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

The advertisers can see the traffic coming in from clicks, I would think. There would remain some opportunity for fraud by FB if some of the ad money is just for impressions but it seems like it would be difficult to keep click rate up while shorting the buyer on impressions.

https://bitwarden.com/help/database-options/

"All Bitwarden self-hosted server deployments, except for unified, ship with an MSSQL Express image by default."


That is the rise from one year ago in the "less-volatile PPI metric that excludes food, energy and trade services". This month was a 0.6% rise. So some people might think about how more months of 0.6% rise would cause the yearly one to increase gradually, up to 7.2% eventually if there are 12x 0.6% months. That would be pretty high.

And then headline figure PPI was even higher at 0.9% for the month, 3.3% year.


0.6% of monthly inflation wouldn't be 7.2% you can't multiply like that.

So the real number would be 1.006^12=7.44%

And over 7% inflation is a bit more than 'pretty high' that's getting really scary if there's no clear outside reason for it


Which of course there is a clear outside reason for it.

Of course...dang it!

I don't know, everywhere I look I see IT staff who don't care that much and can't problem solve. One possibility is that the IT leadership is herding cats very effectively and that things could be much much worse.


Oh, don’t get me wrong, I’ve worked in plenty of organizations where politics takes preference over outcomes, and every middle manager and senior leader wants their pound of flesh before allowing the objectively right thing to happen. These people then promote each other into higher tiers, because modern shareholders couldn’t care less about business effectiveness when share buybacks will juice their earnings - and the C-Suite’s.

It’s a perverted reward hack by leadership, and nobody - governments, shareholders, boardrooms, regulators, etc - seems to give a shit.


"Beyond" is completely ambiguous in this case. Do you mean above or below?


Well obviously they mean below


Not obvious to me


They famously got inundated with tsunami water. It's pretty reasonable to assume they were below the line of tsunami high water marks.


How is that reasonable to assume? You can have a tsunami that is higher than the previous tsunamis, hence, exceeding previous water marks.


What's more likely, worst tsunami ever, beyond previous safety stones? Or company shortcuts safety and falls over because they failed to account for predictable circumstances?

Given the latter happens constantly, and the former is once in generations upon generations, I think it's safe to assume the problem is human and the tsunami was within historical ranges.

Especially since other reactors were hit by the same tsunami and were fine.


Unless they mean beyond the reach of the flood waters.


I got very confused too. After reading a few times I interpreted it as a typo.


...beyond the (possible) reach...(of whatever(waves in this case))


Home Depot, Lowe's, Menards, and Wal-Mart are examples off the top of my head that have this product locator functionality on their websites.


I used this at Menards two days ago. The product location told me where the item was. Turned out that aisle g94 wasn’t aisle 94 but a kiosk at the end of aisle 27 on the other side of the store (these numbers are made up I don’t recall the specifics). I still had to ask a human where it was. So yeah not there yet and this type of service could really help.


That (95,000 / 600 = 158 trucks) is actually much less than 500.


yes my bad, i posted the false figure, its actually 70 of food prewar according to the organization that allows the trucks entering in

https://x.com/cogatonline/status/1774174849650278480

500 is the trucks per day including building materials and industrial goods rather than only food


Consider that a QSFP28 module uses four 25gbps lanes to support sending one single 100gbps flow. So electronics do exist that can easily do what you are asking. I think it is just the economics of doing it for the various ports on a switch, lack of a standard, etc.


SFP/QSFP/PCIe etc., are combining multiple lanes originating from a physical bundle of limited size; transmitters could easily share a single clock source. The wire protocol includes additional signalling that lets the receiver know how to recombine the bits coming over each lane in the correct order.

In contrast, Ethernet link aggregation lets you combine ports that can be arbitrarily far apart -- maybe not even within the same rack (see MC-LAG). Ethernet link aggregation doesn't add any encapsulation or sequencing information to the data flows it manages.

You can imagine an alternate mechanism which added a small header to each packet with sequence numbers; the other end of the aggregation would then have to remove that header after sorting the packets in order..


Plus the NIC/PHY is likely assuming only a small range of propagation delay differences between the lanes/links.

Probably falls down if one link is 1cm and the other is 100km.

A LAG could be done with different medium/speeds, though perhaps not likely in practice.


You can calculate that using the deskew buffer sizes from here:

https://www.ieee802.org/3/df/public/23_01/0130/ran_3df_03_23...

That said, I fully expect such an order of magnitude difference to overwhelm the deskew buffer.


> A LAG could be done with different medium/speeds, though perhaps not likely in practice.

802.1AX indeed requires all members of a LAG to use the same speed.


A firewall. For example, Palo Alto firewalls can easily be configured to block domains newer than ~30 days old.

https://knowledgebase.paloaltonetworks.com/KCSArticleDetail?...


Way more likely that it was /r/the_donald. In my humble, biased opinion--since I was around there but never really active on Twitter.


There weren't a lot of 50+ year old folks on Reddit in 2016. Now there are, but that's because they've aged into that range.


But Trump won more convincingly in 2024 without it? That doesn't support your argument.


Trump won by <1% in an election against a candidate who lost her only attempt at a primary and during a time period where western incumbents saw a 10+% drop due to their handling of covid inflation.

2024 isn't a story of how Trump outwitted his opponents but one of how his opponents tied their shoelaces together.


That is so true, and needs to be repeated more. DJT didn't win because he was so great. DJT won because the DMC candidate was so hilariously bad.


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

Search: