skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I switched to nicotine gum and it was just as bad. When i tried to quit gum I would wake up every hour, sometimes sweating. I was building up a chewing tolerance way beyond what i had with cigarettes.

Nicotine is really powerful stuff. I believe there's no free lunch with quitting. Eventually you will take a quality of life hit white quitting that almost directly mirrors how much relief it gave you to get through the day.
Yes, it's probably 99.9% consensus https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97...
PKCE vs. Proxy
I can think of many reasons why I wouldn't want to start a company, but a fear that one day Facebook will show up and threaten to copy me unless I accept a multi-billion dollar acquisition offer is not one of them.
Isn't this entire thread about assigning blame to cell phones causing safety issues? Instead of looking objectively at all the various issues that cause safety issues while driving: distraction, day-dreaming, sleep loss (comparable to driving while drunk), etc etc
Man, that makes no sense to me if it's just aws cost -- very basic back of the envelop calculating assuming you had $500k to spend per year on cpus on aws:

A c5d.2xl (8 cores) on aws is about $1875 per year reserved, $500k per year would buy you over 2100 cores; if you only did 100 req/s per core, you'd be able to handle something like 213k req/s average.

Just the alb costs on lambda at this request rate would cost you $10MM annually... 20x the cost of doing it on VMs.

>>> 500e3 / (1875.0/8) * 100 * 60*60*24*365 / 1e6 * 1.51
10158796.8

$500k to spend
$1875 per box / 8 cores per box
100 req/s
60*60*24*365 seconds in a year
1e6 requests per $1.51 of alb spend

Staggering the amount of work you can do with just the amount of money you saved and it seems impossible to me that lambda was able to account for this?
Well here’s another way to think about: you’re not just “tripling up your cash”, you’re getting a new boss in the form of thousands of shareholders expecting you to meet specific performance goals or else the value of your company goes to shit. Running a public company is hell compared to a private one.

When you take your 7 billion in cash you are free, no one gives a shit about what you do or even cares unless you’re looking to give away some money.
Overview of RESTful API Description Languages
> If your best choice was Rails or Django 10 years ago you probably don't have a viable startup today. Why? Because it's 10 years later. Technology moves on and market niches get filled. There are orders of magnitudes more people with the skill to setup a basic CRUD webapp, and about 15 years for the markets that these can serve to have been filled.

That's... not true. The choice of web stack – and, in fact, the whole software – is just a piece of what a startup may need.

Seriously, look at the list of YC startups on 2018 and tell me if most couldn't use either something like Rails, or a Single Page App In React With A Serverless Backend. And it wouldn't matter one bit.

https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/20/these-are-the-64-startups-...

> it's likely that the real answer is "develop a blockchain app instead".

I hope that was sarcasm.
> The only valid options for performance sensitive functions are JS, Python and Go.

With custom runtimes that's not the case anymore. I write my lambdas in Rust.

Can't stress (7) enough, would also add 'morale' savings. It can be really stressful for developers to deal with gratuitous ops work.
Big difference between living in a jurisdiction where its outright illegal to use your phone and living in a jurisdiction where the act of driving while holding/using the phone is illegal, and they are two very different things. Many people live in a place where the latter is the case. Its fair to not want people to be distracted drivers while also wanting privacy. Is there no room for a middle ground?
Actually, I think people should travel with a burner phone that does not have any of their standard apps and logins.

Step 1: Buy a burner phone with basic capabilities (maps, etc)
Step 2: Import critical contacts from your main phone
Step 3: Share your burner number with a set of friends just in case
Step 4: ???
Step 5: Profit (phone-free, enjoy your vacation without distractions and without being worried)
No, your are missing a critical distinction. Ethics says to you do the job you were paid to do. If you don't like it, don't believe in it, etc. just leave. The Nuremberg defense was used by people that enjoyed following the orders until they lost and got caught.

My point was that instead of a low-level "programmer" having delusions about deciding the ethics of the company or even industry, perhaps leave that to the public, the consumers. They may get it wrong, but guess what? it's their job to decide what the market wants, NOT yours.

And I didn't say stay and follow orders. If you really believe you are that right, your free choice is to leave.

See you want it both ways. You want to feel morally superior, but want to get paid and eat too. But unless you are willing to really put up something of value, your personal moral objections carry no weight. In fact it pretty much shows how petty you are. Real ethical convictions mean not ignoring or avoiding the personal costs.

So why not change the awful organisations? The ETHICAL way to do that is to change a) the law, b) public opinion, c) show wall street an ethical way to make money, etc. d) compete better and put them out of business.

Stealing time, privately or publicly undermining your employer is not ethical. Stirring up politics at work is not ethical. Or wise.
Could the recent smear campaign on vaping have anything to do with the upcoming release of IQOS in the US market?
Could you describe what functionality of GoodReads you use? I've come across the site before, but all I've ever found useful there was that it has a good compendium of quotes, which I use to get my quotations right. I'd be interested to know if it's a more useful tool than I've realized.
Micropatches Keep Windows 7 and Server 2008 Secure After January 2020
I agree that going beyond the facts is a good thing when humans are doing critical thinking and when being careful and transparent about their doing so.

However this was creating a dataset for classification. Something that specifically should not go beyond the facts. (The basis of the model is the strength of the facts it's built upon)
Don't copy your keys. Don't manage or "organize" your keys. Don't share your keys.

The leaky abstractions around what you're doing with keys is a security illusion, and you need to stop.
Which would be fine imo. But as the person I was replying to says you can already detect a bad bot pretending to be google and deal with them how you wish (my fav is just feeding them random values).

But what are CF (and others like akamai) using to determine you are a bad bots? My objection is more the threat they will use their position to kick bad bots offline.

Now don't get me wrong, I had bad bots as much as the next person. But what about misfires? They will happen. I hope CF have a plan in place to deal with such cases.

Personally, due to family issues I've been working remote-remote (I'm a remote worker anyways, but I've been working remotely away from my normal office). As such I've been using a 4G Mobile broadband connection and the amount of CloudFlare "We are just checking you are not a bot" hoops I've had to jump though recently has opened my eyes on how much of the net is actually behind CF's network because CF still associate "IP as Identity" and my 4G connection is CG-NAT'ed.

I just fear at times we forget that there is the rest of the world out there, not just our little bubble and the choices we make have a huge impact on the usability of the net for others.

EDIT: LOL.. Just checked your profile. The Reg is one of the sites that doesn't like my 4G connection and as such I visit less. What are the chances. (Though you only make me sit there and wait to access the content....)
Much needed perspective in the age of overly dramatic headlines and straight up misinformation.
For compiling to Javascript, is it possible to use npm modules with the code?
What political capital? Federal prosecutors and the FDA have limited resources, of course, but I don't think this issue is preventing Congress or the White House of pursuing more pressing issues.
I think the key with vaping (not necessarily with Juul though due to market availability) is that it's very easy to decrease the dosage of nicotine without reducing the fixation amount. For traditional cigarette smoking you want a high amount of nicotine to fill that void (and also to get through the other side of other addictive substances in tobacco beyond nicotine) and to effectively "get hooked" on vaping instead, to the point that normal cigarettes are completely unattractive to you.. Afterwards, decreasing dosage with a vape is super easy, especially if done in a blind way, ie, buying two identical flavors at different dosages (your "normal" and the lower dose) and put them into two carts. Pick a random one each day to use. I've heard of people doing this all the way down to 3mg to get over the lowest dosage hump even. One has no nicotine, the other only has 3mg. Eventually the non-social fixation (ie, at your house alone) stops, and the social fixation (ie, outside of a bar, etc) is controllable with no nicotine... Then that's not even getting into the different ohm ratings etc that further control dosage without affecting the fixation of using the vape.

edit: note I say "easy", but its not a short process.. If you try to go immediately from 48mg to 3mg you won't have a good time. It takes months for each step down
Texas slaves return then I suppose?

Enjoy work on the Apple product line, Texans...
http://tiwizard.com/downloads/
You can do it with electron spin or photon polarization or by any number of properties, but it's the state of a fundamental particle.

It's an entirely new type of computing apparatus, using the fundamental state of particles. No electron circuits, those won't work.

And it's expensive because of the above. These things are massive, have to be kept at cyrogenic temperature, and isolation gets harder the more particles you have.
It is part of 1.0, but you have to enable it using the "--newruntime" build switch.
Then why are Amazon and Microsoft counted among the 4 surveillance companies the OP?

Also it is arguable if behavioral targeting meaningful increases revenue over day, keyword targeting.

Are there any studies?
Right now I write, almost exclusively, Rust and Python. I'm really hoping I can replace a lot of the Python code with Nim some day.
The phrase using a shotgun to swat flies comes to mind. These modern frameworks and tool chains solve very well understood problems. They enable large teams of software engineers to collaborate and release complicated interrelated software on predictable schedules. Not every project has this requirement. For smaller projects the overhead and the included complexity that comes as a result of using these frameworks and tool chains vastly overshadows the benefits.
Is it not possible to create an ad network that only supports static targeted ads? The ad network itself can run its own JavaScript, but I don't see any reason to allow the advertisers themselves to run scripts inside ads, other than to make the ad look a bit flashier and interactive.
Ads do contain JS and remote images and almost anything else. That's how most banners and video creatives are run.

They're only limited when buying very defined formats like text-based search ads.
Are these all the areas where you think goodreads needs work?

If so, can't you keep track of the books people recommend by simply looking at their ratings?

I would like to see:

- Ability to have reviews be "friends-only". My reviews are generally just notes to myself, and I spend about 30 seconds writing them. I don't like that they end up in the general pool of reviews.

- Faster website! It's crazy how slow the website is. I usually view the desktop version on mobile. I suspect it's intentionally nerfed in order to drive people to the app.

Overall, goodreads is valuable to me because it helps me: see all the books that authors have written; find new books to read via seeing what my friends read; keep a list of books that I'm going to read in the future; see a list of books I've read; and learn when an author I've read has something new. Stack seems to just be a place to keep track of what I've read (but I haven't created an account, so I may be missing features).
It kinda makes me sad to see all the negative responses here. I feel like even the ones who are relatively positive, but still feel the need to list off reasons why a phone can be useful specifically while traveling... are still kinda missing the point.

This will not resonate with some people. That's fine. Everyone's specific situation is different. But the author presents a perfectly valid way of doing something, something to perhaps give a try once in a while. Just leave your hotel without a phone for a day, and see what happens. If that's too much, put it on do-not-disturb, and resolve to not take it out of your pocket except in a genuine emergency (or for some pre-determined reason, like an "I'll text you around 3pm to let you know where I am" kind of thing). There are many pleasant in-between alternatives to the binary of "have a phone and be on it all the time" and "don't have a phone at all".

The point of the post is to get people thinking about how much they spend time on their phone to the detriment of their real-life activities -- which for many people is actually a big deal -- and maybe nudge behavior a little bit to get people to have some different experiences.
> Yes, but I do not have a trade deficit on the whole as well.

Yeah you (as in, most people) do, people just call it a mortgage, a car payment etc.

I.e. they enjoy the present-day use of assets whose total price today is something they'll be paying for down the line, because they think having them today will contribute to their future growth.

The exact same logic is at play when countries decide to indebt themselves. Public debt just amounts to borrowing from the future.
I posted this on scott's blog, still awaiting moderation:

"I’m trying to understand the chain of inference from Google’s leaked result of quantum supremacy to theoretical computer-science “hardness” of the computation.

Computing the exact probabilities of a random quantum circuit is proven hard, but computing the exact probability of a random algorithm is also an open problem, so what you really care about is approximation of computing the probability (up to epsilon), or even weaker, just sampling from a probability (also up to epsilon under some metric of comparing distributions).

Their computer implements Random Circuit Sampling, and their cited “theoretical” hardness results are your paper from 2017, of QUATH => HOG, and as far as I understood from your paper, proving that approximation / sampling from a (random) quantum computer/circuit is hard is still an open problem (Am I wrong here? I’m not up to date with everything), and a difficult one. But you did make a compelling argument that even if QUATH was solvable, it will lead to new insights.

Their actual benchmark uses cross-entropy benchmarking, called xeb in their paper, and defined as 2^n* [P(x_i)] _i-1 (Can’t type brackets). I could not find any ‘theoretical hardness’ paper at all using this benchmark, some results talk about different XEB using log but they prove these are not strong enough and can be reached classically.

Are there any hardness results for their benchmark? I wonder why they would use that instead of the proven HOG, even for smaller input sizes, I would see more value in a benchmark which has theoretical roots. I feel intuitively like their benchmark is much more similar to the log variation of XEB than to HOG, but didn’t think it through completely.

As for their gates, I understand they are not general random quantum gates, but instead they have a variation of iSWAP and controlled phase CZ. The hardness results that do exist also don’t address the limited gates, in how it changes the distribution of random circuits. Are those two gates at least universal, so that we have hope that this could be proved? Their statement was “but reliably generating a target unitary remains an active area of research”, so I assume they aren’t universal. I would love to see some heuristic argument as to why those two in particular are hard, especially given results like Gottesman–Knill theorem, it seems like some surprising gates do have classical simulation. iSWAP is just swap and phase gates, and CZ is phase gate only on the 11 state. Doesn’t feel like it could be universal to me but maybe I’m wrong.

I probably missed some things, so I’d love it if you could point to papers filling the gaps between their results and a real theoretical statement. I don’t have the intuition to tell which gaps are important and which are not. I also don’t know which papers/results already exist and I can’t really search as I am not an academic, and don’t have full access to many papers, and you probably know the state of the art results.
"
The fact that i can read quite a few Assembly dialects at the binary level doesn't mean that binary is suddenly equivalent to inspectable source.
I don't have a problem thanks. As I said, I've bought "quality" and had bad experiences. Funny you mention Church's. I bought a pair of Church's and the sole came off after a week.

I think we disagree on whether a large part of the population is financially able to spend £400 on a pair of shoes or £100 on a jumper or £5,000 on carpet. Especially now with our weak pound: things might be made in the UK but many materials come from abroad.
The use case is lumpy work. You have some batch processes that are unpredictable. Could be hours without a call, then suddenly you need to scale up to 20 cpu to process a bunch of requests. One example is say processing pdfs in a crud app where people can generate pdfs on demand with large images.

I have used Azure Functions so I will talk to that: There are two options, one is a consumption plan where it is truly 'serverless' and they provide you with server time on demand. The other plan - app service plan - allows you to run these on your existing Azure resources. Another option is to get the runtime on a Docker image and run it on a container outside of Azure completely (but you lose a lot of the monitoring benefits).

Anyway the point is that at least in Azure you can sort of slide the dial to how 'serverless' you want to be - one extreme is the consumption plan, then you can go with the app service plan, then less serverless would be to run AKS (Kubernetes) with autoscaling, then to run VM's with autoscaling, then VM's with manual scaling, then finally perhaps rent a physical server in a data centre, then buy a physical server and stick it in a rack in your office.

The advantage of pure serverless over the less extreme ways is if you have wildly unpredictable loads going from 0 to high to 0 at different times, and don't want to (or can't) set up a reasonable scaling system to suit (or don't want to wait for the scaling to 'kick in').
Being able to use Etcd instead of ZooKeeper is huge. Etcd is considerably easier to set up and manage, in my experience; not needing to manage another JVM component is also a big win. Thanks for sharing!
> > > my dependencies might be different

...

> I didn't mean build order but install scripts and native module builds.

OK. Then you're still not talking about your dependencies being different. The dependencies are the same, they're just particular modules with very specific behaviour...

> external resources are downloaded (Puppeteer, Ngrok, etc.), which themselves have different versions or that fail to download

That's more a 'heads up when using puppeteer' than a indictment of serverless and a call to add an environment management layer like we did in 2005-2015.

> Linux by default uses XFS on EBS disks so I wouldn't be surprised if Lambda's used the same.

That's worth checking out.

> Debugging which starts by finding exactly the differences between the two environments which would have been solved by a VM or Docker.

I see what you're saying, but planning your whole env around something like a given puppeteer module dynamically downloading Chrome (which is very uncommon behaviour) isn't worth the added complexity.
Without a smartphone, it's harder to run into your potential soulmate by walking with your nose on your screen, blindly following a map or watching / reading the same random shit your could at home for cheaper.

You could try with a book or a regular newspaper but you might come off as old-fashionned and weird. You can hope someone would find some romance in this incongruous setting though. Might work. Otherwise, you can always act as if you were confused and pretend you ran out of battery.
You're falling into the classic trap of thinking doctors know everything, but sorry to say that's not even close to true. Most doctors know next to nothing about myofascial pain (even many that really should). I've seen multiple cases of mobility impairment and chronic pain that even well a respected orthopedic surgeon thought required surgery be corrected by aggressive bodywork, including trigger point myofascial release and dry needling.
>I guess their target market is people who don't care about quality? At all?

No, their target market is people who have no other choice. This is what regulatory capture gets you.
Maybe you should delete this, seems identifiable.
There are companies that buck the trend of growth and profits at all cost. None of them are publicly traded.
Cannabis works well, as do poppy-extract/opium; but none of it is legal where I am unless you're practically dead already.
I'm in the same boat. A qubit can have more than the two states that a transistor can have, got it.

Okay, now what can we do with that?

"crack encryption by simulating a state!" yeah but what? is that something I should be concerned about now? "hahaha no no no silly normie we'd need two thousand qubits for that, this machine only has 53!" oooookay, and you did that number in your head, how??? "we just solved the first unsolvable problem that a mere bit bound supercomputer couldn't solve, look at this math formula!" but that didn't explain "we are celebrating, are you not celebrating"

There just seems to be a lack of non-introductory but non-PhD level information. Where is the "explain it like I've been accepted into college at all".
It's so sad what she had to experience
> Bots used to purchase inventory are not malicious.

There's no way you're in this conversation without being aware that scalping is a controversial practice at best.

https://theconversation.com/the-economics-of-ticket-scalping...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ticket_scalping
Do we know the 30 year effects of say being a heavy Juul user? It's hard to compare damage of something that has been out for 100s of years vs something that has only been out for a few years.
I lived in NSW (the state in the article) for a while, and had my car rammed into from behind 3 times in 2 years while I was stopped at a red light, all 3 times the drivers admitted they were checking their phone and hadn't noticed the light go red or me stop. They're not even shy about it, and the casualness at which people use their phones in cars is shocking.

I got front and rear dash cams after the 1st hit, to protect myself for insurance claims etc, and caught the following 2 + uncountable near-misses almost all of which were people using their phones, doing make-up, or at one point eating a bowl of cereal while driving.

People don't take it seriously at all, and having had a close family member killed by someone blowing a red light while playing on their phone, and my best mate killed by a truck driver mounting the footpath because he was checking his job computer, I'm 100% for stricter punishment against people who don't take driving seriously.

Mobile phones, drink driving, all of them can and do lead to people dying and should be treated as such.