jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
I can't wait until the kids all realize why the adults prefer to WFH. When this is all over they're going wonder why they have to go back to getting up early to catch the bus to spend all day sitting in uncomfortable plastic chairs and being told to be quiet and stay off their phone.

My oldest daughter just graduated from an online high school. We get it. Now the rest of the country is going to get it.
> People complain about dictatorships, but the absolute best form of government is actually a dictatorship, because it's efficient and looks out for the interests of the people. Of course, this means it has to be a "benevolent dictatorship".

I would quibble quite strongly with the characterization that dictatorships are "absolute best form of government is actually a dictatorship, because it's efficient and looks out for the interests of the people." They theoretically can be, but their fatal weakness is they have no effective mechanism to ensure the leader actually looks out for the people or that there's a smooth succession. Having effective mechanisms to do that are very, very important to have a "good form of government."
Your name, physical address, email address, phone number, employment, credit card, Facebook profile, IP address, MAC address, device ID...is not that bad?
Also assassinating a person in the middle of Berlin -- coincidentally a walking distance from my apartment.
In many cases, yes. It's not the "middleman" that is required, but reporting the transaction to the government is.
Roblox's main demographic is children. Most of the reviews will be from people who are still quite new to proper writing, cut them some slack haha
From firsthand experience? I think my 2003 iPod w/ Dock Connector can still boot to Disk Mode.
User-agent, in my experience, is mostly misused as an attempt for compatibility, but it really shouldn't be used that way. The proper way to do cross-browser compat is feature testing, as browsers keep adding more features. Google until recently was distributing a different, inferior (at least IMO) version of Google Search to Android Firefox users, based on user-agent.

To detect the OS for download, either JS will have to be used, or the new granular Client Hints[0], specifically User-Agent Client Hints[1]. You can use Sec-CH-UA-Platform and Sec-CH-UA-Arch to figure out the OS and CPU Architecture of the client. However, browsers may refuse to honor this, depending on the privacy budget.

Seeing User-Agent go away will be a net positive for web compatibility. That it also improves privacy is just a nice-to-have.

[0]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Client_hin...

[1]: https://wicg.github.io/ua-client-hints/
Your gnu cash article doesn't contain any screenshots so I'm sure you've spared us the horrors of looking at it but I feel like I can't trust you. I'll have to suffer through this myself, just to make sure.
You asked "why too don't we scoff at a data file without units". You just answered your own question: because it's an "agreed-upon format."

All of my response was to point out that an Excel spreadsheet, CSV file, etc. can equally be considered an "agreed-upon format" by those who use it, so don't need explicit units.

My original question was a simple one. Why should units be a requirement for most datatypes?

I know all of the reasons for why it's useful. I don't understand why it should be a requirement.

The PDB format is not an easy format to understand. Unit conversion is one of the least of the problems in using it outside of its field. Determining bond assignments is much harder, and bond type assignment harder still. In fact, I have a hard time figuring out an example where an explicit "this is in unit X" would make things appreciably easier, as compared to near useless data taking up space.

Could you give an example of how someone could start to use it in another field, easily, where they couldn't now? I can only see it occurring by completely replacing the format, since adding an "A" after each coordinate, or a comment at the top that the coordinates are in angstroms, can't be what you mean. (Nor would including the PDB spec as a comment in each record be what you mean either - though it would be self-documenting!)

For that matter, the X-ray resolution field in a PDB record contains significant digits, so "2.0Å" and "2.00Å" mean different things. The ontology of units is not easy. 2.00Å is 2.00E-10m, not 2E-10m.

In any case, I deal with a lot of unitless numbers as well: pH, molarity, number of atoms and bonds, number of rotatable bonds, ratio between elongation and fixed elongation, etc. The ontology of values is not easy, and a required SI-unit system looks much more like it would get in the way than be useful.
That's a great way to monetize. I have my website, it runs on GA and I'm happy to share the data instead of paying cash. I have under 1000 visits a day. I agreed on the agreement.
I remember this when I was younger as well and it was similar to how movies in hotels were you ordered through the tv and yes I believe you had an access fee in hours to play all the games available.
The number of jobs to run for an optimal compile time can be quite confusing. If none of the files you are going to compile are cached it is alright to run a lot more jobs then usual as a lot of them are going to wait for the disk I/O. After that twice the jobs then you have cores is mostly appropriate.
98th percentile on the SAT's--"you could have done better."

Well, yeah. So what.
I haven't used Xero (xero.com) for a SaaS business but their accounting webapp is quite solid and customer support has always been incredibly helpful.

They also have an API if you're looking to possibly programmatically add transactions: http://blog.xero.com/developer/api
SourceFire (http://sourcefire.com) makes Snort and ClamAV, both of which are open source, but they also have content revenue models, commercial products and a service branch.
What mystified me was all those mentions of {{$sitename}}. Is there an english community-based site somewhere that shares the funds, but not the name, of Wikipedia?
Language exists for communication. I consider it a decline when perfectly good idioms must be laid to rest and replaced with newer phrases because widespread misunderstanding and misuse have led to inevitable confusion when the idiom is used in its historically consistent sense.

I know it's fashionable to profess a relativist/descriptivist approach to grammar, but when people use words and idioms in ways inconsistent with their historical meanings, the language is degraded: it becomes more difficult to express ideas that could formerly be expressed quite simply and clearly. When I'm forced to say "That argument assumes as a premise the conclusion it intends to prove" instead of "That begs the question" communication efficiency and accuracy are diminished, and we all suffer for it.

We do not apply a descriptivist approach to our children's language use. If they misuse a word or phrase, we correct them, because we know that their misuse will disadvantage them in pursuing the goal of language, communication. We use a prescriptive approach in elementary school, in middle school, in high school, and in college. There is absolutely no reason why that same prescriptive approach, the one that preserves the utility of language and respects its goal, cannot continue to be used by the world at large. Fashion be damned! Leave your descriptivist ideology in the linguistics department. I care for communication, not ideology.
Bingo: if I used a MBP as my main computer, I'd take out the optical drive and put in something like this: http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/internal_storage/Mercury_Extr... for $99. Or the 60GB version for $149.
That is actually a common fallacy.

If you know what you are talking about, it is still in your interest to let everyone else know after you have purchased shares so that your shares will rise faster and higher.

Just because you are confident that something will go in a certain direction without telling everyone, doesn't mean you won't benefit from doing so.

As many economists like to say, markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

Your saying really only applies to trading algorithms.
As any security expert knows, a chaotic checkpoint is a security problem. "If terrorists can anticipate that, it gives them an opportunity" to try to evade various layers of security by creating an incident for diversion, Mr. Pistole said. "And what would this do for travel plans for Thanksgiving? Are people going to miss flights because there are long backups, because other people are protesting?"

This just sounds like fear-mongering. Even if people miss their flights, it's the TSA that should be blamed not the protesters.
> Why does comic-con pay famous actors to appear?

In the case of Comic-Con, they do that because their audience who pay for their tickets are more likely to pay if the actors they like are part of the experience.

In this case, we are talking about companies paying people exorbitant sums for no other reason that at some point the speaker may be in a position to affect the flow of government largess.

Even "networking" in this context is geared towards signaling to friend & foe that you now have inside reach to people whose actions or even mere words can move mountains of money in one direction or another.

Totally different.

By the way, this is standard textbook economic analysis and it would not be different if the names and political parties were switched.
Most of the major media companies have a pro-Democrat bias. Is that what you mean?
To go one level deeper, I feel your comment exhibits a fallacy as well.

Sure, science progresses over time. It's fallacious to say that science is wrong because we used to think the sun revolved around the earth. Evidence evolved, ideas changed.

But dismissing all instances of scientists changing their mind, when they really just lied, as "oh, evidence evolved" is the kind of thing that (I feel) erodes trust in science.

I think the evidence is strong that advice against masks was a lie meant to prevent panic, not honestly communicated "best we could do at the time" science. A lie with good intent for overall public health, but dishonest nonetheless.
So just hide it, and put up a warning message at the top that the course is no longer updated. Why do they need to take it down? It won't consume bandwidth unless people actually use it (in which case, they must find it useful), and I can't imagine raw disk space is a concern. Or, if it is, throw up a torrent so at least people can grab the data.
The results in Figure 3 are certainly promising. Has anyone been able to find the mentioned supplementary material though?

> A post-hoc exploratory analysis of immunogenicity in subgroups of participants aged ≥55-<65, ≥65-74 and ≥75 years was performed (Tables S6 and S7). Increases in levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2-spike bAb and nAb at days 29 and post-second vaccination at both the 50 and 100 ug doses were generally comparable across the age subgroups and with those observed in the younger (18-55 years) study participants. Seroconversion rates were also comparable across the age groups and with those in the younger participants. It should be noted that the small size of the ≥75 year-old subgroup (n=22) precludes definitive conclusions to be made.

There doesn't seem to be any link to supplementary material at either the Elsevier page [1] nor the NIH page [2]. The clinical trial registration [3] suggests that there was an update just a few days ago, so perhaps they're just waiting to upload a new PDF?

[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X2...

[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7871769/

[3] https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04405076
I feel like the author of this article is simplifying "falsifiability". Yes, it's not easy to identify, but getting unexpected results from an experiment, I don't think, has ever been the line.

You have to understand those results as well, before you can interpret them, and while "understanding" is surely fuzzy, it's completely missing in his commentary, as if Popper suggested at any point that the moment something unexpected happens, the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

"Wobbly philosophy would become part of legal doctrine."

It's only wobbly if you leave out large parts of it, as the author has...

The title of the article suggested nuance, but I don't see much of it in the article itself. It seems as if the author attempted to take down a basic tenant of science, and feeling satisfied that he had, moved on to draw further conclusions that result. I don't think he succeeded in that set up, however, which makes the second half of the book review (the part about the actual book) less interesting or compelling.
Canonical lists always continue into ad absurdum.

But we always got more leaves off our sweet potato than tuberous roots due to mammals eating the roots.

Which since sweet potato is so cheap to buy worked out ok.
Sounds like the organiser only owned up to it because there was an article coming out - https://twitter.com/bobbie/status/1361009044723429377
Anything based on Chromium is vulnerable to all specialised fingerprinting techniques such as this one https://niespodd.github.io/persistent-tracking-shader-cache/ and many others that I listed here https://github.com/niespodd/browser-fingerprinting

Some parts of Chromium seem to be intentionally exposing fingerprinting surfaces and, because its changing quickly with new features and addons, keeping up with patches like Bromite does is incredibly challenging task
this sounds like viral marketing for JJ Abrams' new movie.
If you look closer at that list, the most recent film to enter the public domain was produced in 1968. The last time a film entered the public domain (known at least) was in 1991. And the overwhelming reason any work actually entered the public domain was that they failed to renew the copyright (which implies they could still not be in the public domain if the creators were more on top of their copyright situation).

I think what the GP meant with "public domain does not exist anymore" is that it is effectively is no longer relevant.
He means no more works will ever be added to the public domain. He's right as far as I can tell.
As a point of reference, SpiderMonkey does do this with its Ion jit (I implemented some of the early polymorphic inlining code for Ion, but it's been cleaned up and robustified greatly since then by different contributors).
We'll inline up to 4 callees at a site.

Aside:
That was a very thorough and well written blog post, mraleph :) A very enjoyable read.

edit - I do think the blog post implies that v8 can't do polymorphic inlining. That's the impression I got from it anyway (and I was somewhat surprised, as I had assumed it would). It may be worthwhile to change the wording to make it more clear that V8 can inline more than one callee at a site.
I think there is actually some profound truth to your intended sarcastic comment, although you didn't intend it. There is an aspect of that in oil drilling.

But the difference is that, in the end, there are consumers who want oil for doing something with it (generating electricity and other work; making plastic), not just for trading for other commodities. The only thing you want bitcoin for is trading for other currency or commodities, it has no use value in itself.
Maybe the Corsair K70. It claims to be a gaming keyboard, but it is a fairly standard keyboard layout.
That is, imo, the beauty of shell script.

At its core, they are the very same commands you would give manually. but wrapped in basic programming logic (if clauses etc).

thus you can walk the shell script and get a good feel for why the script is doing what it is doing.

If you want to do that with a binary, you pretty much have to either hit it with a debugger (i think a previous thread here on Hacker News actually recommended using strace to inspect systemd boot behavior) or have the source code sit beside it for reference.
Or just install Neo4j, start it, and go to http://localhost:7474 in your favorite web browser.
Amen. It's also kind of insulting how much HN has bought into this "Great Man" theory of engineering and development. Sure, Elon Musk is a smart guy and seems to be a good leader who sets bold goals, but the real geniuses that make SpaceX possible are the brilliant engineers working there--who you've never heard of.

Watching the way HN reacts to SpaceX, in contrast to say, NASA, or the ESA makes me think those organizations should hire a charismatic frontman, too.

Edit: For example, see my sibling comment: "The thing that intrigues me is in the new innovations he had in his rocket, and why NASA didn't have it before SpaceX." (emphasis mine)
Note that these are Antarctic temperatures (as you might guess from "ice core"), not global temperatures.
Who does a PhD to get a job as an Academic? I did a PhD to have the opportunity to learn something that nobody else did.
5.8% growth per month, not too shabby. Must be getting exciting.
TrueSkill is nice because Microsoft published the math. The article is a nice and colorful introduction.

From what i hear the Starcraft 2 matching algorithm is very impressive. What system do they use?
“There are always going to be people who say, ‘What about the crayfish?’ ” he says. “Well, what about it? Every fundamental law has exceptions. But you still need the law or else all you have is observations that don’t make sense. And that’s not science. That’s just taking notes.”
Exactly, http://diveintohtml5.org/examples/input-type-range.html
Yes, getting the inventors wrong is a bad thing. Every inventor has an ownership of the invention and initially has an ownership of the patent that results from it. Usually when a company files a patent, they make sure they get all inventors to sign assignments which give their rights to the invention and patent to the company. But if they did not get all inventors to sign, and an unnamed inventor can later prove that he/she was actually one of the inventors, then the unnamed inventor will be held to be part owner of the patent and any inventions that are listed in there.

Thus, a company can invest tens of thousands of dollars into a patent and millions of dollars into developing the patented technology and then an unnamed inventor may appear out of the blue and claim ownership.

So yes, it is important to name all the actual inventors.

BTW, this is not legals advice, just academic, theoretic discussion. There are many more complicated issues that can and will come up in real life, so I hope nobody actually tries to extract legal advice from this.
The people of Sussex have long felt themselves to belong to the English nation.
Israel captured the West bank in a war. I doubt that the population of the west bank will ever be assimilated and become patriotic Israelis. Religion, let alone nationalism, guarantees this I'd say. Israel (and the US) will eventually tire of having to use the army to control the population.
Eventually Israel will have to give it up imo
It's quite often that the arrow images and css styles timeout for me. I think we would all appreciate some more caching, especially the server.
Wow - k5, that's a blast from the past. The sensible comments on there seem to dismiss this as not such a big deal, DRM wise - any thoughts?
YES. Recently many platforms were key in deplatforming ISIS and slowing the rate of radicalization. ISIS was an internet phenomenon and when their media was pushed to less famous outlets then their outreach was weakened.

Ever since the beginning of the Internet webhosting companies have colluded to deplatform the KKK and a few other notorious white supremacist groups. This has been largely successful in curbing the outreach of the KKK in the United States. It's also why YouTube is getting a lot of criticism for embracing white supremacist groups and facilitating thier growing outreach. This is a break from long-running comm business practices.
It's the pre-fix parenthesis for scope that is the problem, I think.

function {} is more familiar mentally than (function).
Well, one year eight months, but ok.
One thing not covered in this article (and maybe the CAIB report? I don't know) is whether the Russians could have done something useful in the rescue. Could enough fuel and scrubber tanks have been boosted to Columbia on a Soyuz or Progress to get it up to the ISS?
Stop trivializing the very real issue that I and many other folks on here struggle with every day. Frankly I find it very disrespectful.
Reminds me of http://strikemag.org/fuck-your-hard-work/
I don't agree with the narrow definition of clickbait. I think any sensationalism in headline, for sake of gaining clicks and attention, can be considered clickbait. I saw Wikipedia also proclaims the same relation to ad revenue; I just disagree that it's the only interpretation as people have been using the term more broadly for a while now even if it's origins are of the online advertising world.

In this case, I wouldn't categorize the headline as sensationalist though, considering that it's accurate and the next 72 hours are actually important.
If a negligible cost is a high enough cost, then why do more?
I used to recite a similar list when someone would ask why I left. It's actually eerie how similar they are.
Well, remember that equity is typically either completely worthless, or worth an enormous amount. That is: You can either cash out for incredible sums of money (after an IPO for example), or just sit on your illiquid equity that can't be sold even if there was a willing buyer.

In the unlikely event that your equity is EVER worth anything, the difference between 0.1% and 1% and 10% is the difference between you being super-rich, or super-duper-rich, or super-duper-mega-rich. Not a meaningful difference for many, as far as the incentive structures go.

Keeping the slices small allows the company to scale out and make sure that dozens or hundreds of its early employees will become very wealthy when the IPO happens. In many people's eyes, this is better than having a smaller early team get even richer. If the first 100 people all get 0.1%, you've only given out a total of 10% of the company, but every single one of those people are gonna be ridiculously wealthy in an IPO, and so you can motivate an entire early team that way...and increase your overall likelihood of hitting that payoff some day.