skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That was exactly what I didn't pick up on, and you took for granted. I only rarely use non-symbol keys, so it hadn't dawned on me that the new syntax was, in fact, knee-capped.
It's not close to correct. It is wrong. The article literally links to the correct test, but the author's language cobbles together of a few sub-links worth of half-digested material that the author doesn't understand to avoid plagiarizing the legal dictionary.

There is no quantitative assessment of how much evidence supports one side or the other in the test at all.

Ignoring how ironic it is to make a mistake of this type, it's particularly grating because adding more evidence to one side of a dispute doesn't necessarily add to how much we believe their position, yet most of the article's statements regarding proof are made with that assumption. He equates evidence with proof (or at least an element in approaching proof), but fails to address the connection between evidence, pre-existing belief and interpretation.

This is why people talk past each other. This is why different news orgs can 'spin' the same facts in opposite directions. Ignoring that complexity leads to mistakes.

This error is consistent and the top parent comment in this comments section notes a particularly glaring weakness in the non-bayesian approach.
Fact 1:
Physics says it should be cheaper, because of massive energy density, as you need less stuff, and so less human effort to juice the energy source.

Event history:
1. lots of reactors in the 60s and 70s
2. reactors are water cooled and designed essentially like normal power reactors, meaning they are similar size and operate with little margin
3. accidents happen - accidents that were conceivable though beyond the design basis
4. environmental and mass resistance heats up in response to 3 - rightfully so
5. 3. also leads to pressure to make current reactors safer by adding safety systems
6. reactors turn into giant jumble of safety systems with massive man power and maintenance costs, costs that similar sized coal or natural gas do not have. The increase in safety systems enhances safety superficially, and costs increase until the plant is barely break even.

The key is that the accidents created a new and higher demand for safety that could not be economically met by the previous designs. But those previous designs were in place and had to operate, so they back-engineered a bunch of crap to make them "safe" at huge cost - a cost that basically annihilates all of nuclear's energy density benefits. At the same time, resistance was too high to build new reactor design concepts that could match the new safety paradigm, and so gen IV was not achieved.

What you say is true - "it is not economically viable." But you shouldn't bundle all of nuclear into that category. The crap from the past was not economically viable with safety standards we have today. What's coming is.
InGenR [1] is a similar utility I wrote sometime back.

It is similar to cog in that generated code resides alongside the source code.

Some differences/advantages are:

1. Generators can be pure JavaScript or declarative dot templates.

2. The generators can be distributed as npm packages as the generators are resolved through npm's require resolution.

[1] https://github.com/lorefnon/InGenR
As am I. But the reality is, these laws have made that inevitable. The question is when, and how badly, will this affect the Australians tech opportunities.
The Nuclear Museum in Albuquerque is pretty amazing too. It's big, with a lot to see both inside and out.
done that for years too. file syncing from windows to linux isn't the fastest... the vms are decently fast but not good enough. I also use quad monitors on my windows pc and 7 at work (tho one runs twitch or MLB all day), I hate to say it but the vm feels almost as bad as me using a 13" laptop (or a laptop in general for development without monitor) feels. I just switched my laptop to linux (it's new and it's god awful fast, it was always choking on windows, and it may be because linux isn't speed stepping the cpu constantly). My desktop is generally quite fast but it's a beefy box.
While this legislation is not well-drafted, it's got some giant flaws, it was passed without consultation, and (at least from my non-extremism-expert point of view) it won't do a huge amount to stop the rise of extremists (whether of the far-right, Islamist or other varieties) because they don't really need this kind of content to build their movements...

In principle, I'm quite okay with the scope of the censorship that's imposed by this legislation (which is quite narrow), and in general, I'm quite okay with the idea of holding social media platforms to account with the threat of massive penalties, when it comes to content that is obviously objectionable.

I think the fact that a pro-business Western government is willing to impose penalties of up to 10% of global revenue says something about the way we're beginning to view the place and the responsibilities of the big social media platforms.

I don't think I support this particular piece of legislation as a whole, but I am okay with much of the core idea behind it, and I wish they had done it properly and thoughtfully rather than rushing it. It's also clear that they're not going to do anything about improving regulation of problematic elements of the mainstream media.

(edit: I should add - I have given the text of the bill a skim read, and read some media commentary but not any serious expert or industry commentary on this. This is only a mildly-informed set of opinions.)
We have textbook argument for free trade but in real life that is something for country level agreeemnt and not totally.

We have nerdy then commercialised internet ... may not like but country level internet may be a reality one day.

As for job, as they have some kind of IT involved, some kind of job will be instead of export from USA.
Imagination and anger
Well, is that actually the case for any books?
Back in the 80s they did a couple of approximately 4 kiloton conventional detonations down here.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_Scale
Somewhat cheeky from the BBC, which has a record of permanently deleting large sections of its website much more recently than c. 1999.
Some classnames don't change often and some do. I'm updating the extension as they change and trying to use more stable css selectors (like div[aria-label="search"]) though those only work in english.
Isn't it technically a crime though? That's the kicker: the legislative backing to the schemes. Its a matter of time until this GS are so locked down that circumvention becomes impractical, even if its several years in the future. The 'it doesn't work' argument is temporary unless there is enough pushback (as happened with music, thankfully)
I don't know how conscious people are, but in general there's surely awareness that as long as a business seems to be on track to success, investors have the possibility of some exit regardless of whether the business succeeds in the long-term.

For the most extreme variant of this, VC investors in Dropbox or YouTube or whatever don't need to care about whether those companies eventually go bankrupt.

So, investors might believe that Uber can actually make it, but as VC goes they are just looking at Uber being on track up to their exit. They don't actually worry about the deep long-term. So, there's less difference than you might think between consciously creating a false appearance and exiting versus believing (though perhaps wrongly) that the business will be viable beyond the exit. The VC folks are focused on the period up to their exit either way.
Making philosphical arguments about censorship, technical feasibility etc will never resonate with politicians in this political environment. The only course of action is to focus on jobs. This problem will only worsen unless global tech come together. Industry needs to attach a clear and measurable cost to governments following this type of legislative actions. The cost is the loss of jobs and employment prospects for Australian IT workers in the global tech community. It's not fair on the individual but unless we focus on the bigger picture this is only going to get worse. Australian politicians are now operating without any cost being imposed by global tech community and that needs to change asap to step the tide. The Austrian voters need to also see the type and quality of products and services they receive from these company's impacted and degraded to reflect compliance with these laws - the impact needs to be felt by the end users in these country's. It's the only way to motivate change among the voters and defend internet freedom from further attempts to control it.
Reposting the same project every week will make the moderators ban your account.

https://translate.google.com/?oe&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&client=....

每周重新发布相同的项目将使版主禁止您的帐户。
Better to change your inbox type under Settings > Inbox > Inbox Type than remove the tabs with an extension.
Putting satellite communicating GPS tracking devices in Komodo dragons would probably be one of the best ways to locate non-super villain headquarters.
Has it been argued that Facebook didn't act quickly enough to shut down the Christchurch stream and remove copies of the video posted that weekend? I thought the consensus was that they responded as well as could reasonably be expected.
> Australia passed sweeping legislation Thursday that threatens huge fines for social media companies and jail for their executives if they fail to rapidly remove “abhorrent violent material” from their platforms.

> The legislation criminalizes “abhorrent violent material,” which it defines as videos that show terrorist attacks, murders, rape or kidnapping.

The title isn't semantically accurate. They mean material that depicts violence.
I understood it as such that every observation uses integral multiples of five-minute intervals.
What's also interesting that the Kofola drink is distributed to the pubs in barrels in the same way as a beer and served from the pipes that IMHO tastes much better than the bottled one. And it's not only Kofola, during the times, other vendors came with their own versions, so there are multiple other variants, but usually, you can get piped version in many of the restaurants and old-school pubs here in Slovakia (In Czechia, the beer nation, piped Kofola is not available that widely..:-) )
One assumes they'd put them up on Azure's version of S3, but that aside, no doubt no one knows if they can legally offer these things without DRM because of the contracts involved, and no one wants to take the risk.

Or they know they can't and don't want to go through the effort of getting new contracts.
I'm completely dumbfounded. It's as if the expressions don't shoot the messenger and one abhorrent act does not a trend make are completely unknown to Australians and Kiwis. When will the nanny state realize that violence as a whole is still on a downward trend [1] and that these bandaid solutions are just that? Something doesn't always need to be done. This law only reduces culpability for would be terrorists.

[1] https://slides.ourworldindata.org/war-and-violence/#/6
As an Australian I'm glad I no longer live there. Even Chinese internet censorship laws look sane compared to this: at least they don't threaten to jail employees for failing to do what's technologically impossible. This law is basically the Australian government saying we don't want any social media companies or video sharing platforms in Australia, ever (or at least until some AGI is invented that's capable of identifying violent videos as effectively as humans).
My company has stopped doing business with Atlassian due to Australia's recent legislature. I can't say we won't hire Australian citizens but they will be at a serious disadvantage. I'm sorry.
> Meta-ethical debates are ethical debates.

I think this is the fundamental disagreement.

Ethical debates are debates over ethical claims. Ethical claims are normative claims, i.e. claims about what ought to be the case. Metaethical debates are debates over metaethical claims. Metaethical claims are positive claims about normative objects, i.e. claims about what the objects of ethics are.

"Should we eat meat?" is an ethical debate with various opposing positions. "Is the Good the same thing as the Right?" a metaethical debate with various opposing positions. But, crucially, individuals with opposing metaethical positions cannot present sensibly opposing ethical positions: they're simply not reasoning about the same Good or Right, even if they're using the same words. Why should our ethical committee entertain such a futile endeavour?
This feature currently does not work with the OS X ssh agent:

https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/410
Also, aren't the buckets private by default?
Load Google Fonts Faster in WordPress
Keep your $30. Or... Pay me $30 :)

ffmpeg -activation_bytes 1CEB00DA -i test.aax -vn -c:a copy output.mp4
Visions of Science – Carlyle
If the outcry in the media were that she had no place on such a committee due to representing an organization which forwards unsound and poorly reasoned arguments, misrepresents the scientific consensus, or similar, then it would be a completely different discussion.

Instead, as far as I can tell the objection is to the views she expresses themselves. In particular, she (and others) are painted as abhorrent, openly hostile to trans people, and other such things. I suppose she might actually be? But I looked, and could only find her expressing concerns about restrooms and sports teams. I don't agree with her, but those actually seem like perfectly reasonable questions to ask and not particularly hostile.

> or that the transgender acceptance movement is tantamount to "[changing] the definition of women to include men" [3]. That reason isn't liberal bias - it's scientific consensus.

Well I suppose that would depend on your definition of women and men, your definition of biological gender, how you think gender relates to gender identity, etc. To be blunt our society doesn't seem to have worked that stuff out yet (despite what many on the far right and the far left would have you believe).
Things will change is global industry starts coming together and using Australia as an example by imposing costs on jobs, employment prospects, quality and availability of service. The tech company have so much power and reach that politicians can only dream to ever attain. They just need get bigger balls otherwise they are going find themselves in a global legislative framework imposed by knee jerk tech illiterate politicians that will make life very difficult.
Did you sign a contract promising a certain level of work? Do you have documented communications between the two of you whereby you stated that the job "was outside of my knowledge and did not feel comfortable"?

In all likelihood, he sounds like a scummy client trying to rip you off. Unless you agreed to a 3rd party audit prior to starting work, it is also unlikely that he has the right to withhold your last paycheck.
Do you mind if we continue this in the other thread? I think they're essentially duplicate conversations, and just one would be easier to follow.
If you want to join, by all means. PM me your email address and I'll send you an invite. We're all located in a specific region right now but that doesn't make a difference.
I don't want to downplay the importance of campaign finance reform but that's just a drop in the bucket. Look at all the wealthy donors that endow the Ivy League. Look at all the charity speaking engagements, yacht clubs, Davos junkets, private island parties.

Meanwhile, mainstream television is waning in influence for political advertising. Now it's all about Facebook. Think of the micro-targeting turnout power they have. It's obscene!
Ad-tech monopolies finally being threatened with some accountability for their impact on society. I mean, perhaps not in the right way, but I like the idea of ad-tech monopolies actually having to do something to uphold reasonable standards under threat of state involvement.
> GYB, Generate Your Boilerplate

Love the name :)
Thanks for your replies. I see that it's also required in other countries.

So I'm a little curious that if a protest is related to complaints about the government, will it get accepted (at most cases)?
So they still get your money and you deal with the inconvenience?

Try buying from https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebooks where possible (DRM-free).
I also prefer Amazon over other ebook stores simply because I know I can break the DRM effortlessly and reliably.

I am well-aware that it's a bad thing to do from a legal perspective (and especially encouraging others to do the same), but legal =/= moral. I'm paying a full price for them and treating them as my property. That includes being able to read them on any screen I want with whichever reader I want, even if I do end up mostly reading on a (physical) Kindle.
Maybe. But these are all hypotheticals. The article presents it as I should be morally disgusted by this move. I don't really see it.
It just goes to show how flawed the political process is. It has nothing to do with outcome and everything to do with perception.

This is nothing new. The internet was safe for a few decades because lawmakers hadn't caught up to it. Now it'll be just as fucked as everything else - or worse.
Then take the next logical step.

Quit paying them for the abusive media. Pirate. You have to break the law anyways even if you pay legit.
In Sweden we have a similar drink called "julmust" or "påskmust" which many people go for, over international beverages, during Christmas and Easter: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julmust
“What doesn’t kill you makes you smaller” - Super Mario
Ever seen Roblox?
Looker is easy to cr*ck (terrible security) and you can deploy it everywhere for your BI needs. So we dont need similar product.
Now that's a nice strawman.
I hate that paywalled content is being posted here, as everyone has a WSJ subscription.
Anatomy of a Minimum Viable SaaS Stack
No, this used to be the case, but isn't any more. Captures using lossless capture cards are called Webrips and generally disliked because they have to be reencoded (losing quality) and can only be ripped in realtime. For a long time now the better p2p groups (and even some scene) have figured out how to extract the encryption keys directly from the EME modules. So most of the Netflix rips you find on torrents these days are actually byte-for-byte copies of what you would view on Netflix.

Actually they should be byte-for-byte copies, but generally aren't, since Netflix makes you jump through half a dozen hoops to get the highest quality streams, so pirated copies are actually much better quality than what you can get on Netflix.
Between 2016 and 2020 about 100 new cables have been laid or planned. The primary reason for new cables is the demand for bandwidth. But it is difficult to pinpoint the source of this demand.

Memes i say. Memes.
Nicely put. Good luck to OP.
This lockdown is what organisations like EFF are trying to fight. Once I have paid for a product, I am its owner. I should be legally allowed to use it, disassemble it, or repair it in any manner I choose to.

My main concern is that my book collection in all probability will outlast Amazon as a company. When they go away, should my books be unreadable? Will I get a refund when Amazon goes bankrupt?

DRM violates the transactional nature of business by tying the product eternally to the seller to be usable at all.
Outside of Utah, yes.
Easiest thing to do is click on the web link and then click through to the article. Typically clicks from Google don't get the paywall.
> And how would you stage & commit only a portion of the changes made to a file?

I wouldn't. That code is untested, and I have a thing against committing untested code.

Git stash -p, on the other hand, allows me to select what code should be left in the working directory for testing, with no need for a staging area.
It doesn't really matter that a tiny minority believes that. There's absolutely no legitimate justified need to reenact nuclear detonations with actual nuclear detonations to prove it ever happened to deranged low IQ skeptics. It's OK that we have a handful of deranged low IQ skeptics who have nonsensical beliefs. It's OK to just ignore them. It's not critical or even marginally important that society spend much time seriously addressing the most fringe of their beliefs.
This legislation is forcing tech company's to become "virtual deputies" of all content and information. It will eventually force tech company consider more invasive systems to analyze, scrutinize and evaluate every piece of content you post online for appropriateness. This is about political control over the internet.
As has been explained so many times including my message, you can't opt out. Data collection is beyond that. They take it without you doing anything. It doesn't go away because you ignore it.
Well, that's one argument for piracy. Or at least avoiding anything that you can't have DRM-free.

(I still like my Steam library, but the games I really care about are bought on GOG/HIB when possible.)
That’s a very slippery slope. Most of their tools would be just fine since the notions predate POSIX, and people already expect incompatibilities across platforms (plus Plan 9 ones more or less work similarly as their counterparts). Naming a new not-really-Git thing Git causes more confusion than benefits because Git is not a standard but a “product”.
Are they being serious? Social Media companies should simply stop serving Australia.
Anybody know why blocking the offending IP didn’t work?
You're saying this like someone's holding the game company at gunpoint and demanding an easy mode. This has always only been about it being ok for a dev to add it if they want. Why are you fighting their choice to do that?

And... You don't think disability is a valid reason to add an easy mode? I hope you see some of the raw shit life has to offer then because that's a message that can only come from a place of very privileged contempt.
DRM is technically a crime, too. It's infringing upon First Sale Doctrine. You, as someone buying media, actually have rights to what you purchase. The general public has just accepted the industry trampling on those rights and lobbying for laws that conflict with them.
Lots of even non-conservative people don't accept trans movement. It's quite a high bar if only trans-ok people are considered sane enough to participate in ethics board.

E.g. I'm 100% against trans participating in sports. It's disgusting when men pretend to be women just to have a record on their name. It's even more disgusting when it's celebrated as diversity or progressive or whatever.

Does that make me just a "relatively conservative" or full-on "transphobe"?
Well that's one way to not have any Facebook servers or employees in your country.
I have never understood why people create entire programming language when just creating a nice C++ library would been more than sufficient, desirable, integratable and adaptable. You can always export bindings for any target language and users would be saved from learning yet another beast that would be unmaintained in few years. I'm not saying never developing new language... If you have radically new thought, go ahead do it but just keep combining feature1 from this language and feature2 from that language doesn't make a lot of sense (especially the part of taking completely unrelated unsearchable word to name your language).
It's funny - I haven't tried Spotify in years so I have no idea if it's still bad - simply because Spotify burned their goodwill with me as a customer because of how bad their Android app was in the first year or so of their US launch.