skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
When I say 2.2 pixels as the diameter, I mean roughly that a pixel will be made up of all the samples 1.1 pixels or closer to the center of the pixel and they will be weighted by a gauss curve. How that gauss curve is actually used is not formal or strictly defined, but is usually a curve that goes out to about 3 standard deviation a baked into a LUT and normalized.

A curve that uses more standard deviations would have to be wider in pixels to look similar.
People did it in C way back, with usually structs containing their value and a table of functions associated with them (vtable). You can do "inheritance" by having the parent struct be the first member of the child struct. You can do all sorts of fun stuff (composition is easy of course, injection also). The only thing of note, is that you can't "curry" the source, you'll always have to give the "source/this/self" object as an argument to the method. This isn't any different from how you could in python, for example, do : `"my string".split(" ")` or `str.split("my string", " ")`.

(just some fun little experiments I did last year
https://github.com/jRimbault/DataStructures/blob/master/lib/..., there isn't any vtable, but it does show a string "class/struct" with all private fields, and methods for creating, managing those objects)
I don’t have a particular opinion one way or the other on the idea that safety tends to revert. But given the past couple of years, I see why someone might think it is starting to revert.
The problem with this idea is that it rests on two incorrect assumptions - that there is some governing body that would be able to prevent the release of such information, and that we would immediately know upon detection that the asteroid was on a collision course.

In fact, in this case, the asteroid was detected independently by the SONEAR survey in Brazil and the ASAS-SN telescope network run by Ohio State University. Neither of these would fall under the "jurisdiction" of NASA or any governmental organization that would effectively be able to prevent them from talking about it. ASAS-SN tweeted the discovery, and I'm quite sure they didn't have to ask anyone permission to do so.

Secondly, the first few observations of a newly-discovered near-Earth object are generally not enough information to calculate the object's orbit accurately enough to know if it will hit Earth or not. So what do scientists do when they discover one? They immediately report it to the IAU and get the word out to as many other astronomers as possible, in order to obtain more observations & accurately determine the orbit.

As a result, it's hard to imagine how such a discovery could be kept secret.
If you are fine with ads so that content creators make money, where do you draw the line? How much money should they make?

Having more data about you allows them to pick out 'better' ads and make more money. Wether this money goes to ad networks or content creators depends on how much leverage one has over the other.
An Escape Room Where You Can’t Escape Your Privilege
We tried compensating users for every ad they see, using a browser extension (ClearCoin), but Google took it off the Chrome Web Store because extensions have to have a single purpose; ad blocking & replacing is apparently two purposes. Maybe they just didn't like us.
Plenty of previous discussion: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=Antikythera%20comments%3E0&sor...
If for verification, I'll add this trifecta some of us independently arrived at:

1. Formal specs drive spec/property-based testing for quick verification.

2. If that passes, try to get automated proof with the solver.

3. Use formal specs as runtime checks or traces that get checked with the input being from fuzzers or other test generatore. Failures take you right to the property that failed.

4. Optionally, leave runtime check in for any specification property that is unproven or lacking resources to prove.

Also, static analyzers that quickly catch certain kinds of problems. If available, I'd run them in parallel to the property-based testing before the proof attempt. All this together keeps time/effort minimized with productivity on verified code maximized.
If genetic engineering is outlawed, that will make AI automation even more disruptive for human workers.

Automation won’t be outlawed simply because it’s too economically advantageous. China is going all in on AI already.
What do you mean "we"? I'm American and can't take credit for what a few people invented decades ago.

What was your contribution to it, exactly?

Unless you did really create the internet, in which case thank you.
CyberChef - The Cyber Swiss Army Knife
If you didn't have that requirement of conflicting packages, would you still have used docker?

Isn't once a year update a large security risk?
In my experience with C/C++/C#/Java I pretty much always use factory methods and hidden constructors for complex object construction in order to hide the constructor semantics and failure modes behind a standard function abstraction. It has the added bonus of being more testable.
i) states will realise that a global competition in human enhancement is collectively irrational, and proscribe it through a robust international convention, e.g. as they have with chemical weapons, and nuclear weapons through the non-proliferation treaty

(ii) states will sanction, pressure - and even attack - those who launch mass human enhancement programmes, e.g. as they sometimes do with countries breaking out of the non-proliferation regime

Possible, but I think this will be very hard, as it is ultimately a knowledge problem. Biology is like software in a way.

In the limit, I think we will know the causal variants (which we don't know now it is not necessary for selection but is for genetic engineering) and then it will be difficult to contain such information or capabilities.

Regardless, China does not appear to be interested in playing that game. As long as this is the case, the point is moot.
Agreed. I occasionally buy newspapers for ads.

I decided a few years ago to disable ad blocking for awhile. The result was frankly, a parade of shit. Google was probably best at showing the occasional relevant ad, mostly in GMail.

Beyond that, the automated crap that does the targeting tends to hit the lowest common denominator topic. What I actually do online barely registered, but if my kid used my laptop, it would immediately take over the ad experience.
Are you sure your diet did not change? Even your portions stayed the same size?
Show HN: Cookiebro WebExtension can now blacklist single cookies by name
I don't really see your point. Places were the government don't care about how people live aren't very nice. In fact they are often outright authoritarian, much more so than any "tyranny of democracy". Preventing people from falling too far in the first place by having standards is a much better idea than often unchecked enforcement after the fact.
I haven't written it at all, but the Pony language showed up here on hackernews a while ago, and it has the kotlin solution except the notion that the variable isn't yet initialized is type-carried there. You couldn't 'fake out' the process and observe a null on a non-null variable there.

In other words, with some type system antics you can have your cake and eat it too, and that makes 'rust did this right', without also tacking on a deep dive on why pony's approach also has downsides, disingenuous or ill informed. (which I'm sure it does; my point is, this article doesn't cover it).
We didn't do anything. Evolution is a relatively efficient searcher but a very bad respector of modern systems design principals. Each chemical pathway has a tendency to be tied to multiple unrelated systems. The genome itself is only for a developmental system/architecture largely consistent across the vertebrates. We could try surpressing say visible agression traits and discover 50% of the folks die in their fifties due to some previously unknown liver metabolism or get super depressed when their kids grow up or get phantom limb pains. If some one gene swap would make people 10% smarter and not kill their groups off faster, odds are we have the better gene. Biology is just a lot more complex than code, or vaccines. I mean i might be wrong maybe increasing "fitness of mind" will be as easy as a smallpox vaccine. But i haven't read any genetic or proteomic stuff that makes me say, oh wow this is simpler than we thought. What i see is people building software to get a grip on the complexity of these systems.
I'm sorry but I couldn't help not commenting on this. That comment on the README is disingenuous at best, truly a shame as it now casts for me a different image of what I initially thought to be a cool project worth supporting.

node.js was not (of course!) planned to play nice with 'metacall' so I do not see why they were expecting otherwise. I have spent thousands of hours working with and contributing to libuv, V8 and node itself and I can tell you from experience that they are examples of extremely good software engineering and practice.

I suggest the authors of this lib (if they´re reading this) to actually spend some time studying the code infrastructure that makes node.js possible instead of just bashing out at it out of mere ignorance. You would be surprised.
> Over the long term I wonder if this will give Europe an edge in cybersecurity relative to the US?

No. The headline is misleading. This isn't "Europe" doing it (as though Europe were uniform, rather than wildly different from Germany to Lithuania to Bulgaria to Russia to Italy to Spain to Belarus). The article is pitching an artificially wide premise, as a form of clickbait. It's not "European authorities," it's police in the UK and Netherlands.

It won't make any consequential difference at a global industrial scale. $1 trillion in venture capital - leading to the creation of the largest cybersecurity tech companies - every 10 years and paying extremely high salaries to attract the best talent, is all that moves the needle on cybersecurity. Everything else is a blip at best.

On what matters, Western Europe - Europe as a whole in fact, the rest of Europe is even further behind - can't or won't compete, save for a few rare exceptions. Only the US and China are on the field. Everybody else is watching from the sidelines.
By that logic we should all be using punch cards.

I get the notion that most new problems are just old problems being rediscovered/resolved though. I’ve been at this professionally around 10 years and closer to 20 as a hobby. It’s more and more frequent that I see a new framework/language/pattern being touted as the new hotness and I can remember using it years ago and migrating away for one reason or another after the inevitable shortcomings were discovered. Just last week I saw a blog post about using event pub/sub in JavaScript to decouple your code. Welcome back to 2002 (and probably a bunch of years before then too)

I still really enjoy my work, but today I tend to gravitate towards higher level systems design and mentoring the younger folks. This is kind of a weird turn here but you might consider a career coach. I was hesitant at first but mine really helped me get out of the boredom/rut that it sounds like you’re in.
If you had to make an off-hand estimate of the total number of teens and children you've witnessed either in YouTube videos or watching YouTube, how does that number compare to the number of teens and children currently alive in this world at this moment?
Cannot comment on depression. But from personal experience and after reading Why we sleep, my understanding is that to get maximum benefits from diet and exercise, a good sleep is a prerequisite. This is paramount when you're doing these things for losing weight. I don't see good sleep being recommend enough whenever people embark on a weight-loss journey.
Cars, Cockpits, & Intelligent Pilot
People of any religion, political affiliation can still access open source code. Just Iranians can't get it from GitHub (and theoretically, from any US company complying with our ridiculous sanctions policy). It has NOTHING to do with licenses, no matter how much you wish it did.

How does MY decision as a programmer to host MY GPL-licensed code on GitHub somehow mandate an obligation on GitHub to break US law?

How does it somehow violate the "spirit" of the license?

If you think Microsoft in 2019 is some evil bad anti-Open-Source monster like it was 20 years ago, consider this: do you really think that Amazon, Google, Rackspace, or anybody else is going to sell services to Iranians in direct conflict with US law? Realistically, maybe the Feds don't care or won't care enough to do anything, but it's not like GitHub is just doing this because somebody there doesn't like Iran.
As far as I'm aware, a lot of former black hats who are not sociopaths end up in the private sector.
I eat one big meal per day, sometimes fasting once or two times a month and I definitely have a lower appetite with slim body aesthetics. I didn't crave food once my body adjusted to one daily meal for the timeframe of about a month passing. Realistically I don't do much activity and I assume a bodybuilder wouldn't be able to do one meal per day.

I hypothesize the weight of a person, factors from "the mealtime" to the "time of sleep" and for storage of calories compared to used calories.

Similar, I hypothesize the timeframe from meal to meal factors into the storage of calories compared to used calories.

Furthermore, I hypothesize the individual metabolism of the person factors from the development years by the childhood to adulthood corresponding to the active lifestyle of the individual.

Lastly, I hypothesize the individual metabolism of the person factors from the composition of the gut bacteria. (Fasting could help reset the gut bacteria to a healthy state)
the point of the article is that the wars is over.

money won by enlisting the corrupt law makers. from now on, content will have DRM (e.g. netflix) and if any adblocker even tries to touch it, the creators can be jailed.

now if you want to create/contribute an adblock, besides time, you must have impeccable opSec or also be willing to do time in jail.
Solving a 32,768x32,768x32,768 Rubik's cube [video]
They didn’t say $100/lb, they said a package as small as a pound would cost $100+, that cost would’t scale linearly with weight but it might with box dimensions, similarly to how a single heavier person doesn’t cost more in passenger airlines but multiple people(seats) do.

Also, for an apples-to-apples comparison, try buying that cross-country plane ticket 2 hours before takeoff.

You don’t even have to take their word for it, you can get an instant quote right now from the freight companies (most places that aren’t amazon-scale probably pay about 30-40% of that retail rate)
Wow. I actually have a lot in common with this dude. I have a very rare disease that causes autoimmune autonomic failure, which was initially blamed as "diabetes complications", due to type 1 diabetes.

I was always suspicious it was something else, as it started when I was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at age 5. I was constantly scavenging the medical literature when I was in college.

At age 22, it got out of control and I was in and out of the hospital. I came across a journal article and I realized that there was nothing about this disease that could eliminate it as a possibility. I knew I was screwed.

My blood was sent to the only lab in the US that tests for it. It came back positive.

Now, in the past year, at age 30, after trying about 10 treatments, including in combinations, I am finally in remission.

I am back in school finishing my electrical engineering degree. I am a senior undergrad. I have a new lease on life. I never thought I would be doing this well!

EDIT: My diagnosis story is here. But, I was not doing as well as I am doing now, when I posted it: https://rareandextraordinarycom.wordpress.com/2016/05/14/fir...
I don't think there's actually anything concrete to discuss. After reading the post, my feeling is that the author is probably fishing for HN geeks that would be intrigued to test his headless detection mechanism. Which would be borderline antisocial behaviour towards the HN community. This would better fit under the "Ask HN" label.

Moreover, I'm not even sure how useful would this community testing be academic-wise. Black-box testing is great stuff for CTF competitions. But any decent academic venue would dismiss systems that can't withstand white-box testing as security-through-obscurity.
Depending on what you consider cost, I might take the other side of that bet. A huge cost of higher IQ is probably the higher caloric requirements for a more effective brain, but that cost is fairly incidental given our new environment. There may well be other, similar examples.
As long-term large-scale observational data, consider that the "Mediterranean diet" is widely touted as especially healthy. People in Mediterranean countries tend to eat late dinners, like the control group in this study.

No concrete conclusion here, just a general warning about believing in monocausal silver bullets, I guess.
Apple might push SiriOS next year, against Amazon and Google assistants
So you actually ate less during IF, while in the article both groups consumed the same amount, just at different times: "The same amounts and types of foods were consumed on both schedules."

Their IF (or eTRF) groups stopped eating at 2pm each day. Presumably they went to bed a earlier than you, as their breakfast was at 8am, so shifted by your two hours that would mean no food after 4pm.

I'd have a hard time doing that. In a way, dinner is a reward for the day's accomplishments for me. I'm not saying it's impossible to adapt to that, but I'd rather work out more than fast for 16 hours every day.
It used to be called bank fraud and it was the banks problem. Now it's called identity theft and it's your problem.
Seems to me that tech is going to be much better at solving this problem than the government. After all relying on the government to force the changes necessary hasn't panned out for the past 20 years.

Maybe after all that time we can start looking to other means to help address the issue rather keeping trying to alter it with legislation, but hey maybe the government will suddenly magically get its act together and things will work out.

Of course even if the entire USA went carbon nuetral tomorrow it wouldn't do much because the biggest contributer to CO2 emissions right now is China at almost 2x what the US producing.

So maybe looking into technology to reduce the problem is the way to go.
Patron seems to be a symptom of that

Wouldn't Patreon be more an indicator of said symptopms?

I hate English sometimes, and its my native language.
> Safety regulations are a completely different beast.

Only they're not. If you impose a billion dollars in fixed regulatory burden then you can no longer have sub-billion dollar companies.

But lack of competition erodes everything -- even the safety rules, because bigger companies are more capable of capturing regulators.

Any regulation which is the direct cause of a lack of effective competition is doing more harm than good.

> That doesn’t mean safety regulation is necessarily good or that deregulation couldn’t be helpful sometimes. But the actual track record in recent decades is completely contrary to this idea of decreasing regulation providing better results.

That's kind of the point. The entire frame of "regulation bad / deregulation bad" is a farce. What you actually need is regulation that maximizes the ratio of benefits to regulatory burdens. That means removing burdensome and ineffective regulations and having efficient and effective ones.

But evaluating regulatory efficiency and effectiveness is dry and non-partisan. Framing it as "we need more regulation" is failing before you even begin.

This 737 MAX debacle is a case in point. It came about because Boeing was trying to avoid the high costs of recertification, so they didn't change things that could have made the plane safer because changing them would have required recertification.

So we have "safety regulations" negatively impacting safety by making it move expensive to improve safety than not. That's not a case of needing more overall regulation or less overall regulation, it's a case of needing to replace worse rules with better rules. The ideal outcome is that the net regulatory burden becomes lower and as a result it becomes less expensive to make changes that improve safety.
Kind of BS. Yes the regulations and oversight should be amazing and effective, but Boeing should have redesigned the airframe from the beginning when it became clear that the more efficient engines didn’t work with the frame. Let’s not misplace the blame here. Their business driven goals (don’t require simulator training) were smart until they couldn’t be made to work. Instead they forced it, resulting in death of human lives and possibly Boeing itself.
The binary data at the end is a different story than the text data at the beginning.
Parent poster's claim seems to be that Boeing is incentivised to make safe planes, and is likely to have better aeronautical engineers than the regulator. In that scenario, it wouldn't matter if the regulators were corrupt or Boeing certified itself.

Unfortunately there's a massive hole in that argument, which is that (i) Boeing might be incentivised to do things which aren't in the public interest, such as take risks to make a great deal more money, and (ii) it might suffer a decline in competence due to contingent or management factors.

Perhaps in a perfect world incentives could be so perfectly aligned that no industry would need regulating. But that's not the world we live in.
But software has changed drastically in 25 years.

Rise of the internet, totally new app platforms (browsers), x64, ARM, smartphones, open gl, neural networks, development of increasingly sophisticated timing and side channel attacks, and on and on. I feel like you could pick any sub field of programming and find any number of revolutions in the last 25 years.

You say it’s all just new abstractions, but don’t you feel they bring some benefits and allow for new challenges?

Take computer graphics for example. There is so much more abstraction than there was 25 years ago, but go pick up any modern AAA video game and you can tell there is also so much more depth than we used to have. No?

But I haven’t been programming 25 years, so maybe my opinions will change.
No doubt once we or our AIs understand the biology a lot more thoroughly the future looks bright. But it is not like getting to a new software company and speeding up the build times by 10x.
Murdoch owns 2/3rd of all newspapers and their associated brands in Australia. Arguing that he's "not that powerful" is disingenuous.

IIRC, that raid was over an article that was a few years old at that point. If it was about national security, it wouldn't have been delayed that long. It was a political stunt and intimidation.
Similar to an old conveyor system on an Eshed Robotech system. There were 5 bits for each carriage encoded using magnets which rode the conveyor giving you 32 addresses. As the carriage passed into a station a pneumatic cylinder extended to trap it so it would stop above the sensors. If that carriage was to be processed at that station it would be picked off by a robot and placed in a dock.
Companies rewiring everybody to want everything for free with ad-supported models certainly doesn't help.
one-deep tables of function pointers with some kind of sensible model on why sets of function pointers are there.. many, many useful applications.