skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Naah, that was a much more normal "flux capacitor", and it was only "fluxing":

>Time circuits on, Flux Capacitor ... fluxing, Engine running All right.
Didn't seem to work very well when Russia banned "gay propaganda." Russian constitution doesn't really seem worth the paper it's printed on and more or less is run by conservative-democratic mobs.
None of these are third places, though; they're more expensive commercial activities, and non-participatory performances. Not the same thing. They don't facilitate the same social or psychological functions as the relaxed, inexpensive, unstimulating and improvisational third-place.
It's not super accurate, but most cars these days also have outside temperature. Add a humidity sensor inside and outside, and we have temperature and humidity inside and outside the car, which should give us enough information for a basic microcontroller to approximate the temperature differential across the glass and whether or not fog (or frost) is likely.
That would be ideal, to be able to make a decision a priori and then stick with it "forever". But as Mike Tyson would say, everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.

In reality, you can only make effective decisions once you've had the experience of what you are deciding about.

Also, regarding the specific issue of zombie companies, they can always be brought back to life. There is tremendous value in having a fully working organization/team.
Ask HN: How do you maintain lists in a company
What ideas and techniques do people use to maintain lists such as reading or ideas lists, in their organisations?
I'm not very knowledgeable on this, but I'll try to get the ball rolling. If you want details I'm not going to satisfy.

Decentralized internet vs centralized internet is like 1 person witnessing an event vs 10 people witnessing an event. If 10 people witness the event, the information is more resilient than that single person's faulty memory (aka data corruption), that single person becoming inaccessible (a server going down), that single person lying (hacking), or if that single person intentionally withholds some information (throttling/censoring).
I'm a hundred percent with you. I've seen the term "Zombie" to describe a company that is sustainable, providing a valuable service and paying their employees a lot on here. And noone was ever able to convince me why that is a bad thing. The fact that this business is only interested in bubbles and thinks sustainability is disease, really goes to show how fundamentally putrid this whole industry is.
From the header of the website:

> arXiv Vanity renders academic papers from arXiv as responsive web pages so you don’t have to squint at a PDF.

Why aren't more PDFs displayed like this on the web? I thought the math stuff would be a problem but this site shows the math stuff alright.

Anyone knows how to reliably convert complex PDFs to beautiful web pages like this?
I'm not sure why, but I really enjoyed this piece. I wouldn't have thought that smaller articles, such as restaurant reviews, would go through a fact-check at an outfit the size of the New Yorker.

And yet, it's a good thing it did! Wouldn't want people to think the grasshoppers are fried or that the guac is seasoned with adobo.
So when China acts protectionist, this is OK and in tune with free-trade globalism, because globalism "doesn't lock you in to believing every item should be produced internationally."

But when they accuse the US of that very same protectionism, this is not hypocritical, because of complex and nuanced reasons. Do I understand that correctly?
60 year old white men have voted in every election for the past 40 years and people generally don’t switch ideology this late in life. The democrats strategy has always been to improve turnout from groups that dont vote in every election. There are more democrats in the US than republicans, but not everyone votes. Elections are determined on getting good turnout, not swaying people to jump ship to your side.
You can read on other devices too - such as android phones, tablets, and iPads. Im willing to go on a limb here and say these devices probably sell more than Kindle. Kindle is not the only device to read this content.

The mental gymnastics you’re going through here to support the Amazon monopoly claim is funny.
Same thing Happened in Honda CR-V. They removed the volume knob, and people had to use touchscreen; there was a huge backlash, so they brought back the physical volume knob.
I haven't read the paper, so I'm purely arguing against your argument here: You said "whatever the exact details of the field configuration might be, it's inescapably true that the electric potential is zero at infinity, rises to a positive maximum at the + plate, falls quickly to a negative minimum at the - plate, and then returns gradually to zero at infinity again."

This is true, for a charge at rest. It is equally true for the gravitational potential. Yet it is possible to extract momentum from other massive bodies through a gravitational slingshot. So I don't think one can conclude purely from that argument that a static field distribution can't extract momentum from other charged particles.

The fact that the charges are moving means you have to worry about which frame you do the calculations in. The slingshot works because it preserves momentum in the center-of-mass frame, not in the solar system frame. The same applies in E&M, When you have charges in motion you have to worry about electrodynamic effects.

My E&M is far too rusty for me to say whether those effects change the conclusion of your argument, but I believe you have to include them before making a valid conclusion.

(Background: I don't teach E&M. I just argue about it with my wife, who sometimes does... ;-)
Depends on the sector. If you’re a software engineer or white collar worker, leaving your job for a prolonged period of time is a matter of planning and frugality.

Speaking only for myself, I intentionally lived in a small apartment in order to make sure I had at least a year of income saved. I did this pretty early in my career in the bay area. I believe it’s still quite possible to do this if you are willing to forgo purchases that signal wealth (i.e, live in the smallest manageable apartment, keep driving your beater for a long time, cook instead of eating out).
See my earlier comment on this below. In Europe, the PET had been pretty much what the Apple II had been in the US. It is heart shattering how Commodore/CBM was unable to exploit this position (e.g., by providing an upgrade path to the next level) – whatever the internal dynamics behind this.
That's a great question! If I'm understanding it right, I think the two ideas can complement each other. For broader goals or when you're totally clear what you want to do and how you get there, it's fine to take time. Even then, you can use shorter feedback loops to make the process more efficient.

Say you want to become a better writer. That's a broad goal and there are several approaches you could take towards that goal. On one extreme, you could read a lot about writing, write little, try to perfect things, and get something out once or twice a month. On the other extreme, you may write every single day and get it out in front of some people, get consistent feedback, learn, and improve. Both of these approaches will take time… the second approach, with the shorter feedback loop, can probably get you there faster though.
Careful...most of those cheap burgers are prison or school grade meat. Frozen pucks of gristle.
Nitpick, but booleans are perfectly ordinary scalars. Maybe the author (and you) might prefer something like “homoiconicity falls on a spectrum” or “homoiconicity isn’t a binary property” or some other ordinary way to make this statement.

I quite liked your link. Instead of deciding what the word “homoiconic” ought to mean, it just showed what you can do in a homoiconic language with quasiquote syntax. Delightful and to-the-point!
Everyone helps the economy. Making it rich vs poor is kind of absurd.

Inequality is not as bad as it is made out to be. With our current level of automation for goods and services consumed by the masses, a high degree of equality would already result in mass unemployment since only so many people are needed to operate the highly automated production that would benefit an equal society.

Inequality on the other hand creates a LOT of diversity in demand for goods and services and this in turn drives a lot of job creation.

You need a LOT of people to build a $350 million yacht for example. If no one could afford something like that, it wouldn't be built and those jobs would no longer exist.

Furthermore, besides helping the economy via investments and spending on things that only they can afford, they also help in philanthropic ways that no government would be capable of helping:

https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/07/29/against-against-billio...
How to Enable Always on Display on Any Android Phone
It’s somewhat of a relief to know it wasn’t just me...
I still don't see how that removes determinism and very much would be predetermined as you know I would write.

Even if the need for hunger disappears. Our previous variables/memories/wants/desires we collected would still factor into everything. Let's say we made a machine at this point to remove those variables from our brain. Well the action taken to do that or not would be predetermined.

So if we did wipe everything from our brains and started anew. Something would make our personality and it wouldn't be our own choice. Even if we planned for our brain to be rewritten a certain way before the reset. That's a predetermined decision factored from all the previous events experienced.
More people need to challenge non-compete agreements. In the majority of cases (especially for non-management employees) they're illegal and don't hold up.
I believe this canoe is picking up cannonballs along the way.
Flawlessly moral or not, choosing to do nothing or choosing to obey is also a moral decision.

But you're also muddying a clear case of free speech, that Americans find a basic human right with, slippery-slopeism.
That is true, but it's still not for corporations to decide. I hate the system they have imposed on them but that still doesn't give me the right to decide what's right and wrong. Same goes with China. If Google doesn't like it then they can always exert their influence in other ways.
Although Scheme's question mark for predicates has had influence in other languages -- besides Clojure, it shows up in Ruby, for example. And for head/tail versus first/rest, I don't really mind either one, but head/tail is pretty strange if you haven't seen it already -- it makes the programmer imagine that their data is some sort of animal that needs to be beheaded (or is it supposed to to be the head and tail of a coin?)
Why do people buy tens of thousands of Magic cards when you only need 40 in a deck to play?
He literally says, "it might be a good business but it's not a startup."

Small businesses and startups (as YC uses the term) are different things. Your neighborhood coffee shop is not a startup that leveled off, it's a small business.
HN is not a single unified voice. Many have been speaking against all the instances of perceived government overreach you point out (GDPR etc). What is and isn't overreach/immoral is obviously not the same across peoples and groups and actions. This comes across as interesting to you only because the hypocrisy appears apparent by how you've grouped the actions and players.
An excellent talk by Sturart Sierra that covers much of the same ground "Homoiconicity: It Is What It Is"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7zyGMcav3c

spoiler: his talk also does not finish with a definition of homoiconic either
A big issue is the legality or illegality of these protests is itself being disputed.

These protests are in large part about Russian citizens reasserting their constitutional rights both to participate in elections (as currently all the opposition candidates to Moscow municipal elections have been denied access to elections, and many of them have been arrested) and to their right of unarmed protest and demonstration (Articles 32 and 31 respectively of Russian constitution).

In this regard, the claim of the protesters (disputed, of course, by Russian government) is that their actions are explicitly legal under Russian law, and instead the actions of the Russian government in forbidding this protest and arresting participants are illegal and violate the constitution. The argument is that these restrictions to assemble and protest don't have to be obeyed by anyone - citizens or Google - as they're unconstitutional and can't be valid law.
I would reword it as "the primary representation is also a data structure literal in the language itself". I think "literal" is basically what they mean by "primitive type", i.e. there is first-class syntax to create the structure.

Another example of a homoiconic language is XSLT, where the syntax of the language is based on XML, but it also has XML literals.
So, basically we are somebody's OpenAI Gym and at the end of the training certain agents will be selected as useful for higher reality and the rest discarded.

However, the same can be said about this universe being a prison where failed conscious beings from extraverse come to either improve or be killed off once for all. That would be far less optimistic, however way more realistic when I look around the state of our universe.
I'm not going to argue that the navy should be allow insane schedule, if it's due to budget or poor planing, but in case of a real war maybe you can't expect the grew to get a full 8 hour sleep.

A warship need to be able to operate under the worst of circumstances. In that case every move you make needs to be reflex, and I can imagine that touchscreens aren't ideal for quick precise motions, done by reflex, after only 4 hours of sleep.
Something I would love to see is how much it costs to keep some of these smaller startups running. Cushion app used to do this and it was really great.
How about "defining" homoiconic to mean that it's easy to manipulate programs? More specifically, say a programming language is homoiconic if (1) the standard library for the language includes a parser, and (2) the parser returns data structures that are easily manipulated by functions in the standard library.

Point (2) can be achieved by having the parser return generic data structures such as lists, arrays and hashtables for which the standard library will probably have lots of convenient functions (this what Lisps do); or by having a dedicated AST data type, but including a bunch of AST manipulation functions in the standard library (like Template Haskell).

Of course, this isn't a very precise definition because it relies on the undefined terms "parse" and "easily manipulated". Does read_file_to_string() count as a (trivial) parser that produces strings, which can be easily manipulated by standard string functions? The idea is this doesn't count, but I'll leave the problem of defining what counts as a parser to other philosophers of programming languages. :)
Well, I guess your assertion is right. Whatever we were to think as heaven would just be what we were programmed to think overtime.
If multiple sellers, who presumably are not colluding to raise prices, are selling at a certain price, then that just happens to be the market price. Cities have very expensive rent, high pay, high everything costs, so the price of the products reflect that.

Also, a bar (or club) is dependent on its social atmosphere, partly dictated by the type of clientele it brings in. A place that sells $5 beer is going for a different clientele than a place that sells $15 beer (i.e. richer people).
Thats not just you. A skilled joystick player will be easily beaten by a mediocre player with a keyboard/mouse if all the other conditions are the same.

Infact, most games have aim assist if you use a controller as means of input.
Compliance with laws varies by country band city.
Why wouldn't better access to information be good for Google? (the literal information company)
> I for one never trust anyone who doesn't drink.

And if they can't drink for medical reasons?
No, a majority of the time, they are not illegal outside of California.

State legislatures have been doing a great job in preventing non-competes from being banned, because they aren't scared of organized political action by labour.
I wouldn't call it satire. Chuck is still what a lot of people could call profoundly weird, but we're all here with him not laughing at him.
learn the way the internet learned, first look at html.
learn how the language works, then start "reading html and practice understanding it.
then go for JS , then CSS.
Here is a catchall of sorts where all 3 and more! are discussed:

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Learn/Getting_start...

i suggest find someplaces like this to retrieve some skeletons so you can see simplicity then learn to flesh it up, start small just make a page that says hello world, and displays a kitten pic , or some such thing:

https://linuxwebdevelopment.com/html5-boilerplate/

how you learn is important top down or bottum up.
do you look at the big picture grand scheme and dissect it to find what parts make it up?
or do you look at fundamental pieces, and examine how they relate to each other and function as a group?

here is a place to experiment with JS script so you can edit a snippet and see how things change:

https://jsfiddle.net/boilerplate/react-jsx/

keep in mind there are many flavours of java, but basically its a programme sitting inside the html.

CSS can be confusing to read if you have no context for it.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Learn/CSS/Introduct...

basically CSS is a way of enforcing a certain look or layout
but there are some cool tricks that can do things like animations, or changing fonts formats and images according to some event in the browser.

frameworks come up, this is a not basic aspect
That's time consuming and expensive. If you found yourself in a situation where you're signing a non-compete out of desperation, you're lacking in both time and resources.
Relevant https://reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/comments/covug3/noth...
The haircuts of US/UK bosses must be another clue.
I've thought about this at length.

The most compelling reason I've thought of to create a simulation of the universe is obvious - to learn about it. To see possible futures and discover things organically.

Then I thought, "this is super complicated." Why would you do this, as you probably had to have the answers to the universe to begin with.

Then I started thinking like a programmer. If you can somehow find or guess the initial conditions to the universe, that would be enough to have it play out in some useful variation.

We still have a lot of work to do to get to the point where you could make reasonable guesses, but finding out everything on our own would probably take an insane amount of time and we'd be extinct by then.
Ok, this seems like a different argument from the one you made above, that morality is purely individual.

If the overall morals of society (as represented by the majority) don't get transposed into law then we go back to my original comment:

> in a functioning systems the law should be adapted to the morals of society

In a democracy the top of the hierarchy is chosen to represent the views of individuals that elected them.

Edit: Whether the morals of society are dictated by the few (rulers) or by the many (people) it doesn't change the conclusion. At some point the balance regarding society's view on the morality of certain things tips. And as an individual you are still very much the product of society. Can we agree that there are things now where there is a societal consensus regarding their morality?

There are actually very few things where societies over time consistently agreed on their morality (like theft).
Nawlins is about the most atypical American city you can find. It's best typified as Caribbean North.

That's not a slight, just an observation. And yes, virtually all major cities are fairly distinctive. As Ed Glaeser has pointed out, something of an anti-Anna Karenina principle: unsuccessful cities are all alike, successful cities are each successful in their own way.

Not entirely true, but a strong element of truth to it.
Read the Letters from Birmingham Jail to gain some insight on the obligation to protest unjust laws.

This whole argument is ludicrous. In the US, it would be unconstitutional for the president to censor protest. So if your argument is that laws are morality, how do you square the conflict between these two nation's laws?

Re: Edit
>And wouldn't laws in a democracy explicitly reflect the views of that majority since they are created by the representatives of that majority?

Not if dissent has been crushed.
The most damaging advice I ever got in my life was to talk to myself.

I have always thought in mostly visual/symbolic terms. This made me really good with math early in my life, but it started failing when I began proof writing. Then I got the advice to "explain the problem to yourself and the solution will come naturally" from a friend who is really gifted at mathematical proofs. (And also later received similar advice in programming in the form of "rubber duck debugging").

Surprisingly, it works remarkably well and probably increased my problem solving skills tenfolds, or at least my ability to communicate the answer. I started using it for everything.

But it comes with the side effect of gaining a voice in your head. And that voice is a fucking vicious asshole to me. In the recent years the thoughts even started subvocalizing and I have to forcefully remember to make it stop. It's super embarrassing when there are other people around you.

I am sure this problem is unique to me because I have never heard someone describe it (other than partially matching symptoms of schizophrenia or tourette). But I am certain in my case when the voices started and I am not sure the superpower problem solving skills are worth the trade.
Well sure, but given that TOTP is itself just formatted HMAC, that "everything else" of formatting is the essence of TOTP.

Otherwise you probably wouldn't say you're implementing TOTP, you'd say you're implementing HMAC.
Not all female circumcision involves removing the clitorus. It varies, and the least harmful forms involve only a symbolic pin prick. While I strongly oppose all forms of circumcision on babies and children (unless a good medical reason is involved), I think the lightest form of female circumcision is essentiallu much less barbaric than male circumcision. If people practicing female circumcision could be convinced to switch to the lighter forms (perhaps through creeping normality?) that would already be a great improvement, and a good step towards eventually stopping the practice completely.

It would be more consistent if male circumcision was treated with the same condemnation that all forms of female circumcision (or 'FGM') seem to receive. Currently the western world criticising female circumcision seems like the pot calling the kettle black.
> In truth, there is a kind of Grand Unified Law, of which we are still working out the details

What makes you believe that such Law exists at all? Or that we mortal humans or our organizations such as Google are computationally equipped to make correct decisions in accordance to such Law? Or that such Law is compatible with Western liberal morals? These are all very contentious propositions.

BTW someone on the Internet is writing a book on this and related topics which is long, rambling and unfinished but still very thought-provoking and interesting. Here is a section (unfortunately, unfinished) on this exact problem: https://meaningness.com/ethical-eternalism
Anybody read the original research ?

If so , how big was the effect ? What are the stats ?