<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: fabian2k</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=fabian2k</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 22:38:09 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=fabian2k" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Factorio 2.1 Experimental Release"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I had the same experience with the platforms when I first played Space Age. But this depends entirely on how you scale your Nauvis factory before you start launching rockets. You don't want to start too small, if you rush to rockets too quickly the beginning of your space exploration will be tedious.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 18:41:42 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48737355</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48737355</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48737355</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Factorio 2.1 Experimental Release"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>You never want to burn fruit itself since that wastes the seeds. So you always want to process fruit the first step.<p>I limit fruit production based on the number of fruit on the belt, to avoid creating a huge buffer. But after that the factory just runs continuously at the same speed. And if I have too much of a final product, it gets destroyed or burned for heat and electricity.<p>One benefit, especially in the beginning, is that by processing more fruit you get more seeds. And you need the seeds to expand your fruit production later.<p>The enemies are probably one of the not ideally designed parts of Gleba. It's trivial to handle them if you know how, and can be very frustrating if you try to approach it the "wrong" way. If you have been to Vulcanus and Fulgora you can trivialize their threat.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 18:37:03 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48737286</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48737286</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48737286</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Factorio 2.1 Experimental Release"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Limiting production is probably the most difficult way to play Gleba. The easier way is to minimize buffers and have a path to extract spoilage at every position where it could accumulate. And to never, ever have the factory stop at any point in time.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 18:18:24 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48736946</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48736946</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48736946</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Factorio 2.1 Experimental Release"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The big changes are presented in the Factorio blog, read FFF #421 to #423 here to get an overview:<p><a href="https://factorio.com/blog/" rel="nofollow">https://factorio.com/blog/</a><p><a href="https://factorio.com/blog/post/fff-441" rel="nofollow">https://factorio.com/blog/post/fff-441</a><p><a href="https://factorio.com/blog/post/fff-442" rel="nofollow">https://factorio.com/blog/post/fff-442</a><p><a href="https://factorio.com/blog/post/fff-443" rel="nofollow">https://factorio.com/blog/post/fff-443</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 18:04:25 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48736689</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48736689</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48736689</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Factorio 2.1 Experimental Release"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>It's already faster even without that because it now uses mixed content rockets to build ships and platforms. But space-to-space logistics do mean that you can make rocket launches less bursty and continually ship stuff into space to then use it.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 17:56:33 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48736544</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48736544</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48736544</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Factorio 2.1 Experimental Release"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I don't think the developers promised more here, but the community might have overhyped itself as it is common. It's still a very solid .1 release, the improvements to space logistics and platform building are very nice. There's also a whole bunch of really nice circuit additions.<p>Gleba is different, but I think that is good in a game that is as long as Factorio. There's a bit of a bumpy difficulty curve here if you approach Gleba in certain ways. But it is very different mechanically than the base game or the other planets in a way that is interesting, at least to me.<p>It took me two or three iterations when I first landed on Gleba. But afterwards my factories there were more robust than on the other planets and almost never stalled or broke down. And solving that was quite satisfying.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 17:49:53 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48736426</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48736426</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48736426</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Why did this journal retract two 1940s papers by Max Planck?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>it's really a bit of a different concept in scientific publishing, not actually plagiarism. The problematic part is publishing the same results twice, because it increases the burden on reviewers and inflates your publication count. It's also just messier if the results are in multiple places since it makes it harder to follow where those results were used and cited.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2026 12:59:26 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48718709</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48718709</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48718709</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "FDA advisors unanimously vote to approve Moderna's mRNA after agency drama"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The COVID19 vaccines were the most-discussed vaccines ever. And there was an enormous amount of coverage for the potential side effects. Recommendations were adjusted based on new data.<p>There was also bad communication on the topic, often when politicians got involved or due to outdated information continued to be repeated. But there certainly was a lot of public discussion about the risks of the vaccines, they were simply vastly outnumbered by the benefits of the vaccines.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2026 08:37:10 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48627444</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48627444</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48627444</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "U.S. science is in chaos"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>What happens right now is vastly different than before. Of course there are different priorities in funding for each administration, but those are usually more gradual shifts and especially don't cancel running grants arbitrarily.<p>And if you think this administration is prioritizing science with actual applications, I have a bridge to sell to you. The cuts they made are not sensible policy, they are inherently destructive and wasteful. They aborted studies that were still running, so a lot of money was spent and we'll never get any results from that because they were not finished.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 11:02:30 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48568595</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48568595</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48568595</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "U.S. science is in chaos"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This administration is both fundamentally anti-science and wants to enforce political control over all government institutions. Science was never a particularly stable work environment, but the sheer insanity you have now makes it a deeply unattractive place. You have no idea if your grant might be denied, or even canceled at any point later by some political commissar that doesn't understand science.<p>And it's not just particular topics they hate, they hate the entire system and institutions. And they try to either break them and force them to adopt their political views, or they attack their funding or use any other powers to dismantle them.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2026 10:45:08 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48568441</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48568441</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48568441</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Is Meta destroying its engineering organization?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> 30-50% of engineers on core teams have been forcefully reassigned to data labeling and RLHF, upsetting folks even more.<p>This really doesn't sound believable to me, but who knows with all the craziness going on. Software developers in the US are seriously expensive, using them for data labeling would be a waste of resources. And the percentage sounds very high, unless "core teams" is only a small subset of the total developer count.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 17:41:19 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48558963</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48558963</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48558963</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "New way of making espresso with ultrasound"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>If I read it correctly, they did espresso and filter taste tests at room temperature (thought they don't state the exact temperature, and how they managed to brew filter coffee with the described setup). Overall the press release is somewhat misleading in what the goal is until the part you mention. If the focus is industrial production of cold, mixed coffee drinks I'd have expected more quantitative measurements instead of taste tests. Testing how well your coffee is extracted is pretty trivial with the right equipment.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 09:40:44 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48552799</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48552799</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48552799</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Making espresso with ultrasound"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>But people want to drink coffee/espresso hot, not room-temperature. So you have to heat the water afterward anyway. I'm not seeing that much potential for energy savings here, unless you're comparing setups with large boilers inefficiently used for small amounts of coffee.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2026 09:29:44 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48552715</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48552715</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48552715</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Curl will not accept vulnerability reports during July 2026"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>It's up to the employer, they can ask for a doctor's note from day 1. Many employers have more lenient rules, though.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2026 10:27:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48539234</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48539234</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48539234</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Looking Forward to Postgres 19: It's About Time"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Some kind of versioning is extremely important for certain use cases. And having it a core DB feature makes it easier to show that you implement that checkbox.<p>One thing I'm wondering about is the performance of temporal tables for the common case, when you only query current rows. When you manually version tables, one strategy is to have a second table that contains archived versions. So your main table only has the current rows, avoiding a performance hit for having many versions per entry. Is there a way to do this with temporal tables? For example partitioning between active and old rows?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 20:14:16 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48508945</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48508945</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48508945</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "The U.S. Is Terrorizing Cuba to Make Rich Men Richer"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Should the Cubans that will inevitably be killed along the way be thankful as well? Or the Cubans currently suffering due to the blockade?<p>Even for clearly despotic regimes, overthrowing them is not the obviously right thing.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 12:38:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48489537</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48489537</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48489537</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Postgres by Example"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Appears a bit too superficial to me to be useful. It groups topics very weirdly (bool and timestamp, uuid and JSONB) and there is almost no detail in each topic.<p>Explaining text column types without mentioning limiting length with constraints instead of using varchar also seems a bit questionable to me.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 18:05:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48480253</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48480253</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48480253</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Looking Forward to Postgres 19: Query Hints"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>You can manually add more advanced statistics in PostgreSQL. That includes statistics over multiple columns.<p><a href="https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/planner-stats.html#PLANNER-STATS-EXTENDED" rel="nofollow">https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/planner-stats.html#P...</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2026 08:12:08 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48458144</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48458144</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48458144</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Why Custom Attributes in .NET Give Me Nightmares"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>yeah, there's plenty of ways to do that. I like having the attribute there so that there is a strong hint that some magic is happening somewhere with that class.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 16:32:44 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48372510</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48372510</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48372510</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by fabian2k in "Why Custom Attributes in .NET Give Me Nightmares"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The only case I've used them was to mark classes that I need to find via reflection and do something with them. For example a migration system where you want to load all migrations that are defined and check if you need to run them. Of course you don't really need an attribute for that, but I find it helpful to leaven a marker on the class that there's something else going on there.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 15:39:44 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48371690</link><dc:creator>fabian2k</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48371690</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48371690</guid></item></channel></rss>