- detrites parentSeems figuring out what it is they're doing and duplicating it would be a straightforward thing to do. Surely there's a research group working on it?
- Theorising I've seen on this - though, I don't recall where - suggested targeting resonances with HAARP in a similar way to how a human singer can shatter a wineglass, by projecting the crystals frequency, causing it to oscillate itself to pieces.
That is high-watt transmission power may not be required. And further, it was suggested it's not done in isolation by HAARP but cooperatively with various transmitters also transmitting the same frequency at the same target - using standing waves.
It makes sense conceptually as an idea but I'm not sure there if there's any evidence of it?
- With distributed ray detectors and suitable modeling of inner earth processes, assuming that the premise is correct - seems it may have potential to work?
Ie, maybe able to generate the level of specificity required.
EDIT: Also there aren't that many places on earth at high risk of earthquake that also have poor construction, etc. Meaning any advance warning, that a significant quake may hit somewhere, can trigger "battening down the hatches".
- This is very cool, but I can't understand how 60khz is enough resolution to usefully discern what would be happening inside a CPU, etc, that's running way faster than that? (Disclaimer: I can't read the article as it says "browser not supported".)
EDIT - Answered here: https://www.hackerneue.com/item?id=36332352
- Are there advantages to this other than, I guess it being convenient? (Zig noob here.)
Eg, are there C to Zig ports that have had a demonstrable performance or memory-safety gain or something like that?
(Specifically, I mean over a C-lib wrapper compiled using Zig, as matching this case.)
- I've observed that for the past 4.5+ billion years, the sole principle driver of the climate on our planet has been the million-earth sized nuclear reaction it's in orbit around.
That the past 100 years of cows farting would suddenly have infinitely greater impact strikes me as absurd, and meshes well with the decades of failed predictions I've observed its purveyors making.
That they will casually disregard, as entirely irrelevant, large-scale human deployments specifically targeted at changing the climate - that have succeeded in doing so - only supports this assessment.
Finally, asserting a "consensus" only by ignoring or mocking any and all dissenting views is utterly pathetic and not indicative of science. It's more indicative of field capture by industry, politics and profits.
Even the most cursory analysis of investment flows, or the personal investments of people promoting it and what they stand to personally gain from it (while taking private actions contradicting public claims) confirms this also.
That everything the field claims about the future is based on "modelling" (which is another word for "imagining"), really just cements the level of "science" we're dealing with here. No wonder their "models" always fail.
I'm not saying the climate isn't changing, and I'm not even saying we couldn't be causing it. I'm saying the current investigation into it is off-track, compromised, and historically incapable of coming up with any accuracy.
Ie, if China can successfully, and continually, modify the climate across their entire continent using a large-scale tech deployment, how is it reasonable to exclude it from theories on anthropogenic climate? It makes no sense.
(And if you aren't aware of China's weather modification programs, look them up. It's not "conspiracy theory", even CNN has reported on it.)
- > I've always naively thought that climate disaster was still 10-20 years out
You can hardly be blamed for that, they've been saying it was one way or another since at least the 1970's.
Literally none of their doomsday scenarios have occurred as stated yet.
My bet is, rather than bovine farts and air for plant-life, the major climate driver will turn out to be what it always has been... 1 million earths-worth chaotic searing nuclear eruption, boiling atop hidden internal processes 4b+ years.
And if there is a human aspect to it, I'd first investigate the large-scale weather-modifying experiments creating and directing precipitation in arbitrary and unaccountable ways over large landmasses for decades. Eg, look at China's.
(Cue the brigade claiming sensible observations are madness because there's a "consensus"... among only scientists that agree...)
- Counting subreddits is meaningless as a stock percentage. For example, there are millions of subreddits, but only 150k or so even have any activity at all. A small percentage of those are responsible for most activity.
The number of users impacted by the (very popular) subs that have gone dark looks in the region of almost... everyone.
What will reddit look like without r/pics? Without r/funny? Without r/Music, t/aww, r/todayilearned, r/explainlikeimfive, r/DIY? Etc.
Less than 1% of all subs are going down, but it's substantially comprised of subs that matter the most, appeal to the largest number of users and literally have characterised the site as a whole for over a decade.
- I've no idea how to interpret your comment in way that isn't bizarre. You seem to state you think competitive advantage in intelligence activity - and in military activity for that matter, as they are deeply intertwined - doesn't exist.
And that the reason it doesn't is because everyone involved has to constantly leak and brag all their confidential secrets out in the open so they will be considered hireable by other agencies tasked with secret-keeping?
Have I read that right?
- There are several different types of CPU's, in two main classes, CISC and RISC. The difference is summarised by the first letter - "Complex" vs. "Reduced" - Instruction Set Computer. Or, what size "vocabulary" a CPU decodes.
RISC-V is a type of CPU architecture (a set of plans for how to build one, not an actual CPU itself), that also happens to be open source. Anyone can build a RISC-V CPU without having to buy the rights to do so. (Many are.)
This project is an emulation of a RISC-V CPU. A kind of virtual "reference" CPU in software. It can be used to compile code that can run on a RISC-V type CPU, and to help understand what's happening inside the CPU when it runs.
It's written in C, which is and was a very fundamental programming language that's influenced the design of many other languages. It is a language that is very close the fundamental language CPU's natively decode and process.
CPU's natively use a language referred to as "Assembly", but which actually has many varieties particular to each CPU design. Regardless of variety of CPU, assembly is usually is about as reasonably "close to metal" as it gets.
It's literally communicating with the CPU directly in its own language. This makes it extremely fast to run, but laborious to code, and also somewhat "dangerous" in that with such low-level control, it's easy to mess things up.
This project takes an input of a text list of RISC-V assembly instructions (a "program") and pretends to be RISC-V CPU with those instructions loaded into it and being run on it. Useful for understanding, prototyping and building a RISC-V program.
CPU's are designed rather to run assembly that already "works", having been created programmatically (compiled or interpreted), by a higher level language that isn't going to give it things that make no sense (hopefully).
So there is not usually a lot of provisioning done in the design of the CPU to make it easy to watch it and its state carefully at a low level and examine how your assembly program is working, or not working. Emulation eases this.
- Not sure if this was intended, but coming to this as someone vaguely aware of RISC-V, it's looking like a fantastic form of documentation for the ISA, that both describes and gives a way to play with it, but in an intuitive, even fun manner.
Obviously this works best for someone who already knows C - but, given it's C89 mitigates against this aspect somewhat.
- I'm not sure I've even met a person I believe would be deeply disturbed by aliens being confirmed as real.
Most find it interesting, exciting, or vaguely potentially alarming - in the same way an unknown rustle in the jungle might be alarming until you know it isn't dangerous. But not "deeply psychologically disturbing".
The only people I think could be genuinely deeply disturbed by the prospect of alien life may be deeply religious folks, surely not a representatively high percentage of HN visits.
My guess is a text-only message board with zero identity verification contains a higher percent brigading and sockpuppet content in general.
- I tallied (roughly) the number of subscriber accounts, across all these reddits. It's around 1 billion. Obviously, it's not conservative as many will have subscribed to multiple. But, I see MAU (monthly active users) is about 1b. So, this is huge.
EDIT: Seems the source for MAU I found was way high, making this potentially even bigger. Every other source I've found is 400-500m range for MAU on reddit (as another pointed out).
- 2-3 generations. Historically demonstrable as a metric to be sure about the ill effects of a new substance/tech. History is littered with examples of consumers & industry placing convenience & profits ahead of what's sensible to these ends.
Eg, X-rays - 60 years from invention, popularity, child use, "crazy" people claiming they're bad, to suspicion they might be, conservative study, realising they're screwed, all kinds of safety standards being applied, and acceptance.
Radiation, thalidomide, PCB's, DDT's, smoking, Asbestos, etc. Sometimes it can be faster or slower, but 2-3 human generations is also pragmatic as you can reasonably assess effects on offspring as well as sufficiently-aged pioneers.
I mean, why are people even considering artificial sweeteners? Isn't it only because it's taken us all several decades to realise refined sugar is fucked after initially thinking it was great if not at least "safe"?
I'm happy ingesting organic fruit, but I understand many out there prefer their bodies used as profit-making devices.