skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Perhaps I'm just not disciplined enough with money, but I know if I had that type of cash I'd definitely be doing some really interesting things artistically to push the scope and scale of art today. I'd love to see art of 10x the scale we see at Burning Man in cities around the world. The LED "art" we see in many parts of Manhattan for example is just terrible application of a medium/technique.

I'd love to build parks and spaces for people to connect, experience joy and explore. Of course, I'd want to do participate in philanthropy too, but there's something to be said for commissioning the art to define the 21st century.
Emissions tests are different from fuel efficiency tests, and in fact are often at odds with each other. A more efficient car doesn’t necessarily have better emissions, and there’s no easy way for a typical driver to measure their emissions.
Show HN: Sound Sensitive LED Earrings
I learned about this from the "Science of Discworld" books, I believe the first one, which I cannot recommend enough if you like Sir Terry.
Where does the garbage and sewage go?

A few of the main functions a city provides is collecting garbage, and treating sewage. I don't see a word about them in the Business Insider article. Are there details elsewhere?
Feels like that HN link a few weeks ago about how China employs tens of thousands of people to derail online discussions that are critical of China, often strawmanning the U.S., and the E.U. instead.

Right now on HN two of the top five discussions have been derailed in this manner. Curious.
From memory, GCC does one NewtonRaphson iteration on the approximate result so the error is much lower (closer to e-9 from memory again). They don't use the approximation directly in fast-math mode.
This is in the USA. While I've invested in a few foreign companies, I'm not familiar with how other countries deviate generally from SV norms.
Yep I use Clubhouse for software dev projects as well. It’s great. The longest I’ve kept using an issue tracker.
This is mentioned in TFA:

> It's also not that explosive, owing to the fact that TNT doesn't have enough oxidizer to burn all its carbon and hydrogen fuel, which is why you see a black cloud of mostly carbon after TNT is detonated. So TNT is generally mixed with other chemicals, such as RDX to form an explosive mixture called Composition B that is found in many bombs.
Another way to phrase this is that, in the realm of theorem proving, a human is only going to 'validate' a response from an AI so long as there exists some mathematical or proof theoretic foundation to validate the response from an AI.

To do otherwise is insanity, unless the AI can somehow provably demonstrate that they have invented a better system than all existing mathematics, computation, and logic.

AI has plenty of room to grow in the realm of arts and creativity, because those are places where having a base foundation does not need to be so mechanically reinforced. Toppling all existing knowledge in the arts is fine to do, being that disruptive in the arts is perfectly acceptable and often welcome.

When it comes to the safety of code - expectations of what a machine is going to do, for really important stuff, you want to have a solid, clear, strong reasoning system that is easily understood and easily conveyed to those looking to embrace it. Lots of math and abstraction exists either in the mind of humans, or on a computer, but to take one's hand and smack the whole house of cards down simply because it can't be proven to be absolute perfection - that's a ridiculous thing to do. We know what computers can do because we decide what computers can do. We need to retain some 'ground' in reasoning because what would happen if we collectively stepped away from it all for too long?

42.
I have some theoretical understanding of photonics but what sucks is that with programming, you just fork shit and start hacking. With physics, just starting hacking is much harder.
No, not really. A SAT solver checks if there's a model in which a formula is true, while this program checks if the formula is true in every model. It's believed that there's no efficient reduction from one to the other, because otherwise NP=coNP.
IIRC Mercedes wasn't caught cheating they just got in trouble because they use the same engine control units which contain the routines that make cheating possible.
Ask HN: Has learning a programming language affected your mental models? How?
VAG deliberately programmed around the tests (a defeat device). It's not that VAG sent a car to the test but the test just didn't test regular driving VAG deliberately changed the results for cars under test.
The nature of FUD is not that it's outright wrong, but that it's largely irrelevant and intentionally missing the point, and you can usually recognize that without knowing much about the subject matter.

For example, when they write that licensing the ISA is only a small fraction of the total cost of designing a processor, that is correct. But they are simply ignoring the broader implications of a non-free ISA and its financial effects, and the fact that this fact in itself may actually depend heavily on their current business model. Think about how the free availability of Linux has changed how people can build software, and how that has brought down the cost of software considerably, and much more so than the licensing costs of a Windows install per server. Also, their argument is sort-of "you don't need competition because the price isn't that high", even though it obviously would be a lot higher if there were no competition.

Similarly, it's not wrong that verification and validation of CPU designs is expensive. But (a) noone suggests that those people who are buying ARM chips now will do their own CPU designs in the future, and (b) ARM chips obviously also require expensive verification and validation, so you end up paying for that regardless where you buy a chip. So, again, simply intentionally missing the point.

Also, a lot of it is obviously just speculation, such as "well, what if the new processor is less secure than our product?" Well, yeah, big if, tons of unjustified assumptions: Are their processors really that secure? Couldn't a new processor designed from scratch be much more secure than their accumulated cruft? Again, not factually incorrect, but highly misleading by implying unjustified assertions. That's what the "(U)ncertainty" in FUD refers to.
I think the cool factor here is that they "propose a new idea, pre-IME, which guarantees that “Is this touch event a sensitive keystroke?” analysis will always access user touch events prior to the execution of any IME app code."

In the paper they note as "a pre-IME design, IM-Visor always recognizes and isolates sensitive keystrokes before the IMEs could access them. To achieve this, whenever a user intends to type in a soft keyboard, the STIE will be initialized to intercept touch events and analyze whether it is a sensitive keystroke."

This model is one that begs a matching and reversed exploration of "sensitive keystroke" emulation and whether such pre-IME analysis can be fooled.
It's not even like the test couldn't be met, VAG just wanted to skip the urea system. At the same time as they were cheating, they were selling other diesels with urea that met the regs just fine, no cheating.
Care to explain how they're ineffective instead of repeating libertarian platitudes? Is your argument that they are ineffective because manufacturers are cheating on the tests? Seems like the ineffective part here is not the regulation but the enforcement. These regulations are expected to be misaligned with industry incentives. That's why regulation is necessitated.
I don't think so anymore. I just got the 2018 ipad for music production and I'm not rich, I got it off QVC for monthly payments. You can get a $200 iphone from a pre-paid phone service. Apple has only just begun its campaign to get Apple products in more ordinary hands. The move to arm processors for Mac signals yet another move on Apple's part to aggressively expand their customer base.
I'm only basing it off of how the writer presented the argument. He didn't mention these facts, but he presented these as if they were also people with hard backgrounds, effectively arguing against his main point, which had only a single person he would point to in support of it.

Like I mentioned earlier, there's probably some truth to what he's arguing for, she just did a piss poor job making a case for her point.
> Even scientific calculation would be fine with 32 bit floats

It really depends on the algorithms in question and the error tolerances.
The regulations don't take into account market reality. People don't want to buy cars because they're low-emission, they want to buy cars because they're fast, big, and safe. They need to be bigger, faster, and safer in order to compete. But lowering emissions makes that much more difficult. So of course you're going to lie on emissions. If you don't, your competitor will, and then you lose market share.
And 1-5 employees sounds like the kind of business that would just as well stack a few gray boxes in a room and call it a day.
I think if you have IntelliJ Ultimate it combines the features of the various IntelliJ spin-offs.
NOx emissions specifically are a problem because the engines are run very efficiently at high burning temperatures with complete combustion.
New anti-budgeting app, Fiskal is a better way to spend and save
That graphic is most of the arguments made on that page. I don't see you can claim that it's used out of context?
thanks for making wttr igor! sorry about rate limiting this post might have caused, which api does wttr.in use? I think I'll write about setting up your own weather service api account next.
Some people have tried to argue that the cheating is definitive proof the regulations were too hard, and so obviously emissions regulations should all be scrapped.
How to Promote an AR Game with Organic Traffic
So dumb question: What does chip and signature accomplish?

I assume that someone who installs a skimmer can still use the card data somewhere that does not have a chip terminal... it is my understanding that the vast majority of fraud in the states is CNP (card not present).
You go to the main website and plug in the paywalled URL.

The person you are responding to is just saving others that step.
> The rules for implicit coercion in JavaScript are rather unintuitive.

Yes. And a lot of self-described Javascript developers don't even know that. Because they've never read a book or any other document that explains those rules. And that's why they struggle, like the person in this thread to whom I originally replied, and they can't produce correct code quickly and efficiently, and they create bugs that they don't understand and can't fix, and they can't correctly understand code written by someone who actually understands those aspects of the language.

I agree that you can't memorize everything there is to know about Javascript. But if you don't know something, you have to at least know that you don't know it, so you can look up the correct information when you need it. But a lot of self-described Javascript developers don't even know what they don't know.

For example, I know that the methods String.prototype.substr and String.prototype.substring both exist and they're both used to extract substrings from a string. But I still, for some reason, unless I've used one or the other within the last day or so, I have to check the API docs to determine which one I want to use and what its parameters are. I know that I don't know what I need to know. What I will never do, is write a loop that extracts the characters I need one at a time and builds the substring from them. But I have seen where people have done that, in production code and in technical interviews. I am of the opinion (not universally shared here on HN, apparently) that that is not acceptable from a highly paid professional software developer.

And certain basic things about JS, like the ones I originally described, I think you should just know. But again, that's just me.
I just have IntelliJ configured to use Emacs key bindings; vi ones are also available for people who use the wrong text editor.
In the example you gave, you learned about a specific thing siri can do- tell you what planes are overhead. Now say you know from experience that WA also provides the current altitude and speed of those planes. If you had a strong ToM for Siri you would have a very good intuition about whether you could rely on siri for info as well. As it is, I have no idea. Do you? Don't you think it'd be a much better experience if we did know what to expect?
Non-Paywall archived version:

http://archive.is/IoaKQ
Mercedes was already ordered to recall affected models.
Palmetto high school is one of the better public schools in Miami but Miami public school are pretty bad and under funded. Palmetto is far from an elite high schools where only rich people go.
The 'systemic issue' is that conducting lab tests in cooperation with automakers is clearly an inadequate way of enforcing the regulations. That does not imply the regulations are faulty, it implies they need a more robust enforcement methodology.
Hackers Have a New Favorite Target: Gas Stations
If you have no money to tax or so little you can barely survive you would be immune if you have so much its not painful enough let it scale up and allow no deductions.

Limit the ruling to conditions which can effectively be prevented with genetic testing which substantially burden society, and which society is willing to gratis help you prevent.

If its a 1% chance of transmission you have a 1% chance of a burdensome tax if its a 100% chance you have a 100% chance no need for us to worry personally about the chance of transmission.

Its not really a slippery slope as nobody is being denied the right to procreate it's just that if they know they have a genetic burden and choose to pass it on anyway they will have to help shoulder some of the financial load they put upon society.

It makes perfect sense to help people for free figure out what skeletons they have in their genetic closet. We all have some but some have a 1 in 100,000 chance of being born blind and some have a 50 50 chance of a painful ugly expensive death and should probably adopt.
Apple releases new iPad, FaceID ads
I found this page a couple of years ago and was horrified and delighted by it. If you like/hate this content, you might also enjoy 70's dinner party @70s_party on twitter

https://twitter.com/70s_party
SICP Goodness – Fibonacci Numbers
The parent is saying Nissan handled segmentation wrong with Infinti.
Without defining what "simplicity" and "correctness" are supposed to mean, this article is empty of content. The title appears to be riffing off of the famous saying "First make it work, then make it right, then make it fast" ( http://wiki.c2.com/?MakeItWorkMakeItRightMakeItFast ) which is supposed to be a warning against premature optimization (one that is less often taken out of context than Knuth's famous saying). But by lumping both "making it work" and "making it right" under "correctness", it makes it appear that the author values simple software that doesn't do its job over complex software that does. And the problem is that you can't easily slot simplicity in by drawing a stark dividing line between "making it work" and "making it right", because it's a continuum of correctness. At best, simplicity is more important than performance, much of the time. But at the end of the day the point of software is to perform a specified task, whether or not it is achieved in an aestheically pleasing way underneath.
Thoughts on Reddit and it's redesign
Can't you just buy a competitor's car and test it yourself and report them if you find cheating?
If you use the car the way tests use the car, the performance will be the same. The trick is you can't complete your daily driving needs by driving the way the test does.
What would regulations look like that took market reality into account?

The whole point of regulations is to go against what the market will buy without them. If people bought low emission cars without any outside forces then you wouldn’t need any regulations. Of course, in reality that path leads you to smog-choked cities and lots of dead people.
> RISC-V may, perhaps, compete in two fields with ARM: education, where ARM doesn't give a fuck, and hacker boards, which is a tiny market

Those seem like very similar markets to those that Linux started out with.

AFAIK, Sun never ran FUD/attack ads against Linux, but this feels similar to a hypothetical world where they did so very early in 1993.

I doubt FUD will ultimately be able to prevent the adoption of RISC-V, but it may be able to delay the inevitable for a few years.
Exotic websites like this always remind me of geocities and the early days of the Internet.
The test could even be met without the urea system. But the car would have to run rich and flush out its NOx system more often, which uses fuel and lowers performance. The thing that was so marvelous about the Volkswagen TDI engine was how all of its performance numbers and fuel economy were better than what was advertised. Other manufacturers were racking their brains trying to figure out how they did it.
For China, Tech Giant Tencent Is Both a National Champion and a Threat
Show HN: My Vim/Tmux config for everyday coding
yes, i see now i formulated that rather poorly. this is what I meant by systemic failure. the regulations themselves are not the issue.
> So kudos to you for not relagating the kid to non-person status like that.

I was raised to do as I was told, sit quietly and speak when spoken to in company. It did me no harm whatsoever, and meant I could behave in public without constantly demanding attention.

There is a difference between expecting a child to behave properly in company, and neglecting to interact with them at all.
> the state will cart people off for nonviolent crimes like stealing a bike or using a fake ID

Reasonable, morally normal people don't want anybody sent to prison for stealing a bike. That's a reductive straw man. The issue at hand is that this person had stolen before, had been caught stealing multiple times before, and, despite being told that doing it again would result in a long sentence, still couldn't stop himself from stealing a bike.

This is a pattern of bad behavior, even in response to the threat of dire consequences. That's not normal. And it's not just "stealing a bike." It's the totality of the behavior that's being punished. "Three strikes" laws require three strikes. It's silly to look at any one of those strikes in isolation. The point is that society is saying, "enough is enough."
Gerald Weinberg. A classic, inpired much of Demarco and Lister's Peopleware.

https://leanpub.com/thepsychologyofcomputerprogramming
Indeed we are. And oh so fragile!

:D
This incident only related to cars sold in Japan. The VW scandal was different.
You believe EV is "clean" even though most electricity is generated by Burning some kind of Hydrocarbon, be it Coal, NatGas etc...

Further the current electrical grid can not support a full migration to EV, we can barely support summer time loads in some area with A/C Running, if everyone changed to EV Tomorrow it would completely collapse the electric grid.
Increasing emmissions standards make EVs more attractive. The incentives are aligned.
FWIW, I switched to a new iPhone a few weeks ago, and it has learned at every workday at a particular time when I open a Messages conversation with a particular person and type "Good," it correctly auto-suggests the rest of the phrase that I sent at that time.

I have noticed, however, that it wont always make suggestions for similar repeated texting events. I think it has to do with limited space in the iOS auto-complete bar, because once I get past the first couple of words it fills in the rest.

If you're using iOS, is it possible that your usual phrase is too long to fit in auto-complete?

As for the other things you suggest, it appears this is the direction Apple is headed, based on the most recent WWDC keynote.
Thanks for the detailed explanation. As a parent, I can see what you imply with regard to different kinds of lying. A very young child will lie to avoid an undesirable result in a very basic way: "Did you throw your food on the floor?" (with food plainly visible to all). Child nods emphatic "no".

While older child only lies when they think that I don't have enough information to know the truth for sure.
My main point is if she wanted to make this point, she could spend a little more time digging for examples in favor of that point, of which I'm sure she would be able to find if she wanted to, and less time making the exact opposite point because these are the five CEOs she can name off the top of her head (that's an exaggeration, but that's how it came across).

I'm not saying her argument can be objectively proven or disproven. At best she can only show a correlation based on her definition of what constitutes a 'boring' life. But she should at least have tried to make the case she had chosen as best as she could (given a limited timeframe and a modicum of research). If this is the best she could come up with, I am not impressed.

Granted I made a generalization to journalists in general out of it, but that's just based on a handful of articles that have made dubious claims that I've bothered to take the time to read fully, and being disappointed in how weak the arguments seem to be (because I'd like to see a good argument for why I should consider those claims to be true, and accept those arguments, or at least think critically and thoughtfully about it, rather than being able to quickly dismiss what they say because they said almost nothing at all).

There was another one recently that claimed that Online Dating leads to Depression, and the text supports the assertion because A) Match.com did a user survey and found people thought online dating was addicting, and B) 'studies show' that addictive behavior can lead to depression. Therefore 'studies show' Online Dating leads to Depression, for the headline. Such a weak defense of their point, and they might as well have also said just about everything that can be addicting leads to depression at that point.
I agree except that I don't think they were ever in a different position despite some iconic sports cars; Toyota and Honda have always been on top. Well, maybe there was one change- Subaru got their shit together starting in the early 90s and, at least in my opinion, are definitely preferable to Nissan at this point.
You're right, future times are more complex and might require more attention to detail. But I think you can still achieve the requirements in a simple way, perhaps by storing it as UTC + lat/long and running a script to update future dates when someone changes their rules.
I don't have any evidence on hand, but I distinctly remember most of the auto makers complaining every step of the way about most emissions regulations.

Granted, it tends to get a "boy who cried wolf" feel to it as they've always done it, but they absolutely raised a stink about the constantly rising regulations.
I, for one, am happy we have had 50 years of steadily tightening emissions standards, rather than sitting on our hands since 1965 waiting for EV to kick in.

ICE may very well one day be fully outmoded, but that day is not here yet, so in the meantime...