gertlex

Guilty... but also, I think about article up/downvotes an order of magnitude less than I click the links. I wonder what fraction of users do voting without clicking links.

I assume there's NDAs in place with some vendors pre-release, since my understanding is some accessory vendors get the needed info before new models are released, so they can spin up their lines and have accessories ready to go when the new model hits the market.

(but I could be wrong; NDAs w/China? no idea what the time between announced/released/shipped is typically; I last bought Apple product in 2009...)

My main take in this area is that reading HN/Reddit actively makes it harder to get the business done. Certain phone games seem way better.

My more general hypothesis is that generally reading interesting stuff is too engaging, and the brain needs to relax "just right".

Me too, but there were some replacements that made me happy because they fixed some irk with google's version. (I think I used Commafeed?)

I eventually got away from subscribing to like 50 webcomics (all I used RSS for... most other stuff was too high-volume, and I liked reading everything in my feed, iirc) though and stopped using an RSS feed altogether.

I've been doing some of this too. It's great just messaging claude in discord when I want to make a new device's IP static. I also put my mikrotik config sans passwords in (local only) version control, just in case.

And perhaps it's significantly easier on other routers, but I would not have gotten VLANs working without claude doing it for me...

Regarding the button control, if others are looking for similar, I found that a bluetooth audio control device intended for mounting to motorcycle handlebars (so, water resistant, big buttons) works well while I'm doing dishes to manage audio going to my bluetooth hearing aids.

I'm probably a fair bit younger. I came to know the phrase, then (of) him, through the flash animation of the Happatai/Yatta song on Albino Black Sheep in the early 2000s (and these days on youtube if you search 'irrational exuberance yatta'; mildly nsfw in a few spots). Never bothered to dig into its meaning, though.

I kind of read this

> Fossil fuels are roughly 40% of maritime tonnage, but in the model they represent about half of maritime freight energy because coal, oil, and gas are mostly long-haul bulk trades. Moving a ton of scrap metal a short distance and moving a ton of oil or LNG across oceans are not the same transport-energy problem, even if both show up as one ton in a cargo table.

as being exactly what was being talked about... more fuel is spent on transporting fuel due to distance it travels.

but your comment made me re-visit (i.e. more closely skim...) the article, and it's really about: "as the demand for fossil fuels is projected to decrease, (1) less long-haul shipping is needed and (2) a greater fraction of shipping will be short-haul, which will be practical for other types of freight fueling (i.e. what's shown in the figure at the top of the article)

I have no sense of how realistic the figure is. For example, I don't know the current projections for decline of fossil fuel demand over ?? year timeframe.

I read this and another half-dozen replies to the parent comment (but not the article, of course...) and was still confused. This comment was the clearest to getting me to understand it.

Example contributors as I presently understand it:

- we transport fossil fuels further around world (i.e. Middle East to the US)

- we transport most other goods some shorter distances

- iron ore transport is "up there" with fossil fuels; high ton-miles of transport.

And of course the cost of transport for a good is a function of distance, a la the rocket equation mentioned in other comments.

And the article is focused on making this point in the context of the effect of reduced demand for fossil fuels and steel (iron ore) on maritime demand. (which is interesting, and totally not what the article title was leading my brain to think about)

Edit: And then I went and actually looked at the figure at the top of the article; guess the real topic is yet a different framing than what I comment on above!

Instead of the value of evaluating a single scan, what about determinations made from evaluating regular deltas between images?

As a layperson, I'm mostly familiar with the concept of "get scanned, and a professional evaluates it"... are there scenarios where the approach of "imaging every few weeks, to make decisions based on trends" is currently done?

(From reading other comment threads here, I suspect the general answer is: other body-scanning startups have proposed the same thing, and it hasn't made sense)

As an aside, I could probably benefit from allergy shots, but the idea of having a regularly scheduled errand to do during the workweek is pretty unappealing, so I never seriously consider it.

They may be looking at the societal level and saying: "I can attempt to teach my kids best practices, but I've learned I sure can't rely on my peers to do the same with their kids...", then feeling like the outcome of that, if left as-is, is societal decline... and then believing that something needs to be done beyond the individual level.

Ahh, right, definite blind spot for me! (extra so since I'm hearing impaired)

Do you think the category of people that "consume their news" via primarily reading headlines from aggregators (google/apple mobile built-in "news") is significant or no?

(this is a big part of my consumption, and is combined with scrolling HN/reddit headlines; often to paywalled sites, which leads me to mostly reading comment discussions on those two sites)

(edit: disclaimer after reading a few other comments: I use Android; so don't have personal experience with Apple News, which may in fact be significantly different/better product)