skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not to mention his extremely well founded comments on their patch.

High level consulting basically.
The point about unfalsifiability is still valid. Even if we can simulate sentient life we still can't prove we ourselves are simulated or not.
That doesn't mean people don't use it.

Is what you're saying here documented anywhere?
Then OpenSSL environment variables are security vulnerabilities too? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13558750
If we remove memory corruption errors, that it already one less class of errors to worry about.

As for the <whatever type safe systems programming language> crowd, these complaints have been done in the past by fairly unknown people like C. A. R. Hoare, Niklaus Wirth, James G. Mitchell, Alan Kay, Luca Cardelli,.... so what do they know about computers.
> Also, although being easier, is jupyter doing anything not being done in emacs years ago?

While I already think it's worthwhile that you can sidestep emacs' setup and learning curve for uninterested students, you might be interested in how it is already used for collaboration and teaching.

One list of examples might be this:

https://github.com/jupyter/jupyter/wiki/A-gallery-of-interes...

If you're teaching math or physics to a bunch of students who know Python and SciPy, I would assume Jupyter notebooks are an amazing way to distribute course material.
The trouble is that your view requires both an imagination, and humility.
OP's post contained the phrase "Tier IV emissions", which I never heard before, so I googled it and got me to this page[0].

Turns out it specifically governs nonroad engine emissions i.e. that of farm vehicles.

[0] https://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/nonroad.php#tier4
> For all we know, a hypothetical simulation must take part somewhere far below the atomic/quantum level, maybe around the Planck scale.

And the whole concept of "planck scale" could be simulated. When you get into the realm of "simulated universe" you may as well say "God did it". It requires equal levels of evidence for proof and provides the same level of evidence.
> but I couldn't cry even if my life depended on it. I'm not an expert, but I feel it's more about nature than nurture

I couldn't either, but after seeing a therapist for some time (for a light depression), I became much more aware of my emotions. Crying became much more easy as well.
The Schiphol app is one of the better ones, but then there are all the other airports...

Also, this issue is not limited to airports - there's lots and lots of integration to be done.

Say, if I want to take a bus in Bergen (Norway's #2 town, or, if you ask the locals, #1) - you need one app to find out which bus(es) to take, then another to buy a ticket. If you want to buy a ticket for the airport coach? Oh, you'll need another app for that. Actually, you'll need two, as there are two coach companies.

And, getting to Oslo, (#1, or, if you ask the people in Bergen - #2) you'll need another app if you want to take the shuttle train into town, then yet another for getting tickets once you transit to trams/buses in the city centre.

&c. If public transport companies could agree on a way of sharing payments, the market is more than ripe for unified apps for route planning and ticketing, at least on a national level. (Expecting standardization to cross borders is probably a bit of a stretch - and, unless you happen to live in, say, Liechtenstein with half a dozen countries within walking distance (yes, I exaggerate), not much of a concern, really.
What is the simplest database?
"The same exact things were said of the Italians, Jews, Poles, Irish and many others that poured into the US."

This bears repeating. Exactly the same arguments were advanced by (otherwise) fairly intelligent people about whichever was the latest group. Those arguments were wrong, and this argument is wrong.
There’s more to mathematics than rigour and proofs [2014]
What nobody is telling you about PWAs
Audio latency on ios devices is less than 10 ms (iirc about 6-7 ms). It's not ideal but saying it's "not workable" is an exaggeration. Also I don't believe the latency for computing devices is worse compared to digital instruments because we accept it, but because digital instruments have always had an advantage due to their specialization.
You can now order emergency booze and food using Prime Now on Alexa – The Verge
You can do this with SmartGit, which I prefer over Sourcetree.
Fake accounts scandal weighs on Twitter CEO
Mass Effect: Andromeda and the Illusion of Freedom UK
how are its lubrication properties?
Transform RSS feeds into posts on your website
UK follows US in banning electronic devices on flights
That's also means they may have to alter our minds sometimes to avoid expensive computations:

For example a bit contrived example: if we try to find the next Mersenne prime (or something similar, computationally hard but easy to check thing (e.g. anything NP complete)), and we use millions of computers to do that, and the simulators do not have it precomputed already - then the simulators either have to compute it too to provide the proper sensory input (the mersenne prime found) or alter our mind not to do this...
Grand jury decides that a GIF counts as a deadly weapon in Twitter seizure case
>Why should they? I don't want the column sizes to change under me, I want them to stay as they were left.

Well, I want the window to expand to show me the content of the folder and the file metadata without me having to do anything special - no hotkeys, no special zones to remember.

This would make it actually useful, as a utility, rather than something I have to service, as a user, on a frequent basis in order to get the details I want.

It just seems so obviously broken and such an obvious feature that I can't think why it isn't being done .. nearly every other file-system explorer interface I use, on Linux and occasionally Windows, can show this information properly through auto layout without human intervention .. yet Finder is some kind of special.
After having received several counterfeit items (cheap electronics, chef's knife, household stuff) I avoid Amazon altogether. Funny thing, nowadays I trust Aliexpress or Gearbest (Chinese markets) more than Amazon or eBay -- at least I know what I pay for, what to expect and as a bonus, free shipping.
Mythic launches a chip to enable computer vision and voice control on any device
Source? I had the believe it is the exact opposite. As in beef shit poisons ground water and air
Three Object-Oriented Programming Books Worth Reading
> In the space of all possible universes it is unlikely that we live in the most probable one, but it is likely that we live in a probable one.

I was never great at probability theory, but wouldn't we by definition most likely be living in the most probable universe?
Have they fixed the very slow swagger-ui project yet?
actually common browser window sizes are divisible by 128, which means that you could just bitmask all but the last few digits to achieve the same result in a few cycles
Thanks for that .. I believe I may finally be able to fix this decades-long annoyance with this tidbit of handy information.
The life-changing magic of tidying up (your computer)
Your #2 implied that Bostrom himself mixed up the causality, but he did not. In a sense, it's your comment that's mixing up the causality. Just because it's confusing, the way Primer is confusing, doesn't mean it's illogical.
The Road Not Taken” – The Most Misread Poem in America
Show HN: Lomotions – Video camera with beautiful filters for Android
Security service for websites(IP privacy,WAF,DDoS protection)
Only reasonable explanation is that he has a secret AGI working for him in the shadow.
Seeing as they also use APIs and API's, I don't think it's intentional, but badly written.
> That's OK for Linux specific stuff but stat() is pretty standard.

The libc (~POSIX) call is "pretty standard" and uses typedef'd pseudo-abstract types (OSX's stat has been 64b optionally since 10.5 and by default since 10.6, though the 32b version seems to remain available in 10.11 by compiling with _DARWIN_NO_64_BIT_INODE), the underlying syscall is not in any way.
I experienced a series of extremely unlikely coincidences recently and one of my first thoughts was that if The Sims was a sufficiently advanced game I'd be doing those sorts of things to the characters.
My long-time side project and first Android application. Finally public :)
> And it only needs to be simulated convincingly enough and in enough detail to fool your human mind.

If we are inside a simulation, there are too many variables that are beyond our control. What are 'we'? are 'we' 'humans'? Or are 'we' 'programmed' to 'think' so? what is a 'thought'? What is 'mind'? What does it 'mean' by 'fool' 'your' 'human' 'mind'?
Modern C++ and Lisp Programming Style
Certainly doesn't solve your problem to know this, though, does it? I for one cannot fathom how this sorting arrangement is of use to anyone, personally ..
Welcome to 2017. I know where you are coming from, and I feel the same way, but we are part of a shrinking group. I pride myself on being able to find my way around unfamiliar places by simply studying a map beforehand (digital or paper) and having a basic grasp of the public transport options available there. When I drive a car, I can get where I want to be by simply using the signs and essentially just knowing the rough outlines of the topography.

I'm Dutch by the way, and I only ever use the 9292 service to check my itinerary and look for alternative routes if a delay or service cancellation occurs (although usually these are announced and/or provided for).

It's great that I am able to open up a web browser or some app before or during a trip to figure out if my itinerary needs changing or if a connection can be made, but I can't imagine having to depend on a dozen apps to figure out something as basic as where my gate is or when I should get out of the bus — buses announce there stops via scrolling text and usually voice, and why would you even get on a bus without knowing how many stops you'll be riding or even which direction it should roughly be heading?

There is a whole generation out there (severely generalizing, but it does feel this way sometimes) who completely lack the skills for even basic navigation. Their awareness shifted from actual to digital surroundings, their dependency on technology gradually increasing.

If people want to live like that; fine. But I find this increasing dependency on information fed to you rather than actively sought out worrying.
The problem, as I understand it, is that Amazon mixes inventory from various sellers as long as its the same product. Or appears to be. It makes sense on paper but obviously doesn't work when counterfeit products slip into the stock.

If that's the case, ironically enough counterfeit sellers might actually end up having original products shipped / fulfilled by Amazon, which might add to the confusion, e.g. positive customer reviews on a bad listing.
Really? There are people like this on HN? You think these companies are spending billions to extract these resources them hording them in their vaults? No. They're help all of us buy the things we need, including the device you used to type your nonsense.
I tried to access the developer program (from this (https://lbry.io/quickstart) link on this (https://lbry.io/get) page) and got a blank page.
Show HN: A springy, composable parallax-scroller for React
Machine learning for 'green screens'
Do tell!
London-based women's health tech startup, Elvie, announces Series A
Regarding "Basic Thermo", everything we 'know', we subjectively acquired over a tiny period of time, through a game of telephone that refers to the current universe. We're really in no position to comment, in absolutes, on the nature of the parent universes.
What Is Social Credibility – The Bitter Business
React :D
I don't know what phone you had in 2000, but I had a Nokia 2100 in 1996 and it was the best phone ever made.

Now that I think about it, I probably had an Ericsson T28 in 2000 and it did kinda suck.
and what happens when the game is over :)
You only need to simulate one mind actually, it's all a dream :)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solipsism
The one I remembered was that it's about the same energy generating density as a compost heap:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_core#Energy_conversion
Create the folder ~/Projects/go and use it as gopath, I recommend a vendoring tool to prevent cluttering.
The part where "is this a simulation" becomes an uninteresting question is when you ask "Does it matter?". Would answering the question of whether we're in a simulation have any impact on your behavior, thoughts, and actions? Probably not. So what does it matter?

My high school physics teacher once said that, if we ever find something that is outside the universe, then we will obviously be smart enough to call that the universe also. Because "universe" is a definition that means "everything".

Similarly, if we ever find a reality beyond reality, we'll just call it reality. Because that's how it's defined. It means "everything".

Or put another way: Of course we live in a simulation. Your experience of the world is just an emergent property of how your senses and neural system interact. There's no real reality. You're already trapped in a dark box doing fly-by-instruments using signals processing to interpret what your nervous system is detecting.

Is that not already a simulation anyway? Maybe not. Maybe it depends on how you define "you".

Fundamentally, would knowing that you're in a simulation change anything?
I used to take writing lessons and the teacher always said that the coincidences only happen in real life, not in stories because that wouldn't be realistic.
Its so strange that the US still uses checks.
I don't understand why is simulation even necessary. Simulation argument says that our universe and consciousness is pretty much just some sort of mathematical structure, that is being manipulated according to some simple laws as it evolves through what we call time.

But then, isn't the only requirement for beings inside this structure to perceive it as such that the structure exists? Do you need to really physically manipulate it?

To put it differently, what if the designers of the simulation could come up with some theorem that would let them correctly skip hundreds of years of simulating something. Would beings in those hundreds of years still existed, even though it wasn't actually executed? What if they just calculated the final answer? Would we then exist?

So, to me, either this is nonsense, and we are not in simulation, or, any kind of mathematical structure that can possibly exist somehow "exists" and no "creator" is needed. But neither of those two options is a good argument for existence of simulation creator.
Grand Real Gangster City
> Is it true methane is so much worse a geeenhouse gas than co2 ("20x")? Wouldn't that mean him turning methane into co2 is not just carbon neutral, but great for the environment?

It's true and it actually has a GWP[0] of ~80 over 20 years (so over 20 years a given mass of methane traps 80 times as much heat as the same mass of CO2), although it degrades back to CO2 and water in 12 years. So yes if you're releasing the carbon into the atmosphere either way, it is much, much better to release it as CO2 than as methane.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential
Nice. I have recently figured out that Lufthansa has also a API
https://developer.lufthansa.com/docs
It looks like a brain and that's enough for me to jump on the hype train. I don't really care if it does nothing more.
Unicycle Acts HD
1. "Visit Boxouse $40" sounds like you are charging money for tours, which almost made me leave the site immediately: tweak the copy to say "Stay in a Boxouse $40" or "Try a Boxouse $40"

2. Your presentation needs work.

- Barebones: needs a photo that's less dark, also more than one photo (including inside and outside)
- Standard: decent photos, looks bright & clean
- Boxouse Deluxe: despite having some nice details this looks like a junky piece of crap. The photo quality is the worst of the three, and the house in the photo is messy and unappealing. The side with the mattress looks sloppy (is that a deflated air mattress? A sleeping bag over a sagging mattress? Whatever it is I don't want to even sit on it, much less sleep on it) and the Ikea-esque drawers with the awkward space between looks unfinished or dysfunctional. The other side by the metal tub has a trashcan and two gadgets plugged in... don't know what they are but that whole side just looks like random junk in the corner of a garage.

The boxouse in the "Visit Boxouse" page is bright, has some design and is appealing: this is what a deluxe one should look like, not the sloppy thing you have there now.

3. If your business model is to deploy them to people's houses for free and split rent revenue, why is your website geared around individual sales?
Poor choice of words on my part. I don't NEED a dozen apps to travel; I am just somewhat annoyed that any two-gate airport in the world needs its own, poorly designed app. I want integration - after all, these apps aren't exactly rocket science.

Oh, and I don't rely on the apps. They are a convenience. I still have my itinerary on paper and ask for printed boarding passes just in case.
The main question to me would be how much becomes atmopheric from raw pig manure versus digester.
If something or someone is simulating this granular level, it has to go through quantum uncertainties to reach our observable macroscopic reality. From this point of view it is totally opaque and does not matter. Traditional simulation/god hypothesis usually work on the macroscopic scale, which is IMHO not compatible with our knowledge/observations.
I'm still going through the docs and all so this probably has been answered before :

How do you deal with takedown and dcma requests? I know ipfs for example has a blacklist for dcma requests.

I'm trying to understand what keeps someone from copying a video and sharing it for less or uploading a movie or TV series.
Android O features and API you should know – Tell Me How
Python’s Functions Are First-Class
Indeed; the 'simulation universe' possibility I find (oddly I know!) comforting, and this has provided me with a way of understanding to some degree the comfort offered by religion to many people, while at the same time I still can't understand the religious aspect itself.
I am not sure what to make of the whole universe-is-a-simulation argument. The problem is that, this is as far as I know, not an hypothesis we could ever hope to prove. Not any more than we can proof that a diety exists outside of this world.

I highly doubt that there is a higher creature, whether that would be a God of some kind, or a whole civilization outside of our universe that somehow simulates us.

But let's for entertainment suppose that we are in fact a simulation. Would that not immediatly raise the question "why"? If we are a simulation I would really like to know the reason for being simulated. What do they hope to reach with simulating a life like ours?

I fear we could never find a satisfactory answer to these questions. I also agree with the statement that this brings us back to a more mythological explanation of the universe and life around us. It'd make more sense to try and explain our universe without that hypothesis to me.

Another argument that I'd like to raise against the universe-simulation hypothesis is the following. Humans like to see the world around them in terms of the technology that, at that moment, is considered modern and which they like. For example, Freud compared the human brain to the steam engine, which at that point was modern technology. Today, we compare the brain to a computer, and we even go as far as to consider the whole universe might be similated in one. Maybe just because that is what we consider 'modern' at the moment?

In 1000 years from now, humans might think it's silly to think of the brain as a computer and rather think of it in terms of technology X, and the universe is technology Y.
You're right, it was in really poor taste. I'm sorry. The downvotes are entirely justified.

(As a poor attempt at mitigation, I had literally just made that typo, which cost me about two hours because I'd run a lengthy migration on the wrong database in a staging environment and then not understood why nothing I tested was working, when I read the BBC News article... and, yes, I thought, "Hey, yeah, me too.")
I would be fascinated to see how they intend to beat the incumbents to market. Airbus has already announced its interest in electric planes: They've flown an electric two-seat trainer (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_E-Fan), and announced plans for a (hybrid-)electric 90-seat regional plane.

Commercial aeroplanes are incredibly capital-intensive, and their plan seems to require getting good at commercial aeroplanes before Boeing/Airbus gets good at batteries/motors. Precisely one of those things is commodity technology...
MCQ Questions on CSS1 and CSS2.1 Properties Part-1 – InfoTechSite
It _is_ a vulnerability!
Harms of PD and Countermeasures
God I wish it was open source and the dev didn't suddenly disappear :(
It seems far more likely that the universe is a computer game rather than a simulation. A simulation implies that it tries to simulate everything accurately - if it's a computer game, we can expect that the creators cheated in multiple ways to keep computations way down.

Obvious ways to cheat:

- Only the things you are directly experiencing and seeing is simulated to a high degree.

- If you ever came close to discovering the true state of the universe, the game might simply erase those thoughts or twists things to make them fit again.

- People who really study physics and have access to detecting whether the universe is a simulation are all NPCs :)
Nice. Some more examples of the filters it offers would be useful.
If a simulation contains minds is it not equivalent Dennet's "Brain in a vat" [1] model of consciousness ?

In "Consciousness Explained" Dennet postulates that a conscious mind perceiving a thing-in-the-world need not have perfect rich input data but merely a neuron that responds yes to the question: Am I seeing that thing ?

[1] Consciousness Explained, Daniel Dennet, page 8, [ Prelude, Hard Hallucination Problem ]:

"...intervene somewhere along the chain (anywhere on the optic nerve, ...between the eyeball and consciousness), tugging just right on the nerves would
produce exactly the chain of events that would be caused by a normal veridical perception of something, ...producing, at the receiving end in the mind, exactly the effect of such a conscious perception."
Something that most people never consider in these discussions:

If you accept the hypothesis that mind is generated by a computation, and that this computation is finite, then the same computation that produces "you" can be performed in different places and at different times. The same computation can be performed inside a simulation, inside a simulation inside a simulation and so on.

Whatever environment around you can be included in this computation.

As long as the computation is finite the larger and/or more temporally extended the universe is, the higher the probability that the computation that is generating this current moment for you is being executed more than once. If the universe is infinite in some sense, this probability converges to 1.

And yet you would have no way of knowing that this is happening.

So I claim that, if you assume that mind is generated by a computation, then then question of wether we are in a simulation or not can be replied with "both" or "it doesn't matter".
From what I understood, they were using methane in internal combustion engines, so they are not releasing methane into atmosphere, rather burning it and producing CO2. I would assume that some of the methane is going to end up in atmosphere (engine efficiency, leaking from gas tank), but compare that to untreated pig manure, which would produce said methane anyhow.