skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
He's currently at the same level of Praggnanandhaa[1], world's youngest Grandmaster, one year after he started his FIDE rating [2].

It's truly impressive being able to progress as fast as this, from what seems to be still a very basic and informal training.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rameshbabu_Praggnanandhaa

[2] https://ratings.fide.com/id.phtml?event=25059530
People collect cars, watches, shoes, expensive clothing. On the extreme end there's figurines, paintings, antiques -- at least the former items have utility, the latter are mere articles for signalling to others.

Does it really blow your mind that the ability to move freely without being tethered to a phone is a selling point? I can give an example where it really helps for me: I'm a nudist.

But even when clothed I like walking around able to take a call or listen to music without snagging a cable on one of the many protrusions in this world like door handles, kitchen cupboard handles etc which can also lead to an expensive phone launching from my pocket onto the floor.

If you're worried about pollution, Airpods should be on the low end of the concerns list.
> If that were the case, why didn't Microsoft's WMR partners blow everyone away?

I can only speak for myself here: I bought the Rift, because I didn't know anything about VR and trusted Oculus more than some 'wierd unknown' manufacturer. (a lack of knowledge is another huge issue in my experience)

To be clear: I don't think, the Rift S is going to _fix_ any of those issues. But it certainly is an improvement. And that's what so many are debating here.

> The tethered experience seems more for the enthusiast

I don't know... If everybody with a 1070 or better is an enthusiast, then you might be right. But as PC's get faster, that will hopefully change.
to me, AAA is budget, and for the most part, you get budget by delivering sales. As a series goes on, they expect more sales, or budget gets cut.

Can you think of a AAA, "hardcore gamer only" game that is significantly more expensive, precisely because they know sales will be lower?

Latency can be fixed by moving the processing closer to the edge, like a CDN. Cloudflare and Netflix have boxes everywhere, google just needs to pop some mammoth consoles colocated inside isp data centers, and group people together connected to the same console. They can get there with 5G faster than itll make sense to keep adding gfx power to phones (battery life.)

Google is looking towards the future, where half the population lives in a city with cheap 5G.
That's not what OP is saying though. Let's say p=.001 - That means we're confident the results are not due to chance.

If we repeat the experiment and get a different result, then we need to be looking into confounding variables and testing methodology. Just because the P-value is low doesn't mean there's no fundamental flaw in the experiment used to find the p-value.
If you want more material, the "Hash Tables" chapter in my book walks through it:

http://www.craftinginterpreters.com/hash-tables.html
> What unionless countries achieved these things? It seems to me that workers in countries with unions tend to have far better working conditions than those in countries without union

Beware of correlation/causation. Unions that represent the highest earning workers are the strongest, because the strongest workers already have the highest bargaining power and the highest salaries.

A modern example of what productivity does to working conditions is in SV, where the unionized workers have less perks than the un-unionized ones.

Historically unions are always tied with: import restrictions, protection from competition, minimum wage laws (that dont apply to themselves), unemployment (the best way to increase wages for a union is to cut supply short).

As a nice example, Argentina has unions with constitutional level protections since the 50's, and unemployment is up, working conditions are down, poverty is up, import restrictions are up and minimum wage laws are up: result, 40% of the population works under the table, and union workers have some of the highest wages in the country.

You will seldom find improving working conditions without notable increase in GDP per capita.
Guns are common in the US, but most gun owners are not out looking for a chance to use them. Even those who support carry their gun with them everywhere do not pull their gun just because they can, and most have enough training to not pull their gun too soon. (pulling a gun can defuse the situation when the other party realizes it is serious, but it can also escalate the situation when the other turns to the fight side of fight of flight)
X-Ray Chimneys in the Galactic Centre
Some more blatant TV examples:

- Knight Rider 2008 was basically a long-form Ford commercial, featuring not just the Mustang, but a Mustang that could transform into... any other model of Ford automobile. Ford commercials also played during the break.

- The infamous attempt by Microsoft to get the phrase "Bing it" to catch on, by paying shows like Hawaii Five-0 to use it in dialog during the show.

- My personal favorite example was Chuck, which dodged cancellation once or twice specifically because of the extent of it's product placement partnership with Subway. It was so blatant that the showrunners made detailed descriptions of Subway sandwiches during the show literally a running gag.
Correct, plus a couple other damaged items. The burn on the table was actually from a joint, not a cigarette. I can tell as soon as I walk into the house what was smoked and how much. Marijuana, tobacco, pot rolled into cigarillos... if I look in the trash to confirm, I'm always right. Marijuana smoke smell dissipates fully in a few days, and guests don't seem to mind a little left over. But tobacco smoke never goes away. It even soaks into the deck wood outside, so I can often tell if there was a heavy outdoor smoker there even if they leave no butts behind.

I explicitly allowed marijuana smoking inside the house up until then as a way to support legalization, and because the smoke is much more tame. But then it occurred to me: people can vape. I'm not a pot user so I guess I'm a little behind. So now, no more smoking.

But yeah, if someone burns anything in my house by leaving a live fucking coal on it, they're pretty much guaranteed to lose their security deposit. Shouldn't be too difficult.

Aside from that, I go to great lengths to give all my guests' money back. If someone just lets me know that they broke something, I never charge them for it. I suppose I'd have to charge for things like broken windows, but that hasn't happened yet.
> There is an argument for indexing fines to income or net worth for people too (in addition to severity of the crime) -- if you want to stop a behavior, for example speeding, it doesn't make sense to set the fine equal for everybody unless wealth distribution in society is remarkably flat, so the marginal value of lost money is similar for everybody. If you don't index for ability to pay you just create a separate set of laws for different classes of people.

The issue is that stopping the behavior is committing to a bad abstraction.

Cars can kill people even below the speed limit. If you drive faster, the probability goes up. That is an externality, because you put others in danger in addition to yourself, regardless of which speed it is. In principle what you ought to do is price the externality. You create some amount of risk by driving a mile at 50MPH, so you're charged a proportional amount for that. The risk created by driving at 70MPH is more, so the charge should be higher, proportional to the higher risk.

But that would require monitoring the speed that every car drives every mile and billing for it. Until recently that wasn't even plausible and even now it would be a huge privacy invasion. So instead we settle on choosing some speed, ignoring the cost of anyone driving slower than that even if its true cost is non-zero, and whacking anyone who drives faster with a disproportionate fine to compensate for most instances going undetected.

Committing to deterring all speeding at any cost is completely ignoring why we're doing this to begin with. We don't need to eliminate all risk -- that would imply eliminating all cars and other vehicles and in practice isn't possible even then.

What we need is to throttle the risk so that it remains at a manageable level. Which is exactly what pricing it does. That's true whether you're doing meticulous risk accounting or using blunt stochastic methods like speeding fines.

And when you price something, rich people buy more of it because they have more money. If the price you've assigned to the risk is actually proportional to the cost being imposed by taking it, you really don't need to stop them. Just let them pay for the risk in money. Then use the money to pay for safety improvements or compensate victims or whatever you like -- if the amount they're paying is properly proportional to the risk then you come out better off this way than by actually deterring them.

> This is basically the same argument as for progressive taxation.

The argument for progressive taxation is that we're not trying to discourage behavior and the rich are better able to pay, so charging them more will have less detrimental effect because it will have a lower impact on their consumption. It's more about taxing the poor less than taxing the rich more.
Your point that you can use one while charging the other was valid and helpful.

But saying "I'll just address this point, because it is categorically incorrect" was unnecessarily aggressive. With that opening, I think people expected a solution with no caveats.
To my mind at least there's a significant difference between commensal bacteria and sucking down one of the bacterial 'spurts' from a rotting pigeon or rodent in the drinking water.
You are setting up a false dichotomy. You don't have to choose between Autopilot and paying attention. The video above is an obvious example. It didn't result in an accident because the driver was paying attention and intervened.

Also you aren't considering that other drivers can be the cause of a potential accident. You can assume that the other drivers on the road are average drivers with all the distractions that come along with that. If you make the other drivers on average slightly safer, that improves your safety even if your behavior is completely unchanged.
The youtube video creator addresses this in the description and comments:

"the base frequency is 183.58 and the "binaural beat" frequency is 40hz - meaning the difference in the left ear and right ear is 40hz. The left ear plays 183.58 and the right ear plays 223.58hz the difference being 40hz. "
It doesn't. And GP is pretty obviously asking why we should punish pedophiles for watching kids videos on YT.
It is initiated by the user ... the update only happens after you give say it's okay to do so.
Shaina's sequence, a continuous shot covering 5 years of life [video]
I assume that’s constant lookup time assuming well distributed hash values? The absolute worst case for a hash table is when every key has the same hash, and then you must fall back to something that’s at best log-n time.
The world's first VR gym is opening in San Francisco
I didn't say you can't run a REPL in the terminal. Actually I said you can do that. What you can't do is use the VS Code debugger. You also can't: get code autocompletion, linting, automatic refactoring like renaming variables, you can't run files by right clicking and clicking "run", etc.
How does being a bad random number generator mean that we don't have free will? I don't see these two as contradictory.
Be warned that if you like all the tooling VSCode provides for Go then that is still not available if you are using go modules. They are working on it and there are some rough betas out there for some limited functionality but simple things like renaming variables etc, are still not available.

Realize this is a tooling issue and not necessarily a language one, but do feel like they should be mentioning this. It makes working with modules pretty painful. (we are doing it but man do I miss simple refactors / usages etc..)
And the reduced amount of suffering and pain.
I think this type of Autocomplete only works on fixed lists. You're right, it would be completely annoying if it were a free text field with autocomplete suggestions...
Take care that your kids don't lose learning how to use technology. I knew several parents growing up that were surprised a few of us were so good at computers. Experience builds quickly. Even just running a bbs or playing games on a bbs was enough to build decent exposure. And I'm sure there were terrible things there.
> You're claiming a belief and a lack of belief are the same things.

Am I? That's news to me.

What I'm actually doing is making claims about grammar, the semantic evaluation of sentences, the the potential existence of multiple valid definitions of the same word.
It's being blocked for political reasons. Just like when the US went to war against Iraq, one argument was "Saddam is a dictator that kills his own people". But there are worse dictators before and after Saddam.

You are using the same manipulative cherry-picked argument to justify censorship. Censorship is a weapon used by dictators, not free leaders.
What have you tried so far? I bought myself a Rift during the last Black Friday and am very pleased. BeatSaber and Eleven Table Tennis alone make it worth.
Robot swarm inspired by cells can keep moving even if its parts fail
i can and did look it up, since i hadn't heard of it before. however, that doesn't answer the question as to what the commenter meant with their comment in the context of my reply. i meant "that" as in their whole comment in context.
It's too bad Toyota doesn't make battery-electric cars; they'd be the perfect car for a taxi. Teslas are expensive and not that reliable, but if Toyota decided they wanted to capture that market they should be able to dominate it with their reliability ratings.
They do have stereo cameras and sensor fusing, as well as detecting more than just the lines in the road. Here is what the camera sees: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rACZACXgreQ
Phone Companies Are Finally Doing Something About Our Robocall Hell
The SDC concept vastly underestimates the processing power of wetware. The tendencies to view humans as the bugs and to add rules to make reality more predictable are just excuses to avoid the real issue.
How to attract great people (to work for your company)
Maybe it's a market fit question? Certainly the original Oculus had a very successful kickstarter, but that was a ~$350 device and it was expected a standard gaming computer would be able to keep up with the resolution and refresh rates.

Now it appears that for a "good VR experience" at the high end you need a ~$600 headset, a $1300 graphics card and a dedicated/padded room with no major breakable items. Even with all these things you are still left making unappetizing tradeoffs between resolution, refresh rate and frame rate.
Dave Rubin recently had an interesting interview with Onkar Ghate, an objectivist philosopher, about free will. You might enjoy it and it might rekindle your interest in philosophy: https://youtube.com/watch?v=rvush0oW-cw

IIRC, this interview with neuroscientist Dale Stevens dives into the claims (similar to your example) from the past few years where scientists try to disprove free will: https://youtube.com/watch?v=X6VtwHpZ1BM
Cars have gotten so safe though. There's all this measures put in place to ensure your survival _in case of a crash_. Wouldn't it be more relevant to calculate the chances of getting injured / end up in a crash at all?

I mean just being caught up in a traffic accident and have no bodily harm done to you can be a traumatic event.
Ember.js to React.js Migration
What happens when your model errors aren't normally distributed?

If the kurtosis is high, p-values are over-stated. If fat-tailed then p-values are understated.

Why? Because the likelihood of your p-value isn't guaranteed to be normally distributed.

Normal is a nice assumption but asymptotic can take a long time to kick in. The CLT is beautiful analytically, but fortunes are made from people who assume it.
> apparently change their handling and driving profile overnight at the whim of the software engineers at Tesla, without even telling the drivers

OTA updates only happen after confirmed by the users. Where did you hear that it happens without user intervention?
Atheism has a long history of redefining terms.

The OED changed from

"To deny the Gods/God" to

"To deny or disbelieve in the gods/God"

The latter - disbelieve - fits the greek, but the former was the intended meaning by those who coined it three centuries back, as a derogatory term (ref, encycolopdia Brittanicca which goes in to the history of this issue unlike Wikipedia). The OED mixes and confuses two definitions and reflects a common modern redefining, by atheists themselves, of 'atheism' to mean 'lacking belief' which dodges the problem that to positively believe there is no God or gods is clearly irrational without proof, which is thought to be logically impossible.

That's why educated atheists claim to be agnostic, and uneducated atheists claim to be atheists.

But the proof in the pudding is in how the individual expresses themselves towards religious persons, ie "The God Delusion".

Dawkins claims to be 9/10ths atheist, "technically agnostic".

But that book is a statement that religious believers are delusional, so revealing that he is in fact a true atheist. No genuine agnostic would ever make such a presumption in to minds they cannot see.

Dawkins is therefore irrational.

The irony of the situation is that :

-while a religious believer might be rational (if there were, in fact, a god, and it were proving its own existence, as they claim, as opposed to faith as "Belief without evidence" is in fact an atheist redefinition, by Bertrand Russell to be precise, now also in the dictionary).

-a true atheist is always irrational whether or not there is a god
It’s more difficult than you might imagine. I find Hindu countries are much easier as like others have suggested, not all Buddhists take vegetarianism as seriously as people think.

In Japan there is a type of vegan cuisine which monks eat, however it’s considered a kind of fundamentalist diet and it’s difficult to find outside of certain temples.
Doesn't seem very different to most other tech news sites to be honest. Seems like almost every article you read nowadays is sourced from Reddit, Twitter, YouTube or some other social media site.

Probably the same deal with Hacker News in some spheres too.

They've basically become a quick way for journalists to find a story.
The "great tool" is censorship. New Zealand is just the current lightening rod to push more of it on everyone.

Both NZ and the US and all other countries are becoming more oppressive every year. Censorship (the tool of tyranny and dictators) is constantly be pushed to "protect" someone.

If you think NZ won't change because of these events you are deceiving yourself.
But haven't actually tried it, right?
Perhaps those drivers don't have your inside view of Tesla R&D?
Fixing that wouldn't seem to require any architectural changes in x86 though, it's just that Intel hasn't cared enough about JO and friends to optimize them this way.
Sadly, all previous versions of the BT standard were also fusterclucks.
Diversity Chats in NgAtlanta
Carriers Announce Anti-Robocalling Partnership
> they're also easier to interpret correctly without special training.

Heh, you'd be surprised! Most people I met would interpret a 95% CI by saying that there is a 95% chance that it contains the true mean.
My 8 year old was really into Minecraft videos. I started noticing him watch videos of "mods" with gun-based first person shooter games, and "trolling" where they blow up each others' creations. He talked about "slenderman" and "fortnight" like he had seen/played them before.

When he started talking about what he saw in the videos as something he himself did, we decided to pull the plug. That was scary for me as a parent. Too much stimulation for a kid, and way too much exposure to things his brain isn't ready to handle.

Added this to my home PC's hosts file for now until I figure out a better solution. Facebook was just a "while I'm in there" addition in case he gets the urge to try it.

127.0.0.1 www.youtube.com
127.0.0.1 www.facebook.com
You are by saying there's no difference in the definitons. Chambers says atheists have a belief. Websters says it's the lack of belief.
It could theoretically be a trolley problem. In practice Tesla are probably not that safe if you compare them driving themselves on freeways to humans driving under the same conditions.
It's perfectly consistent with the scientific method. Atheism is falsifiable. If there's solid evidence of gods existing, an atheist will change their mind. Theism is non-falsifiable, and thus inconsistent with science. Also Templeton Foundation is a well-known collective of anti-science loons.
Exactly, I think you hit at it when you write: "it seems to me you are considering that maybe the world doesn't operate from a higher point of view as a "system", or that system is not the correct terminology?"

Plus, you give a useful example with the species of ants; for them, their humble interactions are relative to their existence. In contrast, for us, maybe the 'system' is the term we're bounded by relative to our existence. It may be the best frame of reference we can grasp. It could be our edge and we can't go further.

If that's the case, I wonder if evolution needs to advance further to get at some sharper-level species. Compared to a human, might a sharper-level species perceive the world operating at a higher point of view other than a 'system'? And I wonder how their languages might operate?
That's a cherry-picked stat if I ever saw one. In context of this thread you seem to be equating that with "think climate change is a problem that needs to be addressed", which is an entirely different question. Most of us don't want to see our kids lives ruined.

In fact, the headline stat of that linked survey is "56% of Americans over 55 worry a great deal about global warming".
You’re implying that agency is the element that is most desired. Ie if a human crashes and kills themselves/others, it is ok, because someone is at fault.

If the car is anywhere from slightly to quite a lot safer, but accidents that result in injuries/deaths occur, then it is not ok.

Psychologically you may feel this to be ‘right’ but I would prefer a world with less injuries and deaths all round. And one day the courts will too
It doesn't take a week/month/quarter to find a software engineer for one job. I could do most of the reachout in 2-4 days. There's only a finite amount of stuff one can do in a search.

I suppose I could invoice after the fact. I can easily provide glowing references from other startups, that's not an issue.

There are already plenty of hourly contract recruiters (I have a low opinion of their quality, sorry). My personal experience with hiring hourly workers (on Upwork) is that that's where the real scams are- incentives are not aligned. I only hire others on on a project basis now- seems like it makes the most sense for everyone involved
Punchy and brutally vivid writing. Reminded me of Hemingway.