skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I wonder who is the client for a $500/hour tutoring. The only thing that comes to mind is some kid of very rich parents, who would be served equally well by a $25/h tutor, but just has money to burn. Other than that, assuming the $500/h tutor is some principal eng. with unique knowledge and experience, I could see his knowledge being worth that much in a short-term consulting deal, but not for tutoring (a couple of conversations can set up back $5000, I don't think engineers are willing to spend that much money on self-improvement with no guaranteed returns).
> I don't see why we shouldn't transition to renewable energy asap anyway.

Because solar and wind (+ battery) cannot replace coal and gas.
Not at all.

I used it on a project last year, with AWS Lambda, not really impressed, specially the whole workflow.

You either use a bare bones IDE, or need to integrate AWS Shell into your CLI, with basic zip as packages build by yourself, including handling third party dependencies.

No debugger integration beyond plain old console.log().
A Journey into Scalling a Prometheus Deployment
Hm.. my "social network" was #coders on ircnet and efnet. NNTP, some ICQ contacts and a few forums.
China is taking the problem seriously. Although their one-party rule is deplorable for human rights, it enables China to move rapidly on major technological issues like this because the economy is shaped by edicts from the top.

Anyone in the West who's trying to shift the blame to China is deluding themselves. We need to fix our politics so we can move with the same determination as China on this specific issue, not the other way around.
> It's not that simple.

The combination of money and family never make things simple. Not sure if you watch the movie "Million dollar baby", the back story of the inheritance/power of attorney in this movie really make me sad for our human race and our behavior.
How often do most people fly across the Atlantic?

My point remains: Air travel is not at the top of the list for the majority of people so let's not always mention it as an important action.

It would probably be more productive to tell people to drop all fossil fuels energy at home, and for their car if they can.
KjamiZ!11!!
Science is primarily driven by private enterprise, that’s why. A business without any demand has no reason to exist. If the sea rises, or weather becomes more catastrophic, or oil becomes scarce, people will naturally devise solutions and mitigations. You can already see this in places like Florida where new construction techniques are being used to build houses that can withstand hurricane force winds.
I reached 5000 a few times... I also have 10000 links in Pocket.
Jared Diamond isn’t talking about problems that can be tied to recent technologies or youthful ideology that can be explained away as one generation not understanding the previous. He is specifically citing 1) the release of carbon dioxide over the past 200 years of mass industrialization 2) the extensive and increasing overuse of resources such as water, topsoil, fisheries which has been increasing unsustainably for hundreds of years 3) the proliferation of nuclear weapons which is again a trend over many decades. I don’t understand how someone can read this interview and conclude “this old fogey doesn’t understand the zoomers!”
Can't be worse than Spanish Wikipedia.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_avia... is a good read on this.

If the airline industry continues growing at current rates by 2050 it will consume the whole CO2 budget if we want to stay below 2°C.

In reality we now need to change everything and pretty quickly.
كلمات اغنية في الجنة هاني عادل مكتوبة كاملة
Is there any open-source and private calorie/food-tracker?
Hey there,
I was looking for a good calorie/food-tracker App like(for Android & Linux).

I found apps like Lifesum, Yazio and so on. but all of them are very data hungry and expensive.

Is there an open-source alternative?

Thanks!
You're importing coal-based power from your neighbors. That's what you did to replace your nuclear energy generation.

Let me ask you this, if solar is capable of replacing fossil fuels, why did Germany sign a multi-decade/mult-billion-euro deal to buy Russian gas?
Frontity, a React framework to create WordPress themes
Asynchronous Programming and Scala (2017)
No, not really any protests.

But there were all sorts of web shutdowns leading up to previous anniversaries.
I would have preferred to be medicated with 6 rather than 14, which is when I started medication for ADHD.
There is obvious over-diagnosis with ADHD (and related) conditions. Every parent knows that. I don't think it's an "opinion" at this point. I can factually get all my kids diagnosed with ADHD if I choose to. The first victims of the situation are kids with "actual ADHD", whose problems are trivialized.
Windows client (pre-alpha) has just been released too.
https://lists.zx2c4.com/pipermail/wireguard/2019-May/004126....
There's a great deal of spin coming from the people warning about climate change too. End of the world stuff.

Here's something to consider: during the Early Eocene period (roughly 50 million years ago) temperatures were 9C-14C higher than now and CO2 levels were 1000-2000 parts per million [1].

And yet according to science, Earth was covered in forests from pole to pole, mammals flourished, and the oceans were "teeming with fish and other sea life". [2]

That's something you won't hear much about, because it doesn't fit the agenda.

1: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/global-warming/early-eocene-period

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eocene
Subpoena are considered moral, I think, because testimony is required for democratic society so that we don’t rely on hearsay. There are many situations where someone does not “want” to testify, but it is necessary to better understand the truth.

If someone could just decline subpoenas then we would lost rule of law.

I think it’s worth pointing out that there are checks on judges issuing subpoenas and it’s not done arbitrarily.
Energy consumption is indeed tied to anything interesting and useful we can do. But the problem isn't and never was energy use itself (global warming isn't caused by waste heat). The problem was a) unsustainable energy sources, which threaten energy security long-term, and b) polluting energy sources, which cause climate change (it so happens that a) and b) generally overlap, so people confuse this point).

Put another way: if we could suddenly switch transportation to electric and replace all our power generation with renewables with some surplus power on top, why would anyone want to limit energy consumption? That would be equivalent to saying, let's reverse civilization, bring back more poverty and suffering, because it was all cool and games 300 years ago.

> We are so far from completely decoupling it that you might as well consider money and energy to be the same thing.

With market setting prices according to supply and demand and business model shenanigans, and with lots of externalities everywhere unaccounted for, I'd say prices on everything are pretty well decoupled from energy use. It would be a better world if they weren't.
They could even reduce growth, but regulating one's continent out of competitiveness with the global market is one hard pill to swallow.
As someone who struggled for 32 years before I was diagnosed - you don't know what you're talking about.

I have been to multiple (European) therapists who had just your approach and had no idea about ADHD. For years.

In the end, I knew all the techniques for getting things in order, just couldn't follow up on them, and wasted tremendous amounts of my life trying to do things. (Not to mention gaining ~30kg, because I instinctively ate a ton of sugar - which has a similar dopamine-inducing effects to Ritalin, just with calories and not as long-lasting)

After taking one pill I was able to finally get myself together.
Science had its chance over the last forty or fifty years. Now we're running out of time.
> The IPCC has estimated that aviation is responsible for around 3.5 percent of anthropogenic climate change, a figure which includes both CO2 and non-CO2 induced effects. The IPCC has produced scenarios estimating what this figure could be in 2050. The central case estimate is that aviation's contribution could grow to five percent of the total contribution by 2050 if action is not taken to tackle these emissions, though the highest scenario is 15 percent.

As I said, people tend to overstate the actual impact of aviation.

There are much higher priority things to do.
So overall you feel we don't need to take any measures to reduce our impact on the system?
I'm using WireGuard in combination with Pi-Hole on a VPS and connecting to it on my mobile phone to have far better ad blocking. Works as a charm. Rock solid.
The bricked up in tunnels example was pretty horrifying. Like I know they want to convey the value of hard work, but that is some Cask of Amontillado level crazy.
And the number one problem is that waiting until the disaster hits is a really, really dumb strategy. It may be efficient on paper, but that's only if one places no value on human life and suffering, and is willing to gamble the disaster won't collapse the economy before it gets fixed.
> Please, try to at least be honest enough to openly admit you don't care about climate change out of convenience for yourself.

yes, it's true, I can't see myself going back to a pre-industrial quality of life for the sake of climate change, and be honest, neither can you. The resources used to produce the computer you typed your comment on probably equates to 50 years of resource consumption of someone from 1500AD. Not to mention your phone, car, earphones, public transport, roads, electricity, air conditioning, heating, Netflix, Youtube, datacenters, air travel, grocery shopping, insane supply chain that made your $50 Levis possible etc. etc.

Add in billions of people who are aspiring to your level of affluence + billions more who will be born who will fight tooth and nail to experience the luxury of Netlix and chill and you see we are fucked. There is no way out of this and no amount of tree hugging will make things better. Joe average wants his SUV, cheap jeans and Happy Meal. Fuck you if you get in his way.

It's a whirlpool of catastrophe and you can't get out of it even if you tried.

Technology will save us or the species is finished.

>political action is possible

Your "Save the Whales" badge is part of the problem (literally, plastic + metal pin produced in a third world country). Your political banners and TV adverts are part of the problem. All by products of fossil fuels.
REST isn't SOAP. What you're describing just adds unnecessary complexity.
Possibly more abstract than what you are looking for but Object-Oriented Design Heuristics is a decent text.

https://www.amazon.com/Object-Oriented-Design-Heuristics-Art...
I think the idea that science is some kind of fairy tail or magical solution to all our problems is a bit off. But, ask someone in the 1800s how they feel about the future and you’d get some pretty ignorant and wildly inaccurate responses.

The thing is, you and I are no more qualified to speculate on the future than someone from 100 years ago would be qualified to speculate on the Internet. However I can say one thing: if we even make a fraction of the progress in the next 100 years compared to the progress in the last, I don’t think we have anything to worry about when it comes to energy or transportation.
Variable, but generally worse. It's much more tightly censored than Wikipedia: for example, edits are manually reviewed by admins before going live. Also, most community features (talk pages etc) have been removed, so it's constantly gamed to push spam, copy pastes etc and the mods don't really care unless it touches a red line topic like politics.
I think it's dangerous to lump it all in together.

What if you're advertising the historical equivalent of a vacuum cleaner over a brush? A dishwasher over washing up liquid, a car over a carriage, a savings fund that invests ethically over one that doesn't, a cheaper, faster municipal broadband over a monopolistic inferior broadband, the examples are innumerable. A progressive political party over a corrupt incumbent?

I agree in general that advertising should be curtailed from the present level, but I don't agree that it's fundamentally unethical.

If you've got to rely on word of mouth, even with the internet, it will take a lot longer for good, useful products/ideas to spread.
It will take at least a century of focused effort until an off world colony can be self sufficient. Think of how complex even the simplest things are that you interact with on a daily basis and how difficult it would be to replicate the industries that manufacture them on the Moon or Mars.
Sigh and this is why plain text SNI is was not a good idea...
>You are wrong.

I hope so.
That's already happening, fertility rates have fallen below replacement levels in most of the developed world. It's only Africa that is lagging but Africa isn't creating the problem.

The population is continuing to grow because life expectancy is increasing.
Curious that they have a column "attractive" in the person's features which seems to correlate with age ...
There's no easy way to automate/schedule this, and you have to do it one conversation at a time. Long-running multiyear conversations produce unwieldy multi-MB files. They're not even doing the bare minimum to make data portable, as I see it.

I try to hold on to all digital communications with people I know (as opposed to service providers/professional interactions/strangers on the internet), and preserve it on my own hardware in portable formats. The idea is to have the digital equivelant of the box in the attic full of letters. Maybe that record will be interesting to me in a few decades, or to my descendants - or maybe not, which is fine too. But either way it would be a damn shame if we all collectively lost the "boxes of letters in the attic" to digitization, and these proprietary platforms aren't helping.
> When I said there won't be a concern with portability via .NET Standard, I merely meant that the current shifting landscape of Framework features vs Core features vs the intersection known as Standard, will go away.

I'm really struggling to understand this. Can you explain how you would prepare to port a .net 4.x site to core/5, if the notion of a compatible intersection goes away? How would you even make a library which is compatible with both 4.x and 5?
Isn't the flaw in just treating this like an energy source problem? It isn't. Switching to Nuclear or renewable doesn't reduce the massive contribution from beef farming for example. Another huge contributor is deforestation due to crops such as palm oil, which demand is fueled largely by palm oil being considered a renewable energy source. It's too complex to boil down to 'wait for the unicorn technology to solve the problem'
Here's an article with headline, "Major Climate Report Describes a Strong Risk of Crisis as Early as 2040": https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/07/climate/ipcc-climate-repo...

And yet it says, "The report details the economic damage expected should governments fail to enact policies to reduce emissions. The United States, it said, could lose roughly 1.2 percent of gross domestic product for every 1.8 degrees of warming."

So an extreme rise in temperature of 3.6 degrees could reduce US GDP by 2.4%? That's about 18 months of average growth. That doesn't seem like a crisis to me - what am I missing?
It is a calmly stated ignorant opinion.

Imagine living with a diabetes, or some other invisible issue that affects your life, and having to hear such calm opinions all the time from people around you. Telling you that your issue is not real (so - de facto - you're imagining it).
What's wrong with Spanish Wikipedia?
Unnecessarily hostile? No. People who have to constantly deal with a difficulty other people don't have, while those people completely unoriginally reflect the same doubt that's been repeated over and over again, can make frustrated comments in a thread on the topic without being characterized as hostile.
It wasn't destroyed.
Wouldn't the transition from life that thrives at 200 to 500 ppm to life that thrives at 1000 - 2000ppm suck though?

I thought the big deal was that we liked it how it was.
Given what she went through in her own trial and jail, when she said "nothing more to offer", I think it's not hard to believe that they already got everything out of her. How the grand jury could think otherwise is beyond me.
Technology alone is not enough. Every 12 to 15 years we are adding 1 billion people more. We expect 9 billion people around 2050. More air pollution, water pollution, soil contamination, less forests, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_overpopulation#Effects_o...
>prepare your children

If you're stressed about the environment you shouldn't be having children
Any motorbikers in London interested in making a day trip out of this?
Ask HN: Can we have more Brainstorm HN?
There have been two Brainstorm HN posts that I can find:

* Brainstorm HN – A look at my meager domain collection. Thoughts?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7887328

* Brainstorm HN: Outlandish Startup Ideas Pool
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=602478

The second one, "Outlandish Startup Ideas Pool", was a pretty interesting read.

Can we have more "Brainstorm HN"?
There is also an issue of under-diagnosis in adults and young girls.
The libraries with source like other languages also do today, but also that the language is verbose like Visual Basic did.
China's economy isn't by any stretch of the imagination "communist", but telling every car where to go is perhaps the right solution for the future, with computer science making it feasible and overpopulation making it desirable.

However, I'm not sure that's in any way relevant to freedom of thought and freedom of information.
Because our politicians are corrupt? Former chancellor Schröder now has a cushy post in the Russian gas industry.

Besides, gas is a cheap, fast way to replace coal with drastically reduced carbon emissions.
THIS IS AN EMERGENCY!
Limiting population growth is desireable from a general environmental perspective, but it is a big red herring with respect to the climate change. The fight against the climate change needs to make some significant progress in the next 2 or 3 decades. In that timeframe, population dynamic won't have any effect, short of global disasters. So any discussion about population growth in that context sounds like an (intended?) distraction from the actual necessary means.

On the matter of population growth, the data is actually giving me a lot of hope: in most developed countries, the population is stable or even declining. China has a reproduction rate much lower than the equilibrium one of 2, causing a lot of problems on its own, still the population is growing a bit more as the average lifespan keeps increasing. But there is a clear maximum in sight.

The elephant in the room rather is: what if the average Chineese citizen would emit as much carbon and the average American one? Without any population growth, if that happened, it would be game over. So the immediate call to action has to be to reduce carbon emissions. In any country.
Cacio e Pepe is just pasta with cheese and pepper.
So by far the best way for the businessman to reduce their footprint is to not have more private-jet-flying-children
Artificial Intelligence and Autism
But plenty of things cause extinction events, hell humans were causing the Wolly Mammoth to go extinct long before we had anything resembling a civilization. Plenty of other plants and animals will drive other animals to extinction. It’s the circle of life, one which we, being animals, are a part of.
> Culture fans: These are not the knife missiles you were thinking about.

Bummer
I was wondering what happens if you skip the SNI bit and just rely on the Host header in the data. Does that work?
Depends. I was diagnosed independently in EU (Poland) and in US (California) at the age of 32. They didn't need a paper documentation, just asked about my childhood.
China is set to increase their CO2 emissions - according to their own policies and promises from their own government - by 20% just in the next 10 years. [1]

These figures are what their own government is aiming for when you examine their policies. The real one could be much higher.

[1] https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/china
I don't know about you but I think 14C hotter sounds pretty unpleasant
This persuaded me to look her up. Wow ...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/apr/05/anti-n...
That's right, there are EU countries we could wipe off the face of the planet and it wouldn't make any difference.

Looking at per-capita numbers and trying to hold everyone in the world to the same standard has never been the way the world works, and if we tried to establish such a system, we'd never make any progress on this issue.

(If we wanted to hold everyone to the same standard, we could divert income from the rich and make them poor, because consumption pretty much increases linearly with income, except at the top decile where consumption increases massively. But attacking the richest isn't gonna save us either, because planet earth doesn't give a crap about the income levels of whoever's putting CO2 into the atmosphere. All that matters is how much of it we put in there.)
> We'd need a economic/cultural revolution at a global scale. Everything has to scale down, no more ICE, not more plastic, no more food imported from the other side of the world, reduce meat consumption, reduce traveling &c.

This is a sentiment that rubs me the wrong way. I totally agree that we, at a global scale, need to drastically reduce our carbon footprint. And these reductions will have changes to our society. But many of the suggestions of those currently engaged in the cultural revolution are either focusing on small problems (like not buying food in plastic containers) or have complicated unintended consequences (like buying locally grown foods).

Shipping stuff on large boats is incredibly efficient per kg/km. It's not unlikely that I emit more Co2 driving my car to/from the grocery store than the emissions from shipping all the things I purchase to the store itself.

We should focus on things like stopping the burning of fossil fule for electricity generation and carbon natural land based transportation long before we almost religiously ban plastic straws.

I don't think the best way forward to actually solving this problem is engaging in some almost Protestant self hatred and punishment, trying to make the transition as impactful on our lives as possible.