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

> Invasive species thrive in ecosystems that we create.

In some cases yes, in other cases they simply out compete local species.

My country had managed to keep snakes out, but no doubt if they ever took hold here they would thrive in the wild, and harm the native bird population like the invasive stoats have. The invasive stoats live in the wild, far from people.


The book referenced actually provides numbers on this. Invasives out competing local species is a rarity according to the studies referenced in the book.

Here is another perspective too: https://www.vox.com/down-to-earth/22796160/invasive-species-...


How much do you take and how soon before you want to go to sleep?

5grams within 30minutes of hitting the sack.

Phew that is a lot. Do you know of any research that support this much for sleep, and how much the body can tolerate for extended periods of time?

The best I found was this from the European Food Safety Authority

https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.2903/j.efsa....


> Do you know of any research that support this much for sleep I look into it but because I started at a low dose and increase it until I find a dosage that works for me.

I love how refreshed and relaxed I feel when I wake up in the morning when I use it and it increases my sleep time. Its concentration falls as we age and my eyes have got sensitive to monitors again so its not all bad as it reduces my screen time. Taurine, like all chemicals does other things in the body which need to be factored in as well.

Unfortunately modern medicine, which doctors are keen to knock out, often have side effects and they have destroyed what little authority they had with me, which is their own doing.


Thankfully, as has been proven by non-modern medicine, that 5g of Taurine every day has zero side effects.

So instead of burning the gas they will release it into the atmosphere? Or is there a way to cap it and prevent release?

Methane is apparently 33x worse for warming (over a century) than CO2:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/methane-burned-vs-me...


From what I understand (after reading the wikipedia page about it) the crater probably isn't putting out much more methane than the rest of the ground in the surrounding area. Wikipedia says the flames are seen there because the shape of the crater allows the gas to accumulate into concentrations that support flames, while in the rest of the area the gas leaking from the ground is rapidly diluted by the wind, but is nevertheless being released.

Looking at the thing, this makes some sense to me. There are flames coming out the side of the walls of the crater all along the perimeter, from only a few meters below where the surface of the ground would be. The gas is obviously very shallow below ground in that region, and unless the top layer of soil is impermeable to gas I think a ton of it must be leaking out all over the area.


Doesn’t seem too big to cap with a concrete dome rolled in place on rails (similar to the Chernobyl sarcophagus install), with the methane captured and burned off (perhaps even used for electrical generation).

The Chernobyl New Safe Confinement took abot 8 years to build at near 2B USD cost[1]. If fire is put out, a simple geoengineering tarp with piping underneath and dirt on top will do the job. Those are used a lot in covering up old landfills to capture the gas and avoid water leaking in.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_New_Safe_Confinement


Isn't that effective like what the crater is currently doing? It's effectively already concentrating the methane and burning it off before it fills the atmosphere.

Dig a deep enough ditch around it to cut off the fuel. I'm sure Bob the Builder could do an excellent job for not alot!

Or, like, a tarp, but either way you have to worry about the gas going around if you're not capturing it just right.

Can a tarp withstand the heat currently generated? I suppose any material with high heat resistance, low weight, and not too gas permeable would do. Snuff the fire (once capped, it should naturally burn out from a lack of available oxygen), pump and productively burn the gas.

Since this comment chain was about the worry of methane release after stopping the fire, I'm assuming the fire would already be put out if necessary.

Perhaps there is a nearby source of sand.

Or more likely two drones crash trying to put compete each other to deliver a service with an insanely high charge rate.

Yeah, that is something that could go wrong in the US system.

As soon as I read the OP's comment I knew someone would reply to say the dot was not technically required, but I didn't expect to see an actual publicly addressable example!

I actually searched and was surprised no one beat me to it.

Time to buy tulips then? /s

No. Time to sell

> (I used to work on Firefox for Android)

Can you offer any insignt into why Mozilla makes up jump through all these hoops just to install extentions?


Unfortunately it seems that at some point they've also talked themselves into believing that continuing to run add-ons within the main browser process has suddenly become the height of irresponsibility and absolutely and totally unsafe, so a few add-ons are grudgingly permitted with additional scrutiny given during review, but

- they don't want expand that process further, because it's counter to the direction that AMO has been moving (from manual pre-publication review of all public add-ons towards automated checks and only manual post-publication spot checks)

- running add-ons in a separate process as on Desktop isn't possible, because on Android secondary processes can get killed at any time, which add-ons aren't set up to handle correctly

For some reason I've only seen this explanation buried somewhere inside some Mozilla's Discourse forum (I think, if I remember correctly), but I think not much (if at all) as an explanation in the Github issue tracker and certainly never on the official Add-ons blog.

Though I have to admit that even if the above explanation was given a wider airing, for me it already smacks too much of "the safest computer is one you never turn on" and I'd still be unhappy about the add-ons situation and continue complaining.


> running add-ons in a separate process as on Desktop isn't possible, because on Android secondary processes can get killed at any time, which add-ons aren't set up to handle correctly

That's true (though it will probably improve as WebExtensions evolves toward service workers), but engineering wasn't hung up on that.


On the engineering side, there aren't any good reasons. Engineering didn't put in all the effort to implement the add-ons APIs on Mobile only for it to be restricted to such a small set. It's product management's decision.

You are vastly over estimating the hazards under a hood. When opening a hood and looking for a problem, filling up a water tank, checking oil or topping up the radiator the greatest danger is probably somehow not propping the food open correctly or forgetting to let it cool down first and touching a hot part or fluid and getting a minor burn.

Opening a car hood is miles less dangerous than changing a light bulb on a desktop lamp, it's probably even less dangerous than driving the car on the road.


The car managed the terrain, so it couldn't have been that difficult. It strikes me as bizarre that someone stuck in the desert with supplies would engage in experimental engineering rather than a two day hike.

Don't link to his site. He clearly does not want visitors from HN.

In that case he'd IP ban everyone that comes from HN instead, no?

It seems he does, otherwise he wouldn't have setup a message just for users from it. It sends a very clear message.

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

Search: