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

It's hilarious that they blame localisation and not Turkish insanity for these deaths.

Gizmodo's article did suggest banning knives from the homes of stupid people, Turkish or otherwise. Sadly, I don't think this degree of insanity is that unusual anywhere.

The governance types maybe don't inhabit HN in high numbers.

Or simply don't care.

The low-effort metacommentary on what all of HN is supposedly doing or saying is what 2026 HN is really about.

Or no more hot drinks. Ban kettles.

Global population approximately: 8.44E+09, Energy to heat 1 liter of water in electric kettle: 80 watt hours, 1 Watt hour ~ 2.78E-15 exajoules. Global energy consumption approximately: 600 exajoules.

8.44E+980 watt hours(2.78E-15 exajoules/watthours)= 1.88E-03 exajoules 1.88E-03/600 = 3.12E-6 or .000312% of the global energy use.

In simple words. Banning kettles would do nothing to cut global energy use.


Isn't that only the energy of 1 liter per person per year? I think most people heat more water than that.

(Also I think bitcoin energy usage is also on the order of 0.001% of global energy use.)


Thanks, you're right, I'm off by x365. But still it's a very insignificant value.

A quick search says 200 TWh for bitcoin mining per year, out of a total of 31 000 TWh of electricity generation, that is, 0.6%, or 600 times more than what you thought.

The Comment above used energy consumption of 600 exajoule.

200 twh = 0.72 exajoule

0.72/600 = 0.0012

Which is off by 100 because I forgot to multiply by 100 for percent, so 0.1%.

But if we are in twh we can get the tea numbers as well: ~300 billion liters per year, with ~100Wh/litre that would be ~30TWh.

So 30 vs 200 is about as close as I expected.

But this is all just for fun.


> I won't want to be beholden to them and their whims forever.

Who's keeping you beholden to them now?


When did Cloudflare ever do this?

It's reasonably common if you take any kind of privacy preserving actions or really anything that makes you less identifiable.

I'd say cloudflare is less bad about it than some, but I worry my privacy preserving measures might simply be defeated at this point.


Just using Firefox is enough these days. I can't even book a train ticket on Firefox anymore. "Your behavior is similar to a bot. Try to log in to your account or use a different browser." My >10y tenured account with dozens of prior undisputed orders apparently does not matter as much as my user agent.

How does that relate to "Cloudflare will next decide to lock me out of half of the web for my crimes of using a free browser", though? Seems to be unrelated?

If I get locked out or get served captcha after captcha on Firefox (with or without my ad blocker and extended tracking prevention disabled) but everything works flawlessly on Chrome there's really only one conclusion I can draw.

Well, no, there are multiple. Thinking it's punishment for using a free browser is unsupported by your description.

I only use Firefox with tracking protection on and the DDG extension on, and it always works for me.


"using a free browser" = "take any kind of privacy preserving actions"

If you use an odd/fringe browser you are more likely to be caught by CF Turnstile and be locked out from websites.


Perhaps, but not as a punishment for using a free browser.

Whether it's on purpose or incidental doesn't matter.

Punishment is something done on purpose.

Not always, see e.g. "punishing heat", i.e. sense 2 here: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/punishing

I was using that sense, and being hyperbolic with "crime". Cloudflare can cause bad outcomes for browser heterogeneity without any malicious intent whatsoever.


No, that's nowhere in the definition of punishment. A system can be constructed with strongly normative attributes that punish anyone trying to not conform with the norm, without any intentionality behind it.

You've just defined punishment with your definition of it.

You must have some conception of why these measures exist, and else this sort of tool will be helping. Surely.

They are meant to block abusive mass onslaughts from armies of bots, not agents of individual users acting in good faith.

Indeed.

If you've got something to say, say it.

> Prompt and competent response, as expected from bunny.

Call me pathologically unbiased, but I doubt this same article written by Cloudflare would get this response.


Cloudflare's incident response usually gets high praise from HN. Look at the remarkable lack of hate here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45973709


> Somewhere along the way, tech stopped asking questions like that, and now, people are hostile to the suggestion that the question should be asked.

People never stopped asking this sort of thing, and you can find some people who are hostile to anything. 'Twas ever thus. Constructing a cherry-picked, wistful narrative is not very helpful.


That seems a pretty weak signal. Individuals like presenting stuff and going on jollies.

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

Search: