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

The worst part of projects for me is finding cheap domain names that don't suck. That's also the most exciting part for me. So I built this using Codex, CloudFlare and Fastly so I could get back to making more stuff.

I hope you find your next project name with it.


this is super cute. i’m going to use it for notes to my kids. thanks for creating it!


This seems reductionist. There's plenty of other reasons people are F1 fans: the spectacle, the wealth, the prestige. While speed is certainly a draw for a lot of fans, speed can be at odds with the some of these other traits. For instance I took my son to qualifying in Miami, and while we both thoroughly enjoyed it, qualifying is quite short, and not nearly as exciting as watching it on TV. My son's first comment was: they don't seem as fast in person.

We ended up kicking around the track for a few hours taking in all the sights and experiences and he enjoyed that a lot more.

I guess my comment is, speed is important, sure, but don't give me a plaintext website either. There's a balance between speed and entertainment value.


I thought F1 was supposed to look a lot faster in person. The cars going at 300kmph don't look so fast on a screen because the camera stabilisation. Someone who makes drones on YouTube collaborated with RedBull to shoot Max Verstappen with a drone at those speeds. And Max was impressed by the perception of speed from the drone footage compared to regular TV broadcast

Link to YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pEqyr_uT-k


Okay, that was a cool video. It's always cool to see how things go wrong and how the challenge was overcome. That has to be a really cool and fun job.


your eyes/brain stabilize better than any camera/software.

Having attended f1, rally and euro hillclimb races in person, I also thought the F1 in the v8/v10/v12 era indeed looked slower than on TV. I think the reason is they were so scandalously loud that you would expect something visually faster from something that is ripping your ears off even with plugs.


> My son's first comment was: they don't seem as fast in person.

That was the exact opposite of my experience with autoracing. Watching on TV with the long tracking/panning shots seem to reduce the effectiveness of the speed. Standing at the track watching the cars fly by and are only there for a split second really brings home how fast they are. "zoom zoom" is about as close as one can get to describing it. There's also just no way to replicate how loud the cars are either. I've seen Fox try where they have moments where the commentators shut the hell up for a minute, they push the mix from the mics around the track, display Vu like meters on screen with some sort of Dolby/surround type of something suggesting it sounds great in that mode. Don't care. Nothing like being there.


> My son's first comment was: they don't seem as fast in person.

Depends when you're sitting, but you mostly appreciate it at good corners.

There, you can really feel why F1 is fast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1ckq7T1Tlg


I'd expect a long lens shooting down a series of S-curves (think: Austin) would exaggerate how fast the cars look, but everything else would seem faster in person. My first F1 race was, indeed, in Austin, and the cars seemed mind-bendingly fast. Even just the sound sent a shiver up my spine as I walked up to the track from a half mile away. But that was in the V10 era; now they're very quiet.

On the other hand, my last F1 race was at Silverstone, and we were at Vale grandstand which is right at pit entry and the final chicane before the front straight. Sitting in a braking zone definitely makes the cars look slow.


Yes! There'll be different key traits for different customers. Like you say for F1, might be speed for some, prestige for others. So perhaps you might need to focus most of your things on both, or some things on prestige and some on speed. Generally there'll be a relatively small set of truly key traits.


i rewrote a code base that i’ve been tinkering on for the last 2 years or so this weekend. a complete replatform, new tech stack, ui, infra, the whole nine yards. the rewrite took exactly 3 days, referenced the old code base, online documentation, github issues all without (mostly) ever leaving claude.

it completely blew my mind. i wrote maybe 10 lines of code manually. it’s going to eliminate jobs.


> it’s going to eliminate jobs.

that's the part i'm not sold on yet. it's a tool that allows you to do a year's work in a week - but every dev in every company will be able to use that tool, thus it will increase the productivity of each engineer by an equal amount. that means each company's products will get much better much faster - and it means that any company that cuts head count will be at risk of falling behind it's competitors.

i could see it getting rid of some of the infosec analysts, i guess. since itll be easier to keep a codebase up to date, the folks that run a nessus scan and cut tickets asking teams to upgrade their codebase will have less work available.


> it's a tool that allows you to do a year's work in a week

Exaggerations like this really don't help your credibility


How many teams of 10 took a year and USD 5 millions to develop a CRUD that failed? That can be done in one week now


I'm not sure that spending $5 Million to fail every week is actually better than spending $5 million to fail once a year

Brings a crazy new meaning to "fail fast" though


if the success rate is the same, that would be actually good


the amount isn't relevant to the argument; the point is that the amount - whatever that may be - is applied equally to all companies, which means the competitive balance will stay the same. its a great build tool, but you still need builders to use the tool.



I’m happy someone mentioned this movie. I am constantly thinking about this quote:

> Vincent: You wanna know how I did it? This is how I did it Anton. I never saved anything for the swim back.


Maybe a different carrier with different coverage?

I'm also wondering if Find My will save the "find", including GPS coordinates at the time, and report it out when it has connection?


Find My doesn't require the passerby to have connectivity _at the time it passes by_. They record where they were when they saw the lost phone, and whenever they get connectivity back, they report that to the owner.


As an amateur I always thought a “marketplace” of reference designs with criteria you could filter on (through-hole, easy to hand solder, pitch, programming, etc.) would be a great resource. You could even make an attempt at compatibility (I2C, SPI, # of GPIO pins) with certain MCUs. If something works in theory, let me pay the designer and get the schematic and footprints in KiCAD or other EDA.


As a programmer there's something that really clicks in OpenSCAD for me. I've made a few designs that are super easy to adjust/repurpose based on variables. When Thingiverse's customizer worked well (well enough), it was a great tool.

https://openscad.org/


You mention jsonlines in the escape hatch section, is there an escape hatch for jsonlines? I tried .jsonl but I get a 500 error.


I'm very sorry, you have found a bug. Dates and json lines currently not working happily together.

Try a table without a date column:

    curl https://csvbase.com/calpaterson/iris.jsonl
Is ".jsonl" the right file extension, do you think?


That does work, thank you!

And I also think .jsonl is the correct format. It's what I've seen others use.


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

Search: