HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | mulanroo's commentslogin

She has now asked three times, in 2023 about his voice, in 2025 about the videos, and again today. What changed between them is not the technology, it is what she is asking for. The first time it was stop. Now it is have some shame. That is someone who has worked out there is nobody to appeal to, only an audience, and asking an audience for restraint has never scaled. The enforcement falls on the family, personally, every round, because it does not fall on anyone else.


The reason this keeps getting reinvented is that the physics only half works. Sound disrupts the flame's boundary layer and separates it from the fuel, but it removes almost no heat. The fuel stays above its ignition temperature, so anything hot nearby relights it the second the speaker stops. DARPA demoed this in 2012 and it stalled there. Impressive on a small liquid fuel fire in a lab, very hard to scale to anything you'd actually want to put out.


Yes, I kind of discovered that in a dream, in which I extinguished a fire by teleporting away oxygen. It worked, until I stopped teleporting. The oxygen came back and the fire started again. When I eventually woke up I thought about it and I told to myself that I should have chilled the place, not that it matters in real life. I was also proud of my subconscious' understanding of physics.


I wonder if one could use a thermal camera (or some other, high speed sensor) and some kind of feedback loop to squelch it and keep it disrupted until it cools. Or conversely, manipulate the flame for more complete combustion (in industrial processes).

But granted, I have trouble seeing this work on a large scale without much more sophisticated sonic wave tech.


Same application spectrum as CO2 fire extinguishers I'd imagine (which we use for expensive lab hardware that we don't want to get damaged by water, foam, ..., but which are utterly useless for anything more substantial becuase it just reignites).


One thing I didn't know before reading this: an unusually large effect size can itself be a red flag. You don't have to understand all the statistics to at least notice when a result looks almost too good to be true.


It is interesting how all these famous non-replicating psych paper results feel reasonably intuitive to me. Like I can buy that having a more structured and detailed deadline helps you procrastinate less. I can even buy that doing a goofy little "power pose" exercise kind of hypes yourself up to give some self confidence and do better on an interview or whatever.

You would almost expect the opposite and that all the famous studies would be the ones that run counter to intuition. Maybe those get more replication attempts, or people feel less confident faking them.

The direction is intuitive, but the effect sizes are, as you say, unusually large. I'm no statistician, but if you have an effect size that's several multiples of the standard deviation, that would mean that it dominates the natural variation in results right? So you're kind of making an implicit claim that other factors in play (for eg in this proofreading task, how busy someone is or their reading level) are peanuts in comparison.

Further, if there are these relatively simple factors like how a deadline is expressed that make you several times better, you'd expect anybody who stumbles into several of them and stacks them together to be absolutely off the charts. Somebody who listens to Mozart, gets the right priming, doesn't deplete their ego, and receives short deadlines is suddenly like 50X more productive, which doesn't seem to match reality.


Your exact intuition about the implausibility of many large effect sizes is called the “Piranha problem” by my favourite statistician Andrew Gelman first here in a blog post: https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2017/12/15/eats/

And then as a published paper: https://sites.stat.columbia.edu/gelman/research/published/pi...

> how many explanatory variables can have large effects on an outcome?


This is one of the things that did in Jan Hendrik Schön.

I can't remember the exact measurement but he was showing a set of curves that were simply too neat for a relatively small sample size - roughly 100 or so plastic transistors. In reality you cannot get that neat an effect without a huge sample population


Motorcycles are everywhere in the Philippines, and there are far more now because of delivery riders. They make sense here: they get through traffic and park anywhere. The tradeoff is the roads, which can be rough, and riders squeezing through whatever gap they can find. Accidents are common. I don't ride myself, but it's obvious why so many people do.


I've never cooked a steak. Not once. It feels like one of those foods where getting it wrong means you've just ruined an expensive piece of meat, so I've always let a restaurant take the risk. This post makes me think I've probably been overthinking it.


Watch Alton Brown’s Good Eats on cooking steak. It takes less that 10 mins cooking time and it’s easy. That gets you 80% of the way there and then the rest is fiddling around for personal taste.


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

Search: