Honestly US standards can go to hell. I absolutely abhor these monstrosities. They should be outright banned except if specific need can be shown. They are dangerous, take up way too much space, and excessively damage the road.
Your freedom to do stuff stops where my freedom to walk & cycle around without undue fear of death begins.
Attributing "monstrosities" only to the US as a "US standards" doesn't make sense since the consumer trend towards bigger cars is global. It's a consumer trend, not a standard.
In NL, for example, I see plenty of large EU cars driving around with only a very occasional US "monstrosity" like a pickup truck, and I don't even live in the city.
“Because children grow up, we think a child's purpose is to grow up. But a child's purpose is to be a child. Nature doesn't disdain what lives only for a day. It pours the whole of itself into the each moment. We don't value the lily less for not being made of flint and built to last. Life's bounty is in its flow, later is too late. Where is the song when it's been sung? The dance when it's been danced? It's only we humans who want to own the future, too. We persuade ourselves that the universe is modestly employed in unfolding our destination. We note the haphazard chaos of history by the day, by the hour, but there is something wrong with the picture. Where is the unity, the meaning, of nature's highest creation? Surely those millions of little streams of accident and wilfulness have their correction in the vast underground river which, without a doubt, is carrying us to the place where we're expected! But there is no such place, that's why it's called utopia. The death of a child has no more meaning than the death of armies, of nations. Was the child happy while he lived? That is a proper question, the only question. If we can't arrange our own happiness, it's a conceit beyond vulgarity to arrange the happiness of those who come after us.”
YES. The "This is evidenced by the new set of hacker values being almost purely performative" is so incredibly true. I went to a privacy event about Web3, and the event organisers hired a photographer who took photos of everyone (no "no photo" stickers available), and they even flew a drone above our heads to take overarching videos of everyone :D I guess "privacy" should have been in quotes. All the values and aesthetics of the original set of people who actually cared about privacy (and were attracted to it) has been evaporated. All that remained are the hype. It was wild.
SAT solvers are used _everywhere_. Your local public transport is likely scheduled with it. International trains are scheduled with it. Industrial automation is scheduled with it. Your parcel is likely not only scheduled with it, but even its placement on the ship is likely optimised with it. Hell, it's even used in the deep depths of cryptocurrencies, where the most optimal block composition is computed with it. Even your friendly local nuclear reactor may have had its failure probability computed with (a variation of) it. In other words, it's being used to make your life cheaper/better/safer/easier. Google a bit around, open your eyes Neo ;)
PS: Yes, I develop a propositional SAT solver that used to be SOTA [1]. I nowadays develop a propositional model counter (for computing probabilities), that is currently SOTA [2]
Are there open source examples of usage for real world problems, for example train scheduling or something else than software engineering practicioners might find relatable?
Register allocation, instruction selection and instruction scheduling can, with a degree of bloodyminded patience, all be solved with boolean SAT. That's a compiler backend.
I like the higher level CSP more as an interface but those are _probably_ best solved by compilation to SAT. SMT also worth a look.
When I used to work at Deutsche Bahn, the German railway operator, in the mid 2000s as a research student, we were using Mixed Integer Linear Programming.
Author of CryptoMiniSat here :) XOR+CNF is indeed supported by CryptoMiniSat. Which is cool, but if you _really_ think about it, the resolution operator over these two are gonna give you multivariate polynomials over GF(2). So resolution is poor in CryptoMiniSat, because it only encodes one of the constraints that this polynomial implies (i.e. one that can be encoded in a single disjunctive clause). And if you wanna do the _real_ deal, i.e. "properly" solve multivariate polynomials over GF(2) then you are in for a ride -- the all-powerful, much-feared, Grobner basis algorithms, and I am not touching those with a 100m pole, because they are hell on wheels :) I mean... it's possible to contribute to them, and I know of two people who did: https://theory.stanford.edu/~barrett/fmcad/slides/5_Kaufmann... and of course, https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-37703-7_... i.e. Daniela and Alex. It's... rough :D
Thanks for the links to those people. The GF(2) simplifies Grobner bases calculations a lot, IMHO, but I don't have much experience with them either. I am just curious, because to me it now seems to be an obvious way to go. I mean, the fact that we can represent any SAT problem as an intersection of 2SAT and XORSAT problems indicates, there must be some generalization of the both polynomial algorithms. And it seems to me this generalization is somehow related to Grobner bases methods.
I have only very quickly skimmed it, but I wouldn't be surprised if the theorem D.21 in Kaufman's thesis (https://danielakaufmann.at/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Kaufma...) turned out to be true for all the unsatisfiability PAC proofs, not just the circuits she is looking at. (As I commented below. If you're proving contradiction, looking for element 1 in the ideal using Grobner basis, then it seems somewhat unreasonable to require degree of basis polynomials larger than 3, if you start from all polynomials with degree less or equal than 2. If you look what e.g. 2SAT algorithm is doing algebraically, it only needs degree 3 polynomials as well, although the monomial of degree 3 is immediately eliminated. So if the Grobner basis algorithm needs to build large degree polynomials, because no small degree will help you, it's likely your system is already satisfiable. Would really like to see a counterexample.)
Wait, is this another algorithm where they didn't bother even cursorily looking at the classical algorithm for even a minute, then compare it with their stuff? Last time they pulled this, it was my field, and I could only laugh. Just stop this nonsense and start doing some real work. Yeah, I know their "work" seems to be "how to extract money using buzzwords" but it's getting tiring, and I don't consider that "work".
I wish I could tell a story. Alas, I can't. It turns out that large corporations are excellent at hiding evidence of wrongdoing, and will do everything to cover the backside of high-level execs, because stock price matters. When it's bad, the exec leaves for a "better opportunity", and none will be wiser. The stress of the honest, serious engineer(s) remain, and the exec gets a free ride to their next big beautiful step up the ladder. In retrospect, don't follow internal reporting guidelines, and don't talk to internal lawyers. They either are incompetent or competent, but paid to swipe stuff under the rug -- you'll never find out either way. Instead, go to the relevant regulatory agency, write a detailed report to them, and let it play out.
It depends on the country. It’s not possible to operate large companies in Hungary without paying to the prime minister’s family. When I lived there, I signed a paper at a large multinational company as a simple developer. The paper’s only purpose was to channel EU funds to the family. I was naive, and I thought that it’s a real project, with real work. It wasn’t. Later I realised why some of my coworkers were against it, but I didn’t believe that that company would go down on that route. I was really naive.
It's extremely fucked up that the EU has this kind of kleptocratic autocracy in its midst not only stealing billions but actively sabotaging its operations, when people have been warning about Hungary for 15 years (the Tavares report is from 2010 I believe).
It's funny seeing America, and making the same mistakes. We're humans after all.
The transition in Hungary was really seamless. Step-by-step. The Tavares report was still mainly about possibilities. The laws and the new constitution were already there to use them, but they still didn't use their full force. They could pretend that it's a democracy. They still pretend it, and most Hungarians still believe it, even when the government rules by decree for over a decade now, with elections with not equal playing field at all (opposition needs to win over 10% to be 50-50 with the ruling party).
And they're on the next phase. There is a new opposition leader, and it's way more difficult to pretend democracy now. The most interesting is Orban's used to be supporters. They switched like nothing. One day, an opposition adjacent podcaster was satan itself, the next day, "she's all right after all". One of my friend and his siblings argued against Orban with their parents for more than a decade, then the switch was instant. The parents will still choose badly next time, for the bad reasons, and they will allow to happen this again. When MAGA collapses, you can expect the same thing. There won't be any self reflection.
I am happy they demonstrated how useful these devices are. Marking these as "disposable" is a kind of insanity. I recovered a few of them "disposed" (i.e. "randomly thrown away into") in an empty flower pot, and took out the LiPo batteries from them -- which are rechargeable, and have charge circuitry (non-trivial for LiPos). That we somehow decided that it's OK to design these to be used only once feels wrong.
This is the opposite of repairability. We specifically made them impossible to reuse and refill. Makes my tinkerer (and eco-friendly) heart very sad.
There are reusable vapes and reputable stores carry only those, but they are generally many times more expensive than disposable vapes, which are favored by smugglers (profit margins) and underage users (price point and potential seizing by parent/teacher/police).
Disposable vapes put young people in contact with career criminals and organized crime, who will be only too happy to oblige even if the customer has no money. The result is young people in debt to criminals, which has the exact same ramifications as getting in drug debt. Those young people can then be coerced to commit other crimes to cover their debts.
My reusable vape cost like 15$. It's basically the same components as a disposable vape, except I can refill a pod and switch the pod if I burn the wick.
Well, lucky you, I guess? Here they are considered tobacco products and taxed as heavily as cigarettes. I think the cheapest models are around $50.
That amount buys 10-200 disposable vapes from China, depending on how much you order at once and whether you care about the quality. Meanwhile, street resale prices are about $20 per vape. Smuggler’s heaven.
The smugglers / bulk sellers do sell to school kids, who then resell to their friends and even online (telegram most probably). Seen so many teenagers walk over as a random car pulls up to exchange vapes for cash. Even seen a big time dealer arriving at a teenager’s house party in a new, expensive car with a trunk full of vapes, accompanied by muscle, talking about how many of each flavor the customer is going to buy.
Maybe things are better on the other side of the big puddle, even if it means the same things are sold quasi-legally.
>"Disposable vapes put young people in contact with career criminals and organized crime, who will be only too happy to oblige even if the customer has no money. The result is young people in debt to criminals, which has the exact same ramifications as getting in drug debt. Those young people can then be coerced to commit other crimes to cover their debts."
This feels like pure fearmongering, and it's not even believable when most people here grew up around cigarettes, dip, or vapes in secondary school throughout the decades, and the dynamic was never anything like what you’re describing. Nobody was getting shaken down for cigarette or vape debts by “organized crime.” It was usually just some older kid or significant other, ex-student, or friend with a hookup who’d buy a pack or device and resell at a small markup. Sometimes it was even just a straight favor.
Trying to paint disposable vapes as a gateway to mafia debt collection just doesn’t square with lived experience in the US. Plenty of us experimented with nicotine products when we were underage - or know someone who did, and while that had its own health and legal issues, coercion into crime to cover “nicotine debts” simply wasn’t part of it lol
--
More people get into organized crime from their local Wal-Mart denying their job application as their only realistic ways to make money from labor, than ever do from nicotine products
what country contradicts my statements? Where in this world is getting spotted a Geek Bar equate to a severe debt that requires crime to pay off? Absurd premise.
Obviously it isn’t about a single vape. A bulk dealer wants to get rid of stock as quickly as possible, so they don’t expect a payment up front. Say it’s a box of 200 vapes. Then, someone steals it from the teenage vape dealer. Now, the teenager is out $4k in income but expected to pay $1k to $2k to the bulk dealer. That kind of debt to organized crime balloons fast; there are no controls on the interest. After a month of non-payment the amount owed may exceed $10k. At that point, the teenager can easily be coerced to commit additional crimes, including but not limited to hard drugs and murder.
I’d like to stress that this is not hyperbole, such things are documented to happen.
The conversation was about a single vape, and casual use, in the first place.
And yeah, I bet that's happened before, just like I bet a day-trader who ran on margin has lost all of his savings, house, cars, and wages through garnishment. That doesn't mean it's how 99% of situations, even in trading on margin, goes.
Even as it relates to underage dealers - even the stupid ones, a very few amount of teens buy in bulk - let alone do it only to fail on sales and get coerced into crime for payback. Not to downplay, the old "ATL" story like that is definitely real shit for illicit drug selling. But for vapes/alcohol/sanctioned (but legal and readily-available) substances? C'mon now. The market's there, but the incentives for coercion (due to the commodities being readily-available) are not.
I'd sooner assume that a story like that is a teen that's making a BS "blame the system" excuse for the fact that they actually bought vapes in bulk, squared it away, wanted to make more money than that hustle could offer, and voluntarily graduated to higher crime on their own. Fair play if they pull the excuse off, though - they've got us talking about it.
What does somebody buying hundreds of vapes to resell and then having them stolen have to do with individual customers, which was the original premise?
Everything you said is wrong. Refillable vapes are around the same price as disposables and kids get them from gas station attendants that don't care. What's this about organized crime?
Even in the US, selling to kids is illegal in most states, so the same issue applies: kid can't buy vape at store, kid goes to adult who is likely to be criminal to get them to buy for them, now kid is vulnerable to exploitation.
There's a pretty amazing video where a guy makes an entire functioning e-bike battery out of disposable vapes that he gathered around a music festival. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcVp9T8f_W4
I can't fathom why disposables are legal. Really believed that the post-boomer generations actually gave a damn about waste.
I like to start doing like this, but as you can see I'm like most people here don't have experience on electrical or electronic equipment
do you have an idea where I can start doing shit like this??? not up to professional of course but as a hobby where I don't need to electrocute myself would be nice
Building an e-bike battery from some random trash is a terrible idea. You won't electrocute yourself, but you are very likely to burn down your house when one of these cells randomly decides to ignite.
That we somehow decided that it's OK to design these to be used only once feels wrong.
But clearly they can be reused, so maybe it's better that they be thrown away by the unknowing, giving those who do know a source of cheap (as in free) electronics?
I work on a (once top-of-the-line) SAT solver [1] and a (currently top-of-the-line) model counter [2]. Actually, I am very interested in the part of the rebuttal of "when each constraint has at most two variables, then the constraint satisfaction problem (and even the more difficult problem of counting the number of solutions) can be solved in time less than the lower bound that is claimed" -- in the model counting competition [3] there are actually problems that are binary-clause only, and I have to admit I am having trouble counting them any smarter than I already do normal (i.e. >=3 length clause) problems. Is there some very fun algorithm I'm missing that I could use for only-binary clause solution counting? I have thought about it, but I just... can't come up with anything smarter than compiling it into a d-DNNF form, which most SOTA model counters (and so I as well) do.
I'm also with Sparkasse and it's the worst. Their digital systems and their technical understanding is the bottom of the barrel. On the other hand, the "most digital bank" in Germany, N26, a so called "neobank" has laughable security [1]. It's a huge mess over here. I used to also bank in Singapore, the difference is night and day. Fun story: Sparkasse has an integration with a stock brokerage, and the stock charts are PNGs generated at the backend. It's literally 1995-level HTML usage, One can only laugh.
Your freedom to do stuff stops where my freedom to walk & cycle around without undue fear of death begins.