skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I haven't read this, but do people forget basic chemistry? We burn fossil fuels because the process is exothermic -- we extract usable energy from it.

Lithification of CO2 (to make up a word?) is, as far as I know, endothermic. It takes energy to accomplish. On the surface, tending towards counter-productive. Burn fossil fuels to lithify CO2 from burning fossil fuels. Or ramp up nuclear, with all its problems, for the same.

Fusion, sure -- but we are not there, yet.

Unless we look at the sun -- solar and wind. (The largest fusion reactor we are going to have -- up in the sky.)

"Alternative", next-generation, "renewable" energy might allow us to divert part of its potential excess supply to lithification of CO2. At the "tailpipe/smokestack" of conventional production, or even, if we can figure out effective capture, out of the sky.

You want CO2 dealt with, you're going to need to find a way to package it into a stable solid state.

By the way, we already have one worldwide, extant system for lithification of CO2. Based upon solar energy. Photosynthesizing flora.

Trouble is, we are outracing its natural counterbalance while simultaneously reducing and eliminating the flora required for it.
this article has a great list of people to follow on twitter, if anyone has ones to add be sure to post below =)

Olson is a great one, especially in GIS
here is my contribution: https://twitter.com/randal_olson
> therefore we can't use plants in any part of a carbon sequestration chain (even one that also involves industrial activity)

Not sure where your logic is coming from here. I am not saying we shouldn't use plants, but I am saying that even if we let forests retake "all the land," the stable CO2 level would be a bit higher than pre-industrialization, and it would stay that way for a long time until dead plant matter returned significant amounts of carbon to the deeper parts of the crust.

Therefore, using other methods like the one in the article are necessary if we want to reduce CO2 levels.
This is something that isn't often mentioned, but from what I understand this is actually kind of a one time deal with fossil fuels. I was under the assumption that the Earth is not likely to have another carboniferous period.

The implication being that we have one good shot at solving civilisation. It just gets more difficult when we start to run out of fossil fuels.

One of the reasons we don't see anything going on out there when we look up could very well be that most civilisations never properly make it off their planets.

Can anyone else comment on this that might have better information than me?
It prevents utilities from selling power generated by solar and wind farms in Wyoming.
I've been paying rent with www.rentpayment.com which unfortunately serves up their home page with multiple logins over http. Naturally, emails and tweets to their support go ignored. Maybe they'll finally respond after more people ask them why they're "non-secure".
Agreed.

The fact that one of the authors is Brian Kernighan is partly why, IMO. Just a few days back, I commented here in reply to someone about the quality of his K&P and K&R books (both of which I've used for trainings), on Unix and C respectively.
Choosing to bring devices full of encrypted noise vs choosing not to being devices is deliberately choosing to waste your time in addition to the CBP officers'. Maybe that's your goal, but they get paid to do that so you aren't exactly teaching them a lesson. If anything, you are just being rude to other people who want to cross the border since you've impacted the throughput.

It's sort of like "teaching the cops a lesson" by loitering around the local school in an ice cream truck implying something might happen.
Natural gas, hydro, and coal may fall under "net metering system" too.

The law plainly says that beginning in 2020, electric utilities in WY may not procure any power from solar and wind (unless they're located behind their customer's retail meter).

Why name technologies at all unless you're trying to pick winners (or select losers)?
Stoic teachings - when I'm facing dark times and feel I'm in dangerous territory psychologically...instinctively fall back of stoic mindsets in those situations. (e.g. "This too shall pass").

And yes I realise that quote isn't stoic per se - that's a simplified illustration of my point. Going into more detail - Meditations by M Aurelius.
I am far from too young to remember it. I was a partner at an ISP when it blew up. Yes, a lot of people switched careers. I was one of them for a while. But I know far more that moved back home with mom and dad than tried to make a new career in a new field. Many lateral shifts, but very few wholesale changes.
I don't know if there is danger, but I find the idea very scary that there is an organization that collects very intimate data on me without my knowledge and uses that to manipulate me. They are not really trying to find points that people agree on with Trump. They are trying to create a strong emotional image that works with the person in question and connect it to Trump.
This president is simply presenting alternative facts.
That white savior narrative is bullshit. No matter what Lincoln did, you will see a pretty strong trend of people who fly Confederate flags and what party they support... It also does not excuse or somehow counteract the last half century of Republican actions

The real reason the US "freed" the slaves was because there was a cotton crisis in egypt, making the united States the primary supplier of cotton to Europe. Now, the civil war was a resources game of who could fund their armies the longest, and Lincoln was smart enough to know that Europe would most likely support the south in the war in order to ensure steady flow of suddenly more valuable cotton. So, he made the war about slavery and issued the emancipation proclamation. The language in the EP is very clearly aimed at European interests and it put a moral high ground underneath the north to stand on, to sort of guilt Europe from funding the south in the civil war. It wasn't about civil rights, it was about securing the war effort.
When wind and solar actually become cheaper than coal, the problem will take care of itself. When will this happen? People seem to think we're close, but it's still at least a decade?

Population of Wyoming: 500,000

Their decision to use coal is irrelevant. I can't believe this is a top 10 story.
get_foo and get_foo_mut are a convention used by the rust standard library.
What's wrong with Electron apps?
Thanks! It's in there (row 21), but I got the price wrong.
> And while [sitting in an office] all day isn't exactly the worst thing, I could see issues if that turns into people getting depressed. [Office work] isn't really healthy.

> And while [bagging groceries] all day isn't exactly the worst thing, I could see issues if that turns into people getting depressed. [Menial labor] isn't really healthy.

> And while [driving an truck / bus / uber] all day isn't exactly the worst thing, I could see issues if that turns into people getting depressed. [Sitting all day] isn't really healthy.

UBI at least gives people options. If someone is happy playing WoW all day, and society doesn't really need them anyway... I see no harm in that. At least they have the option to quit playing and do something else. People doing menial labor often don't.
I think this says it best:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13457548

I'll also add that if you look back to 70's the Democratic Presidents have been more fiscally conservative than the Republican ones. That just supports the comment I link to above, which I think is 100% correct.

Republicans of the last 30 years care about one thing: reduce taxes on the wealthy.

The second thing they care about: reducing regulations on businesses. They want to be able to pollute and discriminate as much as they want, to increase shareholder value.

The fact that people vote against their own best interest has flabbergasted me for the last 20+ years.
In short: he made a rule for himself: no internet before bed and up until after the lunch.

It sounds simple but it's already more than most of us were ready to accept.
Rust would call that owning, though.
I'd hope that with embedded DSLs we can get closer. People are already doing lots of it in Haskell, including domains you listed.
Of course there is always the risk that one invents an "inner language" with poorer semantics and tools.
Good points, but error handling and less boilerplate are mostly moot once the code is already written, which is what makes them not great carrots for switching projects.
We buy way way way more luxury cars and suvs than you do. These are not considered vehicles for the wealthy either.

Small cars do not really sell here.

(For reference, I actually bought a new VW Golf R about 2 weeks ago... for roughly $41,000, just as a single data point).
Angular 2 with TS for front-end is an OK choice and works well for us. Choose another backend though, Meteor has seen it's prime. Chances are that a good old Express server will be more than enough.
For those that have not been to Wyoming, the wind there is phenomenal. Anecdotal story:

I cycled across the state from Yellowstone down to Colorado and the wind (plus awesomely paved roads, amazing scenery and friendly motorists) made the ride practically effortless. I set off at 11 in the morning on the Western side of the continental divide, went over a 10K or so pass, stopped off in a cafe for a couple of hours with some cyclists I met on the way (they had eloped from an organised tour and I had met their former partners earlier on the road). At that stage it was 5 p.m. and I had done 75 miles but it was too early to call it a day. I got going again and, by 8 p.m., I managed to put in 150 miles for the day. I was pleased with this, particularly considering that I had tent + stove + other camping gear with me. Only my heroes on the Tour de France managed such speeds for so long and they could slipstream each other plus they had a team car and 'PED's...

From my anecdotal experience of Wyoming (the locals told me it was always windy although the wind allegedly is 'always against you'), it would be a shame if this was not (wind) farmed. This failure to encourage wind power is kind of expected though for us observers from outside the U.S. - 'crazy Americans'!!!
I think for this era, fungi and other consumers of decaying matter could not break down the cellulose walls of plant matter. Since then they did. It is interesting to imagine a species gaining sentience on a planet where there was no coal or oil to power from a wood-burning society of iron to steel and plastics.
Has only 2GB RAM. A version with 4GB for $20 more would perform better as a limited use desktop PC.
Err, I work for a web host and we offer SSL by default as part of the onboarding. Speak for yourself :).
I once heard the back-to-nature approach deftly savaged as "abstinence-only decarbonization."

There is some low-hanging fruit to be plucked in terms of reducing consumption but the vast majority of the decarbonization effort should be focused on different modes of production. There are solid quantitative reasons to focus on cleaning up production instead of decreasing consumption, as well as the obvious political advantages. In 2014 the IPCC estimated that coal power had a median CO2-equivalent emissions intensity of 820 grams per kilowatt hour and that rooftop photovoltaic generation had a median intensity of 41 grams per kWh, 95% lower. So you could ask people to turn off their air conditioners in the summer, and if you convinced half of households to endure that discomfort it would actually reduce emissions much less than if everyone air-conditioned like before but via solar power instead of fossil power. Imposing austerity on energy services is a painful and not even particularly effective way to cut emissions.
Methane is CH4, if you burn in oxygen then you get CO2 (and some CO potentially as you say) and H2O. Where's the NOx come from?

Can you get particulates burning methane? Long chain hydrocarbons, I can see how that works; but methane seems like it would disperse too easily, unless it's liquid/solid methane you're burning or you're doing it in a very low pressure atmosphere. That's my intuition though, any citations showing significant particulate yield with methane combustion?
Storyblok.com could be one you may never heard before. ;)
> We should shun colleagues

Isn't that... a political solution?
... Except generators and comprehensions are often faster than for loops in your hot path.

Apart from that... What's readable tends to be the best option.
I just built a 3500 line chatbot with the ms bot framework in typescript and my experience was very different.

Source maps in node are working fine for me in intellij. I can set breakpoints in the typescript code and step from there with full inspection capabilities.

The library compat issues you're describing I didn't have. I used what MS recommends or uses itself in the bot framework, which is of course all nicely compatible (e.g. mocha/chai/sinon for unit tests). For promises I used regular ES6 promises, so that wasn't an issue either.
> Suddenly a million sick people are making insurance claims who previously had no insurance, what did you think was going to happen to premiums?

This is what I mean.

From a business point of view, suddenly everyone has an extra $1000.

They were buying stuff from you until now, there's no reason not to try to drive the price up to see how much more you can charge now.

If enough businesses will do that, it will reach a critical mass where the ones charging old prices are the idiots left behind.

So if literally everyone has an extra $1000, nobody has an extra $1000.

A bit different with insurance, since the government forced insurance companies to accept all these people, so they increased prices. I'll ignore the fact that they were still making enough profit to just accept the losses, because people are greedy and they will always want all the profit they can get.
This is also true, I would say it's a combo of the two. The more new things at once the more likely it is that you'll be working with something without a good correlation to something in your previous experience. But at the same time having a broader and richer base of experience will make it more likely that you'll have an easier go of it for any of those individual things.
It wasn't anywhere near half the workforce. It was 500 temp/contract workers who'd been brought on for a third shift to keep up with anticipated demand. When supply outpaced demand and dealership inventories were growing too large, they cut the third-party temp workers, and went back to two shifts. It still sucks, but your understanding of the facts is off. Temp workers are constantly in a state of gaining and losing employment. It's a pretty awful way to engage employment. VW is still a major employer around here, and never seems to cease hiring (or at least heavily marketing available jobs throughout the area).
>Trees certainly work as a buffer in the sense that carbon in plants is carbon not in the atmosphere, but the amount you could hold is tiny in comparison to the amount that must be sequestered

Is it? Let's do the math.

Absorbing the 350 teratonnes of human emitted carbon[1] over the 8.4 billion hectares of Earth's non-tundra / non-desert land surface area[2] works out to... 42 tonnes per hectare. If we can green deserts[3] that drops to 30 tonnes.

That's 30-40 trees per hectare, at 1 tonne per tree.[4] Or 3 kg per square meter of soil carbon, the equivalent of 25-35 cm of topsoil. More likely some combination of the two. Soil carbon is stored up to 40 meters down by deep rooted plants.[5]

Most of our land management is via agriculture, so agriculture seems to be the only lever long enough to make a dent. Practically this implies transitioning from soil destroying tillage to soil building cover crops, long-distance imported fertilizer to in-situ fertility produced by soil organisms, and ecologically unstable monocultures to resiliant polyculture, agroforestry, and rotational grazing systems.

The "gotcha" question is not whether we can replace our existing agriculture with these systems. The question is whether we can replace our existing agriculture with itself. Any unsustainable system is, by definition, not a viable replacement for itself.

[1] http://petrolog.typepad.com/climate_change/2010/01/cumulativ....

[2] http://cnx.org/contents/TWFXbERo@1/The-main-biomes

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xcZS7arcgk

[4] http://cabiblog.typepad.com/hand_picked/2011/06/ever-wondere....

[5] http://www.soilquality.org.au/factsheets/organic-carbon
Thanks for pointing out Dark Horse downloader.
Comparing IIFE to UMD Bundles in JavaScript
جامعة حفر الباطن
Try OVH. $3.5/mo for a 2GB RAM VPS
https://www.ovh.com/us/vps/
Im sure this is already happening
Besides West Virginia, what rhetoric was there? A large portion of middle and rural America didn't vote republican because they thought coal would come back, it's because a large majority didn't like the Washington status-quo in which Clinton represented. However, Donald Trump was a wild card and not part of the "establishment".

If Sanders or a different republican was in the race it would be an entirely different story.

Now...if you are referring to West Virginia, then the issue revolved around bill Clinton initially making a lot of promises there and never following through, and as a result you had so much bent up friction from it that Hillary barely even campaigned there.

With your comment, it makes it sound like you are saying "look how trump hasn't helped you at all, I bet you wish you voted for Clinton now".

Ultimately the president was elected based upon how middle America felt they have been treated by the government over the last roughly 20 years. In other words, trump won because he gave people hope and was willing to speak against established parties (even his own).

On the flip side, Hillary is a conservative democrat (I would personally consider her more republic than democrat in terms of today's views). Along with this she would have had a republican house and congress. The out come by either would likely be the same no matter who won. The only difference is that since many news outlets are liberal leaning that the headlines would be friendlier.
> Remember, HTTPS isn't just for security, but also privacy.

And the third thing: authenticity.

No-one has modified the page, for example to insert or change advertisements
the 86, FRS and BRZ are all very similar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_86
Ok, it's clear you are just trolling at this point. It's really not that difficult. In October of 2009 the unemployment rate was 10.0%, and today it is 4.9%.

Democrats use this stat to say "look how many people the administration has put back to work". Republicans then say "easy there, most of this 'improvement' is from people just giving up, not from all of these people finding work".

Nobody is arguing that the stat is being _recorded_ incorrectly. They are arguing that it is being _used_ incorrectly. It is being used to imply that there has been a massive improvement in the availability of work. The other side says this stat does not actually show an improvement in the availability of work. What is meant by "real unemployment rate" is a stat that would better show the availability of work.

If you don't like that name, then name it whatever you want, but don't pretend that you don't know what people are talking about when they use the term. That is the "dangerous" behavior as far as I am concerned.
How Louis CK Tells a Joke
I left a job in the US after being tricked into joining an elaborate hoax in the Middle East (Doha Qatar to be specific.) They purported to do ML research, had a real office (incredible), high end equipment, even some former C-level CROs from US firms.

Once I moved over (after giving up my previous job, school districts, etc), it was clear the entire operation was a sham -- the $7Billion endowment was non-existent, most workers had side-jobs (during the day!) and there was no ML research at all to speak of.

I persevere knowing that the golden land called the United States of America still awaits me. Just need to wait out the schoolyear.
Or, as I found out in TLV, have a beard
> if FSF wants a intelligent assistant it will have to collect usage data

Well, not necessarily (although that is certainly the path of least resistance). However, even if data collection is necessary, there are ways of doing it in a privacy- and freedom-respecting manner.
You can get the Deep Belief stack running on a Pi GPU:

https://petewarden.com/2014/06/09/deep-learning-on-the-raspb...

Aside from that, I don't think the performance will be acceptable. I've been running Spark and Jupyter on a 20-core, 5 node cluster and it's acceptable, but only useful for debugging (because stuff happens slower).
You'll definitely start charging $2, otherwise you would not have stayed in business for long.

If you keep the same price, but everyone is charging 4x as much, you are losing, because everyone else needs 4x less customers to make the same profit as you, not to mention the work involved.

You'll run out of supply soon enough, too.
It probably does, but it doesn't make such effort less worthy. Anti-circumvention provisions should have existed to begin with, same as DRM.
Correction: If you want the parse tree, GLR and Earley can have O(n^4) time complexity it seems:

http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/22621/complexity...
Sadly I read this as a thinly veiled attempt to argue for Congress to fund anti-bioitic research.

Why? Well the article practically spells out the why: pharma is not incentivised to bring new anti-biotics to market, but they can create lots of "new" ones that are similar to the old ones. Why not change the model, and create a system where pharma companies can churn out "new and innovative" anti-biotics, for a nice guaranteed government payout. "Win win" for pharma, politicians, and who knows - maybe farmers and people?

Cynical? Extremely. An element of truth in my view? Almost certainly.

The way I view it - we have too many different options available on the market. We should look to remove a decent % of them from circulation in as many countries as possible, to allow any resistant strains to lose their resistance. Yes, this would impact pharma companies, but their could be a rotational system with extensions to patents as required to keep them happy.
7 cuestiones sobre la América de Trump
If you can't turn 8 figures into 9, you're an idiot. What has he ever done to help anyone with all his wealth and power?
I found dumb that a $10 fine is made look as if it's on top of the $0.12 per kWh, but it's actually per MWh. It's $10 on top of $120 - while still silly, is not as bad.
My Intel chromebook has only 2GB of RAM, and is good enough to develop on - YMMV.
The 80s maybe?
>However the ESP8266 is built around Tensilica's Xtensa, not ARM's Cortex.

DOH!

I have to say, though, that having the AVR code generator merged is very cool. At one time I was a big user of avr-gcc and remember when the AVR LLVM effort was just getting started. I haven't been following it, though.

One of the annoyances with gcc is that the optimizer kept wanting to use code motion to relocate the interrupt disable instruction to the beginning of the function it was found in. The only way to keep the optimizer from doing that would have been to make the instruction depend on all of RAM, which would effectively disable optimization for any function that disabled interrupts. So coding critical sections required a bit of jiggery-pokery to keep the optimizer from breaking your code. I hope the LLVM back-end found a way around that.
I think the point is more like an HR administrator who opens a web page, containing an employee's details. They need to update the employee's home phone number, but their password manager dumps the HR administrator's password into the "Set new password" field, which is therefore overwritten.