yagibear

Nature has a more detailed article https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-00383-3?s=08 describing why they chose petunias, and propagation via cuttings.

It's mentioned in an expired Internet Draft https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-schwartz-add-ddr-forwa... which refers to https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/canary-domain-use-appli...

A free Mariner’s Weather Handbook https://setsail.com/mwh.pdf

ranked by check outs p.a.:

rank, title, total check outs, date of publication, check outs p.a.

1 Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone 231,022 1998 10501

2 The Snowy Day 485,583 1962 8372

3 Where the Wild Things Are 436,016 1963 7649

4 The Cat in the Hat 469,650 1957 7455

5 To Kill a Mockingbird 422,912 1962 7292

6 1984 441,770 1949 6222

7 Charlotte's Web 337,948 1952 4970

8 Fahrenheit 451 316,404 1953 4722

9 The Very Hungry Caterpillar 189,550 1969 3717

10 How to Win Friends and Influence People 284,524 1936 3387

Data from https://125.nypl.org/125/topcheckouts which mentions other factors, such as shorter books having higher turnover.

It seems that that work didn't make much impact because it sat as a tech report and wasn't published until 1987, by which time Perlman had published her algorithm that received more exposure in SIGCOMM in 1985.

Never heard of since it was last discussed on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17436591

This could be useful for design problems if they were cataloged or tagged, e.g. identifying input as rotary or rectilinear, and type of output.

Radia Perlman's books ("Interconnections" about switches/routers and "Network Security") are great at explaining why with a sense of humour.

Archived at https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20170417232443/https://jour... or use the Google cache version from the web link at the top of the thread

Thanks

Could you please name some? There seems to be an even bigger bunch of apps that do plain drawing, and it can be hard to find the needle (apps that convert rough sketches to clean line art) in the haystack (many apps for sketching; most just replicating the paper experience on a screen without adding functionality). Thanks.

Why is it that so many people (such as this author) use participation rates as an indicator of equity? I understand gender equity to refer to equal TREATMENT of different genders, which is quite different from having equal NUMBERS of both genders in the workplace. Some differences in participation rates MAY be due to gender inequity, but some may also be due to other factors such as innate differences between genders (a crude example: perceptions about the meaning of prerequisites as mentioned in the article).

The first proposed "solution" merely promotes participation rates as a measure of gender equity, and the 2nd proposal "Provide female entrepreneurs with..." just adds another form of inequity. Only the 4th proposal seems truly gender neutral and constructive.

"doesn't require complete concentration" is key. Many people new to watching cricket expect continuous stimulation, which it is not. It is more a meditative repetitive cycle of spaced intense activity. And it's amazing how many jobs you can get done in 30second ad breaks between overs.

People who compare cricket to baseball ("baseball on valium" as Robin Williams said) generally miss the variety that is made possible by bouncing the ball off the pitch, which greatly enriches the sport.

Domain-Specific Languages, not Digital Subscriber Line

TLDR, anyone?

Traditionally the smarts that determine how the network is used (e.g. optimising routes) were provided by the network devices, bundling hardware and software. SDN allows the control to be separated from the hardware, rendering the hardware a basic commodity. Cisco traditionally sold devices/hardware, and would struggle to compete with commodity hardware. Cisco are trying to respond by strengthening their software.

For discussion see later submission https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8004244