skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> In a way, it's similar to the paradox of tolerance, and a tolerant society needing to be intolerant of those that are intolerant.

That's not a paradox; you're just intolerant. Whether you're right or wrong to be so is immaterial, as is whether the people you're intolerant of are also intolerant.
It's not irrelevant. The high water mark for Li-Ion efficiency is 0.875 MJ/kg[1] (in practice e.g. a Tesla seems to be 0.7 MJ/kg). For petrol that's 46.4.

Now, let's adjust that for the efficiency of the power train. Let's give the electric car 100% (in practice it's 95-97%). Production ICE engines are around 20%. That gives us 46.4 x 0.20 = 9.28 MJ/kg.

That's a 10.6x difference in favor of petrol if we take the optimistic 0.875 number. The most fuel-efficient cars sold today consume around 5L/100km. A liter of petrol is 0.78 kg. A 1000 km of range is the probably holy grail for an electric car.

A a car powered by petrol needs to carry 39 kg of fuel at the start of a trip for that range. That'll be at best ~390 kg for the Tesla at its theoretical limits, which isn't counting overhead weight associated with the battery pack, and unlike a petrol-powered car the weight doesn't reduce as you go through the trip (a significant hurdle for e.g. electrically powered airplanes).

Of course the power train of an electric car is lighter than on the ICE-power vehicle, but the ICE still wins, and all of this is before we get to the battery needing much more volume than petrol, although as the Tesla shows you can win back some space by placing it in the floor, which isn't a realistic option for ICE.

None of this means electric cars aren't viable, but the weight and volume differences for the same MJ are inherent, and aren't going to go away.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density
Here's the original comment:

> I lean heavily towards giving people the freedom to do what they want, but in 'private' and without burdening public life of others. If people want to light up or shoot up, so be it. But I think a community must have ways to discourage or push people out of the public sphere who practice unwelcome and unsocial behavior. The gov't fully feeding, clothing, and sheltering large groups of addicts is impractical and unviable in most/all places.

As you can see there's nothing about trans people in that statement. I don't agree that this is an invalid way to feel, it's ok to label some behavior as antisocial. That doesn't mean that all of the sudden totally unrelated topics become antisocial. You say yourself that the anti-trans people don't have the power to impact these laws (and the constitution would stop them anyway). Do you really believe that there's no such thing as antisocial behavior that should be discouraged?
>I mean, from a utilitarian point of view, you are still doing the correct action of not giving people grief because they’re a divorcee. You can have all the Utility Points you want. All I’m saying is that if you “forgive” something you don’t care about, you don’t earn any Virtue Points.

>(by way of illustration: a billionaire who gives $100 to charity gets as many Utility Points as an impoverished pensioner who donates the same amount, but the latter gets a lot more Virtue Points)

This is a great illustration of what I understand of Antisthenes' precept that Virtue is the only good.
Software is full of tiny monopolies and it's standard consensus that monopolies cause the market to fail.
Oh well...

"No video with supported format and MIME type found."
https://imgur.com/AIig5WT
I think Goodhart's law applies to people gaming the system or juking the stats to inflate a measured number

Indeed, it is. From TFA: "In the case study on orthosomnia, researchers found that patients had been spending excessive time in bed to try to increase their sleep numbers, which may have made their insomnia worse." (emphasis mine)
Seems she can implement cards using javacript.
This is a side-track and pure speculation, but I wonder if a popular recent TV show might be further putting people off nuclear energy.
The Illuminating Geometry of Viruses (2017)
> Capitalism is about enriching yourself - not enriching your users and certainly not enriching society.

Capitalism is not about enriching anyone, it's about being free to do whatever you want with your resources.

Free software developers use their resources to enrich society (and I applaud their work). Mark Zuckerberg uses his resources to enrich himself. Both are being capitalistic, as long as they don't steal or kill (I'm sorry, Hans Reiser). They freely decide who to work for.
You’re not alone. I also force-kill browsers for the same reasons. Odd that this is the easiest way to get the desired behavior but it is what it is.
Entering the Third Decade of Cyber Threats: Toward Greater Clarity in Cyberspace
I’ve seen south-african monkeys carefully opening the rear-door of tourist cars (as they stopped to take pictures), grabbing some loot, and running away as fast as light. There are actual human thieves who are dumber than that.

Monkeys make me nervous, it’s like I’m looking at drunkards in a pub: probably stronger than me in hand-to-hand combat, only slightly less smart, undoubtedly more vicious, and completely unpredictable to the untrained.
What Does the HN Community Think of Burst (Green Crypto)?
Naturally decentralized, Energy efficient, Infinitely Scalable, is the claim.
> This might be legitimately less true for more entry-level jobs, which is why we have unions. Pushing back against unreasonable transfers of burden from the company to individually-low-power workers is basically the entire point of unions.

Precisely. If I had to guess which group of people get fired or penalized for this sort of thing most, I'd go with "shift managers". The shift manager at a fast-food franchise might have the most power in the room, but they don't have local control (i.e. ownership) or corporate power (i.e. any say in company policy). If somebody at the head office screws up like this, their options are to fire the person who won't sign, or complain upstream until they get fired.

If replacing people is a lot of work for the company (and especially if its not that hard on those replaced), these things tend to take care of themselves. If everyone is in one place and talking, sanity tends to prevail regardless. But when costs are low and power is sufficiently indirect, there's no guarantee anyone with a say in the matter will give it any thought.
CoreDNS Name Resolution Issue Due to Cache Inconsistencies - Deep Dive
First, congrats on the Beschizza link. This is the first time that I've seen a direct HN link from BB. Guess we should talk about HN less, yall, Eternal September and whatnot.

Second, this example is an illustration of 'Stallman is right'.

By that, I mean, DB is acting as back-up and thumb-drive for a lot of people that don't pay a lot for those servers. As pointed out, DB can't actually support themselves by doing this, thus DB is squirming away from what made them popular and towards the money. As such, DB is going to abandon those people that made them what they are and go towards F500s and the like, because money.

I get it, but Stallman is right: "Now that corporations dominate society and write the laws, each advance or change in technology is an opening for them to further restrict or mistreat its users."

Here, DB is trying to fork from what is good for the users (backups and thumbdrives) to what is good for DB and the F500s.
They should put in an opt-out checkbox. Many people are happy to give small orgs basic usage data to help them improve their product, but most people don't want it forced on them.
People that rely on desalinated water can become magnesium deficient. There was a study in Israel about a rise in heart attacks based on magnesium deficiency from desalination. [1] I wonder if there might be a mental health angle to this as well.

[1] https://www.timesofisrael.com/deficiencies-in-desalinated-wa...
Well, containers and VMs are two different things (are they not?).
If the US hadn't stopped building nuclear and merely continued at the same rate, half of our electricity would be CO2-free. With even modest growth assumptions, 100% of our electricity would be CO2-free. Today. Not 50 years from now. Today.

It's a shame we decided nuclear was too dangerous and decided to pump our atmosphere full of carbon instead. I'm glad to see that China is making the right choice, I just wish we could have as well.
Director Human Resources
Sounds interesting, could you expand some of the abstract and targeted technical questions that you find effective?
Sometimes I wish one could configure REPLs, for example, to print floats not as the shortest input which maps to that float ("0.1"), but the actual number represented by the float ("0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625") by default.

Somewhat annoying, but might avoid a lot of confusion ("Is floating point math broken?", https://stackoverflow.com/questions/588004/is-floating-point... ).
Well it sounds like a phone interview. One goal of the phone interview is to not waste people’s time with onsite if it’s determined the candidate couldn’t pass onsite.

If their onsite has more leetcode coding questions, then the interview served its purpose.
What's wrong with Excel?
Mixing up cross-approval (from let's say the EU's EMA) with no history is very dangerous. Exactly because snake fucking oil salesfolk rely on the latter.

Downward pressure is nice from unapproved/unknown stuff, but any kind of price stratification inevitably leads to harm for those who are at risk the most.

People already order generics on "ebay" and a lot of those shipments are seized at customs, etc.

We know why prices are high in the US. And that's not because the need to go through FDA approved trials, but because of patents and because every other developed market got their shit together and negotiates in bulk with suppliers. (Thus the US market is what pays for most of R&D.)

> FDA approval there is no incentive to minimize the cost

Do you mean the cost of going through the approvals? I think it should be largely subsidized (and ratio should be computed from a reputation score of the requester - of course using the lower bound of the Wilson score interval, or something similarly fast converging).

> established incumbents to make approval as expensive as possible

True. But there are quite a lot of newcomers. VC money is pouring into medical tech. (Though usually small promising research projects [and sometimes the labs themselves too] are bought up wholesale by bigger companies that then do the preclinical and clinical trials and the FDA approval.) This of course incentivizes incumbents to consolidate.

Keeping the approval sane is largely the job of watchdog organizations (NGOs, other civil advocacy groups, expert groups). Of course filtering the lobbyist bullshit should be the job of everyone's beloved dear leaders. The incentives are not stacked in the common man's favor, as we already know it for some time.

Pushing for safety is of course the usual think of the children argument, but I'm not pushing for more. I'm pushing for the same amount that is currently there.

Furthermore, the FDA costs are almost negligible compared to the development cost of new drugs. (Seriously, it's less than one percent.) And running clinical trials themselves cost a lot of money. Which is something that cannot be simply avoided. Because human biology is very complex, and even with these trials getting the signal from the noise is not easy. Just look at the mess in psychiatry ( https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/05/07/5-httlpr-a-pointed-rev... how basically targeting one gene is [almost?] completely uselss)
I about to launch an open core SaaS and all these articles about open source software getting exploited and how copyleft should be the way to go is getting me confused. The software is for e-commerce. So if users use it to make more money, is that considered commercial use? Would the copyleft license require them to get a commercial license then? Would this cause less adoption and less use of the software? What kind of license would protect us from someone coming along and replicating our open core model using the open source app?
I didn’t read the article, but I know you need to be careful with vit. D supplements. If you take too much, the body can’t utilize it all, and stores it in places that cause problems.
”The EE was significantly higher in standing than in both lying and sitting positions (mean difference: 0.121±0.292 and 0.125±0.241 kcal/min, respectively; all P<0.001)”

Statistically significant in the population, but is it, too, in individuals?
Self preservation or self interest is important. You can't really do much for others if you dont have your own stuff together. Having said that, modern capitalism is moving toward pure self interest and even exploitation of others. The author correctly identified the one freedom the GPL denies - the freedom to exploit the work of others purely for your own gain.
I've observed a bit of an irony there - the fossil fuel industries generate political protection for themselves because of all the jobs they generate.

Nuclear is an order or two more efficient (you need a fraction of the mines, and a fraction of the work to keep the whole technology stack running). In practice this seems to mean that nuclear power doesn't have much of a lobby in favor of it even if it is established as an industry.

In Australia the coal lobby is a pretty noticeable force in two states and arguably influenced the last election. If we were 100% nuclear instead there wouldn't be enough people in the industry to make a political difference.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2019/06/06...

And I wonder how much it has misinformed the general public
The links to 'blogs I follow' with preview at the bottom is neat;

> Generated by openring

https://git.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/openring

Nice.
Another one that may work better for people: magnesium malate.

For some people it can be more easily absorbed than other forms, and the malic acid (which occurs naturally in apples and other fruits) can support the Kreb's cycle that produces mitochondrial energy (which is also linked to mood and general healthy functioning of the body).
Some of the Best Data Science and Machine Learning Courses Online
MIT-like freedom is the "freedom to sell yourself as a slave". GPL is "your liberty ends where my nose begins".

If you understand freedom as the removal of social constraints, you won't understand the value of something like GPL software or Wikipedia.

If, on the other side, you think of freedom as the capability to do things, the accumulation of knowledge in copyleft projects creates possibilities that are less likely in a permissive project, where anyone can capture a version under a proprietary license at any time and evolve it as closed source (compare the ecosystems of Linux and Android for a practical example).
I absolutely encourage people to choose the license that works best for them. My motion has been the other way, all my new stuff is permissively licensed. This is basically because I want my work to have broad impact, and have the possibility of collaborating with as many others as possible, including those making proprietary software.

I'm a fan of Drew's work, and also hope to help GPL projects such as Inkscape (I met many such developers at Libre Graphics Meeting). Choose the license that works best for you, and if you can articulate the reasons for your choice, as Drew has done here, even better.
That's somewhat disingenuous comparison.

Snap, as an ecosystem, includes not only the .snap package, but also the remote side, equivalent to apt/yum. Even if you do not want the store equivalent, just plain old repo, you cannot do that with snap. You would have to replicate all the add repo/check for updates/install/update logic on the client side too - snap won't allow you to register your repo, even if you had your server side solved (side note: for apt, yum, flatpak, plain old httpd server is enough).

Therefore, when comparing with flatpak, which does allow remote-add/delete/info/ls/update, snap is centralized. The "you can code it yourself" is not an argument; you can code yourself equivalent to many other proprietary systems, and that does not make them open or less limited.
No, copyleft doesn't prevent commercial use. In fact, preventing commercial use is impossible with the GPL.
I was commenting on awelkie experience with gnome-characters, in my case (native) it's slower on starting up than the Flatpaked Gedit.

LibreOffice/OpenOffice instead, from what I can remember, I've always found it slow on startup. ^__^
Although it's possible to make nuclear weapons from commercial reactor waste, they're really not a very efficient way of accomplishing that if it's your goal. Typically, at least historically, dedicated production reactors were used for that at sites like Hanford and the Savannah River Site. Those sites have all long since stopped production, but over their lives produced more than enough Pu to last us through one last war.
It's frustrating for the interviewer, because they usually need to photograph your working out to allow others to independently check it later, and insisting on verbally solving a problem denies that.
My coworker was just telling me about some of his Canadian relatives. Their is a very fast fiber optic cable that was installed along the road in front of their driveway. Unfortunately their driveway is many miles long (which is apparently very common in the rural part of Canada they live in) and they would have to pay to run a line from the street to their house. So, they make do without.
You're the only one at the table, Sir. This delightful serving comes gratis with your side of bitter sous-word-chef greens. Shall I get you a second helping from the kitchen, Sir?
Country closest to Bitcoin in terms of electricity consumption: Czech Republic[0]

--

-[0] https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption
> The GPL is the legal embodiment of this Golden Rule: in exchange for benefiting from my hard work, you just have to extend me the same courtesy.

This is a great article that's focused on just explaining why GPL is good. But I'm wondering what people think about enforcing this part of the GPL.

I was very disheartened to see the Linux community's and other GPL projects' attitude to enforcement actions brought by individuals.

If you ask people to contribute under the terms of the GPL, I think that it is fair for those contributions to be enforced. And unless a project has some kind of CLA that excludes it, the individual contributor should be able to hold violators to the copyleft portions of the license.
I have a feeling that the jury is still out on this one.

My observations are that:

* MIT license increases adoption of OS projects, increasing pool of potential contributors and derivative works

* People like sharing what they create, hence derivative works are likely to be shared with the world as well.

I know there are companies that utilize tons of free code without contributing enough back.

Overall to me the difference:

* MIT license increases throughput, hence increases participation in absolute terms

* GPL licenses limit throughout, but improves overall quality of participation
Wouldn't this kind of problem be a perfect match for machine learning? It would have a huge dataset to learn from. Why isn't it happening or what prevents AI tech from forecasting the weather?
Linux probably wouldn't have gotten the investment to become the server OS of choice if it wasn't for Microsoft and Oracle licensing. Chrome only has user concerns now because of business constraints around adblock, and only then do users gravitate back to Firefox (I am guilty of this). GPL in this sense might get in the way of providing user impact, and IMHO positive user experience with FOSS is critical to sustaining FOSS development.

I'd love to see hard metrics on enterprise Linux tech stacks; I would hazard to guess most business-critical FOSS is Apache/BSD, the latest Javascript framework is probably MIT, and most UNIX-philosophy FOSS (those with a "done" point) is GPL.
It's the difference between political freedom and metaphorical freedom (knowledge & rights).

Political freedom I define as not being subject to violence unless you're attacking someone or stealing (material objects) from someone.

Metaphorical (software) freedom is being in control of your computer, that means: you run free software (you know what you're running) and you can use and distribute it freely. There is nothing inherently violent in closed source programs.
They are different, yes.
They seem to do very little that SystemD cannot already do with services and overlayFS, with the added benefit of being already available on most systems.
capitalism was always about exploitation of others
Yours looks like Xod.io, one of the visual languages available for Arduino.

(We also do visual programming, though for algo trading.)
> It is the fault of the tool though if previous versions of a package are mutable, indeed deletable.

The package-lock.json contains hashes to verify integrity.

For legal reasons, you can't really have packages that are immutable or undeletable. In practice, that's just not really a big deal.

Also, how do you solve the problem where a maintainer hands over control of the repository to some malicious actor? What if a maintainer gets hacked? Ultimately, you'd have to audit every single release of every package.

Again, despite those theoretical risks, despite the fact that Javascript projects often have thousands of dependencies, it all works out okay in practice.
I think it's a mistake, it's due to:

.skinny {
width: 30em;
}

on `body`. To me at least `.skinny` suggests there's a non-skinny style it should be picking up on non-mobile/small screens, but isn't.

edit: Ah, yes, there is also a `.wider` (not being used) at `45em`.
What for? It's just glue code, it doesn't actually run the micro-VMs.
The father Brown stories are all great too, if you like the type of short mystery stories.
the paradox isn't about what you are or aren't. but about what you should be.

it is certainly a subtle nuanced issue.
have any resources on privation in particular?
The Chinese already do that with regards to ‘winnie the pooh’ in reference to their leader (and when that was blocked, further obscure poetic language).

I think the govt. is happy with this change, because it dramatically slows down communication rates if people have to have built-in encryption/decryption parsing in their speech.

Also, if you accidentally inform a government agent of the code, so to say, you disappear and the in-group has to change their coding language again.
Makes sense. I generally fail both on the first try, despite being both a software engineer and not a robot.
Wheresvic/legendary: A curated list of legendary articles
> See my other post[1] for the technical reasons NAT doesn't actually provide security.

You're just as wrong now as you were then, see my up-thread post to correct your misunderstanding about security.

Edit: either direct addressing isn't possible with NAT, which provides security benefits, or it is possible, which means your complaint is mis-placed. It cannot simultaneously prevent direct addressing and provide literally no security benefit.
> The code test is one of the more annoying facets of interviews. On the hiring side, it's an efficient way to screen and vet candidates for basic skills. It's relatively low cost to the employer to have a recruiter issue the test.

I agree with you in principle for a programming job, but from the post, this was a dev ops job, and the candidate was asked a dynamic programming question. There was no link to the JD, but I suspect it had little by the way requiring a CS degree.
I have one near me. It's intrusive & annoying, often blocking aisles and getting in a customer's way in a more dangerous fashion than the situations it's supposed to detect.
Perhaps try writing to some FB folks on FB itself or Twitter?

Congratulations, and enjoy!
You've demonstrated pretty well that the value of art is extremely arbitrary.
More devs should do a stint in consulting