skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They talk about 'great stockpiles' then quote a figure of 22,000 m3 of high-level waste. 22,000 m3 of material is a tiny volume. Speaking from a bulk material moving perspective, that is maybe 12 hours work with a big excavator.

Speaking as a mining engineer, in an active mine site you'd need to take special precautions to make sure a 22,000 m3 stockpile didn't get lost. If you don't put it in a designated spot, you're not going to be able to find it again. We aren't talking a big pile of dirt here.

At volumes that small, if someone irresponsibly dumped it in the middle of the Sahara with a thick layer of rubble over the top it would be unlikely to be found and cause anyone any measurable harm.

Literally the only reason anyone cares is because the volumes are so small we could reasonably achieve 0 net impact. You try achieving that with lead mining, coal mining, rare earth mining for renewables, etc, etc. The volumes of material involved would overwhelm any attempt. So people don't bother talking about it. Only for nuclear fuel does it start to matter. We already churn out larger volumes of nastier substances as part of our industrial supply chain.

postscript the other good reason to talk about it the volumes are so small that if it doesn't get attention the aforementioned oops-we-lost-it problem will crop up. I mean, wow. 22 kcm of material. Going to need special markings just to distinguish it from a roll in the turf.
(to save someone some time, having to look it up, it's a quote from Mr Robot)
Hi thundergolfer. mrjn is the person who created dgraph, so I think he knows what the terminology is.
Intel claims servermarket shrinked with 33% are wrong
At this point it's faster than most interpreted languages for most things, but speed at that level is rarely something people are pining for.

PHP still carries its legacy cruft around but if you can ignore that it's a useful language. As is often pointed out the real issue is all the PHP 5.4 and older code just hanging around and the desire to be backwards compatible in the hopes maintainers will upgrade PHP seems ... optimistic.
The best option for dealing with nuclear 'waste' is to use the use up the energy contained within it.

Moltex Energy is one such proposal to do just that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju59gcdmdvI
I do agree, after 20 years.
Also, what happens to the stuff we toss into space? People still seem to make the same mistake our ancestors did regarding tossing stuff into the ocean.

To be more precise: achieving a velocity high enough to e.g. detonate on the surface of the sun (in particular carrying tons of nuclear waste) won't be cheap for a long time. [1]

Stuff we "toss out there" would probably just keep floating in an uncontrolled (in the long run) earth bound orbit and might come back at some point.

[1] https://youtu.be/uNS6VKNXY6s
I've noticed you do these quite often, and I thoroughly approve. I just wonder, do you do all of them by hand, or have you automated the process by now?
I'd really like to work for Mozilla on Mozilla products, but somehow the interview process is broken.

I've managed to go through 3 interviews (2 technical, one with the team-coordinator) but then was rejected because they've found some other with more years of relevant (?) experience on the topic for the position.

Now they write this. So my question is: why don't you open more positions, letting people be hired (and paid) to work on products, instead of looking for charitable work from volunteers?
In reality the way that markets are cleared wasn't necessarily so much more different than a turn-based one, even in one where the clearing happens by the minute. The issue is, indeed, mostly with HFT. However, you shouldn't consider HFTs to be market participants in the traditional sense. Most of them focus solely on moving stuff around very fast instead of actually trying to purchase or sell things for a separate economic goal (e.g. production, hedging, short- and long-term investments).

Once you disregard the rapid transactions that do not have a significant effect on the price, your average human investor is probably putting down some fill-or-kills or limit orders and actually benefits from HF liquidity trading.

It's hard for me to understand, let alone explain, why milliseconds would matter for the human investor, but I what I can tell you is that GS is not investing 100M USD just for buying derivatives every other minute.
Where in space though - a low orbit will decay and further away just means dramatically increased costs.

Far better to just have it in a hole in the ground somewhere geologically inactive.

Edit: I'd far rather it be buried than whirling around above my head!
A much better idea would be to package it appropriately, and drop it on the subducting side of the mid-Pacific subduction zone.

Approximately 1/10,000 as much energy would be involved, and it would be 100% safe.
How to deal with hosting that pushed you to upgrade even you may not need it
Same here.

Using GraphQL in the PHP backend und frontend TS. The schema is exported to TS and thus everything is fully types. A blessing.
> Two characteristics of a city are systematically associated with the appearance of significant figures who grow up there: whether the city is a political or financial center, regardless of its population, and whether the city is the location of an elite university. The effect of these latter two variables is quite large. As the last column indicates, being a political or financial center increased the expected number of significant figures by 64 percent, holding everything else constant, while having an elite university increased that expected number by 184 percent.

Human Accomplishment: Charles Murray, page 369

More generally this critique ignores the second industrial revolution altogether. The U.K. shows progress outside universities is possible, as does the preceding industrious revolution, where water and wind power and the beginnings of steam happened with minimal involvement from universities but progress in chemistry and electricity generation and electrical engineering was absolutely a product of the technical university system. That’s why Germany was at the forefront of this era of rapid progress and the U.K. wasn’t despite its huge initial advantage in capital.
I wonder if there’s some opportunity in building a (paid) interactive story or game.

Maybe not exactly for yourself, but maybe doing it for your kids and involving them could be something.
> Not sure whether it can be argued if it is really a better alternative.

In science it's better to have a known problem (radioactive waste), than hundreds of thousands of unknown problems (global warming).

> Florida even actively prevents businesses from engaging in roof top solar panels

Roof top solar panel is one of the worst way to generate energy, you just add the inefficiency of low scale on top of the inefficiencies of solar panels. Just about everything is better than that.

And then additionally, you can build all the solar and wind energy you want, you still need a constant energy to support it anyway.
But did it helped your carrier)?
I publish an extension on the store of Chrome with 1+ million
of (technical) users. Three years ago, someone proposed me to buy it for 50,000 USD. He clearly indicated that he was interested by the user base...
My hope is that they do that once they offer a premium version of Firefox.
Exactly, they'll nag a little, but almost all people I know have several ways of DM contacting them.

It's better to cultivate that flexibility, than to convert people to flock to the next latest one true DM app.
And put our first manned moon-base nearby. What should we call it? Alpha?
Tomorrow's Gods: What Is the Future of Religion?
Nuclear waste and global warming aren’t even nearly the same category of problem. An entire area the size of Nevada being uninhabitable for thousands of years (which is worse than the worst case nuclear waste scenarios) is not as bad as our current course of climate change.

Build all of the solar you want, it’s not a solution for base-load supply. There are cases already (see Hawaii) where solar power is saturated yet they still burn carbon fuels at night. Energy storage does not exist in any meaningful way for solar and every opinion like yours is tacit approval to keep destroying the planet.

If that’s not a facepalm moment of stupidity, I don’t know what is.
I get the feeling confluence is as good as the effort you put in. For the love of God tag your pages or don't complain when nobody knows they exist.
Right people on the right places. Simple as that.
Because hiring more people costs money and volunteers are free?
static linking works also with glibc, AFAIK (using it)
My belief is that since there's nothing except for life, life of any quality is infinitely better than no life.

However this belief of mine is currentlly being viscerally challenged.
I feel like the solution is literally staring us in the face and we're not seeing it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_borehole_disposal

100% safe storage for literally all of our waste, forever. Why are we not doing that? I can only assume that it's because the spent waste is still "valuable" so it's worth keeping around in case someone figures out more and more efficient ways of processing it to recover useful material from it. Putting it 5km in the ground makes is completely unrecoverable by anyone.
I can respect both positions. I understand completely why people want to hang on to life no matter what, and I also completely understand wanting to be done with a life that offers nothing but pain.

This is why it's desperately important to be honest with your loved ones about what your wishes are, and to respect and help them with theirs.

Personally, I want to live now, and I suspect from watching other people at the end of life, I'll know when I'm ready to go.
> instead of handing out next generation a warmed/messed up planet with dangerous levels of green house gases, we would be giving them a pile of dangerous radioactive waste several miles under the ground

Without actual numbers this just sounds like FUD. How much nuclear waste is produced? How much volume is it? Why is it so bad that we keep it under ground? How does that compare to costs of other power sources?

So far it looks like nuclear is by far cheapest and cleanest least deadly source of power and only irrational phobias are in the way of adopting it in planetary scale and developing even better reactors and more efficient waste management procedures.
> we would be giving them a pile of dangerous radioactive waste several miles under the ground. Not sure whether it can be argued if it is really a better alternative.

Seriously, we are pondering if a completely inert mass of nuclear waste sitting a mile inside the crust where it can harm nothing and from where there is no incentive to dug it up, is a better option than 6 orders of magnitude more CO2 dumped in the atomoshpere, bringing the climate to Jurasic levels, wiping off a large part of the biological diversity of Earth and threatening our very existence on the planet?

Nuclear power is not without it's problems. It's capital intensive, it's politically risky therefore expensive, it can, when managed badly, lead to (typically, tolerable) contamination and harm to people.

Of those problems, the handling of waste is the easiest to solve: just put them somewhere where they can't harm anyone.
C++ is also full of cruft. But you can use a subset of it and it becomes very good.

Also this new mantra of "speed doesn't matter" is what brought us to Windows 10, Electron, etc. No thanks. I'm taking a stand against slow software.
The Birth of the Semicolon
> * Memory allocation functions malloc, calloc, realloc, reallocarray, valloc, pvalloc, memalign, and posix_memalign fail now with total object size larger than PTRDIFF_MAX. This is to avoid potential undefined behavior with pointer subtraction within the allocated object, where results might overflow the ptrdiff_t type.

I did not think they would take this decision so soon, but it is, in my opinion, the right decision to take. There will be complaints from users of memory-heavy programs running on 32-bit platforms though.

For context, this blog post shows how things break when allocation functions are allowed to create blocks of more than PTRDIFF_MAX: https://trust-in-soft.com/objects-larger-than-ptrdiff_max-by...
I haven't changed jobs since I started contributing two years ago. So it hasn't, really, but I learned a lot. It probably will help in the future.
As an Enterprise SEO with over 15 years experience I don't really give any F&%!'s about your favourite language

What I need is something that is faster than the competition, is properly built to minimise usage of our crawl budget and is flexible enough to add new content quickly can properly handle site migrations can implement hreflang for say a dozen locales.
I think more than an external incentive, it would provide an incentive for workers to be able to afford their own immortality, prior to debilitating diseases.
> I don't understand why Shopify doesn't create a search engine for Shopify products. Overnight they would become a powerhouse akin to Amazon and solve the #1 issue faced by sellers -- product discovery.

I don't see the appeal. I really, really like Shopify as a seller and would always recommend it to someone looking to sell online, regardless of volume. However as a customer I couldn't care less about a Shop's backend as long as I have a pleasant shopping and ordering experience. And Shopify alone doesn't guarantee that.

A general search engine and price comparison for online stores/products, regardless of platform, is more appealing, but I think we already have that, at least here in Germany with Idealo, Geizhals or Google Shopping.

Of course, when Shopify can provide fast, Prime-like shipping with their new fulfillment plans that's an actual appeal worth searching for.
There is one such site in Finland:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_spent_nuclear_fuel_repo...
How to understand the code of the Aliens and refactor properly
To put things in perspective, a 10x10x10 meters cube is 1000 cubic meters. 22 of those cubes is what we’re talking about. It’s tiny.
Your approach is an antipattern. It works great for five minutes after you launch. Then you need to maintain multiple versions of the site. And inevitably the two versions start to diverge. And guess which version will get short shrift? There's even a term for this. "Separate but equal". Said sarcastically. No offense, but I recommend you research this a bit more.
> can only assume that it's because the spent waste is still "valuable" so it's worth keeping around in case someone figures out more and more efficient ways of processing it to recover useful material from it. Putting it 5km in the ground makes is completely unrecoverable by anyone.

You can turn the waste into energy indeed, there's a few plants doing that and there's been prototype plants before. The issue is that it does not make sense economically yet since radioactive materials are so cheap.
This is wrong information, nuclear power is not "low-carbon" and can not be considered as a safe option for future energy production.

Nuclear energy is a way to keep energy production centralized and maximize profits of a small group with an option to blackmail nation states forever because "too big to fail" + extreme health risks for millions of people.

This is a dangerous path and there is no economical gain for a society to bet on nuclear power.

Also there are some hard physical facts that might be of interest, e.g. we would need many more nuclear power plants to have any impact on global energy production - but that would quickly lead to "peak uranium". Does it make sense to replace one limited resource with another limited resource if we have the option to use an unlimited resource right now?

The nuclear energy gang is a mafia, generating unbelievable amount of problems for our descendants with a business modell that depends on milking the tax payer - an extraordinary stupid idea that only exists, because our still extremely primitive way of doing international politics is based on nuclear weapons, what is the real reason why nuclear power plants still exist.

Please do your own research. Here is a quick link:

https://theecologist.org/2015/feb/05/false-solution-nuclear-...

Edit - one more URL:

https://www.irena.org/publications/2019/Apr/Global-energy-tr...
London is rapidly losing all appeal. The pound is tanking. Brexit is going to totally decimate the economy long term.
They were talking about group chats.
> discount the cost involved in dealing with this radioactive trash

That is 100% wrong. In fact in the US for example the money to handle radioactive waste was collected almost from the beginning.

The Government HAS a huge fund, that is owned by nuclear power utilites, this fund can be used by the government to solve the problem.

Unfortunatly, anti-nuclear people have made any progress on nuclear waste managment impossible, but this is not, and never has been about money.

> we would be giving them a pile of dangerous radioactive waste several miles under the ground. Not sure whether it can be argued if it is really a better alternative.

That is also nonsense. In no way of estimation, radioactive waste is close to as dangerous as climate change. Handling of radioactive waste is not that difficult and in the future it, once nuclear power is more standard, those things can be used as nuclear fuel again. You are not handing down useless stuff, but a well controlled resource.

> Use the safe option first, and wait for nuclear option to mature until we get a better grip on what to do with its dangerous trash.

Nuclear waste has not been a technical issue for decades. Its a purley political problem.

First of all, the amount of nuclear waste is wastly over-estimated. The danger from civilian nuclear waste is wastle over-estimated as well.

And more importantly, if we actually had a large nuclear industry, this 'waste' would actually be quite useful and most of it should never be disposed in a permanent way.
You may get a drive by lawsuit from a lawyer looking for a quick buck, but you will likely defend it quite well.
I'm not familiar with Ulf's work, but it sounds very interesting. I tried finding his work on stochastic models for shape generation but didn't find it. Mind pointing me in the right direction?
> That's why you create unemployment benefit, preferably in a way that does not discourage going back to work.

Alternatively you could subsidise low wage employment via a wage subsidy like the earned income tax credit. That way you get more people in work as opposed to fewer and those people develop skills and professional networks which will allow the recipients to escape low wage work in time.
Still, you can always only go so far with efficiency gains - they are important, but should not be depended on instead of looking for new cheap & clean energy sources.

And there are also some technologies, that while very energy hungry, can help fix many of the pressing world problems (large scale desalination, plasma waste processing, large scale CO2 capture, various benefiting megaprojects, etc.).
Yes but we have groups on multiple platforms, just because the group is stuck there doesn't mean that I am.
A perfect market where all participants get information at the same time does not exist.

>This profit is immediately realised by the increase in price of all commodities globally.

This would only hold if there weren’t profitable short trades. The profit can also be realized by the decrease in global commodities that would have been slower before.
Make diamond batteries
And people complain as much about C++ as they do about PHP. The emerging languages have put conservative, thoughtful design at the forefront, in great part due to these frustrations.
Full disclosure: I don't disagree. In fact, the TV show is pretty funny.

That said, in the name of viewers and profits, they are drawn to the mundane and the minutia. Yes, the model works for them. But that doesn't mean every media source has to be so disposable in terms of actual quality/value of the message delivered.
The idea that Ruby and R will die any time soon is pretty ridiculous. Massive user base and lots of active development. Perl probably has more lines in use that a lot of languages and although there isn't much active development it will be in use for a while.

The idea Java is doomed is ridiculous at the moment. With android and enterprise software development it must have one of the biggest KLOCs out there.
> Some people do and think that everyone should think the same. I find this mentality rather stifling.

I feel like people should be more informed over the implications. If they still don't care once I explain the issues, that's their prerogative to not care. I feel like most people don't understand why the "I have nothing to hide" mentality will cost us plenty of freedoms we still have.

I agree with you though, most people aren't like the majority of HN users, they just don't care or don't understand.
The scheme is found at an earlier date in a novel by Jerzy Kosinski. I believe it's in his book called "Steps" (1968), however I forget exactly which work it's in.

The scam seems to be well known. I presume it happened sometime.
Thankfully we are not restricted to the resources available on this spherical world as without energy from outside it we would all freeze to death in short order.
Cisco settles with cybersecurity whistleblower, setting a precedent
Except nuclear costs a lot more. L

For the same amount of money we’d get a lot more energy out of solar or wind. And no radioactive waste and proliferation worries as a bonus.
I mean, this is what happened with MariaDB, and over the years more distros have outright replaced MySQL with MariaDB. He made a lot of money selling MySQL too.

I don't condone this idea for browser plugins because the userbase for plugins are usually install and forget. I don't think most devs spend their time reading all the release notes of every plugin they install.

When you install a database server / engine, you take time to figure out if it's the one you want or not. You research the company and other companies using the product.
General anesthesia is usually a combination of multiple drugs. We know exactly what each drug does, medical science isn’t so good at explaining why the drugs have these actions. anesthetists combine these drugs to suit the requirements of the procedure and the patient

Anesthesia usually includes drugs with distinct, separate actions, like an analgesic (to block pain receptors), muscle relaxants (so patients can be moved/organs accessed), CNS depressants (to prevent unexpected spasms disturbing the surgeon), coma-inductors (so patients don’t chat with the staff and freak them out after practicing on cadavers for years), and amnesia-inductors (because surgery is kind of gross).
can you name any?
btw. putting it somewhere and forgetting about it is definitiv not an option.
Not even in science alone; climate-wise having 22km3 of solid material is much preferable over the 30 gigatonnes (!) of CO2 emissions that are just vented into the air nowadays. (and that's just co2, the source [1] I found with a second of googling mentions 60 gigatonnes total)

[1] https://www.pbl.nl/en/publications/trends-in-global-co2-and-...
Moonset from the ISS demonstrating this property: https://youtu.be/bc_jSezwruc
I think you’ve proven the point here? Poker does not hurt anyone else. Wall St does. See: 2008.
So much wrong with this.

Nuclear is clearly the most 'low-carbon' energy that exists, and every systematic analysis has shown it as such.

I'm not gone address your bad economics.

> peak uranium

Peak uranium is nonsense. Just like peak coal and peak oil. We have unlimited amount of nuclear materials, not even U-235 is close to any peak. We have unlimited U-238 and Thorium that we could use as well.