skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You picked that quote from the main page, not from the release notes, here is what directly follows:

* The reference implementation uses LLVM as a backend for state of the art optimizations.

* What other projects call "Link Time Optimization" Zig does automatically.

* For native targets, advanced CPU features are enabled (-march=native), thanks to the fact that Cross-compiling is a first-class use case.

* Carefully chosen undefined behavior. For example, in Zig both signed and unsigned integers have undefined behavior on overflow, contrasted to only signed integers in C. This facilitates optimizations that are not available in C.
Zig directly exposes a SIMD vector type, making it easy to write portable vectorized code.

So the argument is "exact same compiler as C/C++, but more opportunities for optimization thanks to better semantics and better access to native instructions". This seems reasonable on its face, so care to elaborate on the doubt?

The arguments for not switching from C are often performance or target related, so a language that purports to be an alternative to C would want to point out that those issues aren't a problem.

The reasons to switch away from C are numerous and well documented.
That would be because sufficiently controversial conclusions in the social sciences can upend social stability (endangering the ability of social science work to be performed) and serve as the justification for the infringement of human rights.

That's bad, if there was any confusion.

As another comment puts it, findings that buck conventional thought to the point that they can prompt irrevocable ramifications better have an "unimpeachable, reproducible path." And that's difficult when so much of social science is based on statistical modeling of phenomena that are multifaceted and difficult to control for, and not actually produced by deduction.
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it's definitely a distortion of the market that college athletics bring in significant revenue and none of it beyond scholarships accrues to the athletes themselves. On the other hand, this is essentially the legalization of paying college athletes because wealthy college alumni/boosters can easily guarantee promising athletic prospects a certain amount of money in endorsements even if those endorsements don't make financial sense. E.g., a $1MM endorsement for Alumni Bob's Radiology Practice. That's certainly not going to improve the broken state of post-secondary education in the US.

Edit: It's going to have lots of interstate ramifications, too. If this goes through, why would you ever go to Notre Dame if you could also go to USC?
Propfan
> I find it interesting that the GUI doesn’t appear to be a toolkit like QT, but lower level, like a GUI designed for in-game use.

I can't speak for this project, but what you're describing is an Immediate Mode GUI [1]. imgui is one that comes up a lot.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immediate_Mode_GUI
Calling it "faked" is somewhat hyperbolic.

The article refers to it as an "image" (as opposed to a raw source photo) that it clearly states is the result of "image processing".

It's common practice in science to produce such representative images, e.g. in a lot of astronomy, space photgraphy, and things like SEMs
Anything made by man can be defeated with enough effort, time, and people.
Sorry, to clarify... the comment above was:

> Unfortunately, this seems to be the only way that's not outright massive violence such as Hongkong or France to get politicians to do their goddamn job. Taxi services have had a really massive lobby power in the US.

This was strongly implying that Uber was causing political change. I don't disagree that the competition has been healthy or that the taxi companies were bad actors - or even that the regulations were legitimately onerous sometimes... I object to the statement that "disruption = positive social change".

I think that Uber's case is particularly weak because, while skirting regulation may have gotten accolades, the company itself was toxic to work at and brought in a bevy of sexual harassment charges.
Another addition would be Rudy Rucker's Ware Tetralogy.
After a cancer diagnosis, life changes. There are many challenges to face. On top of choosing treatment, patients may have to deal with side effects, absence from work, and family issues. Caregivers also have many challenges including increased stress...
I struggled to read the Guardian article thanks to the overly purple prose (I write professionally, that sort of writing really ticks me off), but the comment discussion here is fascinating.

I’m a cancer patient, a year out of chemo. Almost 1.5 years ago I was given 2-3 years to live. Bladder cancer metastasized to lymph, liver and lungs is not a good thing to have, apparently, and I was put onto a fairly aggressive chemo course to try and hold it at bay for a while.
The chemo was tough, but I started an intensive treatment course of my own at the same time: cannabis oil, large amounts every evening. It massively buffered my against the side effects; I had a good appetite and my hair got a bit thin but never got too bad. All the same I did very nearly die from sepsis a few days after I finished my chemo course – cannabis can’t help when your immune system is trashed and you pick up some normally minor and forgettable bug!

But the big deal for me is that scans now show “no evidence of disease” rather than just shrunk and static. My consultant is saying this level of response is unprecedented and he now expects to be having these meetings for years to come. I know we need proper large-scale trials, I know I’m presenting an anecdote here, and like most of y’all I’m suspicious of miracle cure stories. But the results I have now are SO far beyond anything my oncology team ever expected that I am convinced cannabis has played a significant part along with the chemo in the cancer battle itself.

I’ve been documenting my experiences and listing my methods and techniques in a blog. Is it acceptable to post the URL here?
The Gods of Toil
Thanks for this comment! I realized I was missing something when I got a reply (with my post being at the same depth as the one I couldn't reply to).
It's hard to separate out what is a lack of strength or coordination and what is random trial. When babies learn to do basically everything, they do a tremendous amount of random flailing that gradually (over weeks or months or years) resolves into the thing they're trying to accomplish.

I think some people interpret this as babies just becoming strong enough to do things they innately know how to do, but with my 4 children, it's always struck me as learning through trial and error, like the neurons and muscle fibers gradually form in a way that is something like the average of all the ways they tried to achieve a goal. That's just my perception, of course. But then I also agree that babies seem to come pre-programmed with a desire to attempt a whole bunch of things. Like I said, I think it's very difficult to separate these things out!
ieee.org (and IEEE Xplore, etc) has gone downhill very fast recently accompaning their design downgrade to an all JS based website. I guess content follows form.
He did argue that adults raping children was acceptable, many times over the course of years. There's quotes in this thread.

Any sex between adults and minors is rape, that's what the concept of statutory rape means. He has expressed that those interactions could be mitigated by "willing" and "voluntary" actions by the children, and that in those situations there's no real harm done.

That's literally what he said. He's completely and totally within his rights to say that. I will support his rights to the death. But that saying shit like that is going to get you socially shunned, predictably, and I'm fine with a society that does that.

Society, and the groups he leads, have the right to find those statements reprehensible and cut ties with him. And I think they should.

I mean what's the counterargument that you're making, that he only kind of implied that raping kids was OK? That he merely insinuated it? That his suggestion that pedophilia was not that big of a deal fell short of actual advocacy?

Assuming you successfully win the argument that there's an important distinction here how does that change the answer?

The core point I've attempted to make is that if you write blog posts about how kids getting fucked by adults is no big deal you might lose your job.

Do you find that concept confusing? I bet you don't. Nobody really does. He knew he was going to make people upset saying that and didn't care. That, in fact, is likely why he did it.

Eventually, his actions had consequences.
Too little, too late. After Iraq, Lybia, Syria, and soon Iran, the West has lost any moral clout whatsoever.
Hypothetically, if a student with a full ride merit scholarship wanted to take a job in his field of study, he could. He could also speak at a conference, write a book, and do all sorts of other things that would allow him to monetize himself.

There's no reason athletes should be different. The fact that there are greater opportunities for a star QB to advertise shoes shouldn't mean that we need to limit them.
The NCAA has an interesting choice to make here.

Option 1, they remove the California teams from the NCAA. The Power 5 have been talking about a "division 0" league for a long time. Chances are that would push them all to leave the NCAA and create their own organization.

Option 2, allow California to be the exception. This would be great for California, because if you're a top high school athlete, would you rather play in California where you could potentially make millions, or anywhere else? Presumably a bunch of other states would pass similar laws and demand the same exception, until the NCAA was forced to allow paid players everywhere.

Or Option 3, just change the NCAA rules to match California, and let players get paid.

If sounds like the only winning move here is for the NCAA to allow paying players. I think California just forced their hand.
consumers vote with their wallet, at the of the day.

by and large consumers don't care if the company is for social change or not.

it's difficult for a company to succeed in getting customers to pay based purely on social change intentions. That's how a market works
In a sense, that is precisely what low/negative rates do. If cash-holders' future purchasing power is diminished, it effectively redistributes future purchasing power to those earning money and making things now and in the future.
In their defense, they were fine until they stopped paying attention to risk and correlated positions.

So this isn't a knock on the BS model necessarily, but human greed.
I have been a day laborer (not in India) and worked at Google (not as a researcher) so I might be close enough to both worlds.

While my time at Google was very exciting for me, it didn't yield any stories that friends or family ask me to retell. Compared to "the time my boss asked me to catch running circular saws he would slide down a roof at me", "that time I found a complicated XSS" just lacks pizzazz. And since I worked hard, I had fewer off hours to generate stories like "the time <well-known political figure> got so mad he called me an asshole in a room full of donors" or "the time I got second place in a drunken knife-catching contest".

The net is that based on that coarse metric of how often retellings of stories from various times in my life are requested, my life at Google was actually one of the least interesting I led, and I suspect that will be generalizable for most people without a straight-line path through life.
I mean they're allowed to earn money from endorsements already, they just aren't allowed to compete in future NCAA competitions if they do so. Even if this law prevents CA universities from punishing students who accept endorsements, they still won't be able to compete in NCAA competitions so what is the actual point?
Nearly every google search I’ve done for the past decade pulls up SO first.
Chris,

"substantially improve the status quo of spreadsheets and, by extension, programming."

I couldn't agree more!

We've created a new kind of spreadsheet for building software -- mintdata.com

Would be great to get your feedback -- any thoughts on what we could improve?
They would be available to males and females. Where does it say only males get this? In fact, title 9 might require the male athletes to share some of their profits with the female sports.
It has been super interesting listening to Scott Galloway blast WeWork and their business model on the podcast Pivot.
Please don't use mobile. Mobile form factor limitations are ruining the web.
Since there are not many women playing football, it should be possible for them to join a mens football team.
> Or at least arkward. When I started to study IT, I was surprised to see, that the stereotypes were the majority. Meaning, long, oily hair, etc.

I see what you mean, the real discrimination in tech is against well groomed people! So all the well groomed men and women get pushed out and are forced to study things like business, medicine or law instead!

How do we solve that? I know, we put up posters like "Deodorant is not a sin", have mandatory diversity training days teaching the nerds how to properly shave, and have recruiters float well groomed peoples applications to the top!
These books refocused my life's work towards drones and AI. I now know what I want to be when I grow up: an interstellar von Neumann Probe. I might even make my AI butler look like General Akbar as a nod to the series.
Good, that was pure exploitation. Student athletes should be able to profit off of their talents, just like any other student could profit off of their own talents.

It is like when a software engineer working at a tech company comes up with an idea at work, they could develop, release a product, and then make a fortune ... right? ... ... uh oh!
> I see these complaints often enough that I assume people aren't just lying outright, but I personally have never had any of this happen to me despite all of the junk I've bought on Amazon.

I think this is a symptom of co-mingling inventories. You can 'buy it from Amazon' or buy it from 'Joe's super legit online shop' for $0.30 less. I suspect many reviews of wrong or broken products are coming from some kind of drop-shipping operation and the buyers aren't aware they're buying from a 3rd party seller.
> According to the gene shortage argument, genes can’t be very important to the birth of the mind because the genome contains only about 30,000 genes, simply too few to account even for the brain’s complexity—with its billions of cells and tens of billions of connections between neurons—much less the mind’s. “Given that ratio,” Ehrlich suggested, “it would be quite a trick for genes typically to control more than the most general aspects of human behavior.”

Yes, even regardless of other examples you have provided, that's just basically bad poor logic in the article? Why would anyone assume that the number of connections of neurons would need to linearly relate to the number of genes describing them? What if a couple of genes describe a process that is then repeated for a billion times during development?
I don't know enough about the reflector. If it works like a boat's radar reflector, an 20 cm reflector would have a equivalent cross section as a metal sphere with an area of about 30 square meters.

I mean the goal of a radar reflector is to send radar signals back to their source, they are super effective. They don't really work like antennas generally, but the pictures of the F-35's reflectors do not look typical, or like a boat's radar reflector, and I have no idea what principle they use.
Sorry, how exactly are acquired non-genomic phenoma like developmental attributes, culture, language, or hell, even learned behavior... at odds with the theory of evolution.

Evolution works through genes (well, mostly). That doesn't say other things have zero effect, and I'm really curious about what led you to think so.
Ruby: Cyclomatic Complexity, Perceived Complexity, and, ABC Metric
I'm sorry, is this bad satire or are you confused about what this means?

Let's say you're the star center on the Stanford's women's team. There's nothing that says you can't get a shoe deal here, the same way a WNBA player might.
Rent prices increase substantially when Airbnb enters a market [pdf]
Japanese rates have been negative or near zero a number of times over the past 20+ years. This is not a new problem.

I know in 2002 Nomura Securities was using some extension of the SABR vol model to address it.
Immutability: Is There a Limit?
Yeah, I agree. This basically means paid college players. It will be far too easy for the boosters to funnel money in via "endorsements".

But I'm not convinced that's a bad thing.
Stop spreading misinformation. The bill applies to all NCAA athletes regardless of gender.
You have an example of something politically unacceptable revealed via "genetics research"?
Dear children, do not listen to this man.

He is leaving out important details. He didn't tell you that the only effective solutions to climate change are on the policy level. That means new laws. Laws which apply to everybody in the whole country.

The smart climate experts all agree on this point, but Scott did not mention it. He should mention that these policies are nowhere in sight for the USA. He should be telling you children to tell your parents to vote for the right policies.

It seems like Scott is actually saying the opposite-- "it's no big deal, don't worry!". That's not true. If we do nothing, climate change will be a huge deal. And right now, many countries and their policymakers are doing nothing.

If we continue doing nothing, if we do not enact the right policies, we will not solve climate change fast enough. We will solve it eventually, yes, but too much damage will be done.

And that's the problem that Scott is ignoring. Nuclear energy takes too long. Technology takes too long. And people won't stop emitting on their own. So we need laws!

He is right about one thing though: you children, the ones Scott is speaking to, you will be fine. But many, many poor children in other places will not be fine. These poor children will be hurt and have their lives changed even though they did not have anything to do with climate change.

If something happens to them, it's because we let it happen. It's our fault. Isn't that enough reason to be worried?
It is, if they qualify.
> Almost no one who takes that advice returns to get a PhD, the income is too hard to give up and often life moves on which makes it hard to take the financial hit and devote the time.

These are all fair points and worth thinking about for the OP (or others in a similar situation). I got engaged and married while pursuing my PhD, and I found having a wife difficult, it wouldn't work (for me) with kids (although there were a few).

I worked for two and a half years before going back to school but I lived like a student for those years, so I didn't end up with a lifestyle change. I also saw a reason to get the PhD--I wanted (and still do) to be a P.I. on research endeavors.
That would be a subset of The Library of Babel. I tried searching some of my favorite lines of code here: https://libraryofbabel.info/ -- It is an interesting experience :D
> Some studies also show that without meat and dairy consumption, global farmland use could be reduced by over 75%

But reducing farmland by over 75% is not enough by itself to counter climate change. And, if we can plant enough trees outside of farmland the reduction of farmland is not even neccessary.

It seems, we agree that we need more trees. But you want to get there by eating less meat. Yes, there is a connection between meat and trees, but why not just plant trees?

Edit: reduced the quote to relevant part
Seeko – The Modern Dating Website
2003. Gary Marcus again.
That's the funny part to Christianity. You have the "Christians" that think "fuck the planet". But then you get the other side that believe we have to take care of the planet because it's a gift from God. Sadly, one has a largely voice than the other because the other congregation is busy coordinating and conducting community litter pick-up events.
Bitcoin faces selling pressure and builds new support around $8000
And that pop up might be the least offensive thing about that paper.
Humans are born extremely early relative to other mammals, because of our relatively narrow hips and relatively large brains.
As I said: "treat them differently for things they do that are neither an explicit breach of contract, nor illegal behaviour"

In other words: these rules need to be explicitly stated in whatever contract consumer and provider agreed on.

These rules also need to be universally enforced. Rules that are (intentionally or not) written in such a way that they lend themselves for arbitrary application (that is, not equally amongst all consumers) are legally unenforcible. Therefore should be considered null and void. Which then leaves the service provider without any legal justification for their actions under contract law. That's at least how it works in many places, at least outside the USA.
I'm curious as to why the choice to use Wisp instead of ClojureScript.
It is more prone to social engineering hacks.

If you order an eSim in someone's online account, you can activate it. Done. hacked.

With a normal SIM card it will be sent to your home/office. Unless someone changed that somehow.
They look funny, they stim, they do that flappy thing with their hands, or rock.

The problem is you are attributing the low end of high functioning with all of them. Either you have also met autistic people much closer to normal than that, or you simply haven't noticed them because you can't tell the difference.

>I’m not saying he’s oppressed. He’s a super giant nerd and people don’t like nerds

At some point most people mature enough to realize that everyone's a nerd about something and stop caring. Most people with a college education and an actual career end up meeting all sorts of people and realizing that cliques are stupid. There are still some high schoolesque antics at every company, but generally that has been my experience.
Low quality reporting. Two things that should go in the top few sentences:

* Name of the Bill: SB 206

* Link to bill text: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...

Instead the bill is only accidentally named in the embedded tweet.
This was long overdue. Thank you. College coaches get paid millions of dollars a year, yet when a poor athlete gets rent money for his dad, all hell breaks loose. Let's stop pretending that college sports is anything but a glamorized professional sporting franchise, and pay the people who make it happen. Actually, this bill doesn't even ask the colleges to pay the athletes their fair market value. It simply allows athletes to make money from their own brand. Not sure how anyone can be against this. If someone is making money off me, in a free society, I sure should be able to make money off myself as well.
Heartbeat or the way you walk could reveal your identity
It allows them to feel like they've helped while not actually targeting the areas which are producing the highest amounts of GHGs (transportation & electricity production). Areas that would financially impact the wealthiest among us.
Reinventing the Network Stack for Compute-Intensive Applications