Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

98% isn't much

whynothugo.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 367 posts

Re: 98% isn't much

#261

Post by ClumsyPilot »

This is a basic ontological error, author conflates reliability and suitability

>> If a website uses fancy new browser features and works for 98% of the population

>> If an employer pays their employees 98% of the times, I definitely wouldn’t want to work there

Are you sure about that? 2% of the population has no bank account, will your employer agree to pay in cash?

These are different scenarios -> your employer likely cannot pay some percentage of the population; but that’s not the same as the process randomly failing (which may be worse or better depending in some cases)

Re: 98% isn't much

#262

Post by debo_ »

BoxOfRain wrote: post #149
card_zero wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meanwhile in Britain in the 1960s, this cost-cutting closure of local rail lines did happen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_cuts ... at a time when the trains and rail infrastructure had been publicly owned for about 15 years already. It doesn't dispel the incentive.

I have never heard the name Beeching spoken with more venom than in Wales, I used to live in Mid Wales and now I live in Cardiff. If I wanted to visit where I used to live by train, I'd have to do a multi-hour detour of a sightseeing trip around the West Midlands, deep into England. The Beeching Axe literally cut Wales in half and the consequences are felt to this day, even though there wasn't much outright salting t…

Are you saying they were Beeched Wales?

Re: 98% isn't much

#263

Post by rvba »

zamadatix wrote: post #259
londons_explore wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of people with old android phones with no free disk space using ancient browsers. There are plenty of people still using windows 10 with updates turned off or wedged for whatever reason. These people just use the sites that work. They aren't computer experts, and might not even realise why half the internet doesn't work - they just think that's the way things are.

I think you're conflating "old device" with "10 year old browser" here. E.g. for: > There are plenty of people still using windows 10 with updates turned off or wedged for whatever reason. It'd be "the pool of people who installed Windows 10 immediately in the launch year but somehow accidentally blocked their browser from updating in the 10 years since, weren't able to fix the issue as the web slowly stopped working…

When will Microsoft stop doing Windows 10 security updates?

I have a 10 year old laptop with 32GB of RAM, GTX 970 6GB and an SSD. For many things it is better than any 16GB work issued laptop (that often come with integrated cards - so you wont be able to run any AI model on them). Although the old ssd is starting to show its age (perhaps a full system reinstall would solve this, other option is to get a new one).

The old laptop does not have UEFI so it could not get the (free for some time) Windows 10 to 11 upgrade.

I am smart enough to install Firefox on it and update it, but the official Windows 10 updates will stop coming soon.

I was effectively kicked out by Microsoft because my device is "old". Even if it is beefy enough to browse the internet and watch youtube.

Note that I bought a new beefy laptop now that I hope to use for the next 5+ years (hopefully more), but who knows if they wont come out with some new idea, like UEFI 2.0 for Windows 12 - that again will mean we need to buy new hardware and new windows.

On an unrelated note I want to turn the old laptop to a linux machine - for fun and learning, but dont have the time for that.

Re: 98% isn't much

#264

Post by groby_b »

"Truly robust engineering isn’t about what works for most; it’s about gracefully handling the edge cases"

Not really. Truly robust engineering includes a cost-benefit analysis of which edge cases you handle. We don't live in a world of unlimited time & money.

Re: 98% isn't much

#265

Post by tombert »

When I had appendicitis seven years ago, I went to the emergency room, found out I would need surgery, and was (I think understandably) scared.

I texted a friend about that while I was waiting and he, trying to make me feel better, said something like "Dude, appendectomies are pretty routine, there's probably like a 99% survival rate" for them.

That that did not make me feel better. If I asked you to guess a number between 1 and 100, and you guessed corrected, I would only be a little impressed. 1 in 100 things happen all the time!

Obviously, I didn't die, and it worked out pretty routinely, but I always think about that particular situation when I hear about things being "98% successful".

Re: 98% isn't much

#266

Post by panny »

sneak wrote: post #181

Venues did kick out a lot more than 2% of their existing customers until they upgraded their bloodstream. Website visitors can upgrade their browser.

>Venues did kick out a lot more than 2% of their existing customers until they upgraded their bloodstream.

Only temporarily. Some never mRNAed their bloodstream, then everyone with brain fog forgot about the Trump vaccine and the new normal went back to normal.

Re: 98% isn't much

#267

Post by crudgen »

The problem I encounter more frequently is: Advertised number is high %, then after considering all risks and terms and conditions it is sub average.

Re: 98% isn't much

#268

Post by rvba »

It feels as if OP independently invented the concept of six sigma.

Six sigma is a bit cultish, but overall the concept is quite clear - quality.

98% in a restaurant is horrible, because restaurants usually issue more than 100 meals per day. So 2% rate would mean a problem every day.

Although usually the distribution here would be different 98 good days and 2 bad where hundreds get food posioning..

Re: 98% isn't much

#269

Post by tedggh »

When you work on high availability, mission critical systems, 99.99% uptime is unacceptable. That’s a full hour of downtime in a calendar year.

Re: 98% isn't much

#270

Post by Natfan »

londons_explore wrote: post #72
bradleybuda wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s very difficult for the average person to use a ten year old browser; in fact I’d offer that the only way to use a ten year old browser is to be an expert and do so intentionally.

There are plenty of people with old android phones with no free disk space using ancient browsers. There are plenty of people still using windows 10 with updates turned off or wedged for whatever reason. These people just use the sites that work. They aren't computer experts, and might not even realise why half the internet doesn't work - they just think that's the way things are.

> windows 10

or windows 8[.1], or windows 7, or windows xp... there's a lot of old hardware out there, not every is rich/tech savvy (see also: old people) enough to purchase a new device even 10 years later

Post reply on HN