skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Corrosion is by far not the main issue holding back Thorium reactors. In fact in the MSR experiment they did a lot of work on corrosion and they considered it very solvable.

Re-qualifying that material would be tricky and costly, but there are companies doing it.

For the MSR style modern 2 fluid reactor your main problem is the chemical plant that needs to live in the reactor itself.

Secondly Thorium has absolutely no regularly support, and given the way nuclear regulation works its basically impossible to get a new fuel and type of reactor to market.

There is Thorium fuel for LWR coming to the market very slowly, but the advantages of that are very limited.
Not to mention this very site
Please stop spreading misinformation. There are few circumstances where an employees can be immediately terminated and calling in sick is not one of them.
That’s what he is talking about though, “You only live once” is a selfish (no negative connotation intended) sentiment. If you have a wife, children, debts people are expecting you to repay then to some extent you need to deal with some adversity.

I’m not saying everybody should stick it out in terrible situations but “you only live once” is not the reason you should be flipping the table if you have people depending on you.
Virtual Case File
My lovely so life movies. Im
Every piece of historic evidence tends to prove that mobile phone usage for an ever growing part of the population seems to correlate with better living standards.
Being disheartened by one warm summer is as anecdotal as dismissing global warming after a warm winter. It's true that it was hot, but that may actually have been good, as people may finally be getting their act together (the chances of which are MUCH larger if they're told that there's still time).

The world has never been better equipped to tackle its problems than now. Take comfort in that. And as a citizen of, probably, a democratic state and with the Internet at your fingertips, you have more power than ever, as an individual, to affect our collective destiny.

Will check out that book!
Yes. Downvoting your valid perspective is stupid. More resilient species would quickly fill the gaps and they have. Problem is temperatures are not stable, so every rebuilt reef will need to be rebuilt again in some years. Maybe full recovery when man is gone.
Because it's a slippery slope: the filter is loosely defined for "adult content"; there is no law, it's all voluntary. When in doubt, what would you do as an ISP, to avoid problems? Ban. Most people opt out anyway on their residential accounts, and who's likely to look at "bad" stuff in a public place like a school or library and then complain that it doesn't work? So you ban first and ask questions later.

Hotels are prime candidates for keeping the pornwall up, since they'd really like to sell you their own expensive porn channels as in the good ol' times.
I'm sure this is how it looks from the outside, but it's very much not the way things actually work. Except in very limited cases (like, owner of a small private company), your boss does not set his own salary without oversight. And even then, the best way to increase his own salary is for the company to grow, so he's incentivized to run a proper business and not a sweatshop.
Why not do away with the farce of elections then if the civil service is actually in charge?
META

https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=craftinginterpreters....

days: 0, 12, 38, 47, 47, then months: 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 8, 9, 11, ...

it's a great resource and i prefer submissions like this instead of, say, interesting but only tangentially unrelated articles about "Yankees Who Brought Science to the BBQ World (wsj.com)". and there are always new members who have never seen the submission before.

but still. every 2-3 weeks.
The proposal and following discussion seem pretty detailed too me, and you can even notice that Evan was not convinced at first:

https://github.com/elm-lang/elm-plans/issues/4
Yes he waited long enough to ensure a divorce wouldn’t sink his political career, which it could have back in those days...
1.1% by the way still exponential, just a lower factor than 50 ya
> India is almost as populous as China

What does India have to do with anything? Yes, India uses even less carbon per capita than the US or China! Good for India! It'd be awesome if both China and the US could bring their carbon production per capita down to India's level, or even lower.

As for the situation in the US: the latter of your sources is conveniently from 2015, before the US elected a president who campaigned on reviving the coal industry, appointed the CEO of Exxon-Mobil to Secretary of State, pulled out of the Paris Climate Accord, and has made it his daily mission to roll back EPA protections. Does this [1] sound like a government that's "aggressively reducing coal usage"? If coal usage is going down in the US, it's despite, not because of, any efforts by the current federal government. And indeed, coal specifically aside, carbon emissions in 2018 are projected to rise in the US after a steady decline since 2005 [2].

> And finally, I'm sorry it needs to be specifically pointed out -- but politicians vote on policies. Not lobbyists, not energy companies.

I mean, it doesn't need to be pointed out; we're all, despite differences of opinions, reasonably intelligent people here, and we all know about and have made up our minds on lobbying. Of course politicians write laws and vote on policies; I happen to think that if oil and gas companies are spending things like $65 million a year [3] to try to influence those politicians and the policies they make, they must have determined that has some effect. I suppose you don't, or think it doesn't matter because the buck stops with the politicians or something. I think that's naïve. But I promise we're all familiar with the ground facts, and your condescending attitude isn't really encouraging any useful discussion.

[1] https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/21/politics/epa-climate-power-pl...

[2] https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34872

[3] https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=E01
Vidmate Software
And then lenders won't make the loans. That's exactly the point. Student loans were a bad idea in the first place. The ready availability of tuition money has lead to schools raising tuition FAR faster than inflation for the last 20-30 years. Most of that money isn't even going to education.
> You see, the biggest reason the business in question was successful was that our hero went out and built it. He actually tried.

This is begging the question. That is exactly what people who make accusations of bias are contesting. (Although I'd say survivorship bias is probably the more appropriate choice.)
It's not bad. But it doesn't matter how much tuition costs or what degrees offer pay or not. Everyone will study whatever they want, borrow at 1000% interest if necessary or 1% interest for "profitable" degrees, and then dump the dept as soon as they graduate.

Or am I missing something? Original question, what's stopping everyone from defaulting right after graduation?
SimEarth was a realistic Gore simulation!

http://www.paulloeb.org/articles/InconvenientVideo.html

Serial killing is a drop in the ocean of blood you can spill by parallel killing in SimEarth, wiping out all life on Earth with meteors and floods!
The majority (2/3) of the piece is evidence to back up an idea. This includes a grouchy anecdote, along with 4 or 5 studies linking screen reading to reduced comprehension, empathy, and critical thought.

I didn't find the evidence in the article compelling. But I'm glad it was there and don't think it was fluff.
I'm sorry that my general frustration with most of the comments in this thread materialised as being directed toward you specifically. That wasn't my intention.

People (not necessarily you or I) are going to be annoyed though. And this is fine. A tool doesn't need to be the most popular alternative to "thrive" or to "win" (quoting some other commenter now).

The thought process for most people in this thread seems to be:

1. Get mad when their "freedoms" (dangerous synchronous FFI) are taken away.

2. Complain, because the programmer knows best (ego/hubris).

3. Complain further about "the community" when their egos aren't pandered to.

If the maintainers relinquished their ideals, we'd have a language as dangerous as most of the alternatives. Frankly, I'm not interested in a "community" where everyone gets along but the software is always broken. I need my stuff to work.

To you, specifically, I appreciate that you tried to keep the discussion amicable. Thank you for that, and again I'm sorry.
Solving the crypto-fq bug in ath9k (2016)
did he?
> The amount of people who torrent is absurd, and the amount of people who are using the same net as someone who torrents is even greater. For this to be the least bit effective, they would have to dismantle VPNs, dynamic IP addresses, and somehow find a way to target specific people when they're using public internet.

> But they will be forced to learn this soon.

The real issue is in fact with people: in order to "fix" the way people want to communicate and exchange data and informations, you really need to switch from a blacklist approach to a whitelist approach, effectively banning everything that's not pre-approved.

That's the technical lesson record companies are going to learn. And an escalation of this kind is extremely dangerous. Because with time this may lead to self-censorship, people turning each other in to the authorities, scenes associated with China, East Germany or the Soviet Union. Models I'd not be proud of.
That's the point, it is very difficult to correctly interpret analyses. That's why you don't take conclusions for granted, and work from the basis of what you think is biologically relevant. There is usually a whole phase preceding the actual analysis. You can visualise potential relationships in directed acyclic graphs, to try and see where bias might be introduced. However, that phase is very often skipped by medical researchers.

I never said the analyst was the sole person bearing the responsibility. You are right that just as much as responsibility must be expected from those that designed the information model, those that collected the data but also the person who ultimately analyses it and prepares it for whatever kind of dissemination. Everybody involved has to take their individual responsibility so that we achieve collective responsibility.
My colleague and me (both from Germany) are always looking for interesting side projects. Mail is in the profile, website gives a rough idea of what we do. We would love to hear from you.

Regards!
I'll bet Tesla's EULA forbids setting up your own Megacharger station.
Long story short, no and that's because forces are only applicable in certain situations and not others, and in this case gravity, electromagnetism, and similar subatomic forces are binding the atoms we know and preventing them from "expanding". I'm not an expert and this is just my simplified version of a simplified version.

Here's more to read about it:

https://www.quora.com/Astrophysics-If-the-universe-is-expand...

https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/ask-ethan-if-the-unive...
It's not like it's unheard of, but it doesn't fill the pockets of the selected elite.

There are worker cooperatives:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_cooperative

Workers' self management:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_self-management

And serious economists who advocate for such a system:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branko_Horvat
And they are blooming:

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/06/mysterious-masses-sea...

https://optics.marine.usf.edu/projects/SaWS/images/Caribbean...
> I was bored and

Be proud of your experimentation! We're all fellow geeks here. You don't have to hedge like this with us about spending your time hacking. Thanks for sharing!
The decidability factor is exploited by the side with skin in the game. Those that would be bankrupted by expensive restrictions on behavior, or restrictions designed to prevent such business entirely, know that they can point to unpreventable externalities like caldera volcanos and extinction event asteroids as a means to arm consumers with a toolkit to rationalize hedonism.

As if to say, live well now, because what if any of these other catastrophies strike, and obviate your life savings and insurance policies. You could have spent that money on good times today, but living with your means, and planning for a future that possibly doesn’t exist will leave you kicking yourself during the rapture.

The other side also has existential skin in the game, in the sense that a destroyed inhospitable biosphere is the figurative eating of our only free lunch, and understands the optics of the decision, but hasn’t come up with selfish motives to prey upon the undisciplined weakness of the unwashed masses. Mostly because such principles of psychological exploitation for personal gain (the joy of living in a world where the ice caps don’t melt and unleash category six hurricanes on a monthly basis in every quadrant of the world) are unrelatable to their own motivations to good conduct.

This asymmetry of operations means an unfair fight, and thus a waiting game, each biding everyone’s time until it’s too late, but undeniable.

Until then, the level of money poured into this system is only equalized by the perception of threat on the part of the hedonists. The more they feel threatened, the more they spend to fight the shadow of the obvious truth that will ultimate rob them of all inaction anyway. They aren’t even fighting their do-gooder counterpart. They’re fighting their own capacity to continue typical behavior, with diminishing returns. Shooting themselves in the foot, to maintain a gun collection of foot guns.
Twenty years ago a banking IT failure would have been considered catastrophic and unacceptable.

Now there are serious meltdowns and failures every year.

Meanwhile, when was the last time you talked to a customer services rep of any large org without being told "Sorry - our systems are really slow today"?
And the US is not even complying to the half hearted agreement
Hello! I built an automated form render and validator with redux-form by defining a schema. It already suits my needs, how can I meake suit yours?
Yes the closing or shrinking of humanities departments will be part of the realignment, but again it is hard to say what the natural or optimal number of available programs is. More isn’t always better, but too few isn’t good either. If there is a strong core remaining overall we should be ok. (And I do sympathize with those who will laid off, and that even fewer academic positions will be open for those that want to persue academia).
What you are doing is called Tone Policing.
I think the philosophical point of the article is that if you reached the point where you contemplate breaking up or quitting then you're past a critical threshold. The issues are big enough to get you thinking and you're probably past the point where you see a point in fixing or tried and it didn't work. In which case it will just get progressively worse and the end result is almost inevitable. Hence "probably should".

The practicals of doing this will vary of course. There are many factors to keep in mind and a lot of them are personal/subjective.
This article in particular doesn't seem like a good example of your generalisation. No ridiculous childhood flashback, and the headline is a facet of the main point expressed in the first paragraph.
They are statisticians.
Yeah but behind your "as much as possible" statement hides the whole softwar engineering profession. Getting the requirements right sometimes can paralize a team, making it loose "capabilities" or momentum or even having attrition impact. There's no single PM methodology solution to avoid having the deal with the tradeoffs associated with the agile vs. waterfall dichotomy.

Behind any popular or profitable succesfull software project there are sometimes as much "PMing" practices as there are coders.
If you wanted to take user privacy super seriously, I wonder how feasible it would be to set up a TOR style network to allow users to pass their update back to your server?

That way, you don't know who each update came from, and if you isolated each update, you wouldn't even know if two updates came from the same user.

I haven't taken much time to consider the ramifications, my gut says this would open you up to malicious users who could pass in malicious updates in an attempt to train unwanted behaviour in your model, but I believe this would be an issue with any federated learning approach unless you only use trusted users.

It also does away with the nice efficiency gain you get by averaging the samples based on how many examples the user had.

Of course, this is only useful when reconstructed data doesn't contain enough metadata to ID users anyway.
IME the idea of "tracks" is totally foreign to most urban school districts. We know about "honors classes" and the "vocational students" from movies, but the whole school system only exists to get students to pass state minimum requirements in whatever sketchy, technical way they can, or else house them until they turn 16 and can drop out. The "advisors" presumably exist to check a box on some state form: they certainly don't offer any actual assistance or advice in applying for school beyond being the office where you sign up for ACT or SAT test dates and handing out FAFSA forms.

The idea that a high school would have anything to do with preparing you for post-secondary education, or advising you on what type of institution to get it from, is totally foreign in districts like this.
Your argument proves that PhD qualifying exams are crap because it’s a generalised argument against testing, not a specific one against multiple choice tests.

It’s perfectly possible to write good tests, ones with good reliability and validity. If the test is good teaching to the test is not a problem.
My working opinion of Elm is that it's a very promising language hamstrung by poor governance and crippled by a shockingly toxic community.

...and that Reddit threat certainly doesn't give me any reason to change my mind on any of those points. :)

Edit: I should note, I sympathise with the situation the Elm project is in. The extremely limited resources they have for development mean they have to make some compromises, and I'm not sure they've even made the wrong ones, given their goal. If they waited until a 1.0 version before trying to get adoption the project would lose relevance, so they have to get people to use an unstable beta in production. If they didn't make breaking changes to enforce a vision on the project, you'd end up with a ugly soup like PHP. If they devoted significant time to dealing with the community, they might not get anything done. Golang has charted a similar course but has had way more resources (and still has made a number of people angry); Rust has kept people happier, but in exchange for a much more community-driven vision, and not without cost in terms of false starts and dropped features. Developing a new language as anything more than an exercise is very hard!
To filter out people who would judge a book by its cover.

Also, this is an ancient web site, built back before everyone had to have glitzy junk. So it has a little whimsy. Did you notice how fast it loaded?
There's a lot of wisdom in this comment.

> If everyone's fully responsible for what they do, they don't do their work

Just to clarify, I think this means because they're busy rationalizing their decisions to invested stakeholders instead. Is that right?
I tend to agree but I’ve personally stopped using popular ORMs and instead my own semi-reusable, lighter weight libraries that are closer to the native db drivers. I feel like in this longer form writing, having the complete process laid out offers more consistency and understanding of how things work. I also think it’s a no-win situation for an author; use a library/ORM and get an equal amount of negative feedback.
Nice write up, I like the clean and straight forward style of writing.
I don't know about France, but in the U.S., those complaints just mean it's become difficult to get H1B workers, not that they feel the need to pay anybody any more.

The hope is that their complaints will be answered by a Republican congress allowing them more cheap, disposable labor, not a recognition that labor generally needs to be paid more.
Not hugely informative, but nice. The title over-promises pretty wildly.

That's practically an understatement. It just barely touches on the challenges of extreme temperature range and radiation hardening. The difficulty of getting your design to pass worst case analysis can be rather dispiriting when you have to drastically derate it to account for -55 to 125 degrees C temp range. Further insult comes from derating to account for total dose radiation effects (depending on orbit), although the article seems to only mention the need to account for single event upset events. Handling SEU's is actually a pretty interesting design challenge. Total dose, on the other hand, is just a bummer.
Interesting story. I didn't know about this.
I had Agner as a teacher when studying IT-engineering. At the time I didn't know anything about him really, but always found him pleasant and knowledgable. Looking back now, I wish I had spent some more time picking his brain about his expertise.

The webpage is awesome in my opinion. It's functional, simple and with a good amount of humor :) It a good example of a content-first approach.
Helpdesk software with rich email signature
> Nor can I decide that I’d like to trade higher electricity bills for a longer life span; the government has already made that decision for me. Frustratingly, it’s not even clear that this is good for the environment, because it takes quite a lot of energy and materials to manufacture the appliances we’re regularly throwing away.