skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
At an abstract level, one of the major goals of regulation is to stop companies from doing things that consumers can only figure out are bad on a timescale long enough for them to have already done damage and made enormous profits. There are a ton of regulations around motor vehicles, like disclosing MPG, maintaining safety standards, and consistent odometer readings - things that consumers wouldn't necessarily be able to figure out on their own until it was too late. If a car just plain doesn't work, or craps out in less than a thousand miles, that's easy to remedy.

The problem with applying these standards to education is that the timeframe to assess damage is very long, and it's more or less irreversible.

If you spend a week driving a car and the engine dies, you can take it back and get a refund and then go get a new one.

If you put your kid in a charter school and they fail to learn math for a year, you can't get that time back. It's gone forever, and your child will be behind for anywhere from months to years to forever.

This is why we need to treat certain specific sectors differently. Consumer goods, sure, whatever, the government can make sure that toys don't contain lead and that our TVs wont randomly explode, and after that it's up to us to decide.

But education, healthcare, etc., the consequences of giving consumers "choice" and allowing those sectors to advertise freely and self-regulate are severe and often irreversible.
This particular project is only 7 years old.

https://www.gnu.org/software/guix/blog/2019/gnu-guix-1.0.0-r...
OP explicitly states that he cannot make that guarantee.
Why would mere time to research options lead to better research being done? My five year old has effectively infinite time to research, say, efficacy of cancer treatments compared to an overworked researcher in a clinical setting. In fact, let's just shift all science to people in nursing homes who need to fill their time anyway. Utopia awaits?
b-ok.cc?
If consumers having skin in the game were a sufficient condition for them to make good choices, we wouldn't have needed the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic act to ban radium water in order to get people to stop buying it.
Can't do that on mobile ugh...
Science has certainly become a fantastic way to bullshit people. Combined with how science is funded now its created a weird status quo where things that wealthy interest groups want to be true will tend to have more studies which point to the desired conclusion. Something that's true can be less scientifically backed than something that's false if the truth isn't in peoples financial interests.

I also see a weird phenomena where I'll see people who are wrong like flat earthers running DIY scientific experiments. Yet this crowd seems to be thought of as generally anti-science when they're probably more scientifically curious than the actual population. Being "scientific" means subscribing to a certain set of consensus beliefs among scientists. You can not use science at all yourself directly and be considered a scientific person so long as you just believe in certain things.
> what are you asking for?

I want cooperation. Younger people, myself included, want policy changes that will attempt to mitigate some of the damage done by the previous generation. However, boomers are still in power and actively resist changes that attempt to curb issues like climate change and income inequality. I think this is where a lot of resentment comes from. Additionally boomers will be dead before the consequences of their actions have a chance to seriously effect their lives, furthering the resentment.
BBR in kernel works for TCP because it's used for TCP congestion control. QUIC is built on top of UDP and there is no congestion control used for UDP, you implement it in your application/protocol built on top of UDP. From what I remember QUIC implementation supports BBR and Cubic as congestion control mechanisms.
The role of private industry is to efficiently produce commodities for individuals or other companies - minus externalities, autos, chips or airplanes are great in private hands.

The role of the state is to regulate positive and negative externalities. And students learning something is actually a (positive) externality. Neither the student nor the parent or even the district directly care about everyone learning basic skills - that provides no relative advantage for them. Signals of being superior are worthwhile to the individual. Those might actually result in the individual being smarter but if an individual is "selfish" or thinking in pure "homo-economicus" terms, they are just happy being able to always seem competent rather than being competent.

So the state (or whatever institution can represent "all of society") is what is needed to increase the base competency of a society.
Hey there! I'm part of a team that recently founded contextcue.com, a privacy-focused ad network that does exactly what you just described. We only use the content of the page to place ads, and don't track, collect, or store any user data. We're still in the early stages, but would love to get your thoughts if you want to check it out. Let me know if you have any questions!
That would make the ads understandable, but that doesn't deal with the problem that they are advertising something that's not available in my region. For example, if I go on reddit and see ads in English, then only ads for some digital products and services could be relevant to me, because anything that deals with physical businesses would be inaccessible for me.

The only websites I use that are in my native language are the government websites and banks. This would mean that I would not be the target audience of many (most?) of the ads I see.
It's got extremely limited assist features that still required a human to be legally licensed and competent to drive, hands on wheels, not drunk or on disqualifying drugs, etc. That is not at all self-driving. You can keep on repeating yourself, and attempting to wordsmith this as if it is self-driving - it's not a convincing argument.
Getting tankies to crawl out of the woodwork isn't quite the same as revitalizing a democratic socialist party. You can get a certain number of people immediately on your side in left politics just by saying something to the left of all previous electoral candidates for high office -- see, Bernie Sanders in the United States.

Now, I support Sanders and quite like Corbyn minus the Brexit and the antisemitism issues, but they both face a similar challenge: their core support bases aren't actually ideologically coherent, let alone aligned entirely behind the candidates' programs. Lots of leftists basically treat Sanders or Corbyn as beloved old conservative uncles, while insisting that nobody with Sanders' or Corbyn's actual (social democratic to democratic socialist) politics should encouraged within Left politics.
No matter which side of the climate politics your beliefs are on, you probably support the proposed solutions that apply to your choice. This is because the human mind works backwards from the solution to the problem, finding logic to justify what is desired. Unless you are one of the rare people whose belief in the validity of "there is human-caused warming we can fix or partially avert" is in disagreement with your belief in the validity of "income redistribution is proper", the failings of the human mind likely apply.

To be extra clear: no matter which side you are on, this DOES NOT just apply to the other team.
THIS! This was exactly my Main Problem for decades. For me, it took psychedelics to see past it. I could see meditation getting me there (I meditate now), but it would take a LOT of meditation.
Precrastination: The Dark Side of Getting Things Done
Exactly, but at some price point, for a certain individual, the acceptance of the lower fair is a better deal to bc of a guaranteed outcome.
boramalper 8 hours ago | parent | flag | favorite | on: Linux distros without systemd

> For example, using Docker when the basic isolation features of systemd would do
This is a very obvious argument for privatization of any industry, but check out my response in this same comment thread. Consumers OBVIOUSLY have skin in the game, but asking a consumer to figure out which charter schools are great and which are frauds and which are merely mediocre requires far more research than the average parent has time to do. The incentive for a charter school to misrepresent its achievements is very high, and once a parent has committed to putting their child in that school, the cost of moving them to another if/when they discover problems is very high. By that point, the charter school will have already taken the voucher funding and can use it to advertise to the next sucker.
I don't know who clicks on ads. I've only ever deliberately clicked on an ad once in my life, because they showed a game and I had nothing better to do at the time. The rest... I have no idea who these ads are really for, I just know that somehow it's worth it for companies to spend money on them.
The milestone that marks GNU Guix 1.0 is their package manager I believe. At its core, this system still uses Linux as its kernel, so it's not the 'pure GNU' system that I believe you're describing. As it stands, GNU Hurd is still another 30 years away from completion (sadly). The GNU project's vision has been effectively realized with the Linux kernel, which itself is protected by the GNU GPL. GNU succeeded long ago, but this is their iteration of a free system with the Linux kernel.

I don't think capitalism and RMS' principles are mutually exclusive. RedHat was a big step towards proving this. One of my favorite games is open source (ToME), and I happily bought and paid for it. I'd happily pay for an open source, freedom-respecting operating system if my support was prioritized and didn't consist of canned answers from someone's clipboard. Closed, proprietary software has greatly benefited from many free software principles, albeit by strip mining the ever living crap out of them.
That sounds cool. However, that's just another piece of software that needs to be downloaded and verified before installing. I want this to be part of the OS. It's a dangerous world out there, and the OS shouldn't make it so hard to stay safe.
Your analogy is much better than mine.
Yes, and also that it's a very economic one. If you need to churn out (and get accepted) research in quantity, then "hold on there, do we know that for sure? let's try to replicate that, with a much bigger sample size..." is downright unwelcome.

Scientists are mostly good people, but they're not angels, and if we put them in a system that rewards the wrong thing, we will get the wrong thing.
> Cool, so your serum zorblaxian levels are 300 ng/L. The finding was incidental, so it’s jot tied to existing symptoms / clinical suspicion. It’s a molecule involved in the inflammatory cascade.

This isn't that hard. You look at it again in 6 months. And you ask "Did it go up? Did it go down? Is this just your baseline?" And you keep your eyes open a little more strongly for issues that might correlate.

And, you know what, I, the patient, am FAR more invested in keeping tabs on whether things are going right or wrong in my own body than any doctor.
Every so often you get an app that shows you just how fast modern hardware is when unencumbered by the usual endless layers of bloat and inefficiency.
”Determining whether something is (non) malignant isn't trivial. It often requires a more invasive test (e.g., biopsy, exploratory surgery)”

Not necessarily, waiting can in many cases tell you whether something is malignant. If we had, say, a century of monthly full-body MRIs of a million persons, together with their history and cause of death, the technology to align those scans across time, and the technology to analyze such a data set, a retrospective cohort study (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrospective_cohort_study) probably could uncover quite some interesting and useful information.

If, at every step, you pick the option with the highest expected QALYs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality-adjusted_life_year), and you manage to make doing the MRI very efficient, I think doing that experiment even might pass an ethics committee (at the cost of making the analysis harder)

(might because one could argue that the patient would be better of if the money spent doing those MRIs were spent on something else)

Unfortunately, doing such an experiment isn’t practical (¿yet?).
The locations are on there...
The dropout rate varies significantly by discipline. My experience is only with the natural sciences where in North America at least, most students are funded by their program+advisor, compared to the humanities where funding opportunities are few and far in between.

I would guess that students who are funded by their advisor are much more likely to be exploited compared to the self-funded student because of the monetary exchange going on. But funded students are also less likely to quit because they have a relatively comfy job for five years that protects them from the "real world".
> I’m a capitalist, man of the right

What does that mean, related to computing?
I don't think it follows that they are willing to pay some amount of money. Maybe they're willing to pay for something like Google, Wikipedia, Youtube as a platform, but they're probably not willing to pay for most of the niche and small sites.

And I agree that pay-as-you-go would put a high mental overhead on sites. That's why we have ads instead.
8.69x just by inflationary measures ($8,693,183.39, https://www.dollartimes.com/inflation/inflation.php?amount=1...)
> money that was never mine is not “coming out of my paycheck.”

That's a funny way of looking at it. All value originates in the labor of people like you and me. It's only an accounting trick that any of it appears to end up in others' hands.
Having people like that also enables management to then set expectations based on the work of the outliers. If you aren't being abused then you aren't being a team player. The same way that "unlimited vacation" can easily turn into a competition of who takes the least vacation in order to look the most dedicated.
Microsoft publishes Edge for macOS preview, promises to make it truly “Mac-like”
> Part of me knows that I'm probably underestimating the actual problem, but I've been hearing warnings for years that never amounted to anything.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalcy_bias

Listening to the cultural zeitgeist is one thing, but actually listening to the scientists who are doing these studies or people who are summarizing their findings is another. I really recommend reading through the NCA summary https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/ and sitting with the data and what it says.

The short answer is that you are vastly underestimating the problem
The part of the chart for "threat level I should have had based on everything I know now" is way off. It should have been at least yellow with "zero cell coverage" (assuming the author normally has reasonable cell coverage at that location), should have been red at "got popups to log back into google", and should have broken out of the page and come knocking on your door at the "password didn't work".

If I get unexpectedly logged out of my email account, even if I can log right back in, this should already be at "something seriously fishy is going on and I need to investigate immediately", such as checking the account for any activity. Not being able to log in to my email is "check my provider's status page to make sure they're not having a widespread outage, and if they're not, get on the horn with support immediately".

As the author says, your email account is the keys to the kingdom for virtually every other account you have. Anything that threatens it is serious business.
This nicely illustrates my experience with Google fiber. Even though I happily use some of their nest products I’d hesitate purchasing anything from Google I couldn’t just walk away from.

They don’t even attempt to be competent at customer service.
PRISM was a confusing program because neither the people reporting on it, or the tech companies impacted understood how it worked. The claim was the NSA had direct access in to providers networks, and the companies claimed they did not - the "logical" conclusion was an abuse of CALEA or similar access granted to FBI.

It was later discovered the NSA capability was the direct result of tapping fiber optic cables between international data centers, nothing to do with lawful intercept capabilities.
I am confused about why I can see this screenshot since I am not on a wide gamut monitor. Is firefox doing a weird conversion or the screenshotting tool?

My (probably flawed) understanding was that wide colors means there's more than 8 bits. So stuff that would be say rgb(254.5, 0, 0) would now be distinguishable from rgb(255, 0, 0)? If you screenshotted it back to 8 bit you would just lose the extra bits and I expected to still see a red square? Or is that not how it works?
> - Facebook makes money from your data by showing you ads. If you stop using facebook, you stop generating any revenue and your data becomes a liability, not an asset.

I doubt this
I don't even think it's about the ethics that necessarily make this statement wrong (though, you are correct in that HN needs to consider basic ethics on a much more frequent basis).

In the case of these detections, the ground truth can be very subjective and is certainly not a simple explanation. Is the ground truth read by a radiologist? A radiologist with fellowship training? Multiple radiologists? Biopsied? Followed for 5 years to see if the patient actually died of their tumor?

The complexity is a lot more than the underlying algorithms and computer science (though they are important!).
It’s perfectly reasonable not to use such a test if medical science doesn’t have strong evidence what the data means. Likely that sort of statistical evidence would require institutions with teams of researchers managing and adjusting screening campaigns rather than the judgement of an individual doctor anyway. I really can’t accept the idea though that any test which is safe, cost and time effective, and produces actionable data shouldn’t be undertaken on the basis of some other judgment of emotional state. Doctors are in no way competent to make such judgements about individuals, and even accepting the premise on the scale of population, it means pandering to ignorance and in so doing damaging people’s health. You might as well limit vaccination programmes because of anti-vaccination PR campaigns.
This sounds like a complete nonsense argument. Can you explain what your point is? Are you saying that it's impossible to accurately research anything? Or that, given infinite time, parents would be so bad at researching charter schools that they would never be able to divine the best choice anyway?

What do you think MY argument was? I suspect you misread.
here in the city, we do sew them back on now, you know..
IMO, it's a more funny way of looking at it to think that money that no one ever agreed to pay me when I freely negotiated for my salary was somehow originally "mine".
I agree; an open kitchen caters to the pleasure of cooking alone, or at most with family and close friends you don't being less than elegant in front of, not the pressure of entertaining.

I think there's an element of class-based bravado in many modern houses. Huge windows without curtains, open floor plans, these send a message that your life doesn't have any mess that you need to hide from the world. You can live every aspect of your life in perfect comfort without giving a thought to who is watching, because all they would see is how elegant and attractive your life is.

There's also an elevation of the social and a deprecation of individual activity. The author points out that it's hell to try to read or watch a movie while someone is using a food processor twenty feet away, but that scenario is not part of the perfect showroom lifestyle. In the ideal life, people within earshot of each other are engaged in sparkling conversation. Solitude can perhaps be engaged in stylishly, but two people not speaking to each other because they're each absorbed in their own thing is a bit gross, or at the very least, less than perfect, and therefore it's not properly aspirational to ask your home to cater to it.
It's the name of Netflix's tool.

https://netflix.github.io/chaosmonkey/
Chevron starts deploying EV charging stations at its gas stations
You have no clue what you're talking about. The DC live movies have been absolutely atrocious. Their animated counter parts on the other hand are the best. They are better than the MCU movies. The only way to make Batman great on screen is very simple. Have Kevin Conroy (the only person on this Earth who has earned the right to say 'I am Batman!') play Bruce Wayne.
In nearly every other room of the house, you're meant to sit down. The kitchen is optimized for walking between appliances.

When the available seating is exhausted in the living room, it feels a bit strange to remain standing if everyone else is sitting, so you excuse yourself to the kitchen for another drink, where you find a number of other people standing and conversing. This feels less strange, so you don't see much point in going back to the living room.

Once everyone has made the inevitable trip to the kitchen to freshen up their beverage, and gets caught up in a conversation in the kitchen, the living room gradually becomes empty, and at that point, nobody wants to go sit alone in the living room and miss all the action happening in the kitchen.
That would get expensive fast when you consider the material and shipping costs. They can't have a $1 lower tier.
How high does the floor need to be raised?
The word 'cost' seems to be confusing things.

Both options have risks and both options can kill you. Namely:

A) Doing nothing may allow a problem to fester until it either kills you or becomes detectable with standard treatments. However, you have no exposure whatsoever to side effects, infections, or medical errors for the things that are missed.

B) Doing whole-body MRI 'fishing expeditions' decreases the risk of missing something, but increases the likelihood of possible false positives. Each thing flagged by the scan now needs to be ruled out (otherwise, why bother?) and this usually requires invasive procedures with their own risks.

With our current imaging and understanding of biology, Option A may be less likely to kill people. Opinion doesn't even have to enter into this--you can literally run the numbers.

It's worth noting that we limit testing FOR EVERYTHING. When you get a blood test, you could be screened for everything from ADH to Zika. You aren't though, because you're almost certainly a perfectly healthy outlier on a few tests; that's just how statistics work (someone has to be 3 sigma above the mean). Instead, tests are picked and interpreted based on your symptoms and circumstances.
> But if you think you can write correct asyncio applications of any significant complexity, that's great.

To be fair, I've never written an asyncio application of any significant complexity (at least compared to the async JS application I've written). But nothing jumps out at me as horrific with asyncio. The worst thing is the split between futures and coroutines, but once you realize that there's no real need to use futures any more with asyncio (although you can integrate futures-based libraries if needed), you're good to go.

But fair criticism, I've only written small asyncio applications. The only sizable async-Python application I've made was made using Tornado and ZeroMQ async APIs(although even that eventually ran on the asyncio event loop and used an asyncio-based library).