skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I used to think this, but have relaxed that view over time.

For constraints, validity checking, things like adding/updating timestamps, and other things that are about data integrity, about the only time I don't do that in the DB is when outside information is involved such that it can't be. Otherwise, to the extent possible, I want the datastore to only accept valid data. This goes to the notion that fixing code is easier than fixing data, so the store can not only defend itself, but also help catch bugs.

There are also times when dealing with huge amounts of data that doing whatever you're doing in an SP is the only way to get decent performance. Dragging enormous tables over the network to process is sometimes really wasteful. If you're tuning indexes and whatnot against that model, you're already changing the DB, and doing so at a level that is implicit rather than explicit, and in ways that can change out from under you (if the statistics change).
It's not a solved engineering problem.

It's likely that planned reactors would work, but they are also likely to be really expensive.
LinkedIn is free to block the IPs of the scrapers.
>I believe the politicization of nuclear energy (the resulting lack of investment & innovation) will go down as one of the major blunders in human history.

It's more or less ensured that we won't be in any shape to record histories sooner rather than later.
We should shoot the waste into to sun.
ESET Smart Security 8 Activation Key 2017 Free Download
Major imports into the US come from Canada, Kazakhstan, Australia, and Russia. Namibia used to be a bigger import source country, but it's apparently dropped off in recent years.

Source: https://www.eia.gov/uranium/marketing/pdf/umartable3figure5....
Are we talking about the same thing? Chrome? Chrome literally auto-updates.
Two important points:

1. What about wind and solar?

2. The death/unit energy misses out the fact that we spend a lot more to keep nuclear safe because we are worried about it. If we spent a fraction of the same amount on other energy, we might get similar safety results.
Apart from the waste. We really don't know what to do about it other than bury it and leave it for a few tens to hundreds of generations in the future to deal with with the hope that they will know what to do.

We could do like we do with coal, and just release the radioactivity into the atmosphere. That industry disposes of a lot of radioactive material that way.
You could argue that it's actually our social and legal system which is causing problems, rather than a deficiency of technology.

Not in the sense that people are being irrational, but in the sense that we don't have a good framework for dealing with liabilities -- like nuclear waste -- for extremely long periods of time. We could probably store it pretty well if anybody was motivated in paying the direct and indirect costs of doing so properly.
I'm surprised at the absolute lack of news on how Vega FE performs in deep learning...
> I use the same monitor as well. Until recently, I had the 15" version of that laptop, and now I have the latest 15" Macbook Pro. Both use 2560x1440 on the external monitor even though it's capable of 3840x2160, because that's what OS X defaults to, and every time I try increasing the resolution, I only make it a few minutes before I can't stand how terrible the experience is and end up switching back.

I would suggest to try using different DisplayPort cable.

OSX defaults to "best" resolution for the given display. In case of this monitor, it is 3840x2160, but - it will tell you is 1920x1080 and use it in HiDPI mode. Like this: http://imgur.com/a/infej

Once you change resolution, it will remember, what you changed it to on that specific display, and will use it next time you connect to it.

> I'm saying that native Mac applications look really bad on OS X when set to 3840x2160. The UI and text don't scale consistently, and that's true both of the system-level UI and of application UI.

In my experience, they scale perfectly. The ones that are non-HiDPI aware, are scaled by the system to the proper size (and thus are pixelated).

XQuartz is another matter. It should be taken behind the barn and shot long time ago. Running X11 apps is better done using a linux vm.

However, what I don't understand, why you have wrong scale. XQuartz is a not DPI-aware app, thus it is scaled by the system.
> Parts also shrink up to 15 percent during the debinding and sintering process – but again, that's all automatically managed by the system.

Given this change in volume (which I assume would be highly nonlinear depending on design density and geometry?) I wonder what repeatability is like.

Perhaps for the manufacturing (non prototyping) printer they have a closed loop feedback mechanism to build a few outputs and feed any dimensions out of tolerance back to the input stage.
It needs access to your contacts list, something I am not willing to grant it, given that it's owned by Facebook. Otherwise it doesn't work. Singal and Wire work regardless.
Yeah, tmux is pretty powerful all by itself, and perfectly suited for pair-programming, assuming ssh is set up. I wrote a little wrapper script a while ago to handle the setup of the ssh keys on a temporary basis (the partner's SSH key is allowed to attach to the appropriate tmux session only and is removed when disconnected): https://github.com/goerz/tmuxpair
I can't math good apparently, heh.
Alphabet’s X lab is working on renewable energy storage
I don't run often, but I hike a TON. 10+ mile hikes, 3-5 times a week, over moderate elevation changes. After three weeks at Yosemite in July a couple years ago, I've completely moved on from heavy hiking boots, to Inov8 trail shoes. Ultralight, 0-4mm drop. Best move I've ever made. Just did a week in the Canadian rockies, over HEAVY terrain, and rock scrambles. No more overheating, stronger feet, and I can go MUCH further distances.
Either it will be local, or it will be dilute enough not to matter.
Isn't nuclear hysteria created mostly by American CleanTech industry?

Solar is not a reliable source to begin with so you can't use it to power anything critical. It has to be combined with something like nuclear or fossil fuels to have reliable power. But if we go nuclear, we will have 1000s of years worth of power. So, where exactly does Solar fit in?
In an alternative perspective, for once the big company couldn't force the victim into a limited settlement through the threat of exhausting their finances in a legal battle.

The fact that judgments of such high amounts can happen is a general issue though, and they seem to serve as a questionable replacement for punishment that maybe should be the domain of criminal cases.
I really think you're just spitting out numbers.

Where are you getting these numbers? Particularly the cow one (deliberate killings only).

Generally intrigued.

> yet people jump in cars like it's routine.
It is routine. Time spent driving is much, much, much higher than time spent swimming near sharks. So...

My brain understands that if I refused to go skydiving, then I can not die from a skydiving accident. Which is about as likely as going for a swim instead of a drive to get to work.
I've encountered thousands of cars today. I've yet to encounter a single shark in decades. I'd expect very high danger in the presence of a shark. I've not yet been injured by all the cars I've seen in my life.

People understanding of stats is fine. They understand that the pre-requisite to being attacked by a shark is super-extremely low. That does not make sharks safe. I'll put my hand on the hood of a car any day instead of on a shark.

Your reasoning about Fukushima shows the same kind of problem: it's because of all the urgent actions after the accident that there's not been more consequences. Your argument would show that a house on fire is not dangerous because after people were evacuated, no one died of burning. It's the evacualtion of of a fire that saves life, it's not the lack of danger of a blazing inferno.
As a web developer why would this be useful to me. I know Linux and run it for years and now at this job i am on windows. My stack is usually python flask, postgres, vuejs/react, ...

All of these things run natively on windows is there another advantage to moving to the WSL?

I know there are advantages but specifically for my tool chain is there something i am missing?

TIA
You could also just legislate that every time one uses a car you have to stand in a shaking room packed with people for half and hour. I bet that would really cut down on congestion. If not, just up the wait time in the hot box until it does. People, could of course, would have the option pay for someone to do their waiting for them.
Manufactured products are generally safe because the economic costs of shipping unsafe products is too high. Legal fees, litigation, products liability insurance, judgement costs, UL certifications, OSHA compliance and inspection costs, etc. It took several generations for the risks to be understood and for politicians to succumb to public pressure and enact product safety / tort legislation.

It would be nice for Congress to get in front of this issue and legislate penalties for unsafe AI. It would be nice for the debate to simply begin. But, products liability as a guide, it will be several highly publicized incidents before meaningful protections are enacted. We're still waiting for meaningful privacy legislation, after many information breaches, and there has been little progress.

Its one thing for Musk to warn of the dangers of AI, its another for he and like minded folks to fund a lobby to advocate for protective legislation.
> I might as well argue that car drivers are safer than pedestrians because the average deaths/horse power is vastly lower.

This is a bad analogy. A good analogy would be: if you had to travel 1000 miles, it would be safer to do it by car than on foot because car is safer per mile travelled.
Yes, however this assumes that number of deaths of any technology would linearly scale with its energy output.

e.g. if I built n times more wind turbines to match the energy output of nuclear energy then, according to this measure, I would also get n times the number of wind-power-related deaths.

I see no basis for that assumption, especially as nuclear energy has known risks that e.g. wind power doesn't.
They were published in anthologies of his short stories and articles. EDIT: I believe it's in the anthology All the Myriad Ways.
Here are a few measurable statictics that Nuclear would win hands down:

* Square miles of uninhabitable land produced/tWh

* Fishing industries destroyed/tWh

* Agricultural land destroyed/tWh

* Peoples displaced/tWh

* Lethal toxic waste produced/tWh

* Clean up cost/tWh
"It's a fight that could determine whether an anti-hacking law can be used to curtail the use of scraping tools across the Web."

In the US. Not elsewhere. Is it possible that the centre of gravity of innovation will be somewhere, er, less litigious soon?

Reminds me of the City of London's historical approach to most forms of regulation (think: Francis Drake, privateers, the convertibility of lute strings &c).
It's meaningful because it provides a rational basis for comparing the risk of various power sources. It's the same as comparing deaths/mile to evaluate self-driving cars.

People are overwhelmingly bad at risk assessment, which is why one can be anti-nuclear and afraid of terrorist attacks (both lower risk), while happily driving to work at a coal mine (both higher risk).
Fun twist on Spotfy ad campaign
Agreed, I also bought an XPS 9360 and comparing it to Linux on my Macbook Pro, the difference is night and day. Everything is incredibly well supported on the XPS.
Also, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gm626MgpveI
No as far as I know, Latitude line is also affected.
AI is just a model. Dangerous are humans with harmful models.
Plus, our reptile brains has deeply ingrained fear of wild animals, cars are too new invention to be able to affect our instinct the same way sharks do.
> why is nuclear waste dangerous? because there is still loads of energy in it.

I though it was because of γ-radiation and long half lives? Are those properties unique to matter with high energy potential?
I've always wondered why IBM chose Microsoft to create the OS - what someone told me just recently was that Bill's mother was [worked with the Chairman of] the IBM board which no doubt helped him get the contract.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Maxwell_Gates

edited: I've corrected this, she wasn't on the board but worked with Chairman.
Thanks for clarifications. I actually pay some attention to Elm evolution and check the official blog from time to time. I was much more interested in Elm several years ago and I even tried to get a job at Prezi (Evan Czaplicki was still working there at that time). In the end I like ClojureScript more. It has a good balance of agility and guarantees. It's more generic. REPL enables exploratory programming and live coding. Btw ClojureScript developers I know do use REPL.

I probably wasn't clear enough but I don't think Elm is easier to learn. It's quite the opposite. The good thing about Elm is great default libraries for SPA development (or isolated widgets) and great toolchain. You just use what's given and it works perfectly fine. In the end getting productive fast is easier with Elm than with ClojureScript. And it's easy to do all by yourself. Everything is pretty strict and official site has a lot of up to date tutorials. I also like that Evan values simplicity and Elm gets better and better in this regard.

Every language has its place. ClojureScript is my personal preference. It's just a good fit for things I like doing.
Oh I love that analogy, I thought I would figure out where it came from. Most people reference the times story [1] which talks about 20 cows a year, however that story references a CDC study [2] which talks about 21 cows over 5 years. Which makes it actually about 4 people a year (average) being killed by cows. Which is still more than death by Sharks at about 1 every other year on average according to [3].

[1] "The image of cows as placid, gentle creatures is a city slicker’s fantasy, judging from an article published on Friday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which reports that about 20 people a year are killed by cows in the United States." --
https://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/31/dangerous-co...

[2] "A total of 21 deaths met the case definition for 2003--2008 (Table 1). Four fatalities occurred in 2003, two in 2004, six in 2005, and three each year during 2006--2008." -- https://www.cdc.gov/mmWR/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5829a2.htm

[3] https://www.floridamuseum.ufl.edu/fish/isaf/contributing-fac...
Indeed, it also fails to mention hydroelectric. Nor is there any mention of how much it costs per TW/h, especially when you factor in the insane cost from just a single accident or the fact that the waste has to be safely and securely stored for a very long time.
How can nuclear (fision) energy be safer than wind/solar/hydro? New efficient solar cells should be enough, environment friendly, and safer than other alternatives as long as the manufacturing of these are environment friendly as well. Also, everyone can setup their own solar plant at home, I almost did so, but the price of the materials and the setup are too high for me.

I'd like you to consider if nuclear material is useful for something apart from generating energy. It may be useful for other things we don't even know right now, and in the future we may have consumed all the resources.
Inherently evil and annoying? No, but in practice it's annoying and online at least, potentially problematic on other levels as well such as security and performance. Telemarketing isn't inherently evil and annoying either, but it's become a playground for scammers with robocalls and constantly shifting spoofed numbers. That, maybe, should tell you something about the nature of the medium, or at least the nature of the medium when it's being exploited by a broad population.
Dell is trash and thats why I will soon release www.shitdell.com - to let people around the world to know what kind of shitty product they are getting.

I'm from Brazil and over here everything that Dell sells is trash. Dell Inspiron's hinge breaks usually after 1 year, so you better buy an extended warranty... but why in the hell would you buy an middle to expensive notebook that you know it is made with bad quality and that you need to pay more for extended warranty?

Dell doesn't deserve to exist as a company and soon I will help more people learn about how trashy are Dell's products...
People are scared of nuclear energy for the same reason that they're scared of taking an airplane. Even though it's technically and statistically very safe, the perceived risk appears much greater.

In particular in both cases when something goes wrong it tends to go extremely wrong and you're completely helpless to stop it. In contrast getting in a car accident or slowly suffocating in coal power plant emissions seem manageable.

Personally I'm of the opinion that going all nuclear would be a mistake but on the other hand it's a great way to move away from coal and petrol while we're still figuring out how to scale renewable energies (and maybe fusion, but that's still a moonshot). It provides cheap, reliable and reasonably safe energy with very little CO2 emissions.

I'm more worried about global warming than Fukushima and I'd gladly trade even a dozen of Fukushima-type incidents in the next decades (highly unlikely) if it could stop global warming and its dire, hard-to-revert consequences.

In particular I genuinely do not understand why most ecologists seem to be staunchly anti-nuclear. I can understand asking for better funding in renewable R&D and planning for a transition but, at least in Europe, ecologists seem to favor dropping nuclear immediately, no matter the cost. For instance they applauded when Germany decided to completely stop producing nuclear energy, even if it meant more pollution in the short term. I find that hard to justify.
> 2. The death/unit energy misses out the fact that we spend a lot more to keep nuclear safe because we are worried about it. If we spent a fraction of the same amount on other energy, we might get similar safety results.

this seems extremely hard to quantify.
I do like this thread. It's sort of a nice shopping spree and it's surprising there isn't already a startup that does this.
I used several FP languages before coming to Elm, like F# and ClojureScript. I prefer Elm, been using it for about two years, and haven't missed something like interfaces at all.

Then again, I'm also one of those wierdos who think Go works just fine despite the lack of generics (though I think Go needs generics more than Elm needs something interface'y). Still, things are getting done and I'm happier than with most other languages.
> Also the transition table might be an actual SQL table as well instead of switch-cases in a function.

That would likely add an unnecessary read and slow things down just a little bit.
To add to the other comments:

https://github.com/tiziano88/elm-protobuf
Do you think coal mining deaths should not be counted if they occur 200 miles away from the power station the mine supplies? What about if the deaths occurred a continent away?
Given that the point of the graph is to show nuclear at the bottom, wouldn't that especially be a reason to include wind power in the graph?
The good news is breeder waste is a mix of very short half lives and very long half lives. The very short ones decay to safe levels quickly, and the very long ones have a low level of activity.
1) Extreme costs.
2) Chance for disaster in case of launch mishap.
Did you see something in the article that implied causality? You can make predictions without a direct causal link, though having one typically helps you make more robust predictions.
That's very kind of you to say - thank you!

It depends a lot on the city in which you happen to live. Baltimore, for example, has a great deal to offer in the department of bosque, bower, glade, and verge - this, for example, was yesterday evening, halfway up a very tall hill that happened to be part of my route home du jour: http://i.imgur.com/84Q2mxu.jpg

(That said, you wouldn't catch me barefoot in any woods around here - for all that I grew up that way, the woods back home are not noted for their likelihood of putting broken glass or old masonry underfoot, while those around here are full of such things.)

Barefoot or no, it's definitely worth making the opportunity, if there's a way you can do so! On the other hand, if there are no handy woods nearby, there's a great deal to be said for making the most of the environment you find to hand. No matter where you happen to be - there are wonders all around you, just waiting to be found.
Indeed, and it's important to remember that skyscraper-zipcodes create holes in otherwise regular polygons, which is often not accounted for when storing shapes of zipcodes.

Lots of edge cases abound when using zipcodes, especially zipcodes in a spatial context.
Terawatt-hours are a direct measurement of what we want from an energy source, namely, energy. The equivalent for transportation would be deaths/mile, which is indeed a commonly used metric of transportation safety. Deaths/TWh is very meaningful.
You're correct, but there's only been a few failures like that in the entire history of Nuclear energy, one of which was a ridiculous test far beyond the scope of logic and reason (Chernobyl), one of which was a completely safe and designed failure that killed no one and did nearly nothing in terms of actual damage (3 Mile Island) and one that was the result of a plant being hit in the exact wrong spot by a natural event that it had not been designed to withstand in the first place, and despite that, still failed in a largely predictable and contained way.

And not to mention, the much wider used coal plants and natural gas plants kill way more people in a lot less theatrical ways, largely through disease of the lungs and skin. Again though watching someone die of black lung isn't nearly as interesting as watching someone die of radiation sickness, so we don't hear about it.
My understanding, which is admittedly drawn from HN "napkin math" , is that at current prices for solar and wind, nuclear is a non-starter. That trend is only intensifying. It seems to me that nuclear could have been a good option, but because we've neglected it for so long, squashed innovation with regulations (not necessarily complaining that it didn't need the regulations!) it is uncompetitive economically and will likely stay that way for the near future. Amazingly enough even coal is uncompetitive in many parts of the world now too. The future is starting to turn green under the invisible hand of market economics.
"Spotify" instead of "Spotfy"?
That sounds like an absolutely horrible way to spend five years. I cannot imagine being you, living in the time of technological empowerment, immediately before the time of atmospheric-carbon induced catastrophe, and having no goal or direction of how to spend my immensely valuable life force. I could absolutely not live with myself.
To be honest, I don't either. But the data is still there. You don't know if in ten years Google is going to start losing money and is forced (by its shareholders) to find alternative means of monetization.

You can't really say Google is perfectly secure and will never ever ever be hacked and leak your data either. Maybe it will never happen, maybe it will.

Therefore I believe I should have the right to say "hey, I don't want this private corporation to have my credit info".
HBO hacked Game of Thrones data leaked online
Star Trek gadgets become real for example. I don't see any impossible thing about building an IRL terminator. Maybe not with today's technology, but conceptually we already have most of the things, they are just slow, power hungry and inefficient now. You don't need a CS degree to guess that speed, power consumption and efficiency will improve over time.