skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Except in areas where citizens are allowed to "exploit their fellow citizens," i.e. markets, things are done in the US and elsewhere extremely efficiently. The problem with public infrastructure spending is that incentive structures are not cost driven, or at least not primarily as a function of cost. There are promises made to unions or contractor companies who pay the politicians or makeup major parts of their constituencies. Then there are other departments that have their say, such as environmental impact analyses. Then there is major price insensitivity, because the funding was guaranteed from taxes with absolutely no implication or responsibility to spend wisely or generate a return.
at least you can cut your own holes pretty easily
On the cost side, you’re comparing apples and oranges: building through downtown Boston in a tunnel compared to building through exurban Virginia above ground on an existing right of way.

A better point of comparison to the Silver Line is the inter-county connector in MD. Both built in the 2010s. $127 million per mile, which includes land acquisition costs because it wasn’t built along an existing right of way like the Silver Line.

You’re also completely off on the ridership side. Because rail only takes you on inflexible routes, actual ridership is low except in dense downtown cores. The Silver Line operates nowhere near capacity. Silver Line ridership is under 17,000 passengers per day. The inter county connector averages 30-40,000. So more than double the ridership for half the per mile cost.
So when do we NEED captchas? Is it truly just an anti spambot for site comments?

Browsing around with noscript, uBlock Origin, a VPN, and Waterfox means a I see way more of the internet's anti-bot stuff than before and in many, many cases, I get to sit and point out crosswalks and chimneys and fire hydrants because a webmaster apparently cannot do any request throttling from an IP address...Although I guess I need to partially correct myself since with a large enough botnet the IP address can change significantly in a quick manner.

In those cases I guess I downgrade this to a grumble about captchas being annoying, but overall, I continue wishing for a way to have the open web without a long term need for 'em.
Technically, even though it does to the fev sides of things, isn't this tesla?
Yes, they are linked from the blog post. The experimental papers are arXiv numbers 1803.01913, 1808.07388, and 1809.10456. The basic theoretical papers are available from the Wikipedia page on quantum Darwinism, also linked.
Do they expect you to use the office bathroom shoeless too? Gross.
Because the FAA doesn't have the resources to do it themselves. It's quite different from, e.g., the FCC.
While you can get impeadance from long cheap cables, it does not matter a ton. We AB tested a few bandmates and none did better than 60/40, and only once. Its more important that your guitar have good pots, pickups and grounding.

Then again, this is a guy who shilled for different colors of paint changing the sound of a guitar, so hardly an expert. Good songwriter.
Krebs doxed a few people who didn't want to be doxed, for reasons I do not consider good enough, and doxed a lot of people who didn't want to be doxed for reasons I consider good enough. That's all I said. YMMV

I have no idea why you keep trying to frame what I said differently.
Because it's 2019 and most people don't have a problem with JS.
I’m glad you agree.
Coming eventually, it's been promised, and Space Engine is a long term project, the first public release was in 2009 and it's been continually improving since, and launched 1.0 just recently. It's a one-man project.

In the meantime it works great in wine. You don't even need dxvk or anything.
This hippie idea that if only we weren't so selfish we'd be better off isn't exactly useful.

Yes, if only we weren't so selfish, we'd be better off. What's the action item here? People are selfish and self-centered and are going to put their personal comfort above the health of the planet. And since the health of the planet is important, and you can't change human nature, then we better figure out real ways to make personal comfort be less harmful to the planet, rather than rely on "friends living in colder buildings".
> Strangely, I saw more units with central A/C in Toronto than in San Francisco. I guess they're used to hot summers there.

Toronto can get humid at times:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto#Climate

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humid_continental_climate#Hot_...

Temperatures in July and August often go >30C, and adding >70% humidity to get the Humidex you're looking at ("feels like") >40C.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humidex

* https://toronto.weatherstats.ca/metrics/relative_humidity.ht...

Sweating starts become ineffective because the air is already saturated with moisture, the sweat just beads up on your skin and there's no evaporative cooling. If you have a "dry heat", what you mostly have to do is (a) be in a draft to cool down and (b) replenish liquids. With >80% humidity, it's like trying walk in and breathe soup.
There are two broad categories of comments that you've conflated together into an "irrational" label. The first is grounded in mystical woo-woo, and the second is grounded in philosophy of science (meta-science) and philosophy of mind.

I do think that "consciousness likely can't be explained by science" if you take science to mean the scientific method and models produced by it, and not just "rational thought" which I would argue is not the same thing.

Science at its core is a series of predictive models and they don't tell you how things "are" (whatever that means), but rather how things behave within some error bound. On the one hand I can see how it's dangerous to cast any sort of criticism in scientific results and theorems especially when they've been well established, but that doesn't mean they are "facts" or universal, only that they've withstood repeated criticism quite well.

The problem that this article is talking about is that you can't observe experience (consciousness) like you can observe "physical" phenomena, so you can't use the same sort of tools like you would use for conducting other sorts of science.

You obviously approach any intelligent discussion in consciousness with rational thought, and the people you can take seriously in this field do just that.

If you're interested in reading more about this I can point you to resources, which should probably start with Chalmer's "Hard problem of consciousness".
> How is the cryptocurrency world mutating? Bitcoin works pretty much in the similar way as it worked almost 10 years ago.

Sure, and I'm not sure that's a good thing. But the moment I bring up some sort of Bitcoin flaw, 20 people pop up to say, "Oh, but that's fixed in coin X with extension Y!" The X and the Y change regularly, but when the shiny wears off the old thing, there's always a new thing. And this article makes that clear; if Bitcoin were all that were necessary, Srinivasan wouldn't have had a case for expansion.

> I wouldn't attach something like "revolution" to cryptocurrency any more. [...] In the end it is just another way of moving and storing value.

In which case it has failed, in that they are apparently not better than existing solutions for traditional use cases like "buy a cheeseburger" or "pay Bob back for the cheeseburger he bought me". Let alone something like "get paid by my job every Friday" or "pay my mortgage". As far as I can tell, Bitcoin's relative value prop is only in speculation, light financial crime, and other things that most people are better off avoiding.
Hackernews explicitly lists politics as off topic. While deciding what is and what isn't politics is often politicized in its own right, the moderators do a great job enforcing this rule.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Vanity sizing isn’t the problem. The waist measurement on pants almost never matches the size on the tag, nor should it. That’s because pants usually sit below your natural waist, and your torso gets bigger the further down from the natural waist you are. However, the size on the tag is a “guess” about your natural waist size. Because everybody has a different shape, it’s not necessarily the case that pants that fit you have a tag size with your natural waist on it. That’s one of the complications with designing and buying pants: it’s rise dependent.

Tl;dr though: vanity sizing is a myth
Claiming that science cannot explain consciousness is not "religious" or "irrational", it simply is going back to what science is, namely, that "ideas are tested by experiment". Science as we understand it today cannot really explain consciousness, the same way it cannot really explain what it feels like to be a bat. It can explain how bat's use senses perceive environment using physical principles of sound transmission, but it can't convey what bats feel when they perceive environment. Similarly, I cannot convey my internal conscious experiences to you. I can only try to describe them to make you interpret them in terms of your own conscious experiences, but I can never make you feel what I feel, or if I can, there's no way to tell that.

Of course, in future we might understand things like consciousness and qualia, and it's likely that people who do it will be scientists. It won't be "science" though as we understand it today, it will necessarily have to be something bigger. Let's call it "science+".

And, of course, just because science can't explain consciousness doesn't mean that religion can. It can certainly claim to be able to do it, but will be as convincing as the religion is at explaining everything else.
It is indeed a stretch, but it's just supposed to be an evocative name not a perfect analogy. In particular, quantum Darwinism has a notion of fittest types of information, and this information is replicated, but it crucially does not feature a notion of mutation, so in particular it cannot result in increasing complexity/sophistication over time as produced by biological Darwinism.
In theory you can chose construction materials that don't do anything too horrible when you bang them with neutrons in the construction of your fusion reactor. I'm not sure how well this is achievable in practice in the construction of a fusion reactor but I'm pretty sure they can avoid using anything that creates byproducts as nasty as uranium does.

EDIT: I do wonder if there's a danger of nuclear proliferation with using fusion reactors to breed plutonium from natural uranium, though.
It's not like he is rolling out his own crypto library. He's just rolling his own token but encrypted/signed with industry standard crypto.

It's not terrible to "roll your own JWT" if you don't actually care about interoperability. And he's right, it does sidestep a lot of issues because JWT and corresponding libraries are designed to handle far more use-cases than what he may need it for and therefore if you don't fully understand it all, you may be shipping with unsecure configuration.
Space Engine started development in 2005 and saw its first release in 2010. No Man's Sky wasn't even a gleam in Gareth Bourm's eye.
Celestia is old now but still brilliant
This article highlights a massive issue with the field of philosophy in which there's a disconnect between advancements in neuroimaging analysis and metaphysics. The author claims that physical properties define "nothing at all". Yet what they tell are extremely valuable in emulating these systems and what they can teach us with the exploding fields of ML and AI. In the last decade big improvements have been made in the field neuroimaging. Trying to put the pieces together from neuroscience and emulation to lessons learnt is hard, but possible.

There's a worrying trend that's becoming more apparent in regards to the hard problem of consciousness. New neuroimaging analysis techniques indicates that when you take away individual functional elements of how the brain, we're left not much at all. At what point does a series of embedded components become a computer? At what point does a series of neural networks become conscious?

This is going to be an issue we're going to have to address now. Where is the line of conscious for an individual to make a legal choice? Think of someone wanting assisted suicide, in which they're often in a debilitated state. A call is going needed to be made if they're sentient enough. A tough call given it carries the massive burden. If we continue improving ML and AI we're going to have to make the call from the other end as well.
You think, so you know you exist. That doesn't mean you know what you are, only that you are.
There's a common issue with slipped discs and terrible long term pain. If the day comes when we can print and install new vertebrae easily, I'm signing up. I imagine in this world of phone and PC usage, there'll be many customers in the years to come.
Noted, thanks! I thought maybe it was dead for some other reason, but in the future I'll just try to resurrect it.
Maybe what they were really testing was your willingness to lie for the sake of "culture"?
> And example, I took HWY80 to work and paid nothing for the pleasure.

Except gas tax.

And registration fees.

And toll if you were crossing any of the Bay area bridges.

And additional fees to use any of the Bay Area express lanes.

Car travel is not free of government charges, even if the externalities aren't fully internalized.
What if you are dead?
> I believe this sums up the problem with online news: being first matters most to news sites. It drives traffic. Accurate reporting comes second.

This problem has been around as long as more than one news outlet has been around... Getting the story first over getting the story right didn't get invented by online news.
While I happen to agree with you, I think it's important to distinguish the two:

What A.G. Barr is insinuating is to regulate algorithms.

Copyright is regulation of implementations.

For example, GPG is a software implementation of encryption algorithms. It has a copyright (used as the basis for its copyleft license). RSA, however, is an algorithm: a mathematical reality that can be described by copyrighted works, but never itself copyrighted.

A.G. Barr has expressed a desire to compel every American who implements that algorithm to do so incorrectly.
Reminder That Google Has Always Been Evil
'They were suspected of traveling on a yacht carrying high-caliber weapons, ammunition and military-style gear, officials said.'

This sounds entirely about right. For those who aren't aware, John McAffe is a strange character [1] known for his paranoia and penchant for illegal weapons.

On a humorous note, when asked if he still used McAffe antivirus, he stated 'it's annoying. I took it off.'[2]

For some excellent entertainment, grab some popcorn and read his bizarre WIRED interview:
https://www.wired.com/2012/12/ff-john-mcafees-last-stand/

[1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/centralamericaand...

[2]
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/fcc5bdda-3f36-11e2-a095-00144feabd...
Thanks for adding this -- I can see the total economic impact of this could be huge.

Until April, they were producing 52 planes per month. Then they reduced to 42/mo. Now maybe zero for some while.
At $100 million per plane, that's $5.2bil/mo!

And over $400 billion in 7 years. Can their defense business cover that? Can the employee 401k's survive?
This chart always gets trotted out whenever this comes up.

You cannot know what it will cost to invent something before it is invented. You cannot know how many deadends you will have to go down before you find one that works. In fact, it may be that the invention depends on knowledge or technology that we don't have, and maybe won't have for many many years.

For example, today fusion researchers are using computers to simulate plasma flows, gain a better understanding of plasma, and design better reactors... something that was not possible in the mid-70s when that chart was created.. and would not be possible to do by hand (as was done in the 70s). Hundreds of billions of dollars have gone into creating computers capable of doing that... where is that in your chart?

And to preempt this line: saying they could buy a supercomputer is not a rebuttal. A Cray-2 was the 2nd fastest computer in the world from 1985-1990 (10-15 years after your chart). It's the equivalent to an ipad 2 (a 2011 32-bit mobile low-power processor). I'm using a computer many times faster than that just to type this post.
Turbine blades in modern aircraft are gamma-TiAl, which is a single crystal. These are not 3d printed and the process for making them is similar but more advanced than making silicon wafers.
My 2 problems with Musk is that he has dismissed lidar in favor of just cameras because lidar is expensive. So far most of the Tesla auto pilot accidents would have been avoided with lidar. Even 2 very basic lidar sensors on the front and back could make a huge difference. And he calls a driver assistance system autopilot when it hasn't reached the level of autonomy which the word autopilot implies.
BPF is compiled in user-space and the bytecode is provided to the kernel -- the compiler definitely isn't shipped as part of the kernel.
well there is a known upper bound on solar cells efficiency. and even then we are pouring all the moneys into improving solar cell efficiency
Thank you, this recently came up in one of my free discussion classes and this is a much better explanation to take to my students.
> why are there so many more sizes for women?

There aren't.

Go down to a basic clothing store like The Gap and look at the different pants options available in the men's section. Skinny, Slim, Straight, Relaxed, Athletic, and Jogger aren't just different styles. Each style also fits differently at the same nominal measurements, because the nominal measurements for pants are waist + inseam but there are many more measurements that actually matter, like the ratio of your waist to thigh to calf. Pants that fit your waist might not fit your legs. Pants that fit your legs might be too tight in the waist.

If a 30 Relaxed fits you, a 30 Slim probably doesn't. They aren't just styles. They are different kinds of sizes with names.

> And while I'm it, many women I know don't wear dresses more than once or twice. Why? This seems wasteful.

Come on. Don't be a sexist caricature.

> It also seems that at least a good number of guys can wear off-the-rack for a decent fit

In my experience this is false. It depends, of course, on what you're willing to accept as "decent fit". I personally, for instance, would not accept a dress shirt that billows like a sail around the waist as a "decent fit". And yet good luck finding a rack men's dress shirt that doesn't do that if you are fit but not rail thin across the chest.
Are there any well known resources to do just this? I have no idea which books and topics to pick up.
I'm talking about experience as in "what it is like to be something"[1] which is different than learning or memory.

[1] This is the most well known paper on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_it_Like_to_Be_a_Bat%3F
As you can see upthread, it is plainly false that he violated Twitter’s TOS.
Which would you rather have? A city that stands empty, ready for people to move in, or a city so full and restricted that people camp on the streets?
After having the risks explained to them and having received our professional recommendation that they add application-specific logging that had no means of accidentally logging PII, one of our customers (a major bank) still insisted that we implement full HTTP body logging in a proxy.

Nobody is going to lose their job over this because the practical consequences are that you have to send out an "our bad" email and offer a credit protection voucher that most customers won't actually use. There are no costs.
There's another tick-born illness that makes people allergic to mammal proteins. Have her abstain from all mammal products for some time to see if the situation improves.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/alpha-gal-syn...
We have a great experience with Pilot (YC W18 company)
Hacker News explicitly lists " most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon." as off-topic - not any story with any political dimension at all, which would likely make most stories posted off topic, were that the case.
The same in what sense? Sameness is not an objective property of organisms.
Agree on "most of the time". There are of course exceptions, like the famous BaseCamp story.
I really want to try this.

A new Reddit

- but with the Wikipedia funding model

- with Snapchat's ephemerality

- an amazing API and all open source code

- all submissions cc-by-sa licensed

Since profit isn't a motive, it would encourage the proliferation of new frontends and clients. As well as really cool mashups (haven't heard that term in awhile - probably due to increasingly closed ecosystems.)

Without having to save user generated content you can save tremendously on servers. You don't have to scale other than enough to handle the fire hose. Everything could reside in memory. Just Redis and Rust.

The content gets scrubbed after a week. No sharded storage is necessary. But due to the license, others can persist content they like.

There's next to zero value in looking up old posts. I don't know why this hasn't been done.
If you're taking suggestions, I think a three-column format would be cool. Basically, the first column is the thin icons you have now. The second column is the tweet column. The third column (equal in size to the second column) would appear when you click on a tweet; instead of loading the responses to that tweet as a modal view as it does now, the responses would appear in the right column.

Basically, this would make Twitter a lot more like several email clients or an RSS reader. Quick and dirty mockup: https://i.imgur.com/Uh9Rbcz.png

Also, would be nice to force Twitter into "latest tweets" mode, and also to provide a userscript for those of us who prefer to avoid untrusted addons.
Now, you can play with it in the Go Playground https://play.golang.org/p/P--lUj4Vbax
The UN was created to do one job: prevent World War III. Everything else it has done is a bonus.
Ductless mini-split heat pumps would work well and are quite efficient.

Each apartment can get a separately metered unit, with one compressor serving multiple indoor air units. The indoor units can be in different rooms, each set to different temperatures, with different schedules (why cool the bedroom during the day?).

Typical units can heat the home to >20C even if the outside temperature outside is 5C, and there are even units that can extract heat from outside when it is -20C (originally designed for northern Japan).
Hello Gusto PR person!

Source: only two comments are both defending Gusto in this thread.
If you set of a thermonuclear bomb in the middle of the air you'll get a bit of fallout from the primary stage that sets it off, the secondary, fusion, stage will produce a bunch of neutrons but no fallout, and the third, depleted uranium, stage will absorb all the neutrons from the fusion and produce a fair amount of fallout. A lot of neutrons will escape and interact with the air but none of the elements you find in the atmosphere turns into anything much worse than deuterium or carbon-14 when you whack it with a neutron so overall its fine. You can replace the third stage with lead and lose half the explosive force but gain an almost entirely clean explosion.

If you set it off near the ground many of the escaping neutrons will interact with things that get very angry when activated by a stray neutron. A big bomb detonated near the ground, to crack open a bunker for instance, can send stupendous amounts of fallout into the air and kill people hundreds of miles down wind of acute "vomit now and die in a week" radiation poisoning.