Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | consumer451's commentslogin

Firefox is my daily on desktop, but on mobile it's Safari. I finally got around to installing uBlock Origin Lite on iOS. I used to run the Firefox version on iOS, but that was discontinued long ago, and I never replaced it. I feel like a bit of an idiot for not doing this sooner.

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/ublock-origin-lite/id674534269...


> I feel like a bit of an idiot for not doing this sooner.

Don’t beat yourself up, uBlock Origin on iOS is only four months old.


The ROI is beyond solid. It's actually insane this wasn't done sooner at this location. The normal ROI for a wildlife crossing is 15 years. Here, it's two to three years.

> Cost savings: Each prevented wildlife–vehicle collision can save thousands of dollars—more than $19,000 per deer crash, $73,000 per elk, and $110,000 per moose—in vehicle, injury, and wildlife costs, making well-placed crossings a strong investment [0]

This section of highway had one deer-vehicle collision per day.

365 * $19,000 = $6,935,000 per year.

[0] https://www.pew.org/en/research-and-analysis/fact-sheets/202...

___

edit: this post and resulting thread made me realize that "wildlife crossing" sounds far too tree-hugger for our society. They need to rebrand to "obvious money-saving infrastructure," or better.


This has been stuck in my head ever since I wrote about the rebrand. My final proposal: "car-saver" or "car-saver overpass."

"Today, our State Department of Transportation completed their latest car-saver overpass. This one will prevent more than 300 highway-speed collisions per year, saving drivers a lot of money, pain, and heartache."


This section of highway had one deer-vehicle collision per day.

That sounds like an extreme outlier.


Yes, they place these at places where they're needed, the outliers.

I know cost-effectivness is often the deciding factor, but that's kinda sad, so: One deer hit a day, down 91% means ~330 deers saved per year. $15m spread over the working population (160m) of the US is less than $0.10 per person. So you're spending $0.10 to save 330 deer, which is a trade I would make.

You have to realize that it isn't just about saving deer. If you hit a deer at speed, it is going to do massive damage to your vehicle and potentially cause significant injury to the passengers, up to and including death. Overt fatalities are reportedly rare, like 0.1% or something, but the injury rate is closer to 5%.

The US does not have a shortage of deer. Mostly the opposite as their natural predators have been drastically reduced in numbers.

Agree 100%. Also, hitting a deer at highway speeds can lead to the death of the occupants of the vehicle.

This is not some country road!

This is an actual win-win scenario, for humans and wildlife.


> It shows that the design goal is not to maximise interactions otherwise "controversial" posts should stay up.

What I believe to be a less human-moderated version of the front page still exists on HN. It is interesting to compare it to the default. Both have their benefits.

https://news.ycombinator.com/active


I own non-modular synths, but I have never owned modular voltage-controlled hardware. However, I have had a lot of fun playing with Bespoke Synth. It has a much lower barrier to entry than VCV Rack imho.

If you are wondering what everyone is talking about in this thread, please check it out:

https://github.com/BespokeSynth/BespokeSynth


That's funny because I find VCV much "easier" but perhaps it's because I'm not composing so much as noodling and texture-spelunking.

I do like bespoke and think its great, but it feels a bit janky to me (though it's been like a year since I tried).

It's fun to think about all the various ways people can implement such tools. I'd recommend bespoke for those who want a bit of a different modular system than just a skeuomorphic approach that copies Eurorack design.


The biggest to suffer after the BAM is closed is the EU. It is not an accident that the USA decided not to support Saudi when they asked for air strikes last week.

ARAMCO just told the EU there will be no oil shipments next month.

Hurting the EU is a major goal of the current US admin.


Oil is a global market.

Oil prices will rise in the USA just as much as they will in the EU.


Yes, the USA said that, but the damage was done. For many decades any inclinations for EU defense contracts to favor EU arms, were greatly frowned upon. France was derided for having made the right decision from go.

Post-WWII USA would give you Pax Americana, as long as you had no domestic defence industry.


And yet the Europeans have built one defense system after another in that time. I get why countries want to have their own defense industries. If I were running a country I would too. But the extent to which more of those systems haven't been deployed has more to do with mis-aligned budget priorities between countries and old fashioned jobs politics. Only the largest European countries can go it alone in major weapon systems development, and the joint projects tend to founder on discussions over what gets built where. FCAS/SCAF is a perfect illustration of this.

From the US perspective, what's frustrating is extent to which European powers, particularly the largest and potentially most powerful, have allowed their readiness to decline. I remember a particular surprise readiness exercise a few years back in which the Germans were able to get no more than a dozen tanks moving within the first 48 hours. The rest were broken, undergoing maintenance, or had been cannibalized for spare parts. At the time Germany had, on paper anyway, about 300 active tanks.

It's not the sexy stuff like new missile systems and strike fighters that have been neglected. It's the boring parts that really matter like an efficient reserve system, logistics, spare parts, boots, training facilities, ammunition, fuel depots, etc.

Nobody wants to spend a lot of money maintaining a military in peacetime, but an effective peacetime military is insurance: When you don't need it you don't need it, but when you need it you really, really need it. Your country's strategic situation can change really quickly.


> No. It'll be like software. Entry level employment will be affected.

Whether everyone at the labs knows it or not, this it what they are doing to entire industries, starting with software: Embrace, extend, and extinguish

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguis...

What a time to be alive!!?


They came for software first. It was the industry that was “eating the world”. Mathematicians were also affected. Because math was also “code” thanks to Lean. It was collateral damage.

Now they’re coming for lawyers. Law also has “code”. It’s text-based. It’s arms extend to every industry.

Who knows who’s next.


What's next is capturing all of our audio and visual inputs from cradle to grave, so that we can be truly replaced.

Honestly, if that happened in a 100% trusted environment, it might be cool. But, there is no money in that. Well, maybe Apple would do that? Private Cloud Compute is cool af.

Still, we are far more likely fully cooked than fully trustworthy personal AI agents happening at scale.


Genuinely curious, how could one fight pre-emptive domain squatters once any candidate is publicly suggested?

When I have suggested names in other situations like this in the past, I spent the ~$10 to get the domain, and offered the transfer the free. Of course, not everyone would do this.


Thanks for posting that. Good to know the BBC is moving on from Davies, and investing in a full season with a new production company.

Star Trek is in far worse shape these days. According to Riker, this is the first time in decades where there is no TV or movie even in the planning phase.


I love Star Trek, I love Star Wars, and I love Doctor Who. I have very fond memories of watching Tom Baker's episodes on PBS back in the day.

But once you have nothing to draw on but nostalgia I think it's time to move on. I liked the Doctor better when they were just an outlaw Time Lord in a stolen car doing good and getting into adventures, and not the eldritch abomination they've become, whose mere name causes the galaxy to shiver in terror. I liked Star Trek better when the humans weren't the most powerful force in the galaxy, one-shotting Borg cubes, but they were an upstart species getting a foothold in a universe bigger, stranger and far more dangerous than they imagine. In both cases, nostalgia leads to a sort of narrative power creep.

Star Wars has the same problem. Everything has to be about the Palpatines versus the Skywalkers. It would have been such a better story if it turned out Rey really was a nobody, if the entire plot had the courage to examine its own mythology from the outside and establish that the universe really is bigger than these two players, but we don't dare subvert tropes when the viewer has the media literacy of a mollusk and can't accept a protagonist who isn't Space Goku.

There's no wonder left to any of it. No mystery, no awe. No sense that the universe is bigger than you can imagine. God forbid something take a risk with the fucking franchise. Maybe we should just let it all die.


> Everything has to be about the Palpatines versus the Skywalkers. It would have been such a better story if it turned out Rey really was a nobody, if the entire plot had the courage to examine its own mythology from the outside and establish that the universe really is bigger than these two players, but we don't dare subvert tropes when the viewer has the media literacy of a mollusk and can't accept a protagonist who isn't Space Goku.

This isn't anything to do with "media literacy" - that as a criticism is quite vague, I think. The actual reason is because the two directors were fighting to undo each others' work, and spend hundreds of millions to do so.


And Star Wars. Complete train wreck. Disney just has so much money to burn from live action remakes they can limp along.

Andor was really good and only finished in 2025.

Star Wars Jedi Survivor was also highly enjoyable.

The big films have been sad except for Rogue One.

But there is some Star Wars stuff that is out there and is really good.


Yes, I agree on Andor. But that was a quiet side-project done by good people, and not the main focus of Kathleen Kennedy and her recruits. Both it and Rogue One were made by Tony Gilroy.

Main line Star Wars is a train wreck, unfortunately. I was one of the apparently few people who was looking forward to something new, even deconstructive, in the sequel trilogy. I'm so sick of Palpatine vs. Skywalker chosen bloodline nonsense you can't even imagine, and the last thing I want is to have my nostalgia pandered to.

The ancillary stuff is a lot better however. I hear good things about Star Wars Visions but I haven't seen it.


There is a new movie in the early stages of development. Some news was teased at Comic-Con in July and the directors spoke about it a few weeks ago.

"After years of an unclear future, it seemed as though “Star Trek” finally found a path back to the big screen as “Spider-Man: Homecoming” writers and “Game Night” and “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves” filmmakers Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley boarded the film."

https://www.darkhorizons.com/next-star-trek-film-tackles-cor...


Development on ‘09 started after production wrapped on enterprise in March 2005, although there wasn’t a lot in it. Production in earnest was certainly underway 18 months after.

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

Search: