skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The interesting part for signal processing is that you can run the discrete Fourier transform QFT [1] in O((log N)^2) time. It's much faster than the classic Fast Fourier Transform that is O(N log N), that is much faster than the naïve calculation of the Fourier Transform that is O(N^2). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Fourier_transform

You get an extremely fast Fourier Transform, but for signal processing the problem is how to enter the data and how to extract the data.

In the Shor's algorithm the initial vale is easy to construct so you don't need O(N) time just to enter the data, and the output that you need to read is only a value, not all the values for every frequency, so you don't need O(N) time just to extract the data. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shor%27s_algorithm

[1] I prefer to call it QFFT because the method is more similar to the FFT than to the FT, but most of the people disagree with me.
CentOS 8 in place upgrade available
Jane Eyre translated: how different cultures interpret Charlotte Brontë's novel
Why do you need reflection for a message format that requires objects (use hash map) and lists (array or linked list).
I dropped out of college. Then I wrote more than 20 books about computer science (and various other topics), maintained a programming language for about 10 years, and finished many other long-term projects against lots of resistance.

Sometimes it is a good idea to give up, sometimes it is not. It is not a function of the individual, but a function of the circumstances.
Yes but isn't there a competition to find an algo that can be widely deployed and not subject to weird requirements? A sort of 'goldilocks' algo. For example, I can't recall the name of the algo, but one such candidate for a post-quantum algo required keysizes to be 1TB in size. Another had large computation requirements and so thus couldn't do on-the-fly crypto (which is needed to do LUKS style encryption of disks for example). (Sorry for my lack of sources but it was a Youtube video of some talk about post-quantum crypto algos I randomly stumbled upon and forgot to bookmark)
This post does not "debunk" what I said. In fact, it explicitly mentions the Warburg effect as something to target as a treatment possibility. And looking at two of the molecular cancer biology texts I have to hand (I did a PhD which involved vascularisation, angiogenesis and HIF-1α/VEGF/EGF), there are several examples of drugs which target the pathways related to this effect directly.

Also note that the link does not say, at all, that dietary restriction of simple carbohydrates is ineffective. What it does say, is that dietary restriction should be discouraged in case it causes malnutrition and/or weight loss, which can be counterproductive with effective treatment which itself can also cause weight loss. Which are completely fair points to make for safe general advice to the public; nothing here is black and white, and making definitive statements one way or the other would be both impossible and irresponsible.

So in some situations it may well be counterproductive. However, that is not saying that there are no situations in which it can be effective. Cancers are incredibly diverse, each type evolving in a unique way with different courses of progression. In some cases, it may well be the case that such restrictions can help.
Selling His First Business for $20M and His Second for $400M
DevOps is about collaboration between devs and ops towards building software and operating it efficiently to meet business needs. Traditionally building and operating were looked very differently but experience has taught us that features and stability cannot be achieved without understanding of how features were built and what needs to be done to run those features in production efficiently. In an ideal world, the same person should be able to build and operate systems in production however we don't live in an ideal world - traditionally there was a big divide between devs and ops, and in complex environments you can't learn to do everything yourself. Hence... DevOps.

There are multiple ways this can be achieved. This article is a good read to understand different models of implementation of DevOps culture - https://web.devopstopologies.com/

"DevOps is Ops with new tools. I went to DevOpsDays thinking DevOps means developers and operations merged into one team. I was wrong." - This is kind of right but not completely. DevOps is about bringing ops closer to dev teams by either merging ops or retraining devs to be able to be better at ops (there are more ways as indicated in the above article about DevOps topologies). The idea of doing ops with new tools is that these new tools help us with doing ops like we are building software. Many software development best practices, abstractions, architectures can be now applied to ops as well. This shift in doing ops with these tools which are a lot like other software development tools enable ops to come closer to devs and vice-verse. Here is a great talk by Mitchell Hashimoto (the creator of Terraform, Packer, Vagrant, Vault, etc.) that got me into DevOps - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTQQggVx4sI. This talk explains the use of tools with the backdrop of DevOps.

Other than these two things, your observation was spot on. I was not at the event but that's the story at most DevOps events.

I think software architecture will soon become an area of focus in DevOps circles as the right architecture also essential for achieving CI/CD, agility and DevOps.

Never the less, welcome to the world of DevOps. :)
Air from the atmosphere may be the propellant [1]. If sufficient velocity can be achieved before leaving the atmosphere, then no propellant is needed to be carried up on the way to orbit.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhUasBcoj-Q
Bert Related Papers
That, apart from the political and practical issues surrounding nuclear power, ignores the significant amount of pollution created during nuclear fuel enrichment.
Over the last 6 years, 29 people have gone into space or about 5 per year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_space_travelers_by_nam...

Globally, babies are born at the rate of about 145 million per year. So at the current rate of space travel a baby's chance of going into space would be about 1 in 30,000,000.

Even if space travel were increased by 3 or 4 orders of magnitude, only an insignificant percentage of people would ever travel in space. The energy requirements and expense make it a pastime for only the stupendously rich.
Sounds like, based on the comments, these limitations trace all the way back to the beginning of CSS support in IE. It was probably reasonable at the time and I’m not really sure who could’ve expected the explosion in complexity that ended up happening later; at the time stylesheets were used in a much more straightforward manner - I remember some sites let you select between multiple stylesheets!
Fusion is scientifically possible; executing it in a cost effective way is just an engineering challenge. That doesn't mean it'll happen, soon or ever, but it's a valid gamble. Yes, the history of fusion has been long and full of false starts, but it's undeniable that huge progress has been made, and it's hardly absurd to think the journey is finally drawing to a close.

Magic wands, warp drives, aliens, or colonising parallel worlds are not comparable. They are not, as far as we know, scientifically possible, and no progress has been made towards them.
> You speak of them with such disdain.

Nonsense. They're smart professionals, and probably the hardest workers in the company. Certainly the ones subject to the highest degree of pressure, which they always handle with grace.

I "speak" of the absurdity of our industry's superficial hype cycles, and forever-swinging pendulums. After you've been in the game for 20+ years, you will recognize a number of cycles and pendulums yourself. You'll go along with it, because that's part of being a professional. But you'll wonder why we're collectively unable to step back, and recognize more of these things, and not pointlessly churn so much.

However, I could write a similar comment about engineering managers and SDLC methodology trends. A similar comment about testers and quality assurance. And yes, probably a dozen similar comments about language fads and architecture patterns and trends related to developers.

I don't think any of those comments would come from a place of disdain for workers themselves. I just think that culture has shifted, and anything short of unqualified gushing praise registers as offense for many younger people. Maybe that pendulum will swing again too?
Let's just use whatever tech saved us from the climate catastrophe everyone was preaching was coming 20 years ago. Or the ones before that I heard tell of
Maybe social media should really sit down and think about their "growth" above all else model.

How about twitter use their $$ and do some machine learning and start warning me about risky tweets.
I usually don't have my mouse hooked up to my desktop and I've found Cinnamon better to work with without a mouse. I tried Gnome out under Ubuntu (both the latest LTS release and non-LTS) and while it's better than Windows, there were some issues for me. Some reasons off the top of my head

* The default theme no longer outlines which ui element you've selected when pressing tab to jump to the next element. Made it very hard to navigate program menus

* Some windows don't respond to keyboard commands, ie: minimize or move to side. If memory serves spotify was one of the programs this didn't work for but every window I've tried works without issue in Cinnamon.

* Mouse keys has no options provided under accessibility. You can customize the speed and startup delay to make for a nice experience, but the options were simply not there. I googled how to do it through the terminal but all of the top results wanted you to use a package that I couldn't find in the software store. I gave up.

The default speed for mouse keys is unusable. It takes minutes to move from one end of a 1080p monitor to another. Even Windows provides options for this, though the gui options are better in Cinnamon (best in KDE).

* I like pressing the windows key and launching an app by navigating with arrow keys. You have to type to do a search in Gnome?

Perhaps I'm just not familiar enough with Gnome, but I've people say that it's good for use without a keyboard and that's just not been my experience.
Thanks for this. I must've shrugged it off initially for using the "IoT"-buzzword (who are they selling too?).

Reading up a bit on it here[1], and again, I'm appalled. I don't want to waste time and money cherry-picking Windows versions. There's IoT Core, Mobile and Enterprise, and then there's Enterprise LTSB, apparently with year codes too, what gives?

Nah, all this time and money wasted doing that can be invested in making the jump to Linux, because unlike Windows, chances are, that that will be indeed just a one-time investment. Linux also has a plus of making ghosting hard-drive images much easier, since there are no licensing issues to consider, and therefore could also be done completely offline (PCs are hooked up to local network for remote VNC connections, but are blocked from the Internet).

It may be wishful thinking, but I hope that just like servers are 99% running Linux, the same may one day be said for industrial applications... looks like I'm on the front line, lock and load!

[1]: https://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/vstudio/en-US/86c34...
Agreed. I imagine the bereavement model applies. Too often people get stuck. I certainly have. It's a lot of work to recognize in oneself. Then even more work to force myself to the next stage.
Nvidia already produce third party drivers for their Mac cards.
Nuclear fission could, obviously -- I've yet to see anybody propose a reasonable alternative (with a known tech, not just hypothetical handwaving) to cover our enormous energy needs -- and even then some work is needed to migrate direct fossil consumption to electric. Wind and solar consumes ridiculous amount of spaces and the storage is not solved (we need it for too for other purposes, maybe not in the same form, but that does not make the problem disappear for existing usages...). Without storage, it is not a solution (it does not prevent it from becoming one in the future, but we need to start to build things now, while storage is being studied). Hydro is used already, and developing it to the max will not be enough. Nuclear fusion is not there yet.

So even with pervasive nuclear fission we would have a shitload of problem to solve, but at least that would be an immediate first step, and could be replaced if we eventually figure out how to replace it. We haven't figured out that yet.
Of course, but in a world where, practically, we aren't and won't be able to reduce emissions in time, what do we do? All approaches need to be looked into simultaneously. And it seems like that might be the world we live in.

In many cases it may be far easier to get billions funneled to researchers and scientists for moonshot projects like this than to get world leaders to agree to and enforce billions/trillions of dollars' worth of emissions reductions.

As mentioned in other comments, even if the warming issue itself is solved "out-of-band", there are still lots of other issues associated with what's being released. But it's a start, and might be the difference between turmoil and utter catastrophe. Countless human and non-human animal lives could potentially be saved which might otherwise not be if moonshot projects like this didn't exist. Reducing suffering and death, for all time scales, is the only metric we should be optimizing for at the end of the day.

This problem has to be viewed in terms of what will actually help, not what we "should" be doing. I'd certainly wish the president of my country would sign the Paris Agreement; obviously, we should. But a scientist won't be able to influence that, and probably otherwise won't be able to have much impact lobbying politicians, so they need to find a way to help any way they can.
Interesting - can you let us know what degree is that? I would think in general, it is the reverse.
Tesla. I'm disappointed. You say your cars are the safest on the road. That your self-driving AI is safer than humans. You spar with regulating bodies along those lines-- arguing that you're protecting consumers. And then you roll out a fluff feature that causes accidents.
> Dutch universities can’t select for students

What do the Dutch do if there are 10k spots available in a given university and 20k people apply?
Final Projects from “The Structure of Engineering Revolutions”
I find it... odd that an article on font rendering is using a 14px forced font size (default: 16px) making the article really hard to read on my 14" laptop screen from a foot away. Subpixel antialiasing on my LCD screen is just not my problem here, author. :)
> People are just irrational and can't compare things. Fukushima type accident every few years would be completely acceptable and compared to coal and hydrocarbons.

You're quite right, but keep in mind that identifying the problem doesn't make it go away. If public opinion won't accept fission, then we'll need another option even if fission is technically a fine solution.
How Sid Meier Almost Made Civilization a Real-Time Strategy Game
look at the source code- all of the fastest are using PCRE
Chocolatey had so much promise, but it just doesn't deliver. At least in my experience, software tends to be outdated, and the packaging often of dubious quality. There are also multiple packages available for a lot of software, so you don't know which one to choose. Oh, and the Chocolatey website is pretty awful too.

I do like scoop, but of course the selection available is much smaller than Chocolatey, at least for now.

Come to think of it, it's kind of strange that Microsoft never created a packaging system for Windows (aside from the Store; I mean for non-UWP apps).
I love the teleological formulation "Proof emerges".
Octal is amazingly good.
I don’t know how goodRx makes money, but it’s a great tool for doctors. I use it every shift to pick affordable antibiotics, blood thinners, eye drops, etc for my patients. Yesterday I accidentally prescribed an ear drop that cost $320 for the bottle, when there was a $15 option that was just as effective. Only way for me to know that was GoodRx
Why are you arguing about what is conceptually possible? The reality is such that people can absolutely be compelled to lie in public, especially for "national security" means. It happens all the time. Failing to update could signal something, but continuing to update means nothing. "Resistance" and other such concepts don't hold up to scrutiny against shareholders and 40 year sentences.
> Assuming people in any significant number care about having to use an online account is naive. Apple requires it.

macOS does not require a cloud account. Technically you don't even need one for iOS, but most people will create an Apple ID for the App Store (and I hope this distribution monopoly on iOS will eventually be broken up).
The real villain here is outrage culture and rampant unchecked political correctness. It's our modern day version of the witch hunts of yore.

People make mistakes, and nobody is perfect. That doesn't mean that they are evil or despicable and deserve to be burned at the proverbial stake.

Things are rarely black and white. Why is it so hard to acknowledge that fact?
Right. My whole point is that there are unknowns in the equation which render the proposition void.
Yeah, ok, so we have essentially PDF -> SVG -> PDF/PS because of too many abstractions. It would make sense to expose some internal printing API to the embedded PDF reader so all this nonsense wouldn't be necessary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugchasing
Consuming less would definitely rescue the planet but everyone not having a 1.5 ton hunk of steel to ferry a 70kg person from robot to robot while throwing away 40% of food produced goes against our hardwiring of having more and more. instead we hold out for some unproven brilliant technical innovation to save us instead of thinking about using resources rationally.
worked great for Steve Jobs
You're not the only one missing this. It seems very common to miss, but I can point out what you're missing.

Your link number 1 is supposed to support nuclear being safer than renewables, and it simply doesn't do that.

There's a few links that regularly get shared, intending to make that point and they all don't actually make it.

The list of things that nuclear is safer than, is notably missing grid scale wind and solar. What a mysterious ommision from something that is trying to argue they are not safe.

Having read your link 2 and 3, I see they also don't support the point you are making (the first describes how to recycle turbine blades into concrete and is looking for more applications, the second says solar panels are 90% recyclable and just wants some government policies to ensure this happens), which makes me wonder if you're arguing in good faith here?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/U.S._his...
That doesn't help against attacks by US authorities. If they can make Facebook create a backdoor, they can make Apple and Google distribute it.

Signal has the same issue.
Your internet searches are not part of the telemetry - it's nowhere near that invasive [0] (I still believe you should have the option of disabling it though).

[0] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows/privacy/configure-w...
It's not unreasonable to assume someone will have a line of sight for where a vehicle is being summoned from, just like when in the vehicle itself and you drive forward you're paying attention to its surroundings as well.

I have seen some videos released with summons that just a quick horn honk would have likely prevented another driver backing up their vehicle from bumping into, with enough force to do some front bumper damage, a Tesla being summoned in a parking lot; it moves slowly too, and that could also be a factor in surrounding drivers not gauging or having the same kinds of reactions.
This piece is about so much more than the usual complaint against an increase in rent. It does not talk about public housing. Rather it points out the problem of bureaucracy that acts as a multiplier to the market power of landlords.
Still 13 open issues though. Most of them are marked as enhancement, but 3 as bugs.
Good write up!

Although I pay for ProtonMail, this year I started using gmail again for almost everything - I found email search and automatic calendar integration compelling, especially for travel arrangements and keeping organized while traveling.

I am starting to regret the switch back to gmail because I am slipping on privacy for the sake of convenience.

EDIT: as a self labeled liberal, I find Kevin Williams very conservative politics somewhat disagreeable, but I still find his new book “ The Smallest Minority: Independent Thinking in the Age of Mob Politics” well worth reading and has slightly changed my viewpoint on the importance of personal liberty.
You’re not stupid. Nuclear is an amazing idea on paper. But it’s simply too expensive and too slow to deploy. I recommend reading the World Nuclear Industry Status Report the Reuters article is based on.
You say this as a joke, but I suspect they have been programmed to drive fairly aggressively, though probably to come to a halt before any collision that it can predict. If so, we might soon see two or more Teslas deadlocked, their fenders inches apart.
I only have a 4 year degree myself, so perhaps I am giving graduate work greater esteem than my experience allows.
Orion was a complete failure of a project, so hardly a good idea to reference it.
Another ex-win7/10 user here who switched to Linux Mint because of stuff like this and a lot of simular sh*t. Never looked back and sorry I didnt do it before.
Sure, it's got its problems, but please show me a better alternative.
No, it’s not path finding. The DARPA races were pathfinding and getting from point A to point B hasn’t been the problem for some time.

Driving around other people requires theory of mind in order to make decisions based on what the people around us expect to happen

I’m teaching a friend to drive right now - it’s all about eye contact, being waved through, stopping and starting predictably and without surprises, you’re always looking around for pedestrians and checking if they see you and predicting, according to everything you’ve learned about humans so far, whether they’re about to step into the street

Deep learning on photographs is not going to cut it.
Parsing is simple, you just need to be explicit about what you expect to parse. Like, write 10 lines of straightforward parse function (or maybe better, data description + your own code that you use for all your types) that fills your object's fields. Alternatively, if you have a super structured approach about your data (like you're required to have with template metaprogramming) then you can easily generate this stuff. Like, using a usable scripting language or such.

The idea that types can replace code is just broken. The type system is not a programming language. Or at least, as proven by C++/Haskell/..., not a remotely usable one.
Absolute nonsense. Capitalism is the one system which has lifted more people out of poverty than any other.

Trade has also done more than anything else to keep nations at peace. It’s not just apps and iPhones, and it reveals your naïveté for having suggested it.
I never managed to get SLAD to work with Qt bindings and stuff.

CL was my preference many years back, but practical usage at the fringes required me to be a SBCL expert. Sadly, I am/was not :-( so now I am a Python Pleb.
How does the first link not demonstrate that nuclear, at 90 deaths per trillion kWh (and this includes all the deaths from the earliest incidents when humanity was just figuring out how to harness nuclear power), is not safer than wind at 150, solar at 440, or coal at 100k?

Are you disputing the article? My interpretation of it? The sources it cites? The error bounds on the estimates? What?