Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | CorrectHorseBat's comments login

LFP batteries are Li-ion though

They already have a notch or flat for alignment, which is much more critical during the lithography process than during soldering.


If it's just one chip per wafer, why even bother cutting?


If they only took marine SO2 reduction in account it could still be because of other places where there was a reduction in SO2 pollution?


SO2 sources are fairly well known, Acid Rain was first extensively studied back in the mid 1960s - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid_rain

Marine fuels were the last remaining stronghold of anthropogenic SO2.

The two large scale changes in recent years of atmospheric makeup were the SO2 generation reduduction from marine fuel phase outs and the unuual high altitude water vaper injection from a volcanic eruption.

Atmospheric gas makeup changes are mapped from a number of global sites, and recently mutlispectral orbiting gas sensors have been fine scale mapping sources.

* https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-low-sulphur-shippin...

* https://research.noaa.gov/hunga-tonga-2022-eruption/

* https://research.csiro.au/acc/capabilities/cape-grim-baselin...


Or there's more to learn now and all the "easy" PhD subjects are already taken?


Yeah that could be it. (I'm idly speculating without any knowledge or research. It's just unlike a lot of people here I admit it)

Maybe there's some ideal ratio between "current novelty levels" and "number of PhD candidates".


It's way to late once you start to feel ill from radiation


People undergo radiation therapy as a cancer treatment and they feel nausea but it's not a lethal dose. ChatGPT seems to think that:

Recovery from Mild Symptoms

At a dose of 0.5–1 Sv, symptoms such as nausea, fatigue, and possibly mild skin reddening may appear within a few hours to a day after exposure.

Recovery is likely within days to weeks as long as there is no further radiation exposure and the total dose does not exceed the body's capacity to repair cellular damage.

----

But then it's just a machine so obviously one should consult a nuclear physicist before actually implementing this in a multi-millenia nuclear waste containment site


When it comes to old nuclear material, it's more the danger of getting radiactive particles on and in you than it's about pure radiation. You can walk away from a machine but you can't walk away from that fine powder you just inhaled.


For a real life example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident It was finally clocked as harmful 15 days after they got a hold of it, plenty of time for lots of people to get a lethal dose. And these people probably had at least some pop culture knowledge of nuclear radiation, compared to a distant primitive civilization who would have nothing.


Insufficient grid capacity can also be local, there are many cases of inverters turning off because of too high grid voltage in the Netherlands


How is it only open source on paper? There are thousands of contributors and it's super easy to get your code in.

There's also HACS for plugins which they don't want to merge.


You have no one in your circle thinking he will succeed at making himself richer by crippling regulators?


You should read the text, it's not about calling elephants bananas but real issues with software in the public domain


I read the text: it's license hermenuetics at best and FUD at worst. Has there been a single instance in recorded history of the author of a public domain work trying to enforce usage, modification, or distribution permissions. Sure, you can point to theoretical variation in the precise semantics of the public domain in various jurisdictions, but it feels like a bar exam puzzle, not a real world practical concern. In the real world, you can safely do whatever you want with public domain software. It counts as free software. That half the planet nowadays uses SQLite and treats it as free software is testament to this reality. Obscure license pedanticism just doesn't inform the choices of anyone actually building.


Public Domain is not Free Software (in the FSF sense) because it has none of the encumbrances of a Free Software license.

In other words you don't use PD software "like Free Software". You can use it in many places where Free Software would not be permissible.

In terms of -developer- freedom, public domain is top of the pile, the Open Source, then Free Software.

In terms of -user- freedoms Free Software is top of the pile, OSS in the middle, public domain is similar to commercial software.


Open source and Free software have different philosophies, but in practice they are essentially the same. You are thinking about copyleft vs non-copyleft. BSD, MIT, CC0 are all Free Software licenses but not copyleft.


You’re making the common mistake of confusing the copyleft vs. permissive distinction with the free software vs. open source distinction.

GPL is copyleft. MIT, BSD etc. are permissive. But all of those are both free software and open source, which are essentially synonyms.

The reason so many people get confused by this is that some of the people who prefer copyleft licenses (notably the FSF) also tend to prefer the term “free software”, for philosophical reasons.


It might seem really unlikely any acquirer would ever sue, but if your big company has compliance auditors they will need to see something in black and white.


Lots of big companies somehow manage to use SQLite. I've never heard of a company prohibiting it on license grounds.


Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

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

Search: