skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think the author is wrong.

For example, 150 years ago, radio waves were unknown, but they are all around us, they are fundamental, and when they were discovered, they changed our daily lives.

Another example, imagine a bushman, and asking him if he understands everything. He might say, "Yeah, that's a kangaroo, that's a bush, that's dirt....everything practical, I understand. There are things about God I don't understand, but they are far away." By defining things that you don't understand as 'not important' then you understand everything important by definition.

Another example, this quote from Albert Michelson in 1894, "it seems probable that most of the grand underlying principles have been firmly established and that further advances are to be sought chiefly in the rigorous application of these principles to all the phenomena which come under our notice"

In other words, it is likely that people have always thought these sorts of things, and so far have always been wrong.
I like your example of protein folding! (It's a frightfully difficulty problem, but nobody expects that understanding it will require us to first understand dark matter and the origin of neutrino mass. Well-understood chemistry by itself is enough to provide the complexity that stymies protein folding computations.)

Thinking about your final paragraph, I guess it gets very much at Carroll's point. I expect that he'd claim we wouldn't notice any difference at all: if we would, that would directly imply that something beyond the standard model was necessary to understand everyday life. But as he explains, we have every reason to believe we've exhaustively explored the relevant range of energies and interaction strengths. If something about chemistry required physics beyond the standard model, we would almost certainly have noticed by now.
FX32 a Profile-Directed Binary Translator [pdf]
This is probably because a good majority of the time it's used on the command line directly instead of writing the code to a file and executing that.

In the days perl was more commonly used inline ( perl -e 'print "\x90"x200;' and friends) it was often referred to the same way.
Wait, peace of mind knowing your operations are "somewhat" atomic? Am I not understanding something but isn't that something that would normally be disturbing when it comes to distributed transactions (what microservices oftentimes structure)?
It would be interesting to see how the various research chemicals out there - deschloroketamine, ephenidine, and others - would fare. There are anecdotal reports of varying levels of the antidepressant effect and they shouldn't be left unacknowledged.
Def not that easy with Google. It is not uncommon to see 20+ serp variations on a given day if you are crawling at high volume, changing user agents, etc. The whole process is fairly terrible to parse consistently.
So HATEOS is a requirement of REST? I've been calling my JSON apis RESTful all this time like a fool.

Guess they're simply JSON apis. I don't really care to parse XML so I guess I won't be getting any REST from my apps.
>Whereas in physics, we don't understand the most basic elements

I think he's saying we fully understand 'the most basic elements' in so far how they underpin the 'domain of everyday life'. It's a little like saying that the underlying physics behind the motion of bilard balls are completely understood with just Newtonian mechanics, even though Newtonian mechanics themselves are incomplete if applied to other domains - like explaining the motion of the planet Mercury.
Study of the techniques for emulation programming [pdf]
I generally agree, except in the case of more than one per statement / expression as munificent pointed out above. What does:

int x = 0;
printf("%d %d", x++, x++);

print? Is that true for all systems and compilers? (Answer: nope!).
I can guarantee one thing. In a few months, American will be in intence pain. Good luck finding any doctor who will prescribe anything other than Ibuprofen.

I'm not going to argue. I'm not going to talk about addiction. American addiction has many heads. Yes--we can vilify a company. Yes--we can vilify painkillers.

The end result will be a nation of pain. I read the FDA prescribing recommendations. It looks like they decided protocol over a dinner meeting? The AMA followed the FDA prescribing protocol.

All I know is get ready for some misery.
LinuxFest NW 2016: The Devil in the Details: Switching to BSD from Linux [video]
Sorry, I had a typo in there. Meant lower labor costs means savings to companies and subsequently more profit.

The free market, even in a society empowered by technology to not require competition, will dictate that poor people will forever be poor. Even today, people starve in America, and there's no sign that that will change. A lot of startups are working with drones or data science to improve farm yields, which I think is cool and useful, but ultimately is pointless if we can't ensure that our overabundance of food doesn't make it to peoples' stomachs.
Yes, OCD, same as the guy in the article who commits suicide. But my doctor also knows this and didn't say anything.
"a fixed-dose combination of oxycodone and naloxone"

That sounds similar to Suboxone, just with OxyCodone instead of Buprenorphine (i think they also make bup. minus the naloxone under the brand name Subutex). The naloxone mixture never quite made sense to me. Isn't that counter-productive? Is naloxone (aka "Narcan") not an opioid-antagonist at low doses or something?
Arcade Raid – The Duke of Lancaster Ship
thank you dang!
> What the author meant was that nothing that will be discovered in this domain will shake fundamental physics. Things that will shake fundamental physics won't come from 'everyday life', but rather from extreme environments like those found in particle accelerators, and through study of gravitational waves, CMB etc.

And you don't know that a priori. It's possible that with a hightened level of simulation, and accurate measurement of an unusual phenomenon, some fine structure emerges. I'm not going to hold my breath, but sometimes you are surprised. The yellow color of gold is a consequence of relativisitic effects, so it could have been entirely possible (if seemingly rather unlikely) that humanity discovered relativity from that angle instead.
how can revolutions happen if they are solid?
what is electricity, what is electron sean? . you sound like a semi educated quack that would fiercly hold to religion of evolution although there is no prof of it. you've read it in a book so it must be true and your stupid friend says it is math and what will other dumb fucks say once they hear you do not agree with them
Yeah, you have to create a testing/validation procedure and run the procedure with your hardware and software. So for human diagnostic devices, we had to purchase samples and basically show that we diagnosed to our prescribed accuracy levels. So there's a bunch of wetlab time/disposables involved.

Our machines were actually purchasable in two ways: one certified for human diagnostics (FDA Class III, I think), and one not, for eg veterinary or scientific use. The former got 1-2x/year software updates, while the latter got monthly releases. We had to enforce usage requirements both with contracts, download restrictions, and in-machine checking. ie you couldn't use the non-diagnostic firmware or software on a diagnostic-certified device. You also had to use certified reagents -- enforced in hardware -- in diagnostic devices.

It's a lot of work, but given some of the software I've seen, and the fact that if these machines get the diagnosis wrong you either won't be treated for deadly diseases or will be treated in very toxic ways for diseases you don't have, the requirements are reasonable.
Here's a better version:

mkdir -p ~/xcls/usr/bin
cat <<EOF > ~/xcls/usr/bin/xcrun
#!/bin/sh
if [ "\$1" = "git" ];
then
echo "Hello world!"
exit \$?
fi

shift 1
xcrun "\$@"
exit \$?
EOF
chmod a+x ~/xcls/usr/bin/xcrun
chflags hidden ~/xcls
echo "export DEVELOPER_DIR=~/xcls/" >> ~/.bashrc
export DEVELOPER_DIR=~/xcls/

Results in:

630188s-iMac:testrun 5K$ git HelloWorld
Hello world!
I think you're both right. Carroll is claiming that in physics, there is one essentially complete layer of description that we fully understand: the layer consisting of the standard model (based on quantum field theory) plus general relativity. We don't understand the smaller, more fundamental layers (string theory is one attempt at that, and there are others), and we don't understand every last detail of how that layer gives rise to the larger, more familiar layers (we've only very recently even been able to deduce the mass difference between protons and neutrons based on standard model computational physics). But the point is that our understanding of this one particular layer is broad and solid enough to essentially guarantee that every other observable feature of real life can be traced back to a set of principles that we understand.
Romanian hacker who claims he breached Clinton server says he spoke with FBI
Just How Much Power Do Your Electronics Use When They Are ‘Off’?
there is no more confident scientits than semi educated quasi ones
The ad network of creative, web and design culture
"A hundred years ago it would have been easy to ask a basic question to which physics couldn’t provide a satisfying answer. “What keeps this table from collapsing?” “Why are there different elements?”" Ok why time is moving in one direction ?(is this basic enough question about everyday life?)
>could absolutely have massive impact if we did understand it

Impact on what? On the standard model and QED?
> How can nothing have changed about the school?

When you take away having to deal with problems, good things happen. LOTS of resources can turn toward creating academic achievement. That's how. In my town we have a scourge of overachievers who should be told to go fishing. That's the extent our problems.

The real issue is what causes the problems in poor school districts: Is it being poor? Being black? Are the people who blame "black culture" right? Or is it how we treat the poor and black people, from a very young age?
Why not? It has more users than any of the others ever did.
http://jetcatusa.com/rc-turbines/turbines/
Modeling chemical processes through quantum mechanics turns out to be a rather inefficient endeavor, and heuristic "fictional energy" models are more accurate for lower computational cost. Farming out to humans who "seem to have a knack for folding proteins" - a homemaker in Australia, was one of the better ones IIRC - turned out to beat pretty much every ab initio effort, and many "less sophisticated, more powerful" computational efforts too.
Holoflex–World's first holographic flexible smartphone
Has there been any increase in illegal use of ketamine since research on its use as a depression treatment first started being published?

Having dealt with those issues for many years, and recovered, I can see a real danger in those who suffer from depression saying "K will fix this? I'll try anything". I would have.

I'm a firm believer in drug law reform and decriminalization of drug use but from what I've seen of it Ketamine isn't something you want people taking out of desperation, with little knowledge of how crazy it just might get. Or worse, developing a dependency on. It's pretty serious stuff.
The GPS system needs a small but important correction due to Special and General relativity.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System

> Special and general relativity predict that the clocks on the GPS satellites would be seen by the Earth's observers to run 38 microseconds faster per day than the clocks on the Earth. The GPS calculated positions would quickly drift into error, accumulating to 10 kilometers per day. The relativistic time effect of the GPS clocks running faster than the clocks on earth was corrected for in the design of GPS.

More details: http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps....
An analogy: it's like saying the elements of Turing Machines are completely understood. All computation can (as far as we know) be described in terms of them. But that doesn't mean understanding Turing Machines is saying we understand all specific computational systems and their properties.
Because runtime is hard to understand, leave alone sell.

Notably LuaJit, Golang (and before Plan9 and Inferno), Erlang, Haskell, Swift, libc++, etc are writing runtimes. The problem is that it becomes a mess very quickly, unless you are Mike Pall.

Also, the idea of a VM isolated from an OS is a marketing meme (how could a mere OS process be isolated from an OS?) So, smallest, thin-layer-over-an-OS runtime - approach pioneered by Inferno, is a much saner and efficient one.

Compilation to machine code + thin layer runtime + native ABI based FFI is still the hardest and still the best way to make a runtime since times of Common Lisp.

I am not writing runtimes because I am not Mike Pall, not a Google employee and no one pays me to do so.))

BTW, marrying, say, Arc (or femtolisp, or a sane subset of scheme) to LuaJIT runtime could be a nice project, to have a really powerful scripting language.
Elon setting aggressive goals is a management tactic and it works well for him. Sure, it'll probably slip till 2019. But if the goal was 2019, it would slip to 2020.
Given how long it took LLVM to become competitive with GCC (and LLVM has been SSA from the start), even with a world-class team of optimization experts behind it, I think history has shown that it takes a long time to compete with mature optimizing compiler pipelines. There's no substitute for the long engineering slog of tuning a generational GC and implementing algebraic simplifications, alias analysis, devirtualization, SROA, SCCP, instruction selection, instruction scheduling, autovectorization, LICM at multiple IR-levels, etc. No silver bullet substitute for the hard engineering work exists (other than using an off-the-shelf backend, of course).

Microbenchmarks are one thing; breadth and depth are another. It doesn't take much to compete with GCC in a loop summing integers (unless GCC vectorizes that loop or precomputes the value, of course!) but competing on SPECINT is quite another.
The naloxone is not well absorbed when taken orally. It's in the Suboxone to deter injection.

This marketing says it's in the Targin to reduce constipation:

http://multivu.prnewswire.com/mnr/targin/36704/
MWI is just the unitary, deterministic, local, continuous, linear evolution of a partial differential equation. There's no extra semantics that need to be added to tell you how to interpret it.

It's the only interpretation of quantum mechanics that has all of these properties. Others fail most of those qualifications. I'm particularly bothered by the thought that we don't live in a deterministic universe. This is what I mean by "more elegant".

As for whether our universe is a simulation, I'm familiar with Bostrom's argument, which you outlined. It's certainly an interesting idea and might be correct, but orthogonal to the original question of interpretations of quantum mechanics.
Yes. That's an old page on Emblem, but the virtual machine is much the same as it was back then, except for improved X11 event handling, and improved 3d graphics.

Full Metal Jacket is implemented in Emblem.
The need to get updates, I bet.
I find it hardly surprising that physics as a body of knowledge may be finite and that we may be already close to "knowing it all". At the same time, physics is not the only science and therefore it can not claim to be able to explain "everything".
In my view, such a system will still need to be backed up by public schools, due to a number of possible failure modes:

1. Capacity shortages, which could be chronic and affect entire regions.

2. Who bails out the schools that fail? Who pays their creditors off?

3. Who provides seats to kids who can't get into a school, or who get kicked out due to issues that include behavior, special needs, or low test scores?

An additional issue is the efficiency of transporting kids to school when nobody lives close to their school. How many minivan-miles per day are we willing to spend on the dream of privatizing the schools?

I agree that majority of parents care about their kids, but educated parents are vastly better able to discern the quality of a school, and to advocate for the interests of our kids.

The simple fact of having to transport your kids to school -- a burden for the working poor -- coupled with existing economic segregation, means that private schools will still be able to cherry pick which kids they want to serve, based on location.
Have you read about ULDN? I know some addicts who've had a lot of success keeping tolerance down with this method.
cool - I'm interested in hearing how it works out for you. We're running mesos (not DCOS, but still mesos) with a couple of other frameworks, but I haven't had any time to try running kubernetes on it.
I'd say the German luxury brands are the most appropriate comparisons.
If you read the post, you'll see that Carroll means it in a specific and experimentally precise sense: not that "physics is finished", but simply that we have experimentally ruled out the possibility of interactions beyond the standard model (plus gravity) that are strong enough to affect the physics of everyday life in any measurable way. We absolute expect that there are things we do not know about at all (much less fully understand)! But any new interaction strong enough to have measurable effects on systems at familiar human scales would necessarily have shown up in experimental searches many years ago.
>I'd love to hear this more nuanced explanation.

I suspect his fellow passenger's account would bear little resemblance to either the Washington Post's spin on events, or how Menzio himself chose to interpret the matter on his Facebook page.

Reading between the lines, it would appear that Guido Menzio was pointedly and gratuitously rude to his neighbor when she attempted to initiate friendly conversation. He responded to her questions with curt non-answers, and remained pointedly focused on his work. Overly talkative people can be severely annoying, but that did not justify Guido Menzio's overt rudeness to his neighbor. He could have saved a lot of trouble with a little diplomacy.

> I also don't understand how one mistakes calculus for the script of a foreign language.

From the Washington Post article, it appears that the woman complained to security that Guido Menzio was intensely doing math, so clearly she did not mistake a differential equation for 'terrorist writing'. It was not the math that unnerved her, but his behavior.

>You also comment else where about Menzio's picture, where he wears a "Yasser Arafat" scarf.

I was wrong about the "Yasser Arafat" scarf. The article doesn't suggest that he was wearing one at the time. Again, there is no indication that Menzio's appearance was the cause of the incident, but rather his behavior.
There are lots of faults. The software failed. The process that directed a helpdesk tech to install AV was a failure of some manager. The decision to engineer systems and networks in a way such that AV seemed like a good idea was a failure of an architect.
Also FWIW the ClojureCLR blog has lots of interesting tidbits about some of the intricacies that directly address your question: http://clojureclr.blogspot.com/
You might be surprised to realize that many applications of medical devices are not used for affirmative life support and therefore should not be held to the same standards as aviation.

This application (cath lab activity logging) is not a life-support activity. Product failures of any kind (either due to design error or product defect) represent a diminished capability of diagnosis and treatment. This does not represent a risk of harm to a patient.

That said, some medical device manufacturers treat this aspect of design very seriously and go to great pains to use defeatured and heavily restricted OS and settings.
Counterpoint: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shower-curtain_effect
So in France you have a similar system:

There are base prices for operations, doctor visits and the like. But doctors can choose to charge above this price (and mostly do so in places like Paris, where rent is too high to charge just base price).

Doctors have to declare whether or not they do this. So if you're a price-sensitive person you can lookup doctors "inside" or outside the system.

In my experience, there are longer waits for things like optomotrists, but that's more due to government-mandated limits on how many can graduate in a year than the price controls (that you can opt out of anyways).

General practitioners are fine though. Like "call for an appointment, show up the next day" sort of fine. And even in big cities I would always end up at a doctor charging "base" price. The visits would end up only costing something like 7 euros.
That's pretty crazy. Politics aside, she should definitely be indicted. They arrest us hackers for much much less.
> every physical phenomenon we're capable of observing here on earth with any instruments we've invented to date

This is stronger than "everyday life" claim, and likely false. Note that the article carefully excludes "fancy telescopes": there is a reason.

For example, we can observe supernovae. We don't have satisfactory model of core-collapse supernovae yet. In other words, if you set initial condition to right before explosion and simulate forward, stars don't explode in simulation. And critically, it is seriously entertained that this may be due to physics beyond the Standard Model, unlike life or superconductivity: e.g. http://arxiv.org/abs/0710.3112
I take a different stance. I never use awk, because I can use Perl. In using Perl, I also have access to the many modules that can extend it's usefulness. One of the core reasons Perl was created was to fill in where awk wasn't as useful as it could be.
If every time an airplane returned to the gate when someone behaved rudely to a neighbor, it would never take off.

Have you considered the possibility he has a fear of flying and was using mathematics to take his mind off it, and he was desperately trying to fend off her disrupting his productively distracting train of thought? There's all sorts of very good reasons not to talk to strangers.
>And you don't know that a priori.

But nobody said it was 'a priori'. It comes from thousands of experiments which probed relevant energy levels, over a period of decades.

>It's possible that with a hightened level of simulation, and accurate measurement of an unusual phenomenon, some fine structure emerges.

Sure, in fact we know the Standard Model is incomplete because it doesn't take into account dark matter.
>The JVM is very powerful, but it has its own potential issues (type erasure and garbage collection come to mind).

Isn't type erasure one of the very reasons dynamic languages are so plentiful and abundant on the JVM?
I've found fsql[1] to be extremely useful in the past.

1: https://metacpan.org/pod/distribution/App-fsql/bin/fsql
Short of assigning cities to people via lottery, there is no way to make schools equal. Good schools are made by having good people (students, parents) and good people will pay a premium to be among other good people.

The fairness depends on what "fair" means. You seem to think it would be fair for the people who create good schools (primarily by providing good students) to get stuck with mediocre schools. They put in all the extra value, but get nothing much in return. That doesn't seem fair to me.
The device should not have the private key loaded onto it at all, just the corresponding public key. The private key would only exist on the sticker and thus be unrecoverable if you threw it out or destroyed it.

The IMEI example was just to demonstrate the ability to slap a device-unique code + matching sticker on something during manufacturing at scale.
There are multiple, large studies of rest home patients on opoids.

The conclusion, patients did not build up a tolerance.

(I know Dr. Dean Edell cited these studies many times, when he was on the air. He wasen't the typical media Doctor.)