skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The really ironic thing is trying to decide (before the internet was ever a thing, say 50 years ago) which of the 2 scenarios is more dystopian.
Have you considered existing scientific columnar data storage formats, like HDF5 or Parquet?

Their main advantage is that they have good, mature implementations in a variety of languages, which would be handy if you ever find Javascript to be too slow.
And the chapters afterwards? Fully automated luxury space communism is a worthy goal.
Huh. I knew Jungle was a novel but the part based on food safety was based on actual situations he observed
Many versions of notepad++ phone home, so be careful what you type.
Any sort of versioned online wiki tool is better than word documents with filenames - this can be your own wiki, or sharepoint or Drive.

Non tech savvy users can read the page to see the latest version, and others can track through history if they need to.

We've had success doing smaller projects completely on trello, though it isnt really a wiki tool, you can force it by having a single top level card with all the feauture requests linking to individual cards to see the progress.
Linus is like darwin, it eliminates weaklings like the author.
Ting also has fantastic plans: you pay for what you use; if you use more you pay less per unit; all prices are clearly listed on their website; roaming charges are reasonable; there are no surprises.
I think the point was that people who currently choose not to work are not harmed by automation of low-barrier-to-entry jobs that they are already choosing not to take.

And it's a valid point! If people really are choosing not to take jobs that are readily available, then automating those jobs is a net benefit.

Now, we should not ignore the fact that this is stated as a hypothetical! Are there a mass of unemployed who are choosing not to work? And would all of the people who lose their jobs due to burger flipping automation be able to find new jobs or be happy with no job?

Those seem like the more relevant questions.
Did you read the original article? Where do you think a lot of the waste from China comes from (hint - we send it there). A lot of the plastic 'recyclable' waste we ship there can't actually be recycled (clam shell containers, contaminated plastic), and ends up as part of the waste stream.
Now you’re talking.
I'm puzzled how I could have given the impression that I am looking for safety. I just don't want the compiler to defeat programmer intentions. I don't see how your example can depend on overflow semantics. The vectorizer is free to assume there is no overflow and let the programmer suffer if she screwed up. What I don't want the optimizer to do is to prevent the programmer from checking for overflow because it can't happen in theory while it can happen in practice.That is, I am interested in prioritizing programmer control over the safety net.
>But they need to be kept from the unrecoverable mistakes.

Unless those mistakes involve trampolines[1], because wheeee! Those are cool.

What I'm saying is that there are a lot of dangerous things, but we don't necessarily ban all of them.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/7-terrifying-statistics-tramp...
Feelings aside, it’s a good thing when unintelligent children remove themselves from the gene pool. It’s also a good thing when the children of stupid parents who fail to take basic precautions to protect their offspring remove themselves from the gene pool, because there is likely a genetic component to the parents’ incompetence which the child inherited and risks spreading later in life. The world could use more lethal pitfalls that only affect less valuable people, because it will help to ensure the survivors of a given generation are more valuable and will strengthen the species overall.
Yeah ditto, but that wasn't regulated afaik until the Zen fight.
Insurance companies bat their eyes. Owning a trampoline dramatically increases your insurance costs.
How does one legally define where one buys a product? Shipping address? Home address? Point of sale?
Except they didn't. What's the more likely story: that Microsoft entered a multi-year contract with the US government and policies around the border recently changed or that Microsoft was complicit in US government policy and therefore responsible for all of their actions by association? Such a flat way of looking at the three dimensional, shades-of-grey world we live in...
> But they need to be kept from the unrecoverable mistakes.

That's a good point. I hope they keep these magnets out of kids' hands. The article ends on a promising note in that regard:

> We remain willing to work with the CPSC to develop the magnet safety standards for which we’ve already petitioned, and which will be more effective and reasonable than the all-ages, nationwide ban we succeeded in vacating in the Tenth Circuit. As we’ve already been doing, Zen Magnets looks forward to providing not just the highest quality magnet spheres on the market, but also the safest in terms of sales methods and warnings. Now that the war on magnets is over, hopefully we can all focus towards the war on magnet misuse.
GitHub users threaten exodus unless Microsoft cancels ICE contract
Sounds like everyone has had similar experiences with trying VS code then falling in love with it
You're right… kind of.
For some reason it's not available throught contextual menu, like other apps, only in the Edit menu.
https://imgur.com/a/2FDNDu4

And if the App forgets to expose that option (Skype, for instance), tough noogies.
my son ( 7 ) is like this, his brain lets him do interesting things, like from early on, you could hand him some paper and ask him to write things, then you could rotate the paper any way you like and he'd just carry on writing so it was fine when rotated back to normal. But he has a ton of trouble with socializing and has never made a friend, he is also a super realist. He doesn't like to pretend to be anything but himself. "If you could be an animal what animal woruld you be? - Human Boy". Any suggestion to pretend to be something else tends to be met with a reaction of "why on earth would I want to be anything but who I am". Or even if you over emphasise something like "Wow Ethan,you are super awesome" "no... I'm not awesome, I'm just normal"
The problem is that almost no one reads those warnings. Most packages for kids toys will have a warning somewhere on them about how they are a swallow or suffocation hazard. People get desensitized to that constant bombardment of warnings. Unless you spend some time really thinking about it, it might not be clear why swallowing a magnet like this might be so much more dangerous than swallowing a something of this size made of different material.

That also factors into your point about other household items. Most of the household items that are dangerous to children are very clearly dangerous. It is much easier for a parent to overlook the danger of these magnets compared with stuff like potentially poisonous household cleaners.
No reason to stop improving though
Were they bought up by someone?

No, and the AT&T thing is just for copper.
Because they're not a "random stranger", they're a content producer you chose to follow because you enjoy the content. It may not be the kind of content you personally like, but so what?

You've already said you follow some content creators, so you're familiar with the mechanism. What's left to understand?
Well, I wasn't explaining the logic of the law, but the logic I use. I'm consistent; we have rejected requests for a trampoline, and the usage my kids have had has been heavily supervised.

One thing about trampolines is that AIUI, the vast majority of the danger comes from having multiple people on one at a time. Most of the remaining risk is manageable, more in the normal range of risk, especially with supervision. As evidence, I cite that in lawsuit-crazy USA, there are businesses like Sky Zone that provide trampoline play commercially. That kinda bounds the upper level of risk...

I have some additional considerations that require that for other reasons, but I think I'd still feel the same way even without them.
That's a pretty crap warning to be honest, it looks like a promotion for a company/product name OMFG more than anything.

Replace all that with the six words "DO NOT EAT, YOU WILL DIE", and it would be brutally effective
The only thing they hate more is housing they can't afford at all.

Facadism isn't particularly new though. I remember somebody saying the same thing back in the 1980s, that in the future it would be considered ridiculous. Now here we are in a "future generation" and it's still going strong.

I think the best thing would be to document the old buildings and then demolish them, so that they can enter history gracefully. Nothing lasts forever, and modern cities need new buildings.
Maybe the problem is sales tax.
Its regressive. Its complicated in the multi-jurisdictional context.
I read your intent and I don't agree with a libertarian implication that ignores how things have worked more or less fine, and which is certainly not banning everything.
We - are you one of the authors? Perhaps you can clarify the following paragraph from [1], page 8:

>Inclusion Criteria and Variable Classification:

>Subjects from 0-17 years old were included using a primary search term for diagnosis of “ingested object” from the time period of 2002-2015. Cases of ingested
objects were classified as “suspected magnet ingestion” (SMI) if the term “magnet” appeared anywhere in the narrative section of the database.

Where's the screening part you mention? I didn't find anywhere that the inclusion criteria implied that magnets have actually been ingested - or that the results were filtered in any way other than a keyword search.

E.g.: "Child ingested a marble, parent worries that it could have been a magnet" would pass this inclusion criterion.

[1]http://sci-hub.nu/10.1097/MPG.0000000000001830
That's a great question! As you know, DNA -> RNA -> Protein where the first arrow is transcription (polymerase) & the second one translation.

Genes are transcribed by a polymerase, and a couple of factors determine if the polymerase can be "recruited" there. Here are a couple of those factors:

1) Is the site accessible? That part of the genome needs to be "open chromatin" for it to be transcribed. Next question of course is what makes some chromatin open some closed..

2) Histone signals: DNA spools around wheel-like things called histones. Histones get marked in a variety of ways to indicate "status" of that part of the genome. Some of them are pro-transcription.

3) Polymerase is usually recruited there by DNA-binding proteins called "transcription factors". These proteins bind to the regulatory / "promoter" region upstream of a protein-coding gene. There are over a thousand different transcription factors, each with a specific "motif" they recognize.

The global state is detected in various ways (receptors on the cellular mebrane etc.), which triggers these transcription factors, which then go bind DNA near the genes,
to activate a new subroutine.

Here's a paper:
http://www.pnas.org/content/107/20/9186
Title: "Comparing genomes to computer operating systems in terms of the topology and evolution of their regulatory control networks"
What I said is backed up by facts. How is it a conspiracy? The labor participation rate is 62.x. That means that 37% of the US is not employed. Fact, not a conspiracy.

The unemployment rate has been manipulated for various reasons and in various ways for years by politicians whos reputation is directly linked to the number. Again, fact, not a conspiracy.
Ah that is weird. Try going to the URL without .png see if it works?
Haha, this is Ken M quality.
For some years as a fairly young kid, in between a crib and a real bed, I had a mattress on the floor.

When I was in college my freshman year, the dorms had bunk beds, and I worried about falling from the top, but never did.

My parents were not especially concerned about the dangers of beds, bicycles, cars, drugs, alcohol, chainsaws, or lawnmowers when I was growing up. On the other hand they drew the line at motorcycles and guns. The only time I was seriously injured (concussion), it was bicycle related, FWIW.

I don't know how you do a cost-benefit analysis for society when nobody particularly agrees on the benefits of something.
Rust's built-in lints are configurable with compiler directives, so you'll be able to add

#![deny(bare_trait_objects)]

To the top of your crate and cause a compiler warning if someone uses the old syntax on your project.

EDIT: just realized I mis-parsed "you" in parent. Oh well.
I should have also said that it depends on one's definition of open. For instance, when expo mode was added to Firefox (I was sad to see it go), I used it to have about 4-5 groups of 2-8 tabs each, but only was ever actively using one group.
Never, because if it did cross over suddenly flash demand would surge by 10x and then there'd be a massive shortage, pushing the price back up. https://blog.dshr.org/2018/03/flash-vs-disk-again.html
You can't lie about FDA approval without easily being found out.

The drug approval and regulation mechanism is what limits that sort of abuse. Remove it out of the way and the abuse will creep in.

Uhhh, I think you skipped over at least eight steps in your logic there.
Ada overflow semantics are precisely what programmers assumed were C overflow semantics on architectures that roll-over on signed arithmetic (e.g. basically every processor architetcure in current wide use). The original intent of the C "undefined behavior" category, as far as I can tell, was to in this case permit compilers on dissenting architectures to make another choice. For example, on the Itanium you might want to have a trap on overflow. Because C is comfortable with "it works differently on different processors". So it is my intention to repair the obscurity in the language by spelling out what I am 100% sure would have been obvious to C programmers and language developers at on time.
You say "almost no one" heeds the warnings, but it's certainly not true that almost everyone gives tiny magnets to toddlers.
That's very interesting. I wonder what the environmental difference was/is. I'd say I've had Firefox crash only a handful of times over the years, and in some cases that involved me doing very bad things in JavaScript.
Got a source on this? Or at least information on what versions?
Apple makes their own SSDs; presumably they could make something similar if they want to.
Email and calendar are still the primary tools in my corporate job, despite trying and using many other collaboration tools.

Otherwise, email still used 'a bit' but only because no one else uses it socially anymore.

Calendar is never going to go away.
You can call it calendar, diary, facebook events, reddit reminders but it is still the same thing - a way to work out what you need to do for the day, and remind you to do something in the future.
Yes, a number of the NYC-based founders asked for that too.
> Simply put: if a job is so repetitive that it can be automated out of existence, it's in the interest of humanity overall that it should be.

Quite a different way of framing it than your original comment. Here you tout how it's good for "humanity" in general. Before you were touting how this is good for the people being put out of work.
"Children need to be able to hurt themselves."

I think you're kind of appealing to nature in a fallacious way. Hundreds of years ago, these magnets wouldn't exist. So, yes, there's always ways for bad things to happen, but even if that's "natural" and therefore necessary, that's not a reason to retain a particular hazard that has existed for a short period of time historically.
Sounds delicious. (Maybe I shouldn't read when I'm hungry.)
>Well, I wasn't explaining the logic of the law, but the logic I use.

Great! The whole point is that you are capable to do that, and that the total ban is unreasonable. Nobody is arguing that having small magnets around little kids who don't know better is a good idea.
Maybe the bot can get the shrimp in my mouth.
> If a regulator agrees to change a rule and something bad happens, they can easily lose their career. Whereas if they change a rule and something good happens, they don’t even get a reward. So, it’s very asymmetric. – Elon Musk

A worse asymmetry: If a person spends years and his own money battling a regulation, and something good happens for the entire economy, the person doesn't get rewarded. In fact, the person might suffer when competitors who were just sitting around with no skin in the game can now freely enter the market against the person who fought so hard to open up the marketplace.

Another good example is the Carterfone decision[1], a landmark FCC decision that allowed devices to connect directly to the telephone system. Prior to Thomas Carter's years-long fight, AT&T considered it illegal to connect anything to your telephone. The ruling paved the way for answering machines, fax machines, and modems.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carterfone
> So accept facadism or widespread annihilation of historic fabric.

Look at these examples. The historical fabric has already been annihilated and keeping the facade around is making a mockery of it.
There is such a thing as being crippled by information.
> lobbyists who wanted to sell as many cars as they could.

That's such a boring scapegoat. Rail was a plenty powerful industry at the time who afforded themselves plenty of lobbyists. Personal vehicles were a literal revolution. What always seems left out is that people overwhelmingly wanted this state of affairs and largely still do. People here are acting like people would love public transportation if only their minds hadn't been corrupted by the bad people.

> It's overwhelmingly shit because urban planning favoured cookie-cutter suburbs.

But now that we're here what do you propose we do? Going back in time for a do over isn't exactly a solution.

> People won't pay out of pocket to upgrade infrastructure.

* People who own cars don't use public transportation and have little desire to start.

* The overwhelming majority of people own cars.

* Public transportation comprehensive enough to replace cars is ludicrously expensive.

* People who don't use a thing don't want to pay for a thing.

=> It's not exactly a leap in logic that people wouldn't vote for it.

I think you've got a better chance of creating programs that just outright buy cars for the poor.
Yeah. I like to keep my active set very organized to not lose myself in a sea of tabs. I also use Alt+# shortcuts to quickly switch. I think one behavior I've seen people do is treat tabs as if they are bookmarks, which would definitely result in 10s-100s of them open.
1. You don't measure the number of steps, you prove that it's bounded by some function of input length.

2. You don't work off number of oracle calls, but number of total steps with an oracle call counting as one step.
Sacked by AI, tech worker found humans could do nothing
A lot of those people are actually employed but can't afford housing. This is a problem with no good solution in sight so far and it's going to get exacerbated with job automation.
~100,000 narratives to classify and they couldn't even be bothered to have a couple interns spend a few weeks reviewing suspected narratives? All it would take is to present the suspected narrative to a human with the instances of "magnet" highlighted so the human could quickly determine if the sentence mentioning "magnet" was actually talking about one being eaten. Since when does a dumb database query with next to no diligence even qualify as science? If this is truly a matter of saving the lives of children, then surely the expense could be spared.

This whole thing is insulting.
This is a really common code pattern: client sends request to server; server sanity checks request. If you omit sanity checks from the server because you assume there are no errors in the client, you break a lot of systems.

I am expecting the compiler to only make optimizations based on things it knows are true - that are true. So if the source code is "check for null;check for null; do something;" the compiler should be able to delete the second check (hopefully with a warning). In fact, the Standard is very explicit about permitting optimizing compilers to delete repeated operations. However, in the case I described, the compiler does not know that the pointer is non-null, it's just easier to assume it is not null. That leads to an "optimization" that is not an optimization. I agree that requiring compilers to only use true optimizations is more of a challenge than allowing them to use false ones, but nobody said it was going to be easy. In particular, it looks like Clang loses way too much information going from source to llvm language which makes it difficult to carry information about whether, for example, a pointer dereference is safe or not - but that's a defect in the compiler, not in the source language.
>Thats's interesting but I'm referring to a cold sore not the genital or other types.

"Cold sores" is just another word for oral HSV-1 or more rarely oral HSV-2. While HSV-2 is commonly referred to as genital herpes due to its historical preference for that site, the truth is that both viruses can readily infect both oral and genital sites. Genital HSV-1 for example is very prevalent:

"With respect to genital HSV-1 infection, 140 million people aged 15-49-years were estimated to have genital HSV-1 infection worldwide in 2012, but prevalence varied substantially by region. Most genital HSV-1 infections are estimated to occur in the Americas, Europe and Western Pacific, where HSV-1 continues to be acquired well into adulthood" [0]

In other words, the dichotomy between cold sores and genital herpes is largely pointless; it's the same virus. Oral can transmit to genital and vice/versa. Why one is heavily stigmatized and the other not is simply puzzling.

[0] http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/herpes-simpl...
It has a very large effect on what shows up next to the "sales tax" label on your receipt. Sure if they were honest it would say "fee to make the developer's interest payments", but it never says that.
It's only one controller that can only wiggle.
If you mean it in the sense that one could cheat the results and not be diagnosed, then absolutely. Most of their metabolites could linked to dietary deficiency. We did have a metabolite panel done and my kid would have been a false negative.

As a parent of kid with Autism I experienced it first hand. However, instead of doing like many parents (including those with neurotypicals) we did not cave-in, but build a lot of incentive and rewards and it paid off very early. But this is my n=1, so I don't know if it is because of our parenting style or something else.
I know you guys all like to feel so clever by saying that, but it's not as if their burger business is some big money-loser that they are propping up out of sheer altruism.
The generally accepted definition of autism spectrum disorder is that in DSM-V. This physiological test is compared against ASD diagnoses based on DSM-V, and based on that comparison, the accuracy of the test (for the given sample tested) is calculated.

As more is known about the condition, the diagnostic criteria listed in the DSM could be updated, which would mean that this test would then need to be evaluated again. But that doesn't prevent its current accuracy being measured.
Agree. I am not entirely sure what the sabotage was, or its impact, and do not necessarily empathize with Musk. But I think that honest language in official releases is something that will reduce the stranglehold that lawyers have on corporate communications.
It runs like native mostly fine for the most part, doesn't call for a rebuild from scratch. Our VR browser engine is based off of FF for now, and it's on Steam VR and Oculus Stores without anyone noticing.
Employment stats are very misleading. There are lots of people with full time jobs who can't even afford housing. Sure they have jobs, but they are still in a really bad situation.