Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | chez17's comments login

>Seeing this simple failure illustrates a risk in moving that direction.

Right. There are currently no known failures in the private system. Let's stick with that.


The point isn't to have no rules... It's to ensure the ability to compete... right now certain protectionist rules only serve to help incumbents, and are only aided by lobbying efforts.

To countermand that, what is needed are policies to ensure competition. Compulsory patent licensing for starters, and a dual-source requirement for prescription medications paid for by the state would be another.

What we have had, and continue to have is not a free market, and it doesn't serve you to have it continue as such.


The phrase 'well has dried up' meant that I'm no longer looking to freelance, I'm trying to apply to salaried positions and was hoping for some examples from other freelancers who have been in a similar position.


>The incentive to build new rental housing will evaporate

Or the incentive to build cheap apartments that can be profitable with the caps will increase. If you know you can easily get X amount per apartment, and can build and manage a building under that total amount, why wouldn't you? This is often a recurring theme that I see that people seem to do. Since something can't be as profitable as before, no one will ever try to make a profit now. I don't get it. There will be developers who will figure the numbers out and make good money. Of course the numbers may be too strict and my scenario isn't a possibility, but I would bet you haven't ran the numbers yet to know it's not.


Generally, but I don't know about Berlin specifically, the cost of building new apartments has gone up over time. There is also the sunk cost of building them. So if you imagine the whole transaction from start to present, you get a big investment (say $10M) and you build a building with 100 units which you rent out at $1000/month. After say 22 years[1] your apartment building has recovered its costs and actually returning free cash flow.

What I have seen is that it takes time to get a project started. And the costs of building can go up faster than rents do, and you get to a point where it is economically infeasible to build a new building given the maximum possible rent you could charge to live there. At that point no one builds new housing because nobody likes to lose money on purpose. So all new housing stops.

There is an interesting 'bubble' here in that with nearly 0% interest rates you can get away with higher costs, but that won't last.

[1] it is going to depend on interest rates on the building loan, city taxes, maintenance, etc. Every time I've looked at building an apartment it seems to flip over to generating cash 20 to 25 years after its built, assuming single owner etc.


About 44% of newly built units in 2014 are privately owned, so the other more-than-half are not.

I couldn't figure out how much of that is actually publicly managed (versus some potential third class), but they're already a significant part of the housing landscape of Berlin - and they have less of an issue with recovering costs over 25 years than individual house owners.


Money is fungable. It can be invested in anything. Yes apartments in Berlin might still be profitable, but other investments are more profitable and capital will move to those.


>Also, there is no guide out there for streamers, or people who are in the public eye on the internet, on how to avoid getting attacked by script kiddies.

A famous StarCraft streamer made a guide on how to avoid this:

https://blog.destiny.gg/protection-from-ddos-attacks/

I googled "guide to preventing DDOS on twitch" and it came up as the fourth result. How hard did you look?


Yeah I've seen this, and gone over it with him. He has some added exposure due to Steam which is another potential risk. I added a bullet point for that.

Thanks for pointing this out but what do you think about the VPS vs VPN. It has an increased exposure to attack because everything else you do on your pc isn't being routed through the VPS.

It also doesn't do anything for best practices for avoiding other forms of hacking. So it's a good guide but definitely incomplete.

I looked pretty hard, I spent the better part of 4 hours just looking around and reading these sort of articles and evaluating whether or not a VPN or a VPS would be better. And in retrospect a VPS might actually be better for his skype connection. So thanks for pointing me to this again so that I could think on that again. I wouldn't have gone back through it otherwise.


The main reason of using a VPN or VPS is that you keep using your normal IP for the stream and the game. Everything else (where the attacker can get your IP) you use the VPN/VPS for. This will not protect your chat or browsing from getting DDOSed but it WILL prevent the attacker from killing your stream and your game. The benefit with using a VPS is the much bigger bandwidth of the host company to soak up the DDOS trafic so you can stay online.

If he has a fixed IP this is too late for him, he needs to get a new IP for this to be useful.


Skype is definitely #1 on the list. It is remarkably easy to get an IP given a skype username


I would first do some research on probiotics. From what I've seen, the only proven benefit came using them ina very certain situation which I forget completely (it was something like it helped clear up diarrhea after an antibiotic quicker or something like that). My point is they aren't cheap and you could simply be wasting money. I'm honestly not informed enough either way, but when I looked into them a few years ago, there was little to no proven benefits of using them.


Well, since TFA is specifically about post-antibiotics gut problems, the commenter is in a good place to be asking for information.


I don't know, the Ax FX is insane. I would bet good money that 99.99% of people couldn't tell the difference between it and an amp in ideal situations.


Actually they couldn't:

http://www.seymourduncan.com/tonefiend/recording/can-you-tel...

Not only people who think themselves picky when it comes to tubes vs modeling could not tell the difference, but they also failed to even recognize the amp types.

(It reminds me of red-wine)


Not really a great test (as admitted in the commentary). There's no way to know how many people that entered weren't familiar with all of the amps that were used (according to the author, "a couple of contestants realized that 1, 3, 5, and 8 were the models, but got all the amp types wrong"). Swap two models and your score is a maximum of 50% regardless of how well you can identify tubes vs. digital.

"Not only people who think themselves picky when it comes to tubes vs modeling could not tell the difference, but they also failed to even recognize the amp types." It was a contest with a giveaway. The only thing we can infer about the entrants is that they wanted free stuff.

I'm with the author as far as conclusions go: "Sometimes models sound great, and sometimes they sound crappy, much like amps."


Perhaps a more important reason to dislike it is that he ran the guitar output into a DAW, and then into an amp. Guitar pickups are very sensitive to impedance loading.


At $2200+ to emulate tube sounds, with significant resale risk, it's a pricey option for non-professional players. I've got a few small-ish tube amps and a limited pedal board that covers most of the styles I'm interested in at acceptable volume levels. If I ever decide that I don't like one of my amps, or I want something different, I can sell it and recoup most of what I paid for it - there's not really any chance that Fender will release a new amp that will cause my Princeton RI to suddenly drop in price drastically. The same can't be said for digital gear.

I've tried some less expensive digital gear (Line6) and, while it's nice enough, I feel it leaves much to be desired compared to a well maintained tube amp, so at my gear budget (and since I don't really have any space constraints) I think tubes are a better choice for me - and I don't think I'm terribly atypical. In the long run, if gear that provides the quality of Axe FX drops in price significantly, I might change my mind.


I can definitely tell the difference. A friend of mine has the AXE-FX. We tried testing its Mesa Boogie model against my actual Mesa Boogie amp -- and the difference was night and day.

Like one of the comments from above, part of the magic of tube guitar amplification is that it is much more responsive dynamically to inputs. You can turn the volume up a tick, or hit the strings harder or softer, or change your picking style, and the results are drastically different on a tube amp.

This gives the artist more space to express themselves -- which is why tube amps are still favoured amongst guitar players today -- decades after transistor's have taken over the rest of the electronic industry. You can't get the nuanced expressiveness in a crystal lattice that you can in the free space of a vacuum. [1]

[1] I'm paraphrasing from H. Alexander Dumble, one of the gurus of guitar amplification.


Sure. Interesting how confident you are in this assumption - there are plenty of audiophiles who claim they can definitely night and day hear the difference in 2 brands of speaker cable. So presumably you've blind tested yourself and are definitely sure it's not bias, or wishful thinking, or feeling special because you've got the real deal.

The AXE FX II models the differences with tube amplification that you're talking about.

I also don't like that quote any - by the logic of that quote MP3s and CDs are equally rubbish recordings that have no room for expression? Or are we only extending it to what suits your view?

There are a vast number of ways to customise a real tube amp (I've owned a Mesa Boogie Mark IV) and an Axe FX II (which I currently own.) A poorly setup mesa vs. one that's been carefully configured will be night and day as well. Did you factor that in? Was there a tone match? Actually the Axe FX doesn't claim to emulate particular models precisely in many cases (see http://wiki.fractalaudio.com/axefx2/index.php?title=Amp:_all...)

My point is you dismiss it as if you can know for sure - go do some blind testing where these factors are taken into account (you can start with a skeptic's view at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EtxHlJ2FPo) and then see if your certainty is affected.

Finally, Metallica have chosen to do all live shows using only Axe FX's. So obviously you know better than this small band who barely tour.

I know HN is basically turning into the new reddit, but comments like these where you just make a statement and then act as if it's established then go on to quote some guy really make me wonder whether reading the comments section is going to continue to depress me forever at this point.


> Finally, Metallica have chosen to do all live shows using only Axe FX's. So obviously you know better than this small band who barely tour.

Actually, Metallica uses Mesa Boogie amps...[1]

[1] http://www.metallica.com/band/band-bio-gear.asp


Actually Metallica uses Axe FX II for all tours like I said...! Maybe they've not updated this page.

[0]:http://www.g66.eu/articles/890-metallica-backstage [1]:http://forum.fractalaudio.com/axe-fx-ii-discussion/87016-met... [2]:http://thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/13217/metallica-confirm...

That's some really lazy google'ing there btw...!! Look at the top 3 results for https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1....

Are you hoping that I just... made up that point? I find it interesting the degree of denial audio guys have with this stuff. The Axe FX is a really amazing and inspiring piece of machinery that allows for a huge artistic freedoms and is basically the product of one guy's dedication to accuracy (many amps are modelled to the extent of their entire circuitry being simulated as well as precise physical models of the valve sets which you can change, etc. etc.) - when I wonder why the Axe hasn't got the love it deserves (though there's growing love for it) the reaction of 'not the same as analogue' guys reminds me why :)


2010, seems a bit outdated. Hetfield's guitar tech (or someone claiming to be) has an overview of AxeFX posted on the fractal forums. http://forum.fractalaudio.com/axe-fx-ii-discussion/83548-met...


>You can't get the nuanced expressiveness in a crystal lattice that you can in the free space of a vacuum.

Cute, but at the end of the day it's just different nonlinearities in the transfer function. If you like how ancient technology sounds, that's fine, no need to ascribe mystical properties to it.


There is a difference, like you say (I owned an Axe-Fx). It sounded very good, especially the Plexi, but at the end of the day it sounds like a mic'd amp. You can't make it sound like an unmic'd cabinet, leading to lots of [1] discussion [2] about getting that 'in the room' sound [3]. It sounds pretty much exactly like what you would hear on a CD; it's definitely good at getting that studio mix sound.

[1] http://forum.fractalaudio.com/axe-fx-ii-discussion/75301-roo...

[2] http://forum.fractalaudio.com/amps-cabs/79963-clrs-amp-room-...

[3] http://forum.fractalaudio.com/amps-cabs/70327-frfr-amp-room-...


From what I understand and what I've read on Axe-Fx II emulation, it emulated the circuit components of the amps, including analogue ones, to emulate the signal processing. If that is true, I can see how some aspects of emulation could be worse, but a drastic difference in dynamics doesn't seem possible. I also own Axe-FX II, and can't tell the difference between it and the real amps, in any regard.


Well the majority of people aren't voting and our system is clearly going to shit on a major level. The point is that it's your civic duty to vote, people fought and died for your right to vote, and it's the best non-violent way for you to impact your world. It boggles my mind when people advocate for others not to vote. You know that's what the power structure wants right? An apathetic population. How on earth can people look at our current situation, where the majority don't vote, and say it's working? How can people look at that and say the solution for more people to not vote? I'll never understand it.


it's the best non-violent way for you to impact your world

Clearly parent disagrees that it impacts the world in any way; simply asserting it is probably not going to change their mind.

You know that's what the power structure wants right? An apathetic population.

Not voting does not mean being apathetic, and vice-versa.

How on earth can people look at our current situation, where the majority don't vote, and say it's working?

I don't think parent is saying it's working, or that the solution is to not vote, but that voting or not is irrelevant to the result, and therefore, why bother.


The so-called "civic duty to vote" is really a civic duty to support whatever is done by the representatives chosen by the plurality of voters. As a task supposedly necessary to maintain democratic society, it is lacking in any personal responsibility; and its practical consequence mostly consists in accepting whatever the people in power decide to do.


In Brazil, voting is mandatory. Yet, somehow, massively corrupt individuals get elected time and time again. Take a look at the massive scandal the current president is involved in (who has been cleared of any wrongdoing, go figure). The previous president who was from the same party was paying the congress a monthly stipend to pass his mandates. Somehow, with everybody in the population voting left and right with all their muster, another corrupt leader from the same party was voted in.

It's almost as if the total number of people voting in Brazil has nothing to do with the quality of the individuals running for office within their system...


Of course not. This was some government contractor taking the tax payers for a ride. They could charge $x more per train this way and just through in a shitty gps device. Things like this aren't accidents.


Surely you mean £x more. And you're wrong anyway, this is a standard feature to allow long trains to enter short stations.


It has an SD card reader. You can double the storage for super cheap.


You could even triple it with the new 200GB SD cards, but the performance won't be that great. Not so bad for storing documents and large media, I suppose.

Any idea if it uses one of the many standard-ish SSD SATA or PCIe interfaces?


You can upgrade the NGFF drive in many other chromebooks. I suspect you should be able to do the same for the new pixel. For example, see bubble 4 in the image at the bottom of this page: http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information-fo... I upgraded my ngff to 128GB on my acer c720P chromebook.


This option doesn't seem to be available in Pixel. SSD is soldered.


I have bad news -- the SD card reader on both the new and old Chromebook Pixel is hooked up over USB2 (i.e. max 20MB/sec transfer rate). There is no internal expansion via msata/pcie. And the SSD is soldered down.


Would it be worth putting a large SD card on it, and using a portion of the internal storage as high speed cache?


I guess so. The question is whether it's worth spending $1k on a laptop with such a restriction, vs. just buying a different one for about the same price that's actually expandable.


Perhaps he makes art everyday but simply doesn't publish it.


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

Search: