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

Actually, that source claims it’s a string puzzle.


Maybe because the site is hard-coded for the US imperial system?

Quoting the article: «Bolts are commonly specified by their thread size (e.g. 1/4"-20), and their length. I'm looking for a 1/4"-20 x 1" bolt, meaning that the bolt's diameter is 1/4" and its length is 1", so I select these filters.»


Maybe because the site is hard-coded for the US imperial system?

Why not go to the site and take a look. They, obviously, sell both metric and imperial bolts (and everything else).

It's not like Americans don't occasionally need metric bolts.


> It's not like Americans don't occasionally need metric bolts.

It’s becoming a lot more common than not in fact. Automobile industry for example is pretty heavy on using metric bolts / screws. It’s not a recent thing either, a 2004 F-250 I used to have had many (most?) bolts as metric.


The US automotive industry started their metric push in the 1970s, and was mostly done in the 1980s for everything new. There are still a few parts from the 1960s and before that work just fine and so haven't been redesigned (and thus the bracket it goes on in a mix), but if there was ever need to redesign that part it would be all metric.


This only helps the tool makers. I wrench on Japanese and European cars yet every toolset comes with Metric and SAE sets. It seems to only inflate the parts count without giving you more functionality. The SAE and Metric bits are practically interchangeable.


> yet every toolset comes with Metric and SAE sets

I’ve mostly only seen that really with jumbo cheap quality “Father’s Day gift” type tool sets. If you are buying good quality tools, SAE and Metric are most often sold separately in my experience.


The quote “a work is never finished, merely abandoned” originates from French author and poet Paul Valéry.

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2019/03/01/abandon/


Neutrinos don’t need to go around the earth, so in theory you have a pi/2 advantage over an EM signal when sending to an antipodal location, for instance. In practice of course, throughput is utterly horrible for the reason you indicate.


Latency would also be degraded by the interaction property. The probability that you detect the first packet of neutrinos is extremely low.


All you need is a couple bits, but yeah, making sure it’s the neutrino your buddy sent and not some other one is where it gets complicated.


I think neutrino detectors capture at best something like 10 neutrinos per year or so, so the throughput would be severely limited.


This assumes that neutrinos aren't slowed by a dense medium as light is.

That's a maybe. Still, good point.


We already fire neutrino beams through the Earth's crust, and they travel at the speed of light, and the core isn't that much more dense.


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

Search: