skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Short summary:

- The 28 findings was repeated in more than 60 laboratories all over the world resulting in a median sample size of 7,157

- Overall, 14 of the 28 findings (50%) replicated successfully

- The replication team obtained the original materials to ensure faithful replications of the original findings

- All 28 studies underwent formal peer review at the journal prior to conducting the studies

- All of the studies were preregistered at OSF

- Researchers can predict whether findings will replicate or not in surveys and prediction markets with pretty good accuracy. (prediction market)

Full paper (100 pages): https://psyarxiv.com/9654g/
List of studies, and the outcome:

1 Direction & SES (Huang et al., 2014) p<.001

2 Structure and goal-pursuit (Kay et al., 2014) p=0.97

3 Incidental disfluency (Alter et al., 2007) p=0.67

4 Moral Foundations (Graham et al., 2009) p<.001

5 Affect and Risk (Rottenstreich & Hsee, 2001) p=0.77

6 Priming consumerism (Bauer et al., 2012) p=0.15

7 Correspondence Bias (Miyamoto & Kitayama, 2002) p<.001

8 Disgust & Homophobia (Inbar et al., 2009) p=0.56

9 Incidental Anchors (Critcher & Gilovich, 2008) p=0.25

10 Social Value Orientation (Van Lange et al., 1997) p<.001

11 Trolley Dilemma 1 (Hauser et al., 2007) p<.001

12 SMS & Well-Being (Anderson et al., 2012) p=0.58

13 False Consensus 1 (Ross et al., 1977) p=0.23

14 False Consensus 2 (Ross et al., 1977) p<.001

15 Position & Power (Giessner & Schubert, 2007) p=0.31

16 Framing (Tversky & Kahneman, 1981) p=0.43

17 Trolley Dilemma 2 (Hauser et al., 2007) p=0.42

18 Tempting Fate (Risen & Gilovich, 2008) p=0.01

19 Actions are Choices (Savani et al. 2010) p<.001

20 Intuitive Reasoning (Norenzayan et al. 2002) p<.001

21 Less is Better (Hsee, 1998) p<.001

22 Moral Typecasting (Gray & Wegner, 2009) p<.001

23 Moral Cleansing (Zhong & Liljenquist, 2006) p=0.08

24 Assimilation and Contrast (Schwarz et al., 1991) p=0.39

25 Choosing or Rejecting (Shafir, 1993) p=0.10

26 Priming warmth (Zaval et al., 2014) p=0.01

27 Intentional Side Effects (Knobe, 2003) p<.001

28 Direction and Similarity (Tversky & Gati, 1978) p=0.99
Stories like these tend to convince me that the total balance of having social networks in the world is utterly negative.
They are the equivalent of leverage in options trading for human interactions and communications.
Government Computer Intrusions – The Discovery
Since people seem to be talking about what this means for Apple stock...

Apple's PE ratio is 15. For any given company this is a very good number. Add to this that Apple has the growth potential of a tech stock (e.g. Google has PE ratio of 40, people pay a premium for the stock because they expect it to grow).

Certainly Apple is very undervalued?
I haven't read into Contributor to see if they are even claiming that in the first place (the homepage doesn't mention anything about it, and I don't feel "tracking" and "ads" are the same thing at all, even if many conflate them to be).

But assuming they are promising that paying for Contributor would remove you from all tracking (whatever that means), wouldn't it be a pretty big deal (both legally and ethically) if it was found that they are still tracking you while saying they explicitly won't?

Obviously tracking required to run the service would be excluded (they need to know who you are to take money from you in the US, and they need to "track" your identity to tell that you are the person paying for that service), but don't they already have plenty of controls over how they use your personal information, regardless of whether you are paying for Contributor or not?

Sure, they could stand to make them more obvious, but I get asked all the time to double-check my privacy settings with google, I get asked if I want to enable personalized ads when I'm setting up a new Android phone, and the page where you go to turn it off is a single toggle switch.
Al Capone was imprisoned on tax charges.
The toy car used differential steering with 2-wheels and a castor wheel. One of our ideas of future work was to change the current steering method for an Ackerman model, giving our toy car a more realistic dynamic.
Read the whole article.

Umm...I did?

I'm confused, you claim I didn't read TFA, like I missed something. Yet my reading says you seem to agree with me. If you a point, I'm probably not getting it.
despite all my rage I'm still just a rat in a cage.
How are software architects coping up with fast-paced technology development?
Seagate has their Kinetic KVS-harddrive project too...
Online SML (SMLNJ): https://www.tutorialspoint.com/execute_smlnj_online.php

I really liked SMLNJ plus there's MLTON which is a highly optimizing SML compiler, albeit not so friendly with error messages (or it wasn't when I used it).
Only if evolution is much slower than technological development for our dumber ancestors. If it would have taken them a million years, then they would have gotten smarter before they could do it.
And everybody that dies of hunger be damned, right? As long as you make a buck...
(I don't mean you specifically, I don't know much about you)
Container Linux on the desktop: or, How [she] over-engineered [her] laptop
Really ? I remember seeing the big 14th July fireworks in Cannes from an aircraft on the Nice landing approach - I found it disappointingly small...
> * Apple announces it will no longer report unit sales. This is a clear shift in strategy.

Yeah, this is interesting. I wonder if higher prices (to increase device ASP) for better devices (breaking the two year upgrade cycle) mean that we have now seen peak iPhone growth. For the first time in years, I have recommended old/used iPhones to multiple people over new phones.

On the other hand, Apple has increasingly emphasized services and complimentary devices in recent years. AirPods, Apple Watch, and Apple Music (to name a few) lock folks into the ecosystem and replace non-Apple alternatives.

https://stratechery.com/2017/apple-at-its-best/
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18499781
Tried it with my current PDF. Didn't really manage much other than "use more keywords that employers like!"
I actually think that it is great that they are doing this, and I hope that they do it as ham-handedly as possible and as publicly as possible.

Our national policy toward cannabis is making a long-overdue tack toward full national legalization, and NASA's actions won't make a lick of difference within that broader context. However, another issue that exists in parallel to the broader legalization shift, where NASA is influential, is the Federal government's stance on marijuana use by Federal employees and contractors.

It is entirely possible that a Democratic Congress will decriminalize cannabis this spring, and several states (e.g., NY, CT) are likely to legalize soon. Regardless of the mechanics of exactly how and in what order it happens, I would posit that it is highly likely that 5 years from now, marijuana is going to be basically legal in the US, with some states continuing to ban it.

In that context, the Federal government could go a lot of different ways in terms of how it regulates its employees. It could say, "our policy matches the Federal policy", i.e., don't break any local laws but otherwise we don't care if you smoke weed. Alternatively, it could keep its current draconian personnel and hiring policies....which, importantly, would not require any action by anyone.

My personal belief is that the more widely covered egregious examples of the cannabis ban adversely affecting outcomes (e.g., 'now NASA can't get Elon Musk's help' is a punchy headline), the more likely it is that Congress will feel pressure to make the Federal bureaucracy more cannabis-tolerant.

So yeah -- NASA should investigate Elon and be as dumb about it as possible.
A tax break on future hypothetical tax revenues does not cost the taxpayer anything.

Especially when Amazon could have easily placed their new offices in lower tax or tax free zones.
Apple announces it will no longer report unit sales. This is a clear shift in strategy.

I thought that at first, too. Then I read that Apple was an outlier in reporting these figures. I'm OK with Apple not reporting these kinds of numbers if it allows the company to focus on quality of product instead of satiating the salivating stockholders (of which I am one).

Orders have been cut not once, but twice.

We don't actually know this as a fact. It is pure conjecture.

It is what a bunch of so-called supply chain "analysts" say, but they say it all the time, and are almost always wrong.

I wish I could be wrong as often as these Wall Street types and still keep my job.

The only people who whiff more often than Wall Street supply chain analysts are five-year-old softball players.
Intent to "destroy Android" is always rephrased in some form like "we want to provide value to customers" and "reach key demographics". I can guarantee you that everyone at Apple (for some convenient definition of "everyone") goes through mandatory training every year on how they should not talk about how they are going to destroy the competition.

That, and all the current big tech players spend equally big money on government lobbying, so absent a smoking gun, I don't think US antitrust action against any of the tech giants is likely in the next 10 years. Microsoft, you might recall, did not have government lobbyists and the lesson that everyone in industry took away was "monopolies are fine, but you'll get in trouble if you don't have any lobbyists".

So Apple's strategy is to make expensive, high-end phones and capture the bottom end with used phones and older generations. You can phrase this as "destroying Android" or you can phrase it as "providing good value to consumers". The strategy can be the same either way, just be careful when you write that email.
The entire concept of bitcoin requires the network effects and integration. Pretending the hash value of a block is useful in any way without them misses the entire point of its existence.
> $14.9 billion in annual revenues, greater than the gross domestic product of Iceland

Er... this doesn't sound right.
Two questions: how are you defining 'efficient', and what are some more 'efficient' means to redistribute wealth?
He went to a quarantined area just to proselytize. These are endangered tribal who have remained practically un-contacted for thousand of years.

As someone who is not very familiar with western religions, can anyone explain the rational behind such acts?
> essentially sovereign and outside national law

This is definitely not true. Maybe you confused it with Isle of Man or Channel Islands, which are crown dependencies with certain autonomy, often accused to be British tax havens.
What’s with all the tough guy shit on HN now?

In light of TFA, the irony of your indignation is not lost on me.
Amazon admits it exposed customer email addresses, but refuses to give details
Why App Promo Videos Dominate the Internet
I saw Aria2 has two packages in F-driod. I installed them and looked at the docs but I couldn't figure out how to download stuffs with Aria2. A small example of it's use will be highly appreciated. Thank you.
> The employees decided to buy units in a new 11-story condo building in the Long Island City neighborhood of Queens just before the first reports of Amazon’s HQ2 location were released this month...

On the surface, these condo purchases seem suspicious. OTOH, there are thousands and thousands of Amazon employees, so, one might ask: how many condos in NYC do Amazon employees typically purchase per month? Is that number zero?
Are you arguing that he became Acting Attorney General* because he he got money in a weird scheme for a "conservative advocacy group?"
Gamification is overt and transparent psychological manipulation. I had friends in Sociology etc. who had to conform to elaborate ethics compliance guidelines before launching surveys etc. Why is gamification not similarly controlled?
They could have built it in a state with little or no corporate tax.
> But given their history of shutting down unprofitable properties I would be surprised if they just provide this service for altruistic reasons.

Google News was ostensibly started for altruistic reasons, because on 2001-09-11 ALL news websites went down under the load.

In 2018 news websites maybe are more behind cloudflare/akamai and would be able to handle load, so less relevant technically.

But to say that altruistic reason would surprise you because of this history is extremely cynical. Even by my standards.
What are you upset about? Journalists shouldn't be expected to work for free.
That's a fantastic list and reflects my sentiment about Apple's price hikes very well.
iPhones to me always started at around $700ish. Only with the larger plus sized models people started accepting $800+.
Then boom - suddenly the jump to $1000+ with the X (which was deemed a 'special' device based on it's 'advanced' features), so I think many expected prices to come down again. But instead we now have an XS Max with starts at $1100.
Compared to the $700 usual starting price we are up 58% and innovation has decreased not increased since.
OpenStreetMap UA: “Russian Mappers Attack Ukraine in OSM!”
> The web ones, it will be hard to avoid JavaScript.

I don't think any of the projects mentioned are incompatible with a server-side implementation. You could even use something like HTML's image ismap attribute to implement an online white board.
Patches for the Better Spectre STIBP Approach Revised – Version 7 Under Review
Statistical Thinking for the 21st Century [free online textbook]
"It was surprising that even with these efforts we were only able to obtain support for the original findings for half of the studies. These results do not definitively mean that the original findings were wrong, but they do suggest that they are not as robust as might have been assumed." - Michelangelo Vianello, one of the project leads.

Yes, yes they do. It's ok to say the original findings were wrong. It's ok to re-assert the null hypothesis. The unwillingness to do so undermines the process and is disconcerting to say the least.
Essential Server Terms
If you're still sending in resumes cold you're doing it wrong.

You need to either apply through connections or turn "cold" job postings into warm leads by finding someone in the company to refer you. How? You can find people on Twitter, LinkedIn, I've even found employees of companies I'm interested in on HN and reached out to them to establish rapport and get interviews. Get creative. I've also written blog posts about companies I'm interested in that lead to job opportunities.
ugh. knowledge of this monitoring will probably scare some CPAP users, stress them out, and worsen their sleep quality.
There is more to it - the environment, and networking effects (so., the environment, which causes or prevents them). Only some of the human civilizations went all the way to the Internet, we still have people living as hunter/gatherers even today. So the advancement does not come from "inside" alone.

In any case, I like to think of humanity more like a brain, human = neuron. There are huge differences, for example, the human network also extends deep in time, not just in space (we manage to "network" with our ancestors, one-way from them to us, they gave us knowledge as well as all their tools). My point is "humanity" to me is a network effect. Place any modern human, adult or baby, in an prehistoric setting (20,000 years ago). Even if you gave them, let's say, an iPad-like device with all knowledge we have as of now, they would still not be able to do anything - because without the tools it would take quite some time to bootstrap. So "humanity" really is a lot - a lot - more than the sum of all humans, it's a giant ecosystem on its own.

I think depending on the environment you can have creatures with far higher intelligence than the average human and they still won't come up with modern technology. I think individual intelligence is clearly necessary and beneficial but overrated, that network effects are the main contributor, and that they don't appear automatically. We still have plenty of human societies right here and now that seem to be stuck.

Here's a Google Talk I once bookmarked: Joseph Henrich, professor in the Department of Human Evolutionary Biology of Harvard University, "The Secret of Our Success" https://youtu.be/jaoQh6BoH3c

An aside, arising from those thoughts, more of my own thoughts about something else: Each time you think about who "deserves" something, e.g. high pay, consider that most people who actually contributed so that the person even is in the position to achieve anything more than building a mud hut are dead, and another large amount of the contribution is "everybody else". That somebody can create a Dell or Microsoft, or invent theory of relativity, is because they are placed at the right points in the human network in time and space. What would they achieve by themselves in the forest? So much for "self-made" people. Self-made just like Newton who made the (much older) "standing on the shoulders of giants" famous. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoulders_of_g...)
To people you know and have an understanding with, it might be no problem. To people you don't know, it'll come across as pretty hostile.
Your Twitter is a self curated feed of the people you want to see. The idea that people intentionally seek out stuff to hate is a people problem and not a platform problem.
That isn’t indignation, but I don’t blame you for projecting.
They're wrong unfortunately. Biological sex has a strong scientific basis. The existence of intersex doesn't change that.

This is a good primer on the subject from a liberal M.D. and source: https://www.playboy.com/read/the-difference-between-sex-and-...

"For 99 percent of us, our sex and anatomy dictate our gender; they are essentially the same thing. But for the one percent of the population who are transgender or intersex, their sex and gender don’t align. What has complicated this issue is that some outlets have replaced the word sex with gender when reporting on the memo, particularly when making any references to anatomy."

"But intersex people possess both female and male anatomy, which leads to having a gender identity that may be different from the way they appear to the outside world. To suggest that this group proves that gender is completely unrelated to anatomy, or that a person’s sense of gender in the brain somehow operates in a way that is distinct from the rest of their body, is foolish and erroneous."
CMS.js v2.0.0 Released – Fully Client-Side JavaScript Site Generator
Plenty Is a Free SMS-Based Reservation System for Food Pantry Visitors
> bent on revenge and eager to kill.

Could you clarify? Upon whom? My understanding is that neither the Afghans nor the Iraqi civillians that ended up being the majority of the victims of our subsequent actions were the perpetrators of the acts on 9/11 or even from the societies that nurtured them. If I recall correctly, 15 of the 19 were from Saudi Arabia and the remaining 4 were from the UAE, Egypt and Lebanon. Even Osama bin Laden was Saudi, and nurtured in Switzerland, funded by the US Army and subsequently protected by the Pakistani Army which was itself directly funded by the US taxpayer.
Here in the UK, a great many deprived areas were completely ignored by our own government whereas the EU helped fund regeneration on those areas.

The EU has also funded flood prevention programs in the UK while our own government has done naff all aside appearing for rhetoric soundbites.

Much of what the EU does goes unsung. And a lot of stuff gets completely misreported too (eg the whole bent bananas meme). In fact this has become so common that there's a coined term for it: euromyth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euromyth)
Sure, but it's also not nice or polite. "I'm just sarcastic, I'm just having fun" is a great way to dismiss someone else's feelings when they're actually not happy with your chosen mode of mild meanness.

Speak however you want, but as always people can label you a jerk for anything you want no matter how little offense you intended by it. It's a design flaw in language that's impossible to eliminate.
How to Encrypt Your MySQL and MariaDB Backups
So you spend a long time considering a change, and then you care about a 15 second difference in the time it takes to apply that change?
Worldwide trade existed and worked quite well long before our current financial system. I don't get why on would believe that without Wall Street the world would stop to function. Part of the fairy tale I guess.
I had a similar experience with the Best Buy Geek Squad. They went above and beyond and I tried to tip $20. The geek squad guy waved his hands, backed up and say "No I can't take that". He said the only thanks he wanted was filling out the survey and my repeat business.
This is great - any others you can recommend?
If you look at the performance testing between SOCs in the Apple and Android ecosystems, you'll see that the Apple cores from two years ago are still on par with the newest performance cores in the Android ecosystem and way ahead of Qualcomm's best.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13614/arm-delivers-on-cortex-...

If you buy an older iPhone, you're still going to get performance that is equivalent to a $1000 dollar Android flagship without the premium price.

Given that buying a brand new Pixel phone only gets you two years of OS updates, you're also going to get at least that much support after the sale.
Privacy is a double edged sword and apple has taken the other side of it compared to most other companies. Doing good ai while being privacy conscious is not easy, huge props to them and hope they succeed.
The mobile phone cycle is just a redux of what happened with PCs until around 2007. Computers were getting a lot faster and software coming out actually demanded better computers.

Honestly, around 2009 and the introduction of the Core 2 Duo, computers became good enough for most people.

I just retired a circa 2009 Core 2 Duo 2.66Ghz Dell laptop with 8GB of RAM running Windows 10 with one of the last great 15 inch 1920x1200 displays (as opposed to the 1920x1080) as my Plex Server about two months ago.

In day to day use, I couldn’t tell the difference between that and newer computers besides the spinning hard drive vs SSD. It has a gigabit Ethernet port and was wired into my network. It had just as much of RAM as most computers sold today, the hard drive was the same size (but much slower), the screen was better than what comes in many consumer laptops and most computers today don’t come with gigabit Ethernet.

In 2009, a computer from 2000 would have been unusable. (http://www.topdesignmag.com/top-performance-computer-looked-...)

Mobile processors are now getting that way. While an iPhone 5S from 2013 is perfectly usable running iOS 13, there is no way that an iPhone 3G from 2008 would have been something you wanted to use in 2013.
Take a look at NixOS then :-)
Мы рождены, чтоб сказку сделать былью.
Maybe. I would argue that long term it isn't. Businesses and the people who control them are only that wealthy because society lets them be that wealthy. Damaging society (e.g. via increasingly obscene wealth inequality making people more unhappy) means, long-term, risking massive societal upheaval, and thus your position.