jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
It'd be interesting to see Texas tax deployments of wind and solar within the state but incentivize manufacturing of wind and solar. If oil and gas exports from Texas are going to decline in coming years, having wind and solar exports increase would be a nice logical offset. And even if oil/gas exports don't decline it does seem like manufacturing of wind/solar products will only increase so it would be seemingly low risk.

If Texas doesn't want to deploy wind and solar I don't think anyone outside of the state is going to change their mind. But they should realize that if the feds are going to dump huge amounts of money via rebates or tax credits into wind and solar that there's a huge market to design and manufacture those products within the USA. Texas likely has the ability to make itself into a leader in wind and solar engineering and manufacturing (if they aren't already).

Lots of tech companies seem to already be flocking to Texas (much to the chagrin of Texans) so maybe my idea above would be met with harsh criticism from those who live in Texas (I do not).
The WiFI extender I used could not change the passphrase.
What many here may not realize is that amongst certain groups in the US, people are not exposed to complete information. And in cases where they are, it tends to create cognitive dissonance with the narratives they have heard repeated frequently on a few "news" sources and by their friends.

Immediately after the severe cold period passed, I heard from friends and family in Texas that they survived DESPITE the failures of the wind farms which "Biden forced" upon them. Now keep in mind, Biden had only been president for about one month. When I politely provided more details, such as the ratio of natural gas powerplants vs wind, and the failure rate of both, the common reply was, "Well let's not fuss over that now."

This has been a long process of disinformation and brainwashing that has occurred, to the point where there is frankly no rational thought involved in politics there. Whoever you or "your people" think are bad, you want exactly the opposite of what they want. It is mindless and pointless and destructive.

It may take another 20 years, but unless Texas shifts its policies and behavior, it will become another "once was" stories. Anyway with any awareness of reality will move away, leaving the rest to architect their own demise.
It's the same with html and css: people shit on it all the time, but this just shows they don't have the imagination to see how much worse it could be.

Just compare to e.g. Photoshop file format: https://github.com/gco/xee/blob/master/XeePhotoshopLoader.m#...
It would be hilarious if Instagram changed their site consent form to simply say that ‘your feet may end up on a foot fetish website.’

How many users would continue to use Instagram?
I was going to post a protracted point for point response, but decided I wasn't in the mood for yet another lengthy internet battle with an obvious zealot which will probably end up in a Godwin law violation or a comparison of digital phalli or some such.

You've made some good points, some bad, I disagree with most, agree with others (and learned a few things from your response, thanks for the corrections). You've successfully demonstrated using a search engine for finding archived posts without demonstrating that those posts reached the front page. Well done.

It's obvious that Adobe is a sorry pitiful place that produces slipshod software that blights the Internet and our computers with its presence -- from the 150 slider widgets in Photoshop to Flash. This has been true for a decade or more. You'll get no argument from me.

However, Apple also has a lot to answer for. Just because its principle computing platform isn't terribly popular, so it's less likely to be a target, doesn't make it more secure ("we're secure because nobody uses us!" is not a terribly good selling point). The sec community has long standing grievances with the slow pace of security patches Apple puts out. Jobs has likewise generally remained silent on this matter.

You may continue feeling slighted by even the slightest of finger-pointing at Apple even if it's not intended as Apple bashing. A strong and vibrant Apple, as a viable competitor, is good for several industries. Hanging off of every word Steve Jobs says as perfect and without flaw is not.

Enjoy the rest of the weekend.
If you're going to invent scenarios, you should invent realistic one's. For example, I'm fairly confident that you couldn't solve the problem of brain duplication for a trillion dollars. The NIH budget in 2010 was ~32 billion which isn't close to a trillion, but it's a lot closer to a trillion than we are to duplicating a brain.

On a philosophical level though, a lot of people would probably disagree with your proposed actions. For me, personally, I wouldn't want to "influence" (vaguely kill, but also any of these "duplication" scenarios) someone else's mortality for any amount of money.
There must be some point, or otherwise it wouldn't be done. Follow the money.
Highly relevant: http://1.618033988749894848204586834365638117720309179805762...
Another one I love is philosopher.life, aka "h0p3's wiki" where this guy h0p3 shares his personal thoughts philosophies and personal online interactions. It's really charming and interesting and a real throwback to the "old Web" of personal websites.
I recommend https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cells_at_Work!

"The story takes place inside the human body, where trillions of anthropomorphic cells each do their job to keep the body healthy. The series largely focuses on two such cells; a rookie red blood cell, AE3803, who often gets lost during deliveries, and a relentless white blood cell, U-1146, who fights against any germs that invade the body."

For a never-ending rabbit hole: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BiologyTropes
> Don’t connect it to the internet and your fine.

Assuming the TV won't connect anyway, e.g. by actively wardriving for unsecured wi-fi or by shipping with a cellular modem.
My understanding is that the amount of fuel loaded onboard the plane for takeoff by the ground crew is determined in part by this estimated weight figure.

If the weight estimate is too low, then it would be possible for the ground crew to load too little fuel, leading to a situation at the destination of nearly or actually running out of fuel.

So it may have been labeled "serious" due to the possibility of not loading enough fuel if the weight estimates are too low by too much.
So there was nothing in the "system" to check that there was an unusual amount of children passengers on-board this flight?
Have another up of coffee, the data is in the leak.
The root cause wasn't that adult females were checked in as "miss" (which implies it was done against, or regardless of their own intentions).

The root cause was that the system assumed "miss" = "child". So it's a case of a mislabelled category.

The real root cause was a mistranslation: "in the country [India?] where [system programming] was performed the title Miss was used for a child, and Ms for an adult female".
I think that's right for some of them. However, a few of the logos I looked at and thought "wtf?"

This isn't unique to GNU projects or open source, and I don't think these are worse than other ones I have seen in other contexts.
Be honest, did anyone read the entire article?

I don't like this trend of writing incredibly long articles. It's as if the length alone somehow makes it more intellectual or credible, or perhaps just makes the author look good.

An approx calculation, assuming reading speed of 250wpm, means a 12,000+ word article, like this, will take nearly 1 hour to read.
s/stealing/copying/
+1

I have realized that having an overview of what's on the agenda aka the bullet points is the most helpful thing. Just talking about those bullet points instead of reading from a script makes the presentation more of an engaging/interactive conversation with the audience rather than a prepared speech/lecture.
I saw Jobs give a presentation of NeXT's Enterprise Objects Framework (an early, even pioneering ORM) at a trade show in Chicago... during the presentation one of his NeXT machines crashed, and the audience got to see the system reboot on the big projection screen. I don't recall any real wisecracking... he just said "oops!" and maybe a little banter but did remain very calm and continued the presentation without really missing a beat.
They do that with business cards in Japan (and cellphones that can scan them). Not sure why it hasn't caught on yet here in the US. My roommate has the same problem - stacks of business cards, but no easy way to digitize the info.
Exactly, skype provided a service that does not rely on content.
The reminder seems nice, except for the fact that its using one of those godawful modal dialog boxes that prevents you from doing absolutely anything else. That crap needs to die a quick death.
The million dollars were revenue; not sure about the guy's net profits when everything was said and done. If I understand correctly, there was some kind of SLA in place -- the people who bought all those pixels expected them to be on line for a certain period of time, etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Million_Dollar_Homepage#DDo...
this reminds me of the old interview tip "turn weaknesses into strengths" Being able to flip a hiccup into a fluid teaching point is good for any kind of teaching not just power point presentations.
My brother-in-law quit a traditional job to drive for Uber, so he must think it's better. (also, he told me that for the first time, he's excited to work in the morning) It's a pretty competitive market -- if a service doesn't provide enough work, they won't be able to retain drivers (plus many people drive for multiple services, especially Uber/Lyft drivers).
I work with Kubernetes quite a bit, so I'm reasonably knowledgable on the pro's and con's.

I definitely think there is a misunderstanding about what Kubernetes solves. I think Kubernetes is very good at helping structure very large applications where a split of micro-services makes sense.

Most start-ups don't need it - it's likely overkill, and unless you go with a vendor you're likely to set it up incorrectly. But it is an advantage in much larger, spread out teams if the culture surrounding all the teams makes sense.

If sub-teams can handle their applications really well, which many companies have achieved, then it does provide significant benefits over monoliths.

I think the problem you're noticing is that everyone wants to jump onto Kubernetes without realizing why it's even there - the same with micro-services. I shudder when I hear that from my friends with no more than 10 people on their development team, but I think it makes a lot more sense when I see teams of >200 complaining that their huge monolith is what causes the most friction.
I think this comment highlights a lack of understanding what responsible disclosure is about. It's there to reach the best possible tradeoffs to protect consumers and force a quick turnaround with fixes. Just publishing vulns, which the vendor might not even see or learn about(!), will not help in getting things improved and puts consumers knowingly at risk at scale.
To say nothing of Toyota, Honda, Mazda, many German manufacturers... amirite?
Some interesting commentary:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14010010

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12308246

> That may feel good to say, but as someone whose job it was to find these kinds of bugs in software from companies ranging from tiny startups to financial exchanges to major tech vendors, this is a kind of carelessness shared by virtually everyone shipping any kind of software anywhere.

> That said, the term "responsible disclosure" is Orwellian, and you should very much avoid using it.

> It's coercive. It redefines language to make any handling of vulnerabilities not condoned by the vendors who shipped those vulnerabilities "irresponsible", despite the fact that third parties who discover vulnerabilities have no formal duty to cooperate with those vendors whatsoever.

> The better term is "coordinated disclosure". But uncoordinated disclosure is not intrinsically irresponsible. For instance: if you know there's an exploit in the wild for something, perhaps go ahead and tweet the vulnerability without notice!
LSD itself is harmless, nevertheless, try not to jump from a balcon while high on it.
I'd rather Github not become the Gmail of version control.
Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Use OpenRC on Gentoo and keep on enjoying Linux.
Yeah, and I can't get rid of water, but I can get rid of Roundup :D
What numbers are you looking at?
This is not how economics works, not even a little bit.
No they haven't.

The premise is "had growth rates among the quintiles remained as they were post-war, then..."

That is nothing like "one quintile has taken from the others".

Growth rates change all the time, and the transition from a labour economy to a knowledge economy has the effect of reducing the pool of "winners" as the returns to knowledge form a greater share of total returns.

This same transition is visible in most developed countries. Some have welfare systems designed to prevent it, and their overall growth is lower for it. They contribute less of the global groundbreaking progress (like new cancer treatments, Covid vaccines, etc) commensurate to that fact.

This is a false premise. Do not fall for it.

Just because you are in a group whose growth rate has been higher than the other group, doesn't mean you "took" something from them.
Water works really well as a filter.
I wonder if any of these documents will shed further light on MLK’s alleged participation in a violent rape [1].

[1] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/martin-luther-king-f...
A lot of magic is happening in your second paragraph.

Inflation reduces debt and wealth at the same time. Wages at the low end rise with the cost of living. Debt and wealth are denominated nominally. The cost of a new car may go up, but the cost of the car you're currently driving (and haven't paid off) is going down.

Printing money doesn't steal from the poor. Printing money and giving it to the rich steals from the poor. Speculation on assets comes with low inflation, not high inflation, because with low inflation comes low interest rates. The only reason this is bad is because when this speculation crashes the economy, the rich will be saved by direct payments from the government.

Nominal asset appreciation due to a rise in the money supply isn't a rise in value, and the poor aren't competing with the rich for assets. It seems like that in housing because it is an extraordinarily safe asset to drive up in value (when interest rates are low) based of the history of the US government bailing out losses in real estate.

Wealth inequality in America is due to direct payments to the wealthy, and the government consistently stepping in as the silent guarantor of last resort behind every asset bubble. If the government were instead the asset buyer of last resort (not at par like after the mortgage crisis, but at market value), crashes of asset bubbles would be a boon for the public, not a boon for the people who participated most in the bubble.

edit: The problem with the Fed is that it focuses on a goal of holding down inflation while not considering employment in enough detail. The quality of jobs, whether jobs are in bubble (or fragile) industries, rate of rise in wages, and the quit rate are ignored in favor of a simple percentage of unemployed, and administrations even narrow that down to the proportion of people currently collecting unemployment instead of the prime-age (25-54) employment rate as would make sense.
Chrome. It's just my personal opinion as a user, based on my own use case. Can't really detail, but mainly various UX issues. It feels unpolished.

As for ad block, I use DNS based blocker apps like adgarud on my phone.
There's a hole in your argument:

It takes $500 to build a well-diversified portfolio with a roboadvisor, and that portfolio will behave comparably to a larger one (it'll be a bit worse, but also taxed at a lower rate). So, if everyone invested their savings rationally, then when the Fed propped up stock prices, it wouldn't change the distribution of savings across the population.

The real issue is that a larger percentage of the poor's assets are in items that depreciate.

In the '08 crash, a the percentage of people in the US that owned a home dropped from 69% to 63.5%, and is only starting to recover:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/184902/homeownership-rat...

The Fed has been keeping mortgage rates low, and that has certainly helped home ownership rebound. So, it's more nuanced than "the fed steals poor people's money".

(Don't get me wrong; the system is rigged to transfer wealth to the rich. I'm just saying there is more than one mechanism at play.)
If they want non-idiots to use their stuff, then they need to open up and give a few tours of their "vaults" or whatever.
The only thing Apple is selling is their brand with the iCard. Hilariously they say it's not from a bank, but it's not only issued by a bank, but runs through a traditional credit card provider.

Breaking the stranglehold of Visa/MasterCard would be innovative. I personally think they should put their economic weight behind something like stellar so the 'unbankable' of the world has a chance to leave poverty.
Echelon-like capture of unencrypted information was widely accepted as reality during my time on IRC (2000-2007). The Slovenian Government was actually sloppy enough to let the knowledge out in public [1]. We were provided the technology by the Germans, but it's possible USA just wanted to stay out of he way.

[1] https://www.dnevnik.si/249095/slovenija/249095
Mask early, serious lockdown as soon as it becomes serious, and don’t end lockdowns before numbers are way low. We masked late, put lockdowns in place late if at all, and ended them way too early, which means that some countries went through several ones. And we’re not through yet.

That said, I don’t share the optimism of the parent poster. This would be a heavy burden in terms of freedom and human rights for a result that is far from certain. There have been some resurgences, the extent of which is of course unknown because the truth would be damageable to China. And there is no knowing whether the next variant would start it all over again, in which it would be back to square one.
Firstly that was in March. Secondly it discounts the serial passage research which leaves little genetic evidence. All the potential sources are unlikely, so why discount a lab accident?
That was me.. I guess I was uncertain about whether it would get flagged if I put a curse word in the title. No deeper agenda there.
So I read this and thought "wow, indentation would be so stupid to manage in a terminal... even typing python into python's repl is brutal" but then I looked up the syntax for a for loop in fish and it is exactly the same as the syntax in bash except it uses the word "end" instead of "done" and doesn't have "do"... what am I missing?
IMO the entire ecosystem is just by and for people with high personality-trait Openness. If you write a blog that presents novel ideas in interesting ways, you get a readership full of people that like reading novel ideas presented in interesting ways. Nothing really more interesting or complicated going on here - people rarely have one weird idea, they tend to be idiosyncratic or conformist in general.
Going beyond that, I thought modern planes were designed with plug doors and latches that physically can't get partially engaged.

If you're depending on a sensor alarming on the flight deck, you're already several failures in I would think.
> These arguments about why we're all obligated to cooperate with Alexander's attempt to walk his identity back always seem to be inventing new norms

Not really. The NYT was perfectly willing to protect the anonymity of a different psychiatrist blogger. Yes, this person did a better job of keeping their identity a secret, but the justification was largely the same.

And let's not pretend that journalism is only about sharing information. There's a great deal that journalists don't share (or even try to actively suppress) for many different reasons. Partly because there are a lot of ethical considerations when publicizing information.

Worth noting that part of the issue is that, with psychiatry and counseling in particular, it really doesn't matter what he was writing about or what his politics are. Any such publicity compromises the blank slate that counselors are supposed to present to their clients. While this does mean that mental health professionals have an obligation to take care with their public image, it's not unreasonable to ask others (including journalists) to respect the particular cost they face with any kind of exposure.
Yeah, why not. I didn't give it much thought. This script makes some assumptions about the site structure, that's why it's able to be so short. Of course if you were able to get the image links without grepping, then it would be even easier.
I don't think anyone wants the WHO to be powerful. They want the WHO to be honest. And they aren't. But that isn't the WHO's fault or anyone working there. It's a property of what the WHO is.
Farmers do water vegetables with water that is not safe to drink, they spray diluted sewage onto vegetables as a cheap fertilizer, runoff from adjacent livestock operations flows into cropland, etc. The difference is that meat is generally cooked before consumption, which kills a lot of bacteria, while many vegetables are eaten raw. You are probably in more danger of getting food poisoning from alfalfa sprouts than you are from a t-bone.

(Ok, that was a bit of a cheat. Sprouts of all varieties and leafy greens are usually the worst when it comes to veggie contamination while undercooked chicken and ground beef are the worst for meats. I am picking my examples at two extreme ends of each group to make a point, but hopefully the real point you will get from this is that there are a lot of factors that go into food poisoning risk assessment...)
Reason for my downvote: that was nothing but obnoxious and uncalled for and fraught with untenable assumptions about the OP. you could have said "you may find you dont like programming after you give it an honest effort, in which case you might want to try something else".
I believe this was already explained, but I can't remember where. Siemens had been working with the Idaho National Laboratory to identify vulnerabilities in the PCS systems, which were then used in the exploits that Stuxnet leveraged. The US intelligence agencies that developed Stuxnet could have used INL as a front for interacting with Siemens or they could have simply taken the vulnerabilities after they had been identified as part of that joint effort. Either way I'm sure there was help from Siemens somewhere throughout the process, but not necessarily for the explicit purposes of creating the Stuxnet worm.
Learning the basics would be a smart move. Just don't get a big head once you've learned a little, because the gap between "knows enough to be dangerous" and "truly competent" is vast.

The strategy is simple. Stay focused on practical problems at all times. Pick some real thing you would like to achieve, and bang away at it, learning as you go. When you get stuck, look for help on places like Stack Overflow.

Expect to suck at it, and expect to spend countless hours baffled by things you can't figure out. There's no skipping this process. Most people find it too painful, which is why most people never learn to program.

It doesn't really matter what projects you pick, so long as they're relevant to you. If they turn out to be "too difficult" you'll learn just as much, and be able to pick a smarter project next time.
Personally I think this test is not set up properly.

It does appear that IE 10 has made improvements on HTML5 support over IE9. Going off this test however, they would receive the same score of 130.