Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | angus-prune's commentslogin

What a great write up of a fascinating story.

I'm constantly impressed at the writing coming out of the emulation world. I can't think of any other technical niche that produces such consistently approachable writing about such esoteric technical subjects.

I don't understand hardware, I barely program. I don't even use emulators. Yet I will always read write ups like this and from the dolphin blog and elsewhere which give me a great understanding of reverse engineering, the community nuances, and the hacks and shortcuts that made the games possible on the limited hardware available at the time.


It's incredible, isn't it. I'm a professional C++ programmer working on games for well over a decade now, I've done some pretty complex low level stuff on playstation/Xbox but I bounced off hard from multiple attempts at writing a simple GameBoy emulator - I just don't "get it" - but I always find it fascinating when people work this kind of stuff out, I have so much respect for them.


I disagree that the sport is about bikes. I think the sport is about cyclists. The olympics is particular is built around human athletic competition not technical competition.

How do you find the best cyclist if the quality of the bikes is wildly different?

In any experiment, you have to control for the factors other than the ones you're looking to test. I don't think its fair to say that they don't care about finding the best, they're just trying to find the best of a different category than you're interested in.

As GP said. There is also space for different competitions about technology (in motorsport, formula 1 has both a driver championship and a constructor championship which is about the technology).


> How do you find the best cyclist if the quality of the bikes is wildly different?

In that case, you should probably give everyone the same 'official' bike.


If bike manufacturers can't use bike races to help them market and sell bikes, teams will lose a massive source of income.


Excellent point!


I agree, but sadly when officials start trusting, they stop looking, and this opens it up to more widespread cheating.


I'm not sure what you mean by that?

Just produce the same identical bikes, and assign them randomly at the start of the race?


Ever go to a go kart track and notice that some karts are faster than others? They're all identical as far as the eye can see, but in reality tons of subtle differences pop up.

You can have spec bikes, but there no way they'll all be tuned identically, all have the exact same lubrication in all the bearings, all have the exact chain tension, all have the axles torqued identically. All the derailers built exactly the same... One bike will get inevitably have an advantage over the others.


Assign the bikes randomly, and swap them around often enough between legs of the races. The Tour de France is pretty long.


This would need to accommodate many different sizes, geometries, subjective preferences.


Why? The whole point is to standardise, I thought? They are already _not_ accommodating preferences for eg recumbent bikes. So what measure are a few more preferences not accommodated?

In any case, you can make a bunch of different official sizes.


> The whole point is to standardise, I thought?

No, the main point (as already explained by someone above) is that this competition is about the cyclists, not equipment. The idea is quite simple, but leads to complex, sometimes somewhat arbitrary rules, but they in the end work quite well to regulate the competition.

No offense, but you're clearly someone who doesn't know much about cycling, but are insisting that the cyclists (competition organizers) are "doing it wrong". Arguing with that is tiring, so I won't continue here.


No, they aren't doing it wrong. They are just (effectively) optimising for something very weird.

It's about entertainment.


I genuinely see the point you're trying to make, but fitting a bicycle is like fitting an article of clothing. It's is laughable to suggest clothing be one-size-fits-all the same way it is for bicycle geometries. It doesn't compare.


In any case, you can make a bunch of different official sizes.

They already override plenty of individual preferences that people might have with their bikes.


> There is also space for different competitions about technology (in motorsport, formula 1 has both a driver championship and a constructor championship which is about the technology).

And even then the technology is severely curtailed, it has to compete within a fairly restrictive design envelope.


That example is appalling and indefensible.

I think it's important to note that it has been condemned by BDS.

According to the website you linked to - "Even the BDS Movement has called on BDS Boston, a group promoting the Mapping Project, to cease doing so"

I don't know more about the issue than what you shared, and do not know the structure of BDS, but decentralised groups are vulnerable to their sort of thing where one autonomous group undertakes actions that are entirely unacceptable.

It's one of the reasons it is so important for groups to stamp out antisemitism within their own ranks and not let it fester.


If you expect not to be judged for your worst behaviour, then everyone around you won't live a happy life.


The information was in the post - ws2812 (or ws281x, there are variations) which are also known by the semi-brandname "neopixel".

They come in various form factors including fairy lights, strips and matrixes.

They are very easy to work with, and there are good libraries or open source platforms (eg wled) to run them.


The debate isn't about whether the technology should be available to millions but whether (and how much) apple should have to pay for the technology.

Either Apple are guilty or being stingy, or Massimo are guilty of being greedy. Either could be responsible for the conflict.


I couldn't care less whatever is the interpretation of reality is. You seems to be interested in who is guilty or not.

I am not interested in that. It's just some thoughts in your mind.

The end result was that tech became more accessible and which is all I care about.


The impression I got was that Massimo was paying fairly for the development team of a medical product.

As soon as the technology had a consumer application, the market value of the expertise changed drastically.


Im not sure running TrueNAS counts as learning ZFS, which I think is GP's point.

If you want to use ZFS, then TrueNAS with sensible defaults is a great way to go. If you want to learn ZFS enough to roll your own deployment, change the configuration correctly and understand the changes you make then don't start with TrueNAS, and definitely don't listen to the TrueNAS community.

Or at least, that's how I read the GP comment.


I mean, pretty much if you want to learn anything you're going to have to put a lot of time into it. With ZFS it will be building different servers with different disk layouts and figuring out how to test and benchmark those options. Which just takes an absolutely massive amount of time.

I know, I was doing just that 5+ years ago.

Commercial storage vendors aren't really any different. Mostly the biggest difference here is they offer a very limited subset of hardware and disk configurations and tend to iterate over that very small configuration space. Step outside of that config space and they won't have much insight.

This remind me of the earlier days of Mac vs PC. Mac tended to have a very small hardware set of supported devices, and in many ways helped stability. PC supported pretty much anything you threw at it, which commonly had issues with crappy drivers and untested interactions.


> If you want to use ZFS, then TrueNAS with sensible defaults is a great way to go.

I evaluated TrueNAS Scale about 6 months ago and bailed on it very quickly. My install with their "sensible defaults" ended up having swap partitions on all my spinning disks. That alone was enough for me to decide against using it. One bad choice likely means other bad choices in my experience. They also trampled / reset my 'zfs_zrc_max' tunable every time a VM got started (I think) and it wasn't obvious what was doing it.

I didn't think there was any value in learning the quirks of TrueNAS over doing a setup from scratch, so I ended up going with Ubuntu LTS and doing all my own config / testing.


I see a thread of people talking about their experience of the game and how aspects of it made them feel. That's exactly what a forum is for, and a very legitimate way to engage with a piece of art.

Particularly for a game with strong sexual representationa and inclusion, it is legitimate to discuss aspects where the inclusion is still lacking. This may be useful for the Devs future plans, or it may change nothing but be useful for other prospective players to understand about the game.

You might not find the thread useful or engaging. I don't find the threads about compatibility with hardware I don't own useful or engaging. Not every thread is for every person.


Most western democracies dont publicise arrests and mugshots like the US. Most of these countries are more free and have better functioning democracies than the USA. In fact, many coutries would consider publicising every minor arrest as an imposition on personal freedom and a massive overstep by the government.

I do agree that police should be filmable in almost all circumstances.


Ah, Europe loves its secret courts.


It's so lovely when HN discussions derail into USA vs Europe. Divisiveness, internet's favorite thing.


The parent comment was comparing the US to other western democracies.


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

Search: