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

Some are even worse than this. When I was in Portugal, the machine said "Press (1) for GBP. Press (2) for EUR.", then on the next screen, after you select "(2) for EUR", it says "Rate will Apply. Please confirm. (1) Accept conversion (2) Reject Conversion". If you select "Accept conversion", it overrides your currency decision and you pay in GBP with their markup fee...

It's a complete con...


Oh, that one is weird.

I see this feature in Poland. The choice is clear. Or there is no choice and it is paid in local currency.


I saw the same in an ATM in Greece. The first screen wanted me to let them convert the currency (at a 20% markup), I declined, and the second screen said "are you sure? You might be charged a lot" and had "accept" and "decline" where the small print said "do you want us to convert anyway?".

It was really scammy and I almost fell for it.


That one is not weird. There is an intent to deceive, so it is fraud.

Is there a reason why I'm seeing squares between each of the characters in your message? It's making it pretty hard to read...

I'm using Chrome on Android


The text is crossed out using Unicode combining characters of a strikethrough. This allows it to display without any specific formatting support, but it does require that the font support those characters. The font you're using doesn't support the characters, so it displays boxes, instead.


Firefox on iOS, I see strikethrough but the strikes are at varying heights.


I... still don't understand the issue. It looks like both examples in the table would evaluate to the same thing. Am I missing a stray "\n"?


I tried to work out the problem myself first (using only the text) and accidentally used the diameter as the radius just like ChatGPT! Granted I haven't really tackled any maths problems for many years though.


I'm not sure I really understand this.

If you mean one instance in each pod, then each should be labelled differently and you can filter down to one instance.

If you mean running multiple instances in each pod (and container?), then the standard kubectl log output will also have them all joined together. For both of those, you would need to add another unique identifier to each line, or run each instance in a separate container so you can submit the logs with the pod name and container name combined being the unique identifier.


Have you had a look at AsiaRF[1]? If you are building an access point you are probably looking for more specific cards. You do miss out on things like hardware offloading if you go down that route afaik though but it may not matter due to the extra processing power you tend to get.

I don't know much about it but things like DBDC/MIMO are probably wanted. Other people may be able to comment more about this though.

I just went down the route of using a Banana Pi R3 with OpenWRT in the end though[2]. The R4 does exist now with Wifi 7 though[3].

[1] https://asiarf.com/product-category/wi-fi/wi-fi-module/wi-fi... [2] https://wiki.banana-pi.org/Banana_Pi_BPI-R3 [3] https://wiki.banana-pi.org/Banana_Pi_BPI-R4


Thank you. I hadn't looked at the banana pi - looks interesting.


Is there a way to see the optimal solution? It would be great to be able to see why I'm so bad haha


Not yet. I'm wondering how is the best way to present it without avoiding people to be tempted to skip the daily mystery.


Also, some of us weird folk have both an AMD and NVIDIA GPU in one machine...

Actually, I guess that is more common now that AMD CPUs have a GPU built in?


You could download both binaries for that scenario.


The "Ball on Platform: Edge Balance" one seems super interesting to me.

Is the sample solution just hardcoded or is there some maths behind it to make it work from any location/initial speed?


It's robust. I hamstrung the model solution by forcing pistonAcceleration to be 0, and forcing hingeAcceleration to be 0 during the first second, but it still "caught" and balanced the ball.


Pretty sure he is disputing that it could be 81% cheaper that the original comment said. "Up to 80% cheaper" means 80% or less, not 80% or more.


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

Search: