skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hmmm, from the article:

When the IPCC’s fifth assessment report was published in 2013, it estimated that such a doubling of CO2 was likely to produce warming within the range of 1.5 to 4.5°C as the Earth reaches a new equilibrium. However, preliminary estimates calculated from the latest global climate models (being used in the current IPCC assessment, due out in 2021) are far higher than with the previous generation of models. Early reports are predicting that a doubling of CO2 may in fact produce between 2.8 and 5.8°C of warming. Incredibly, at least eight of the latest models produced by leading research centres in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and France are showing climate sensitivity of 5°C or warmer.

...

Even achieving the most ambitious goal of 1.5°C will see the further destruction of between 70 and 90 per cent of reef-building corals compared to today, according to the IPCC’s “Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C”, released last October. With 2°C of warming, a staggering 99 per cent of tropical coral reefs disappear. An entire component of the Earth’s biosphere – our planetary life support system – would be eliminated. The knock-on effects on the 25 per cent of all marine life that depends on coral reefs would be profound and immeasurable.

...

But these days my grief is rapidly being superseded by rage. Volcanically explosive rage. Because in the very same IPCC report that outlines the details of the impending apocalypse, the climate science community clearly stated that limiting warming to 1.5°C is geophysically possible.

Past emissions alone are unlikely to raise global average temperatures to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. The IPCC report states that any further warming beyond the 1°C already recorded would likely be less than 0.5°C over the next 20 to 30 years, if all anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions were reduced to zero immediately. That is, if we act urgently, it is technically feasible to turn things around. The only thing missing is strong global policy.
Hi, I posted the link. I wouldn't call myself a hacker, I'm a reader.

I'm often in awe of the stuff I read, but I love to spark conversations by posting interesting articles.

Thanks for your input!
On the other hand I think the focus on convertibles is a complete failure. We order a surface here and there but it isn't really something you would want to work with very long compared to a classic design. I also like exchangeable batteries without having to lose warranty. These are service parts ffs.

The market for laptops did shrink significantly due to phones, but I know a lot of people that still prefer to use a classic laptop for home use.

So while the market did shrink, the rest was almost entirely destroyed by bad design decisions.

I still don't know why people use devices like iPads, it is a complete mystery for me. They are as useful as tramp stamps.

I couldn't care less about weight or dimensions if that means I could get high quality parts. Not I don't get them and some models are still beyond 1000$...
>#1) [...] it took /a lot/ of applications [...] I don’t have the actual numbers

..ok?

>#2) Tech interviews are just stupid broken [...]

..ok?

>I was /never/ offered feedback. Not once! [...] This sucks.

You're talking senior positions. A senior, just going by semantics, should be very aware of his standing, and what recruiters want to see for the specific position he wants to be his job. If you have questions, ask the recruiter, that's appreciated. Why should they spend money on the time it takes? For the luls? When you don't even ask for it? You tried senior and you didn't make it. Either you didn't know about important criteria, or you didn't meet them, in both cases you're just not there yet.

>#4) Recruiters are absolutely useless, unless they are good, and then they are gold. Not much to be said here, general recruiter model seems to be throw all your jobs at every applicant, see if any bite. Throw all your applicants at any job, see if it anyone gets hired. Keep commissions if it works.

the entire paragraph is hot air

>#5) Not publishing salary information sucks. Asking someone what they expect to make without publishing salary information double sucks.

If you don't know your value, you're not worth the value they'd be willing to pay if you did. It's not rocket science...

>#6) Weed out the jerks early [...] CTO wrote back and said verbatim, “I honestly wouldn’t have written you back, because the code you sent over is terrible. But my team liked some other things about your resume so I want to give you a second chance to impress me. Can you send over some different code?” [...] And he wrote back and said basically oh I’m sorry, I thought I was clear, I have 50 resumes on my desk from the best CS schools in the country, you went to a boot camp, you /are/ lucky if I decide to interview you. And I was like, no thanks! Can you imagine for working for that guy if that’s how he treats candidates?

guy was honest with you, gave you feedback you did't want to hear (heh, #4) and made sure that you would't waste even more of his time (due to complete lack of context-awareness with respect to the position and concurrence), while still giving you a chance, because some people in his team were interested. bruh. this is the best imaginable case. get a grip
Awkward Cause: A Calgary man tries to live an extremely low-carbon lifestyle
In my opinion, you oversimplified it. Yes, the German car sector's public image is hurt and they want to repair the public image, I agree with that. However, I wouldn't be so sure that the best way for them to repair the brand is by delivering justice.

Does it really help the German car sector's reputation, if people will hear in the news for weeks how they investigate the case, who's responsible, how they figured these details out? I don't think so, because every time it'll be on the news that they caught someone, the news will also repeat the original sleazy act of (alleged?) cheating, and that sticks, that's what people will remember.

However, if they just try to be not too loud about it, most people will forget in a year or two.
socially dominant?

Let logically test that. Statement: A person with larger social power have also larger social network. Proof: we count the social network of a person with low social power and compare that to a person with high social power.

If men has on average more social power than women then they should also have a larger social network. The outcome however is the reverse. This prove that either the claim that men has higher social power on average is false, or that the relation between social power and the size of the social network is wrong.

Social status has also a proven connection to two aspects for all mammals. Reproductive success and life expectancy in old age. If men had higher average social status compare to women then their reproductive success should also be more guarantied and male live expectancy would be longer then women. It is not.

No respected scientist has ever claimed that men has higher average social status then women. Most split social status on gender lines and don't do any comparison between gender.

What you say is relevant for the top 1% in politically and economically subset of the population. In every other aspect of society it is false. A typical presidents of the united state will be a white male. A typical bottom 1% homeless person would be a African American male. A typical childless person is a male, and typical lonely person is also male.
I'm on a Mac - if only it were that simple. Firefox still has poor performance on Retina Macs, and Safari is removing support for a bunch of extensions I use daily in the upcoming Catalina release. I use ungoogled-chromium but would love to move to Firefox sometime soon. They just need to sort out the performance issues.
"That compatibility has been absolutely crucial for the language's continued success"

I am not sure I buy that argument. The problems with Python 2->3 were mostly about Guido and his management style rather than actual language. People were not sure how long Python 2 would be maintained and whether or not they would need to support both and how that would work and all sorts of things like that. And Python 3 was not very complete on release, with a lot of things changing rapidly and backward compat getting shoehorned back into P2. With C++ committee approach this is a lot less likely to be a problem.

I think the reason things never get dropped is because C++ is not well designed. It is basically C with OOP and generics bolted onto it. So low level C stuff like direct memory access is built-in. And since OOP is kind of an afterthought, there is a split between parts of language that do fall under the OOP system and parts that don't. So you can introduce something like std::string using the OOP system and make it super safe, but you cannot replace C strings with it simply because C strings (and direct memory pointers in general) are a core part of the language that is not connected to OOP in any way. Same goes for smart pointers and iterators and functor structs and what not. Most of the cool things in C++11 and C++17 are firmly planted in the OOP world and cannot affect anything that is the "original C" part.
"Bicycle crime is real dude"

I actually admire the fact that they take bicycle theft seriously there.

In my East London flat I look out on an otherwise secluded balcony where a certain gentleman stores an ever-changing selection of nice looking bikes. I suppose it's possible that he's a legitimate bicycle trader, but given the fact that it's a) a total crackhead flat, and b) he doesn't seem to treat these nice bikes with any respect, just dumping them in a heap, I'm 99% sure they're stolen. I'd report it if it wasn't totally pointless, because the London Police don't care about bike theft.
At the very least, chrome new tab pages send your typing cursor to the Omnibox if you try to use the search box. Doesn't work if google.com is set as the new tab page.
Tree planting: Where can I do it and which type is best?
Seems like it would be cheaper to have non-stealth F-22 coatings for training, and then only apply the costly stealth coatings if doing actual missions?
Thanks for the tip. I got BTT and now I only have brightness and volume sliders on the Touch Bar and no escape. Much better. Will probably do some customization but it’s already a big improvement.
Which goes to my point: wanting users to be better educated is wishful thinking.

Do you have a plan to educate even 90% of users? That would be a dream come true, but that still leaves a gaping hole of 10%. I would guess 90% of programmers could explain the difference between HTTP and HTTPS (the other 10% being the dreadfully incompetent).

Right now I'm guessing we're at 5% or so and no amount of wanting that to not be true will change that.
Primary radar is bad at determining speed, especially when the aircraft is not flying directly towards or away from it and even more difficult with a reduced radar signature.

(ATC relies on secondary radar - that is, transponders)
"Google evil. Apple privacy."- HN

While I'm not a fan of obscuring what a URL is actually doing, this already is happening with headers.

But this is news because it's Google.

Apple does this and it's a "feature".

Marketing is a dangerous tool.
I used a 2017 at work for a year and eventually decided to move back to a 2015 -- I just couldn't do the keyboard any more.

I also recently purchased a refurbished 2015 with top tier specs as a personal laptop.

Apple has definitely lost out on thousands of dollars of revenue from just me due to the touchbar/butterfly keyboard feel/butterfly keyboard reliability/usb-c only decisions. And don't even get me started on my inability to replace my iPhone SE with a decent, small phone.
What is the incentive for a hobbyist to set up and maintain a gateway, given that the protocol is not open?
who do you have to know to get a joyride in one of these? do the trainers even have two seats?
Disappointing replies here so far. I wish that were more of a surprise, but HN is not so jazzed by pure humanities topics, it seems.

I can certainly sympathize with the feeling that theory is hard, understanding it is hard. I wish I had appreciated it more when I was in school, because having a professor and a class, syllabus, etc would have been so helpful just in grounding me.
Uhhh I'm not so sure tech is so innocent here. The honeymoon period with big tech ended after 2016, when society finally realized exactly how much influence big tech has over our minds, and how they absolutely show no responsibility towards the power they wield to alter people's realities, instead hiding behind silly excuses about just being platforms.

This isn't just about contrarian views. This is the fact that, thanks to big tech, any nut job can have the same real-estate and influence as a more established journalistic organization that has many people that internally also argue about how to convey messaging to the public.

I say all this as someone who frequently criticizes the mainstream media for also drumming up drama where it doesn't exist, and misinforming the public. So I'm hardly a cheerleader for them. But at least there is some sort of self-policing going on, and a realization of the responsibility they carry in society. There isn't much of that the big tech companies like Facebook.
Yeah, not quite sure what it's doing here. It's kind of a glimpse into a domain that's quite foreign to a lot of the regulars.

For us, you can sort of think of this article as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Sociology is a very different approach to academics than we generally get in STEM. The things you learn are more complex and more open-ended. It's not like a science class, where the correct answer is already known and it's up to you to learn it. Even the best ideas are open to critique, because they're very preliminary.

Learning to learn in that environment felt very unfamiliar to me. I would throw up my hands on the first day in class, because it felt clearly wrong. And it was, but that didn't mean that there wasn't something to learn. The field advances by discussion, but constructing that discussion is difficult because it's potentially open-ended and very prone to being derailed.

So the article is kind of interesting on that score, if only to see what other people have to be told. Though I'm not sure it'll inspire really good discussion here, either.
> People choose iTunes, because features.

This is inaccurate. They don't get to choose iTunes.

Also, a lot of the more popular Electron apps are not as feature rich as some of the native apps, so I don't agree with your assessment. I think they're popular because the people who do seem to like them are loud enough to sway opinion.
The technology is designed to scale to tens of thousands of active end devices per gateway (base station), but for that it does assume that most traffic is from end devices to the network. Larger scale can be achieved by adding more gateways.

End devices hop over multiple channels. Most gateways can receive simultaneously on 8, 16 or up to 64 channels (using 1, 2 or up to 8 antennas). The network can dynamically adapt the channels used by each end device to distribute traffic over the available channels.

End devices will use different data rates (spreading factors) for their transmissions (depending on required range). The LoRa modulation allows gateways to receive multiple transmissions on the same channel simultaneously if those transmissions use different spreading factors (most of the time, the spreading factors are "almost orthogonal").

You can deploy more gateways to create smaller cells. The network can then tell end devices to lower their transmit power.

More details in this video: https://privatevideos.hubs.vidyard.com/watch/iXBL8d2mjyjubK8...
I will in fact make nearly the figure you started with for half of the median household for in my case for a household of 2. Despite your links I'm not sure how you figured the rest of your numbers despite citations.

The ACA subsidies turned out to be a joke for me.

A) Cheap options like high deductible plans or plans with very high co-pays for drugs make no sense if you know your medical expenses will be quite high.

B) They misjudged how much they should pay towards the VERY expensive options they offer on the market and decided at the end of the year that they had paid too much and I ended up with a huge bill.

C) Non of the options were affordable this year

I'm paying $361 every 2 weeks for employer provided medical and this is still cheaper than the market options were.

If you add the cost of drugs I'm paying closer to 10k out of 36k for medical costs + 3k in taxes leaving me with 23k leaving me with 1900 per month.

In regards to the disposition of people in the state people actually tend to cluster around where the jobs are not where the cows are. 75% of the population of WA state lives in the western 40%. Nearly 1/3 in king county alone heavily clustered around Seattle and outlying cities.

I had some difficulty digging up exact recent sources. In 2000 around 69% of citizens lived in places with populations 50K or more.

https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/DataFiles/53180/25602_WA.pd...
I was just thinking this...and that is very good for Google, and perhaps Bing. So this move is totally selfish.
Private Browsing Is Not as Private as You Think
Stupid question but I didn't see it asked or answered:

Does your rig make good tasting espresso!
> For me these are constantly Chrome and Intellij IDEA.

Well, JetBrains is one of few choices that's even more of a hog than Atom.
The problem is, that the car sector and politics are deeply connected here. So yes, they do all they can, that it seems they delivered justice. But they really cannot do that without a fundamental change of the structures and that is not gonna happen. So they found some scapegoats who probably get compensated behind the scenes and yes, they make sure, that this scandal is not gonna happen again, but that's about it.
This is such bullshit, who the hell runs 64gbs of hdd. Budget laptops 6-8years ago already shipped with at least 300gb hdds.
Machine Translation Evaluation with Bert Regressor
Interesting!

Are we starting to see that effect of culture change on results ? How ?

Or did they somehow managed to prevent that ?
This is likely moot nowadays with drone technology, stealth drones, and modern cruise missiles. They're far more likely to be deployed to take out anti-air defenses before even these aircraft come in.
if you know the structure beforehand, why not generate a perfect hash?
> When you value uniqueness over conformity, then it becomes easier to be proud to be (and be attracted to) less conventionally-shaped people.

This is merely a justification for self gratification through inordinate love of food and drink. There's a natural shame about being overweight, and it's unfortunate that people encourage others to push past that. Even non-religious people can see that this is unhealthy and just plain bad for us. I was about 50lbs overweight for a few years, but I never let go of the shame that it brought me, knowing it would mean giving up on my only hope of getting back to a healthy weight.
Everything is GMO to a degree, and without GMO people starve as long as we all live in cities. So start a farm with a group of like minded people, or be dependent on corporate farms
How hard is it to generate noise?
I don't see what the problem is. They're a bunch of criminals. The Australians I mean.
I too wanted to comment on some of the points, as this just isn't a well written article and reads more like the rants of someone who isn't ready emotionally, letting the frustrations boil over into not evaluating the scenarios properly.
> you don’t think that’s a problem?

It's a problem, just like the routers that aren't getting updated. It's not my problem.

> You are really claiming that Android has a better update strategy than iOS and is more secure?

Yes. I've already explained why, and you haven't refuted it.

> Which Android phones from 2011 are still getting updates?

I don't use eight year old phones, so this doesn't matter to me. If you use old phones, you could argue that iOS is marginally more secure than the Android options; but that argument is irrelevant to the purchase decisions of 99% of the people here who do upgrade devices regularly for whom there are Android options that are much more secure than iOS phones.
I don't think one needs to believe tha the government is always a good actor. The question is if the benefits of surveillance to say, public safety and order will outweigh the likelyhood of bad outcomes or abuse. That's not a trivial question, and it differs strongly depending on which country we're talking about.
Also if you're running 64gb hdd there's no way that you're running Windows version that takes 30gb
There is an all-new electric Fiat 500, based on a new electric-only platform, in development for a 2020 release.

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/motor-shows-geneva-motor-...
It's a different problem. SC2 is a realtime strategy game, and Kriegspiel is turn-based. The information asymmetry is different in both games, and the goal is different.

In SC2, you can perform realtime monitoring of changes and track them with multiple maneuvers all at once. In kriegspiel you cannot.

Also in SC2, when you see something, you know what it is. You don't know what kind of pieces are where in kriegspiel. Mistaking a queen for a pawn in kriegspiel can be a game-loser.
>One challenge is that theory is not theology, though it sometimes tries hard to be, and though students, particularly students looking for language with which to critique various forms of power, often treat it that way.

I feel like this is something I see often where new language and ideas come out and folks who find it convient use them as a sort of unquestionable club to unleash upon the world.

I'm not sure that no matter how correct the theory is, that doing so is helpful in their cause.

Taking theory out of the classroom and into the larger world seems very difficult.
No. Not a F-22 or F-35 are unlikely to actually be invisible. A B-2 bomber has a better chance.

The talking heads from the military may talk about 'invisibility', but they are full of shit. Just propaganda for the tax payer.

The problem is the physical size of the jet. In order to absorb the radar the material needs to be the proper size in relation to the wavelength. A B-2 bomber is large enough to absorb useful radar frequencies, but F-35 or F-22 isn't.

What the F-35/F-22 stealth does get, however, is invisibility in the XHF and higher frequency ranges, which is what is used for radar guided missiles. So they will have a major advantage against ground and air launched long range missiles.

The F-22 also has good infrared suppression, which protects it against infrared guided missiles. F-35s have a large IR signature, so they are probably not much better then other US jets. Traditionally speaking it's IR weapons that have caused losses for USA airplanes in modern times.

At VHF and lower frequencies the F-22 and F-35 can be detected, but those radars don't offer enough resolution to make them particularly useful for missiles. People suspect that with multiple angles and computer algorithms it may be possible to target a jet that way, but who knows.

So if you were Russia and you detected something with VHF long range radar and then you pointed a shorter range XHF radard at it... and nothing shows up then you can be reasonably certain that it's a American stealth fighter jet. That doesn't mean they can do much about it, though.

To combat this it is suspected that Americans use a technique that involves 'ghosting' commercial airliner traffic to mask the signatures of their jets against the lower frequency, longer range, radar.