skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>
High-quality or easy to install code is not necessary for a result to be reproducible. True reproduction would mean coding the algorithm from scratch by following the written description, and that's what it literally means in most other fields of science.

Which failed here. However, you're going to have a difficult time convincing many people that the attributes you described would be bad properties, just that they might not justify their expense.

> You can't download & install a Large Hadron Collider in an afternoon. Does that mean the LHC experiments are "not reproducible"? Of course not.

By the same token though, the LHC repeats experiments and solicits feedback on how to improve their methods, which they go to great lengths to publish and simulate, because they're aware of this problem.

> IMO, the "blindly rerun the code" definition of reproduction is actually a HUGE barrier to creating a true culture of reproducability in computer science. It results in super lazy reviewing where "public source code that's easy to install and puts the correct-sounding shit into STDOUT" becomes a stand-in for "paper actually describes a novel idea in enough detail that it can be truly reproduced".

Ah, yes. Yes. "If this code is TOO reproducible then people might reproduce it, and handwave handwave the quality of papers would decline.

That's certainly NOT the case in pure CS papers, which have only improved since the days when folks felt that "Lenses, Bananas and Barbed Wire" was how folks should go about writing papers.

Now, physics might be different. But there is surely a middle ground between, "I've shipped you a LHC just plug in in lol" and "This paper doesn't even remotely describe how we achived the results."

If you believe that wasting the time of scientists is bad, then surely you're for clear papers with accurate descriptions of the methods so that those who go and reproduce your work are not sent on wild goose chases?

> As a scientist who has actually done that leg work, I don't think packaging code so that it runs with a single click is the best use of public money in science in 99.9999% of cases.

No, we got that part. But surely someone does and maybe you can design your work to leverage that rather than reproducing and discarding scaffolding. My big concern here is that a lot of scientists (like you claim to be) are underqualified and unpracticed at software, and thus are surely seeing at least some aspect of their work distorted by software and hardware issues.

> Which I guess is just another way of saying that scientists should spend their time on science, not engineering.

Scientists are not going to be able to escape engineering. No one else is going to build what they need besides them.

> please remember who's going to be doing the actual work you're demanding. It's mostly phd students who make $30K/yr. And they have to do this work in their free time because their 60 hr/wk day job is fully allocated to doing the actual science.

Yeah, I'm aware. I suspect their lot would be better if your attitude wasn't that their work is disposable and unimportant.
Propagating, yes. Persisting? Not necessarily - it depends on selection pressures.
> It's possible the associations are all due to selection effects

FWIW, the original authors (Ray et al) said as much.
This is a knife that cuts through political issues. If your society has become so political that it can't even imagine the thought of restricting travel to prevent global pandemic, well, if nothing else consider that after the pandemic rages through a country it is fairly likely that said country's survivors are going to take a very dim view of open borders for a long time. If nothing else, consider that this is the sort of thing that will destroy any willingness to have free travel in the world.

Similarly, no matter how free a country may be, there are rules about quarantines. You can be involuntarily subjected to one, and that's that. Your Constitutional rights or whatever your country may have are gone for the duration.

This goes below politics and below the blustery winds of the day all the way down to one of the foundational principles of society, which is, you won't have a forum to argue about how open borders should be in your society if you don't have a society at all because it got sick and died. Despite superficial similarities, this isn't about immigration debates or open borders or xenophobia or any of those hot-button issues. This is just, can you take basic, "lizard-hindbrain of society" actions to protect yourself or not?

I don't know that this particular outbreak is there or not, but it's only a matter of time before some outbreak of something is.

So the answer is, everyone should prevent people from potentially affected areas from coming in to the country for the duration of the outbreak. If you fail at this task, no amount of rhetoric, no amount of voting, and no amount of mocking your political opponents with various epithets about how phobic they are will do so much as save a single life from the resulting outbreak, because those are all category errors. Epidemics are not political matters. They are way further down the societal Maslow hierarchy than that.
Just want to explain how things works, i don't know if i'll ever finish this proyect, but if i don't i want the things i did explain crystal clear, i want every concept well presented so every single post in the serie can be a piece by its own and you can learn something.
I'm now trying to write two articles a week but it's hard, coding C89 is not fast, there are a lot of cavities and undefined behaivours xD
We already have one built-in function that alters the control flow: panic. But I agree it's a bit weird.
Maybe they did but it ended up in his spam filter or he unintentionally ignored it? As GP said, we need 2 sides to the story to make any judgements.
“An alien thought for many on HN, I know.”

My sense is that most people here would be happy with a secure and intellectually interesting life. I think the people who want to be billionaires don’t waste time posting here.
we’re a B2B app, it’s unlikely a random user will sign up for our service as it’s quite expensive and contract negotiations happen before the account is activated. we also never send marketing blasts or sell (or even collect) any information about our users. we also don’t operate in any country requiring compliance with the GDPR.
To be honest that looks more like a history of really bad projections and extrapolations that failed to even try to account for many other variables let alone the correlations and their causations.

It brings to mind one flaw of the game series Civilization as a game with fixed assumptions - it always assumes food surplus maps to population growth. While it certainly poses a limit past a certain point more food isn't going to help any more than twenty randy husbands will cause a fertile woman to have a full term baby every month.

Food to farm labor's link has been downright economically broken with mechanized farming. People and even land aren't the limit to production for first world farming ability but the limit past which it makes no economic sense to do so.

Hyperbolic growth requiring a singularity to sustain does not imply hyperbolic growth alone is going to give a singularity - unless there are no other limits which will become readily apparent as it is approached.
Tl;dr: Many women have painful sex; many more aren't taught how to clearly set, assess and enforce boundaries when it comes to having sex, which means they're left vulnerable to bad experiences of a lesser sort. Sometimes these aversive experiences involve badly-behaving and opportunistic actors, but quite often they do not. Somehow, this proves that those who are concerned that the whole #metoo thing might be getting out of hand are totally wrong and missing the point. This was published in a for pay magazine btw, that asks for a subscription ($$$) to read 'more content like this'.
If you have issues with fine cuts (like fishing line or tissue paper) the scissors on a victorinox swiss army knife work very well. Get a 91mm size knife for scissors that aren't laughably tiny, but only smallish.

On the opposite side, tough items, like leather or pennies (!) can be cut with EMT shears.
The i7-8700 is heckin' fast, but if you look at it over time, the rate of improvement has slowed down quite a bit. The 4770 is six years old. The Core 2 Duo E6600 is its price-comparable equivalent from six years before that. An E6600 has a PassMark score of 1553. An i7-4770 has a PassMark score of 9780. An i7-8700 has a score of 15155.

And we shouldn't miss that that's way faster! But the slope of that curve is a lot shallower than it has been historically, and a 2x improvement probably doesn't move the needle in the way that a 6x improvement does.

We're spoiled, in that we can say such an improvement no longer moves the needle. But it also means that hardware stays viable for much, much longer.
The question is no longer if you have been scammed on Kickstarter, it's how many times have you been scammed.
Requiem for a Sports Bettor
Bayer has a long history of doing the wrong thing on purpose and coming out the other side with riches to show for it. It appears that people have wisened up to this style of business practice faster than Bayer realized.
[citation needed]

I think there's a good chance it would boot, especially while still within the crew compartment of the lander.
Great to see actix-web reach 1.0. I've played with Rocket in the past and liked it, but ended up choosing actix-web recently for a production project because I don't want to rely on a nightly compiler for a production project. I'm only using actix-web in a small portion of a larger Rust project, but so far my experience with it has been quite pleasant.
Good question, I never considered it. The motherboard, CPU (i7 4770) and RAM are a very, very old desktop setup.

I checked Amazon and the hard drives were purchased on 10/8/2017 and they were $479/ea. The U-NAS case was $150 and the SSD was a random 120GB SSD I had after upgrading my desktop (it was the smallest of the "spare" SSDs I had in a drawer in my desk).

The 8TB HDD were Seagate Archive Drives that used to be the primary storage until I upgraded, so they became offsite backups. Those were purchased 5/8/2016 for $248. The external enclosures I use were $19.99 ("ORICO Toolfree blah blah" I can get you the exact model if you're interested but I assume you can find something newer and better).

So direct cost, I'm not really sure. A lot of it was "free" for me in the sense that it was spare hardware. But should be enough for you to guestimate what a setup would cost.

How long it will last is really hard to say. I monitor the disk health via smart and by keeping two copies I feel pretty safe. Luckily I'm also a Google Fiber customer (which means 1TB free Google Drive) and I sync a lot of critical stuff (software repos, personal photos, documentation like taxes, etc) to Google Drive for a third backup (following 3-2-1 rule). Right now I still have >1TB free on my primary 12TB drive, and the growth rate isn't very high. The most intensive thing I store is video from my iPhone, so that's really what dictates my rate of growth.
Patrick,

Could you PLEASE consider reading the article we're all discussing before you roll into the comments section of an article about it with your strong-but-loosely-held opinions? You're arguing against a point that almost no one is putting forward (that software should be one click).
Sorry I edited to say environment/society.

Not trying to comment on whether or not gun control is right, just that it seems like the people who say that they are bad for society don't seem to understand that it's one of the few empowering things in many people's lives.
> Compensate your employees well, have them be independent contractors.

Absolutely, that’s a valid choice. We chose the employee approach because that’s what I would have wanted as an employee: I didn’t want to hassle with health insurance, taxes, vacation, hardware, etc. I wanted to just show up to work and have my employer take care of the rest, so that’s the company I built. (We definitely went overboard trying to make things easier for the employees.)

Most of our competitors in this same space take the contractor approach, and I’d say that’s better for the company for sure. I understand why folks do it, and I don’t think there’s a wrong answer - both have pros and cons. My comment just wanted to lay out a couple of answers to the post’s question, “Why aren’t more companies remote-first?” Hopefully I achieved that.
Since 45's election, the public has become more supportive of increased immigration.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/235793/record-high-americans-sa...

Anti-immigration sentiment peaked in 2014.
I love Paper except for the fact that I can't get it to show the folder view as default. It's just one click, but it drives me crazy that it won't remember that I want to see the folder view.
Stupid people live everywhere. It’s not a uniquely North American thing unfortunately.

They may face other issues and we just aren’t aware of it.
Dr. Seuss Changed Education in America
Basically just a reskin.
Unless you're talking about some unknown evolved version, in a first world country the risk of spreading to a large scale is pretty low. Ebola is not very contagious / risky for the first world as it stands now.

Could it be? Yes but you could argue for any number of diseases that "if it changed" would create devastating consequences.
When a reactor is built in the US, the operator will start paying into an account for waste disposal. This is included in the cost of energy production. Since high level waste quantities are pretty low for nuclear reactors (About 27 tons a year)[1] disposal of fuel isn't the largest issue.

Decommissioning on the other hand is remarkably expensive because of secondary nuclear waste like contaminated reactor vessels and concrete make up 99% of the nuclear waste.

[1] http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fue...
"Evidence of the cheap herbicide’s danger to biological functions and the environment continues to mount. Why are U.S. regulators not listening?"

Why are regulators not listening is a great question. Perhaps they are listening, just to well paid lobbyists on Bayer's side.
> But it is important to disconnect monetary spending from coupons or vouchers as they are not equivalent.

They must be. If they are not, then you've entered the territory I referred, where marketing actions are impacting service availability. This impact is not acceptable in professional services.

In this specific case, if voucher giveaways produce ingress of resource leeches (cryptominers that will never result in real customers), and if it is impossible to prevent this undesired ingress without impacting existing customers (which it is), then that marketing action must stop. This is the conclusion I expected from the post-mortem.
Even if we used double of his everything it wouldn't be nearly enough. If you are into taking stuff away from other people for your own benefit, I suggest invading/conquering other countries.
Disclaimer: Monitor dev here ...

Watch this space: https://github.com/mozilla/blurts-addon/issues/142

;)
I was on 8fit, a fitness app. Was never notified of any breach. Lame.
> On the other hand, if a court finds that a law is unconstitutional, that means that the legislature does not have the authority to pass the law to begin with.

Not necessarily. If a law is found to be unconstitutional, that might only mean that some provisions exceed Congress's authority. They can always modify the law, and amend it in order get around the unconstitutional aspects. Not all constitutionality decisions are as black-and-white as that.
> Why though?

Cuz they don't need to!
Not everything needs to be a "big tech company", but you are right big tech companies are quite similar in this respect. At critical mass capitalism seems to cause companies to lose their driving principles that made them unique - their behaviour becomes more of a mindless ecology driven solely by money.

Now look at Mozilla, it's a non profit, look at everything it does, they have never lost their principles. They will never reach the scale of Apple, Google or Microsoft, and that's a good thing.

> What makes them so unique, in your mind?

Beyond the negatives that come at their scale, Apple are doing some systematically deceitful things directly to customers that make them stand out from other companies ([edit] talking about their attitude towards customers with defective hardware). If they think that little of individual customers, how could they possibly care about an individuals privacy?
We need to make it more common for people to have children first, then once the youngest is in school, only then, for the stay at home parent to get a part time job (or possibly study at university part time), and when the kids are in their teens switch to a full time career.

People are living longer, there's no reason you can't have a career second. But biology is such that kids need to be first.

And no, kids aren't as expensive as people think. If you wait till you have lots of money you'll never have the kids to spend the money on.
I will try to not laugh at this the next time I pay escrow and other closing fees. We are in Web 1.0 in terms of the technological application of programmable consensus.
I'm shy because I'm afraid of people thinking badly of me. But I like people.
https://monitor.firefox.com/security-tips#after-breach
Here is the paper that made me start to take organic food seriously a few years ago:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3945755/

I don't have the skills to evaluate it in depth but it seems to indicate a plausible connection between glyphosate and leaky gut, which could explain why a lot of people who don't actually have celiac's have troubles with wheat.

This is conjecture on my part, but it's possible that many people with trouble with wheat would be fine if they were able to avoid pesticides and repair their gut bacteria and general gut health.

The other thing I learned alongside reading that paper (or maybe it was mentioned in it, I forget), was that they use glyphosate not just to kill weeds, but as a dessicant applied directly to wheat to aid in the harvest, and a "ripening agent" applied directly to sugar cane.

Finally, although the risks are not well understood, it has been demonstrated that glyphosate does appear in detectable amounts in human excretions (urine and milk), which goes against some of the claims that were made in approving its safety (they claimed it does not bioaccumulate).

Sorry I don't have sources handy for the rest of this stuff, but it's enough to perhaps encourage others to run some searches too.

Edit: a final concern is not to humans but to soil biology. This new and growing field has been finding that there are symbiotic relationships between plants and fungi in the soil and that pesticides may disrupt this, dramatically reducing effective soil quality and the nutritional content of the plants grown there.
oh - I suspect that Monsanto was seeing this coming, and that caused them to sell to a "too big to fail"-type company, with out-of-US base.. as noted extensively in other places, its not a bad business decision until the costs have to be paid, and actually are paid.. meanwhile collect money as usual.. the extent of this sort of strategy in the real world is probably shocking to people who aren't in the back rooms of money decisions often.. of course its unpleasant, thats part of why they keep it quiet
I’m sure we can handle more people on this planet if we don’t all eat meat daily, we don’t need to drive cars, and don’t get on airplanes to travel 200-500 miles.

How much wasted space do we have in cities because we build around cars?

https://www.fastcompany.com/90202222/heres-how-much-space-u-...
This topic is so aggravating. On one hand, you have the "Don't eat science words, they give you the autism cancer!" reactionaries, and on the other side, you have the "Everything is completely benign, because science!" reactionaries.
Gitlab gives few reasons in their handbook [1]. The obvious one is: "If we start paying everyone the highest wage our compensation costs would increase greatly, we can hire fewer people, and we would get less results."

[1] https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/people-operations/global-c...
> 65 used to be retirement age (for men at least), it clearly needed raising years ago, but was hard to do politically in many countries. It is finally being raised. When pensions were first introduced they were meant to run 5 years, not 20.

Working beyond 65 is fine for some people but there are many cases where this isn't. Take any job requiring physical labour like construction. There is only so long you can do those kinds of jobs. Also the fact that you've been doing them for decades takes its toll, physically.

So what's the solution there? People still need stuff built. So you only work construction until you're 40-50 and then what? Change careers? To what exactly?

Even for jobs that aren't physically demanding, many people have jobs that if they lose them when they're over 50 they may never work again. This could be completely not their fault either. Their company could go under or get bought out. It could be economic downsizing.

The problem, on HN at least, is that there are young people in a high-demand high-paying profession who have never experienced a recession making sweeping statements like "just work until you're 70" as if everyone else is in the same boat as them.

As much as you might be a highly paid tech worker, come back here when you're say 55 and those same companies who were fawning over you as a new college grad won't give you the time of day. In tech we haven't really dealt with this yet but I guarantee you it's coming.
Ford Is Fined in China
Transforming a problem into pattern recognition seems like a good way to use your brain natural inclinations.

Very neat little article.
That “smaller pool” is still somewhere in the range of 100+ traditional sword-making families. (One per major clan in the feudal era, basically.)

How many of those families are active making swords today? Probably six.

That’s 96+ people inheriting the legacy (knowledge, tools, masterworks, etc.) of a swordsmith, maybe feeling inspired by them, but not having any direct application for that inspiration.

Because there now exists automation, you only need a few of those descendants-of-smiths to put their inspiration into a non-traditional application, to see a boom in “every-day products crafted using swordsmithing knowledge.” Each one of those descendants-of-smiths can serve as a consultant for an entire kitchenware or stationery manufacturer.

——

And, mind you, I never said that the Japanese tradition of swordsmithing was good or advanced. You’re right about these being misconceptions.

Instead, the important part is that the tradition was more prolific, compared to other countries active in swordsmithing in a near-enough-to-modern period that the descendants are still around and the legacies of their sword-smith ancestors haven’t been lost to time. This means there are more Japanese people than people of any other country who essentially “grew up in a sword-smithy” (whether it was an active one or not) and so likely became inspired to study sword-smithing, even if just as a hobby.

Mind you, the modern smiths who feel inspired by their ancestors’ works aren’t using their ancestors’ techniques to make all these fancy modern scissor/kitchen knife/etc. blades. They’re using modern knowledge learned from global sources. They didn’t study Japanese swordsmithing; they studied all swordsmithing.

But, because the interest in swordsmithing is uniquely concentrated in modern Japan compared to other countries, there’s a critical mass of people with that interest—enough to fuel a community. And that community is responsible for the flourishing and progression of technique in modern Japan.
> We just had a group of people who were told to stop playing online Chess all day.

What was their job? We're not talking about software developers here, are we?