skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: What is your information distillation pipeline?
I have been struggling with this for years now. I read articles on Medium, watch YouTube videos, daily check Twitter, HN, Reddit, etc. When I find a paper I like I queue it to to my Mendeley list. When I like an article I add it to Pocket. When I like a tweet I bookmark it. When I have time I try to consume some of the stuff I save. Yet it feels like I'm not making any good use of the information I'm putting into my brain. Many of the things I added I lost interest in because too much time passed, and others I just skim through even though I should be reading it in more detail and taking notes. When I take notes I struggle to organize them and make them easily searchable for posteriority.

This leads me to ask you how you go about dealing with the tons of information that internet makes available to us. I want to call this the "information distillation pipeline".

What sources do you use to learn new things and keep track of the novelties in your field?

How do you decide what is worth reading deeper into, spending more time on, etc?

How do you organize yourself to queue the information you want to dive more into when you have time?

How do you take out the bits of information that actually matter to you? Do you record them somewhere? A diary? A mind map?

How do you browse the information you have recorded? Do you try to memorize it? Add tags? Just basic word search? Complex folder structures?

A related post is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20847508, but it only talks about books. Certainly they are one important source of information and the post gives many good insights, but I would like to revive the conversation with a broader spectrum of sources and focusing more on the whole pipeline and searchability of your saved knowledge.
This seems very plausible as an explanation for dark matter but I'm confused as to whether the author proposes it as an explanation for dark energy as well.

Are there not galaxies on opposite sides of the universe, expanding away from each other too fast for them to ever interact?
Well not only that, but the whole game mechanic is that you have to get close to specific points of interest in order to activate them. Obviously for the game to work, they need to know you are at said point of interest...

It's like accusing the airline you used to knowing where you traveled to...
There's nothing special about 60GHz, it's just like any other radio transmitter that's been around for decades. The safety is well understood and apart from some pseudoscience around it (as has been for every new tech, including microwave ovens, cellphones, 5g etc.), there are no concerns.
For the gun rights people, O'Rourke is just stating what everyone already knew. To illustrate this, there's a lovely 'cake' meme [0] (available in both cartoon and text form!) about how much gun rights have already been eaten away, and every one was sold as a compromise already. At some point, "this is a compromise because it means you get to keep any rights at all" stops being acceptable. (The link itself is from 2017, but the text is from 2010)

> Allow me to explain.

> I hear a lot about "compromise" from your camp ... except, it's not compromise.

> Let's say I have this cake. It is a very nice cake, with "GUN RIGHTS" written across the top in lovely floral icing. Along you come and say, "Give me that cake."

> I say, "No, it's my cake."

> You say, "Let's compromise. Give me half." I respond by asking what I get out of this compromise, and you reply that I get to keep half of my cake.

> Okay, we compromise. Let us call this compromise The National Firearms Act of 1934.

> There I am with my half of the cake, and you walk back up and say, "Give me that cake."

> I say, "No, it's my cake."

> You say, "Let's compromise." What do I get out of this compromise? Why, I get to keep half of what's left of the cake I already own.

> So, we have your compromise -- let us call this one the Gun Control Act of 1968 -- and I'm left holding what is now just a quarter of my cake.

> And I'm sitting in the corner with my quarter piece of cake, and here you come again. You want my cake. Again.

> This time you take several bites -- we'll call this compromise the Clinton Executive Orders -- and I'm left with about a tenth of what has always been MY DAMN CAKE and you've got nine-tenths of it.

> Then we compromised with the Lautenberg Act (nibble, nibble), the HUD/Smith and Wesson agreement (nibble, nibble), the Brady Law (NOM NOM NOM), the School Safety and Law Enforcement Improvement Act (sweet tap-dancing Freyja, my finger!)

> I'm left holding crumbs of what was once a large and satisfying cake, and you're standing there with most of MY CAKE, making anime eyes and whining about being "reasonable", and wondering "why we won't compromise".

> I'm done with being reasonable, and I'm done with compromise. Nothing about gun control in this country has ever been "reasonable" nor a genuine "compromise".

> LawDog

0: https://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2017/10/gun-rights-cake-...
Except this is trivially testable because it should produce defined gravitational lensing effects which follow baryonic matter, rather then interactions like the bullet cluster where gravitational lensing has detached from the observable matter.
Top Richest People in the World from 1995 to 2019
In practice programs on these weird large-int machines would just use `-fwrapv` and move on.
There are many territorial animals who protect their territory from intruders and humans are by far not the only one. Is your complaint about humans refining the process and erecting a formal framework around this instead of constantly deciding who owns the territory in a fight like other animals? I don't think you'd like it more, to be honest.
No. Hale-Bopp was discovered in 1995 and became visible in 1996. Halley was last visible in March 1986.
Politics is more or less the mechanism by which society takes collective action. Since people are broadly speaking in favor of free value, pretty much every policy that has nearly exclusively positive or at worst neutral effects has been implemented. It's not like anyone would oppose such policy! So "politics" exists as the realm of policy proposals that help some people and harm other people. All political opinions involve harming someone. If they didn't then they wouldn't be "political" opinions, they would just be opinions.
No unions + virtually infinite supply of labor. If it doesn't baffle me, it probably shouldn't baffle economists.
Thanks for that reference. Fan of EFF. I’ll check it out. The case history archive is a pretty cool resource.
For rejection emails, I think it might not be sent until tomorrow morning.
Thinking over this I have to agree.

Not to mention, half the utility of the gestures is the ability to interact with messy/wet hands. Snapping my fingers near my phone in that situation isn't attractive.

Maybe teaching a gesture to your phone is the most accessable option, respects culture and disability the best.

It's a shame though, I did like the intentionality that the sound of snapping fingers afforded.
> an organism with no brain but 720 sexes]

They are showcasing the modern feminist?
Interesting. I feel the exact opposite. Many of my x-coworkers are life long friends. I will attend the wedding of one that's been a friend for 25 years and other x-coworker friends will likely be there.

It seems waste to spend so much time with co-workers and not be friends. It also seems a waste to spend so much time "working" and not have it be fun and pleasant and social.

But, thinking about it more maybe I was spoiled making video games. It was something I wanted to do, my co-workers wanted to do it to, we did it together sharing the struggles and feeling proud of our product. I'm guessing there are plenty of jobs that if I had to do I'd just want to put in the time as quick as possible and then get back to something I enjoy.

I have a close friend that upon graduation wanted to make video games. He applied, was rejected, ended up in finance, made more money but at least for him it's clear his job is just something he does to get paid.
Don`t mix up the idea of renewable and infinite. Theoretically it can be done but until we each that point it definetly is not working like that.
> Touchscreen keyboards provide much more data that can be used for autocorrect.

My spelling mistakes are either from muscle memory hitting an incorrect sequence of characters, transposing letters, or from me not knowing how to spell a word. How is a touchscreen going to improve any of those problems?
Would you mind providing a source for this leak?
50-50 anachronisms vs flexibility to allow C to run on novel machines that we don't currently envision. Sure, it would be nice for developers on today's machines to reduce it to the conventional subset.
I have no expertise at all in the matter, but my understanding is that the evidence for dark matter is overwhelming. In particular, this Reddit comment (which is mostly just a TL;DR of [2]) seems pretty convincing:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics/comments/kucdk/dae_think_th...

It seems to me a dark matter hypothesis is hardly extraordinary—that is, I don't see why anyone would have priors that particularly disfavoured it—and, if it were to exist, us not knowing much about it doesn't seem particularly surprising either.

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter#Observational_evid...
Is that true? Increasing a level in a few companies on https://www.levels.fyi/charts.html is a similar magnitude increase
We do impose our laws on the tribes, right? I mean, they have their own criminal courts and everything, but they are limited in their ability to mete out punishment. As far as I understand, they cannot form treaties with other nations. They can't raise armies. States can compel establishments within native american tribal territories to collect sales taxes on non-native people.

I don't think it's technically correct to say that they are subjects of the US government. The US doesn't really have subjects at all, right? We have citizens, and Native Americans are citizens of the United States. But it is likewise incorrect to say they are sovereign, at least as we typically think of national sovereignty.

Please help me correct any misunderstandings.
Podcast with him, from a few years ago: https://www.npr.org/2018/02/06/572558864/patagonia-yvon-chou...
This is 100% what you can do today with a Galaxy S9/S10, https://www.linuxondex.com, plug in your phone to a USB-C dock and get a full ARM64 Ubuntu environment
Everyone has thought "maybe it's just a bad gravity equation?" at some point. It's a fun idea, but it's contrary to observation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_Cluster
A better analogy for Twitter and Facebook is the town square, rather than the phone company. They don't just enable point to point discussion, but broadcast to any and all who will listen.

Which is fine, and good, except when algorithms keyed only to engagement cause the noisiest, most provocative and potentially divisive content to be amplified.

We have, for a very long time, had laws concerning appropriate behaviour in a town square, or any other 'public' setting: don't incite riots, don't behave violently towards others, be respectful if someone doesn't want to talk and walks away. I support the efforts we're now seeing to bring those norms into online spaces.
Every so often you hear a story about a recording that was presumed lost but has been found on someones VHS collection[1].

Then there are examples like Marion Stokes[2] who recorded 71000 tapes over 30 years.

Fast forward to today (ha ha), and I do think there is some justification for downloading 'pirate content' for archival purposes. In the same way that I think LibGen is a very important project even if it angers some.

To be clear, I believe in buying the items I'm actually going to read or watch to support the creators. Not just pirating everything.

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jun/28/apollo-11-ta...
[2]: https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/marion-stokes-televisi...
Adding another alternative to the list - have been working on https://happening.net, a site to make event hosting easier.

It will be gradually getting more features to support Meetup-like functionality.
Can you ELI5 - how can we observe something 93 billion light years away, if the light has only been traveling for 13.8B years? Shouldnt the "observable" distance be the the age of the universe?
Wow that's really noble of you, have you considered logging off permanently and living in a tent in the woods? You realize none of the world's problems ever get solved if you bury your head in the sand and ignore things right? I mean we could all go back and start living in caves again, that would certainly solve the climate crisis wouldn't it?
Just because there's no detail, or it's not satisfying, doesn't mean it's less likely.
Good presenter. Critique: I think an awful lot of the time and energy is spend analyzing the market type reasons for each language being popular. But by the time we get to supporting a thesis that OOP is less relevant, or not central, to things like C++ and Java, not enough time and energy to really bring it home. And I'm not sure I'm convinced, although it is an excellent theory.

Here's what I think: The dichotomy exposed in essays like https://blog.codinghorror.com/separating-programming-sheep-f... and The Camel has Two Humps: http://eis.mdx.ac.uk/research/PhDArea/saeed/paper1.pdf, is real. I see it every day.

I think there is another dichotomy. Many people who can code, can think the way needed to write software (not just fumbling and guessing), and can understand a structural and procedural way of thinking. But a large proportion just cannot understand functional programming. "Poof!". I don't think it's education. I think it's a lack of a particular and obscure innate mathematical ability. And I don't think it's a defect either.

Peoples brains are wired different. Visual vs. verbal. Well FP, certain types of math (say number theory), temporal thinking (threads, race conditions, liveness proofs), are very different kinds of thinking than the basic "recipe-like" procedural coding.

So FP isn't the norm because out of 100 people, perhaps 5 can program. Out of that 5, perhaps 1 really "gets" FP. Maybe one more can force it and get it done.

My experience is watching co-workers try to maintain and manage a simple tool written in a functional language. It made perfect sense to me, but it was a disaster. Folks, some things that are easy-ish for you are just not easy for others. It's not "smart" vs "not-smart". Understand, not everyone is wired up the same way.

And the ability to really get FP is one of those things that is neither easy nor common.
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1904.13302.pdf

only 2 nodes away from failing :)
> Without limiting other conditions in the License, the grant of rights under the License will not include, and the License does not grant to you, the right to Sell the Software.

>For purposes of the foregoing, “Sell” means practicing any or all of the rights granted to you under the License to provide to third parties, for a fee or other consideration (including without limitation fees for hosting or consulting/ support services related to the Software), a product or service whose value derives, entirely or substantially, from the functionality of the Software.

IANAL but sounds like that means if you're building apps for people on the platform, consulting, using it for clients/freelancing, or a hosted platform built on the technology then you're not licensed to do that and will need to get approval.
Cool! Back in college we used fpgas with verilog! The labs always took some finagling to get working, but still very fun!
Ubuntu Releases Patch for Major ‘Sudo’ Security Exploit
I'm not sure what you mean. The n-body problem has no analytical solution in general. You have to simulate. The author is suggesting that assumptions you make (such as representing the earth moon system as a point mass at their CoM) in order to make simulation feasible might lead to a catastrophic divergence from reality over time.

This is all a consequence of n-body dynamics being chaotic [1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory
> Turkey won’t be able to arm or use those nukes

A car is going 120 km/h through the desert toward a cliff.

But there are multiple ditches and big rocks between the car and the cliff, so it's very unlikely it will actually drive off the cliff.

And even if it does drive off the cliff, the airbags and restraints will probably keep the passengers from dying.

So it's extremely unlikely that everyone will die.

> bat shit crazy

What's batshit crazy is that the car is driving toward the cliff in the first place.

It's batshit crazy that the car ever left the paved highway at all.

Come to think of it, why is a car anywhere near such a dangerous area with a trunk full of nuclear warheads and a drunk driver at the wheel?
You're stretching the definition of "political" to such a degree that it renders the word meaningless. You're basically claiming that any act that has any impact on anyone is political. That it's basically impossible for an organization to be non-political or even less political than any other organization.

And that simply flies in the face of common sense. Only the most hardcore post-modernist would deny that the NRA is a more political organization than the IETF. So obviously some dimension of "politicization" exists beyond just "acting in the world".

And if an organization wants to be less political, one way to do so is by relying less on political considerations when making decisions. With "political" simply meaning topics that are widely and commonly considered to be political. In the same way that the NRA is widely and commonly considered to be political in a way that the IETF is not.

You can debate about whether it actually is a lofty goal for an organization to strive to be non-political. Certainly there are many counter-arguments for why organizations should be more political. But I don't think you can deny that the dimension exists in some meaningful and actionable way unless you completely throw common sense out the window.
I B M
> The sick were rejected and sent back where they came from.

Only if they were also poor. First class passengers on the boats didn’t go through medical screening.
I'm not sure what's new here except the fact that almost everyone now carries a camera yet we're still to get clear images ;)

Considering the quality of the average person's pictures, I don't think the proliferation of cameraphones will help us get clear picture.

Pictures, yes. Pictures of blurry, smeary things in the corner of the frame. But clear, well-framed pictures are beyond the capability of 95% of the public.
> What if they took the JWST design ($10 billion in development costs!) and made 10 or 100 more copies? How much would each additional copy cost to build and launch?

There's presumably a way to estimate that. But you'd also want to ask if it's even useful to have 10 or 100 copies of JWST? Even if the unit cost is lower, the total program cost would still be greater than the $10b for one. The astronomical community is probably not large enough to fully utilize 10 JWSTs, let alone 100. I'm sure we could come up with enough observations to keep them all busy, but there isn't enough person-power to analyze and interpret all that data. So if one has money to build 10 JWST's, a likely better use of that money would be to build one or two and spend the rest of the money hiring people (graduate students, postdocs, faculty) to do science with the data. Or just build one JWST and use the money for a second to build something else that pushes capability in other areas (e.g., the "Origins Space Telescope" far-infrared mission concept, or the Lynx X-ray telescope concept). I suspect that would be better for how much new science you can do per dollar spent.
SpaceX seeks to launch another 30,000 satellites for Starlink broadband network
The Grove 8 – Growing Trees in Blender
Usenet dealt with this via killfile. There is no reason why you cannot do client-side filtering (compare /silence with /ignore in IRC). Client-side and server-side each have their pros and cons.
Oof, a gravitational lensing based result at 8 sigma... so much for this fun little theory
N-body we can do, for example Illustris Project. To address the concern of this post, one would need non-linear general relativity simulation. That's more challenging.
They theoretically have a right to vote. Stop making laws that disenfranchise them, then you can consider changing the deal. But we made a deal. Plus the us has never stood up to it's side of deals with native americans.
> Physicists (including the author here!) are generally smart enough to have thought of those objections themselves

Yet we're no closer to a satisfactory answer. It's not that physics has some unresolved problems, it's that physics has a giant hole through its center.

Einstein got us closer than Newton, but his work is obviously incomplete. The dogma surrounding Einstein's work borders on religion.

But muh experiments!

How many times have Newtonian mechanics been proven? Lots and lots. And at one frame of reference (pun not intended) it's absolutely correct.

How is Einstein's work any different? It's not. Stop pretending only a chosen few can have meaningful ideas about how the universe works. You might need training to translate that idea into a workable theory, but not to generate the ideas themselves.

If I were you (collectively) I'd be taking ideas from everywhere. It's still your job to see if they make sense, so don't worry about the unwashed masses stealing your thunder.
ah thanks! didn't think to check Amazon. I don't have JP prime anyway so that's perfect.
The most powerful supercomputer in the world reaches 143 petaflops, bitcoin network in comparison reaches 80704290.84 Petaflops. Granted that a majority of this computing power is in the form of custom ASIC's, but the figure is really staggering.

And all of the 80704290.84 Petaflops, consume 73.12 TWh to repeatedly calculate SHA256 ! What could be the world's most powerful network does absolutely nothing but crunch hashes billions of times to discard almost all of the results anyway. Sheer waste of computing power.
> TLS is a complex protocol with trusted mainstream implementations (even OpenSSL, at this point, is a fine option).

Trusted for now.

How long until the next heartbleed? Do you want that vulnerability embedded in billions of unupdatable IoT-devices?
Usually the date and name of the exchange, to comply with "Know Your Customer" regulations and fight duplicate accounts.
How can one be sure.
I found some insightful comments below the post:

>I think that char – char should definitely be legal. The distance between characters is well defined. Same for char + numeric. Both logically makes sense. I think a good analogy might be floors in a building. Asking what’s the distance between the second and seventh floor makes sense, or what’s two floors above the 4th. But the question ‘what’s the 5th floor plus the 6th floor’ doesn’t make sense.

>Affine space describes these kind of relationships in mathematics. Eg position and disposition in n dimension, or count and offset in buffers, even timestamp and duration.