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

roofs aren't as good at preventing evaporation as pipes, so if that is the point why roof it?

Theres a very narrow balance where canals covered in solar panels make sense.

It needs to have enough evaporation that its a problem, but not enough where it justifies piping it.

That's a very narrow market, and so unlikely to be scalable or prevalent.

Personally i don't think this makes much sense, it's not like there is no room to place solar panels, and the added costs of putting it over water makes it not as efficient. I suppose the main benefit is easy access to water for cleaning (which can then be dumped back into the canal).


it probablz does, it just has a lot more water and less sun and heat so its not as noticeable

> it just has a lot more water

What? France has had to shut down or down rate nuclear power plants because of a lack of cooling water.


Yes, and it still has more available water than a literal desert.

>First of all, it addresses the issue of people in the EU importing things we really do not need.

What right do you have to tell me what i do or do not need?

What an absolutely evil stance to have.


I want to reduce the amount of trash being shipped straight from China to our landfills. And yes, that will come at the expense of some things. Is that evil? In my opinion it is a necessary solution to a problem

I think you are missing the big picture. The ones importing “trash” (as you call it) in relevant quantities are bigger businesses and companies.

Sure, you are in part correct. Fast fashion, cheap electronic that breaks in a few years, and are also problems.

But there can be more problems than one. I'm discussing the one that the article mentioned.


Whats wrong with landfills?

There is no problem here other than your eco-neuroticism. Stop doing evil things.


Ok, so yet another misguided eco-terrorism motivation that does nothing except reduce our quality of life.

No right at all, nor do I, and indeed nobody is asserting or exerting that right: market forces will adjust prices accordingly in order to ensure that customers will be able to make purchases at the market rate (through reshipping companies, for example).

This sort of ad hom attack is a bad look. If OP’s stance is so evil, say why.

It’s ironic to see free trade maximalists, who are often associated with anti-woke, anti-DEI positions, be so “triggered” by protectionist stances. You’re not the first person I’ve seen react like this.

As always, an intelligent, measured rebuttal will go miles further than an emotional outburst. And I say this as someone who (mostly) agrees that tariffs are bad.


Ad hominem is "you're evil therefore your statement is wrong", not "that statement is the mark of an evildoer". And they do "say why": "What right do you have to tell me what i do or do not need?"

Either way, it's no lower in quality of argument than the wild assertion that everyone affected is just "importing things we really do not need" (what does that even really argue or justify?)


They don’t explain why that is evil, it’s just asserted, and in a hysterical fashion at that.

If forcing others to conform to your own morals is not evil, then what is?

Ad hominem? I didnt attack him personally, i attacked his argument that he had a right to tell me what i needed.

He doesnt, and so forcing me to obey him is evil.


> It’s ironic to see free trade maximalists, who are often associated with anti-woke, anti-DEI positions

Goomba fallacy, these are not the same people


Plenty of overlap.

Not what I'm seeing in my woke, pro-DEI, pro-free-trade circles. But I suppose if you generalize enough, anything will overlap with anything else, much in the same way that humans overlap with mammals.

He has he right, as I do, as you do, the same right as any other citizen.

You can feel how you wish. Few dispute one should be free to express themselves in a way that does not impact others. You can do whatever you want in your own head. It is when your views butt against others that issues inevitably arise.

I do not get your point. Is it an issue that I have an opinion on policies that impact other people? Are you against the concept of causing issues?

I think we cause issues all the time. For example, by importing trash that we do not need. It is a part of living. But the we need to address these issues, like a tax on imports. This will inevitable lead to other issues, such as the small scale import of books not being economically viable. But the fact that it causes issues is, in my mind, not a good enough argument against it. Because all things that impact other people cause issues.


My brother, they acquired root on a machine they should not have had access to.

How confident are you that the machines they acquire root on in the future will never hold any model weights?


I’m not saying it’s impossible, I’m saying it’s not the case, _yet_

I've been using it for the past few days, and it runs really well!

I usually get 7 token/s using llama or lm studio, but this inference recipe runs at a smooth 80 tokens per second.

Genuinely very usable, and fully local!


Btw, using llama.cpp you can achieve 55 - 45 token/second for processing/generation. if you use a qwen3.8-27B (IQ4_XS) verison, with decent quality in reasoning for coding/tool usage (with a 16GB nvidia).

I think now most of the struggle is getting a 32B-27B llm to work on 16GB/12GB card, because they are at least affordable/accessible for the time being compared to higher end models.

Recently the nvidia RTX 5090 32GB has reached price range of 7500 dollars (despite MSRP being around 2000 dollars when it was first launched). Crazy times.


Which card are you using? I was getting about 40 with an UD q3 quant with MTP (prediction) enabled and llama.cpp compiled for my compute capability, but was very limited in the context size. I have an 4060 ti 16GB. Wouldn't recommend it as there's a tradeoff between larger context without MTP and about 18 tokens/s.

I got a RTX5080 as primary and a RTX3050 (8gb) as secondary.

I always max out on context size so that means i need to split the model between both gpus + offload some into system ram when using LM studio. I'm guessing that is what accounts for most of the slowdown when i use that.

With this recipe i don't have to worry about it. It's pretty fast, and since its all running in the 5080 with max context it's stable (though i got to look out not to load anything big on the same gpu)


With llama.cpp (CUDA) and a 5060ti (16GB) I get 60t/s with 128K token space. Odd you got 7t/s, did you verify all the model was loaded in VRAM? (--gpu-layers all)

it was but i max out on context so it doesn't all fit with kv cache etc...

7 t/s not sure how you can use this? And if it start thinking a bit. It works yes but that's really very slow. On top it's very low quant that impact the model quality.

> 7 t/s not sure how you can use this

80 t/s - maybe you need to finish reading a sentence before you comment on it?


>It's not easy but it's also not impossible, you have to actually value your privacy enough to do the work of establishing it.

It is literally illegal.

Are you suggesting that we must commit crimes?


Every reasonable person.


You understand that hospitals have more costs than just aspirin, right? Depreciation, amortization, utilities, rent, taxes, maintenance, salaries, etc...

Its all coming out of revenue.


>ACA has saved tons of lives.

The ACA has killed a whole lot more lives than it has saved by causing healthcare costs to spiral up.

If you begin with something that is obviously incorrect and trivially debunkable, perhaps that's indication that you should review your priors.


Am i misreading it, or does it do as good in benchmarks as Opus 4.6?

Am i seriously running something that good locally?

Gotta test it out


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

Search: