skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The only way I see for us to save ourselves is either A: Fusion power comes to life and provides near magical amounts of energy for dirt cheap prices, or B: We start building nuclear fission plants all across the globe, dozens if not more opening per year.

Most of our technical problems comes down to energy requirements; we need to replace most of the world's current electrical usages, we need to replace the world's oil and gas driven transportation structure with electric, we need to replace our natural gas derived fertilizer with air and water derived fertilizer (which costs 100x the energy to produce at best), and that along with the millions of other fossil-fuel derived chemical reagents and materials that don't get counted in most energy requirement surveys, we need to scrub out 200+ years worth of pollution in the air and also the oceans (which has absorbed most of our CO2, hence the acidification), and still accommodate for future increases in energy requirements across the globe.

Quite simply, even if we doubled or tripled our energy production rates tomorrow and it was magically all clean power, we still wouldn't be anywhere near the power requirements we need to build a clean society, and that is before we even start looking at serious CO2 sequestration. It will always take more energy to sequester CO2 than burning the old fuel could ever theoretically produce, and we only harness between 20-50% of the energy released from those fuels even today, with the rest escaping as waste heat, so we have a LOT of extra energy to make up for.
I cover these up with a bag before getting close to being in view...
> I don't expect scammers to pick up this tactic because it would double their OpEx

Except my missed call log is full of back-to-back calls from random phone numbers in my prefix. Either half the folks in Metro NYC (where I haven't lived in over a decade) are calling me to report the other half got hit by a car, or this adaption has already been made.
So I have some grad/phd student friends and a small computational lab - enough cores, ram, storage and jobbing engines that in 2000s it would have been a respectable not quite super computer but none the less very powerful system capable of crunching lots of numbers quickly.

My friends sometimes try to validate conclusions of the papers or just re-run the data crunching presented in those papers.

They never succeed. Either the data sets don't actually match the data sets in papers, or something in the formulas is off, or the code does not even compile.

I did computation physics in college. We had to write code as the paper of homework/tests. Our TA would never run our binaries. He would take our source code, compile it, feed it two of his data sets (we had one) and check the result. If the student's code did not compile, the student would get an F for that homework. If the student's code bombed on the data set that was shared with students, the student would automatically get an F. And only if the second data set got different results than he expected would he go chasing the errors and potentially still give a good grade. By the end of two semesters everyone knew one never tweaked the code to just run the known data set and get the known result.

Science would benefit tremendously if this was the approach.
In the end, does it really matter that much who provided the DNA? Family is mostly socially constructed anyway - just because half the children's DNA comes from someone else, doesn't mean they belong any less to the parents who raised them.
This might be of interest to you: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/privo-mobile

Looks like they are trying to make a dumb phone that has better UX like a smart phone.
I’d argue that this is, in fact, a failing of the language of description, and that going back and refactoring terms and systematizing the folk knowledge of a given field would go a long way towards fixing the public attitudes towards that field. We should give more respect to people who make existing concepts easier to understand, or simpler and cheaper to prove or demonstrate. Then maybe we wouldn’t have to spend so much time bemoaning the poor state of education.
That's really impressive. Thanks for sharing.
Hi, one of the authors here.

It'd most likely lead to symbol conflicts, if you'd like to both use the sandboxed library, and the original (unsandboxed) one, even for constants / defines.

The other problem is memory synchronization: typical programistic run-times don't provide info on whether a given memory pointer points to memory which will be read only by the library, or maybe will be updated, or both (const-like annotations are rarely conclusive here), hence some additional work will always be needed to correctly wrap a library function. Also, file-descriptors are just integers, and it'd require a heuristics to figure out when file-descriptor sync between the main code and the library code is needed or it's just a pure int which is used.

So, no, a fully automatic library interface would be quite impossible, at least without some kind of heuristics, and this would be error prone.

PS: One of the main ideas behind the project is represented by the motto "Sandbox once, use anywhere", so technically only one implementation of a library API is needed for all users using the same set of functions.
Edison was the biggest thief of IP during his time. Of course when western societies steal it is not theft but "manifest destinty" "braveness" and a lot of other BS. But Chinese company's rise is purely because of theft. Is it ?
So... the report says 0 spanish websites were found having trackers. I've tried 3 random links of said websites, all taken from the report [1-3].

Ublock detected and blocked google analytics in all of them ([1] has urchin.js too).

[1] http://www.lamoncloa.gob.es/Paginas/index.aspx
[2] https://www.riojasalud.es/ciudadanos/problemas-de-salud/30-e...
[3] http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/servicioandaluzdesalud/princi...
I would like to see a tool that lists all modern scientific hypotheses and theories along with the published experiments that support or refute the theory/hypothesis. The theories should be linked to show what builds upon what. Wikipedia is probably the closest we have to this right now.

As science gets more complex, we either need to create a way for people to perform this bottom-up reasoning themselves, or we need to appeal to authority.

Appeal to authority is dangerous and anti-scientific. IMO, people are right to reject that.
When you have to hassle the backend guys because querying <<100 comments is slow, is that the point where you stop and ask "what are we doing here".
Like showing and managing the cookies consent pop-up :)
Agreed. I experienced a bit of a culture shock moving from Northern Europe to USA. Robocalls are a real pain here in the USA and I don’t know why. I’ve learned that I should never answer a call from a number I don’t know (not that easy), but it doesn’t have to be this way.

I also get a number of text messages trying to phish me into buying drugs or sex. It’s totally nuts.
Mass censorship is so hot right now!
==> I have heard the same horn be tooted in India over the last 2 decades, and India is no closer to the that goal than it was 2 decades ago.

I think the article is too optimistic in India's favor, but it is incorrect to say "India is no closer". As per the following link, India was #12 in GDP just 10 years back, and now India is #6 or #7 knocking at #5.

https://countryeconomy.com/gdp/india?year=2008
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi...

Yes you are right the problems will not be solved in 1 generation. It probably will take longer, but there has been significant change in the past 1 generation, and there will be similar significant change in the next 1 generation.
Maybe just the market fragmentation. For example, a lot of the robocalls in the US are trying to sell extended warranties for vehicles, student loan debt services, health/life insurance, scammy tech support, etc.

If you target the US, your sales pitch can be in one language, with roughly one set of commission paying providers, and super cheap VoIP calls. I assume that would be harder in Europe due to language, state provided services for health+education, more strict laws on loans and warranties, differing costs for local VoIP numbers, etc. You would likely have to tailor for each country.
I've never received a robocall and the whole thing seems dystopian. Is it something uniquely American? Is there EU legislation that prevents this, such as the "don't call me" register (bel me niet register)? I'm not on that, though. General anti-spam laws then? (Since it's unsolicited commercial communications directed at consumers). Genuinely curious what's different.
They just don't seem to care. You research something - after hours you'll end up at their bugtracker, where you can read the desperation of others (often some issues are not fixed in 10+ years). I don't understand their priorities. There is to date still no way to restrict visibility of work-logs on issues - a usecase basically every smaller shop has because the client is often participating directly in the JIRA. Service Desk solves that problem but it's quite expensive and you can't mix software projects with service desk projects. So you have to create linked-issues and have yet another layer of indirection :/

We end up syncing projects with another plugin on the same instance :/

Confluence lacking some robust text-only markup (like markdown or asciidoc or whatever) is also more than lame. It shouldn't be that hard because most macros can be configured by text attributes anyway... Expose that Wiki in a readable markdown format and have me let git... like github gist would be more than enough. I despise using Confluence at the moment...

Gitlab could eat their lunch but they also seem to have their priorities off
It's not contrived, it's an actual problem that existed for centuries coinciding with insurance markets during which the free market did not provide a solution. Saying there wasn't a need for the thing because the free market didn't provide a solution is tautological.

If centuries is an acceptable time scale for obtaining a solution, then we're not really arguing about the same thing at all. I'm sure we could both come up with theoretical free market solutions to just about any issue. The problem is they don't always materialize, and it's not terribly difficult to see any number of issues in history that existed before widespread regulation that were not solved by the free market.
> The parts of the job which I enjoyed the most were not my actual job (writing and selling software, filing taxes in a timely fashion, etc) but helping other software entrepreneurs optimize their businesses or engineers navigate career challenges.

This bit in the post about the author having previously been a founder of a business intrigued me.

As a founder myself, I know that there are bits of the business that don't fit into my natural skillset but have to be done. That is accepted as part and parcel of running a business.

The second point intrigues me though. In my decades of running my own software business, I have had a lot of staff come through as employees, get skilled up, then leave to start their own businesses using the skills they learned while at my company.

This actually gives me a great deal of pleasure and pride. I LOVE seeing people's career pathways take off, and I love it more if I had contributed in some way.
I was looking once (about a year or two ago) on Czech (EU member state) government websites and about 90% of them were using something from Google, usually Analytics. But some of them required even Captcha (so no way to access it without being vetted by Google, an US company).
The first post is done in Paper.js, while the rest of them are done in Three.js. The scripts in MathUtilities are for the Unity3D game engine.

All of them are excellent graphics frameworks (though with strengths in 2D, 3D, and standalone content respectively).
the fault found in THAT line of reasoning is that the established scientific culture/institution doesn't even play ball by its own rules.

Political biases in every aspect from results interpretation to what questions we're allowed to ask, historical "just so" arguments that are sometimes falling flat (much to the detriment of the health of the planet), the lack of "negative results" studies due to funding biases and the replication crisis work together to cause a profound skepticism of the body of scientific institutional knowledge to be in some ways _more scientific_ than just reading and accepting the latest scientific news.
If model-theoretic semantics and the various ways to slice, dice, and extend Datalog are interesting to you, then almost any talk by Peter Alvaro might be as well.

In particular: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2Aa4PivG0g
I checked out the list of remote engineering jobs after reading your (fascinating) article but unfortunately they all seem to be restricted to North America. Is this a time zone issue or a legal issue? Are there plans to expand remote jobs to other regions (like Europe)?
I think this is more related to the respective climates and local tastes than anything else.

For example I can't for the life of me find any good potatoes, apples or bread in Italy - or anything even remotely sour that isn't wine - apparently it's not something the locals particularly enjoy.
That's actually pretty rare. I've worked at places that did government contracting and none of the teams directly servicing those contracts were tested, neither was anyone else at the company.
I'd wager they have read their own rules. The GDPR is riddled with language to the effect of "lol but not EU governments OBVIOUSLY GUYS COME ON".

I think GDPR is a great law, but if there's one critique of it'd I'd level without hesitation, god damn is it hypocritical.
The difference is regulation.

The US is firmly gripped by the belief that "regulation doesn't work", and keeps electing people who try to prove that true via incompetence, cronyism and ideological malice.
That's neighborhood spoofing - the prefix may match, but if you're only allowing the exact same number to come through then the call would still be blocked.
Different use cases. I think RDF/RDFS/OWL excel at combining different linked data sources with SPARQL queries. I think graph databases like Neo4J may be easier to work with if you are building a local knowledge base. These are just my opinions.
I don't read a lot of TechCrunch, but did anybody else find this article quite poorly (perhaps hastily) written?

(My apologies to the author for the flippancy of that question)

An incorrect word in the opening sentence, a few places where tenses are mixed or incorrect, and generally long-winded sentences... Is this usual for TechCrunch?

Regardless, interesting news to wake up to - I'll be interested to watch the direction of both product suites after the acquisition.
The article didn't go into much detail about how all this was calculated out. I don't think they took into account gov debt. that can be a huge factor. Japan for instance has not had any increase in GDP over the last 25 years and that doesn't look like it's going to change. So I don't see how their gdp can jump from 4.8T to 7.2T in just 11 years!

Japan is currently at 230% and it weighing very heavily along with their aging population. Their GDP hasn't been increasing at all in the last 25 years. The US is heading in the same direction with budget deficit of 4% every year whilst only growing 3.3% a year. US interest payments are expected to reach 25% of federal spending in 2028 if we continue with our current deficits. At that point, unfortunately US growth will be a complete standstill, for decades to come :(

Indonesia is an interesting one to watch, i keep forgetting how much people are in that country!
Would unfreezing some of these soils make the soil hospitable to carbon-consuming plants?

Seems like the effect of permafrost melt may be partially mitigated by increased plant growth in those areas: through both gas and soil nutrient sequestration.
The best way to prevent the theft of sensitive data, is to not have any in the first place.
>You will be in a tough spot if you're in the USA. All the nice Nokias and decent low-tech phones are rapidly becoming useless as carriers phase out 2g (and even 3g) coverage to free up bands for LTE and now 5g.

Anecdote: I used to have an LG dumbphone with AT&T (I'd purchased it with prepaid time at the airport). A few years ago they sent me a message to come to their store and have it replaced for free because it would stop working with their planned "network updates".

I did that and got an Alcatel dumb phone. Not sure if it's using LTE or whatever G, but it works well and I'm reasonably happy with it. I do wish it was a flip-phone like the LG, because I've butt-dialed 911 a few times with it.

(They did initially give me what must've been a used phone, since it had over 50 personal contacts from someone else on it, but that's a different story...)
Exactly, it seems as though he felt like he couldn't blame both SV and Holmes at the same time, so chose to blame the SV culture. I'm still interested in seeing the film and judging for myself though.
Getting people to trust science is a matter of persuasion, not of “establishing scientific authority”. What's the difference? One is about acknowledging people and their needs and seeking their well-being; the other is viewing things as a political tussle for power and anxiety about people who don't seem to be on the same “side” as you.

---

There's a beautiful article that I think serves as a model example. In the field of education, there's a certain idea that's believed by many teachers, but which scientists (in cognitive psychology / learning science) know to be a myth. Against this background, this article (“Why mythbusting fails”) discusses why the scientists' approach towards transmitting this knowledge fails to convince its audience. It is worth reading, because it is really about persuasion, about dealing with disagreements between people: https://deansforimpact.org/why-mythbusting-fails-a-guide-to-...

---

Science is many things:

1. A wonderful method for arriving at reliable knowledge. The best we have.

2. The set of facts accumulated via that method. This set will always be tentative, incomplete and contain some fraction of false positives.

3. The set of facts believed by professional scientists today.

What would be good for people to trust would be (1) > (2) > (3), but for people taking sides, the priority is inverted: they care more that people be on the side of science (against religion or whatever), than that they apply the scientific method wherever possible.

---

In his books like The Mosaic Distinction and the Price of Monotheism, the author Jan Assmann discusses the idea of “counterreligions”. Though many people in Western society may no longer be religious in one sense, they still retain certain attitudes picked up from it, like the missionary/crusader zeal of treating those who do not believe in the same things as them as enemies needing to be either converted or fought, general condescension towards “heathens”, etc. We see this in discussions about politics or nearly anything, where people neatly get polarized into opposing sides rather than a gradual spectrum as one may expect.

---

In this very article, see things like:

> Science denial, however, is like crime: combating it requires…

(treating disbelievers as heretics to be fought)

> Galileo cleverly acknowledged the values of his enemies.

I don't know about Galileo's views, but why view acknowledgement of others' values as merely a “clever” device? How about replacing “cleverly” with “sincerely”, and “enemies” with “real people we'd like to persuade”?
The European court fines countries all the time. Poland and France have been fined for not following air quality legislation. Denmark has been fined for 'processing' farming subsidies incorrectly. I wouldn't surprise see fines for those that don't pick up the slack. EU bureaucracy is like a glacier. It's slow, but when it gets moving it can grind down mountains.
Almost certainly not. This has been a barrier for me too.

What I've done is started putting the phone in do not disturb and airplane modes when I'm not expecting a call.
Might wanna add a [2017] tag in the title.
Well, were the planes you have flown immune to spiral divergence? - that's the point here.
Or it may just crush you...
In this regard, don't compare them to AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, etc....

Cloudflare is a CDN, so compare them to Fastly, Akamai, and all the various other CDNs listed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_delivery_network

And yes, intelligence agencies would be incompetent if they haven't already implemented methods of penetrating CDN providers, or working on doing so. All of them, not just CloudFlare.
I tried building something like this for rust, in order to execute closures as a separate process[0].

I could probably automate it for a struct with a macros so that the API was autosandboxed. Also, it was purely an experiment and is not particularly safe - secrets in the "broker" process would leak to the client, for example. I had plans to deal with at least some of these issues using a build.rs to generate a separate binary that could be exec'd but I stopped caring.

I wonder how this sandboxapi gets around that?

The reason I didn't bother was because I found that constructing the sandbox was the hard part, not executing the code in it - how do you detect what the code needs to do in the sandbox? You end up too tight or too loose.

Also, performance is miserable if you have to fork/exec every single time. So you may be tempted to cache the process across executions but that comes with its own pains. Again, curious how this is dealt with in sandboxapi.

Personally, I want to see sandboxing support at a language level. I imagine a language, perhaps like Pony, which has isolated units of execution that connect via some form of RPC/message passing. With a type system that "taints" types based on actions, basically a capability type that propagates upwards, you could generate seccomp filters for every unit of execution. Pony seems like it's actually not far from this, from what I could tell.

Sandboxing in a language like this is a matter of moving the execution unit out of process, which shouldn't be that hard.

[0] https://github.com/insanitybit/sandbox
I totally agree with you that it is not possible for a regulator to predict the future with respect to how their decisions impact a market. However, I think that is only an argument against hasty regulation, as opposed to regulation in general.
> Just use VueX

That's the problem with large-scale Vue apps. Vue is awesome until you need to use VueX, after which it just becomes an inferior version of React + Redux.