skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Dosing is a mess. Here is my advice:

Start from good bud. Highest strength / weight ratio.

You can get different sized capsules from GNC or similar stores.

A given raw plant will be similar by weight, but does vary some.

When you bake it, go until it is crunchy dry. Can be an hour, but watch temp. At 250, THC boils off into the air. I used an oven thermometer. Preheat, until you see 235, then put your stuff in there.

I used foil in a shallow pan, and foil to cover it.

Then fine grind when done. I used a good coffee grinder.

You can test what you did by literally dipping your finger into the powder and licking it off. You will get a noticable buzz. That means it will work.

Get one of those little scales. And weigh what you have and make portions.

More in a bit.

Ok, back. Had a kid crisis to manage.

Fill capsules from a portion without packing down. They sell little jigs that hold the capsules for you to just scrape it in.

Close them up, and you have doses.

Then, someone has to take one. They take 30 minutes or so to hit, and can last for hours.

Titrate from there. It is experimental, and best done on days where you have no commits and do not need to go out.

The other simple thing you can do with activated plant material is make simple edibles. No bake cookies, hard candy, etc...

Just toss the powder in and mix well.

A mostly sativa plant is a head effect that leaves a person with energy, will remain awake generally. Indica is more of a body effect, and it is sleepy type.

Mine prefers sativa because after mental adjustment and tolerance, she will still be active. We reserve indica for can't sleep nights.

You can research these things online. I did and learned a ton.

I tended to sample what I made as I do not use the stuff at all, but do want to know what it is capable of. Truth is, a little goes a long way for us not sick or hurting people.

But for sick or hurting people, it takes more. Just know that.

Be careful, be clean, don't judge, try to have fun, be positive. If it works for her, this is a special thing you can do, and it is just nice, human.

Made our lives much better. This stuff is a mood amplifier. If you want it to be good, it tends to be.

Every so often, I will have some and enjoy a meal we cook together, movie, music. Those are nice times we look forward to.
I don’t understand if this argument is sarcasm or not? I don’t have a boiler but I have a water heater and know if I don’t manually start the pilot light after having shut off the gas I could die.

Technology has always required basic understanding to avoid harm.
If you want to create web apps go to online courses.

If you really want to understand how machines work, how strings work.

How distributed computing works

How databases work

How to program efficient string search

How regular expressions work

How to represent problems well for example in graph

How statistics works

How to analyze problems

How to read papers

How to be able to learn anything by your own

And the list goes on and on

It's all in real college University courses no online course would give that to you.

You have to focus on theory of math and cs for a couple of years and stretch and train your mind.
F-Droid supports adding additional repositories, so there is no "the store."
I thought Tesla collected training data everywhere all the time?
>For the record, I don't think anyone here can diagnose my effectiveness and contribution to my company from a few dozen words in a HN post.

> It also helps that I have absolutely nothing to lose and can walk into the room refreshed and cool as a cucumber, while the candidate has a job on the line and has already been hit with at least a couple of really tough and nerve-wracking technical questions"

Yes, I do think I can diagnose your effectiveness and contribution at least when it pertains to hiring in so far as this attitude is 99.9% of the time an extreme liability. If you work at big tech companies, it won't matter because you've never had to own the results of that mistake, but if you ever run your own company, you'll learn this lesson the hard way really quickly.

What you don't seem to understand is that interviewing is just as much a sales process as it is a measurement. Your argument that candidates try to present a perfect image of themselves is just that, an argument. Have you ever interviewed a candidate that candidly admitted their unvarnished struggles because they know that showing the strength and fortitude to admit that indicates a level of maturity and security that they want to communicate? Would it surprise you if I told you that these candidates tend to be the ones that have multiple offers?

It's around the same time that you realize how much expanding the team by a single engineer can add to the bottom line of the company (and conversely what the lost opportunity cost is) that you stop thinking like this. Frankly, I don't mind if you do this because very selfishly, as a hiring manager, your loss is my gain. If all of my competition wizened up over night and stopped making unforced errors like this, it would make it slightly harder for me to hire. But given that this is HN, in good faith, I do feel like it's worth giving you the warning here -- what you're doing is not a great strategy.
The fact that you dismiss "anything" that's a flavour of Communism isn't encouraging - as is the disdain for "It would work if we did it my way!". The whole concept of "working if we do it my way" is the history of all mathematics, science and even modern day economics. It's the foundation of liberalism, the system you cherish.

Many philosophers in normative social theory would argue that we have to treat their proposed societies as hypotheses. Consider the analogy to Fermat's Last Theorem - although for hundreds of years we tried to crack its proof, many proofs ended disastrously, but some of them actually opened up whole new areas of mathematics despite not reaching their goal. As such, they also served as learning experiences.

I think the same can be said for normative social theory.
One suggestion: Once one video ends, it would be nice if we would be re-directed or if the following video would load automatically. Presently, I have to manually navigate from the current topic to the next and then activate the video to begin playing... This is of course very minor, but it would still be a nice update.

[edit: fix spelling fail]
If you can't then you shouldn't be using this feature, simple.
Don't we need to find something that does help the small innovator? Maybe what patents "should" be
I have used Windows PCs at work extensively. I had no idea that 'Domain join' could mean 'create an offline account'.
Exactly.

IF this is the crisis we are being assured it is, the only solution is technological. We've spent thousands of years improving the quality of the life of the average human and now a new set of aspiring tyrants on a great moral jihad believe we must reduce our quality of life.

It won't work. And the fight that might come to pass would be a catastrophe unto itself.

We either deal with this technologically or it doesn't get dealt with at all.
Exactly this.

If you didn't do a compilers class and you want a simple language to play around with for lexing/parsing, JSON works great. Here's the core of a probably correct JSON lexer, albeit a super inefficient one, that I whipped up in <110 lines of Python a few years ago out of curiosity[1].

By comparison, check out the state machine transitions at the heart of the cpython implementation of the csv module[2]. It's not really a fair comparison (my JSON lexer is written in Python and uses regexes, the csv parser is written in C and does not use regexes) but even ignoring how nicely the csv parser handles different csv dialects, I still find it strictly more complex.

[1]: https://github.com/chucksmash/jsonish/blob/master/jsonish/to...

[2]: https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/41c57b335330ff48af098...
> It's all in real college University courses no online course would give that to you.

I learned all of what you enumerated online, usually practically applied too. This is not something you have to go to a university to learn.

Granted, I wasn't following a MOOC or a bootcamp - I just kept reading, and digging in deeper, and asking questions and practicing on my own.
This invites the question of how many cleared law firms are operating within the intelligence community.

One might have been tempted to expect something closer in tone to an analytic product than a legal pleading.
What was the point again?

Simple isn't Complex any more than Love is War or Dark is Light.

System-wide interactions between any kind of components is about as difficult as it gets.
Are investors ready for the ‘Doomsday Dollar’ scenario?
A question to ponder: is devops a niche created by developers who can't sysadmin, or sysadmins who can't code?

“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”
I've heard from friends living in Canada that Toronto is much more friendlier than Monteral towards immigrants.
They will use the display panel matrix as an active antenna eventually. (note to self: patent this)

Good luck!
I realize it’s probably too late, but as a graphics person, every time I read about text antialiasing, I wish we could rewind and fix the terminology of “Subpixel antialiasing” and “Greyscale antialiasing”. It seems problematic that greyscale antialiasing involves subpixel sampling and color channels.

I’d suggest “LCD antialiasing” to replace “subpixel antialiasing”. And regular antialiasing doesn’t really need a term, it was already established long before LCDs existed. AFAICT “Greyscale antialiasing” was made up only to differentiate regular antialiasing from LCD antialiasing.
„In 2013 the round-trip efficiency of power-to-gas-storage was well below 50%, with the hydrogen path being able to reach a maximum efficiency of ~ 43% and methane of ~ 39% by using combined-cycle powerplants.“

Not great, not terrible.
It’s straight statistics. You’re completely ignoring the harm done by human drivers; quantify that vs self driving and you’ll reconsider which is more reckless.
This is unfortunately very black and white, which is unfortunate because the topic deserves discussion.

Eating _less_ meat (and less red meat in particular) is still beneficial. One doesn't need to go 100% off meat to have a very positive effect.

I eat a mostly vegan diet, which I think still counts, but in many people's books it doesn't matter because of the 2 servings of meat/eggs I have a week. That's ridiculous, and makes these discussions about ideology rather than positive measurable changes.

Veggie burgers are getting damn good these days too. If people would just give this a try (and leave out the politics), I think they'd find 3+ days a week without meat is no problem.

Also - this article points out some extreme flaws in the original Guardian story: https://skepticalscience.com/animal-agriculture-meat-global-... , quote "in the USA, fossil fuels are responsible for over 10 times more human-caused greenhouse gas emissions than animal agriculture."

Sounds like some extreme skepticism is warranted when interpreting these numbers (as usual).
It doesn't help much. Most of the work in achieving orbit is in gaining speed "sideways". Your average orbital launch achieves high airplane altitudes in the first 15-20 seconds out of a 500 second flight. It's easier to build a slightly bigger rocket than to add a giant airplane to the system.
I've asked myself the same. I think of it this way: we can imagine that, in the set of all possible solutions to a particular problem, a subset of those are too hard for humans because they are solved with systems too large for a human to have designed in a reasonable amount of time, or the systems themselves contain pieces that are composed in some previously unrealized way. Of that subset, there may be solutions whose pieces and compositions are well-understood. In these cases (perhaps not exclusively), it might be possible for us to begin understanding any rationale.

edit: after noticing this other hacker news article (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21107706), I wanted to add that this line of thinking is applicable to understanding programs and proofs written by humans as well. Programs and proofs can be well-understood when their pieces, and the way those pieces compose, are well-understood. When the pieces, e.g. lemmata in a proof, are large or hard to decompose, the proof (i.e. the solution to a problem) is harder to verify and understand.
There’s absolutely zero evidence for that claim.
How about the taxes and costs of living compared to say Berlin & social welfare?
I think parking-lots make more sense than a garage.

1. Garage is full of tight spots. If something "goes wrong", you have to lift your finger off the cell-phone (capacitive sensor, so its innately laggy to a few dozen milliseconds), that signal then has to be trasmitted over the internet, to the car which then applies the brakes.

2. Or... you could be in the car itself... and directly connected to the accelerator / braking system. No delays if something goes wrong.

------

At least with a parking lot, you can argue that you didn't feel like walking (even if you need to keep the car within visual range). But in a garage + visual range, it means that you're giving up control for what amounts to a party trick. Its not like Electric vehicles give off fumes, so there's basically no disadvantage to getting in the car inside the garage instead.
What are you talking about? Not only is wildlife thriving there[1], there are multiple permanent human settlements in the area, a growing hospitality sector[2], and a booming tourism industry[3]. If you're looking at elevated frequency of minor abnormalities, you have a few hundred papers relating those to agriculture and mining to sift through.

You sound like you've watched too many Hollywood horror films. The only place to get a meaningful dose is inside the sarcophagus or to venture deep into buildings that contain dumped cleanup equipment. Both are fairly difficult to access to wildlife or civilians.

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/wildlife-near-nuclear-reacto...

[2] https://www.tripadvisor.com.au/Restaurant_Review-g298058-d10...

[3] http://www.travelweekly.com.au/article/chernobyl-sees-touris...
"Everything works" means every aspect of the operating system works. If you are dependent on apps from the App Store, go use the App Store. The process is similar to buying them via a vendor or installing games via Steam. For those who really need that, it's there. But it's not necessary.
There are few things that scare me as a software engineer. Regex usually comes to mind first, but then I remember ... text rendering.

Just reading Microsoft's Michael J Kaplan's blog (RIP) about Unicode, and how that plays into rendering, was daunting enough.

But this article really points out how ridiculous it can get. No thanks, I'll stick to the easy stuff like my current project, Angular 8 / .Net Core, and let Firefox handle the tricky bits.
Tools deserve review and critique to determine whether they are good, neutral, and/or bad for society; and whether their use should be controlled or uncontrolled for societal good. For example, three such judgements as society sees them today from agricultural inventions:

Shovel: Neutral-Good (farming), Uncontrolled (it’s very unlikely you can do much harm to society with a shovel)

Backhoe: Neutral/Good (efficiency), Controlled (heavy machinery can easily kill people and damage infrastructure)

Agent Orange: Bad (imprecise, damaging, disease-inducing), Controlled (considered a chemical weapon with no legitimate societal use)
> I dream of a world of less laws.

This is definitely not what's gonna happen if we want to tackle climate change. As for the remote working, I guess that more than a fair assessment from employers, there is some cultural resistance that could be changed with a bit of encouragement.
> Parsing is simple

It's obviously not simple - no two parsers have the same behaviour!

http://seriot.ch/parsing_json.php
yes. you have a couple thousands pounds of "self-driving" technology that does not do well in parking lots (that's like 95% of where I usually park my car). It's definitely not going to hit or kill anyone. Also, it's the responsibility of pedestrians 100% to look for cars.

Give me a break. You can either handle what your feature advertises or you cannot. This is in the cannot bucket - the same way autopilot is in the cannot bucket.

The sad story with Tesla is that they should probably focus on the one thing that works beautifully on the car and that is the fact that it's electric. Focus on making a beautiful, insanely fast electric car. People love it already - just stop w/ the gimmicks.
Does C++ not have int32_t and the like from C?
Proton (Steam's custom WINE) is really really good (you can turn it on for all games). Of course it still breaks games that use excessive DRM, but I avoid those games anyway.
And there we have it. Why nothing will change. The idea of using less is so alien to how we have been brought up to always have more and more. Suggesting we don’t throw so much food away, not eat 200lb of meat per year or drive cars that do 60mpg instead of hulking suvs that barely crack 15mpg is seen as communism. That hardwiring is overwhelming hard to change
Related - if you like spending time on reddit: please consider visiting r/realtesla. Sometimes it's a bit too negative, but mostly I find it a nice counterbalance to that creepy "everything is always awesome" subreddit.
Yep. That's techno-optimism in a nutshell. All of us rich folks will be just fine, and the poor people will get screwed just like they always do.
According to the fine print (and carriers' past actions), nothing on an airline ticket is guaranteed as part of the sales contract; not the plane type, flight numbers, arrival/departure times, baggage handling, connections, and, thanks to overbooking, not even the fact that you have a seat on the plane.
It does not change your existing integers or compilation time. Only where you use the new types the compiler will have more work to do. What would be the alternative in those places? Manual code? Preprocessor macros? Assertions everywhere? A theorem prover?

To me the implementation seems to be a good solution given that you don't want to change the core language.
If we had made laws 20 years ago, forbidding combustion engines by 2019, I'm convinced we would have all been driving electric cars by now. The problem electric cars had in the past, that Tesla was the first to overcome, was range.
So, we would have driven electric cars that were slightly less convenient than combustion cars, which would have been very tolerable and likely would have helped a great deal with our huge carbon emission.

The problem with your line of reasoning is that you seem to pre-suppose that the market has to solve every problem, even the ones that the market created.
Crap. My habit of skimming strikes again
It's not a contradiction that wildlife is thriving there,
since, as I pointed out, humans were even worse for the wildlife. That means obviously nothing for what effect it would have for humans themselves.

I'm in contact with people from our nuclear physics faculty that are doing actual research on this, I don't need to read random articles from your generic newspapers. If I need to know something, I can just go down the hall and ask them. That the exclusion zone still has significant hot spots is what they told me.

[EDIT: Your article [1] says basically the same things that I did, most notably the "Nature flourishes when humans are removed from the equation, even after the world's worst nuclear accident" and "The Chernobyl exclusion zone is still considered an unsafe region for humans due to the high levels of radiation". Thanks for that corroboration.]
Evolution with the EWS plugin.
And if the application's run-time safety requirements demand that the debug performance hit be paid, then that audience will view the debug sluggishness as a cost of doing business.

Welcome to engineering tradeoffs.
Fortunately the cars do have cameras facing in every direction. Clearly not sufficient to stop every fender bender but you could say the same about human drivers.
You can still use the Uint32/Uint8/... types. While performance can vary from system to system, the range should be the same on all reasonable platforms.
All the talk about Apple being all about privacy is 100% marketing. There is no way apple is going to give up $12 billion dollars a year in revenue [0] to not default to google for search.

[0]: https://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-en...
A New Theory of Attention
The barriers to using both is really only a question of disk space. Dual booting isn't difficult (just install Windows first).
Vice really does a disservice to the author. "All" math is not wrong, but I sure wish theorem provers were the preferred method of formalizing mathematics. But theorem provers really aren't quite ready for prime time either. But it sure feels like a lot of verification of mathematics is somewhat repetitive.

I think that programming/CS is to mathematics what neolithic revolution was to human culture. It allows for specialization in the stack. People can obsessively optimize different parts of the stack to everyones benefit.
Show HN: I made an API for your Raspberry PI (see, it rhymes)
Yeah, but you're not representative of most people. And the same applies to those who are in the top 10% and claim college education is useless - they're not representative of most people. Folks who now have a job because they have a college degree most likely wouldn't have one if they didn't go to college.

It's rare for someone to have so much self motivation. School environment forces you to learn those things without the burden of having to be so self motivated.
Have you measured?

Also, what do you mean by "this has to just trash performance for debug builds". Do you mean runtime performance?
It does. I personally stick to those exclusively except for for loop index variables.
>> It's relatively easy to parse (while not as easy as a sane well-specified version of CSV would be).

> Wrong. CSV is horrible to parse with its string quoting rules.

I made a reasonable attempt at preventing exactly this misunderstanding, but I guess if people want to misread you they will.

> Nobody is talking about application logic here but you.

The application logic (I'm including internal data representation here) is the meat of all efforts, so you should absolutely be considering it, instead of needlessly putting isolated efforts in optimization of side actors. Parsing JSON should IMHO be a total side concern, and using an oversized library like the one we're talking about fails to acknowledge that. Such a library is either a wasted effort (if its data types aren't used throughout the application), or else (if they are) use of the library leads to massive problems down the road.
It's a multi-billion dollar industry, is this a real question?
>...in USA, a green card could take upto 12 years. In Canada , you will get it in 3 years at most.

In Canada you can get PR on the day you arrive.
Nuclear would be better, but it's not quite as good as it seems. Nuclear engines are rather heavier than chemical.
Headline is of course absurd hyperbole that does not belong here.

> "I think there is a non-zero chance that some of our great castles are built on sand," Buzzard wrote in a slide presentation. "But I think it's small."