If you have something interesting you made yourself, and not some vibe-coded AI slop project, email the mods at hn@ycombinator.com and they can enable your account.
Of course, when everyone sets min-release-age=7, supply chain attacks won't get noticed until 7 days later. So you should set min-release-age=14 and be safe forever.
I chuckled, but in all seriousness, thankfully those individuals and companies who often discover these attacks listen in on every new npm push and analyze it relatively fast. The time to detect is sometimes in minutes in recent months, less than the process of getting npm to remove the packages. Not always but looking at recent ones and advances in latest SOTA models make detection easier than ever. It might change as attackers get more sophisticated.
I think clouds pay a huge abstraction penalty to allow tiny VMs. I guess it helps with onboarding and $10 personal VPNs. But I have never needed a fraction of a computer. I want to rent some number of full computers of various sizes, consisting of CPU, memory, and flash disk. Hetzner is closer than AWS, and I think/hope that’s what Crawshaw is aiming for.
I understand the appeal from AWS's perspective. Customer A pays for a 32 vCPU VM, which they run on 32-core hardware. Then they can also squeeze in customer B's 1 vCPU instance running a blog, and no one notices. Free money!
But I don't want to be either of those customers. It means the whole system has an extra layer of abstraction, so they can juggle VMs around. It's why you need slow EBS instead of just getting a flash drive in the same case as the CPU, with 0.01x the latency.
The key to renting a fraction of a computer is scaling up. If I can rent 1/8th of a computer, I can also rent 3/8ths and 1/2 and then go to a full computer, if that capacity is necessary.
The key to scaling up is to have big-enough hardware on the backend. If Hetzner is renting out bare metal instances then they can only rent out the sizes that they have. If a cloud provider invests in really big single systems, they can offer fractions of those systems to multiple tenants, some of whom scale up to use the entire system, and some who don't. I think that is a win-win.
A fractional VM is also a fungible VM. If the tenant calls to spin up a certain size VM, then the backend can find suitable hardware for it from a menu of sizes. Smaller VMs can slot in anywhere there is room, not just on a designated bare-metal system.
A cloud provider is always going to want to maximize their rack space, wattage/heat, and resource usage. So they will invest in high-density systems at every chance. On the other hand, cloud tenants will have diverse needs, including some fraction of those big computers.
Cool, but why is the most rounded-off part in the center? My wrists cover the edge at 5-25% and 75-95% when typing. When mousing, my right hand fleshy pad covers the edge at 65-80%.
I think because they had to. The rounded-off center part is actually the part you usually stick your finger into to lift up the lid. So it wasn't done for wrist ergonomics, but rather because it would've otherwise been sharp. The result is a big hole in the center.
It looks a bit strange, but to each their own, I suppose.
EDIT: this thing, below the trackpad https://imgur.com/a/DVzlDOj (What’s that even called? And is there a better image hosting service than Imgur?)
You’re free to invest that way if you want. You might one day wake up and wonder why your Blockbuster Video shares did so badly. But Netflix seemed way overpriced.
Investing in future prospects encourages companies to plan for the future, rather than extract what they can from the present. The stock price is a big motivation for execs, so they can only invest in R&D if the market understands why it makes sense to spend money now in expectation of future profits.
The fact that the survival rate of startups hasn't improved doesn't show that our knowledge hasn't improved. Startups are competitive, with only 1 or 2 VC-scale winners per market. So, the claim is like "race car technology hasn't gotten better, because there's still only one winner per race."
Racing competition is flattened through regulation(oversimplified). All drivers have the same car. Drivers skill and fearlessness is the deciding factor.
I came here to basically say this about running a company- but your comment was a better launching point.
As someone who has run several companies over the last 25 years and has read and or tried nearly ever "method" mentioned... Im now running a company where Im abandoning everything and just going at with skill and fearlessness... and no funding. It feels freeing, and we are growing.
Hm, no, in F1 they don’t have the same car. Each season, each team builds their own (adhering to the Formula) and put massive amounts of efforts to gaining efficiency through engineering.
Oh really?! I said my statement was oversimplified. Not all groups have the same requirements. NASA Spec is very regulated for instance... But I knew a comment like this was coming, so as someone who grew up with a family race team, has a race car, and builds a motorsports app. Shut up.
In National Stock Car Racing the cars are all nominally equal, that’s far from the case in F1 where some years a single competitor dominates partially from having chosen a superior technological implementation.
I don't really follow NASCAR, but from listening to my (huge fan) father-in-law, that word is doing some work. His best (or, at least, my favorite) are the creative ways teams find to bend the rules - or blatantly cheat! - to give their cars an advantage.
One that made me laugh: a team once packed their suspension tubes with lead shot to make minimum weight. On the first lap the driver pulled a lever that dropped all the shot onto the track, and then enjoyed an underweight car for the rest of the race! They're always looking for "legitimate" optimizations, too.
I can't think of a single race where drivers are required to drive "the same car", by any reasonable definition of same. Not stock cars, F1, Nascar, demolition derby...
You all are being idiots. Im done. There is so much nuance to all of this that I did not include. Key words are Flattened by Regulation... Have you ever read a damn rule book? Stock, improved, modified, class, my god.
Good bye, never again. Hacker news is a lost cause.
A car race is a zero-sum game, which is not the case of economics (according to orthodox economists at least), so if there was a magic recipe for startups success, more of them would generate wealth, the pie would grow, therefore less should die?
Yes, and indeed more startups are addressing more markets every year. The total number of attempts and successes are both up, keeping the success rate fairly constant.
I think the total light output of each bulb in the pair is the same at all points in time, but the orange-blue gradient is reversed. So when one is orange at one end, the bulb beside it is blue at that end.
IIRC, the end that's negative looks orange, because the electrons emitted from the filament haven't gotten up to speed yet and can't ionize the mercury atoms at that end to the highest states.
If you didn't do this, you'd see 60 Hz strobing when you looked at one end.
You and I look with dismay at the high prices, but remember that a million hospital administrators are high-fiving themselves. So ideas like "just cut waste" are opposed by a large group with a lot more skin in the game.
Heat goes up with the square of current, so putting 10x the current to get 10x the force means 100x the heat.
Still, I think this idea is under-explored. There are probably applications for robots that move really fast, but only for a second before having to cool down.
reply