Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | rafa1981's commentslogin

If Texas has acorn, grass and a low humidity climate year around where the hams can be dried in optimal conditions, I can't see why they wouldn't succeed.

This is just about salting the right ham type and letting it dry at the right conditions. Not exactly rocket science.


If he ran two marathons in one week then he was weakened/unrecovered IMO.


Uggh, that reminds me that I better take it easy when the weather breaks. I like to take LONG bike rides (typically 80-100 km) when the weather is nice. Yes, exercise is good for me, but inadvertently overtaxing myself would not be good.


Intrusive lists are very different beasts than lists by value.

There are less allocations involved (perf and points of failure), values can be inserted on different lists without new allocations, deletion is O(1), elements can be heterogeneous (different sizes and types), etc

etc

I seldomly use linked lists, but most of the time i prefer them to be intrusive. There of course are intrusive list implementations on C++.


Same here.

Using non-intrusive linked lists just feels wrong once you've gotten used to the idea of embedding links, I find there are always better options.

Intrusive lists on the other hand is simply the best solution in some cases.


> values can be inserted on different lists without new allocations

Not multiple lists at the same time, surely...?


They were talking about taking a value off of one list and adding it to a different one, which doesn't require an allocation, but the entity is never on more than one list at a time in that scenario.

That said, you can add an entity onto multiple lists if it contains multiple nodes embedded inside. You have to keep track of which nodes are attached to which lists though (Which generally just means being consistent on which you use where). If you give them decent names, then it's not usually a problem, but it can sometimes get a little confusing if you're not careful.


Obviously not


Fighting environmentalv issues with extra consumption may not be a good idea. Manufacturing a vehicle pollutes a lot. Up to 50% of the enviromental costs of a vehicle seem to happen at manufacturing time.

https://archive.attn.com/stories/13637/hidden-environmental-...


> Fighting environmental issues

I’m not talking about fighting “environmental issues” — I’m explicitly talking about a) global climate change, which has little to do with ~75% of the environmental impacts of an electric vehicle, and b) not spending $trillions fighting wars due to Western society’s unslakable thirst for oil. [1]

Let’s not goalpost this — mining & refining metals (etc.) is dirty business, and we should clean it up, but to be clear: it has a very limited impact on climate change.

> extra consumption

Extra consumption? I proposed taking the trillions of dollars spent on military equipment, plus fuel for planes, aircraft carriers, and other ships, tanks, etc., not to mention the deaths of thousands of people — war is “consumption” to an absurd degree — and replacing all that with domestic EVs.

Don’t tell me that’s “extra consumption”. If anything it’s a dramatic reduction in consumption.

[1] Whether you believe the war in Iraq was fought for oil or not, oil is a causative factor: without the presence of oil in the Middle East, and the riches its trade brings to the states in the area, it’s unlikely we’d be fighting there.


That we are polluting is beyond doubt. Deforestation, mining, nuclear accidents... all these are real problems that need no additional backing science or guvernamental panels, yet they hardly get the spotlight in mass media compared with Co2 levels. Co2 is reported as the worst problem by politicians to scare us, make us feel guilty and pay.

The degree of overconsumism rooted in our system is hardly environmentally friendly. Yet we want to be environmentally friendly by consuming a new generation of Co2 friendly products, which polluted the planet to be manufactured.

Consuming is the problem, not the solution, but who is going to say in a capitalist system backed by fiat money that is only sustainable by an ever increasing debt that we need to have negative growth and lose some comfort to decrease our footprint?


Example: PACKAGE_native_append += "something". "append" is a keyword, but the "native" is just a separate list of native packages, yet both are appended to a variable name separating it by underscores. They use the same "syntax". If my memory serves me correctly, if not in this example "+=" is required sometimes after "append", even if they seem redundant. Someone politely explains you why this works as it does, it makes sense, yet you wonder why you need to hit a gotcha when all you are doing is something as simple as adding an item to a list (as a space separated string).

And then the metadata is also funny, e.g. do_patch[depends] = "whatever:do_populate...". Variables are not just variables, they can contain metadata, sometimes important.

It feels like there are usage patterns, good practices and something more beautiful wanting to get out, but this is a domain where making a better build tool would break tons of recipes, so it feels like everytime they got a problem they added a quickfix and got forward without looking back.

The steep learning curve most of the time is unneeded, you are frenquently doing trivial to simple taks and hit one problem that gets you blocked for a while for things that you are easily able to do outside Yocto.

It is a shame that the good work they do is spoiled by the horrible "interface".


Some people downvoting you may be lacking skills to detect that this, even if partly true, is a joke. For me it was good.


haha they don't like me today


I don't know if luajit runs in your device, but vanilla luajit supports generating and loading bytecode.

https://luajit.org/running.html


I think primarily it’s the ffi I would be missing. This would get me a turing complete language but set up as an executable it’s wrong for me.


Notice that if I remember correctly, you can generate bytecode on the PC (by using the luajit command) and have the resulting bytecode loaded through the C API on your device as if it were a regular script.


I know about a small western company acquired by a big Chinese multinational where Linux firmware devs are working on Windows boxes with no internet. Firewalled.

The company policy is to not allow internet on machines connected to the company network. They say that it is very typical on China for companies to try to atract workers from the competition, and these take with them not only know-how, but internal files from the company they leave too. Hence the firewalling.

It's ridiculous because I'm speaking of consumer electronics, not the military. The team morale is super low because they are fighting against the environment, not the problem they want to solve.

Maybe they only want to crash the western subsidiary and get the prestigious brand name(?). Anyways it seems that they are getting a taste of their own medicine.


Maybe the source was compressed audio instead of flac/wav?

Edit: the source is an mp3, which removes audio frequencies based on perception/masking with other frequencies. It's perfectly normal that it is showing artifacts. A better source is needed.


I encoded the source in MP3 for your convenience. But the source that I fed into Spleeter was FLAC.

Edit: I uploaded the original FLAC to my web server last night, before I decided that MP3 would be more convenient:

https://mwcampbell.us/tmp/spleeter-demo/jonathan-coulton-re-...


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

Search: