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

I use Backblaze to backup my gaming PC. While .git and Dropbox does not affect me it’s worrisome that OneDrive is not backed up seeing as Windows 11 somehow automatically/dark pattern stores local files in OneDrive.

You have to give Apple credit, they nailed Time Machine. I have fully restored from Time Machine backups when buying new Macs more times than I can count. It works and everything comes back to an identical state of the snapshot. Yet, Microsoft can’t seem to figure this out.


I have a homelab with 4x Raspberry Pi 4's running Kubernetes a GMKtec Intel i5-12450H and a ProLiant ML350p Gen8 (which uses an ungodly amount of power). I'd add the following software/tools which have been awesome:

  - Portainer running on GMKtec & ProLiant
  - Dozzle (docker log viewer) on GMKtec & ProLiant
  - Beszel (server monitoring, awesome) all hosts
  - Kubetail (Kubernetes log viewer on Pi K8s)
  - HomeAssistant
  - Jellyfin
  - UptimeKuma (uptime and notifications)
  - Semaphore UI (ansible playbook runner)
  - Metabase (querying and visualization for dbs)

I've recently upgraded my ageing X8SIL Supermicro with an i5 to a X10 Sm board with a 2960 V4 14core Xeon... I was expecting a horrible power situation but it's less than 100w with a handful of spinning disks etc.

I see lots of people complaining on power with their re-used ProLiant and others etc. Is it the throttling or bios settings that messes with the idle power?

Or are you just running it at 100% and my low usage is what saves my electricity bill?


I'm at about 150 watts at idle with 2x Intel E5-2640 with 8x drives. I've gone through the BIOS pretty thoroughly and optimized as much as possible.

Ah okay 150w is not _that_ bad - more than a rpi for sure but still :)

And another cpu+chipset is always going to eat som Watts just by existing.


Still very early, but I’ve been building Market Diary - https://marketdiary.io. Log daily market thoughts, document trades, and review charts all-in one place. Built for solo investors and teams who want to turn noise into alpha. Powered by Markdown, supports file attachment, teams, and TradingView charts. Free to signup. Would love feedback.

I run a python flask app on Docker on AWS EC2. Including Dozzle (logs), Beszel (monitoring) and Unami (analytics). Runs on three t4g instances. One being a dedicated caddy exposed to the internet, one being a NAT gateway (self managed) and the main Docker worker host (private). All in cost is $35 a month. You’re splitting hairs and being the typical overly frugal developer instead of founder mode if you optimizing dollars when you have $20k / mo revenue.

What do I get as an advantage being on AWS? S3 (literally like a $1 month) SQS (free tier) and Lambda (async jobs; free tier). Capacity if needed, just scale up t4g instances.


What a curmudgeon. You must be great dinner company.

Amazing live video of the descent and splash down. Really awesome to watch!

Umm it's a satellite phone.

I hope the NASA stream has some better live footage of descent than they did of the ascent. Takeoff besides on the pad was almost all computer generated graphics and no live video from space.

I'll eat my words, that was absolutely amazing footage of reentry. So cool!

Aren't ships turning off their AIS when traveling the straight? I think https://atlas.flexport.com/ could also be a good source.

By this logic would you also consider trading OIL (USO) and Palantir a "obscene" market.

Actually yes. I put my money in things I would like to see shape the future, which I think is what investment should be about: shaping the future.

But disregarding this admittedly niche attitude; it's not the same thing. If you're opening bets on the ships being bombed before a certain date, you're opening incentives for people to do so. Although buying OIL or Palantir is morally questionable, it does not create such direct incentives.


>you're opening incentives for people to do so

how about short-selling of stocks, isn't it the same thing? I'd even argue that sinking one ship affects say 10 people of the crew who most probable will survive in the warm Gulf waters whereis sinking a company may affect many people life outcomes probably causing a number of indirect deaths. CDS of 2008 would be similar example.

>buying OIL or Palantir is morally questionable, it does not create such direct incentives

it creates direct incentives to suppress competitors - wind and solar energy for OIL, and whoever Palantir competitors are.

Wrt. "Hormuz open" - does the "open" definition includes the new fee Iran would be taking for the strait traverse (something like $1/barrel, nice for Iran, how come that they had't implemented such an idea before? one can only wonder)


> $1/barrel, nice for Iran, how come that they had't implemented such an idea before? one can only wonder

Probably someone would have bombed their country of they had done that before. That and the reverse are pretty basic assumptions..


> how about short-selling of stocks, isn't it the same thing?

Yes. That's why it's illegal to short-sell your stocks just before you announce that your company is broke.

There are no such regulations when betting on a bomb dropping on a boat.


Shaping the future for “good” is not investing. That is ESG and if you value capital and capital appreciation ESG has been proven not to be a solid strategy. See also altruistic capitalism with such moral people as Sam Bankman-Fried, Elizabeth Holmes, Trevor Milton and Adam Neumann. Solid list of moral people shaping the future.

Who said investing is _only_ for "capital and capital appreciation"? It can also be for social good.

Wow. I am not sure how to respond to this as you seem to have a completely different mindset. You mean to say it is "proven" not to be a solid strategy as in not maximizing profit?

Surely, you acknowledge that funding something is a rather direct way of actively supporting it. It is your money and your choice of what you choose to invest it in, and thus how you choose to shape the future. If you buy OIL to make money, you are still responsible for the additional investment made in oil, and are still shaping the future, whether you like it or not.


No, you're wrong. Oil producers produce oil... Consumers consume oil. In between the producers and the consumers, it doesn't matter whether or not trader A sells a barrel of oil to B, then B sells to C, and C sells it someone else. All of the A to B to C is net zero.

All of the money comes from consumers. The money may change hands 100 times in between, but the money from consumers goes to producers.

If you purchase any products which included petroleum in your life, whether it's a house, car (EV or not), or stretchy clothes, that is what funds the oil producers. That where the money goes into the system, including to investors as return.


> It is your money and your choice of what you choose to invest it in, and thus how you choose to shape the future.

Absolutely, but I believe you are conflating investing vs donating. The literal definition of investing is:

> Allocating money (or capital) with the expectation of generating a return or profit over time.


The fact that is used to make profit doesn't absolve us from any moral judgement. Buying stocks of a company improves its financial position allowing it to grow.

Would you buy stocks of ClusterBombsInc over CureForCancerInc because it has slightly better prospects?


The ticker is USO, not OIL, and it's abundantly clear that you have no idea how it works.

I am responding to someone that used OIL presumably because it is - although incorrect - more clear as an example for those that are not into trading.

Oil futures or any other commodity purchase that doesn't result in the buyer taking actual physical ownership of what they purchase is an obscene gambling market with perverse incentives yes correct.

How will commodity producers (oil companies, farmers) hedge their risk / stabilize their prices without speculators and their “perverse incentives”?

We will gather special people, very wise, and completely honest. They'll form a committee, and we will call it Gosplan, comrade!

by this logic investing in SAFEs is obscene gambling with perverse incentives and we should shut down the venture capital industry

The problem with prediction markets is fundamentally that they're unregulated.

Modern equities and futures markets are highly evolved and rather carefully regulated systems. We've spent centuries learning what the failure modes are and how to guard against them. It's never perfect, it's never going to be perfect -- it's fundamentally a voting system -- but in general, we get liquidity and price discovery at a relatively low cost, while avoiding fraudulent and evil behavior like wash trading and criminal profit laundering.

These new "prediction markets" have been put in place without any of those hard-earned protections. And surprise, they're rife with dirty trick and dirty money.


Agree 100% that prediction markets are the wild-wild-west with no insider trading protections, pump and dump, and no oversight. It’s perverting the wisdom of the crowd and efficient market thesis.

>It’s perverting the wisdom of the crowd and efficient market thesis.

I mean, looking at futures and stocks now, I dont believe in those anymore anyway.


typical HN comment when it comes to finance and the stock market. Over and over again the wisdom of the HN crowd is wrong in regards to stocks. Intel at its bottom (they are done, and doomed, listening to main stream media) perfect time to buy and load up. This has occurred over and over again in my 15 years being on HN, almost always they call a bottom.

Have you seen what they do every time half sleeping Trump farts another truth social post?


objectively so


Why would you not? Unless you literally don't care about damaging our planet and civilization in the interests of your own personal profit.

At this point efficient pricing of energy is a strong motivator for environmental causes. Solar is ridiculously cheaper than fossil fuels and not subject to geopolitical risk. And once you have solar panels you've got energy for decades.

Carbon-related environmentalism and greed now go hand in hand.


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

Search: