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

A better reason why wine glasses are not filled like that is that wine glasses are designed to capture the aroma of the wine.

Since people look at a glass of wine and judge how much "value" they got based partly on how much wine it looks like, many bars and restaurants choose bad wine-glasses (for the purpose of enjoying wine) that are smalle and thus can be fulled more.


You might not have a school education, but you have educated yourself. It is unfortunately common to hear people complain that the theory one learns in school (or by determined self-study) is useless, which I think is what the geybeard comment you replied to intends to say.

OK, the real differences between self directed study, and school based study:

1. School based is supposed to cover all the basics, self directed you have to know what the basics are, or find out, and then cover them.

2. School based study the teachers/lecturers are supposed to have checked all the available text on the subject and then share the best with the students (the teachers are the ones that ensure nobody goes down unproductive rabbitholes)

3. People can see from the qualifications that a person has met a certain standard, understands the subject, has got the knowledge, and can communicate that to a proscribed level.

Personal note, I have done both in different careers, and being "self taught" I realised that whilst I definitely knew more about one topic in the field than qualified individuals, I never knew what the complete set of study for the field was (i never knew how much they really knew, so could never fill the gaps I had)

In CS I gained my qualification in 2010, when i went to find work a lot of places were placing emphasis on self taught people who were deemed to be more creative, or more motivated, etc. When I did work with these individuals, without fail they were missing basic understanding of fundamentals, like data structures, well known algorithms, and so on.


Fun article.

The Rush Hour puzzle is quite fun when viewed as a planning problem. In standard PDDL the model becomes very messy. I like the extensions proposed in https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.06312v1 that makes the model intuitive.


While it is possible to self-host small models, it is not easy to host them with high speeds. Many small-model use-cases are for large batches of work (processing large amounts of documents, agentic workflows, ...), and then using a provider that has high tps numbers would be motivated.

Still, I agree that self-hosting is probably a part of the decrease.


I wrote about overlapping intervals a while ago, and used what I thought was the standard math notation for closed and half-open intervals. From comments, I learned that half-open intervals are written differently in french mathematics: https://lobste.rs/s/cireck/how_check_for_overlapping_interva...

We don’t talk about the French notation for intervals. Let it stay in France.

Yep, I agree on that. But still, interesting to see that such a "standard" thing can be so different in different dialects of mathematical notation.

Anything in particular?

Sometimes, that can be the case, but sometimes it takes a surprising amount of insight to make something that is useful. It is often easy to look at a final model and think that it is obvious.

For this problem, there are really three key insights needed to get a useful model

* Adding the exact fill requirements. With some background in constraint programming, this can be obvious, but it is also easy to try to use cumulative instead, and that is as shown not always useful

* The edge-placement restrictions. This is quite an intricate insight that depends on the combined choices available. Also, the first version I wrote for it was wrong in a surprising way that was hard to detect.

* Symmetry breaking for the boxes. This is a standard thing to solve in constraint programming models, but sometimes it is not obvious how to do it. It takes some experience to know that the `lex_chain_less` can be used for this.


Apart from measuring prices from venture-backed providers which might or might not correlate with cost-effectiveness, I think the measures of intelligence per watt and intelligence per joule from https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.07885 is very interesting.



> The classic "fish don't know what water is": what Americans can't see, because they were raised from birth and marinating in it, foreigners can spot more readily by contrast.

Learning that US schoolchildren recite the pledge of allegiance in school baffled my mind when I first realized it was actually true. As an outsider, it sounded like an obvious parody/caricature of nationalism, especially with the religious part.


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

Search: