Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jiggunjer's comments login

Wow 60g would take me 20min on my cheap hand grinder.

I used a beautiful wooden Japanese grinder, Hario, because I loved its simplicity. But, same as you, it takes forever. And sadly, I didn't even know it was taking longer than usual as I didn't have a baseline. Try one of these linked below. You can knock out 30g in about 20 to 30 seconds.


Why this over ipfs?

Because I pushed petabytes of data over it for the past 15 years and it never failed me, not once. Simple as that.

One benefit of ipfs is that you can use cloud flare as a gateway, which is pretty cool. Don't know of anything similar for torrents (from a reputable company).

Speaking from my own experience, I've had a harder time getting data from here to there via ipfs. It's been a year or two since I last tried, but as I recall my troubles were the following:

* Transfers never starting, or not being able to exceed kbps. * Large amounts of data makes client performance worse. * Adding data to the store doubles the disk space used unless you take extra steps to mitigate that.

Meanwhile, I can point mktorrent at a folder, load it in my clients, and have it saturate my link within seconds/a couple minutes.

I'm keeping a close eye on IPFS and the Dat Project to take over here (and my use of Syncthing), but I'm hoping some refinement can happen first.

BitTorrent is 20 years old, IPFS only 6. So, might just come down to familiarity. Definitively many more people, even outside tech crowd, have heard of BitTorrent whereas IPFS is still mostly unknown.

Scrolling on mobile stutters.

I always pronounced it rhyming with cloth.

I believe the one big issue with DOIs is they rely on the resource owners to update the centralized database if the resource location changes. So links can still break/rot despite knowing the URN.

Another issue is that it doesn't guarantee the URN (i.e. DOI number) uniquely identifies a resource. So a single resource can have several aliases, potentially confusing discussions or bypassing blacklists, etc.

I think DOI is essentially a URI schema. I don't think there is a technical reason preventing them from being distributed like IPFS, in fact the underlying resources are distributed it's just the URL lookup that is centralized.

Yes, it is a URI schema. FAQ #11, at https://www.doi.org/faq.html

> DOI & URI: how does the DOI system work with web URI technologies?

> DOI names may be expressed as URLs (URIs) through a HTTP proxy server. In addition, DOI is a registered URI within the info-URI namespace (IETF RFC 4452, the "info" URI Scheme for Information Assets with Identifiers in Public Namespaces). See the DOI Handbook, 2 Numbering and 3 Resolution, for more information.

I know little about IPFS. I know a bit more about DOIs.

A DOI maps more to an abstract, mutable resource than a specific document or file. That doesn't seem so easy to express in IPFS.

Take doi:10.1093/nar/gkz173 which I picked arbitrarily. This resolves to https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/47/11/e63/5377471 .

That shows the content of the paper in HTML, with an option to download in PDF.

It also has references to the journal issue, methods to get the citation in various format, a navigation bar for the site, and branding for the journal.

Many of these may change over time. Indeed, the paper itself may change if there are any updates or corrections, without changing the DOI.

Or the paper might be retracted, like doi:10.1126/scisignal.abn0168 which resolves to https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scisignal.abn0168 . The original paper is no longer accessible. (An alternative is to add the equivalent of a big red stamp on it saying "RETRACTED" while leaving the content accessible.)

Finally, I suspect many journals would not accept a scheme which prevents them from charging for access.

Could you explain how IPFS might handle these issues of multiple formats, mutability, and payment?

> The original paper is no longer accessible. (An alternative is to add the equivalent of a big red stamp on it saying "RETRACTED" while leaving the content accessible.)

I think you are slightly confused - the "alternative" that you describe is actually what happened in this case (and in all the cases of retracted papers that I've encountered).

A Retraction Notice has been published at a separate publication [1] with its own DOI, and it cites the original paper [2].

The original paper [2] has been updated to indicate that it has been retracted. In the HTML version, there is an orange banner saying "This article has been retracted". In the PDF version [3] there is a red header, and the retraction notice has been appended as an extra page.

But you are correct that it is important to be able to update PDFs if a significant mistake (or deliberate fraud) is identified.

[1]: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scisignal.abn0168

[2]: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scisignal.aag1064

[3]: https://www.science.org/doi/epdf/10.1126/scisignal.aag1064

Indeed. I misread the retraction notice quite severely.

Thank you for the correction.

As an alternative example, I searched Retraction Watch.

https://retractionwatch.com/2021/09/23/alzheimers-diagnosis-... describes the paper:

> “Intracranial pressure waveform changes in Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment” — which now seems to have disappeared entirely from the journal’s site — appeared in Surgical Neurology International in July.

It points out the paper is still in PubMed Central, at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8168790/ . However, its DOI, 10.25259/SNI_48_2021 , redirects to a 404 page from the journal.

Well, you could still use the multi-hash thing for the identifiers without distributing them on IPFS,

though it would make it much more convenient for people to pirate them, because then people wouldn’t have to look up “what is the multihash for the thing with this doi?” before requesting it on ipfs.

re: mutability you just have the standard be that the document being linked to is a sort of wrapper to the actual one. My guess is this is really what's going on with doi anyway.

But you're correct that the mutability issue is sort of a tricky one.

There's this from IPFS about mutability:


Presumably she felt he was in danger, or his continued presence would create a dangerous situation.


One definition for the word is "Anything that is produced". So yes, all software is a product.

The comment below the article is spot on: this guy is the tigerest of tiger parents. He just didn't care about good grades, but he devoted a lot of time and energy to his kids. As a result they experienced more of life (the humanities in particular) and developed an intrinsic drive to think and learn and perform well.

The one difference with Amy Chua Tiger Parent philosophy, is that her version is "no, you WILL practice the piano and I don't care if you want to or not."

He at least gives lip service to the idea that he would not have pushed them towards something they weren't interested in.

But yeah, as long as his kid at least vocalized agreement to pursue something, he went all in Tiger Parent style with intensely pursuing that goal along with his kid.

Most people associate tiger parenting with the "you must practice the piano or I will hurt you physically, emotionally, or both" mentality. The original tigress was also incredibly restrictive of who her kids could associate with. In contrast, this article just sounds like a return on a sound investment.

I'm not sure why you claim to know the mind of "most people" but another looser definition is just hands-on parenting, which can be authoritarian as in your usage, or authoritative, as in this case.

I also strongly associate the term with authoritarian parenting

I think bike use would pick up if they had dedicated infrastructure in the city. They seem more popular in the suburbs (NT) where there are some dedicated lanes.

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