skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A 737 and a 737 MAX has big wheels in the cockpit that move as the stabilizer trim changes. This lets the pilots see what the autopilot is doing with the stabilizer, and/or override stabilizer changes by grabbing and holding the wheel or rotating it. You also have two switches to disallow control of the stabilizer, one for blocking other stabilizer controls in the cockpit, and one for blocking control by the autopilot.

In theory then, solving the stabilizer problem that caused the crash is as simple as flipping both switches to cutoff, then using the wheel to set the stabilizer back to a sane value. Handling a stabilizer runaway is a standard part of US 737 training, and the updated Emergency Airworthiness Directive just says to follow the stabilizer runaway checklist. Again, in theory, this should have been a no-brainer, "common" emergency, and following the usual checklist would have fixed the issue.

However, pilot's mental model of the aircraft has been broken. In the previous generation of 737's, there were exactly two things outside the wheel that could control the stabilizers - the cockpit trim switches, and the autopilot, and each had it's own cutoff switch. Now we have three systems that can control the stabilizer wheels, and the new one doesn't have a labeled switch, nor was anyone told it existed.
You are thinking that Napoleon is a phenomenon on NK instead of being a phenomenon of France. This is based on some loud noises coming from the direction of NK and relative silence from French side. This is baseless.

France have access to ICBM, aaaand we know they are Napoleon-capable. I'm not saying they're in for a global conflict, just telling that political-military opinions are built upon sand.
Different regions in the US have very different barbecue styles. There's a vast array of different ways to long-smoke meat over wood, and a vast array of ways to sauce and prepare it after it's been cooked.

Since good barbecue often takes years of experience, 16+ hours to cook, and produces more food than a small family can eat, it's a cuisine that is frequently outsourced to restaurants. So the kind of barbecue which dominates an area really has an impact on the kind of barbecue you can eat in that area, unless you've got years of experience, hours of spare time, and either a big enough family or enough freezer space to cook your own barbecue regularly.
That's the first thing I do when I get a new phone: set up mail and usual apps, disable notifications for most, notify every 4 hours for mail & others, though I usually leave instant messaging run regularly. Also my phone is most of the time in do not disturb, only calls go through.

At the beginning I kept checking, but eventually the need dies off, at least in my case. Anything actually important will be a call.
So the "never have to come down" is ~100 days record which is held by project Loon?
Show HN: A tool for displaying up to date antibiotics resistance data
There isn't much to the character in the Doyle stories, and he serves more as a plot device than a well developed character. So I kinda think people are trying to hard to find a RL souce for the character. Most of the brief treatment Doyle gives the character can be explained as plot driven.

He's super-intelligent and evil because he needs to be a worthy enough opponent to kill of Holmes. He's a Prof at a small University because he needs a job that both proves his intelligence and is prestigious, but gives him enough time to run a criminal empire. He runs his criminal enterprise via a web of intermediaries because if he was directly involved Holmes could just report him to the cops instead of needing a complicated plan to roll up his criminal network. The specific references to his scientific work might be inspired by some specific scientists, but it seems at least as likely they just sounded to Doyle like the kinda thing a 19th century mathematical genius would get up to.
Pretty sure they are comparing BBQ restaurants which are definitely a thing, and differ in style from state to state.

As you’ve implied, if you’re cooking the meat yourself in your backyard then you can do any style you want. I believe “true bbq” can be considered more time consuming than just throwing meat on a grill, and would involve the use of a smoker and perhaps other equipment. It’s not just grilling meat.
Creating iOS 12 Shortcuts with JavaScript and Shortcuts JS
Not really Java: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_Card#Design
If they don't store the IP address it might be OK.
Fedora made Wayland the default already. [1]

[1]: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/f28/system-admin...
There are many regulations that affect data, like HIPPA and ITAR.

How can Windows be used in such an environment if the data collection can’t be stopped?
Colorado is doing this too because tax increases go to referendum votes and we can't convince people to actually pay for school funding.
Can I become an intern in your company for $28.9 million for a summer? I'll even do another year for free.
This is really nice! I wonder how well the ulisp compiler does with optimization - especially for code size. My group is developing Clasp Common Lisp and we use the Cleavir compiler (https://github.com/clasp-developers/clasp and https://github.com/robert-strandh/SICL). Cleavir is a new project to develop a powerful, portable Common Lisp compiler and it could be used to compile lisp dialects.
The very limited flavor of Java running on smartcards is pretty far from generic Java.
New Glenn is not really a BFR-class design. It falls somewhere between Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy.
Long story. Her most immediate trigger was actually a traumatic experience of childbirth. Postpartum/puerperal psychosis affects mothers in approx 1 in 1000 births, or around 1 in 300 where an emergency C section was performed which was the case here; C section is of course pretty routine but in this case was complicated by an ileus. But there were many latent contributing factors to the psychosis as well: adverse reaction to an antibiotic (metronidazole - hallucinations can be a side effect), traumatic childhood, to name just a few.

The most acute episode of psychosis happened in hospital and involved some pretty random behaviour accompanied by total loss of response to input. This did not last more than 10 minutes or so, but on return from that state she continued to behave in a way that pretty much resembled someone on a bad LSD trip. This went on for about a week, during which she hardly slept and was never sure whether awake or not, and reported many types of delusional thinking, e.g. that reality was not as it seemed (think inception/matrix/comment in the OP here). Also paranoia that family, friends or strangers were staring or wanted to harm her or her child. Also occasional thoughts of self harm as a means of escape from this awful state of being.

This was all pretty much solved by Olanzapine which she still takes 1.5 years later although dosage is now tapering down to almost nothing. Also CBT. At some point the diagnosis was augmented by one of "O-only OCD" resulting in a second prescription for Sertraline. But the condition is very much under control; she is back to work part time, in a role that includes responsibility for children; her co workers know the score and are alert to possible issues but there haven't been any that she couldn't manage herself. Occasionally various thoughts disturb her but she has learned to handle them appropriately.

Mental health issues are often exacerbated by stigma, and this is in part because people (for understandable reasons) don't rush to share their experiences with others, which is why I've taken the time to write this post. I would recommend anyone to familiarize themselves with the material published by Mind and others, partly because it's interesting, partly because spotting the signs - and understanding the differences between e.g. psychosis, schizophrenia, bipolar, OCD, etc (even if the science behind them is far from well understood) - might help someone you know one day.

https://www.mind.org.uk/information-support/types-of-mental-....

Edit: interesting addendum, the matrix/inception fear had been there long before the psychosis. I remember years ago telling her I had lost The Game ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_(mind_game) ) which she hadn't encountered before. I explained that "the object of the game is not to remember the game" ... she took it to mean we were all in some sort of simulation and got kinda scared even then.
There's a reason we're moving toward webassembly. This isn't it, but there's a reason :)
Why do strings like “dW5kZWZpbmVk” cause problems?
> That's very informative, I didn't realise the whole horizontal stabiliser itself can be a moving part

On most, if not all, supersonic aircraft they are like that. It was found that the traditional design didn't work well at supersonic speeds, there is debate as to who developed it but the Miles M52 is a likely candidate.

I've had a quick look for a decent video demonstrating it. This one shows it fairly clearly in the 5-10 second segment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFk7kEQ5tVo
> In the previous generation of 737's, there were exactly two things outside the wheel that could control the stabilizers

It doesn't take anything away from what you've said really but there is at least one other system which can control pitch trim. The Mach trim system counteracts changes in the centre of pressure due to speed by making adjustment to the trim.

> Now we have three systems that can control the stabilizer wheels, and the new one doesn't have a labeled switch, nor was anyone told it existed.

Just to add to this point, I believe the reason this was done this way was an attempt to keep the control behaviours of the new aircraft as similar as possible to the old (despite having more powerful lower slung engines) for the sake of maintaining training consistency.
No, my first instinct is to give it the beans and push the nose down more because more often then not you're in a stall if that happens.
Also, as a general "rule", it's pretty common for American aircraft to provide easily accessible overrides to the envelope protection stuff. I've never seen the cockpit of an Airbus, but, from what my friends have said, it's much harder to do. I don't know if Boeing is going in that direction, but I doubt they would.
It usually helps, but as with most obesity-linked conditions it's not suitable on its own as a first-line treatment. The effect is small compared to CPAP, and sufficient weight loss to see that effect takes months, whereas CPAP starts working literally overnight (DME/insurance shenanigans notwithstanding).

Also, chronic sleep disruption is associated with a cluster of symptoms (impaired insulin sensitivity, lethargy, increased hunger) that make it very difficult to lose weight in a normal/healthy way. Many patients find that they lose 10-20 pounds after starting CPAP with no conscious change in their lifestyle.
Those are lagging indicators. Revenue can grow for months (or even years) after a company is on a declining path because of contracts, sales teams selling legacy products and so on.

The premise of the article is to find leading indicators of health.
Here Are the Most Outrageous Incentives Cities Offered Amazon in Their HQ2 Bids
Sorry, cannot describe infrastructure (not a throwaway account).

Prod and Test are out of sync in terms of mission critical software, Test is not powerful enough to handle Prod's tasks, and there is no formal procedure to use Test for testing. So Test is never actually used.

When a bug is found in Prod, it's fixed on Prod, while it's live.

By fix, of course I mean an iteration on and combinations of:

qc: we found bug

dev: it's not a bug

qc: it is a bug: [insert evidence]

dev: it's fixed now

qc: no it's not

dev: how about now?

qc: no

dev: and now?

qc: yes but now this other thing is broken

dev: here's another attempt, please check again

qc: Prod is down

dev: try it now

qc: it's still broken, along with the other broken part, and now these three other parts are broken too

ceo: it's fine, close this ticket
Toxic masculinity get judged based on the meaning it express as words. Languages in the end is all about expressing meaning.

If we talk about toxic Muslims, we could define it to only be about terrorists or other narrow defined subgroup of criminals, but if you use those words then the meaning being expressed is a generalization that invoke a expression of racisms and hate. Lumping together all Muslims, only to then say "technically, I only meant this small subgroup" don't work. Does not work for racism, and it does not work for sexism either. The term toxic masculinity will always seem like veiled hatred against men, and no amount of "wait, I only mean ..." will change that.
There have been quite a few papers on this probem. If you don't get your simulator AND your cost function right ... fun things happen. Things you probably didn't intend. Last year someone made a compilation paper about a series of fun techniques algorithms have used to satisfy the demands of their creators ... while not solving the problem. It was featured in popular mechanics.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/robots/a19445627...

The way to solve it is something engineers hate for some reason. You explicitly design (and simulate) VERY bad hardware. What's bad hardware ? A camera that has a noise floor of 30% it's measurements. Yes, even in low light conditions (also: noise floor must vary a lot between runs of the algorithm). An actuator that goes the right way 90% of the time, and the result of a particular voltage on the motor varies by 20-30%. And in 10% of cases, it's just entirely stuck, without giving any feedback abou tthat.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1804.10332.pdf

Or for the more visually inclined: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUZUr7jxoqM

The lesson is that what engineers always do, open-loop designs (I send voltage, motor moves), can be incredibly outperformed in control, accuracy, resiliency, and more by much worse hardware closed-loop designs (I send voltage, motor moves, I check how it moves, I change voltage).

And yet somehow people seem to have incredible issues trusting such systems. For instance, autopilots are mostly open-loop designs. That's like a pilot flying a plane with his eyes glued shut, and no sense of balance (ie. he HAS to trust one instrument, and have no way to verify that, say, the plane actually goes up when they pull the stick. So if it's keeling over backwards or something, they'd just keep pulling the stick right up to the point they hit the decor). They implicitly trust the plane does what the autopilot orders it to do. If for some reason it doesn't ... it's not going to end well.

The issue is that closed-loop designs are much harder to write. The solution to that of course is to not write them, learn them. An autopilot that flies a plane, and when the plane breaks, rapidly learns how to fly a broken plane rather than just trusting it's (now inaccurate) model and killing everyone doing that.
I was a student member during my undergrad.

It was fun because they (or, more precisely we) organised a lot of events, even at national scale (I'm from Europe). I met a lot of different people from different parts of my country who were also studying EE or similar and had the same interests I did. A very wide network I now sometimes rely on because those people now work in very different places compared to the people who were in my class and now mostly work in the same city our university was.

However, I still remember a day someone asked for a paper and I was disappointed when I found out I had no access as a Student Member. Luckily I had access through the university library but it pissed me off.

No longer a member because it's not really useful in my field and I would have to pay it myself. Membership fee in Europe is around 80% of USA but my salary (I'm a junior) is around 30% of that of an average EE in the USA.
I just had an issue today with an internal program, the error was "unclosed parenthesis". A string with an Unclosed parenthesis would given you this error.

In our case the string that had the issue should have been machine generated but ended up being assigned user input... Is that kind of string also helpful in a list like this?
Don't expect, get what you want. Ask the director if he will sit down for a coffee with you and explain your position. He doesn't have to give you the lead title now just as long as he knows this is something you have been working towards with the goal of your next review.

If they don't deliver they have left you no option but to chase your goal some where else, don't hesitate.
Although this article addresses the situation in rural areas of poor countries, I have personal experience that access to technology contributes to better education even at undergrad level of the education. I personally went to a college which was trying to mitigate the lack of good professors and instructors. I had the idea of doing assignments, recitals and lectures(if necessary) from Edx. I personally believe that completing and doing good in courses from MIT on Edx certainly if nothing else contributed to my self confidence.
In my opinion science is getting less bang for bucks because the low hanging fruit has been picked by now. The big fundamental structures describing nature its working are more or less known. It's about details nowadays and it takes more time and effort to get the details right. You can see that it takes multi disciplinary teams nowadays to discover the connections between these large systems and how they (how all in the universe) connect. People are curious which is our most precious gift from nature and science will go on as long as people stay curious. But yes, not all science is about returns of value in economic sense, a lot of it is fundamental and also often results of science is laying in a drawer waiting to either getting monitized or used for further discovery. Science moves by spurts and hiccups, not straight forward with an even pace.
Maybe it would be more positive to make a recruiter pledge or something, e.g. "I looked at your skills and thought you were a match for this role", "I'll be upfront about compensation", "I'll respond to all emails within one working day"
Backup Management for MySQL, MariaDB, PostgreSQL and MongoDB
“Who is Demoscener?” – What I’ve learned from interviewing them
> If supporting someone with X€ is any kind of "vote", it's a vote that they should get X€ more than they currently get for their work.

No, think of each unit of currency as equaling 1 vote.

It's a vote that, between the various things that they could be doing, they should continue doing what they're currently doing.

For example, in a programmer's case, he could be employed by a company which will give $X votes. He could also be working freelancing gigs and earn $Y votes. He could start his own SaaS business and earn $Z votes. He could do open source work and earn through Patreon $W votes.

Only he will know where he stands in each of those markets, and, on average, you can bet that he will do what gives the most votes (i.e. money).

Not voting because you think he's got enough votes, is like not voting for a presidential candidate because you think he's got enough votes, despite otherwise wanting to vote for him/her. Imagine presidential voting was done such that you can see, in real-time, the votes of your preferred presidential candidate (without needing to vote for him/her) but not being able to see the votes of other candidates. That's pretty messed up, right? You see 10,000 people have voted for your candidate and think, "that's enough for him; he doesn't need my vote", and it turns out that other candidates have 100,000's of votes. It could be that the majority of the voting population would prefer your candidate, but because many of the people that preferred him didn't express themselves through their vote, someone else ended up being picked as president. That means the voting system failed, and that's why such transparency here is disruptive.
Why do recruiters insist on phone calls for everything? Why can't they just send an email? I can't get on the phone while I'm at my job to talk to you about some other job.
My definition would involve some definition of geological homogeny such that you could classify the terrain as mountain and not-mountain. Probably based on whether it was involved in the process that formed the mountain.
Are you sure? – how user interfaces undermine consent
Has nothing to do with whether he’s American. An Australian living in, I don’t know, the UK or Sweden, but on the payroll of the government of Russia, has to declare that fact to the government of the country in which he resides. Otherwise he can be considered a spy. And no, “being on the payroll” is not limited to being an official employee of or even receiving payment from Russia. Depends on the laws of the host country but in most places it implies simply “working at the direction of” or “receiving compensation from”, including non-monetary compensation. Like, say, hacked emails that you can use to promote your organization.

Look, I am a US civil servant. When I travel internationally I have to use a special passport. It’s maroon instead of the usual blue, and it has a stamp in it that states that I am a representative of the US government and am on official business.
And this is exactly why. When I present it at a border crossing, that is an official legal declaration to the country I am visiting that I am a declared agent of a foreign government. If I attemp merely to enter the country using my personal passport I am committing an arrestable offence.
There is a downside though: if you forget something in the declarative tool it cannot be done. Using bash scripts lets a good programmer get what they need done. Using declarative makes it easier to do everything we thought of but some things are accidentally impossible.

I think an escape to bash might always be required, but I think it should be a restrictive thing. That is packages with that flag require a special flag passed to dpkg. Also any packages using bash should automatically get extra reviewers.
By that logic, murder's not a thing.

Texas got mad here because there were no in-network anesthesia services. Having some out-of-network providers is depressingly common, and hard to guard against:

https://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20180917/NEWS/18091...

> About 25% of patient visits to hospitals in their insurance network result in balance billing from care by out-of-network physicians.

Also, from the Vox article:

> The problem with that law, Pogue argues, is that it requires patients to contact the state — and patients often aren’t aware of the option. Kohan, for example, didn’t know he had these rights until I told him. Pogue’s research suggests this is really common: Only 3,824 Texas patients have used the law to resolve their surprise bills since 2009. CPPP estimates that this is a tiny fraction of the 250,000 surprise medical bills sent out in the same time frame.

This is just Texas, too. Plenty of states don't have their 2009 state law to work with.