skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Depends on the logistical costs. But I agree, it's kinda like a broken window thing.
Bloom Filters by Example (2013)
The prefix is dia-, not di-.

My own pet peeve is people saying the same thing about 'dialogue', which is also 'dia-logue', not 'di-alogue'.
One of the best ways to instantly (almost) reduce emissions is to stop farming and consuming beef.

Better would be all meat altogether, but by far the lowest hanging fruit is to stop beef production and farming.
What do you think about the tokenization of emissions? It's certainly not a silver bullet or likely even a good answer, but it could incentivize people to choose more sustainable options. This could shift reducing emissions to a form of social competition thus more people might do it. In this kind of system, people might self-motivate themselves for the fear of being held accountable, or just simply for presentable bragging rights.
many US conservatives have been radicalized by corporate oil lobby propaganda
Static types avoid the cost of runtime type checks and dynamic dispatch.
A comparison of Kubernetes specific operating systems
Because powerful parties possess considerable vested interest in the current carbon-consumption status quo.

Ironically many of these interests could realise the new opportunities of growth in the energy space instead of focusing on potential impact to current business lines.
A scientific perspective: https://hslahman.com/the-problem-with-greens-3/
interesting! I never thought about that somebody might interpret it in this way
Because it's much easier to deny something that big than to take care of it. 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.

The current system is based on unlimited and exponential growth, everything else is considered a failure. An unlimited growth in a finite environment isn't possible, it's called instability.

The second problem is that many people convince themselves that "Science" will save us, that we'll terraform Mars or that shifting to electric cars will be enough, but that's too little, too late. Even if we'd hit our ecological goals, and we're not, we'd be far from fixing the problem. We don't need to slow down, we need a complete paradigm shift. It's like when you move form a basic 40sq meter flat to a fancy 250sq meter house, going back is very hard.
The big hitters in terms of CO2 are Transportation, Industrial production, Power Generation and Food production. For each of those, some big wins:

- Travel less, particularly long haul and travel more sustainable, share a train, avoid air travel

- Buy less, particularly clothes and consumer electronics that you don't really need. Make things last longer, own less. Boycott manufacturers who make deliberately disposable/single use products.

- Make your home more efficient, that means insulation if you're in a cold place and ventalation, use of shade if you're in a hot place. Replace fossil fuel heating with renewable electric where possible

- Waste less food, eat less meat particularly red, buy things that don't have lots of waste attached (like short shelf lives, lots of packaging), and buy food that hasn't traveled far to get to you

Any more suggestions?
Poll: Did you see the alternative parse of the title?
Recently there was an article submitted with the title: "What other smart city projects can learn from Taipei." I clicked through and found an article on things to learn, and not a list of cities, which surprised me.

So I'm wondering how many if this audience spotted the alternative parse, how many got it right, how many wrong, how many didn't notice.
I only saw one parse, and expected "things";
I only saw one parse, and expected "cities";
I saw multiple possibilities, and expected "things";
I saw multiple possibilities, and expected "cities";
I saw multiple possibilities, and didn't know what to expect;
I don't understand what you're asking;
WebGPU Is Coming to Babylon.js
It was nothing of the sort - it was a reply to comments specifically about the InstaPainting service.
I*m working from memory here, but evidence generally finds that having an actual safety net and giving folks homes to live in works. Making sure folks have mental health care works. Even with folks that insist on trying to stay on the streets ... it seems simply taking them home enough time works.

You could also build centers with toilet facilities for people to live outside if they choose - like campsites, only nicer.

If the people are criminals, the solution is to have better re-integration programs and focus much of the criminal justice system on helping folks instead of being cruel and punishing folks.

You are correct, however, that it is outrageous and an absolute failure of government.
OpenIndiana Hipster 2019.04 Brings Mate 1.22, More Python 3 Porting
> Western countries are not the major culprit at the moment...

I believe this is a misconception. We didn't decrease our emissions, we outsourced them. A lot of the China pollution is due to exports for western consumption. Just look at the trade "disbalance" between China and USA.
This is scary because of our current political situation. Even when nature is on our side we have mindless headstrong morons heading nuclear states and we seem to be in verge of war. People do not trust science and still believe in afterlife and heaven or hell rather than believing in our planet and its current problems. Amount of CO2 is definitely going to trigger extreme climate change and that is going to destabilize our geopolitics, and we simply are not ready for that change. We should start making life style changes for the sake of millions of species that are getting extinct and also to start a culture of responsible citizen of earth.
I'm fairly sure that meat production and farming for human consumption is the best way to have a quick global impact on climate change, slowing deforestation and slowing species extinction.

Fossil fuels are the wrong target for a quick win (which we need).

Caveat: I eat meat once a week now.
I find this quite interesting, I'd never heard of this until a while ago (I'm in the EU) but apparently it seems really, really popular with American travelers and backpackers and even people who got in touch with it in the US.
I see the downvoted comment about mountain hiking, but I meant more the urban folks. Also while it's probably a small sample, there basically don't seem to be any alternatives if you look at a few subreddits on that topic :P
I've just understood that I should have been more clear. I meant "borderline offensive" to artists (dirt cheap), of course.
Yes, the known history is neccessarily a subset of the actual one - but I think we often don't imagine how large the gap is and also often make the mistake of assuming that this gap is smaller than it is. Consequentely, our "models" of ancient societies or the biology of the dinosaurs are far too limited.
Hi Muzani,

So I do not even want to get to building at this stage. I just want to get a landingpage in front of the right folks, collect some emails, and see if I can talk to them. I have some broad ideas on products I'd like to work on but have made the mistake in the past many a times before where I just start building something people do not really care about. So right now I am trying to figure out the best way to just get in touch with these people. I have done some AdWords (freaking expensive in the market I am in) and going through subreddits which seem to help. Next stop is trying to find some people on Quora that seem to experience the problem.

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts!
Sounds like something for which you need professional assistance. Seek it.
A tiny fraction but it's important to realize what we personally contribute, and not only blame something outside of our control.
That's an important thing, I agree. Seen a few shocking gaps in my co-workers at previous jobs, and whenever time and energy allowed, I always tried to carefully (to not bruise egos) and positively[0] patch it with a quick mental model update. I don't fault people for being inexperienced, or for not growing up as a computer nerd like I did. I only start having issues if someone wasn't given knowledge they're supposed to by organized learning (hence my scepticism about bootcamps, but see jfarmer's comment in parrallel), or when they claim knowledge and competence they visibly lack.

Programming is a profession. As you say, learning on the job is normal and expected.

--

[0] - https://www.xkcd.com/1053/
It's true, the USA isn't really at the helm anymore. We have high per-capita CO2 figures, but in absolute terms we're in the ballpark of just 50% of China's emissions.

India is set to explode, and there are already reports of manufacturing migrating there because China is becoming expensive as they get their act together.

When the dust settles I imagine China and India will be the dominant emitters with their massive populations. Every time these countries move their quality of life needle the slightest bit upwards across their population it makes a big impact.
Evidence of Possible eBay Preparation for Crypto Payments
In your view, what defines a genuine mental disorder?
Which site do you use for sharing local files?
The clue is at the end

"But I think he deserved his punishment. Don't you?"
does that take into account that the designs for nuclear reactors are optimised not for economic production of electricity, but for plutonium output for nuclear weapons programs?

Not a coincidence that nuclear power plants have been mostly built during the cold war. Or that nuclear power is inextricably linked with nuclear weapons in the minds of defence people (see Iran).

However, there's no actual need for this, and a pacifist nuclear power program could be very economically viable. But there wouldn't be any government subsidies for it, of course, because it would be useless militarily.
Malthus lives!
War crimes is not even remotely equivalent to whistle blowing.
Despite the recent improvements, the EU still emits more CO2 per capita than China and India [1]. Thus, most of the reduction still need to come from the western countries. (Though that will change soon if the current trend continues).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di...
A: No that's not obvious at all.

B: Even if everyone cut their birth rate instantly it would be 100 years before there would be much change. (Think about how long people live and the birthrate is never going to actually be zero.)

So even if that was the problem, which it's not, it's not solvable by any method that has to do with reducing the number of humans.

Only a new energy source can solve this, which makes population increase a completely pointless thing to discuss.
It's not about understanding everything thoroughly. It's about understanding, for most things they use, what does the thing do in general, what's the scope of it, and why that job needs to be done in the first place.
> What I don't understand is why this is so controversial.

Thankfully I hope this will decline. Interesting tidbit I learned today: Mitch McConnell has finally admitted humans are causing climate change. Now the only (herculean) problem is getting him to tackle it properly. https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/politics/mcconnell-says...
Sure, but people saying they don't want nuclear power in Germany "because of Fukishima" is absurd. No power plant is Germany is at a risk of tsunami or a major earthquake.

Should Japan be building nuclear power plants in areas which are at risk of both? Probably not. Should that be stopping countries like Germany fro building them? Also not. The same standard doesn't have to apply everywhere.
This could have been avoided by using Nuclear power.
I'm not sure why you are being downvoted. Mining is very inefficient
Are You a Curator or a Dumper?
> Particularly in the case of families, the notion that food delivery will ever become cheap enough to be a default relies on negating delivery costs.

I live in Italy and delivery cost is like 2,50€. And it's the same if I order food just for myself or for 4 people. So I would say that the delivery cost is cheaper per person for families than for a single person.
Here in Melbourne Australia, Uber has caused the government to deregulate the car hire/taxi business. So the cost of entry for car hire is identical for an Uber driver or other limo/car hire services. It's the cost of the car, the cost of the driver, and the cost of access to bookings.

For street hail, the cost is higher because the government sets regulation about the equipment (eg compulsory CCTV, meters etc).

The net result is that the cost of an Uber ride is almost identical to a street hire, identical to using one of the other apps that are around (13 cabs, Ola etc).

Uber has a name/brand advantage, but it has lost the cost advantage over the old taxi model and it has lost the app advantage as the app is easily replaceable.

Many drivers operate on more than one app and street hail cabs (the "original" taxis) operate on both.

Uber's business model for their core business is unsustainable, the margins and operating costs are identical to other operators, there is no advantage of scale.
Maybe Cloud Run can fill the gap? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19616265 ?
Wireguard has been perfectly usable for years now.
Pricing emissions is certainly a good idea. EU is doing it - https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets_en, but it's too weak, prices are too low. And that's kind of my point - politicians will never price it to the point where it harms growth.
Not exactly a book, but here's a podcast on the topic by Sam Harris with Shane Parrish of the Farnam Street blog.

https://youtu.be/xYoecW3j7u0
Digital platforms can trick us
That is NOT the approach in Europe at all... Maybe in one or two countries, but not in Europe as a whole.
Peeling Califoria's SB 50 Onion with UrbanFootprint
> An unlimited growth in a finite environment isn't possible, it's called instability.

but our environment is the universe, and the universe is infinite in resources...
Climate change is not going to be addressed through individual actions. The only way anything substantial will get done is through concerted wide-scale government action. Get angry, get in the face of your representatives, be a one-issue voter and let them know it: https://rebellion.earth/

(Before some idiots comment 'b-b-but what about China and India?" we can put pressure on them too: carrot and stick with help to invest in green energy and trade sanctions if they continue polluting)
yea, not sure how to get to 4. Either you stop at 3 or you expand your scope to include contained meltdowns and meltdowns at small scale experimental and military facilities, in which case you end up around 7-20 depending on how serious a meltdown has to be to be included.
Conveniently Split Up Modules in Elm with Shared State
The problem is the feedback cycle is far to long for us to handle. Most learning works by doing something, seeing a bad result and then stop doing the thing. Problem is by the time the bad result comes things will be so far gone there is no hope for fixing it.

For a lot of older people alive today they will never see the consequences of their actions so the selfish option is to carry on.
My point is that Amazon is polluting less than multiple small companies doing Amazon job. Should they pollute less? Yes. Are they polluting less than others? Also yes. You see grand total numbers of pollution created by Amazon and compare them to other companies and those numbers are terrible, the issue is that Amazon, one company, is pretty much whole industry and should be considered as such. It's like comparing USA pollution to Cameroon. In raw numbers USA will be far worst, on the other hand, per capita numbers are not so nice on Cameroon side of things.

TL;DR Amazon is not ideal but still much better than it could be.
I listened to someone trying to mimic the vowel sound in another language and fail totally.

Then they got vowel exactly correct by mimicking in English one of the English language accents!

The various different English accents cover a huge variety of vowel sounds, and quite a lot of consonant sounds.
personal responsibility? it's much easier to blame someone else for your troubles than admitting that you've voted with your feet for the past decades.
> I don't think individual action is going to cut it,

I agree individual action alone is not enough. But it might be a necessary stepping stone to start transforming the economy.
ADD is now under the umbrella of ADHD. ADHD just has 3 types:[0]

1. ADHD Predominantly Inattentive (ADHD-PI)

2. ADHD Predominantly Hyperactive (ADHD-PH?)

3. ADHD Combined (ADHD-C)

ADD falls under the first one. It makes sense that you'd recognize yourself in that. They're now considered to be the same disorder, but just presenting in a different way.

One of the things that's usually not discussed, but what you should watch out for is emotional control. Apparently it's easier for people with ADHD to have their emotions flip. Russell Barkley has an amazing series of lectures about it. You can find various bits on YouTube. You could see if maybe you'll discover even more about yourself.

[0] https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/adhd/diagnosis.html
I think I remember the use of the term 'script kiddie' to refer to wannabe hackers who run other people's scripts without really understanding them, from the early-to-mid 1990s, but I don't have any references and it might just as well be from the late 1990s.

Maybe I'll dig into some of my old HackTic magazines to see if they mention it anywhere, but I don't think they did. I think I encountered it online on usenet somewhere, which suggests its use was already pretty mainstream at the time.
Wow it's great that war crimes go unpunished while journalism revealing those war crimes is punished harshly. That's the way to run a totalitarian murderdeath machine!
It's been pretty well established and even discussed on HN that higher CO2 levels impairs some facets of human cognition. I quick glance at some of the research suggests that this impairment can begin around ~700ppm. Having higher and still increasing atmospheric CO2 levels means indoor concentrations will make diffusion between indoor and the outdoor even slower.

On the climate related side, the graph of CO2 levels for the last 10,000 years is very consistent, around 260ppm, up till recently. We should have just as concerned (or were) when it crossed 300ppm, 400ppm, etc.

On a more political note, while some/most climate change deniers at this point are likely ignoring evidence - having graphs with non-zero axis can be called out as a bit misleading which makes the increase relatively larger than it actually is; visually it's at ~230% of it's normal level when it's actually 'only' 157% compared to baseline. Graph manipulation has been used to in the past to spread false information about global warming/climate change so I think it's especially important to make everything above board. It only takes a few people spreading the graph around with the axis cropped out and then everyone will cry 'fake news'.
Currently stands at using more than double the electricity usage of Ireland.

Its not a tiny fraction!
Think of it like optimization algorithm stuck in a local minimum. There's a deeper valley just over there, but you have to first climb a small hill to get there. The market is pretty much everyone executing an algorithm like this, with the extra tweak that staying too high relative to your friends for too long will kill your business.
Looking at that chart if some of you have alive for 100,000 years, this year you'd be celebrating "100,000 years of panic".

Apart from few exceptions, CO2 ppm has been going up forever.

Why 415 ppm is worse (and by how much) than 404 or 390, you can't explain. In the 90s we had until 2020 to turn things around, that prediction was an abysmal failure so now it's new scenarios and scares).

I am most astonished that some people actually pay attention to this ludicrous nonsense.

Most people are one or two paychecks away from personal extinction event and you're trying to persuade them they should pay more for "green" energy or support imposing limits on wealth generation and consumption.

You can't even make the science work but that's the least of your worries. 10-20 years ago when (most) middle class westerners were idle and looked for ways to kill time, this would have worked. Now they are fighting against their own extinction. Simulate that.

Regardless of my personal financial situation or average temperatures, I will never support any government program that purports to mitigate it. Period.
If you enjoyed this, you might also like this article from my blog:

http://heinrichhartmann.com/blog/2014/12/11/Generative-Model...

This is a study of generating time series/stochastic processes. The estimators for the parameters lead straight up to Kalman filters. The state space models are taken from the Kalman setup. This was the first time I understood how Kalman filters come about. Its really a three step process:

1. Stationary processes --> Classical parameter estimation.

2. Discrete state space --> Markov models

3. Continues state space --> Kalman filters.
Investments Microsoft is making to improve identity management
There's an obvious joke here about inconsistencies being par for the course.
You'll find that a lot of people who work with Oberon explicitly state the dialect/variant they use (they are different dialects, not just versions) and Oberon usually refers to either the original or the language family.

Yes, the result is unspecified, that is what i'm talking about: it doesn't specify what it happens, meaning that the implementations will have to figure that out themselves, potentially in an incompatible manner (although in general implementations do try to be compatible with each other, but this is by communicating among themselves and trying to fill the holes in the Oberon-07 spec).
"optimizing growth and revenue" by subsidizing the operations. That isn't "optimization", it's sunk cost that will never be recovered.

Uber is already withdrawing from Asian cities (eg Bangkok) where the price of taxis was close to cost, and in other cities (eg Melbourne), where Uber's flouting of the existing law has lead to deregulation, Uber is just another brand in the market. The price of a normal taxi hailed on the street and an Uber (I took Uber to/taxi from the city the other day, non peak, non surge) was literally within 5%.
yes, but the anti-nuclear lobby as well as some recent disasters make this a non-starter in a lot of nations. unfortunately.
>Even if climate change would be a hoax (which it is not), then why would it be a bad thing to make changes to prevent it from happening anyway?

The concern is not necessarily that it's a hoax, but that hasty data will be used to push for specific policies, benefiting some, making money for others, and so on.

It's also very easy to turn into some semi-fascist "state of emergency" governance, if you have something all-encompassing as the climate to base your legitimacy on.

Of course it would be a good thing to get rid of air pollution, replace energy sources to cleaner ones, and even more so, cut down on consumerism and industrial production of all kinds of crap (that's the hardest part, and one that every corporate interest will be against, but without "reduce", alternative energy and recycle are just environment theater).
> but our environment is the universe, and the universe is infinite in resources...

Get a human permanently and self-sufficiently out of LEO and i'll agree a limited part of the solar system is our environment.

For the foreseeable future our environment is earth and not a lot else.
How do you buy less clothes? Having less clothes just makes the stuff you have wear out faster. All of my clothes have worn out in ways you can't repair. Putting a patch over a hole looks worse than having a hole.
Memoirs from a Japanese Internet Cafe