skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Compare the cost of just one of those reactors...

to the cost of a fully installed windmill in Iowa.

Heck, go ahead and compare the cost of one of those reactors to a fully installed wind FARM in Iowa, or Wisconsin, or wherever. There's just no comparison. Some of these windfarms are producing at, what? $0.02 a kWh? Maybe $0.03? And that's before you even count subsidies or tax breaks. It's no wonder some go to $0.00 a kWh, and some even go negative.

You sound like you know something about what it takes to build a reactor. So I'm assuming you understand the costs there. Which likely means that you think a windmill costs far more than a windmill actually costs. Nuclear is MUCH more expensive in terms of capital outlay, and it is prohibitively expensive in terms of operating costs when compared with wind or solar.

The only reason the reactors we're discussing are being built is because the government is doing it. This is what would have to happen to make nuclear a reality in our future power mix. The government would have to pay for it. It's too expensive for anyone else to try without government assurances.
The internet, like every other social hangout place, was great until all these people showed up.
The explanation put forward (which seems reasonable) is that the cutouts were disengaged because the aerodynamic forces were stronger than could be overcome by the manual control, so they had to turn the electrics back on in an attempt to move it (which allowed the MCAS to continue pushing the stabilizer to the extreme)
HC factically started her campaign right after the first Obama's term, had support of party leadership, and therefore major party donors, and having sympathies of the press. DT started his campaign a year before elections, was rudiculed by mainstream Republican opinion-makers until May 2016, was (and is) in a conflict with major donors (like Koch brothers), and had/has generally unfriendly relations with press. So unless you imply some very big conspiracy theory I don't see how he could have even a chance to outspent HC.
> If one side of the argument is "trans rights matter" and the other is "trans people are just men cosplaying as women", then morally you can only choose the "trans rights matter" side.

I don't think anyone reasonable thinks that trans rights don't matter, they just disagree on what counts as a fundamental right.

The N word is and should be taboo because it dehumanizes black people; it's literally calling them subhuman and not deserving equal consideration as a fellow human being.

But as an example, this is not the case for misgendering. Misgendering a trans person isn't calling them subhuman or not deserving of equal human rights. Nearly everyone believes men and women should have equal rights, so misgendering is simply denying that a person has a right to classify themselves as a different sex than their "biological sex" [1].

I think there can be a legitimate debate on the ethical status of misgendering, but no such debate can happen given the mountains of vitriol thrown from all sides.

[1] assuming you subscribe to a binary model of sex, but this too would be part of the debate
I am not sure why the npm packages in yarn should be more exploitable than Linux.

- Linux is more ubiquitous than Node.js. If somebody exploits Linux, they get at least one order of magnitude more machines. So there is a higher motivation.

- Funny code in C is harder to spot than in Javascript. Furthermore ...

- A binary is harder to inspect than any module written in Javascript (even if minified).

- The code in the Linux default installation has at least 2 orders of magnitudes of the code that yarn installs.

I was very conservative in my estimations.

Considering these kind of attacks, Linux seems more likely to be already exploited by a few organizations in multiple ways.

We have been trusting too much. As more code gets written and many more people come to learn to program, the number of supply chain attacks will increase. And at the same time, as the security know-how is easier to be accessed on the Internet, we will get smarter exploiters capable of hiding their wrong doing.
I think agile has always suggested modifying to fit the team - so then do we need an agile light, or just critical thinkers doing whatever agile provides actual value?
People make resources. People made crude oil and coal into resources. People made uranium ore into a resource. People made ores that would have been regarded as uneconomic dirt into wealth all over the world. (Ethnic) Chinese people turned a rock into a first world country in under 50 years, in Singapore and Hong Kong.

The important resource is people. When oil becomes economically irrelevant the Arabian peninsula will be economically irrelevant despite having had a 100 years of sitting on top of huge oil resources.

Ireland’s natural resources are some land that’s good for raising cattle and sheep and they grew rich off of pharmaceuticals, IT and other US multinationals. Luxembourg grew rich off of banking.

Natural resources are nowhere near as important as people. People turn dirt into valuable things. Without them it’s just dirt.
> that's what PostgreSQL needs more than anything

depends what the queries are. If they're all for exactly the same data then I/O is gonna be a one off. Even then dbs are usually relatively smart about minimising disk reads and trying to avoid them where possible.
As a developer, seeing another developer suggest that they just take a vacation and leave the project leads and stakeholders to talk about what should be done in a month is really weird.

That will not lead to the absence of a death march - it is a recipe for a death march. Not only will you not have an accurate assessment of the tasks but they will not be ordered correctly, and likely way overscoped for the timeframe, and you get no chance to say no. Technical minds / engineers in the room early and often is critical to success - otherwise you’re just told what to do instead of architecting it the “right” way.

Communicate when you need to but try it all for a sprint or two (really, Standup is a hardship? You may not be doing it quite right), then drop after the team finds a rhythm.

Edit; after reading the author’s other works the burnout seems to be centered on a big push from stakeholders to accelerate and keep going so a sprint is seen as a reset - kinda like a new day dawning in a news room. You can plan-in your work to avoid this and still continue to make progress but it does take some discussions with leadership, or at least a clear justification about why this week is exploratory instead of hands-on. Done it many times. I would not suggest changing the whole method just to accomplish this, however - a process fix for a problem like this won’t necessarily help.
Pah, I've not seen Agile cause burnout at all. Far from it, the way sprints become long slow walks and stories move from one sprint to the next, at the altar of 'Agile' and not 'Delivery', developers appear to be under way less pressure than in older forms of project management. With, you know, deadlines...
"Why is Tesla so incompetent when it comes to logistics when other do not have these issues?"

Rapid expansion? I can't think of another car company doing nearly 400% year-on-year sales growth like Tesla has.
"Left" and "Right" are nearly meaningless when people can have stances on an issue-by-issue basis. As someone who has important disagreements with both big US parties, some would call me a moderate, and I feel disenfranchised by the current system, which doesn't let me pick the person whom I agree with most.
Who on earth doesn't run CGI scripts, etc., as a separate user to the one that their apache workers run as?
Since it appears that you weren't just trolling with that comment, I have to ask, have you ever actually been to Europe? The north-western countries offer pretty much the same abundance of material goods and lifestyle opportunities as the wealthier areas of the USA. (I will grant you that the average European passenger vehicle is less wastefully enormous than its North American equivalent.)

And can you give us an example of a cutting-edge consumer technology that is widely available in the USA, but not in Europe?
I agree with much of what you say here. I don’t agree that programmers are at fault or are particularly well suited or intervene, since the core is not a software problem. This is the nature of systems problems. Nevertheless, I think that we have a core agreement.
There's a big difference between "solves every crime" and "is effective at solving crime". I think you're grossly overestimated what the police will do for you, if there isn't low hanging fruit, or some driving factor (someone "important" involved, multiple complaints, politics, ect.).

If there's single victim that hasn't died and the perpetrator isn't easy to find, they might just wait until they run into them or they murder someone. That's not an exaggeration, I've personally seen them unwilling to step in when a violent criminal is out to get someone, or someones being blatantly defrauded.
http://blog.sigfpe.com/2006/08/you-could-have-invented-monad...
That might be actually a good thing. Any disk will break. If disk breaks sooner, you'll have to have a good recover plan and not just hope that this RAID-1 will save you, because probability is not that high.
Developers fall in to approximately two camps; they either want implicit build tools which do "what they expect", or explicit build tools which don't "do anything surprising". This is a good example of a developer who expects implicit behavior, but has got frustrated and hasn't specified exactly what they expect and considered why that wouldn't work for everyone.
New view of the nervous system in fruit fly larva
> The problem with this redesign was that the airframe tended to point the nose up, since its aerodynamical characteristics changed due to the redesign.

Alas, I do appreciate your comment. This is what I was attempting (but failing) to say.
@wozniacki most likely bases those opinions on second hand knowledge. It's hard to imagine why Uber isn't so in demand in many parts of Europe until you see the quality and price of the competition there.

Before hailing a ride I always check Uber and taxi apps, all of which give me a spot on estimation o price. Most times I have to choose between a Mercedes (C/E class, so large and comfortable) taxi and a Uber (lower class car), the Uber ended up being more expensive. In some countries Uber will still offer better price or price/quality ratio but this is far from a given.
I'm European and I'd love to live in the USA; if I put the same effort in there as I have done here my quality of life would be so much better.

I've worked incredibly hard all my life in the UK (and I've been successful at work -- something I have to remind myself of regularly) and it's got me practically nowhere. I'm taxed to the eyeballs (this year I'll pay approx 70% of my turnover in taxes of one sort or another) and the cost of living is insane (the average house price in London is currently about £530,000). Unless you have wealthy parents and bought 10 years ago you can forget about ever escaping the rent trap.

Great public transport though eh! Er no actually. Rail services carry people crammed in like sardines in conditions that it would be illegal to carry livestock in, and reliability stats are terrible; I am regularly delayed by an hour or more. And I am forced to use the trains, because I don't own a car, as I don't have a parking space attached to my tiny rented 1-bedroom flat.

Free healthcare is great though right? Well, when a total of 500 million EU citizens are all entitled to rock up demanding 'free' healthcare whenever they like despite having never paid a penny into the system all their lives, and I have to wait 3-4 weeks to see a doctor, then no, it's not great actually.

Please, my US friends, do not believe the Julia Roberts films, or your friend's holiday snaps of Rome. We, the poor European people who do all the work, do not spend our days writing poetry and blissfully sipping premium coffee, we have it pretty sh!tty actually, and be grateful for your amazing country and the opportunities it offers you.
Do these studies control for people who quit running due to an injury? It doesn't appear that they do. They look only at "healthy long distance runners." Sorry, but that is not very compelling. It's like studying 90-year old chess grandmasters and concluding that chess prevents Alzheimer's.

You have to control for all the people who don't do an activity because they're too unhealthy to continue. And there is no obvious way to do that.
It's not a revolution per say, except that since it can often be hard for trains to bypass congestion/stoppages that schedules can go awry easily. In the US, there are huge bottlenecks around Chicago (where a crazy high percentage of all American rail freight passes through) and as much as the railways would love to build new track, various political/environmental issues have been preventing it.

As the article states, freight trains used to kind of run "on demand" centered around the customer, which made scheduling efficient train loads hard. Now they're trying to group into a more normal schedule, but this can still be hard as freight loads don't necessarily go point-to-point to their final destination and delays can cascade for switch-overs at hubs.

Source: Have been a long-time investor in a major railway and read the investor reports.
Seriously? You're comparing a job you don't like to slavery?! Unless you have people who whip you if you run away, it's not, and it's pretty insensitive to compare it to that.

Show me the gun being pointed to your head to keep you in that job. Otherwise, shut up about slavery.
Direction You Look Is the Direction You Go
Agile Localization: The Complete Guide
In general, about 10% of people are just drizzleshits. Plain and simple.
The key thing people miss about agile (and project management in general) is that you have to tune the process to the situation.

If you look at the PMBOK (Project Management Book Of Knowledge) it is really a comprehensive list of all the things you might have to think about while running a project. All of them are relevant to every project (e.g. hiring, communicating with the public) but some need a lot of attention for some projects and others don't.

I've worked on "A.I." projects where the sprint involves running a batch job that might take two days if it all works right. If it doesn't work right you might have to retry a few times.

When I was in charge of that batch job I would start it as soon as possible, sometimes with a week and a half to spare. Whenever somebody else was in charge of it they would start it with half a day or a day to run and we would blow the end of the sprint.

I blame the continuous stream of "urgent but not important" communicates generated by agile for that.

The timeboxing of planning is also a very bad idea. I worked at a place where we had a timebox of 2 hours for planning but really after that we were nowhere near a realistic plan for the sprint and it would take another 2 or 3 days of knock-down, drag-out meetings that would leave us all exhausted to understand what we had to do. After that the work was mostly downhill, at least the way I saw it, but one of the other team members would consistently burn the midnight oil at the end.

Often agile "teams" have a "normalization of deviance" situation where they have to do one thing (or say they are doing one thing) so they can say they are sticking to the process, but actually do something entirely different to get the job done.

That's sad.
IRV, or ranked choice voting, can be practical even with large numbers of candidates. Ballot designs can be made that keep the voting manageable.

More importantly, ranking multiple people gets rid of the important problem first past the post has of splitting the vote with large numbers of candidates.
The analyist with the best track record (and it isn't even close) is @coverdrive12 on twitter and he called 65,000 optimistic yesterday. This big miss doesn't come as a surprise to anybody who has followed those who track the VINs, shipping data, and activity at the Tesla stores.

I should also point out that Musk's reiterated guidance of 500,000 cars this year is absolutely absurd at this point.
Right now I weigh a little more than 100kg and am currently trying to better my life to live healthier and be more active.

I can run pretty well, currently about 10km with a heart rate monitor to not exceed my limits. I've tried swimming as well but for some reason I get knee pain during swimming, it's probably just bad technique but it feels so stupid to have to get out of the water because of knee pain.

At my max I weighed 115-120kg and I'm pretty sad that I didn't start doing all this stuff earlier.
That is a very general statement. It really depends on the type of swimming and intensity.

I have a bad shoulder (pain) from having it dislocated several times over the years.

When I first started swimming (only breaststroke), I felt tingles of pain pretty quickly. Outside of swimming, I would feel it if I raised my arm over my head in certain angles.

After about 6 months of regular swimming, literally all the pain went away. Clearly my body developed strength around the injury. My shoulders feel better because of swimming.

In a similar vein... I used to have terrible RSI from typing. I randomly started rock climbing. After a while, my hands strengthened and the RSI pain went away. I climbed actively for about 8 years. I stopped climbing years ago (kept typing) and the pain never returned to the same degree as before. When I started swimming more recently, the current hand pain went away again as well.
The Doomsday Clock is what happens when all those people holding signs that say "The End is Near" get together and form a committee.
I am not sure about whether the functor definition in article is correct or not.

Isn't it supposed to lift function as below:

class Functor f where
map :: (a -> b) -> f a -> f b

instead of:
class Functor f where
map :: f a -> (a -> b) -> f b
>All of these are common social fallacies, and associating them with “geeks” in particular seems like stereotyping

There's no such thing as "stereotyping" geeks.

Geeks are already a stereotype -- they refer to specific category of people with specific traits (not everyone having exactly the same, but in a "family resemblance" kind of way).

If you want, you can say that invoking geeks is already stereotyping. But I don't think it's valid to say this is "stereotyping" geeks, as if geeks themselves weren't a stereotype.

So, "Geeks" already implies certain traits, and a narrow set at that.

In other words "geeks" is not like saying "programmers" (which is a much more varied group with hardly much in common). Attributing something to programmers in general would not be very successful (though, even programmers, are statistically more alike in some aspects between them than between the general population: e.g. for one, all of them use computers).

Stereotypes serve a purpose: they are ways to refer to collective traits and behavior shared by groups of people. It's expected that not everybody called an X is an X (we might mislabel someone). But it's not very logical to never make collective observations about groups. We do them all the time, in polling, in business, in politics, in medicine, in social studies, and so on. People are not exactly unique snowflakes, they also tend to have certain traits, and can be categorized into groups by the traits they have.

(And again, nobody expects the categorization to be 100% perfect. It's enough that it's close enough to be usable).
I keep thinking that the simple but fatal decision to mess with the timeline is the deepest sin of social media. If the timeline is purely chronological then there is a much higher barrier to create biases. Social media business models have to respect that or it goes toxic.

The rest of social media's problems have mostly to do with it being a cacophony, which you get with any large and horizontally organized group. Loudest speaker wins, shock replicates faster, etc.
There are a million and a half monad blogs out there. I, for one, am happy not to have to read another "a monad is..." blog post.
How do you answer the c-level concern that we are basically going down to 75% output?
The degree of badness varies among languages/scripts. In some cases, yes, most readers would be able to decipher the intended content. In others, no, it really would be unreadable, except to those geeky enough to also comfortably "decipher" things like \x74\x68\x69\x73. Would you be happy routinely reading your terminal text in that form?
Interesting idea, but it definitely doesn't pan out that way in Canada. The NDP and Liberals happily knee-cap themselves into a vote split.

Though there is also some precedent in Canada with previous Conservative party mergers.
This is the exact opposite of correct. Old school forums were pseudonymous, but managed to do OK on the moderation front because they were often controlled by the community. Tying real world identity to sign-ins just paints a big fat target on those that have the most to lose already, such as minorities.

As an example, check out the myriad articles about Google users being outed as trans when Google started integrating Google+ into everything: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jan/07/google-ha...
>It was recoverable in a similar situation. That does not mean it was recoverable in both situations.

Similarly, because it was unrecoverable in one situation [based solely on speculation at this point] doesn't mean it was unrecoverable in another.

>Any incident like this is a chain of events (which in this case started back with the original design decisions). Many links in that chain aren't obvious, and no two chains are identical. Just because the chain was broken in one case doesn't mean it was reasonable to expect it to be broken in all of them.

I'll note here that you have at best addressed one of my three points. To add color:

>Airline mechanics tried four times to fix related issues on the plane starting Oct. 26, according to the Indonesia preliminary report.

Do you think that's ok?

>However, the pilots on the harrowing Oct. 28 flight [the flight before the crash] from Bali to Jakarta didn’t mention key issues with the flight after they landed, according to the report.

Do you think that's ok?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-19/how-an-ex...
Shrinking a medical lab to fit on a fingertip