skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I’m not sure why it’s posted.

However, efforts like this will make people take trains rather than drive. I wish this would happen in the United States.

If trains went 100 miles an hours on average instead of 50, a lot more people would take trains.

Heck, 75 miles an hour on average would be incredible.
"Mind-bending black hole simulation appears to defy reality"

"Appears to". Doesn't say it does. Doesn't suggest it does. I think you're being unfair.

> when they don't match up with reality, somehow reality's wrong and not the model or simulation.

Can you point to some examples? This is not something I've noticed myself.
> AND reduce traveling AND stop eating so much meat, AND stop fishing so much, AND stop creating to much waste

OR eliminate coal as a source of energy.

Coal is the #1 source of manmade CO2 by far. Just switching from coal to natural gas reduces CO2 per kWh generated by 50%. Obviously putting any solar or wind alongside that natural gas cuts much more deeply.

By contrast the airline industry only accounts for a few percent of global CO2 emission. Why even bring up air travel at this point?

I feel like there's this perhaps subconscious desire to bring moralism into it by shaming people for consumption. The "problem" is that coal can be replaced with almost no impact to our lifestyle, and so getting rid of coal doesn't involve enough sacrifice. The narrative of redemption through sacrifice is deeply woven into not just Western culture but most human cultures really.
Also, for people into that sort of thing, a V8 has more value for a collector than a V6 just by virtue of rarity.
Imgui is quite common these days: https://github.com/Gekkio/imgui-rs
Is there any detail anywhere about why Monica Cellio was fired? Will no one leak the internal chat that was supposedly the justification for her firing?

All I can see online is everyone vaguely talking around the issue.

Make the facts public and let people decide for themselves.
Yeah, I've been wondering about this too. In my opinion, it's been apparent for some time now that newer commercial launch providers are going to render SLS obsolete too early in its lifecycle for it to be worth the ongoing costs of continuing to develop it.

You might even argue that it's already obsolete, as despite it still potentially being the most capable rocket for some subset of missions, the per-launch costs are so high it might arguably be better to re-architect those missions to use multiple launches of a cheaper vehicle rather than launch on SLS. (You can launch 10 reusable Falcon Heavys for the cost of a single SLS launch.)

NASA/Congress has been stubbornly continuing to develop SLS despite that, but how much longer will they be able to hold out? Surely they won't be able to justify continued spending on SLS once there's another operational rocket that's both more capable in every respect, and a couple orders of magnitude cheaper to operate?

So at what point will they finally give up? Are they going to wait until after Starship hops? Until after it reaches orbit? Until after it achieves in-orbit refueling? Until after it lands on the Moon? Until after it lands on the moon, with crew? When?
Transitioning from a Software Engineer to a Manager
>What about enacting a law that says "if you use cheating devices at all, you can't dock in our ports"?

When 99.9% of vessels are doing the cheating, the shipping companies would say you would really like your people to go on a diet don’t you?
Was he prudent in maintaining good work habits?
I hear the industry can be quite hard on people if they are not careful in how they work[1]

[1] https://www.thefabricator.com/article/safety/the-invisible-r...
First point, the last new deal didn't get us out of the great depression. You might recall that the great depression lasted throughout the 1930's. It was World War 2 and its aftermath that ended the depression.

But anyway, the only similarity is in the name. The FDR new deal built new infrastructure. The Green new deal replaces infrastructure. Adding infrastructure where there was none before increases productivity, and therefore causes economic growth. Replacing infrastructure has net-zero change and therefore while the activity adds to GDP, it has no lasting effect on the economy. And since it substitutes for things that would have led towards growth, it actually causes stagnation or decline.

In the social sciences, this is known as the "broken window fallacy." There's a lot of papers you can find with those search terms.

If you want an idea of the best-case scenario of what life would be like under the Green New Deal, look to Japan with it's 20+ years of economic stagnation. Except without nationalized pensions we'd be asking a whole generation to live through work-until-you-die conditions. I'm sorry, but I don't think I want to do that to my kids unless it is a real do-or-die scenario as the alarmists claim. But the alarmists are wrong. The world is not ending tomorrow, or even the day after. We can deal with the change at a pace that doesn't result in economic suicide.
Or phasing out coal. See my other reply.

Coal is such a huge contributor to the problem that you can almost say that climate change is a coal problem. Not quite, but you're not wrong. I am deeply puzzled by anyone discussing climate change who doesn't bring up coal first, yet I see tons of discussion where coal is not even mentioned.
I would like to vote with my wallet, but products don't come with 'CO2 emitted' labels.

That's important because the exact same product could be produced I a variety of ways, some many times more polluting than others.
> Live for today.

Isn't that the cause of the issue though ? "Who cares about 100+ years in the future, my v8 mustang and my weekly plane trips are pretty convenient, and planting a tree won't change much anyway, and china is doing anyway, plus if I'm the only one doing it it won't help that much, and &c."

> seems reasonable to do _something_ that everyone agrees with instead of trying to ram down ideas very few people agree with)

The problem is that the things most countries agreed on are not nearly enough and even if they were almost none of the goals are met.
I'm out of date. The Moscow Time says $49, but you're quite right in that Russia has done a lot in the last few years to bring their budget under control.

Their war chest is not looking too healthy though, the hit to oil prices in the last 5 years depleted a lot of their reserves. Thanks for the correction.
makes perfect sense, we're not made to stay inside all the time. Veer too far from our genes and problems start...
And twitter started this whole thing because they were getting complaints from celebs and being sued by Tony LaRussa for account impersonation.

I wonder if these networks even want people’s humanity verified on each account, seems like it would kill growth numbers. When Facebook started, most accounts were unofficially verified to be humans, as it was only open to people who had a .edu email address, which were mostly verified and given out by universities to real people. Then they opened it up and boom Facebook grew to ridiculous numbers.

I’m waiting for one of the social networks to let anyone verify their humanity, Bumble does it, not sure why Twitter, FB, LinkedIn, and the others cant give this option. Maybe they don’t want to?
Holy strawman, batman! This is so bad I felt inclined to comment.

Neither OP nor RMS said "child sexual abuse is okay" or wants to say that--you know that, right? Why are you phrasing it that way?

The only rational interpretation is that you're deliberately misrepresenting things, which is ironically one of the main thrusts of the linked article. The language used here is important, as are forums like this one.
I care. Also it's a potential legal issue for any given project if there's a registered trademark involved.

Plus first result for "rx rust" lead me to https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxRust
Command Execution Tricks with Subprocess – Designing CI/CD Systems
You can actually do both. Indeed, the most popular and heavily upvoted answers on SO tend to do just that, in the form of "here's the answer to the question you asked, and btw, I think this other thing here might be a better way to go about solving your broader problem and maybe avoiding the issue in your question altogether!".
Yet everyone does not like equally, not by a longshot. We have sites like snopes and polifact. Maybe not perfect, but better than postmodern nonsense like "there is no truth".
International standards for shipping pollution are a few decades out of date. It's been about 40 years.

International trade organizations need to address the pollution happening in international waters, including combustion gases, dumping, and all the national subsidies for environmentally hostile activities relating to shipping.

The article does not actually present an actionable plan for tree-planting. It seems to be saying that deserts, mountains, and tundra are viable targets for afforestation--a.k.a. land area not already forested that is not used by cities or agriculture.
Experimental hydrogen powered boat visiting London
Saying the New Deal got us out of the Great Depression is like saying Gavrilo Princip started Word War I.
If you're arguing that the US should invest heavily in new nuclear energy plants, you'll find no objection from me.
TechCrunch article from 2009: https://techcrunch.com/2009/06/06/facing-lawsuits-and-compla...
How to Avert a Climate Catastrophe
> Internships. And many artist work for free in order to get exposure.

Both of those (assuming the work is for for-profit companies) are controversial as well.
Are you saying, then, that any legislation entitled "Foo Bar New Deal" will therefore have a positive effect?

If so, I would like to propose a Pink New Deal. It's even better than the Green one, trust me. And it seems crazy to suggest otherwise.
Nothing new here, but he does pull together lots of references to the claimed benefits and failed goals of open office spaces.
I never claimed to be wiser, though there is evidence that agrees.

At least in the US, murder rates are consistently higher in states with the death penalty.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140330143555/http://www.amnest...
Apparently there is already one for Rust too.
https://github.com/ReactiveX/RxRust
Maybe it is more complex to deal with the causes of CO2 emissions. Some places in the world like Africa, East Asian have numerous power plants emitting tons of CO2 to the air and there are no simple substitutes to them because of lack of budget. Also if simply enforce those countries to ban factories would cause a rising of unemployment.
Ah. Very frustrating to read complaints that omit key info. Would have been nice if they explained that they're under an NDA.
HTTPS: //amos.me/blog/2019/reading-files-the-hard-way/
It's always staggering to really meditate on the unimaginably vast size of the universe, and then come up with some simple idea such as every combination of letters arranged in books, and realize that our universe could never fit all the books that would require, even if stacked side-by-side between all the galaxies.

(The observable universe is also on the order of 10^80 meters cubed.)
Gwen Ngwenya (ex-MP) discusses affirmative action and tech policy
> People love to focus on the lifestyle choices because they allow them to paint those advocating change as hypocrites, and so dismiss the entire message.

You're right, and it drives me mad. There's also the other side of it, when someone really does live off the grid, eat vegan etc. "Ugh who wants to live like that?"

> The vast majority (~80%, [1]) of the greenhouse gas emissions do not come from "lifestyle" choices such as eating meat, but from transportation, industrial use and electrical production

1. These industries don't generate emissions for the heck of it - they do it to satisfy consumer demand.

2. To force industries to change their ways of doing business, there's not many options beyond carbon taxes. Which will result in some changes - in manufacturing techniques, costs, end product - that are hard to predict now. Some may be for the better, and some, for the worse.

Given these facts canny businesses will almost always successfully lobby against climate regulation and taxes with appeals like "bad for jobs! no more cheeseburgers! they're taking away your SUVs!" to the electorate. But if people are OK with more expensive cheeseburgers or SUVs, these appeals have less purchase. You're not going to get everyone to give up these things, but at least they'll realize their true cost.

> if every single person in the US went vegetarian, it's estimated that it would only reduce the US's CO2 output by about 5%.

And that's exactly what GP was getting at. There isn't one single solution that will fix 90% of the problem. This type of thinking introduces complacency - "They'll fix it before it gets really bad. I heard you just have to plant a bunch of trees/drop some rocks in the ocean/run a carbon capture machine."

Our economy is a leaky pipe, with carbon dripping out all along its length and breadth. The solution to climate change is a bunch of 2-5% solutions.
Rent the Runway plagued with software issues
> participation voluntary and free of charge

If you want distribution of your thoughts, you have to use the walled garden controlled by giants.

> Everyone is free to move to another platform or start his own.

The reality is that you can't. Not without billions of dollars of funding.

Social networks should be regulated. They can't own the platform and make moves to crush others by threatening to downgrade your voice and participation.
Reading Files the Hard Way
I despise this argument & your parent said monopolist behaviour. You can't just ignore the network/cool kid phenomenon when considering social networks; they're all trying to lock you into their own platform, and while you're right that they cannot be described as a full fledged monopoly they are trying their darndest to behave like one and disincentivise diversification.
Go is a new Visual Basic. Probably good for business owners, because of the lowbrow nature of Go language, developers are easily interchangeable, like a commodity.
The article says "a specific energy density that is more than seven times greater than commonly used lithium-ion batteries"
Well ... Google?

shrugs
Summary: Companies with software-like margins should be valued like software companies, companies that sell something other than software should be valued like traditional businesses. This hasn't been the case for the last five years, these last few IPO flops have shown us the light.
It's about what people know you from. If people know you from off platform, and they go to YouTube to see that same person, I can verify that. If your main platform is YouTube, then obviously you are you by definition, and verification carries no information.

Basically, if you were tasked with verifying KFC, you could check that the KFC on YouTube is indeed the fast food chain. If you were tasked with verifying PewDiePie, then what are you verifying?
> It seems as if you disapprove

I do, because trying to manipulate people's emotions is the lowest form of argumentation. Not to mention the fact that she (or rather, her handlers) only care to target western countries. I'd be more willing to trust her (handler's) sincerity if she ALSO AT THE SAME TIME called out the country that has a giant brown cloud, visible from space, hanging over it.

> What is the alternative?

Make a better argument for why _this time_ it's truly different. Start off by admitting that scientists aren't always correct ("the science is settled" is one of the dumbest phrases ever uttered) and admit that scientists HAVE gotten things wrong about the climate in the past (e.g., the ice age predictions of the 70s). Then proceed with arguments that detail why previous dire predictions were incorrect and why it's different this time.

Finally, be logically consistent in your arguments:

* People in western countries are told to "have fewer children" in order to save the earth. Well guess what, we're already below replacement levels. We've done our part. Lecture folks in the developing world to do so, they're the ones contributing to overpopulation.

* At the same time, much is said about per-capita CO2 emissions in western countries. Why do we hear complete silence from climate alarmists about migration from third-world to first-world countries? I would think they'd be staunchly opposed to it, seeing as how every person imported into western countries will instantly have their carbon footprint boosted sky high. Wouldn't it be better for the earth to not have these migration patterns occur?
Remember when Facebook experimented with mass emotional manipulation by boosting negative/positive content?

That's one thing I'd expect a psyop guy might do.

Another is boost posts from allies and demote posts from enemies.
Misleading Graph
Deep learning powers a motion-tracking revolution
I am in a similar situation as you - I'm currently doing my Msc (Computer Science, in Germany) and cannot decide whether I would want to continue to a Phd or head back to the industry. However, I had worked 3 years in the industry _before_ I enrolled for the current masters program, and that gave me a lot of perspective. Since you mentioned this:

> I don't have industry experience and I don't really know how any of this stuff plays out. I'm worried that if I chose to forego the PhD, I'll really regret it in a number of years. I'm afraid I won't be able to find interesting work with just a MSc, and I'm really afraid of getting a boring software engineering gig.

The trick is to find an engineering job in a domain/problem that you are interested in. I would really recommend that you spend a few years in the industry, since my time as a professional really really helped me in the long run. I am able to prioritize things faster, and meta-learnings like "Validate your hypothesis before investing resources" are true in both academia and industry. It would also be a good opportunity to gain some software engineering skills (academia has a bad rep when it comes to code quality) and some people skills (eg: how to do code reviews without sounding like a jerk). Also, the money would really cushion the blow if you end up deciding to do a PhD later after all.
Global warming is obviously being exploited politically.
And public communication deliberately confuses the facts. and it is being used to spread fear.

I dont think philosophers jumping on the subject is going to help
I'm sorry, drones were not in the public consciousness in 2002, let alone 2010, when the military was still mostly using helicopters for this type of search. Drones were used for bombing, and they are probably 10 times as large as consumer drones.

There was no way he expected the police to have this technology and a desire to use it against him specifically.

He also didn't read HN- he's barely able to communicate in his native language according to the article.
Use Route53 as a distributed, eventually-consistent, 100% available kv store
That is the only topic my kid, who recently went to high-school brought up so far. She said her teacher talks endlessly about it, how everything is bad. I think we need to take a step back and think as to what it really means, and to whom. If we're talking about global scale, then sure, it'll be bad, but if we're freaking out our kids, you know the kids in the first world, well how bad is it going to be? We need to stop freaking the kids out and telling them they are doomed.
I guess that is one way of getting me to read the article :)
In which case, you probably wouldn't exist, and neither would the medium in which we're having this conversation.

Better or worse?
I've looked around but can't seem to find a good online primer on Symbolic AI. Any help?
That statement seems accurate to me, but there's a lot wrapped up with it. What should have convinced people, decades ago, is the combination of well-attested theory and numerous lines of evidence. Anybody capable of being convinced -- which is to say, able to understand science and not ideologically blinded to it -- has needed no subsequent convincing.

There are a lot of people who don't fit that category, and if they are to be persuaded at all, it won't be by the means that are used to convince the scientifically literate. For the illiterate, they might well be tipped by one summer's weather or one hurricane's damage. That's bad science, but the voting booth doesn't care whether your reasons are sound or not. The New York Times is reporting on policy as well as science: what people are going to choose to do.

In that sense the statement is accurate. Those capable of being convinced by science are convinced; those who are moved by incorrect evidence have just received a big wad of it. The only ones who haven't reached the correct conclusion are driven by ideology, and won't be convinced by any evidence.

We can bemoan the fact that so much of policy is decided on bad grounds, but that seems to be a fact of life. Most people don't understand science, and manufactured doubt can be used to sway them from the conclusions reached by science. If you care about getting things done in a democracy, you have to take them into account.

That doesn't justify using the science badly, but that's not what's happening here. They're just reporting on the mechanisms by which people have reached their conclusions.
...at least until review factories start producing two-star reviews describing tradeoffs that would seem reasonable to most people.
Europe has had trains travelling at 200mph for three decades https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVE & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TGV
Britain is just way behind, and it's gonna stay that way.
Here’s some info on potential reasons why they are going bankrupt.

-they are mall centric store and mall traffic has been declining. Other chains have been “right sizing”

-big discount stores (target, Walmart, TJ Maxx, etc) have upped their (discounted) fashion game

-forever 21 was slow to adjust to these broader trends vs competitors

I also agree with proverbialbunny. My girlfriend used to go there regularly but we haven’t been to one for ages. Could just be us getting older though :)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/finance.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/...
Yes, traditionally official exile to another continent was considered sufficient. However, eventually the United States, and later Australia, started refusing exile shipments. I suspect that Mexico would refuse exile shipments.
Genghis Khan took a similar approach to cooling the planet, albeit a bit harsh. [1]

[1] - https://news.mongabay.com/2011/01/how-genghis-khan-cooled-th...
> The real question is: What is the alternative?

Well, before the internet existed, we had word of mouth. Pretty sure word of mouth is and always has been the right way of doing things. Even asking a random stranger in person is probably more signal to noise than reading the garbage posted online, and random chance aint terrible either.

Authoritative reportage also still works in some cases.
Qualitative reviews, not quantitative. This is only crappy as a scalable business.

> Are they generally better...than picking a restaurant at random?

Depends on what you’re looking for, but I’ve had much better success off yelp than on it. I highly recommend going to literally random places.

I certainly couldn’t find the restaurants I do eat at on yelp had I had to look again: they’re all in the middle of the pack ratings wise due to people conflating food rating, service rating, and setting rating. Whatever I like about these places yelp does not expose.
Better education and healthcare I'd assume.
I hate those 3 phase residential buildings, because they usually deliver 208V to ovens and dryers instead of 240V.

While the appliances are probably approved fo 208V, I doubt they’re drawing more peak current to make up for it.
So, it seems, they were telling you that you need to verify your humanity to get your account back. But if you did verify it, do you think they would have given you a “verified” status?
Reminds me of Disney, which has long employed DOD Psyops in high positions.