Live data from Hacker News

Viewing profile — pi-e-sigma

pi-e-sigma

HN member
Joined
Thu, Oct 05, 2023, 5:13 PM UTC
HN karma
344
Public activity
352 items

About pi-e-sigma

No profile information was provided.

Recent public activity

  1. comment
    Comment #40183850

    Is Voice of America good enough for you? https://www.voanews.com/a/ukraine-pulls-us-provided-abrams-t...

  2. comment
  3. comment
  4. comment
  5. comment
    Comment #40012963

    By this way of thinking everything is vital for "security purposes" and you end up with a full autarchy. Food is vital because you can't rely on others to feed your population. And…

  6. comment
  7. comment
    Comment #39849322

    Actually it's not universally true that people working closely together know who is competent and who is not. Because you yourself need to be competent to know if others are doing …

  8. comment
    Comment #39849210

    Hence it's not rational for an employee who wants to get a promotion to be competent at their work.

  9. comment
    Comment #39708757

    another explanation - they did test it in other scenarios but the results were against their hopes so they 'accidentally' omitted such tests in the 'official' test suite. Very comm…

  10. comment
    Comment #39708422

    Modern mobile networks use exactly the same protocol to carry voice and data. Because voice is just data. When your call is fading or being intermittent then the packets are being …

  11. comment
    Comment #39707877

    SYN flood cookies are probably older than me at this point

  12. comment
    Comment #39707808

    You wouldn't force a girl to date you because you know it's not rational. You wouldn't force kids to play with you because it's not rational either. Simple as that. Just because so…

  13. comment
    Comment #39707775

    You made a claim that packet loss in mobile networks is not a common occurrence. This claim is patently wrong and anyone with a smartphone can see for themselves.

  14. comment
    Comment #39707513

    Everyone who is using a phone knows that what you are saying is not true. Otherwise we would not experience dropped calls, connection resets and mobile data being unavailable. Mobi…

  15. comment
    Comment #39707442

    No matter how you try to explain it, trying to force other kids to play with you is not a rational behavior. Rational behavior would be trying to find out why they don't want to pl…

  16. comment
    Comment #39707328

    [flagged]

  17. comment
    Comment #39707260

    They didn't fail. They got their promotions. It's you, the end user, who is left holding the bag. But fear not, HTTP3 is on the horizon and this time it's going to be glorious!

  18. comment
    Comment #39707233

    The parent is just moving goal posts. The whole idea behind multiplexing data streams inside a single TCP connection was that in case of a packet loss you don't lose all your strea…

  19. comment
    Comment #39707164

    Yeah HTTP/2 push is so great that Chrome removed it. Straight from the horse mouth: "However, it was problematic as Jake Archibald wrote about previously, and the performance benef…

  20. comment
    Comment #39707080

    [flagged]

  21. comment
    Comment #39706559

    How about latency of the key press? Why Apple II has practically zero latency and your modern monster desktop is visibly lagging in a fucking text editor? Despite Apple II being li…

  22. comment
    Comment #39706169

    yes, too much to ask for a multi-trillion company, especially that this company was until recently well known for maintaining crazy level of backward compatibility

  23. comment
    Comment #39706134

    It doesn't matter. You can provide the numbers when asked by the proponents of HTTP2/3 'do you have proof of your claim??', they will just turn around and say your real world data …

  24. comment
    Comment #39705993

    I didn't assume they are ignorant. I assumed that the are fraudulent. They knew they couldn't really improve existing protocols because it's simply not possible but moved forward a…

  25. comment
    Comment #39705852

    Enter IPv6. Same arguments, it's 'only' a matter of implementation. 30 years later still most of the implementations are worse than IPv4.