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

> massive step forward

umm, anti-glare/matte used to be the norm for LCD. Around 2005-2006 that changed. As laptops became more of a consumer product, and DVD watching was an important usage, the glossy screens became the norm.

https://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.php?t=26396

So, I would call it a massive step backwards! The 2006 MBP had an optional glossy screen, and the 2008 was the first one with default glossy. Around 2012 Apple dropped the matte option altogether.


The screen has an oleophobic coating. That is the danger of alcohol, that it strips the coating. For your phone absolutely don't do this. For your laptop it should be fine.

not at all. sensitive strain gauges are commonplace.

I think if you actually tried to build this, you'd find that highly sensitive strain gauges are not sufficient. The human hand is extremely sensitive, and for example can detect tiny clicks and vibrations that you're not going to get with a simple strain gauge.

> brute force

rather inelegant, similar to an autodialer for safes.

i was hoping to see something that worked like a human lockpicker!


Yeah! Pretty sure the person silhouette in the first photo is fake, so we can understand the scale. Great touch.

you can unjam by providing the real signal locally, or a signal close enough for starlink to work. you don't need to be centimeter-precise.

I was going to suggest LoRA.

But a country-sized network with the purpose of evading a blackout would likely have to be full mesh. A network organized into a hierarchy (aggregated routing tables) requires some coordination that could quickly be identified and squashed.

The size of such a mesh is limited by scaling factors, so this couldn't span a nation. Let's say you could do that though. The network would be completely choked up with traffic to the point of unusability.

I think starlink, satphone, maybe packet radio on small scale are the most realistic options.


> quasi-judicial

the tweet starts off pretty strong, which I didn't care for but I understand. this phrase however feels wrong. i guess i don't understand Italy, but isn't this like saying the SEC or FCC is quasi-judicial?

> In other words, Italy insists a shadowy, European media cabal should be able to dictate what is and is not allowed online.

ah, unlike when CF themselves decides unilaterally, not even as part of a cabal, what should and should not be allowed online. got it.


So, can you tell me everything that happens after you type www.google.com<RET> into the browser? ;)


Nope, but that was the example I had in mind when I chose my phrasing :)

I think I can describe the principles at work with DNS, but not all of how IP packets are actually routed; the physics of beamforming and QAM, but none of the protocol of WiFi; the basics of error correction codes, but only the basics and they're probably out of date; the basic ideas used in private key crypto but not all of HTTPS; I'd have to look up the OSI 7-layer model to remember all the layers; I understand older UI systems (I've even written some from scratch), but I'm unsure how much of current web browsers are using system widgets vs. it all being styled HTML; interrupts as they used to be, but not necessarily as they still are; my knowledge of JavaScript is basic; and my total knowledge of how certificate signing works is the conceptual level of it being an application of public-private key cryptography.

I have e.g. absolutely no idea why Chrome is famously a memory hog, and I've never learned how anything is scheduled between cores at the OS level.


Curious if anyone has turned answering this question into an entire book, because it could be a great read.


> owners of the same shares differently

it’s true, you can’t. however the VCs and the employees don’t own the same shares. even the VCs in different rounds don’t own the same shares.

where TFA analysis falls short is assuming employees have to be paid out at all. since the execs are moving over, there’s definitely some equity being traded in this “non-exclusive licensing deal” but it doesn’t have to involve common stock at all.


> there’s definitely some equity being traded in this “non-exclusive licensing deal”

It does bring up a curious question - what happens to the Groq equity owned by the leadership team that's being hired by Nvidia? And/or VC equity?

If they're all being paid, then is Nvidia left holding that equity? Or is it being returned to Groq (the company)?

One of two things would seem to be true:

   - Nvidia now owns a big chunk of Groq
   - Remaining investors in Groq now own a lot more of the company (on a percentage basis)


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

Search: