> Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.

- Einstein


If that's your scenario, fine. But many put themselves in that scenario unnecessarily, which is the real problem.


Lol no. Docker Swarm, Nomad, even ancient Pacemaker are all simpler and easier to use than k8s. I don't think there's a single feature k8s adds over those options that is actually useful in a non-Enterprise use case (especially homelab stuff, assuming the point of your homelab is not learning k8s).


I use it for self hosting. It really simplified my reverse proxy config like you said. I use the internal networking between services quite a bit. I have it auto-provisioning volumes on my NAS and using them via NFS. I love it to death and would say it has simplified my setup overall. But the upfront cost of learning k8s is indeed high.


Seconding this as well. Similar setup (though I opted for longhorn) and journey. I'm very grateful for learning k8s but man, it was definitely rough for a long while until I really understood all the pieces and cemented my understanding. I can very much appreciate that's a tall order for many people and not wanting to embark on that journey unless there's a good reason.


K3s/k8s may help with that, but it's going to be a learning curve. I personally moved onto k8s for a similar reason, but it was a learning curve


It's a learning curve, but it is consistent, reliable, and standardized.

Kubernetes has become an interface, independent of implementation.

It's much like how POSIX is a standard and there are many implementations.

And yes, POSIX has a learning curve too, but I'd rather learn that than anything proprietary, or non standard/rapidly changing.


No doubt. The ability to scale is great, but the best thing about Kubernetes is really the API.


Start with hashicorp nomad. Less of a learning curve and easy to set up. Traefik can do automatic discovery of services in nomad. Definitely better than a bunch of systemd units.


This article makes me think about "tofu-dreg projects" [0]

Poor quality construction work prevalent in mainland china. If you look for content with this keyword, you will find jaw dropping videos of constructions workers bending or breaking "rebar" with their hands, Owners chipping away concrete in high-rise buildings like its sand, etc.

Of course some of this can be propaganda, but considering it has a local name, there must be truth to it.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tofu-dreg_project


It does have a propaganda feeling to it. I went thru the top 25 YouTube videos for tofu dreg recently, and they had that undertone of hoping for China to collapse.

There are crappy building practices in any country. The real question is prevalence, which I can’t seem to answer.


Then where are the videos of western tofu dreg? China has a literal army of propaganda posters. Am I supposed to believe such problems exist and it never occurred to them to push it?


> In July 2021, another occurrence of tofu-dreg construction happened in Zhengzhou in Henan province where the entire city was put at a standstill due to torrential rains and flooding. The city was referred to as a “sponge city” because of how vulnerable the drainage system was. Some argued that the city was not to blame since they were experiencing unprecedented rain levels, but there was evidence later found pointing towards a weak infrastructure.

Damn, sounds like NYC this past week. Here's one of many videos:

https://x.com/OfficialWildX__/status/1707867092832378884?s=2...


At least in new York there are drains under the grates. In China there are grates but no actual drains. Someone still got paid for building drains.


> Then where are the videos of western tofu dreg?

I'm not totally sure I understood what tofu dregging was, but there's no shortage of low quality construction, collapsing bridges, unmaintained infrastructure, etc. in the US.


This is an incredibly naive take on an issue that is wide spread in China to the point of it being almost the norm.

Confucianism does not lend itself well to crucial infrastructure , you know, things you don’t want to collapse.

https://www.chinaexpatsociety.com/culture/the-chabuduo-minds...

It’s an entire mindset.


Fascinating. Within the past 2 years, the US suffered 98 people killed in a condo collapse, and a fairly serious (though thankfully non-fatal) bridge collapse. There's also the especially egregious case a bit further back of the New Orleans levies failing during Katrina. Must have been undercover Confucians.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surfside_condominium_collapse

https://www.npr.org/2022/01/28/1076343656/pittsburgh-bridge-...


If you really want to go down that road:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61290444

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-57830767

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/05/1096810346/survivor-found-alm...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-66286576

-—

You simply cannot compare the two.

I could provide examples all day of how Chinese culture and the CCP allows this type of phenomenon to continue unabated.

It isn’t to say that there are serious infrastructure concerns in America that continue to go unaddressed.

But the scale of graft and shoddy construction in China beggars belief. It extends into every aspect of enterprise, taking shortcuts is the absolute cultural norm.


The reason it was such enormous news was due to how very rare this situation is in the US. Apartment buildings don't collapse on a weekly basis.


I remember this being "exposed" in the Tate modern in London.

This piece of art is the one that made me acknowledge and appreciate modern art. It really makes you undestand the value of context and performance.



The point is to hurt DC financially in reprisal.

Also, characters from fable came from the public domain, so it's a logical conclusion from the point of view of the author.


Except that now he's put this into the public domain, DC can also do what they want with it to the extent that anyone else can.

It doesn't hurt DC financially, other than potentially diluting the Fable brand because anyone else can also use it now. There's also a strong likelihood that DC do in fact own partial copyright over anything that isn't the comic - so any figurines, film spinoffs, etc., in fact anything that wasn't wholly created entirely by Willingham, even if he still owns the underlying IP, so people almost certainly aren't free to make copies of anything other than just the comics.

Also I don't understand why my comment (the GP to this comment) was been moderated down so much. Is it just that my opinion is unpopular with fans and so it was downvoted rather than debated? For instance, re my comment about public domain vs explicit license there are many articles like this: https://www.techdirt.com/2015/01/23/why-we-still-cant-really...


IANAL obviously, but nothing now stops me from selling T-shirts, figurines and lunchboxes of fable with my own drawings/designs. Any such sale is money not in DC pockets.


Sure, you can make whatever you want from the original designs (but note not from any elements from figurines or films or anything else DC made that deviate from the comics).

However, that in and of itself isn't depriving DC of anything, as they're no worse off financially than if whatever you make never existed. Arguably, if you create something that's a runaway financial success, and someone has to choose between buying your thing and the DC produced thing, then sure maybe then DC loses a sale. But sales are rarely binary like that. If you do something that promotes the brand, it probably benefits DC's sales as well.

The only thing that might actually impact on their profit is someone producing an exact copy of the original comics, at a lower price, and of better quality. Even then, people might still buy the DC version so it matches the rest of their collection. And if it is an exact, exact copy of the original comic, there's always a risk there might be something with a DC copyright on it, e.g. the font that's used in the title, maybe a reference to some other DC property, etc...


>it cannot be resold

He covered it.


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

Search: