jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
I agree -- the 4.1 jumped out at me, along with the 0.8 fT4 (just barely within the lab normal 0.7 -- 1.5).

Interestingly, the thyroid tests from July 2009 have a TSH of 0.12 and a fT4 of 1.7 -- savemylife, was your thyroxine dosage decreased after the July 2009 tests? If yes, you might want to get your endocrinologist to put you halfway between the two dosages.

I agree with greatreorx that this is almost certainly not the only thing going on, though -- but in keeping with Hickam's dictum ("Patients can have as many diseases as they damn well please") you shouldn't ignore the possible contribution of thyroid issues simply because they can't explain everything.
The dueling speculation with regard to how close (or far) you need to be from an MRI scanner ignores a few points. First, the attractive (translational) effect is not strictly a result of the strength of the magnet, it is a product of the magnet strength and the magnetic spatial gradient (or, by analogy, the 'steepness' of the magnetic field).

Contemporary MRI scanners use what's referred to as 'active magnetic shielding' which means that the magnetic field is 'girdled' and held closer to the scanner than it would be if we just let it follow the cube-of-the-distance drop-off rate. This increases the 'steepness' of the magnetic field, but pulls it closer to the body of the instrument.

One of the major factors regarding attractive force is the object that is being pulled. The longer it is (not so much the 'bigness' but the length), the greater the potential pull. The attractive force is a result of the difference between the magnetic field as experienced by one end of an object and the field at the other end. The greater the difference (a product of the steepness of the field and length of the object), the stronger the attractive force.

So, theoretically you could take a 2D ferromagnetic filament and, if you turned it so that it didn't cross any of the magnetic flux lines, the attractive force would = 0. Keeping the center in the same location but rotating the filament so that it crossed flux lines, presto, attractive force!

If you're looking for more information about magnetic projectile accidents, I suggest you check out http://mrimetaldetector.com/blog/2010/02/mri-projectile-acci... and the other posts.
Forstall was never in the running to become CEO after Steve.
The direct line was setup following the Cuban missile crisis because the critical communications took far too long (12+ hours) to arrive.
oh sorry, i meant when i regain connection after losing internet
Consider adding to your list the normalization of pseudoscience for profit, especially practices like Chiropractic that are allowed to masquerade as a legitimate profession. A lot of lobbying had to happen to make this our reality.

https://www.nytimes.com/1972/11/19/archives/7-years-of-lobby...
Similar to mine https://github.com/rurban/ctl

But mine are very close to the STL with generic iterators/ranges and algorithms over containers.
It creates stress, but an insignificant amount compared to everything else in your life.
The top 3 graphs are all you need:

"Growth in productivity and hourly compensation since 1948"

"Real GDP, Real Wages and Trade Policies in the U.S. (1947-2014)"

"Real family income between 1947 and 2016, as a percentage of 1973 level"

As for the remaining graphs, for a number of them;

>The lines aren't adjusted for inflation in the same way, which makes the gap look worse.

In spite of this discrepancy, the outlooks experienced over these decades are still even worse than they look.

Nixon was quite bent on the effort to remove the potential for building middle-class wealth any more for unionized workers. His people didn't like the way it had already occurred to a good extent before he got there. The objective was to not only stop but reverse the trend.

And unionized workers were paid much more than average plus had some excellent benefits which were so essential to an upward class move that non-union companies had to mostly have similar benefits even while lower average wages prevailed.

So it took them and all average-paid-or-lower workers down by removing cash buying power directly from their earned income & savings. Not just a notch like levying income taxes & instituting the Fed to remove gold from circulation as legal tender, then prohibit its possesion, and the subsequent currency devaluations had done much earlier in the century. Instead was the most devastating thing they could come up with at the time since income tax and central bank had already been done, and they had all the gold in the US under their control. Generations after the safety net of silver had been a lost memory after the Founding Fathers' wise reliance on both silver & gold as the standards when designing US currency to begin with had been compromised leaving only gold.

By 1976 average people had lost half their wealth and with hindsight much more than half their wealth potential, just like it seemed was going to happen back in 1971. While the truly wealthy mostly lost half their dollar-denominated wealth too, but they were still rich and their outlook has done nothing but improve in spite of the devaluation of the dollar.

Everyone else was set back decades and here we are.

Never did it seem like there was any objective other than inequality being preferred over prosperity, even for the top Wall Streeters who numerically lost more millions than any working person to the market crash [0], and inflation which had to be accepted as never-ending at the time, from that point forward until a major reckoning.

Still overdue but the wealth removal from the general population needed to continue without more inflation after a certain point or the graphs would have gotten really revealing much too early for those who had yet to cash out.

[0] was watching it live on a Quotron:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotron
I have been writing a grant proposal for months

I am also supposed to have finished it months ago, but I really have no idea what I should write there. The current grant from my PI expires in two weeks, and then I have no funding
React is far from being stable. It deprecated a lot older API, added entirely new concept of hooks.

If one wants stability, then PHP has a way better track record.
I'm employed in one of them and it is a very bureaucratic, political environment. Our facilities are dilapidated despite the billions in funding, resources are so wastefully spent, there's a lot of siloed equipment, a lot of unused equipment, and it's not unusual to see the lab fund the same project twice but run by different people. I would be so curious for an audit to be done to the lab just to see how misspent the money is.

This place I'm in is top-down research. The research ideas that one proposes have to be aligned with certain wishlists and pre-determined directions. It's not a place of innovation, but stagnation. This national lab feels more like a jobs program for phds, but with a sisyphean twist, it lacks vision.
Huh? It obviously means he wish he had owned more TSLA shares because they've gone up so substantially. Actually, it means even less than that. It's simply an acknowledgment of the fact that TSLA has risen so substantially.

Of course, the entire discussion is stupid because Bill Gates almost certainly does not pick individual stocks to invest in. In fact, I bet he does not do any of his investments anyways. He has extremely well paid investment managers to handle all that for him.
At the time, Knuth was exclusively using a PDP-10, "SAIL", running the WAITS time-share operating system. If you look at early ARPAnet maps, you'll see that maybe half of the machines were DEC PDP-20's; certainly at Stanford, MIT, CMU, etc., the first machines to be connected to (what was to become) the Internet were.

One main goal of the 1980's TeX rewrite was to make it as portable as possible, to support other popular architectures of the day. C wasn't available for DEC PDP mainframes; IBM 360s didn't have a C compiler at the time, either. PL/I, Algol, etc. were also not universally available. So, based on the fact that the Hedrick Pascal compiler existed for the PDPs, and a general notion that a reasonable Pascal was, or would soon, be available for VAX/VMS, IBM, and Unix (the gpc front-end for gcc), the choice was made. By the way, at the time it didn't seem like PCs and Macs would be viable platforms, being so memory-constrained (TeX wanted a whole megabyte to run in!) so that wasn't a big part of the consideration. And Unix workstations (Sun, HP, etc.) weren't yet really a thing yet.

It wasn't a super-comfortable decision, but seemed like the best choice at the time. Partly because of this, TeX is written to use just a subset of the Pascal language, so as to keep things simple, and thus ultimately translatable into other languages if necessary. It turned out that DEC eventually made a very good Pascal compiler for VMS, and similarly for IBM; but GPC lagged, and the popular Unix ports of TeX are based on C translations of TeX's Pascal code. Ditto for (all? some?) of the PC and Mac versions.

But, to your point, yes, all the various compilers of the time had their own work-arounds to the "default", "fopen", etc. problems. The fact that they chose different syntaxes wasn't a big issue, being easily addressable via the "WEB" macro language Knuth wrote on top of. Much more of a pain was Pascal's virtually useless string functionality and poor memory-management that required laborious work-arounds, resulting in code that is difficult to modify and debug. It's a real shame that standardization of the features needed to make Pascal a language that was really suitable for cross-platform production code didn't happen in time to make a difference. All of the code Knuth writes has been in C (via CWEB) for quite some time now.

[Edit: tried to say "star"-nix, but that made everything \it, so switched to "Unix".]
AWS employee here. When I was an AWS customer I was also often surprised by the quality of the support answers. Now from the other side I can explain why: even on the cheaper support plans it isn't uncommon for difficult questions to make their way back to the relevant team and the answer you are getting was often written by an engineering manager or engineer on the team that built and operates the thing you were asking about.

Obviously there is a balancing act here to avoid slamming the engineers with too much load answering support questions, but it is not uncommon for customers to be getting answers from the people who built the thing. And on my team at least we always try to use support questions to know where we need to improve documentation with more troubleshooting steps, etc.
They've been on top since the invention of mass media. The internet is eroding that.
I agree that torx is useful. It's also an international standard.

Pentalobe is not an improvement over torx - torx was arguably working fine for Apple, but they decided to invent and start using a proprietary, non-standard screw anyway. The consensus at the time was that Apple did this to deliberately make it harder to get into their products.

The only reason you can find them now, 12 years later, is because third parties started to make the hardware, because it turns out getting into Apple hardware is something a lot of people eventually want or need to do.

Apple's attempt to lock you out of your own hardware didn't work, because ifixit and others spent tens of thousands of dollars on custom tooling. It was a big deal at the time, the hardware wasn't available anywhere, let alone at a hardware store.
Honest question:

Is the argument that, as a developer, I should be able to construct a large building with 1-person apartments the size of prison cells, say, if there is a market for that? Should the only limit be restrictions imposed by fire safety policy or similar?
I've been thinking of something similar: a super lightweight (n)vim machine using Raspberry Pi (originally RaspPi Zero but performance went through the floor with my number of vim plugins, so likely a beefier one).

I think the lack of syntax highlighting is going to be the major hindrance for me moving forwards.
>"Like they always have"

You have a short view of history, my friend.
Loved my BBC Micro model B. 32Kb RAM was a luxury back then.
It was attached to a huge black and white 1970’s TV as real computer monitors were very expensive back then.

Planetoid was my go-to game. Got me into BASIC programming and 6502 assembly.
I highly respect Bruce Schneier, but he obviously has no clue on current subject like most anybody else.
Submitted yesterday, and discussed at great length:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2011021
I hadn't thought of it. Did you?

I did: "One that I've mentioned in almost every post here for ages, a service that I can take a photo, it does OCR and feeds the text into Google translate. Bonus points if it does source-language-detection. More bonus points if it is actually usable in a foreign country on real live things like signposts, menus, timetables, advertisements, book covers, leaflets, etc." - me, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=569838

Nearly two years ago, travelling in a foreign country with an iPhone, knowing Google Translate existed, knowing OCR existed, and not being able to do anything with that knowledge.

(It's so rare that I hit this kind of advance view on things I'm going to be shamelessly happy about it. NB, I'm not claiming anything here - I couldn't write it and didn't try).
For a single isolated transaction that may well be fine; when (for whatever reason) there is only one possible vendor - the last parcel of land blocking a scheme for example - that vendor is using the law (of private propoerty in that case) to exploit the other party quite as much if they choose to hold out for an unreasonable sum. The whole purpose of this system is to determine a fair means for the transaction as a whole to proceed without either party being able to unreasonably exploit the other.
No, that's really what Ed's like. He's also _really_ not OK with you smoking up to relax ("You have trouble reading and writing and 'rithmetic, so you need a little chemical help. You pussy."); I'm pretty sure he also once posted he'd never work with you if you pirated software. I've been surprised by many things he's said. I think he's coming from a principled place.

That doesn't mean I agree with him totally... but I don't think he's gunning for you.

If Ed's disappointed with you, someone else in the real world who could be vital to your business is going to be similarly disappointed. Why not figure out how to fix it? You're going to be successful either way, we all know it, but for the most part nobody in the real world is going to give enough of a shit about you to get past the first negative reaction they have to you. Might as well use Ed as a scientific curiosity.
They say "pizzlies", but I like the OP's "grolar bear" much better.

They seem scandalized, or maybe robbed, by this. It's a survival tactic. It's working. Sheesh. Let them do what they do, the natural thing, instead of trying to preserve a too-small gene pool.
I suspect adaptation might be a better term. Mutations aren't causing this or doing anything (so far as I know) with this, it's merely two creatures breeding and their gene pools intermingling.
I'm always thinking of companies who were making deals in Soviets almost a hundred years ago[1]. Obviously the capitalist leanings in the USSR were weaker after the 1920s and there are many differences, but I am not fully convinced it will look that different from a long term (many decades') perspective.

I suppose these companies turned out okay? The fate of locals notwithstanding. /s

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrialization_in_the_Sovie...
Agree with all your points, and I did mean partial application, not partial evaluation.

And yes currying is not the same thing but it's common in informal settings to say "Haskell has automatic currying" and everybody knows you're talking about automatic partial application.

Lisp can of course do partial application and currying but not automatically; as you say you'd have to write special macros and sacrifice variadic functions to make it work (and I have done so). And it's really not that necessary in Lisp because we have parentheses; Haskell is the only example I've yet found of a Lisp-like language that has successfully removed most of the parentheses, and it succeeded because of its implicit partial application. But it had to sacrifice variadic functions.

When I first started using Haskell I lamented not having macros, and then I realized that many of my use cases for macros in Common Lisp weren't necessary in Haskell because of its laziness.

CL is still my daily-use language. But Haskell expanded how I think about programming almost as much as Lisp did all those years ago; that happened because Haskell took the functional metaphor to an extreme. I now write better Lisp programs because of my exposure to Haskell.
Apple is using Swift everywhere. Including SwiftUI.
I wonder though why does that matter for a web format that can be served with GZIP encoding? Wouldn't GZIP eat the duplicative <move-to /> tags for breakfast? It would be so much easier to write, read, manipulate and animate.
The optimistic interpretation is that they just want to repair their image in the minds of developers, so that more developers feel open to using Azure (Developers! Developers! Developers!)

But I agree there's something unnerving about how deep their grasp has been getting lately
Tesla is probably overvalued, but it's also not as simple as Tesla == cars. They're also one of the leading players in grid level battery storage (a market that will be huge soon). I don't think any other auto manufacturer is involved in that.
They have to be same as the maximum addressable bit, i.e. in the case of 48 bit virtual address size the 48th bit.

This is actually kind of a cute way of dividing kernel and userland space as you just set the upper bit to 1 for kernel addresses and 0 for userland.

EDIT: Specifically talking about x86-64 here.

https://github.com/lorenzo-stoakes/linux-mm-notes/blob/maste...
Hey guys! I’ve been working on this 3rd party Spotify app, and I’m finally launching Discover Together!
It analyzes you and a buddy’s Spotify profiles and uses machine learning to curate a very special Spotify playlist sent straight to your library that is filled with songs that are recommended based on your guys’ blended music tastes to discover new music together .It is basically a Spotify Discover Weekly Playlist but for two people to bond over new songs together! Would mean a lot if you guys could try it out here with a friend or two, and I guarantee you guys will find your next favorite song Also lmk any feedback and it would be amazing if you could share with more friends/family/significant others/tinder or hinge dates especially with Valentine's Day coming up
If you like the app, show us some love on Product Hunt here
No, it must be sign-extended from the top bit of the valid set. Otherwise the address is non-canonical.
Yes, this is something larger groups are starting to realize and try to work with. Look up the Nature Conservancy's climate change corridors.

They are trying to preserve/conserve land in strips as a priority. This way as climate changes, plants and animals will have a path to migrate unimpeded (or at least impeded less than if there were large roads/developments in the way!).
It is not true that the government doesn't care about the rights of individuals just because you want it to be true. Those that are employed are individuals too, and are not being magically compelled to carry terrible secrets against their individual moral codes and ethics. They are carrying out a mission of defense which extends into the technology of this century -- even cars have had 100 years for us to deliberate and come up with the current system of laws that govern that technology.

Not sure how you are going to be able to substantiate this in any way, as the public can only judge the NSA based on the reactions of the establishment against its detractors and whistleblowers, lies and damned lies, etc.

So this may be a case of "don't blame the peon's" but is deflecting from the issues at hand of abhorrent abuses of power.

While the legal framework for their actions are up for debate, their collective character is not.

How so?
The 'single device' will just be doing the observing. The cataloging will be done by many more devices on the ground.
I saw some random headline today, that said something along the lines of "The US is in that awkward position, where we can't fix things within the system anymore, and yet aren't far enough along to start hanging the bastards"
This is another vote of confidence for type annotations. There still seems to be a debate between highly experienced Pythonistas whether typing is good or not.

In this case I think they work really well, and aren't stuck in places where they're not needed.
> The DOJ certainly seems to think a law was broken.

That fortunately doesn't matter.

To send someone to jail, you need to convince a jury they committed a serious crime.
> Maybe we should consider addressing real issues before they become violent protests.

> The protest in the capitol yesterday was based on a fantasy: Trump's refusal to accept his loss, and continued reinforcement of election conspiracies. How can you address what has already been explained, but one side refused to accept?

You don't see the problem here? Maybe you don't see the election dispute as a "real issue". But approximately 40% of the country does.

A significant portion of the country opposes BLM, too, by the way.
No one mention Session ? https://getsession.org/
> That's hyperbole. Having a bird's eye view of every single account, transaction, investments, net worth, etc. is "totally useless"? No.

If you can get it to actually connect to things (I have 2FA on most accounts, and since Mint scrapes the sites and stores passwords in plaintext, it doesn't know how to handle this) and tag everything properly (MCC's vary pretty widely). I think that the promise of Mint is great, but in reality it falls apart as soon as you have more than a few accounts, or start using anything that wasn't originally built in (e.g. 2FA).

That all said, I follow the same general principles: autopay everything in full, invest money first, live within my means (with certain exceptions that are the "budget").
I perceive your tone as matter of fact, like everyone knows and agrees. I don't think you are talking about conventional wisdom though.

"the rapid pace of hydrogen advancement" makes me think of Nikola...and Hindenburg Research.
I’m not sure where we stand on solar panels on everyone’s homes. Doesn’t seem to be replacing power plants, which is what we need.

Making sure my manufacturered imports are carbon neutral will be difficult. All the other indirect emissions will also be hard to account for.
My only issues with this are that it's impractically hard to protect data to the extent necessary, and large fines become a lever for disgruntled employees to cause massive damage.
My windows think pad has had a super buggy hibernation for a few years. Better than Linux laptops I’ve tried, but still not at all solved. Only my mac seems to get hibernation right.
You can shelter at home until you have gotten over it, and then you have immunity as well.
So they only do this for files that are already present on Spotify's server with a matching hash? That's not particularly interesting
I played this as a little kid and had never read the book and had absolutely no idea what was going on. I got a hint or cheat book to complete it.