skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I do have a slight downtime (1 second or so) when upgrading containers since the bash scripts just pulls the new image, stops/rm the container and start up the new one... Although my project is for an enterprise customer who works 7am-5:30pm so I just do it outside of those hours. Each end point is it's own instance too, which minimizes the likely hood of anyone knowing.

It was all designed to run on kubernetes which would allow rolling updates with zero downtime, but I can't justify the cost of a cluster at the moment.

The node app and postgres are on different instances. They could easily be on the same, though. Postgres is open to the world since GIS analysts need to be able to connect to it with QGIS. The API is also open to the world using CORS for the same reason (a custom GIS collection tool accesses the REST API).
Checkmate, vaxxers. /s
I didn't use any hyperbole in my response, but you're projecting a lot onto mine. Let me give you a realistic personal example, something that might happen to me at least once or twice a week. I'm 20 minutes into establishing my bearings in a set of files I think I'll have to modify or at least understand for the next change I need to make. Someone comes over and asks me a technical question - maybe via a chat ping or a tap on the shoulder, or even just by walking behind me. Now I can choose to tell them it isn't a good time, but they've probably already started to describe their problem and that alone has stolen enough of the focus I was building up that I'm better off trying to help them first. (If I'm an hour in rather than 20 minutes in I'm more likely to tell them to ask me later). After giving them 5 - 10 minutes of my time, the original focus is lost. It may take me another 20 minutes just to get back to the cusp of beginning to write code again. There are only a few good sized blocks of time to work in the normal day, so that's more expensive than it seems.

I can deal with a nearby conversation and ignore it, although frankly it can be very distracting when it's about technical topics near my own work. Two or three at once is rarer but very irritating when it gets started up. Headphones are great for that, but when I'm suffering from tinnitus they no longer work. What's wrong with walking to a common space away from the work area when you want to have a 2 minute discussion with a coworker? If it's not worth the walk, maybe it isn't worth the discussion.

There's nothing strange about people having trouble in an open office space, all I would ask for is some empathy. I have internalized some of the lessons of my own problems by trying to resist the temptation to ping or otherwise disturb coworkers by non-email means unless it's absolutely necessary. A good deal of the kinds of questions I'm asked or I hear asked (maybe as many as half of them? and I would include my own questions here) could be solved by thinking or researching just a little more in solitude before reaching out.

I've also created improvised physical barriers around my desk to block visual distractions. As a result my current workspace is OK for getting things done, but it doesn't change the fact (for me) that open offices are bad by default and need personal and spatial modification to become acceptable, as compared to the mythical office with a door which would be good for getting things done by default. It's not about being incapable of function without "utter total silence", it's about being made slightly miserable every day on average.
While we do have an innate model of right and wrong --- a murder taboo is universal amoung human civilizations, for example --- these instincts flow from a long epoch of the influence of evolution and game theory on our psyches, not some grand philosophical system.

Philosophical systems of ethics have always seemed to me like elaborate rationalizations for what we all know to be right and wrong innately. Since most of us possess this faculty with or without philosophy, the formalization is just self-flattery.

Do you think healers sought to do harm before Hippocrates came around and that the mere phrase "do no harm" ushered in a new era of helpful medicine?
What questions?
To bad all the good Darknets were taken down and replaced with Honeypots.
Not here, but I use NetBSD constantly as a timesharing system via SDF.org.
I've seen this too but not from just one trip. I've seen heavy users kind of never come back.

I suspect your friend had latent psychotic tendencies. Would be interesting to look at family history.

These are powerful drugs that seem capable of both helping and doing harm. They should definitely be used with care, studied, and not abused.

Of course what the war on drugs did was to ban the scientific study of these things and push them exclusively onto the street where they did get abused.
Platonist.
Any tips for approaching such experimentation in a relatively controlled manner?

(I've always been keen to try, but have avoided so far due to an unpleasant childhood experience when administered an opiate painkiller, which resulted in nightmares with conscious flashbacks for months.)
Lenin was an appropriate name for this man.
It's exactly the same in US

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/02/09/384968360...
just in time it's beginning to be replaced.
Which laptop? How's battery life? Does s3/s0 suspend and resume work?
Well if you are using emacs, like I do, what else do you need?
Ok maybe a browser outside of emacs and a pdf viewer:-)
And a tmux session somewhere.

Someone once said:

I just need a bootloader for emacs :-)
"The brain is a wet computer. Reality is its internal model of the external world informed by imperfect sensory inputs. Consciousness is what thinking feels like. When the brain ceases to function, the individual is destroyed."

The problem is that those are just superficial statements that don't capture the nature of reality at all. It's like saying "there's ground under my feet, and a sky above me, that's the nature of the universe."

It just seems that you just packed your bags and moved on because the nature of reality and consciousness is not your interest.
This is less a news story than a coat rack Greenwald uses to hang a bunch of loosely-related political arguments he wants to make:

* That Ecuador under Moreno is subservient to western powers, this according in part to Correa, who ran the previous Ecuadorian administration, which was widely considered one of the most corrupt in the western hemisphere (I have no idea if Moreno's was as well). OK? None of us are equipped to litigate the question of whether Ecuador is well-governed, and I doubt Greenwald is either.

* That the UK might (based on no evidence presented in this article) be wrangling to convict Assange under contempt statutes, because, I don't know, the UK is super corrupt and out to get Assange.

* That the US almost surely plans on prosecuting Assange because, despite the fact that US law makes it pretty difficult to prosecute Assange and despite the fact that it is extremely unlikely the UK or any EU country would extradite him, there are politicians in the US that really don't like him. OK? And?

The one morsel of "news" in this is the intimation that Moreno is about to revoke Assange's asylum. Of course, people paying attention have known this was coming for months. Greenwald has an unnamed source saying the details are being finalized now. Great.

The rest of this is basically a very... impassioned... op-ed piece. Infowars does this stuff better, or, at least, more entertainingly.
Julian Assange is not "effectively imprisoned". He can leave the Ecuadorian embassy any time he chooses. Ecuador is under no obligation to provide him domicile.
Oh right, my bad. I just saw a first archive.org index at 2014 but that is of course not necessarily the time of writing/publication.
A talk by his son, given at the Brattleboro library a few years back.

"Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: Writing the Red Wheel in Vermont"
https://youtu.be/coSJeHcdmgs
Mixing complementary therapy / standard cancer treatment could affect survival
Not strictly, but the original plan was to have Microsoft market OS/2 2.0 to the clone makers. So when MS walked away, IBM didn't have a good story for 3rd parties. OS/2 2 had drivers for stuff with names like "IBM 3142" and you had to know whether that was the equivalent of an Adaptec SCSI adaptor or HP LaserJet printer. The association with PS2/MCA certainly muted OS/2's reception though.
It sounds like you've redefined great for yourself such that it doesn't exist. Most other people still have a working definition of great.
As a Xoogler myself, I have always wondered about the logic of "we can't open source X because it uses too many libraries and is too integrated". The obvious answer is, OK, open source the libraries and refactor the integrations to make them more flexible.

Reimplementing all of Borg from scratch seems crazy to me given the huge effort that went into it. Does Google want an open source cluster infrastructure or not? If yes, in what universe is it less effort to write a totally new one from scratch vs just progressively open sourcing things?
>Why is it when voter ID laws are proposed by legislators, they never propose a way to get IDs into the hands of eligible voters who don't already have them?

In an odd and absolutely unrelated coincidence, republicans who push these laws also close dmv’s in minority areas, change their hours to make it harder for working class drivers to access them, and instruct dmv personnel to obscure the fact that id’s are free.
I agree insofar as I think we will eventually be able to build a consciousness machine or at the very least I see no fundamental barrier to it. But that explains not at all why we have a subjective experience. You probably don't think a huge pile of memory chips has any subjective experience in the general case, experiencing what it is like to be a pile of memory chips.

Nonetheless you and I believe if we just wire the memory chips together in the right way and load some specific bit patterns into them, then the pile of memory chips will suddenly go »Holly shit, I am consciousness being inside of an enormous universe!« But the pile of memory chips will not just say this, no it will be truly aware of it.
Science isn't about infallibility, it's about overwhelming bodies of evidence supporting a conclusion inductively.

There is overwhelming evidence, anthropological and biological, that homosexuality is (at least!) as old as genetically modern humans. There is no evidence of any sort of exceptional origin for homosexuality in humans, especially in light of homosexual behavior in other species. The very idea of a dual (or multiple) emergence of homosexuality across species violates one of the central dogmas of genetics: that the parsimonious explanation is always preferable.

Spitting out a bunch of low quality hypotheses and then building the rest of your career on them (as Cochran did with his claims about Ashkenazi intelligence) is not how good science is done.
At this time Android has 87% market share. And climbing.

The only thing I wish for is for none of these companies to be allowed to get the entire pie. Those improvements you talk about? They were done during a fight when they were more or less tied with the opponent. The closer you are to 100% market share, the fewer and far between they are. You want proof? Look at MS, or Intel. The moment they got dominance they coasted on it for years with no tangible improvement to anything else but their bottom line.

And you seem to think that I must be an iOS fan and probably hate Google. My main phone is Android and has been for 7 years now (although I tend to own and use one of each Windows, iOS, BB10). That's exactly why I want to see more free competition.

P.S. Google deals in user data, not selling phones. So a valuable market is one that gives them access to that data. One with lots of users. The phone they use is irrelevant.
That's look promising. Thank you very much!
His word in an interview or PR bulletin is one thing. His word during testimony before Congress is another.

Out of the entire Zuckerberg / Congress sideshow,m I thought this part stands out as clearly lying to Congress. Not knowing the number of data points isn't out of line (10? 1000? 10000?), but there's no way he doesn't know the term "shadow profiles" in the context of tracking people without Facebook accounts.

> Lujan: Facebook has detailed profiles on people who have never signed up for Facebook, yes or no?

> Zuckerberg: Congressman, in general we collect data on people who have not signed up for Facebook for security purposes to prevent the kind of scraping you were just referring to [reverse searches based on public info like phone numbers].

> Lujan: So these are called shadow profiles, is that what they’ve been referred to by some?

> Zuckerberg: Congressman, I’m not, I’m not familiar with that.

> Lujan: I’ll refer to them as shadow profiles for today’s hearing. On average, how many data points does Facebook have on each Facebook user?

> Zuckerberg: I do not know off the top of my head.
The thing is, even if you were right (and I think you are) and this was definitely proven, this knowledge is useless outside of purely scientific curiosity.

Okay, our whole perception of reality and individuality and consciousness is an illusion. Well, we still live in this illusion: even if at a fondamental level we're deterministic machine, that's not how we feel, that's not how we experience reality.

Even if I know that there's no free will, it won't be a satisfactory answer to people doing dumb shit around me. It won't be a satisfactory answer to me being bored in a purposeless job I hate. It doesn't solve the problem that some things seem right and other seem wrong.

Knowing that the brain is a wet computer is just as useful as knowing that particles are made of vibrating strings: that's interesting but doesn't help me interact with the reality I experience. "morale", "justice", "happiness", "love" might be perceptory illusions but that's still what we experience, and you can philosophize about all of that.

That being said I agree totally that turning to philosophy to determine the "nature of our experience of reality" is a dead-end, it's up to science.
Do you value anything? Does anything matter to you? If something does matter to you, why? If it matters because it achieves a specific end, why does that end matter?

Is it a trick of the brain? Are you simply forced to behave as if things matter when in reality you believe everything is pointless and nobody has any value beyond the hedonistic gratification they can provide you? If someone murdered everyone you cared about, would you claim that your grief stems from an illusion, a mistake?

You’re free to answer “yes” to all of these. I just think it’s a really sad way to live.
Why do you need a subjective first person experience when humanity could operate just as well as a society of philosophical zombies?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie
Why? "Lenin Moreno was once a wealthy businessman and politician. But in 1998, he was shot in the back as gunmen stole his car from a parking lot in Quito. He was paralyzed from the waist down. Moreno overcame intense pain and bouts of depression to become a motivational speaker. He's written books about the healing power of laughter." This seems to explain a lot of what he has been doing in Ecuador, more so than his first name.
last April, Trump’s then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo, now his Secretary of State, delivered a deranged, rambling, highly threatening broadside against WikiLeaks.

I watched the video linked and I wouldn't describe it as "deranged" or "rambling". Just because the author disagrees with Pompeo does not make him deranged. When reporters write blatantly political things like this, it really makes me question the fairness of the rest of the article.. what else did they mischaracterize to fit their political views?
> As far as I'm concerned, after Wittgenstein, philosophy has had nothing to do.

After which Wittgenstein? From Tractatus? Or from Philosophical Investigations? You rather sound like you prefer Tractatus but Wittgenstein still had something to say about philosophy after Tracatus. Are Philosophical Investigations nonsensical? And what about Tracatus?

You sound so certain about philosophy... But how come that we can even dabate about philosophy? How can we understand those nonsensical philosophical questions if they are nonsensical? And how do you define what is nonsensical? Aren't such inquiries purely philosophical questions?

In your comment you used so many purely philosophical terms but you still claim that philosophy is utter nonsense... I guess we should agree that your post is utter philosophy.
> I'm not sure what you're saying, when would that be different from what we have today?

The situation today is that "[a-z]" is undefined by POSIX if you are not in the POSIX locale. I'm suggesting that it, and similar cases, should be made defined in all locales that include a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m, n, o, p, q, r, s, t, u, v, w, x, y, and z.

> You also might want ranges as [a-fk-z] (for example)

Looking back, I wrote unclearly. Where I wrote 'overload items of the form "x-y" in ranges' it would have been better to write 'overload items of the form "x-y" inside bracket expressions'.

In "[a-fk-z]" there are two items of that form. Under my suggestions, "a-f" would be replaced with "abcdef" in all locales, and "k-z" would be replaced with "klmnopqrstuvwxyz", giving "[abcdefklmnopqrstuvwxyz]".
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdJRjihJpCs

(longer version of the one posted by evo_9)
If the evidence is scarce enough to allow many different theories, that means no particular theory has much value at present.
Psychedelics such as LSD, Psilocybin and Mescaline has the ability to treat long term depression. They seem to allow you to step out of the box in other words get you a truly new perspective on the world.
From what I can understand these drugs alter the brain area responsible for emotions the amygdala. I would go as far as to say people with long term depression needs reprogramming of their brain and one way to accomplish that is Psychedelics. This is not something one should self administer when depressed. For those who tried above substances did it change your brain for the better? Also I belive Psychedelic drugs could help people with autism spectrum for some. People with autism also be helped with a different perspective on the world.

Psilocybin and Depression
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03380442

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/psychedelic-drugs-...
I do, I'm using dwm, firefox and urxvt.

I've got a lot of netbsd running machines. The one I use now is a Haswell CPU with nvidia graphics, and everything works well on it (even nvidia graphics!).

Not all machines are so good. I have a too new Dell XPS. It doesn't have graphical acceleration. But it was very cool to have the touchscreen working already (although with rough edges).
Nice app. As someone who uses org-mode for note taking, I tried micropad. Here is a quick feedback:

1. Add support for syntax highligting the code blocks in markdown may be?

2. It is not obvious that full screen will hide the sidebar and how I can bring it back.

3. App has several bugs I think. Trying to create a image note with 1MB image froze the application.

4. Vertical space is a premium these days. A lot of vertical space in the app is wasted. Not sure if this being an electron app.

5. Whats up with app icon? I am using appimage on Fedora.

6. For some reason the note taking does not feel effortless. I do not mean this as massive criticism but as others have pointed out, allow deletion without prompts and allow undo.
He's not a 'reporter'.
do you want to negotiate a contract with hollywood?
I feel like a lot of people defend philosophy on the basis of transcendal sentiment, which says that says there ought to be something more to the world than the ground and the sky, as it were, usually phrased as the "meaning" or "purpose" or "nature" of something.

I understand the feeling. It's natural to probe. But what if it really is all just ill-defined sentiment? Why should we imagine there is something "more" there, that there is a "nature" of things beyond that which we can measure?

The principle of parsimony demands that we reject extraneous abstractions, and I don't see anything forcing us to acknowledge that the nature of reality is a legitimate object of inquiry as distinct from physics and math.
This is basically still the case in the Vatican, Malaysia and Cambodia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elective_monarchy#Current_uses
>a murder taboo is universal among human civilizations

Using the word murder is cheating. Of course an "unlawful killing" is taboo, it's in the definition! Killing humans is definitely not a universal taboo, just look at wars and those that support them. Since all ethical statements have an evaluative piece to them, we cannot say anything is universally taboo.
You are right, but I'm not talking about this and you know it. I was saying that this gentleman, quotemstr, is confusing and mixing the model with the reality that it is trying to model.
It somewhat blew my mind the other day that you can add an '--inspect' flag to a locally-run node instance and inspect it via Chrome (chrome://inspect).

After building a server for many months now, and relying on far too many console.log()s, this trick has enlightened me to the point where I feel as though I was a fool for not finding it out before!

Ndb looks like a promising improvement over this functionality and I'm excited to check it out.
What's the size of the transitive dependency graph of Borg? 10MLOC? 50MLOC? 100MLOC? I have no idea. But it's a lot of code no matter what. Open sourcing that much code is a huge undertaking, unless you're just planning to throw it over the wall with no expectation of external people working on it.

On the other hand starting from scratch you get to grow the community and the codebase in lockstep.
I've spent a good portion of my life in the border region between software engineering and pure science. I wish more people from either side would spend more time in this region. It makes for both better scientists and it definitively makes for better programmers.

My experience is that when the two are combined you'll get much faster scientific progress coupled with software engineers that have much better problem solving vocabularies. Engineering seems to inject more imagination and urgency to the scientific bits of the work. And you need engineers that have the scientific vocabulary to lift their work to a more scholarly level.

Much scientific publishing is junk. It doesn't carry its own weight in that it provides an insufficient delta in knowledge to be worth the time it takes to read.

Likewise, much code that is written is junk in that the developer used the first method (or only method) they could think of to solve a given problem due to having a limited toolchest for problem solving. Often not even knowing which exact problem they are solving.

Don't shit on engineering papers. It benefits both those who think of themselves as pure scientists and engineers.
My guess, he was a money man appointed by a board filled with money men.
Holy shit. Why can one do?
I wish to see how they dealt with the overhead because of all the encryption, checks etc. performance-wise? I know LOL is quite an old game so they mastered these points. I am especially curious because lately I play PUBG and when PUBG does something about cheat it effectively kills performance.
i didn’t play nms and missed out on the hype. i wasn’t really talking about this specific story.
That's not what you should be hiring interns for interns are meant to learn from you and this is a legal requirement in some countries.

Don't take this to unkindly your coming off as some one who is taking advantage.
Cory Doctorow on Google launching a DRM-free audiobook store