skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The thoughts about ideas and information are particularly relevant.

If you're not a domain expert everything you come up with will collapse under efficiency arguments. Such as "if this made sense someone would have done it".

Much of expertise is knowing what experts themselves think. That's why you can answer the question of why it isn't already there.

I have a question though. If you need to be a domain expert, how can there be so much focus on young founders? Is that a different category of investment, people who happen to have a lead into an emerging industry like social networks?
It's definitely possible. I'm guessing based on cost/benefit. Here's an SDR R&D board from 2018 for "low bandwidth applications" using Spartan-6 FPGAS, (https://artes.esa.int/projects/spyrus). Unfortunately they don't provide any results from the radiation test campaign (wonder why?)
ain't dead
> They are not conspirancy theories

Agreed, I've read a bit more:

> The pragmatic interest on the part of industry is natural, since the behaviorist approach that has appealed to many AI researchers aligns with the profit motives of surveillance capitalism.

Still, the language is loaded, the examples of claims (of AI proponents) are cherry-picked, the limitations of technology are misrepresented and the results are dismissed because they don't take "historical context" or "emotions visible clearly on the faces" into account.

It doesn't read like a scientific paper at all - or is this how papers in non-STEM look like in general?
I wonder if they have automated builds :-)

git push orbit master
Is it Unity-based?
Apple Buys 50 Business Class Seats from San Francisco to Shanghai Every Day
I think usually because the employee opens his fat mouth is why.
Please don't create throwaways to post like this, and then repost flagged comments. Eventually we ban the main account.
Tor can also be de-anonymized if a person controls a significant chunk of the network. However, if we keep changing the route constantly, (instead of establishing a static route during startup time and just reusing it, as tor does), we might make a much better and safer system. As you can expect, creating route takes time and defeats the purpose of IM.
Near the end of the story, someone figures out a device that uses actual atmospheric clouds as material for fusion chain reactions.
Hopefully they’ve learnt from what went wrong and made improvements for the production model.

A lot of Boeings crashed in the early days of jet aviation, too, but now they’re considered very safe.
Ask HN: Are you interested Q&A with the FPGA hackers of HN?
I thought it might be of interest to the community for those of us with fpga/asic experience here, professional or otherwise, to do a Q&A.

I do fpga and asic design, and verification, for a living; with a little clojure mixed in.

I’ve seen a number of others here that do the same or similar. Hobbyists, pros, people that have picked it up by osmosis, what have you. Please join in!

I haven’t really thought this through beyond asking the question. So maybe this thread will be both the gauge of interest and also be the Q&A itself.

I have a lot of experience but in a narrow field, so I’ll answer what I can.

But I really hope other asic/fpga hackers will jump in. I have as much to learn as anyone.

Well, let’s see what happens.
clickbait title should be replaced by something like "90% of us aren’t eating enough fibre, and how to improve that"

Despite the title it has some good info
Part of the charm about the early days of the internet for me was that I was a child and I had child-like logic about how things worked.

My view of the internet was very skeuomorphic. Websites were like "places" and by riding the web-rings I felt like I was surfing through cyberspace. When I would come across new information I would store it in my bookmarks which I thought of as a sort of inventory. If I came across a small tribe on some random internet forum somewhere I might share some of my best links with them to win them over. If I found a guest book I would sign it as a way of planting my flag.

I viewed anyone who actually "owned" a website to be something like a God, a MASTER of the web. I also viewed hackers as very dangerous people, where if they wanted to, they could blow up my computer in my face.
Yer a Developer, Harry – Programming Is Magic (2014)
Based on your parent comment...

> This is really sad for people like me who don't want to install WhatsApp on their phones because it sends too much of my data to Facebook... probably that's precisely why they are so strict, to get all the data because that's all they get (the service is gratis after all).

When you send a message through WhatsApp, WhatsApp knows you sent the message and who you are.

Since they know who you are, they also know, independently of the request you just sent, whether you're using their official client, and what data they've managed to extract from your phone.

If I get a seemingly-valid message from you despite the fact that I know perfectly well you've never installed my official client, I'm going to conclude you're not using my official client.
This is really awesome, but 6m is just not enough range.
Flights are also subsidized at the moment by not taxing fuel at all. Also, the market doesn't care too much about the environment, hence governments.
Here is a NASA booklet on the topic of radiation and manned spaceflight: https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/284273main_Radiation_HS_Mod1.pdf
But then you might as well use Crystal instead, which already have scripting language usability while retaining the performance.

I like the idea of swift and I want to like it, but everytime I look at APIs it seems they dropped the ball.
They probably couldn’t do this to the kindle stuff now at this scale, if that’s any comfort.
Our lives are frittered away by detail. Simplify, simplify, simplify. -hdt
In elementary school I remember the dancing hamsters.
This is interesting at a meta-level.

It's ultimately content marketing for a16z. If Chris Dixon wrote this same article—e.g. "Here are all of the best things I've said"—then it would come off as arrogant or ickily self-promotional. But having someone else write it allows the author to praise the ideas without the same stigma.

I don't know whether it was intentional or not, but it's interesting how well the content comes across when the base idea ("writing about smart things our partner was right about") is the type of marketing companies/VCs _want_ to actually say but social norms prevent.

The article itself is an example of the advice within the article. A "good idea that people think is a bad idea."
LEMV = Long Endurance Multi Intelligence, in this case a specific programme [0]

ISR - Intelligence Surveillance Reconnaissance - a generic term

EW = Electronic Warfare - a generic term

There is recent operational history of using blimps in the ISR role [1]. Things don't always go according to plan, though [2]

[0] https://www.army-technology.com/projects/long-endurance-mult...

[1] https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=blimp+iraq&tbm=isch&tbo=u&...

[2] https://frieze.com/article/eye-sky-what-surveillance-blimp-a...
A homeless person’s greeting is almost always an insincere and contrived opener for them to aggressively beg for or demand a free handout from you with an implicit threat of verbal or physical violence if you don’t comply with their request.
I'm just going to leave this picture of the elephant in the living-room:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubert_Dreyfus%27s_views_on_ar...
iPhone SE. I like the smaller form factor, and I buy Apple because they do a little better at privacy and security while doing way better at 1) integrating with my other Apple products, 2) looking good, and 3) lasting longer.
I wanted to chat using WhatsApp comfortably using my Weechat setup.
It’s not that well written but ‘why was it posted’ because it doesn’t introduce npx is a bit much.

It’s also easily put together by the next example (uses npm) and google, if you were actually interested in the subject.
Speak for yourself. I personally prefer to evaluate the statements of scientists on a claim by claim basis.
Frustrating. IE6 had a marketshare of 95%+ (the rest was IE5.5 and IE5), we saw what was possible, but we could not deploy it to production as we had to fix IE6 bugs.

Not everything was better then.
Covey's "7 Habits" taught me everything I needed to know.

I use the app Things to throw new items into an Inbox. This takes half a second and doesn't distract me from whatever it is I'm working on at the time.

Later, when I have a free moment, I use the classic time management grid to mentally map every item in the Inbox into one of four categories:

1. Urgent & Important

2. Not Urgent but Important

3. Urgent but Not Important

4. Not Urgent & Not Important

(Visualized as a 2x2 matrix)

This categorization step could be done once a day or once an hour depending on how much incoming work there is.

Based on the outcome of that quick assessment, I move the item into one of the categories 'Things' provides out-of-the-box: Today, Someday, Any time. And I have tags for every project or area of responsibility I have. During this step I usually take a few minutes to fill in some details about the task that I don't want to forget. Sometimes I realize the task is an entire project in itself, so it gets a new tag or Project item in Things.

Every day I start out by scanning my projects and moving items into the Today list. The day is done when I've checked them all off (yeah, right!)

It's all derived, I believe, from the Getting Things Done methodology.

[1] https://www2.usgs.gov/humancapital/documents/TimeManagementG...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getting_Things_Done
I am part of this project but just about to board a 2 hour flight. If you have any questions, feel free to post below and I will answer them later.
So Matt Levine readers will know that everything is securities fraud.

What about United staff buying and selling stock on the basis of who is buying tickets. Is that insider trading?
What's interesting about these numbers is that few people seem to apply the same analysis to the $50/month or more they are giving to the mobile network provider. I use a prepaid SIM without any data plan and spending about $50/year for phone calls and SMS. I currently pay my home cable-modem ISP about $70/month, and it provides a service that I don't think can be effectively replaced by mobile network plans at this time (perhaps with coming 5G services, that might change).

My smartphone only sees data via wifi, and it is definitely not at the center of my life. I get more than enough internet exposure through my home and office computers and wifi networks. Being disconnected outside is one of my guilty pleasures. My main use of my phone outside work is for offline GPS and casual camera use in the wilderness, where there is no phone service even if I wanted it. As a result, I value a small and light phone since it is mostly a passive burden in my pocket. But, the battery needs to last a whole camping trip away from the electrical grid.

My current phone is an aging Moto G4 Play which can still go 5+ days with many hours per day GPS logging. I am starting to see reduced GPS reliability that I think may be physical antenna damage. So, I may replace it with a fresh mid-range phone, rather than replacing its user-serviceable battery and looking into non-OEM firmware updates to extend its life.
Sci-fi (and all fiction) are really just the author talking about the present. As such, all the sci-fi tech is just a neat description of an existing problem. Inevitably engineers will strive to solve those problems.
The language is loaded because it's part of an ongoing discourse that by

>is this how papers in non-STEM look like in general?

you're not familiar with. And yes, this is quite a good paper for sociology standards. It comes from a STEM-guy so I think I like his style of writing.

> the examples of claims (of AI proponents) are cherry-picked,

This is not hard science where you have to find hard rules and a counter-example breaks your argument. He's commenting on a trend that we can all relate to. Is it a vocal minority or it's actually the vast majority of the industry/media? For that you can go back to data but that's not the goal of the paper and it doesn't invalidate his thesis anyway, as long as the narrative dominates the public discourse.
When authors use such extreme wording, it makes it clear they're looking more to write poetry rather than facts.
You really need to realize there are different markets.

Young founders are often in B2C and capital-light. They are judged (almost) purely on growth metrics. Series A negotiation can drag on for months, and its hard to fake 100% month-on-month growth.

The B2B will usually be more experienced insiders with deep domain knowledge, and excellent references.

EDIT: everything is relative. If you are a brilliant PHD in ML then you can be 25 AND a domain expert AND go in to a capital-heavy B2B sector.
"It depends."

Sometimes vendors would burn duplicates by accident. Sometimes they would simply run out and production would loop (there's "only" 16.7mil addrs per manufacturer prefix). Sometimes they print the same run in different geographical areas, because the MAC only matters in a broadcast domain. Often they just wouldn't keep track of what they assigned.

I just think it's funny to realize that people read "unique (to a broadcast domain)" and assumed that could mean "unique (everywhere)" because it's a really big number.
Canada is such an amazing contrast to the US in that area, true. I wish people here had a better understand of just how necessary nuclear power is if we want to survive to ever reach the hoped-for “clean energy future.”
I wish I could say that people believed in science. Priests (literal ones, not metaphorical ones like your strawmen) seem to have more influence over public policy in much of the world though, including America, and more often than not to the detriment of all.
If it were demonstrably true that Down's folks are a happier-than-average lot, would statements like the doctor's still rub you the wrong way? Is it the sweeping nature of such a statement that makes it offensive, as much as falsity?
Perhaps the huge surface area could be turned to its advantage? If microwave rectennas could be incorporated into its upper surface, perhaps such a craft could be powered by beamed power from satellites? In the right climate, what about solar power? These would only be viable for operating in extremely remote areas where the logistics cost of moving fuel in becomes prohibitive. It's niche, but there is a market there.
> mostly because they don't have informed opinions or the cultural means and interest to join a non-technical debate

This is somewhere between slander and trying to explain away other social groups bullying engineers.

The truth is much simpler: engineers have responded to being bullied out of the debate by simply ignoring it, and implementing AI without concern for the results of that debate. Engineers have that power -- they can unilaterally change society by implementing a new kind of mind without approval or buy-in from other parties.

So I think my position is the reverse of yours: if business leaders, activists, etc want to meaningfully impact the AI debate, they should engage with the engineers actually building it -- rather than having a debate among themselves.
So the upsell comes later?
Creating a correct implementation of a protocol is one thing, creating one that is indistinguishable from another implementation another. E.g. for TCP/IP you can find out the OS just from the additional information even though implementations are correct [1]. I guess they are doing something similar. And even if your protocol implementation were perfectly indistinguishable from the other one, usage patterns might reveal differences. E.g. if you have a bot then bots will most likely reply immediately after you issue a command. If you add a constant wait time, it's still distinguishable from humans typing at varying times. Same for uniformly randomly distributed wait times, I'm sure there is a distinction (I'd say it's correlated to message length for example). All of this is visible without looking at the message contents, which are obviously not available to the WhatsApp service.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP/IP_stack_fingerprinting
I personally prefer as you said the humble approach - in fact seeing any security software not display a big fat warning is for me a warning.
Telegram has a RCE 0day, not to mention their snake-oil cryptography track record (Diffie-Hellman backdoor).

Ricochet was audited in 2016:
https://twitter.com/torproject/status/699668346921332737

And since then things have moved forward only very slowly, but I do not see this as a sign of the project being abandoned more like that there aren't enough people to maintain it.

FWIW the @torproject still endorses ricochet for now: https://twitter.com/torproject/status/1073322441836036096
https://observer.com/2016/07/space-radiation-devastated-the-...

Apparently, the Apollo astronauts had a 43% mortality rate from cardiovascular disease, which the research quoted in this article attributes to radiation.
It's a hot topic.

One very good argument I've read recently is that most of what pro-science people label as "anti-scientific" statements like anti-vax stuff are made by people that don't refuse science as a whole but just science coming from what they perceive is a corrupted establishment. Clearly this involve cherry-picking that validates their ideological positions, or it's just following the twisted narrative of some political group.

Science, with the capital S, is still society's reference framework for truth (and this is a huge problem, but not the one we are talking about) but these people refute the priests and the religion, not the God. New priests are bending the same God to their interests and the times favor them over the previous priests.
I found there's not much to learn about "humanist" issues, in the sense of background knowledge of consensus of the field. United States and North Korea agree on nuclear physics: they use the exactly same number for cross section. They don't agree much on humanist issues.
there is this humor show (the fix, on Netflix) where they were supposed to “fix” AI.

I think it’s quite telling that the entire show instead ended up talking about robotics. I don’t think any of the participants reflects at all on how AI is used today in the systems they interact with.

So that’s probably the first step in educating the public. Find a basic mental framework for thinking about AI that doesn’t involve robots or skynet.
Briar project is doing something similar. https://briarproject.org/

Actively developed
James Mickens is obviously aware of "how this stuff works" and his arguments are very similar:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajGX7odA87k
Here’s something else that they didn’t predict: that sales of books printed on paper are at their all-time highest now.
Open Source is a term that is a fair bit younger than Free Software/Libre software. It was created so those who didn't like GPLed and similarly licensed software could easily talk about lightly licensed software (eg: BSD).

Most of the people I run into in Seattle that are all psyched about Open Source are of the lawyer for BigCo type, or are personal zealots who have been diving down the rabbit hole and buy the ideology of "true freedom". Problem is, you don't create much of a virtuous cycle of improvement when there is no incentive to contribute back to upstream, or even post your fork online.
ARPAnet, 1982: Late nights on a Heathkit H89 running CP/M, 24x80 green screen... dialing up at 300 baud to a terminal server, probably across the Potomac at the Pentagon, typing magic numbers (pre-TCP/IP) to connect over NCP to unseen computers at MIT. Stallman and others were happy to give out guest accounts to random teenagers like me, so I spent hours futzing around systems like the bizarre MIT-ITS (Incompatible Time-sharing System) or the only slightly less bizarre V6 Unix at mit-ccc. Discovered Usenet news and mailing lists and FTP archives and dove in headfirst. There was a feeling of rough travel then, with no paved roads, no centralized maps, few guidelines, but many kind strangers along the way. It wasn't all tech or sci-fi geekery -- I was parts of mailing lists as diverse as alternative music (Love-Hounds) and body piercing.

Proto-WWW, 1993: Happened across O'Reilly & Associates at a network conference, and joined up with their Global Network Navigator project, the first commercial web publication (my first gig there was the first ad). Even so, every last one of us at GNN was passionate and excited about this medium exploding before our eyes. Everything was new, untried. There was no breaking things because so little was formed. There was a fluidity of expression (even within its constraints), a vast potential that was almost tangible, a sense that the web itself was a creative material to be molded. In this short time between the web's inception (~1993) and platforms like Geocities (~1995), we played in the raw muck of the primal web: HTTP + HTML + GIF + you.
Why Iris Murdoch Matters
That's equal to 800 workers visiting in Shanghai twice a month or vice versa. Sounds about right considering how much Apple does business and manufacturing there.
Clickhouse (like any other SQL DB) would work great if you could chop up your log files into fields and store one type per DB. ElasticSearch is great for this because you don't have to worry about schema- ClickHouse you will... unless you do Two Arrays. One for the field type, and one for the field value.

If you value being able to store arbitrary log files, ClickHouse is not for you. If you want to build your system to generate tables on the fly- ClickHouse might work.

See: https://github.com/flant/loghouse
And those SV companies also were caught having a no poaching agreements between each other. If those guys could enforce non-competes in California they would do so reflexively.
the USA is the only country that has murdered innocent people with nuclear weapons
Like many people said many times before: just because you can, doesn't mean that you should.
just ship to spark?
Godel's Proof for God's Existence
we use spark on hdfs.
By 1969, this was already a common meme. One example from 1967 was from the "Court Martial" episode of Star Trek:

KIRK: Yes. (Notices the piles of books everywhere) What is all this?
COGLEY: I figure we'll be spending some time together, so I moved in.
KIRK: I hope I'm not crowding you.
COGLEY: What's the matter? Don't you like books?
KIRK: Oh, I like them fine, but a computer takes less space.

http://www.chakoteya.net/StarTrek/15.htm
> It was exciting and new but not really that useful

Well, the FAQs under the comp.sci usenet newsgroup hierarchy were a truly awesome resource when I was a C++ dev in the early '90s.
I’m somewhat tired of these kind of “startup folklore” articles, although I read and bookmark them all. Sure, these people were crazy successful and see many other people being successful. Still, so much of these “insights” feel like they could be exactly the other way around. Many successful founders I have met, have told me: well, no we weren’t the only ones doing this, but we got lucky for this and that reason (e.g. timing). What if the lucky ones wrote the “rules”?

I don’t know if it’s possible but I would love to see all these concepts proven by data.
I think IE6 belongs to the corporate era.
Moto E4

#1 reason - user removable battery

#2 reason - has an SD card slot

#3 reason - has a physical headphone jack
Quasi-superconducting?
Pornography, Profits and the Internet (1995)
That makes sense. It's good that PEP8 makes exceptions for such cases, I suppose, but it just looks wrong to my eye.
Be the change you want to see.
AMD GCN Radeon Support in GCC 9
They do exist. Here's one for Discord: https://github.com/reactiflux/discord-irc