<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: Delk</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=Delk</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 05:39:47 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=Delk" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "A macOS bug that causes TCP networking to stop working after 49.7 days"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> I’m still at where when I connect external hard drive or SSD via USB, use it and then eject it, I shut down the MacBook Pro completely before I unplug the cable. Just in case.<p>That sounds... a bit paranoid? At least on Linux (Gnome), if I click to "safely remove drive" it actually powers off the drive and stops external mechanical drives from spinning. No useful syncing is going to happen anyway once a hard drive no longer spins. A modern OS should definitely be reliable enough that it can be trusted to properly unmount a drive.<p>> For the laptops that I actually carry around and plug and unplug things to etc, normal amount of time between reboots for me is somewhere between every 1 and 3 days. Cold boot is plenty fast anyway, so shutting it down after a day of work or when ejecting an external HDD or SSD doesn’t really cost me any noticeable amount of time.<p>I personally don't reboot my laptop that often, but it's not because of a boot taking too much time. It's because I like to keep state: open applications, open files, terminal emulator sessions, windows on particular virtual desktops, etc.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2026 21:41:15 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47667572</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47667572</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47667572</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "What came after the 486?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>A lot of that probably came down to the motherboard chipset. IIRC Intel made their own chipsets for the Pentium III and they were good and reliable. Athlons were coupled with chipsets from VIA and whatnot.<p>Some of those chipsets were fine and others were less reliable or compatible. The quality of the drivers for each chipset may also have mattered.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 20:23:15 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47535251</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47535251</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47535251</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "10% of Firefox crashes are caused by bitflips"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I almost never get Firefox crashes on Linux, and I don't remember seeing significant slowdowns with text boxes either, at least not simple ones.<p>How long are the inputs that you get problems with?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2026 13:05:02 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47274479</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47274479</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47274479</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "RAM now represents 35 percent of bill of materials for HP PCs"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>If running low on memory seems to matter less now than it did a couple of decades ago, I'd rather say that's because fast SSDs make swapping a lot faster. Even though virtual memory and swapping were available even on PCs since Windows 3.x or so, running out of memory could still make multitasking slow as molasses due to thrashing and the lack of memory for disk cache. The performance hit from swapping can be a lot less noticeable now.<p>Of course compression being now computationally cheap also helps.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2026 15:14:56 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47167184</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47167184</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47167184</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "Banned in California"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>What do you do to address health concerns before they become ER-level?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2026 14:44:59 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47166807</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47166807</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47166807</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "I verified my LinkedIn identity. Here's what I handed over"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> Remember, a hash is a "one way function". It isn't invertible (that would defeat the purpose!). It is a surjective function. Meaning that reversing the function results in a non-unique output.<p>This is a bit of a nitpick and not even relevant to the topic, but that's not the reason cryptographic hashes are (assumed to be) one-way functions. You could in principle have a function f: X -> Y that's not invertible but for which the <i>set</i> of every x that give a particular y could be tractably computed given y. In that case f would not be a one-way function in the computational sense.<p>Cryptographic hashes are practically treated as one-way functions because the inverse computation would take an intractable amount of time.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 22 Feb 2026 10:50:26 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47110003</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47110003</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47110003</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "How far back in time can you understand English?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> biwepe(?)<p>Probably beweep; lament, weep over.<p>> pinunge(?)<p>This is explained later on the page. "Where a modern writer would say he underwent torture, a 1200-era writer must say that he suffered pinunge instead."<p>I also couldn't understand this one although the word "pining" did come to mind, apparently not totally off, as that has apparently come from the same ancestor. Didn't help me figure out the intended meaning, though.<p>> No scar(?) is never hit(?) forgotten, not uuhiles(?) is libbe(?).<p>I guessed this meant something along the lines of "[?] shall I never [?] forget, not while I live". I didn't figure out that "uu" is actually "w" until that was explained, so it escaped me that "uuhiles" is "while[s]", though.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 22 Feb 2026 01:36:42 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47107181</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47107181</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47107181</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "Reverse Engineering Sid Meier's Railroad Tycoon for DOS from 1990"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I think Transport Fever is of a slightly but significantly different genre.<p>Railroad Tycoon is a strategy game with competition whereas Transport Fever is pretty much a building and optimization sandbox. Even Transport Tycoon falls more in the latter category, IMO, despite superficially having competition even in single player. (I haven't played OpenTTD in a long time so I don't know if the AIs are nowadays competent enough to make the competition interesting.)<p>In RRT, with cut-throat competition enabled your company can even be opportunistically bought by the competition if you aren't careful. You can also be driven out of cities by rate wars. Some of the other strategy aspects feel perhaps a bit artificial -- you can't cross the other companies' track, for example, so you can effectively cordon off areas from competition. Nevertheless, those competitive strategy aspects add a significant edge to the game.<p>I've also played a lot of Transport Fever. The competitive aspect, even if against the old and cheating AI, is probably one of the reasons I still end up returning to the old Railroad Tycoon now and then, though.<p>Some of the technical limitations of the original are somewhat frustrating, though, so I find the reverse engineering effort really interesting.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2026 00:27:18 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47068365</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47068365</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47068365</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "The RCE that AMD won't fix"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>It actually says "hacking <i>on</i> one of our programs", which makes it even more obvious that it's using the word closer to the positive traditional hacker culture sense.<p>I'm sure that still looks unprofessional to some people, just like any jargon that isn't corporatese does.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2026 16:23:27 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46914827</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46914827</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46914827</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "Eat Real Food"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>If humans are considered apex(-ish) predators, it's because there's mostly nothing "above" us in the food chain. We aren't typical prey for any other animal, so we are at the top-ish.<p>It doesn't mean the diets of humans are biologically supposed to consist of huge amounts of meat.<p>Most apex predators are of course obligate carnivores. But humans are probably near the top because the use of weapons and tools makes us highly dangerous, so most land animals are wary of humans. Even many predators don't prey on humans for food.<p>(Although some large land predators do, mostly when they're desperate for food.)</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2026 16:22:01 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46542853</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46542853</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46542853</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "Linux is good now"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Games that require kernel-level anticheat will probably try to detect VMs and refuse to run.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2026 02:43:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46460814</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46460814</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46460814</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "Loss32: Let's Build a Win32/Linux"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I remember not getting Close Combat 2 (from 1997) running on Windows 10 some years ago but I did getting it running under Wine, albeit with some tweaks.<p>Whether that was a Windows compatibility issue or potentially some display driver thing, I'm not sure. (90's Windows games may have used some DirectDraw features that just don't get that much attention nowadays, which I think may have been the issue, but my memory's a bit spotty.)</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2025 19:11:46 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46447241</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46447241</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46447241</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "GOG is getting acquired by its original co-founder"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> Im pretty sure I read in the past GoG still sells you a license to a game in perpetuity, rather than ownership<p>Just about every commercial software license says the software is licensed, not sold.<p>Of course the practical difference is in whether you can trust you'll be able to keep using the product indefinitely or have to rely on the publisher's goodwill.<p>(Also, whether the idea that a software product is only licensed and not sold is legally valid of course depends on the jurisdiction and legal interpretation. IIRC back in the day some people tried to argue that you couldn't resell a game or other piece of software you bought on physical media because the software was only licensed to you, not sold. That argument didn't necessarily fly.)</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2025 10:06:28 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46431516</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46431516</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46431516</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "AMD entered the CPU market with reverse-engineered Intel 8080 clone 50 years ago"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I'm guessing that was a 286. I think Intel parts topped out at 12.5 MHz but AMD and Harris eventually reached 20 or even 25 MHz. I still have my original PC with a 12.5 MHz one.<p>The difference with the 386, I think, is that AFAIK the second-sourced 8086 and 286 CPUs from non-Intel manufacturers still made use of licensed Intel designs. The 386 (and later) had to be reverse engineered again and AMD designed their own implementation. That also meant AMD was a bit late to the game (the Am386 came out in 1991 while the 80386 had already been released in 1985) but, on the other hand, they were able to achieve better performance.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 25 Dec 2025 17:34:08 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46385818</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46385818</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46385818</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "Some Epstein file redactions are being undone"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Probably the Underhanded C Contest (<a href="https://www.underhanded-c.org/_page_id_17.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.underhanded-c.org/_page_id_17.html</a>) but yeah. Obfuscated C Contest entries usually aren't underhanded, just intentionally obscure about what they do or how they do it.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2025 04:42:09 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46372524</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46372524</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46372524</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "Microsoft will finally kill obsolete cipher that has wreaked decades of havoc"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>That replaces number two and is the correct alternative in most cases.<p>There are cases where a password manager may not solve the problem, though. It doesn't help if I forget my disk encryption or work AD password and I need to be able to login before I can get to the password manager in the first place. Enterprise IT is also where you find some of those frustrating password policies, such as long and complex passwords with mandated changes every month or two, and where you usually can't choose your management tools.<p>Of course those particular passwords usually get typed so often that remembering them isn't much of a problem. And password managers work well for pretty much all secrets that aren't needed that often.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2025 20:20:38 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46358530</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46358530</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46358530</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "Great ideas in theoretical computer science"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>For what it's worth, my computer science degree also had courses and projects that included requirements analysis, breaking down the problem, and elements of software engineering methodology and project management. (I believe we had a course titled "software engineering" even though the university doesn't award engineering degrees.)<p>I suppose in some schools computer science programmes might be fairly distinct from engineering ones. However, it seems that in lots of places a bachelor's in computer science is rather an generalist degree that covers lots of (mostly software) tech topics and some CS theory.<p>I'd still have trouble calling myself a software engineer, though, since I don't technically have an engineering degree, even though in lots of places my job might be described as such.<p>I also don't know a single programmer/developer whose job is distinct from field 2.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2025 23:12:44 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46332061</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46332061</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46332061</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "Great ideas in theoretical computer science"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I haven't looked at leetcode in a long time but if the problems require e.g. rebalancing a tree, I honestly don't remember how to do it and might not be able to reason it out on the spot either. I have no problems with concepts like recursion or computational complexity though.<p>It sounds like leetcode problems require either memorization of a significant number of algorithm design patterns or seriously sharp algorithmic problem solving skills.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2025 22:57:59 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46331947</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46331947</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46331947</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "Microsoft increases Office 365 and Microsoft 365 license prices"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I can't think of any official documents I'd be getting in Office file formats. Forms are mostly web ones or in some cases PDF, read-only documents are PDF. <i>Maybe</i> you can submit some documents or attachments in the Word format as a citizen but I wouldn't be surprised if PDF is already required anyway, or an image format for scans.<p>I'd be more worried about document interoperability between government agencies and other organizations such as companies that do work for the government. The government could of course mandate contractors to use an open source office suite which would extend the need for training to those companies.<p>Also, I've seen some orgs make heavy use of Office formats in terms of e.g. surprisingly elaborate formatting, document history and comments, and although I haven't tried to use those in LibreOffice, I wouldn't be sure it supports all of those in the same extent some people have learned to use them in Office.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2025 17:26:16 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46207723</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46207723</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46207723</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by Delk in "Bikeshedding, or why I want to build a laptop"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>There are lots of ways of "just not working" but IME the problem with corporate Windows laptops is often the enterprise software crap on them rather than the hardware, necessarily.<p>My work laptop with a high(ish)-end AMD laptop CPU and reasonable hardware quality drains the battery in a couple of hours. It also doesn't feel any faster than my personal three-year-old more lightweight (also AMD, same brand) laptop. In some cases the private device is faster despite its lower specs. Its battery would also easily last 5 times longer than the work one, probably, if I used it on the road.<p>(Incidentally, the poor battery life isn't much of a practical concern with the work device either because I need to use it at the desk 98% of the time anyway. But I can certainly see how crappy software and configurations can make using those devices a pain.)<p>> Give me something solid that will last 5 -6 years with a serviceable (I don’t care if it’s glued or torx’ed or whatever in, just as long as it’s replaceable) battery, and I don’t care if the RAM and SSD is soldered to the chipset.<p>I'm okay with that, even if I'd personally prefer the serviceability. But I'm honestly not okay with the idea that it's fine to just toss a laptop after two years. I want people who do that to get their own planet.<p>Also, an 8 GB RAM upgrade makes little sense nowadays but a 16 -> 48 GB or 32 -> 64 GB or 32 -> 96 GB upgrade can actually make an otherwise reasonable device better if the amount of RAM becomes a bottleneck.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 07 Dec 2025 13:46:49 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46181652</link><dc:creator>Delk</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46181652</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46181652</guid></item></channel></rss>