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

Why does H3 use a nonoverlapping set of hexagons? A square grid would make it even simpler and faster to calculate. I am perfectly happy to believe that a hex grid works better for some reason but what is that reason?

The main design goal was to make the distance between neighbours constant. With squares, you have 4 side neighbours and 4 corner neighbours. With hexagons, it's easier to interpolate paths and analyse distances.

Maybe this comparison with S2 will explain:

https://h3geo.org/docs/comparisons/s2/


No, not that I am aware of. I'm not an expert on the topic, but it is my understanding that the majority of prosecuted crimes involving the Internet in the US are prosecuted in State courts, not Federal.

I wouldn't call myself an expert on this topic, but I think you're severely missing the point: virtually any case involving use of the internet can be federalized under the interstate commerce doctrine.

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48764


Everything can be federwlized under the interstate commerce doctrine. There was a case where a farmer grew his own plants (wheat, I think) to feed himself and his animals, in contravention of federal quotas. It was ruled the federal government has authority because growing wheat affects the wheat market, even if the wheat is never sold and never leaves the state.

Making formal, public statements like this is a good start. It is certainly better than NOT making these sorts of statements.

Mostly, each county has its own registry. (In some cases, there is a statewide registry.) This works, because each parcel of land is clearly in one particular county.

They are busy assisting ICE with hunting down immigrants.

Discussing the truth or falsity of some vague accusations of misconduct against a public figure is not an appropriate topic for Hacker News.

But the way in which social media can be used for baseless character assassination (and perhaps a discussion of what could be done to change that) absolutely IS an appropriate topic.


To determine the truth, someone trustworthy needs to evaluate the evidence. Like this author already did, but the trouble is, they're a stranger. We don't know whether to believe them.

So the question is who else is going to do it, and why should we believe them either? That's where journalists working for a reputable newspaper have an advantage. It's why we still need them.

It's clearly beyond what anyone of us are going to do casually after reading a post on social media.


Nice solution! Google, can we get that on Android by default to reach the masses? Apple... you too: you built a reputation for protecting privacy.

If you want privacy, Google and Apple are not the answer. And Apple's claims about privacy are mostly unverifiable and should not be trusted.

I don't think any rational discussion about privacy can be had without first describing exactly what your definition of "privacy" is in this specific context, AND you must define a threat model. Otherwise we can't know if the vendor is even relevant to what they care about.

Privacy from what? From a determined government and court system? Nothing is going to keep you private from that. From your peers and family? Apple and Google keep you private in that regard. As for the world of privacy in between those extremes: it depends.

From advertizers? From power-grabbing BigTech?

> From a determined government and court system? Nothing is going to keep you private from that

While there's always https://xkcd.com/538/ there are not currently quantum computers that can factor 4k RSA keys, so the court can order whatever it wants, unless they have a way past that (which may involve variations of xkcd 538), they ain't getting shit out of a properly configured digital safe. (construction of said safe is left as an exercise to the reader.)


Or they can just let you rot in jail for contempt charges

Most of us (reporters included) aren't protecting anything with their life, not just because of a survival instinct, but because what we're protecting isn't actually worth that much.

For the relative handful who are custodians of that sort of data, history suggests a smaller minority than they'd like to admit have a readily achievable breaking point. The true believers who are left then are a minority that's hardly impossible to track and subvert through attacks that don't involve decryption on a device.

The point of that XKCD wasn't to be THE SINGULAR EXAMPLE, it's sort of a Zen Koan for people who only think in terms of technical risks and solutions.


xkcd 538 can be defeated by a duress wipe feature like the one GrapheneOS has. Your life might be in jeopardy, but the data will be safe.

It's not quite settled whether the FBI is able to demand you to decrypt data for now. If this becomes widespread enough, they might try to get SCOTUS to decide this, which may or may not end privacy once and for all.

I thought it was. I thought passcodes can't be demanded but biometrics could.

> The real take away is that the Robotaxis don't really exist

More accurately, the real takeaway is that Tesla's robo-taxis don't really exist.


Because it is fraud trying to inflate Tesla stock price.

The real term is “marketing puffery.” It’s a fun, legally specific way to describe a company bullshitting to hype its product.

Puffery is like saying this is the best canned chili ever made. Selling a can of chili but never actually giving the chili just an empty can is fraud.

Puffery should really be limited to subjective things like flavor and not self-driving cars.

The Robotaxi service might be puffery, selling "full self driving" is just fraud.

A robotaxi rollout where each car needs a safety driver is fraud.

What's even more unbelievable is that a significant number of people are still falling for it

It doesn't need to!

If the winner, instead of paying what they bid, pays what the second-highest bidder bid (and bids are secret until someone exceeds them) then the incentives change. Everyone is incented to bid what it is worth to them, safely knowing (1) they won't pay more than that, (2) they will win the auction if no one outbids them, and (3) they won't pay more than necessary to win the auction.

eBay works this way (more-or-less), so you CAN (if you choose to) simply place your bid any time that is convenient and then ignore the timing of the end of the auction and all the sniping bots.


Ever driven a vehicle with an automatic transmission rather than a manual gearshift with a clutch? Then you almost certainly used a fluid coupling: basically two fans in a can with oil so turning one turns the other.

The article is so full of hype it doesn't bother to explain how this is different from the "fluid gears" invented in 1905.


As immortalised in the 1978 song "Greased Ligthnin'" from the film Grease:

    Well, this car is automatic
    It's systematic
    It's hydromatic
    Why it's greased lightnin' (greased lightnin')
I am pretty sure that "hydromatic" there is actually "Hydramatic" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydramatic).


1978 film (based on a 1971 musical) set in 1958 with the high school kids repairing a beaten up 1948 model year car.


If it’s a hydramatic, be careful to only lubricate it with snake oil.


Many automatics these days are manual transmissions with a computer controlling the clutch. They have nothing in common with the slushboxes of old, the oil is just for lubrication.


ZF 8HP is still a traditional torque converter transmission. Most high performance or high torque applications use that design. Dual clutch automatics or automated manuals can't take it.


Virtually every truck has an automated manual transmission, every EV 2-speed is a DCT, Porsche uses PDKs etc.


Every truck? Like which ones?

As an American (land of the pickup truck) I can't think of any


I think GP meant eighteen-wheelers and the like.


> American (land of the pickup truck)

More like SUVs with beds

But yes, sibling is correct, I'm talking about commercial vehicles.


Citation needed. By truck if you mean commercial truck (lorry, artic, etc.) then no, Allison still makes hydraulic automatics which are very common in vocational work the world over.


Tremec makes DCTs that are used in 800hp Mustangs and 1000hp Corvettes


Even slushboxes tend to aggressively lock up the torque converter. It's usually only in a "fluid dynamics" mode for brief moments. (Except maybe on a gentle hill start)


It's worth mentioning hard acceleration causes a torque multiplication to occur in torque converters vs a slow acceleration does not (check me on that). Once locked up, multiplication no longer occurs. Thank you hot rod magazines of the 90's.


Maybe in sports cars but the majority of vehicles still come with hydraulic autos or CVTs.


I mean, certainly the VAG group likes to use their dual clutch automatics, but "true" torque converters are still very common. ZF makes them for like a million different cars, and AISIN makes them for the Volvo and Geely group.


> Ever driven a vehicle with an automatic transmission rather than a manual gearshift with a clutch? Then you almost certainly used a fluid coupling

Are you sure?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuously_variable_transmis...:

“The most common type of CVT uses a V-belt which runs between two variable-diameter pulleys.

[…]

A belt-driven design offers approximately 88% efficiency, which, while lower than that of a manual transmission, can be offset by enabling the engine to run at its most efficient speed regardless of the vehicle's speed.

[…]

Disadvantages of a hydrostatic CVT include:

Reduced efficiency. Gears are one of the most efficient methods of mechanical power transmission, with efficiencies as high as 90 percent in many cases. In contrast, few hydrostatic transmission systems achieve more than about 65 percent efficiency”


CVT != Automatic transmission (which is generally hydraulic)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_transmission#Hydraul...


CVT is not the same as "automatic transmission", but it is a subtype of automatic transmission, i.e. CVT is a kind of automatic transmission, but there are also other kinds of automatic transmissions, which are more frequently used.

"Automatic transmission" just means that you do not change gears manually, which is also true for CVT.


Not sure why you are making this statement.

> "A continuously variable transmission (CVT) is an automatic transmission ..."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuously_variable_transmis...


There are also DCTs which IIRC don't use a torque converter. But chances are pretty good that an automatic transmission car uses a torque converter.


A hydrostatic CVT is not a torque-converter transmission (which is hydrodynamic). A hydrostatic CVT is basically a hydraulic pump, control valves plus hydraulic motor. So what you would typically find on construction or forest equipment.


Except a fluid clutch actually works, and a torque converter works even better and has three fans inside it ;-)

I can see the "passive" cylinder getting dragged around a little by viscosity but I don't see how this could transfer even the tiniest amount of power.


Yeah, and like it's name a torque converter can actually not only transmit torque as well but also convert rpms to torque. Running the engine at high rpm at standstill converts revolutions of the input shaft to torque on the output shaft, thus allowing the car to start accelerating at slow speed but with high torque, operating without a clutch.

That's as close to fluid gearing as you can imagine.


Yup. You can hold the RPM steady and watch the road speed climb as the inner blades "catch up" with the outer ones.

Not as funny as with CVTs though where you can have the road speed increasing as the engine RPM decreases. Or there was a guy about 20 years ago who had a Volvo 340 automatic fitted with a Volvo 760GLT 2.3 litre turbocharged engine, which he used to compete with at drag races at the local raceway. It did not too bad against similar vehicles in its class, but it sounded pretty funny because it would just race up to about 4500RPM and stay there for the whole run, as you had a rising howl from the drive belts at the back.

Of course my car has a torque converter and two viscous couplings - the TC between the engine and gearbox, one viscous coupling that makes the centre diff act like a very stiff LSD, and of course one that works the other way (eases off as it slips) to let the cooling fan stay at a steady speed.


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

Search: