hnaccount_rng

Joined 5 years ago

Karma
805
Submissions
405
Member since
Jan 17
View on Hacker News

Recent submissions

Comment · 19 days ago
That strongly depends on what you consider drawing, right? Sure you didn’t dip a pencil into an inkwell and caused stains to appear on a paper. But you did something that caused stains to appear on the image. You already seem to accept Photoshop as a way for a human to do that. Why not Qwen?

We can discuss the quality of the offering. But that’s a different discussion

Comment · 1 month ago
Do you happen to know how they compare to Trumpf the German laser manufacturer?
Comment · 1 month ago
I would have formulated it less dismissively than my sibling but yes. There are ~no scenarios, where the Cloud act is not the more straightforward solution. Even factoring RSA-1024 will take non-zero compute time. And that can be spend more productively
Comment · 1 month ago
You are right that there are better options and there is no excuse not to choose something better today. But that’s not what GP is arguing! It’s just that: For any given interest level there is no way that expending the resources to attack the RSA key is valuable! You are either willing to expend resources then attacking the owner is far cheaper or not then you are also not investing weeks-to-month of cluster time.

And from that perspective RSA-1024 is still perfectly adequate

Comment · 1 month ago
Because there is nothing not already automated here. RSA will either be cracked because some assumption about prime numbers doesn’t hold or because we throw more and more brute force on it.

And if it were the former it wouldn’t be the “next” in line that would be cracked…

Comment · 2 months ago
Sure, and in a zero marginal cost world that would be fine and dandy. In practice, it would mean significantly increased development and documentation costs for a low percentage increase in sold units.

Selling spare parts was worth when things broke often and labor was cheap. We don’t live in that world anymore. That means a broken device will no linger get fixed. But on the plus side there are far fewer broken devices. I’m pretty sure that has the same problem shape as “there is no glory in prevention”

Comment · 2 months ago
You have trade offs though. Both with added effort during the development but also just physical limits with the amount of additional losses you have over clicked vs soldered connections
Comment · 2 months ago
I think the term information is misleading here. In any encrypted message there is the original information, it must be because we are able to decrypt it. So from an information theory point of view that the server can "distinguished my ciphertext enough to produce a coherent reply" is always possible. The whole point of encryption is that we have Math that allows the identification of that information only under presence of the (or at least some kind of) secret.

The price that HE is paying is essentially "have to run every possible contributing computation", which means it has to scale extremely badly for anything real world complex

Comment · 2 months ago
You are aware, that the normal Balkonkraftwerk is plugged in with a standard Schuko plug? This _only_ works because there is no licensed electrician involved. The personal cost would add at least 50% of the total expenditure and it is made safe by reducing the safety margin by the up to 800W that the Balkonkraftwerk supplies on that circuit
Comment · 3 months ago
They need the grid frequency to generate AC. Those inverters are only allowed to be grid-following (at least for the plug-in part. I think there are systems that provide a -to-load socket that can be a PSU)
Comment · 3 months ago
That’s largely correct but misses the point that the battery+pv system is legally only allowed to feed in 800W [1]. On our circuits you can draw ~3.5kW without tripping the breaker. This brings you to 4.3kW max load, which - as far as I understand - is still what all the circuitry must be rated for anyways.

The downside is that we have three phase power supply anywhere halfway recent. And that only gives you a single phase. In _most_ cases that’s fine, because you get a net-sum of all three phases at the meter, but technically you are only drawing/supplementing one out of three phases. In practice this likely doesn’t matter since different house put theirs on different phases and it all washes out.

[1] the DC side can have up to 2kW of panels. But that’s not visible to the grid

Comment · 3 months ago
You are of course somewhat correct. But - I think - only technically. In practice what happens is that the “maintenance”[1] costs on solar production is extremely limited and should (that’s not yet possible to reliably say) be much lower than the rest of the grid.

If that’s the case, then we really don’t have to care about usage amounts _during the surplus time_. That in turn will enable completely different patterns. I think the correct analogy is the movement from candles/gas lights to electric lights. Before electricity was widely available nearly everything in life had to be done during daylight hours. Today we don’t even think twice about whether a meal can be cooked “after dark” or to move to a different location or ...

And yes that means I say: We will provide electric power for free [2], just like we do with street lighting

[1] let’s just call all replacements of cells and inverters maintenance for this discussion here [2] at the point of consumption. But that happens if the cost is smaller than the implementation of the sales system

Comment · 3 months ago
But it’s also environmentally better for you to take the resistive heating thing. As long as you never need to heat it up outside of the noon-window that’s strictly positive. Because the “additional” solar panels will be necessary anyways to cover the night/late evening usage. The optimal buildout will always have superfluous energy at noon. That’s fine. We just need to get over the whole “energy costs anything” thing. That’s only true if you need to spend fuel to generate it
Comment · 5 months ago
But transit only solves your problem in cities like London. Some people - for some reason I’m still not entirely clear on - seem to like this. But other people - so far the majority - don’t. And for those, self-driving cars solve the transit problem. That’s valuable. And you only need to beat unit economics of taxis. So there is a significant margin to capture
Comment · 7 months ago
Isn't the US example: Medicare/Medicaid? It has far less costs (i.e. more of the money spend ends up with patient care) and has a reasonably good reputation?

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton