skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well this is how capitalism is supposed to work - the creation of disvalues to motivate consumption. You degrade environments so people have to buy posh housing to insulate themselves from physical reality. Etc. Ultimately (social media) you degrade human attention to reduce people's freedom to evade trivial commercial blandishments.

Happy populations would be a catastrophe for capitalism.
Even with `privacy.resistFingerprinting` enabled, my fingerprint is unique all-time on https://amiunique.org.
What are the things that make the difference between invigorating and exhausting?
No, I think his supporters see the dog whistle too, but in reverse: the "wink" to establishment as the dog-whistle with the message to them as the "real" one. I don't think either interpretation is strictly correct. I don't think President Trump himself has a "canonical" interpretation of these things-- his sentiment is changeable, not ideological or even political.
> Why do people buy the DRM-locked e-books?

Do these people actually know a) that e-books are DRM-locked and b) what DRM-locked implies to their ownership of said e-books?
I imagine if you get an FPV headset it's quite a fun activity.

If people can spend thousands of hours playing flight simulators on the computer, surely there's a lot of replay value of doing the same thing with an RC quadcopter through a forest or around your home/neighborhood w/FPV.
Most people are denied the opportunity to casually pick up $6 million for nothing and that money could have gone to increase salaries for people who are actually helping to keep WeWork running.
$350M worth of data
Practically all the plant foods we can buy have been very heavily altered from their native form. Even many things we think of as "wild", like berries, were cultivated and bred by vanished populations.

The whole Amazon was heavily populated and orcharded before Columbus and his ilk spread measles, yellow fever, smallpox, etc. Pop. estimates range up to 100M. Amazon trees are very different from their wild origins.
Firstly, streaming doesn't need to be equivalent to renting. That's a wrong notion. For example Bandcamp allows you to buy music and download DRM-free copy, but you can as well stream it from their site for convenience.

Secondly, even if you can say, renting has value if you rent the same thing for lower price than buying, it's only reasonable if you still have the option to buy the same thing (DRM-free).

But it becomes a major problem, when someone only provides renting of digital goods and you can't buy them. In such case DRM on streaming isn't any better. I.e. for example Google Stadia or Netflix exclusives would be such example.
Ah okay, yeah. I misunderstood. Thanks for clarifying!
I've heard of Stranger Things
> So, the question then is, how to APPLY that to a general set of problems.

That's the tricky thing. As far as we know, IQ is the best proxy for general problem solving ability. From what I've read/heard from intelligence researcher; however, is that while you can train folks to excel at certain types of problems, it doesn't really improve one's general problem solving ability.

Think of an IQ test as a random sampling of problem solving exercises of various types from the domain of all possible problem solving exercises. Now imagine generating a whole bunch of such tests, and then using those tests on a bunch of people to setup your distribution (i.e. set the IQ scoring for each test). While it is true that in general the scores are going to be highly correlated across tests, each test is going to have a different composition in terms of the kinds of problems it presents. From what I understand, training may help on certain classes of problems (and thus on particular tests) but there isn't any training that will meaningfully improve the average of all your scores across all of the tests.
I think the point that's missing from the discussion is that adtech companies should be targeting solely on placement (i.e. what ads should show up on a particular website based on the content of the website), and not select individuals (i.e. based on user interests regardless of the place on the web an ad is shown), when faced with this kind of legislation.

This is exactly how marketing worked before and how people can go about it now, as you describe, through traditional advertising markets.

I'd personally prefer it that way in general, but legislation is necessary for them to optimize on those restrictions.
I earlier claimed that the Patriot act allows NSA to spy on anybody, which is correct. And semantics aside when a court orders Verizon to secretly handle all the information about calls within the US or where one end is in the US [1], saying that they do spy on everybody is not really far fetched.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/jun/06/ve...

I can't believe we are having this conversation on this board, that is supposed to be populated by people who have read that kind of news a bit in depth...
The drugs were connotated with blacks and Mexicans. Those connotations were racist.

Later on, those connotations influenced lawmakers and policy was effected by it. This created racist policy.

Many of these racist lawmakers died. Others became less public about their racism.

Today, those policies still affect blacks and Mexicans more than whites, even though drug usage is similar. Therefore, the policies are still racist.

Thus if one supports the policies, one supports a racist act. Semantic arguments over whether that makes the person who supports them "racist" are moot. They're still supporting something that's racist.
> The issues outlined by Markopolos lie primarily in GE's troubled Capital unit, a financial services division often seen as a black hole in the company. The Capital unit holds commercial and personal loans, as well as insurance policies that include coverage of long-term care.

> In his report, Markopolos suggests that an accounting rule change for insurance liabilities and a significant lack of reserves to cover long-term care liabilities will push GE to take a $29 billion hit. While GE called the report meritless, an analyst said the allegations reflect "a GE culture that historically hid losses and deceived investors."
But how long does that benefit last?
Fluff has value. Fresh cotton candy should be eaten rapidly. It’s fluff. It’s allowed :)
Win wars and wealth, lose wars and wealth.
I've only ever written one solver in Python about 10yrs ago. But it wasn't a search and never made guesses, it was an enumeration of all the analog elimination methods I'd ever figured out when solving them on paper.

It was fast, but there were a few difficult puzzles it couldn't solve - obviously there were some real world techniques/alogrithms I hadn't managed to figure out.
It would rather defeat the purpose.
We can avoid reading too much into the study by just remembering the error bars. It's not like 39 is a universal constant. It's more like 39 with a standard deviation of 6. That's a wide spread, but it's less wide than the spread you get from syllable rate alone, and that's all the study quantitatively tells us.
Let me rephrase: why would companies consider battery life a limit when liquid fuel is a viable way forward for range, time-aloft or size?
I practice scrum with legos.
And why stop there? Let's outlaw everything people enjoy doing. It's for their own good.
Initially freaked out when I got the email, but it looks like actual repo contents weren't compromised.
I think it's just the world. Joe Rogan is popular because currently "Joe Rogan Things" are growing (Weed, fitness, nutrition, MMA, psychadelics). These are all trending.
> Problem is these benefits are superficial. On one hand you get cell phones and cheap flights, on the other rivers of plastic and land devastated by mining.

It's not superficial to the people that are no longer starving and dying of preventable diseases.

> And it isn't even worth it, because a large part of the profit inevitably goes to those responsible for this devastation, so wealth is actually extracted from these places.

So, it's not worth lifting people out of poverty if some other people also get rich?

> It is in this system only, which allows it in the name of profits for the powerful.

You think you've got a design for a social system that would lift more people out of poverty while harming the environment less? I'm all ears.
but nixon started the so-called "war on drugs" that has incarcerated generations of people of color in the US.
Dupe? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20882624
Exactly. I don't care about getting marketed at (an ad blocker is the simple solution there). What I worry about is the collection and storage of all that data, to be used/sold for x purpose by y organisation in perpetuity.
The original intention is irrelevant for today. If a good law was originally passed for racist reasons that is no reason to abolish it. (Not saying that drug prohibition is good.)

> Today, those policies still affect blacks and Mexicans more than whites, even though drug usage is similar. Therefore, the policies are still racist.

Just because a policy does affect a certain group more doesn't mean that the supporters of the policy are against the group. For example, Blacks are more affected by laws against murder, but that doesn't mean that those who support laws against murder are racist.
Ask HN: How to not get lonely as a solo founder?
Interesting, I did a similar analysis for music scores before and arrived at 30 bits per second.
That's a nice way to spread fud, when the complaint is that binary code was decompiled and copied.

>"Most of these instances of copying occurred before we opened our proprietary code last year, which means the Search Guard developers intentionally decompiled our binary releases in order to copy our code."

Hard to see how this could be anything other than deliberate infringement.
It is a tad ironic, that I have been "flippant" and "disrespectful" to your argument (not you, mind you, unless you are your argument) you wrote out in 1 minute with minimal thought.

Yet at the same time, you can't see how you have been "flippant" and "disrespectful" to the complicated issues (with real people who are affected by this) you pulled together in your 2 paragraph comment.

Ignoring all detail when there have been 10000s of academic books written trying to explain and understand these issues from all viewpoints.
You guys are funny, I'll give you that!
Because looking at the signal correlation is not the only test that is applied. But it is a significant test that was not discussed in Hossenfelder's article.
The only part that I find interesting or possibly worrying:

"Liquidity Risk

"“The dirty secret of passive index funds -- whether open-end, closed-end, or ETF -- is the distribution of daily dollar value traded among the securities within the indexes they mimic.

"“In the Russell 2000 Index, for instance, the vast majority of stocks are lower volume, lower value-traded stocks. Today I counted 1,049 stocks that traded less than $5 million in value during the day. That is over half, and almost half of those -- 456 stocks -- traded less than $1 million during the day. Yet through indexation and passive investing, hundreds of billions are linked to stocks like this. The S&P 500 is no different -- the index contains the world’s largest stocks, but still, 266 stocks -- over half -- traded under $150 million today. That sounds like a lot, but trillions of dollars in assets globally are indexed to these stocks. The theater keeps getting more crowded, but the exit door is the same as it always was. All this gets worse as you get into even less liquid equity and bond markets globally.”"

But other than that the market in index funds dwarfs that in the indexed securities, I haven't the vaguest clue what they (this isn't the first time I have heard this) are worried about.
it isn't about giving ad-tech any chance of anything, it is about websites that are liked and used by people (most of whom have either no means or no desire to support those websites with money directly) being able to sustain themselves in order to exist.
Even basic investment courses, and any investment guru, will say any stock investment is not low risk enough if you need the money short term.
> I couldn't really tell what was really being sold routinely, personal info or ad space

It’s the same thing.

Look, the website deals in mental health information, right? And health information is part of a class of information that’s protected under the GDPR. Under that protection, explicit user consent is required before that info can be shared with anyone.

When the website invokes the Google ad APIs, that results in Google learning that this user, who they build an identity around via tracking cookies, is reading a website with information about a health condition. Google isn’t the website the user visited, it’s a third-party the website just informed without explicitly asking for the user’s permission. That violates the GDPR. The website makes money off of informing Google about this. That’s “selling user health information” to an advertiser — Google.

Google turns around to its ad bid network and solicits bids to show an ad to google push_id abcdefghihk123, who is visiting a website about mental health. That, again, is a GDPR violation, because disclosing information about a pseudonym ID still counts under the GDPR (and the info can be de-anonymize easily by aggregation networks). That, again, is Google selling personal info to advertisers.

What it boils down to is you’re thinking about this is all wrong; the way Google sells ads, there’s no difference between selling personal info and selling ad space because you’re always bidding to show an individual you’re given data about an ad. The bids are based on how much the person’s profile matches the bidder’s interests, and anything new learned about the person that can be gleaned from the current website visit is added to that profile. Advertisers are literally being told “here: this person with id 12345 and these characteristics matching your target profile is currently reading about depression. How much to show them an ad?” The bid request data they’re given in turn is enough to identify the user in any number of data aggregation services — most of which require “share and share alike” participation — so the bidder looks up the bid request data and discovers probable email address, location, income, marital status, interests, etc, and in return tells the aggregation service “this user is currently visiting doihavedepression.com”. Again, GDPR violation.

That’s the nature of modern online advertising. You’re never bidding to just show N ads on site Y. There is no such thing, in using Google’s advertising system, as selling an ad space on your site to Google that isn’t also a sale of personal information to Google and by Google to the advertisers bidding to fill that spot. As such there are entire classes of websites that probably should not be showing Google ads.
I lean heavily capitalist but I enjoy keeping notes of things like this that must so obviously be done collectively. Thanks
Show HN: ThingSpeak IoT Sensor Data Grapher
> I wonder if his ability was trained through years of using fast screen readers, vs. a lower visual processing load leads to better audio processing, or some other explanation.

While I'm sure his visual cortex picked up some slack, I'm willing to bet it's mostly just through training. We just aren't trained for faster communication. I've known blind people and they are the same way with their readers.
Luxury fashion was reduced to logomania
Because the only way to get people to stop naturally forming markets, is by force. Usually lethal, if history is any guide.
Ask HN: BlueTick, the most exclusive social network
I am creating a community of the top 0.000001%. Together we will collaborate and solve the biggest problems facing humanity e.g Climate change/destruction of nature, large scale conflict/wars, inequality (income, discrimination), poverty, religious conflicts, government accountability and many more.

To join this club you should either be a verified twitter/Instagram person or have a Wikipedia page to your name*

Apply here https://forms.gle/UCDLHv2EVz92YGj67

* I know this isn't inclusive of all smart/prominent people in the world, but I think it's a good enough filter. Appreciate ideas/feedback on this.

The big idea is to get all the smartest and brightest people in a room and have them take a go at big problems with money being a no factor.
Absolutely- once they hopped on board with all the major brands they couldn’t keep items on retailer shelves.
... and then a movement was started in his name which resulted in big changes in how society worked, or at least changes in how the leaders had to act in public.
Every paragraph of this blog post consists of FUD that has been debunked elsewhere. The blog post repeats all of these various sources of doubt without including the follow-up that has been done bolstering support for the LIGO results. It seems like the purpose of the blog post is to sow doubt in the LIGO results, which is not warranted.

> Already in 2017, a group of physicists around Andrew Jackson in Denmark reported difficulties when they tried to reproduce the signal reconstruction of the first event.

This has been solidly debunked by several independent groups. Here's the first Google result I found on the topic:

https://www.quantamagazine.org/studies-rescue-ligos-gravitat...

> It further fueled the critics’ fire when Michael Brooks reported last year for New Scientist that, according to two members of the collaboration, the Nobel-prize winning figure of LIGO’s seminal detection was “not found using analysis algorithms” but partly done “by eye” and “hand-tuned for pedagogical purposes.”

I'm not sure what this is about -- it sounds like some off-hand remark taken out of context -- but the numerous, extremely detailed follow-up publications, not to mention that the public data release, should clear up any ambiguities.

https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/page/detection-companion-papers

> "Since April, the collaboration has issued 33 alerts for new events, but so-far no optical counterparts have been seen. "

That should say that no NEW optical counterparts have been seen. GW170817 was a stunning success wherein a neutron star collision was observed by LIGO in gravitational waves and by numerous optical detectors.

https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/page/press-release-gw170817

> The number of retractions is fairly high partly because the collaboration is still coming to grips with the upgraded detector.

True. These aren't really "retractions," but low-latency event notifications that are downgraded on further analysis.

> With the still lacking independent confirmation that LIGO sees events of astrophysical origin

False. GW170817.

> "Alexander Unzicker – author of a book called “The Higgs Fake” – contemplates whether the first event was a blind injection, ie, a fake signal. The three people on the blind injection team at the time say it wasn’t them, but Unzicker argues that given our lack of knowledge about the collaboration’s internal proceedings, there might well have been other people able to inject a signal."

This is simply a conspiracy theory. Note that the author (Mr. Unzicker) claims that CERN, a completely separate experiment and group of people, was subject to the same kind of conspiracy.

> And then there are the “glitches”.

LIGO data is indeed very non-stationary (in the spectral sense) and contains various instrumental artifacts. A great deal of effort is put into understanding these effects.
If you create a system that by design will cause the driver to lose focus, you are responsible for the driver losing focus.

Saying “we told the users that they must pay attention while they are not driving”, or “we told them that the system called ‘auto-pilot’ is not actually able to autopilot the car”, and “we advertised the car’s self driving ability but had documentation saying it doesn’t actually have that ability” then you are responsible for that system driver behaving exactly as you would predict.

Their have been numerous studies that show that people stop paying attention when they are given menial or non-focus dependent tasks. Saying that the only safe way to use autopilot is by not being a human is fundamentally the same as saying “the brakes in the car only work if you press them continuously for 5s or apply 300lbs of force”.
I have high hopes that Textile Photos[1] could be this.

[1] https://www.textile.photos/
RE:Streaming, Graphistry wrote much of the Apache Arrow JS lib to optimize for this case of streaming GPU DBs -> GPU browser frontends, you can see a pretty striking before/after here: https://www.graphistry.com/blog/experiencing-the-future-of-g... . JS networking devs can handwrite that stuff.. but it stinks, and this way, everyone benefits. I recall Vega folks had some fun experiments with GPU DB -> CPU frontends here (ended up part of an HCI or VLDB paper?), not sure what happened since. Our production focus on that layer is now more on scaling up node js cpu+gpu code <> pydata GPU code (Nvidia RAPIDS).

For OmniSci folks: Cool to see Jupyter embedded! Our more advanced users love this path, but we find versioning & team collab tricky in big enterprise settings, so every additional company and (hopefully) contributor here should help. Getting there :)
This. This is the main thing I want to do.

I havent bought one yet, but have flown a cool DJI/FPV setup around a local mountain. It was really fun
The monarchy aspect is a red herring here. The properties in question were granted to the family long after the abdication. The soviet confiscation had little to do with the fall of monarcy in this case
Why Wouldn't Get Rich with Forex Trading, Bitcoin Mining, and Cryptocurrency
Yeah, close to having an empty apartment with no active utilities, food, water, transportation, entertainment or furniture. Where do I sign up?!
The Portal series is definitely my favorite. Alright may tied with The Witness.
About the steel, since you brought it up. It for sure melted, there was an iron fire that lasted months.

https://web.archive.org/web/20180911150844/http://911encyclo...

http://s3.amazonaws.com/nasathermalimages/public/video/prete...
Fair, I only meant to fix the warning, not improve the code quality. I think the problem here is probably something more along the lines of a bad abstraction, as I get the feeling the idea is "I have an int, I need to safely allocate this much memory within limits." If you just change the interface to size_t, that would push the problem down further, but at some point I'd ask why bother with this helper function.
It's not supposed to be easy just basic...
Nobody wants to risk the liability and noise of a flying lawnmower.
Lego is a really cool company. One fun fact: At least the "techy" parts don't have assigned desks. They're also investing in cool new tech, like compostable lego (of course, no easy feat given the requirements on durability). It's also extremely test/research driven. (source: a friend who works there)
A tech intervention to tame tuberculosis
Here is a logical reason to buy a non-LED bulb: you prefer black-body light to narrow-band light. Even if the LED is rated at 2700-3000K, it has spectral peaks. Even the "high CRI" bulbs-- CRI only tests eight spectra!

At night, our home is lit with tungsten halogen when entertaining, and red LEDs when it's just us. I would like to reduce my carbon footprint, but I refuse to do so at the expense of my sleep and health.
Read an article recently about how Chinese parents prefer their children play with LEGO than Barbie: https://www.economist.com/business/2019/07/27/why-chinese-pa...
Ask HN: How to overcome the fear of sales as a technical founder?
In video message on Dorian, President Trump displays doctored forecast