Yes, they are duplicates, although the links themselves are distinct. The current post points to my website, whereas the other points to my Git project. But they are indeed duplicates, in the sense that both refer to the same project.
Further, this post is from a new account with no posting history that has copied my submission (along with the exact wording) from <https://lobste.rs/s/hjipba/>. Copying the wording is no problem at all. I appreciate the visibility this post is bringing to this rather little project of mine. But I am not sure whether this post was made by a genuine user or by a bot. Any clarification from the poster or the moderators would be helpful.
I am also worried that one or both of these submissions may get flagged as duplicates. I had submitted the project myself earlier today at <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47422759> but it did not gain any traction. I have emailed the moderators to ask whether it would be possible to merge the multiple stories into one.
I'll tell you what I specifically and intentionally do when I need to change lanes. I brake slightly, signal, and wait for the person on my right or my left to pull ahead of me, then change lanes immediately _behind_ them. Then sit there for a moment until my following distance evens out a bit.
This ensures that
a) I do not cut anyone off accidentally, and minimize the amount of stress in my immediate part of the universe
b) I will (most likely) have plenty of room behind me after I change lanes, reducing chances of anyone else running up on me
c) If there's noticeable traffic, the time I spend signaling and waiting for the person to move slightly ahead of me gives plenty of warning to the people _behind_ them that I'm about to enter the lane.
Ultimately, yes, of course in principle you're right, when I change lanes, I enter the lane in front of someone.... but I _can_ control whether I enter as far as possible ahead of them.
You shouldn't be braking when changing lanes is what I was taught, you should be matching the speed of the lane you're merging to. There are many drivers who think that braking is always the right solution, when sometimes it's a little more gas.
And in inclement conditions, it can make the difference between losing control of your vehicle or not. When you brake, you decrease your steering ability in most cars. Fine when its calm and sunny in CA, not so much when it's icing over near Ashland OR on the pass.
Well, sure - braking is mostly relevant when merging to the slower lane, when merging to faster lane I generally do not need to - since that lane is already moving faster, just need to speed up slightly and time it for the right moment.
My point is, it feels safer and easier to aim to enter a new lane with the aim of "following" someone, rather than trying to rush in "ahead" of someone. But maybe it's just me.
Since people are posting links to alternatives, another awesome source is the noun project. Has a mix of royalty-free, Creative Commons CC-BY-3.0, and paid license icons.
This is a very cool app and list of resources for learning Japanese. Does anyone know of similar top recommendations for learning Chinese (Mandarin or Cantonese?)
I believe Yomitan has Chinese dictionaries available for it but I don't know much about it. I would like to add Mandarin/Cantonese to Manabi Reader before long.
While I agree that the training/learning ecosystem is pretty heavily centered in Python, going from that to "Ruby is awful" seems like a very drastic jump, especially if we are talking about the LLM interaction only.
I probably wouldn't write a training system in Ruby (not because it's not doable, just because it's not a good use of time to rewrite stuff that is already available in python ecosystem)... but hooking up a Ruby system up to LLM's for interaction is eminently doable with very little effort.
I am assuming your situation had some specific constraints that made it harder, but it would be nice to understand what they were - right now your comment describes a more complicated solution and I am curious why you needed it.
You don't need it until you need it, and needing it often comes in the form of a lightning strike from blue sky. The counterargument is that having everyone pay a higher amount makes it feasible to actually have this coverage available, when needed, without bankrupting the insurance companies, because the rare astronomically expensive care is covered by the premiums paid by the vast majority of people who are relatively healthy and are unlikely to need it.
Now whether the on-paper prices for medical care in this country actually have any relationship to objective reality is an entirely separate question of course. In general coming from an outside perspective, combining healthcare and for-profit motives in a single system seems particularly likely to lead to all kinds of perverse incentives, but, it's the system that exists, and it seems unlikely to change any time soon.
What I don't understand however is what IS actually expensive about the care itself?
Doc will get paid his normal rate, $500k per year (maybe more maybe less?)
Nurses all get paid something between 100k and 200k (maybe more maybe less?)
Then we hear about these surgeries that cost 100k.
What exactly is costing 100k for 5 hours of knife and time in a bed?
Wildfire, I understand, there is no way to re-materialize a house for less than (what is basically a fortune these days). But time and materials for a surgery seem to me that it should cost 5k at most?
And at those rates, wouldn't everyone just pay like $15 a month? And if the answer to this question is malpractice costs, can we have two plans:
> They almost exclusively compare their model to prior models from 2024
As another comment here noted, the title is missing (2024) - this model was released almost a year ago, last December, so it's not surprising that that's the models they compare to.
