Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Scene_Cast2's comments login

I root my phone out of principle (and it does come on handy sometimes). Rooting a phone seems increasingly rare, unfortunately.

I did for years. Custom roms and all. Then over time there was just less and less of a need for me to do so, and more and more of a hassle if I did (banking apps breaking, etc).

I'd love to hear how people write tests for ML. When I'm doing a greenfield project with a new model, a lot of issues are very statistical, e.g. incorrect downsampling - the model will run and train, just less optimally than normal.

I can't put optimality bounds because I don't know how well the model _should_ train, and when it doesn't train, that's not necessarily because of an incorrect implementation. And, actually training a model for a test is quite resource and time heavy.


You can test:

  * the tools that operate the model.
  * to make sure the fitness function calculates fitness correctly,
  * simulation runs right.

  * the storing and recovering of the model operate correctly - that is, data is saved and then recovered correctly and consistently.
  * that the engine that runs the training operates correctly
  * that shutdown and startup work
  * the a crash can be recovered from usefully
And I’m sure more

You change who's paying.

Sure, as a biz it makes sense, but as a society, it’s obviously a big failure.

Did they ever get 120Hz support on v1, and is it a planned feature for this v2?

On my Quest 3, I find 120Hz to be night and day compared to 90.

EDIT: their promo page says that 90Hz OLED feels like 120Hz LCD for VR.


The bit that's not obvious is how the low weight and short leverage of the headset affects lag.

When you are wearing a heavy headset that extends far from your face, it's not just the rendering latency and screen latency that affects the disconnect between your head movements and what you see. The headset physically lags behind your head motion because it has inertia. The total lag is the sum of the digital and physical lag. So, improving the frame rate can only get closer to the physical lag.

And, that's on top of the practically-instant pixel response of OLED vs LCD.

All that is to say that there are physical explanations for why 90 and even 75 Hz is better in practice than people would reasonably expect on the BSB. I can confirm first-hand. And, so have many reviewers.


It's 75hz and 90hz at a reduced resolution I believe.


From the video, 5120 × 2560 per eye, operating at "up to" 90hz


It's 2560x2560 per eye, as far as I can tell.


Yes. It’s really dishonest of them to use the 5k number for "resolution" without specifying it's "combined resolution".


Says up to 90Hz


The video review I saw[0] said it was 90Hz with "some upscaling".

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbFU6KoEASU


I never did as much thinking or testing of dropout on transformers as the author, but it didn't seem to help with my "baby" (~10 million param) transformer models. IIRC the latest Llama models don't use dropout either.


Same, I was never able to debug why dropout > 5% really hurt convergence speed for my toy LLMs. I chalked it up to the models not having enough parameters to fit fineweb and just stop using it.


My intuition is very undeveloped on this, but it makes some kind of sense to me that dropout would make convergence slower, because you're ignoring a bunch of parameters in every batch. The goal seems to be to get a better, more general model by trading off some training time.

The Llama thing is interesting, though!


Is there a good alternative with high-bandwidth, high-quality video? I just tried Discord, Telegram, and Element - they all compress their video quite noticeably into a blurry mush.


Zoom has some settings for HQ and “musician audio”. But to really do it right you need something designed for recording high quality - like riverside.


I'd love to be able to load a FEN or a PGN into it.


In principle, I agree. However, I haven't had a tasty apple in ages - they're all way too sweet for my taste.

I've been thinking about how modern fruit optimize for (among numerous other things) sweetness, and whether modern fruit are actually healthy in terms of glycemic index / glycemic load / etc.


My SO is basically like "fruits _are_ filled with sugar" and they're not wrong. It feels pretty hard to make strong qualitative judgements on this stuff. Feels better than a snickers bar, surely?

The only real thing that feels kind of easy to say is that any sweet drink is probably worse for you than just drinking water. Easiest diet in the world is to just never buy soft drinks, and the extra trick is to also not replace it with orange or apple juice.


While fruits are packed with sugar, eating fruit also comes with fiber. This extra digestion slows the intake of sugar into the bloodstream, and getting fat/unhealthy from sugar comes from to much of it going through the liver. Because you may have too much sugar at a time, the liver needs help from the pancreas, which secretes insulin to store the sugar, which makes you fat.


This is biologically confused. Fructose is processed by the liver. Glucose stimulates insulin release from the pancreas. Sucrose is one glucose and one fructose, but as you might guess from the name, fruits often contain free fructose.

Fiber doesn’t slow sugar absorption by very much. It is better than, say, HFCS, but mostly because you can’t ever eat as many calories as you can drink.


Do you know if there's a good rule of thumb for how different that ratio might be? I do like having some quantitative ballpark to go along with the qualitative texture


You may be interested in the glycemic index [1] which represents how much a particular food causes your blood sugar to spike compared to pure sugar. Based on a cursory search, the GI for an apple is somewhere in the 30s which is way less than a candy bar which can be 70+.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycemic_index


Most fruits are also somewhat acidic, which helps digestion and insulin sensitivity.


Fruits have sugar but unless you're on a diet that heavily restricts sugar intake it's not an alarming amount. A normal sized apple for example is larger by volume than a Snickers bar but has 1/4 the calories and half the sugar.


Eating too many fruits can provide too much sugar, but fresh fruits have low sugar content in comparison with any artificial sweet food.

Only dried fruits, like raisins, dried figs, dried dates, dried prunes and so on, have high sugar content, well over 50%, so they are comparable with chocolate or candy bars.

Most fresh fruits contain only around 10% sugar, with a only a few, like grapes or fresh figs exceeding 15% of sugar (but less than 20%).

This means that for most fresh fruits you can eat a half kilogram (or a pound) per day, while still avoiding an excessive sugar intake.


It seems like fruit are preferable due to fiber, sugar content equal.


> In principle, I agree. However, I haven't had a tasty apple in ages - they're all way too sweet for my taste.

You may be interested in Apple Rankings:

* https://applerankings.com

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33639206


This is not a very good site though. It's basically "Apple Rankings of Some Random Dude" and not much else.


Where we shop (in western Europe) there are these shiny huge apples, often each of them has a separate sticker. All ultra sweet because, well, people are often stupid and our instincts are too strong for some situations that we didn't yet evolve to handle better. Sugar addiction from early age is one of them. Human liking of sugar developed during times where sweet fruits were rare and no ultra cheap refined sugar or HFCS was discovered. Companies deliver what people buy more.

Then at the side there are big bags (~3kg) of these not so appealing small apples with various flaws. These are the ones we buy, either bio or not, and they are much less sweet. They last less, presumably less chemistry within to keep rot away for longer, which is a good (even if annoying) sign.


when my parents sold my (passed away) grandfather's farm, they took a sapling of the 150 year old apple tree. Those apples are so delicious.

They're tiny and acidic, but the flavors are so complex compared to a supermarket apple that's giant and sweet.


Would have to be a branch that was spliced, and wouldn't be 150 years old, apple trees don't live that long.

Either way, the worst office snack IMHO is the apple, the person sitting next to me, taking a big bite, munching with their mouth open.


I raise you one Apple tree estimated to be around 370 years old:

https://www.ancienttreeforum.org.uk/ancient-trees/ancient-tr...

But yes, most Apple trees seem to stop bearing fruit around 50 years of age max and rarely live beyond 90-100 years as far as I can tell.


Could also be. In any case it was old and the apples tasted like nature intended them to


Graft would still produce genetically identical apples.


If you like tart apples, try Granny Smith. They are usually harvested a little bit too early, so they are often very sour and very green (the ripe version has a very slight shine of red). Their skin is thick and requires a little effort to chew. I love them.


I know I read several years ago that some zoos were cutting back on the amount of fruit they feed their animals because modern cultvars are too sweet.


This. Commercial fruits are as engineered as candy bars. Well.... Almost.

In any case, apples are often too sweet. I don't eat candy either.


I routinely run 350 real watts, and go up to 1400 when I really need light. Helps with heating, but doesn't get all that hot.


1400 Watt of LEDs is the kind of lighting you'll find atop a tall pole in a sports stadium. That's ~200,000 lumen, or about 10x as much as you'd need to light a large room really brightly. If you put that next to a skylight, it would make the sun look dim. It's certainly not impossible, but that's a lot for a single point light source.

What are your rooms like? Do you live in a castle?


I have 2x SmallRig RC 350D [1] and Godox M600bi [2]. These are medium-spec videography lights that draw their rated power from the wall. Lux @ 3m is noticeably (10x) dimmer than the sun.

I have tripped my breaker when running the setup, so I run from two outlets on two breakers. For my current (quite large) room, I'd love to upgrade to the 5000W lights (Nanlux Evoke 5000B or the Aputure STORM XT52), but electrical wiring would be a hassle. For a standard room, I find 700W to be sufficient.

I also backed this project - https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/brighter-the-world-s-brig... - been following them since their Show HN.

[1] https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1729860-REG/smallrig_... [2] https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1715199-REG/godox_kno...


For reference, this is a 1200 watt stadium light: https://www.ledlightingsupply.com/led-outdoor-lights/led-flo...

So it's not unfair to say that you're off by a order of magnitude. For a single stand, 2 orders if counting all the stands.

1400 W is a lot by conventional room lighting standards, but not if your objective is recreating daylight indoors.


This is what a 20kW incandescent bulb looks like in a home/backyard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT5_-A0m8_U


Before I even click that link I'm going to assume it's photoninduction.

Edit: It was! That mad lad!


I can’t believe he did that in an enclosed space. “It’s like having a bonfire in the room” indeed.


The sun is really bright. My outdoor Hue sensor regularly reads 50k+ lux in sunlight. A room in my house with 100 watts of LEDs reads ~300 lux from the sensor on my dresser.


Yeah it’s truly astonishing how bright the sun is when you start trying to recreate it at home. But my room is brighter inside than an overcast winter day outside! That was my goal, and it’s substantially improved my mood. I’d do a write up but my strategy has been “keep buying lights until it feels bright enough and distribute them around the room”. I should probably get a real lux meter I’ve just been using my phone which seems a bit off.


Standard neural nets (created through regular training methods) have no guarantees about their output. So no, there hasn't been anything like that.

I do recall someone handcrafting the weights for a transformer and getting some sort of useful algorithm or computation going, so there's that.


Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

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

Search: