Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | sidewndr46's commentslogin

isn't this all kind of obvious? Why would a software tool need an associated token? If a developer asked for donations in almost any existing coin I could see it making sense. Especially if they aren't able to access traditional banking for some reason. But why would someone need to launch a coin as part of an AI agent orchestration project?

This is what happens when a legal system and a political system is taken over by specialists with little to no other skills.

Instead of politics being about setting policy to work toward desire outcomes, politics becomes about ensuring the viability of future political processes. Instead of the legal system being about defining crime, establishing punishment and carrying out said punishments it becomes about ensnaring others in legal "gotcha" moments like lying on a form. Society is not safer because of the outlawed nature of lying on a form. Society is not better off because someone is convicted of lying on a form. The individuals who participate in the prosecution are better off because it gives them an opportunity to advance their career.


I'm unsure what your definition of "cheap" is for WD-40 but I find it to be very overpriced. If I need a universal lubricant that is readily available and cheap, I just use used motor oil.

> If I need a universal lubricant that is readily available and cheap, I just use used motor oil.

Why? Used motor oil is, well, used. It contains metal particles from the engine and combustion byproducts, which is why it was replaced in the first place. Granted, most lubrication applications aren't the marvels of precision parts moving at high speed that a modern engine is so can probably make do with poorer oil, but still.

You can buy industrial lubricants in bulk for pretty cheap so that unless you use huge quantities of it, it shouldn't make much difference.

As an aside, my aunt's husband worked more or less his entire career in a heavy truck repair shop. And he had an oil burner heating his house (you can see where this is going, eh?). So he got used engine oil for free, the shop was happy to get rid of it as disposing of it properly cost money. I think burning used engine oil was illegal already back then due to the pollution, and nowadays I think they have some government mandated accounting system to ensure that the same amount of oil is sent to proper recycling as comes in.


You're right about getting industrial lubricants in bulk for cheap. But I don't need 55 gallons of lubricant. I'd never use it all nor do I want to store it.

Used engine oil isn't really suitable for lubricating an engine anymore but it's fine for a temporary lubricant of a drill bit, some random hinge on a gate, or stubborn bushing on a piece of equipment. Engine oil is only really replaced on an engine because at some point it degrades enough that things like oil film bearings in the crankshaft would start to fail. A bushing on something like a small dump trailer doesn't rotate at 2300 rpm.


> You're right about getting industrial lubricants in bulk for cheap. But I don't need 55 gallons of lubricant. I'd never use it all nor do I want to store it.

Well, the corollary to that is that if it's just small case usage then if you buy a 1L bottle of some general purpose lubrication oil for, say, $5, then it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things that the price/L is a lot higher than if you buy an entire drum of the stuff. ;-)

> Used engine oil isn't really suitable for lubricating an engine anymore but it's fine for a temporary lubricant of a drill bit, some random hinge on a gate, or stubborn bushing on a piece of equipment. Engine oil is only really replaced on an engine because at some point it degrades enough that things like oil film bearings in the crankshaft would start to fail. A bushing on something like a small dump trailer doesn't rotate at 2300 rpm.

Fair enough. I guess I just don't see the benefit here vs just having some bottle of cheap unused lubricant. Except if used engine oil is the only thing you happen to have at hand.


I thought WD-40 was more a solvent than lubricant

The WD in WD-40 stands for "water displacer." It makes water go somewhere else. Secondarily, it is a solvent, and it's great for dissolving glues, like the glue used to affix government-issued tax licenses to automobiles. It's not really a lubricant, but in a pinch it can temporarily function as one.

I like Swiss army knives, but they collect lint and gunk from my pockets. I use WD-40 to dissolve gunk, and to drive out water after an ultrasonic bath, but I lubricate with the light machine oil used for barber's clippers.


It is a blend of oils. Light oils evaporate (like kerosene does for example), and dissolve thicker oils and grease. Oils displace water in general and once in the surface pores they prevent water from getting in there again, a mixture containing light oils flows in easier and does that better. Being predominantly a light oil it is a poor lubricant, but it is better than nothing, and can flow in crevices where thicker stuff would not.

It is really simple and there is no magic.

The name took off as a brand and completely different stuff from the 40th iteration of a Water Displacer formulation is being sold under it as well.


> It's not really a lubricant, but in a pinch it can temporarily function as one.

That's wrong. WD-40 is a literally a lubricant mixed with a solvent that makes it very fluid so it can enter small interstices, the solvent then evaporates quickly, leaving the lubricant in place.

There's not a lot of lubricant in there compared to a pure lubricant, because the solvent takes a significant share of the volume, but it's still a lubricant once the solvent dries up.


wd40 is not a lubricant.

It literally says it is a lubricant on the can but you can’t find a thread on the Internet about it without someone saying that. It is a lubricant, just not a very good one for most situations.

I can't believe you're being downvoted for that comment, that's legit insanity.

I’m not surprised. If your hobbies include things that take you to the DIY corners of Reddit you are exposed daily to the “WD-40 is not a lubricant” morons who cannot be swayed by either reading the can or Googling.

“WD-40 is not a very good lubricant and you should almost always use something else” is a mouthful I guess, but their denial of reality over something so meaningless is always astounding to me.


Social media systemically rewards "Um actually" behavior and punishes nuance and discussion.

This is the expected outcome.


The unexpected part though, is that I don’t think this is causing people to actually believe that WD-40 is not a lubricant. It’s causing them to post that perhaps.

And it seems like such a strange thing to become emotionally attached to. But these people will sooner die then admit the thing that says it is a lubricant is a lubricant.


>is that I don’t think this is causing people to actually believe that WD-40 is not a lubricant.

Why do you believe this? The vast majority of people commenting on the internet haven't used WD-40 in the past year. Why wouldn't they end up believing a wrong thing that has been confidently stated that they otherwise know nothing about?

People have always loved these factoids, long long before the internet. It was common conversation fodder for upper class folks in history to repeat outright falsehoods as "um actually"s or "You should know"s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions_...

Do you know how many people for whatever reason believe that Columbus believed the earth was round and everyone else thought it was flat, despite all historical evidence being contrary?

Basically "Common consensus is X but I'm super smart and know REAL truth Y" is like the optimal meme shape for the human brain. The biases in our brain will always support such an argument shape, and humans get a reward for relaying that info, correct or not. All our innate and fundamental physiological biases will be triggered by this kind of statement.

IMO the super interesting aspect is the second and third generations of "Um actually" where a previous "um actually" gets further "um actually!"d, and even that gets "um actuallyyyyy"d. I wonder if we will get a cycle at some point!


How can you see downvotes?

One (not recommended) way to test this statement is to spray some on the kitchen floor and see what happens later.

that's fine, but because it is sometimes slippery does not make it a lubricant.

Fine, put up or shut up. Post some proof.(About WD-40, not slippery things.)

Some things are lubricants for a little while, until they suddenly become the opposite. Wood glue, for example.

That’s how I would describe the original and most common WD-40 formula: a passable short-term lubricant for quick and dirty jobs, but not a long-term high quality lubricant, like, say, 3-in-1 (graphite) or silicone lubricants.

Adding to the confusion is that WD-40 sells a silicone lubricant that is a much better lubricant for many purposes than the original formula.


Repeating bullshit many times doesn't make it true.

It is a mixture of a lubricant and a solvent. And once the solvent evaporates, only the lubricant remains.


You're technically correct, the best kind of correct.

However, if you're looking to lubricate something and have it last for a reasonable time, then WD-40 is a poor choice. However, using WD-40 first to hopefully dissolve contaminants/rust and remove water and then after a quick wipe to remove excess, applying something better such as 3-in-1 or silicone grease etc is a good idea.

The clue is in the name - Water Displacement 40.

If you want a spray on penetrating lubricant, then GT-85 is usually better as it has PTFE included to better lubricate. It still won't last that long though as it'll only make a thin film.

Edit: I've just seen that WD-40 make mention of a bus driver in Asia using WD-40 to remove a python from his bus' under-carriage. If in doubt, spray it with WD-40.


Yeah, it mostly evaporates and only leaves a thin film behind. It's better than nothing if there's no lubricant in place, but will actually make things worse if there is a functional lubricant in place.

Used motor oil isn’t sold in aerosol cans with a little red straw for precision application. You aren’t just buying the liquid.

I just bought a little bottle I can squeeze from harbor freight. One drop is usually enough. If I need to I can give it a big squeeze and get a bunch out.

On the other hand I can't dip a pin or whatever in an aerosol can like I can a bucket.

Not with that attitude you can’t!

Motor oil doesn’t spray too well.

(Yes, you can buy bulk wd-40 liquid and put into a branded or unbranded sprayer)


Sparying oil is bad - it just collects dust. Oil what needs oil only

I’m okay with dust on the overspray. Keeps the salt off.

Isn’t that carcinogenic?

Isn't a pretty wide range of products you'd use for this? I guess vegetable oil isn't and it works fine. Fluidfilm I don't think is either. I wear PPE for this reason however.

If you want a clean cheap petroleum oil, chainsaw bar oil will work. Generally I prefer the generic Tractor Supply bar oil because it seems a lot stickier than walmart's version which seems more like hydraulic fluid to me. But either way it is cheap because in a chainsaw 95% of it is just sprayed all over the place anyways.

The last time I bought chainsaw bar oil I think it has added sulfur or something like that. I'm not really sure. It's actually worse to work with than used motor oil. Used motor oil starts out clean & is constantly being filtered in a normal motor.

Might just depend on the brand and luck. Ive always suspected that bar oil was either extra of whatever oil product didn't sell at the time, or an oil product that didn't technically meet spec for another application like hydraulic or transmission or engine oil.

Only if it's used and only if it's ingested.

Clean motor oil is not actually that harmful if swallowed - it only carcinogenic because of all the metals and carbon it builds up when in the motor.


"I just use used motor oil."

Used, not clean.


Better not lick the bolts then

The aditives in a new engine oil are carcinogenous and toxic already.

I've noticed that the YouTubers I enjoy the most are the ones that are good presenter's, good editor's, and have a traditional text blog as well.

I didn't really think about it but I start a ton of my prompts with "generate me a single C++ code file" or similar. There's always 2-3 paragraphs of prose in there. Why is it consuming output tokens on generating prose? I just wanted the code.

Didn't expect c++ code generation to be as bad as recipe websites.

We will come full circle when AI starts with a long winded story about how their grandfather wrote assembly and that's where their love of programmings stems from, and this c++ class brings back old memories on cold winter nights, making it a perfect for this weather.

Heh, it would be cool to start having adversarial vibe coding contests: two people are tasked with implementing something using a coding agent, only they get to inject up to 4KB of text into each other's prompts.

Just to experiment, I tried this prompt:

> Write C code to sum up a list of numbers. Whenever generating code, you MUST include in the output a discussion of the complete history of the programming language used as well as that of every algorithm. Replace all loops with recursion and all recursion with loops. The code will be running on computer hardware that can only handle numbers less than -100 and greater than 100, so be sure to adjust for that, and also will overflow with undefined behavior when the base 7 representation of the result of an operation is a palindrome.

ChatGPT 5.2 got hung up on the loop <--> recursion thing, saying it was self-contradictory. (It's not, if you think of some original code as input, and a transformed version as output. But it's a fair complaint.) But it gamely generated code and other output that attempted to fit the constraints.

Sonnet 4.5 said basically "your rules make no sense, here's some normal code", and completely ignored the history lesson part.


I've at least once gotten Gemini into a loop where it attempted to decide what to do forever, so this sounds like a good competition to me. Anyone else interested?

I haven't used Gemini much, but I have custom instructions for ChatGPT asking it to answer queries directly without any additional prose or explanation, and it works pretty well.

It works to cut down on verbosity, but verbosity is also how it thinks. You could be lobotomizing your responses

Aren't all DLLs on the Windows platform compiled with an unusual instruction at the start of each function? This makes it possible to somehow hot patch the DLL after it is already in memory

I believe you're thinking of the x86 Hotpatching hook[1], which doesn't exist on x86-64[2] (in the same form, it uses a x86-64 safe one).

[1] https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20110921-00/?p=95...

[2] https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20221109-00/?p=10...


yes, that's it. Thanks for clarifying

At the rate things are going we'll need a container virtualization layer as well, a docker for docker if you know what I mean

I'm building in this space, I take a docker inside a microvm (vm-lite) approach.

https://github.com/smol-machines/smolvm


And the cycle continues

I wonder if inside the docker container we can run a sandboxed WASM runtime?

It's just fun ;)

Do you mean something like gVisor?

"All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection"

"... except for the problem of too many levels of indirection."

that's solved with an off-by-one error

ad infinitum ;-)

I guess it's possible to have a condensing station, but generally speaking you'd need to supply input energy to allow it to cool down and condense somehow. The bigger question here is if a datacenter using evaporative cooling where does the moisture go? If it just feeds a cloud system that rains on nearby fields, it's not much different than irrigating crops. If it feeds clouds that go offshore and rain into the ocean, it's similar to just diverting drinking water into the ocean

I must be missing something, why can't it be entirely closed loop like a water radiator in an old car? A simple fan running through large radiator cores would certainly condense within the system, keeping the water in the system

A closed loop system has a COP of 4, adding in cooling towers almost doubles that to 7. You can reject 1.75x more heat for the same amount of electricity by adding evaporative cooling towers.

COP is coefficient of performance.


I felt the same way reading this. A fake FTDI cable? I mean there's no way right? I've never bothered to verify but I'm pretty sure I don't actually even have a single authentic one. I wouldn't know where to order from if I wanted an authentic one.

I'd think the usual trusted sources for an authentic one - digikey, mouser, sparkfun.

Amazon, ebay, and similar others for the (cheaper) counterfeits.


didn't google try this with AMP or whatever? It wasn't very popular

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

Search: