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

This was my first thought. It’s called Sketch Ocean and it’s in a teamLab experience!


You’re implying that you should never invent new tools. But every tool was a new invention upon its creation. Also, all software is an “engine” for an “engine”.


React is popular for a reason. Declarative UI is a million times easier to implement and maintain. If a total newbie had to learn UIKit and SwiftUI then pick one, they'd pick SwiftUI 100% of the time.


Until the input data gets larger and the performance grinds to a halt.


A lot of these pages look movie related, so it’s likely people looking stuff up on their phones after watching something.


We've come full circle


Soon we may even be able to put a website into a folder.


CTRL+SHIFT+N New Folder/website

EDIt: this is a good thing.


The internet is made of tubes. And tubes are made of circles.

2024 is the year of PHP.


Jokes on you. I've been using PHP since.... 2001. Shit, that's a long time.


Well, I'm off to learn about Apache Tomcat so I can be ready for 2025.


Perl CGI is the way to go to get ready for 2026


Maybe Vercel and Netfly could think about doing Perl serverless.


I laughed, thanks :D

If there's anything to learn about humanity it's that we apply this technique in many ways.


If I remember correctly earliest version of Apache also did this (though it used S/FTP instead of dropbox and .html instead of .md)


Current versions of Apache also do this.


So what you are saying is that the web server Apache is able to serve static web content?


Now how do I serve my micro service from here? Just drop in a js, py or rb file :-)

What if I drop in a tf file?


WTF is "tf"?


Terraform i assume


You used to be able to serve websites via a Dropbox of .html files. It supported CSS, JS and everything. At some point after 2015 they turned off that capability .


Hasn't autopilot had "auto-land" technology for many years now? How is Garmin's different?


Garmin's is literally "oh shit the pilot passed out!" and an entirely inexperienced passenger can push a single button, ending up with the plane stopped on the nearest appropriate runway with the engine off. The autoland system in airliners requires a lot of setup by the pilots and continuous monitoring all the way down, plus working ILS (instrument landing system) equipment at the airport.


When flying private, my pilot told me: “just press this button when I have a stroke or something”.

Almost 20 years ago.

Ignorance is bliss I guess.


Yeah, I don't know what button he would have told you to push, but it definitely wouldn't have landed the plane. I don't think there were even automatic wing-leveling systems that far back.


Not really. You need to intercept an ILS beacon and not all airfields have them and you still need to find the intercept.

Garmin allows true auto landing without ground equipment


US military drones have been doing it for decades now.


How successfully? An bad landing for a drone is much less costly than for a plane with people in it.


It’s nice that Vancouver doesn’t have a highway cutting it in half like Seattle, but it also takes longer to drive anywhere.

From my experience, many of its neighborhoods/dining districts feel really cold/loud/unwalkable due to the high speed 4 lane roads everywhere. Traffic noise still seems like a huge issue, trying to parallel park when cars are buzzing by at 50 mph isn’t fun, and the unprotected left turns are pretty gnarly.


> many of its neighborhoods/dining districts feel really cold/loud/unwalkable due to the high speed 4 lane roads everywhere

Yeah, this is an unfortunate aspect of Vancouver's city planning; our zoning forces nearly all shops and restaurants onto busy, loud, polluted arterial roads. Changing this isn't really on the political landscape right now, and I don't think it's going to change anytime soon.


> but it also takes longer to drive anywhere.

Great. Driving should not be convenient in cities.


Driving is just one mode of transportation. Buses can take 3 or 4 times as much time to reach any destination, which is far too much to be a viable alternative to people with a choice.

Ask yourself if you would like to spend 45 minutes aboard the bus system as opposed to 15 min. in a car


> Ask yourself if you would like to spend 45 minutes aboard the bus system as opposed to 15 min. in a car

Ask yourself how the options would be different if cities weren't so focused on cars.

Edit: To be less vague - my choices to get to work are 20 minutes on bike basically for free, 25 minutes via metro for ~$100 a month, or 40 minutes by car for about $500 a month in tolls and parking plus thousands a year for the car itself and maintenance. There's no reason this can't be the norm in the US aside from local politicians deciding they don't want it.


> my choices

You are a very lucky person then, and your situation is by far not the norm, regardless of which city (or country, for that matter) you live in.


> your situation is by far not the norm

Yes I acknowledged this in my previous comment. But it could be normal for every city with some pretty simple changes that no mayor is willing to make.


If a full lane is dedicated to buses instead then that bus would be much faster than the cars stuck in traffic, while moving significantly more people.


Public transit is significantly slower than driving, unless both endpoints are immediately close to a skytrain station.


Idk if you think that statement somehow refutes my point, but it certainly doesn't.


In general, I agree with you. In specific, I drive almost everywhere despite being a supporter of public transit, because I can't afford to live near a skytrain station and the 'last mile' adds an hour to a trip. If we had more buses, and most routes had dedicated lanes, sure. But since we're half-assing it all, more gridlock is just more gridlock. Which, among other things, means more pollution.

edit: compare to a city like Seattle, which has similar weather, hills, density, etc. A notable feature of the transit centers there is a Park & Ride: a place where folks can park their cars (for free, when I lived there) and get into transit. Vancouver does not have anything of the sort. If you want to park somewhere and take transit into the downtown core, there are extremely limited options. So you get too many drivers. Disincentivizing cars usage is great when there is a viable alternative -- in the absence of such an alternative, it's just flagellation for its own sake.


Sure, you're making a reasonable choice given the current reality. But it doesn't have to be that way. When I say driving should be difficult, I don't mean just make the roads worse without any other changes. I mean improve active transportation, transit, and housing density/affordability. In the short term, each improvement here will cause some pain in making driving slightly harder, but after sufficient time the other options will be good enough that nobody will miss driving.


Huh? The only park & ride in Seattle is in Northgate that's pretty new. They're only really seen outside the city in the suburbs


It's not that new, there's been a park&ride there since the 90s[1]. And, my apologies, I'm referring to the greater metropolitan area as Seattle.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northgate_station_(Sound_Tra...


Of course it does. Crappy for cars means crappy for buses which are public transit.


> Crappy for cars means crappy for buses which are public transit.

Not if you give sufficient priority to buses.

Cleveland has an excellent center-running BRT line: https://nacto.org/case-study/euclid-avenue-brt-cleveland-oh/

And NYC is starting to implement busways: https://www1.nyc.gov/html/brt/html/routes/14th-street.shtml


This is not an obvious thing. Cities can (imo should) give more priority to buses in the form of dedicated lanes and traffic signal priority.


Sure, but the commonality is both need roads and at some point they'll be an interaction between cars and buses.

If the situation is crappy for cars, it will impact the buses at some point.


I feel like LA and Amsterdam are both evidence that having a big highway cutting a city in half is neither necessary nor sufficient to make journeys (even car journeys) faster.


It's not immediately apparent from the street names; but the Grandview Highway and Georgia St effectively act as parts of a bifurcating through-way, albeit with a congestion nightmware between them.


Not really comparable to a highway. I mean, yes it's a wide street, but you can just walk across Georgia Street as a pedestrian. Can't do that with the sort of highways that scar the landscape of so many North American cities.


You can walk across Lougheed Hwy as a pedestrian; it doesn't make it any less of a highway.


So you think he got 3 lucky breaks when with electronic payments, electric cars, and space rockets, and Twitter is too hard?


He got a lucky break with payments that allowed him to try his luck on the other two


Have you ever gotten a job from just showing off your open source work, though?


I was a committer to Elasticsearch. My name is thanked in the (very old) official book. I will still get asked questions.

No one looks at open source work, just as no one cares about your resume.


Other people I know have. Quite a few have leveraged their contributions to the D language into a much higher paying job than they had before.


I'd venture to guess that a key difference is that most Black adults grew up in America while most Asian adults immigrated here, maintaining their previous culture's eating and exercise habits.


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

Search: