skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What timing. Couldn't sleep well, and got up even though it was only 4:15am. Pop open HN, and this was at the top of the list. When I grabbed my laptop, it was with the intent of working in Final Draft to work on some things I just can't seem to get to in normal hours. Makes me feel less grumpy about being awake, or for procrastinating by reading HN first.
How do you "just 'rotate'" bivector into accelerated frame? Because if you're talking about Lorentz transformations between inertial frames, those alone can't give you radiation fields.

To get radiation fields, you need Maxwell's equations and boundary conditions. When you have those, what is the use of GA?
White collar crime in America? That's rich
this is stupid, hard to maintain and ugly as well
Despite all the handwringing here, there's no concrete proposal for what to do with rent-seeking attention-seeking deliberatvely difficult individuals whom one has no obligation to entertain the ideas of.

If I were NYU, I would simply never book Milo Whatever-his-name-is.
Having to deplatform him indicates that someone wanted to platform him in the first place.
Kick his useless ass to the curb/kerb, as the case may be.
Mastodon is not granular enough, we need a system were every device is a server of content.
An AGI Roadmap Beginning with the Subjective Self
That is Apple level of expensive.
He claims he wrote it in his spare time, after being told not to work on it by Red Hat management because Upstart is the future.

https://www.linuxvoice.com/interview-lennart-poettering/
suddenly the right winger is anti-monopoly LOL

enforce your monopoly laws, first of all.

Platforming is not an obligation on any private entity, and here we have an argument to push this fake obligation to the public sector! WoWS just WOws.
The fascists are calling for selective communism to boost their snowflake presenters that no one wants to hear from.
I did it accidentally. The dark mode is nice, but I haven't noticed any other differences.
> But if the argument is "let's replace quaternions in 3D engines!" then the question is really more "Okay, so do they outperform quaternions, then??" because if you're writing the 3D engine, the underlying code only matters insofar as that it has to do what it's supposed to do. You don't need to understand why it works, just that known operations will lead to known intended results.

At some point, people will have to write and maintain these 3D engines. Having easier to grok maths at that point is a Good Thing.
Slightly off-topic sorry. Does common crawl data contain HN/Quora/Reddit content? And is it possible to extract Question/Answers to support something like "Related Questions" in StackOverflow?
I’m responding to your comment more as a representative of a general sentiment.

The implicit psychological construct behind this little “mini-panic” around fringe groups be “de-platformed” is a common one: something bad is happening, and we are losing freedoms/rights/capabilities we (society) has in the past.

It’s a variation on the notion that “the world is going to hell a hand basket.” The rhetorical fallacy is called “false idealization of the past.”

In fact, the access of everyday people to a variety of mediated forms of communication is at historically unprecedented levels.

In virtually the entire history of human society, access to powerful methods of communication was completely under the control of the elite power structures of the society.

The problem that these new communication platforms are trying to deal with is unprecedented. It turns out there are unexpected consequences of allowing access to mass communication, and means of spreading propaganda, to “fringe” groups like “white supremecists” The problem is unique in a couple of ways.

One is that it is only very recently, very recently, in our society (the US in this case) that the precepts of white supremacy have been “fringe!” In fact these are the hateful ideologies that built much of our modern world, on the backs of those unfortunate to have not been born “white.”

This has been hard fought-for progress, and banishment to the “fringe” of these ideas is a major success. The attempts to drive these ideas even further to the fringe represents a triumph of humanistic values. Especially as reactionary groups inevitably fight back with whatever means they have at hand.

It just happens to have happened right around the time that technology put methods of mass media into the hands of more and more everyday people.

Using “De-Platforming” as a method of social control is entirely civilized, and justified. We have bedrock principles of free speech in the US, but those are almost entirely based around the idea of preventing the government from jailing speakers it diagrees with.

To raise an alarm about, “well, what if your currently considered ‘progressive’ movement is deemed deserving of De-Platforming in the future” is a false alarm, because there simply are no historical examples to draw from. These technologies are too new. (Not just the technology, also the increasing ubiquitousness of networked communication.)

It also pretends that in some philosophical sense, all ideas are equally valid, and is divorcing the content of ideas from the form.

I don’t agree that all points of view are equally valid, and viewing ideas through the lens of “form” over “content” is antithetical to the very core concept of ideas and thought itself.

IMO, people are too quick to trot out “slippery slope” fears about difficult problems. However, we can’t get “off of the slope” in a metaphysical sense. We are alive, until we aren’t,and must navigate the treacherous slopes of reality to the best of our capabilities. As both individuals and as members of society.
Has Mint improved sec-wise?

I remember that they used to "achieve" stability by not updating (apt pinning) important packages like kernel, xorg etc and did strange stuff like copying deb packages from ubuntu/debian verbatim into their repos.

Edit: I wouldnt touch Mint with a 10ft pole. Seems like they still have no sec advisaries, still ship a remix of debian/ubuntu packages and so on:

2013:

https://web.archive.org/web/20140214063150/https://lists.ubu...

2016:

https://lwn.net/Articles/676664/
Oh the humanity!
As much as Jony Ive did for Apple, some of the things that I absolutely hate about where Apple is currently is all from how much control Ive has been given. The as it exists "current" MacPro. Current in quotes as it has not been updated in 5+ years. It is Ive's "revolutionary" design of the system that has trapped them into this state. The fact they did a mea culpa on it was quite shocking from Apple. Also, the current state of the MacBook Pro series. Yes, thin/light is a nice aspect in a laptop, but I personally feel they are making them too thing. Add a couple of extra millimeters to the thickness of the case, but keep the mainboard at it's current size. That now allows space for ports like an SD card reader or USB-A type plugs. In the extra space, add some extra battery space and/or allow for better cooling.
That marketing book and the course that teaches marketers is run by Homo economicus.

The economy is very much built by Homo economicus. The consumers are just assume customer to be Homo economicus.

(except we know that it’s just poor old Homo sapiens, which is why the shiny stuff is at the checkout counter. Let’s ~~exploit~~ optimize for all those gaps in cognition.)

So I’d have to highlight that Economic man is hard at work, hacking Homo sapiens.
————

And that’s the issue, the rational choice for the world is very clear. But local equilibrium points are very different. People are going to clear the Amazon because that means they can sell more meat.

The cost of that externality will never get priced in fully, because it’s in the interest of people to pretend it’s someone else’s problem (especially when they’re people’s jobs and food on the line.)

I’m sorry for the bleak image, but let’s remind everyone that Kyoto was a joke. It’s the best we could manage and even then it was weak.

I understand everything you mean about externalities, but once you leave Econ talk, and move to policy - well Homo economicus is there, busy doing the rational thing and lobbying to keep his interests safe.

I predicted AGES ago and publicly a year or so, that we would all soon be championing terraforming projects.

What is the actual path forward, to an actual consensus. Whether we have to go through Homo economicus or corrupt him, or through reminding Homo sapiens that he is the only source of moral authority.
http://geocalc.clas.asu.edu/pdf/New_Tools_for_Comp_Geom.pdf
In high level programming, the code is for humans, the optimized compiler output is for the computer.
My first question was about how writing prose differs from writing code. The post covers this:

> despite being apparently similar activities (both mostly involve slinging text), the temporal timing of software development & writing are strikingly different. Thinking back, I don’t recall early-morning programming being a trend among programmers (programmers are infamous for preferring to come in late and late-night programming sessions which may wrap around the clock, especially in college). It’s fascinating that the stereotypes about writing vs programming line up so perfectly with the RescueTime data.

I am very curious to learn/think more about why the 2 activities are stereotypically (and empirically) on opposite schedules.

Personally, when writing prose (mostly docs, blog posts, and product plans), I prefer to wake up early and do it in the morning. I much prefer coding at night. My hunch is that this is because interruptions are rarer at night and more bothersome when coding.

For anyone else who is both a writer and coder: do you follow the same schedule for both?
A bit verbose, but very insightful.
I guess, meet and exceed housing demand and improve less affluent areas. This involves government money but most seem happy to let the public take the bill in the form of continuously inflating house prices instead.
What I have seen more are 0.1x managers. They may be just 10% of the managers, but the problem is that if you have a deep hierarchy, you just need one 0.1x manager in the hierarchy to ruin your project.
We currently have a feedback loop where rising prices attracts investors who sink money into real estate, which reduces supply and raises prices, which attracts investors, etc. There are a number of factors that incentivize reduced supply such as reduced incentive to build lots of new buildings because that would increase supply too much and reduce prices and an increased incentive to build a small number of luxury apartments instead, which further raises property values.

If ownership wasn't seen as an investment vehicle, this feedback loop would be broken. People would only buy because they need it, or in the case of landlords, the rents they could secure from rentees would be much lower because of the lower market value of the object and the overall lower rent prices across the entire market.

Of course, sufficient supply has one big condition: Zoning laws are relaxed, allowing enough supply to be built in the first place.
Why should "platform platforms" establish a norm attempting to actively appear "viewpoint neutral"?

"come a little closer mouse so that I may better catch you and eat you..."

Why on earth should society bend over backwards to aid spoiled deliberate attention-seekers when there are 7 billion other people who are actually trying to resolve problems that need our actual attention.

These "malingerers" are using up valuable medical staff's time they could be spending upon actually ill patients!
what the person above me said: SPOT ON!!!

"It's noticeable which people only show up to defend far right speech on the internet."
Build more. Better transport. Encourage remote working. Allow denser construction. Relax ridiculous laws that push up construction costs.

The trouble is, lots of people will lose money...
Disclosure: I help manage the lab (hosted by Packet) where we made available the hardware for this testing. If you're interested in testing and sharing your results, check it out here: https://www.acceleratewithoptane.com/

Yes, they are different products but are both based on Intel 3D XPoint memory media. GCP announced support for Intel Optane DC Persistent Memory, which sits in memory DIMM channels (see https://newsroom.intel.com/news/intel-optane-dc-persistent-m... for a visual). The Intel Optane DC SSD referenced and tested in the posted article is an NVMe SSD but with different characteristics than NAND-based SSDs you can read about here: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/solid-state-drives/o....

GCP's announcement is pretty exciting, and as more and more developers get their hands on both types of products, we'll see more interesting usages like MariaDB ColumnStore, Memcached, RabbitMQ, Postgres, etc. We have our own ideas, of course, but it's been fun making this all available to developers directly and seeing new ideas come up.
The Intelligence Each MBTI Type Displays – Astroligion.com
Yes, there are more people every year, but in the US, there aren't a lot more people every year. Population growth is at 0.7% and falling.

On the other hand, I see no reason to think that "demand for good locations is increasing". What counts as a "good location" is in flux, but people always want to live in "good locations". I see no reason that it's more important to live in a "good location" today than 5 years ago, or 50, or 3000.

So what I see is a fairly static number of people who'd like to live all over the place, but a decent chunk wanting to live in large, dense, desirable cities. Which are, not surprisingly, quite expensive.

> how could housing get continuously cheaper

Housing, as opposed to land, is a manufactured good, and we're getting better at manufacturing things every year.

As for land, we can use it more efficiently (higher density, fewer parking lots, more transit, etc.) It's well documented that many cities (Los Angeles is an infamous example) drive up the cost of housing and bias new developments towards luxury units due to building codes that, eg, require very inefficient land use and a large number of parking places.

Alternatively, we can work towards changing what is desirable. In 1920 something like 5% of the entire US population lived in New York City; now things are much more spread out. Today a hefty slice of software engineers live (or want to live) in San Francisco, but that's not an immutable law of nature.

I mean, taken to an extreme, if you build an absurd number of houses in San Francisco without sufficient infrastructure, the combination of massively increased supply (all the new units) and decreased demand (because it's no longer a great place to live) would absolutely lead to house prices dropping. That doesn't sound like a good policy (and is certainly not what the parent comment was suggesting!) but there's no particular reason why house prices can't continuously fall.
Visualization of routing over SpaceX's proposed Starlink network
Matrices are linear transformations. Take a bunch of vectors, map them to another bunch of vectors. It's all inherently geometric.

The matrix:

adg
beh
cfj

maps the vector (1,0,0) to the vector (a,b,c), (0,1,0) to (d,e,f), etc... so if you write any other vector as a weighted sum of (1,0,0), (0,1,0), etc... the weights get mapped to the new vectors.

As someone with a background in physics and geometry, it seems bizarre to me to use quaternions to reason about geometry. It's really unnatural. It's basically just a coincidence that the algebraic structure of rotations in 3d happens to look like this. It doesn't generalize to higher dimensions. There is no equivalent to quaternions for 4, 5, 6d [1].

Bivectors discussed in the article, on the other hand, easily generalize to higher dimensions, and are a completely natural geometric concept. (Of course if your thesis is about constructing 4d objects you care about that a whole lot more than if you build a 3d engine...)

Now that doesn't mean it's easier or harder to manipulate one or the other. As they all reference the same mathematical structure it's also not surprising that the code ends up being the same. And given that algebra is more natural for computers, I can see why quaternions might be useful here. But geometric they are not.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_algebra
bacteria in a jar grow and populate uniformly. Humans don't and tend to clump up in high population areas. Human population growth also tend to slow down with economical stability which is the opposite to bacterial growth.

As for mars, what we really need is to build technology that can make inhospitable places livable without infusing additional resources. A key point is water extraction, which would make a lot of desert environments much more hospitable with the right technology.
Housing is not independent of other goods, house prices go up because we use inflation to manage the economy. They make people money because they are the one example of large yet safe leverage which most investors have access to, so they are a good hedge against inflation. This is why buying is worthwhile long term. Over a lifetime the gains can be considerable because of the falling value if the debt and the rising value of the asset. Of course a volatile market makes this very risky and is highly undesirable.

Deflation is generally agreed to be a bad thing by economists. I disagree falling housing costs would be good as then no-one would want to buy and quality would fall.

All that said I agree relatively stable housing costs are desirable, and in fact quite achievable as the government controls pricing via planning laws. They are in fact 'making' buildable land all the time, and the supply is tightly constrained and tightly regulated in cities. This is a solvable problem.
SpaceX's Starlink Satellite Program Could Start a Space Junk Disaster
I tend to rent despite owning real estate.

I tend to move often and only buy real estate if I'm willing to hold it forever. So I buy what I think is a good long term investment and live where I want to live.
Losing 50% of species sounds bad, but much less bad than losing 50% of all mammal populations. Are we just talking about losing ten thousand obscure rodent species? I actually have no real idea what this value means, which makes me inclined to ignore it. A scientific source would be great, but the article doesn't provide any.

If we're talking about "human extinction" level threats, it would probably be from massive famines, and "half of the animals are now dead" seems much more likely to cause that than "half of animal species are extinct". What is the actual percentage estimate that we would go extinct from this, and when? It matters when comparing it to nuclear war or AI.

The incentive for scientists to lie seems obvious to me. They want people to support and fund their efforts (possibly for noble reasons, possibly because they just want more money). They think that simple facts aren't good enough, so they use fear tactics like "we could face our own extinction" hoping that will convince us instead.

Also, the authors of these articles and the people interviewed are not necessarily the scientists either. Given that sources aren't provided, I have no idea what the scientists are actually saying.
How would the global warming predictions all be biaised in the same way ? _All_ the studies are measuring the same tendency : the temperature is rising. The model does not need to be _absolutely_ precise to be right.
I know a real professional hacker who has worked for me once in this past month. He is very good at hacking. He offers legit services such as clearing of bad records online without it being traced backed to you, he clones phones, hacks facebook ,instagram, whatsapp, emails, twitter, bank accounts,FIXES CREDIT REPORTS, tracks calls. He also helps to retrieve accounts that have been taken by hackers. His charges are affordable, reliable, 100% safe. Contact him via address below plus you can also meet him if you are in the state.
EMAIL: Richardcyberghost at Gmail Dot com
TEXT, CALL or WHATSAP HIM +1 937-551-7074
Tell him I referred you. You can also meet him if you are in the state cos he’s the only Ethical hacker with guarantee that will provide result.
So you'd rather just ignore all scientific results until somebody does a NASA-level code review because there might be bugs? You're basically on par with an anti-vaxxer, and the potential consequences are far worse. Congratulations.
From the possible options I listed above, (c), a substantially easier API.

On the other hand, if it's not exposed to the user, it doesn't particularly matter what structures and math that higher-level language uses behind the scenes to do what it does; most aspects of compiler theory are irrelevant for users of high-level languages.
No mortgage interest tax deduction for owner-occupied dwellings but the exemption of capital gains tax is far larger in terms of revenue foregone.
> Many of the things that differentiates DE's could probably be offered as configuration within one DE

If you want to get flamed to death, mention the word "configuration" on a Gnome mailing list.

There are people who think that things could just be configuration options, and then there are people who insist that the default configuration should be right, and that too much configuration is detrimental to the user experience (because it's hard/complex/time-consuming) and to development time (if you have two sets of two configuration options, that means you have four configuration to tests, and so on). It's not like these folks don't have a point, either.
> Overall, I see no value in this list beyond any other "hey I like these books I happened to read"

But... that’s valuable.
Also technically receiving paid vacation and actually being able to use it are often not the same: in retail us at the bottom of ten end up cashing out vacation at the rate of a few hours a week to compensate for getting fewer hours a week in the slow season but still have enough days scheduled (or are functionally on call) that we can't leave town.
Coffman engine starter
There are several good points here, but this trend is certainly not new. Before the internet, there were plenty of bland tourist traps, catering to a generic taste or a stereotype of what “local” culture should look and feel like. Then travel guides like Lonely Planet helped travelers discover more authentic places that were off the beaten path, which soon meant they were neither anymore.

What the internet has mainly done is accelerate something that was already there. Where in the past something could go from being a quirky find to a packed tourist trap over years, now it can be months. I do think the proprietors of the old “tourist traps” are now actively catering to different tastes, to actively target the type of taste and aesthetic that does well on Instagram etc. but that’s perhaps even an improvement.

The good thing is that all these online discovery platforms pair well with old fashioned serendipity: walk around until you are lost. Then check to make sure a place is not too popular on Foursquare or Tripadvisor :)
I don't believe the GP disagrees that losing 50% of species is loss of biodiversity. But the OP might give the impression that is about losing 50% of animals, which seems more apocalyptic.

"What incentives do scientists have to lie about this?"

They might believe they are lying "in good faith". Exagerating the impact so people take action. Basically treating the rest of the world as children.

And this, like the GP, I too consider counter productive.

And a possible answer to "why is everyone so skeptical...". Because scientists (if taken as a homogenous group) are lying to us (as a group of lay people) for some time. Sometimes this lies are just exagerations made with good intentions, sometimes from bribed "scientists" like the ones who defended the tobacco industry, sometimes the scientists were just wrong but acted like they were 100% certain of their results (not technically a lie, but has the same impact on general population).