skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'd love to see that too. I've seen a range of industrially-compostable products, such that I feel it ought to be possible to eliminate the recycling bin altogether (for plastics, I guess metals/glass/paper still work), and have cities/states mandate the use of compostable packaging. They'd save a ton on reducing landfill/plastics recycling, and also being able to sell the resulting compost.
That is not what falsifiable means. Falsifiable means that an experiment can be devised which could result in observations which contradict the predictions of the theory.
Ask HN: As a Hardware startup what are IoT platforms not solving for you?
There is a vast amount of IoT platform providers out there, from generalized cloud service providers like AWS to companies like particle.io which offer a turn-key hardware solution.

I wonder: is there something that is not getting solved for you as a hardware startup and you have to build it yourself but wished you didn't need to?

Bonus question: what's your platform and why did you choose it?
At this time of writing, GNSS-SDR cannot be built natively on Microsoft Windows. As far as authors’ knowledge, nothing prevents it but their own ignorance on Microsoft’s building tools. Users have reported successful buildings of GNU Radio on Windows systems, so there should be not serious caveats building GNSS-SDR as well. However, GNSS-SDR is not blocked for Windows users. There are several virtualization tools that work well.

Great, let's blow off 95% of the desktop market and see how that goes for us.

Doesn't GNU Radio already support GNSS decoders? If I want a GPL-encumbered GNSS receiver solution, there are plenty of existing options.
>try edge

So exactly what safari does, no?
Today a single core of a CPU can read or write about 100 GByte/sec, about 4x more than the bandwidth of a single DRAM module

At least for x64 systems, I'm almost sure this is wrong. I think your linked image on zsmith.co must be for multiple cores, and probably for multiple sockets.

On all other tests I've seen and run, single threaded memory bandwidth is much less than full system bandwidth. Here's a fully labeled chart showing results more like I'd expect:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11544/intel-skylake-ep-vs-amd...

In this chart, a single core of an Intel "Broadwell-EP"
Xeon E5-2699v4 (bigger sibling to the core you link) only gets 18GB/s, while 8 cores on the same socket max out at 60GB/s. Only for the whole machine (with two sockets and thus two memory controllers) are throughputs higher than 100GB/s seen.

In practice, the limiting factor is the number of outstanding read requests supported per core. In accordance with Little's Law, you need about 100 requests in flight to overcome the latency of a read from RAM. On Intel, each core can only keep track of 10 outstanding requests. Prefetch can effectively double this, but you still need 4-6 cores to saturate a modern memory bus.

See here for more details: http://sites.utexas.edu/jdm4372/2016/11/22/sc16-invited-talk...

If instead it's my understanding that's wrong here, I would love to be corrected!
So, you are essentially paying for 30 min of time to do with whatever you want - got it. Thanks Deepak
man pmset

OK, so RTFM jokes aren't funny anymore. Specifically, what you're looking for is to change the hibernation mode. Old macos used to keep the RAM powered during sleep, so there's a slight drain on the battery, and if it runned out, well state was lossed. BUT the upshot was that wakeup was instant.

As it turns out, that's the default mode on desktop. And you can set your laptop to do that too (assuming you're ok with the tradeoff).

sudo pmset -a hibernatemode 0

Here's the relevant section from the man page:

hibernatemode supports values of 0, 3, or 25. Whether or not a hibernation image gets written is also dependent on the values of standby
and autopoweroff

For example, on desktops that support standby a hibernation image will be written after the specified standbydelay time. To disable
hibernation images completely, ensure hibernatemode standby and autopoweroff are all set to 0.

hibernatemode = 0 by default on desktops. The system will not back memory up to persistent storage. The system must wake from the con-
tents of memory; the system will lose context on power loss. This is, historically, plain old sleep.

hibernatemode = 3 by default on portables. The system will store a copy of memory to persistent storage (the disk), and will power memory
during sleep. The system will wake from memory, unless a power loss forces it to restore from hibernate image.

hibernatemode = 25 is only settable via pmset. The system will store a copy of memory to persistent storage (the disk), and will remove
power to memory. The system will restore from disk image. If you want "hibernation" - slower sleeps, slower wakes, and better battery
life, you should use this setting.
Also the focus notification when using a fullscreen app. Had to turn it off in two different places. Granted my mac gets a ton of notifications too so its not that big of a deal. Microsoft could just use with a little better notification management screen to quickly turn them off.
Clear example of how the market fails the efficiency test: look at the trend in water bottles and aluminum cans getting taller and skinnier. Takes up more visual space on the shelf. Looks bigger and more substantial, but actually has less product inside. Takes more material and energy to produce. But the markup is larger = more profit! (also a PITA because tall skinny things have a tendency to fall over, but who cares). Producers are cynically anti-consumer and anti-efficiency, completely pro-profit.
>> ATM's need a network connection to query the bank. The updates can be sent via their internal network.

Some of these are on satellite connections. They don't need much data. Lots of banking transactions can be squeezed into a single megabyte. Sending multi-gig windows updates to all the ATMs would be a serious headache.
As an ambidextrous-enough person (lefty for a lot of things but write right-handed), for a while my preferred computer setup was a mouse on the left—buttons not swapped, so primary click was on the (stronger) middle finger and right-click/scroll was on the (literally more dexterous) index finger—and a drawing tablet on the right, since I was doing a lot of digital design/painting. Having two pointing devices, one relative and one absolute, felt really useful, as if I could really get in there and manipulate the computer more directly & precisely. Dunno if that was just my perception or if it actually made me any defter.

Nowadays I just use the touchpad on my MBP.
Method for neutralizing offensive chemical odors
RESTED: A REST client for browsers
the problem is he was using it as a justification to argue that his female coworkers didn’t meet the same hiring bar, and that in general some just don’t make better engineers

That's not how I interpreted his memo, and I think the widespread emotionally wrought interpretation of his memo in that fashion reveals virulent groupthink. Didn't a large number of women not go to work because of induced "feels?"

You can a introduce hormones to a xy and watch it grow secondary sex characteristics.

That's strong evidence for at least a partial physiological basis of gender.

To say that the research is in and we know anything with any certainty is hubris of the highest order.

Then why would holding an opinion evoke such a strong response?

I invite you to really reflect and consider, are you sure we have equal oppertunity? Are you sure? If you are, then you’d be willing to switch places with a poor black woman, because you’d still end up where you are now right?

I dated a creole woman for 9 years and asked her to marry me. This last paragraph of yours speaks for itself, in terms of the presence or absence of ideological groupthink. If that poor black woman had the same cultural upbringing as my ex-girlfriend's maternal grandmother, then sure, why not?
Google bids adieu to AdWords and DoubleClick brands
Chrome has a very parasitic relationship with it's host OS's. Stopped using it when it halved the amount of hours a brand new MacBook lasted on a battery. My apologies for the webdevs that have to maintain Safari compatibility for me but the difference is just too big to ignore.
Burying garbage in a big hole in the ground is not a sustainable solution.
> It’s scary.

Those freaks probably spend time outdoors!
In Modula-3 and other safe systems programming languages all the way back to NEWP in the 60's, something like UNSAFE MODULE is exposed in the type system, whereas in C and C++ you have no idea what a library might do.

And in C all bets are open.
De Morgan laws are seriously your friends when trying to make complex boolean expressions optimally readable.
I disagree with your first sentence about two options; if we're to give credence to the idea of a simulation, there are other options we should give, in the absence of evidence, equal weight to... maybe the universe is the dreamlike state of some being, maybe the holographic principle can be extended to encompass greater questions of existence. Just because something like "simulation" is known to us as humans living in our time, and is something we can relate to, shouldn't limit the possibilities. Outside of some reason to believe the metaphysical nature of the universe is one thing or another, there are likely infinite possibilities, including many we couldn't conceive of. As to your main point in that paragraph, I agree: it doesn't matter.

I agree that fidelity of a simulation doesn't inform us as to whether or not there is a simulation involved at all. I'm trying to point out that a simulation is a simulation of "something" external to itself at some fidelity. If that's the case, the larger reality would be external to the simulation since 1) the simulation would be a simulation of something, 2) the simulation would simply be a component part of that larger reality. This may all depend on how we define the term: "Universe". If we mean universe to mean the metaphysically complete reality, then a universe by that definition couldn't be a simulation since it would be simulating something outside of itself. If we mean some smaller sense of the word Universe, like the observable universe or the perceivable universe, then perhaps.

I think trying to explain the universe or reality as a simulation or similar is nothing more than humans doing what we have done since long before recorded history: we're projecting existence (and its "causes") onto some explainable, graspable concept with which we are comfortable. This is nothing more than the motivation that created every religion on earth and is at least as likely to be a correct vision as any of those. In the old days we created Gods which resembled us, but had exaggerated qualities and powers to manipulate the universe and act as its cause... today, we feel much more comfortable with modern concepts such as "simulation"... but we have no more justification to make that claim than our ancestors did to mysterious thunderers high up on mountains.

The question of "Is there a God?" or "Is there a simulation?" is not a 50/50 proposition. The default position is the negative: there is no God until proven otherwise, there is no simulation until proven otherwise. We can start to believe and question as evidence mounts, but right now, I don't see much for a simulation (unless perhaps you want to argue that a quantized universe is just a pixelated one as we'd see in our own simulations).

Again, the author is justified in their claim that the Universe Is Not a Simulation until there is sufficient evidence to question it otherwise.
sure, but it doesn't need to be an either/or
Propose this, and even implement it. Then the first economic downturn, whoosh, out the door. Politicians promising the masses the snake oil of economic booms based on cheap energy, driven by lobbyists from the oil industry. Stop me if you heard this one before, but hey, it's reality.
When I was job hunting about 10 years ago I came across a recruiting firm who pitched me well enough to come in and bring my wife. Their pitch sounded similar, in that they had "inside info" on companies, an extremely high success rate, but they needed me to pay them money.

Being in high demand (tech/programming) I scoffed at them and found my own job. I think they were asking for around $3-5k?

I think the only way this would work for me personally is if I was having trouble finding a job, and if I paid them after I got hired.

I need to somehow confirm this company's actual worth in the hiring process, without feeling like I'm being given a sales pitch.
I have three news/link sources: HN/Reddit, RSS feeds, email newsletters. I browse stuff on HN/Reddit, speed read stories if I ever go past the comments (I'm mostly here for the comments, which are almost always more interesting than the story). Sometimes it's really interesting, then I read most or the entirety of the article. Same with my RSS feeds. I filter and find the stuff I wan't to actually read, most of the items are either irrelevant or it's enough to read the title and maybe skim the article. Same story with the newsletters (which, except a couple ones, I prefer to be posting at most a couple times a week). I find and filter stuff from these sources, then either I read them immediately (seldom), then possibly bookmark; or they linger as tabs before they are read or go into a reading list.

Basically, I read the stuff asynchronously. If sth. is really interesting, I skim or read it; otherwise it gets shoved into a reading list. If it's important enough, I return to it. I also schedule a "lists review" task every seven days in my agenda, so I sometimes go through my lists to find interesting stuff. This way, I'm aware of many interesting stuff and events/news; but I'm not procrastinating away buried in articles or caught in wiki-walking (unless I want to, that is).
Did not read the article, but what the hell! That's one "Hey check this porn out!" e-mail away from total ownage...

I guess as a hacker, having a phone app where I can press a button and the ATM in front of me spits out its contents would be kinda neat...
Going entirely on memory, so I may have misrepresented a bit or been out of order. I seem to remember there's an initial automated sort and wash before shredding to remove dead mice, contamination from single stream recycling, assorted junk thrown in the wrong bin and so on. Then after shredding there's washing and rinsing stages, and a steam and abrasive stage to remove glue and labels etc. It left me quite astonished how incredibly involved it is when I looked into it.

Hand sorting? This really is fundamentally broken isn't it?
> Again you are simply saying that you don't understand it so it must not be possible.

I... don't think subjective experience is impossible. I think that our current knowledge about how it works is very limited, there's a lot for us to learn, and I'm encouraged when philosophers and scientists research it more. I'm discouraged when people say "it exists, what else do we need to know?"

Are we saying the same thing in different ways?

When I say "jump", I don't mean that there is no explanation for subjective experience. I mean that we do not currently know what that explanation is. It's a jump because it is currently a gap in our knowledge about a phenomenon that exhibits interesting properties and that we don't know how to reliably measure or reproduce.

When we talk about things like consciousness we have to "jump" over that gap. It would be nice to fill in the gap a little. Is it possible you thought that I meant something else?

For a lot of people, basic questions like "what are atoms," or "why is there matter", or "how does a physical process create a subjective experience" are really interesting. And to a certain extent, why should atoms exist? It's not a bad question - we can start talking about electrons, and then we can start talking about forces, and then at a certain point we'll have to say, "well, we don't know about this thing yet. Ask again in a decade and maybe we'll have some theories to propose."

There are large branches of science devoted to these types of questions, and pursuing them has lead to useful theories and practical applications in the past.
I'm really happy to see more applications published using Rust (and Go). Without even looking, I know I'll be able to run Plume on commodity hardware.

PHP, Ruby, and Java programs seem so wasteful when it comes to memory. Especially PHP and Ruby where re-using any of the codebase for a mobile/desktop app is often close to impossible.

Consider the Plume install vs Mastodon (Ruby):

- https://github.com/Plume-org/Plume/blob/master/DEVELOPMENT.m...

- https://github.com/tootsuite/documentation/blob/master/Runni...
Back in 2004 I had an ssh terminal open from my Mac (12" PowerBook) to my home Linux server. I closed the lid and took the laptop away with for a trip. For some reason I didn't use the laptop during the week. When I got back home 6 days later I opened the laptop and saw the ssh session. I tried it out and it still worked! I was amazed!

The ssh client had no keep alive. And the sshd had no keep alive. There was not firewall and a long DHCP lease. So it all just worked.

But because of firewalls aggressivly closing xonnections, these days we tend to need keep alives and so I don't this this would work today.
I ascribe a high likelihood that our universe is infinite in extent, so my answer would be ∞. But for any finite volume, the Bekenstein bound will give you an upper limit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bekenstein_bound
Let's look at some actual numbers without the hype.

"91% of potentially recyclable plastic ends up in landfills, or worse, in oceans."

So right there, no ratio. How much goes into the landfill and how much into the ocean? Because lets face it:

Landfill>Ocean

For comparison, 8m tonnes of plastic ends up in the ocean annually according to the cited 2015 UCSB study: http://www.news.ucsb.edu/2015/014985/ocean-plastic

That's 8m tonnes globally. The US makes about 30m tonnes a year. What's the US' share of plastic in the ocean?

https://jambeck.engr.uga.edu/landplasticinput

About 340 tonnes a year. Yeah, that's a lot, but that's 0.00425% of the total. We're in 20th place.

China drops 2.4m tonnes a year. About 30% of all the plastic waste that goes into the ocean each year.

Article does nothing to point out the plastic waste just getting chucked into rivers in India and Asia.
I like the idea as a thought experiment in information theory but I am skeptical of the idea in general.
As much as I hate plastics, I find that it is here to stay. As consumers, what we can do is to reduce the plastics that we use. Re-use plastic bags. Re-use takeout containers (always have a bunch of them in my car). Reduce purchases of food items that are wrapped in plastic (they are mostly processed food anyway). Buy produce that isn't shrink-wrapped. Don't use a straw for drinks. Don't ask for plastic cutlery when getting takeout.

I do think that some sort of tax on plastic use would help deter and reduce, but not completely eliminate plastic waste. Restaurants should be taxed on every plastic takeout container they use. Manufacturers, food producers should be taxed on plastic packaging. Blue Apron should be taxed for all the plastic containers that they send out to customers.

Maybe Elon Musk would be the new China and ship the world's plastic waste to space. It would cost quite a bit of fuel though so maybe it's not as sustainable or eco-friendly.
You see it in Microsoft, Apple and Google desktop and mobile OSes roadmaps, where access to classical C and C++ code is being reduced to a funnel, with constraints what user code is still allowed to do with them.

It will be impossible task to kill C on UNIX clones and embedded due to culture and existing tools.

However the world of application development is much bigger than just UNIX systems programming or embedded development.
I can't tell if it's a recruiting agency disguised as a service or really for the benefit of job seekers. They advertise that 60% of their candidates make it to an on-site.

Either way though, very cool and exactly what I was thinking, so thanks for sharing.
Honestly I've never really concerned myself with the existence of 10x programmers or not, if they do exist I'm not one of them nor likely to ever be, As long as I'm more capable than I was this time last year I'm happy with that, it's kept programming challenging/interesting for 30 years.

My favourite recent feedback from a user was that "The system thinks the way I do and it reminds me when I've forgotten something".

The last couple of years I've branched out to putting much more focus on UX and trying to get ahead of what users are trying to get done and so it's nice to see positive feedback on that - It's funny but those little gentle touches that improve a users workflow mean more to them than all the underlying (or not) elegance of the code, it's a bit too easy to stare at a tree closely and miss the forest.

In a field as vast as ours you might be 10x at one one thing and 0.5x on something else entirely.
Making fun of a stutter isn't cool.
I can see Giuliani, and I can see it sailing--former federal prosecutor being bonafides that are hard for his base and Republicans to ignore. Thankfully, he's getting up there in years so, even if confirmed, won't last long, and maybe he'd pass on it because he'd rather not have that amount of work the older he gets.

Hannity is a joke, and almost welcome the nomination because it exposes the President's incompetence further. I think (or hope?) that even McConnell would balk at such a nomination.
In this case the CVE database records history proves otherwise.
The amount of ads on this article/post oughta be criminal
I don't disconnect my MBP from power because it could go to sleep and disconnect the WI-FI after a few minutes regardless of network activity

I guess it's just that Windows users know the system they use and its flaws (even perceived so) better than Apple users
I am a FSF supporter generally and financially but let's be entirely honest about what the FSF has done in the last twenty years, and that's actually very little in terms of making good Free Software.

They lack a cohesive vision or the expertise to move projects forward. I'd love if that were different - we *need a Free Software org with vision, but the FSF hasn't had any for a long time.
I think it “mostly works” for the company with the cushy contract to provide single stream recycling.
> if a journalist with an axe to grind were to search hard enough and interview enough people, they're bound to find someone they can put on a pedestal and point to saying "look at how corrupt these people are!"

Given that such managers were quoted saying such things in public communications, that makes your spin on this look doubtful.

> Again, though, peoples' possibly unfair commentary on his professional abilities says nothing about the quality of discourse in the company.

It said a whole lot about my fellow classmates. Yes, those acquaintances were all people who were once my college friends who I spent a lot of time with, but drifted away from. (One of them I once would have counted as my "best friend.") I would never have imagined that they would engage in mob-like condemnations of that harshness. Really, something struck me as being completely out of whack. The most likely Occam's-friendly explanation I can think of is some kind of ideological groupthink at Google.
How one man went from hunting meteorites to being hunted by the law
Just because you can't easily put the blame on individuals doesn't mean they're not responsible. Our "system" is great at "blame laundering" or obfuscating ethical implications of decisions through diffusion of responsibility and removal of context at different boundaries. But the system itself is not a thing you can blame, as it's orchestrated by people who wanted it to work that way. Leaders who don't act to change the system are shitty leaders, and they are guilty.
Skeleton Crew