Y
HN Search
Hacker News Search
new
|
comments
|
top
|
jobs
taeric
searching PlanetScale…
1.
▲
2.
▲
3.
▲
4.
▲
5.
▲
6.
▲
63 ms
·
961.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
And what about those of us that find they have stretches where they don't focus well on anything? Games included. There are several games I'd like to spend a bit of time on. It ain't happening.
962.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Add a circle for bullies, sadly...
963.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
This mostly fails a sniff test to me? And indeed, reading the linked article doesn't support your editorializing. To quote: "There is some evidence that they had poor fishing skills, but other factors may have contributed more t
964.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
I find this a more fun question than I would expect. It would be like being surprised that a famous athlete was into athletics as a kid. It seems somewhat expected? That said, I can't help but find myself trying to think of counter ex
965.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
I'm curious on what is "at stake" with this? The close lists a couple of predictions that this can lead to. I'm assuming they will be important in a far future time? Or do these help with some more near term problems?
966.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
I continue to be baffled that they are going to cannibalize the "voice controlled radio and timer" market in the chase of some "magic assistant" one. It would be one thing if they were just adding extra "smart home&
967.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
This seems to imply that none of the rest of the continent would have been viable for travel? It isn't like there were no wheels in mountainous parts of other continents.
968.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
I agree. General consensus is otherwise, though? Thinking more on it, I confess the "they had wheels in toys" is actually more confusing than not. I would think it common for toys to mimic non-toys.
969.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Without wheels, people can't spin thread as fine as they can with. Full stop. Directly to this thread, nobody is claiming they didn't use tools. The question is specifically why they never invented a specific tool. My specific
970.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Unless you are going up a very steep hill, most any wheel barrow is easy enough to put down to a rest. And combined with a shovel, I use barrows far more than just trying to manage a small bag of rocks in the yard. Granted, if you can just
971.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
That is the scale. My assumption was more asking if you also needed mechanical help to get fine threads?
972.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
So is the claim that they did not invent the wheel pretty strictly for use in carts? Still seems a little surprising they would not have invented pulleys. They clearly had good experience with ropes.
973.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
I'm pretty heavy against "efficient" as a goal to look for in government spending. In particular, the first spend on anything will never be as efficient as later spending. That just isn't how it works. So, if you are
974.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Totally fair. Direct to this one, you could probably look at the evolution of rope and generally fabric. I imagine without modern techniques, many of the clothes that we wear would probably not be possible? Certainly not at the scale tha
975.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Even spinning wheels use a spindle. The question would be why they didn't invent the use of a wheel to help with the spinning portion of the task? But, yeah, my short dives show the same. It is generally held that carting wheels were
976.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Awesome, thanks for the video! And I'd expect anything like this to be more than a 1 man job! Apologies if I implied otherwise. I'd expect even using wheels for the turning that you would need more than a single person. It is ob
977.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Right, I know it involves spinning, which fair that you can just use a crank. My curiosity was more on the very heavy ropes. I'd assume that you would benefit heavily from a geared like setup to run the spinning.
978.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
The account of the final weaving of the bridge is awesome. I'd imagine it isn't much different from any job you can do while "dangling," but still. Wow. I am curious on the idea that wheels would not have been helpful?
979.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Fair. Still largely a different form getting cash now, though? Particularly if you account for the fact that governments can go belly up.
980.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Government can also get money through bonds, though? And government spending of these funds can be argued to go much more directly to economic growth for the region than most any other spending. Note that I don't really disagree with
981.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Oddly, I think how you track can matter here. If you do it as a lookup of "I am eating this, and it says it was this many calories" then you are not likely to remember and develop a sense of how many calories things have. Howeve
982.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
This feels odd. Many people paid dearly for being involved, period? It isn't like we have any dynasties that survived through the era, did we? Specifically, 46 people signed the declaration of independence. How many of those are rem
983.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Yeah, 2000 to invest was not a tiny amount back then. I know I felt rich to have an extra hundred or so a paycheck. Massive kudos to your dad for getting you to do this!
984.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Amusingly, for 1993, looks like you maxed out what you could even do in an IRA? Searching for "Vanguard S&P mutual fund minimum 1993" shows that many had a minimum of 3000? I'm guessing that is the same general search yo
985.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Well, your "5k" figure is still probably accurate. They had much larger minimums at launch.
986.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
I mean... the risk of risky assets is that they won't last that long. Any asset you can look back on having held for a long time, is by definition less risky than you could have been. No?
987.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
I'm not sure I see irony? I can somewhat get that it is awkward to have a limit that covers many use cases, but this feels a bit easier to reason about than having to check every possible thing you would want to limit. Granted, I can
988.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Having grown very happy with the radar for my bicycle, I'm growing more and more curious why we don't have more of those on our cars. I've seen the nice visibility affordances on some high end cars when you do reverse. Seem
989.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
I'm not sure I can sign on to this. In particular, this sounds kind of like an indictment of many algorithms. But, how many where there? And did any go on to give good results? Considers, OCR was a very new field, such that a lot of
990.
▲
by
taeric
1y ago
Ish. The catch is we spend a ton of effort on teaching these models to recognize specific things in pictures. Then we ask it to not do that task, but instead count something on the picture. Which, we oddly don't spend a lot of time
More ›