skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think it might go deeper than that. I wear a lot of hats - part software engineer, part data engineer, part data scientist - and I find that the only perspective from which RDBMSes feel like the clear front-runner is when I'm wearing the software engineer hat.

When I'm wearing the data engineer hat, I start to get interested in some of the options that aren't even databases at all, such as storing the data in ORC files. Because they sometimes offer big performance advantages. The data intake pipelines I'm working on are batch-oriented, so they benefit little from how RDBMSes are optimized for random access to records, and maybe also ranges of records, but only at the cost of write performance if you're looking to filter on a natural key instead of a synthetic key. . . it gets thorny. ORC is less-than-stellar at selective ad-hoc queries, but I'm not doing selective ad-hoc queries against the internals of my data intake pipeline, and I will fight to the death to prevent the BI team from doing so.

When I'm wearing my data scientist hat, I've got no idea what my next query on the data is, so there's no indexing strategy that could possibly meet my needs. That kills one of the RDBMS's biggest value propositions. So let's just wing it with map-reduce and get on with life. And, TBH, SQL is just too declarative for the way my brain works when I'm in analyst mode - the semi-imperative workflow I get out of something like Spark SQL or R or Pandas feels more natural.
In terms of snappy / beautiful messaging apps, nothing beats Telegram imo.

It's made with Qt, I believe.
Am optical extra that isn't actually properly functioning as intended in numerous delivered products? Almost as if it wasn't sanity tested in one production unit, let alone some random sample of units?
My wife and I make combined 250k per year, and even we are unsure about whether it makes financial sense to buy. I'm in a high cost of living area (NYC), and a 1 bedroom apartment is 600k or higher vs renting at 2.5k per month.
ML for drug discovery study group
At one point I considered buying a home, but the flexibility of renting outweighed the benefits in the current economic climate, where I'm uncertain how things will go in the next few years.
Down by the river?
The death rates of nuclear power makes no sense to talk about. It is very hard to measure the reduced life expectancy due to radiation. Not to mention a lot of the horrors of Chernobyl was covered up. It also does not take into account the large number of people will severe health problems the rest of their lives.

A nuclear accident is more like a terrorist attack, while deaths from other power sources are more like car accidents. Sure more people die in car accidents, but it does not have the profound psychological effect of a terrorist attack.

Nuclear accidents is like a terrorist attack. They cause massive panics and scare. Uncertainty roams. It is an invisible danger. I don't suddenly get sick from pollution from coal power. Radio activity can make me seriously sick in short time without realizing it. It is an invisible danger.

And even if nuclear accident caused as little health problems and death as the most rose tinted stories suggest, you still cannot run away from the fact that these accidents carry MASSIVE price tags. Chernobyl involved hundreds of thousands of people doing cleanup. It cost 235 billion dollars to do. Fukushima cost 182 billion dollars.

For my native Norway that is roughly a whole state budget. It would bankrupt the country having an accident like that. Or at least if we did not have a big fat oil fund. Most countries don't have a big fat oil fund to finance huge nuclear disasters.

Unless you nuclear advocates start talking serious about the cost issue, you are just glossing over the most serious issues with nuclear power.
Linting Datalog with Clj-Kondo
Theoretically in the UK local councils have an obligation to house anyone who has a "demonstrated connection with the area". There is also a "housing benefit" system which pays rent for those who cannot afford it.

I say "theoretically" because it doesn't entirely work and there are still a gradually increasing number of rough sleepers, but it does at least keep children from living on the street.

https://www.jrf.org.uk/mpse-2015/housing-benefit-claimants

> In 2015 there were 4.8 million families in receipt of Housing Benefit. Most families –2.7 million – claiming Housing Benefit are workless and living in the social rented sector (this includes pensioner recipients). Some 1 million were workless and living in the private rented sector. The remaining 1.1 million were in working families, half in private rented and half in social rented housing.
I'm familiar with gorm, but haven't seen it at any of our clients.
Colour me skeptical. There are multiple ways to capture features and the shirt may fool one set of algorithms but I highly doubt they'll fool them all.
I sold my house 1.5 years ago (after owning for 5) expecting a market crash, still hasn't happened. A market crash was actually pretty far down on the list of reasons why for me, but it somewhat factored in. Whoops. Still got a nice return on it.
Can we declare a "war" on homelessness and redirect some military spending? Maybe instead of another fighter jets, nuclear aircraft carrier, or nuclear missiles, we can help our citizens instead.

I would be a lot happier paying taxes if the spending ratios were reversed.
All I hear them say is:

"Hey customers, it's time to dust off your pirate hats!".
How many 54-year-old Steves exist? How many of those have multiple sclerosis, cerebral palsy, heart disease, and diabetes at the same time? How many were homeless?

I've seen people identify patients using far less information than that. It's a small world.
The point is that how is a layperson to know which sciences are trustworthy and which are not? The media and school treat all sciences as equally trustworthy, and then it has turned out that some of them are pretty bogus. (Half of all published research findings are false, John Ioannidis, etc) So the layperson should be excused for being suspicious of all sciences, in fact it's a reasonable stance to take if one doesn't have the time or interest to examine each science closely.

Of course I have a mental ranking of which sciences are to be trusted and how much, but we can't expect the general public to take such an interest. It's just all science lumped into one big bucket, and it's not pretty.
Yeah, no thanks. I've been to Seattle and to the bay area and I wasn't a fan of either. I have an entire life built here and have zero desire to ever move, and even less to work for a FAANG.

There's much more to my life than being a programmer, that's just what I do for work. My life does not revolve around it.
Names are usually changed in these circumstances.
>to suddenly abandon renewables now in 2019 when wind and solar is seeing staggering success and really impressive price drops while every nuclear reactor is profoundly delayed and over budget is simply odd.

No one's suggesting abandoning renewables, far from it. Renewable use will continue to increase. They're simply not enough, because of their nature as a variable power source.

>Nuclear power is NOT CHEAP!

The power itself is cheap. The amount of regulation around 40 year old reactor designs is high, so that's expensive. Implementation of a newer design would be much, much cheaper.

>Chernobyl cost tax payers 235 billion dollars to clean up. Fukushima cost tax payers 183 billion dollars to clean up.

Source? Neither of them are actually "cleaned up", you know. Also, both of these are very old reactor designs. You're complaining that a piece of 1950s technology which qualifies as an antique has problems 65-70 years later.

> But we have a multitude of storage solutions: thermal, pumped hydro, flow batteries, gas-to-power

..none of which are scalable enough to meet the demand. We'd have to have a dedicated energy storage system for each house, school, factory and store in the world. That's not only not possible due to physical space constraints, it's disastrous in terms of carbon load.

Our power systems work from a central source. There is no technology that can replace the multiple fossil fuel plants that run the grid except nuclear, period.

>It seems like these nuclear advocates have not even investigated all the storage solutions that exist before going crazy about nuclear power.

I can't speak for other people, but I have investigated and I continue to research. No storage solution exists that even comes close to meeting the demand for power when renewables aren't generating on the scale needed. The individual ideas are good, but they can't match decades of investment and expertise in generating electricity from giant central sources.

To take advantage of the distributed nature of renewables and corresponding energy storage, we'd have to completely rebuild the worldwide electrical grid AFTER we research and agree on standards for control and maintenance. That will take decades, and we don't have time. It'll happen eventually as renewables continue their growth, and maybe a century in the future we'll use all renewable sources with distributed power storage and a fully distributed, redundant power grid.

But if we want to survive climate change, we need nuclear, or else we need to force every person on earth to accept a lower standard of living that uses far less energy than we do now. The latter just won't happen, our species isn't that advanced.
True. People blame Whatsapp and Facebook for causing violence but then, when governments can't stop calls for violence being transmitted through these services, can't stop these services, they turn around and blame the governments for shutting down the internet.
I really think it's pushing it to describe the ability to safely store food without it going off and access to clean fresh water as trinkets as though they are silly little things rather than massive impacts on quality of life.
World is wetter yet water may become less available for NAmer and Eurasia
The princess in Beauty and the Beast exists to redeem, civilize, and forgive someone who has kidnapped her family.

This is not a narrative I find more compelling for my daughter than a mermaid trading her voice away to have the opportunity to seduce a sailor prince.
TBH, those are the sorts of things people should be thinking about with respect to home purchases. Yes, there's a financial angle but that includes a lot of unknowns. Factors like mobility, proximity to work/entertainment/friends, time associated with upkeep (especially for standalone properties), etc. are probably what a decision should hinge on.
If they're the same time scale you can easily compare what has changed over time. With different scales it's hard to match them up.
Great list. Also twitter employs around four thousand people but throttles mobile users. They use multiple megabytes to deliver 288 characters.

Two things - pi hole or something like it is a godsend. It makes many sites filled to brim with nonsense become usable.

For phones, one plus seems to have done well with using fast CPUs and cutting down on bloat at the same time.
>The biggest problem with nuclear reactors is the waste. Most of it is still stored at nuclear sites.

Compared to what though? Sending it up into the atmosphere - in far larger quantities - like we do today with the alternatives?

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4639510/user-clip-richard-rho...
Was the 3x cost increase also to be expected?
Dear Bureaucrat, Where is my tribe? (hint: online isn't enough)
I get triggers, but what's wrong with procs?
Treating all of the US (or any country) as one housing market is also a mistake. As wealth and economic opportunity concentrate in certain areas, I would expect some places to crash, some to stagnate, and a few to keep rising. Right now, there’s quite a few states and vast swaths of regions with lower housing prices than ever before, or housing prices that don’t move up (upper midwest and northeast come to mind). And then there are places that not only held their own in the last recession, but have doubled and more.
Cooking and baking are my big ones. It’s tactile. There’s an end to each session (as opposed to most side projects which have a nigh on infinite set of potential tasks, or work which is much the same).

I’m on my feet. I usually don’t have music or TV on so my brain gets a nice bit of breathing time and original thoughts bubble up.

And then if I’m doing dishes maybe I will turn music on, get a bit of dance on.

I love the smells of things as they sauté, or roast, or bake. And the sounds of the knife hitting the chopping board, or the water coming from the faucet, or the coffee grinding and gurgling (especially in the mornings).

And then I get to eat something delicious (the vast majority of the time). And I love learning about new flavors, and how I can combine them and using new techniques with high quality ingredients.

Very pleasant. My Pops does woodworking and stained glass making and photography and cooks and bakes and I imagine it’s much the same. Tactile, not a lot of screens, on the feet, keeps the brain energized and making new neural connections.

Definitely better than looking at page 12 of Reddit (for me, although I do that sometimes too).
That’s crap. I have a set of knives in my kitchen that can be used to abuse women.

Oh wait, they can be used to abuse anyone.

Oh wait, everyone has a set of knives.
Establish a VPN connection to the USA (US server) or download the torrent (PirateBay, LimeTorents, RARBG or other) in conjunction with Transmission, uTorrent, Bittorent or other client. Very simple using VPN (Hoxx in Firefox; Opera browser; ...)
Why Are Languages Worth Preserving?
Yeah, I think Scott slipped up by making his reply so specific to one side of 2019 politics. The issue he's dealing with doesn't have anything to do with Trump or Greta Thunberg, but by bringing up their names he's shutting off critical thought in much of his audience by activating the political "yay us, boo them" reflex. Democrats will be inclined to automatically agree with him, Republicans will be inclined to automatically disagree, and critical thought will be poorer for it.

Hitler was a real person who existed, and there are some lessons to be learned from that time in history, but invoking Godwin's law is frowned upon because even the mention of his name tends to shut people's brains down. The same principle generalizes to any highly polarized name.

Scott Aaronson could learn something from Scott Alexander on this one. ;)
I wonder if someone talked to this reporter about a long-term redesign they're doing, and the reporter conflated that with the short term patches they're doing to get the plane flying again. It just doesn't make sense otherwise.

And, 100 scenarios instead of 10? I sure as heck there's more than that on an architecture redesign!
You aren't addressing the arguments at all here. With the error bars that black6 suggests, we cannot possibly infer anything of meaning over long periods of time.
>>Note that the statement is that the two people are identical other than their wealth

That kind of thing exists in my example too. The real problem is people are similar but not the same.
Good note. Subqueries are sometimes optimization barriers as well - it depends on query engine. If you care about performance you need to look at the query plan.
> the science is settled, but some people still don't believe

The science of basic probability math is settled for a few hundred years now but people still buying lottery tickets and playing roulette.

What is so surprising about that?
Yup, and as they are in your household, there's little reason for them to actually know the password - if you're physically in the household with them, you could easily log them on yourself without ever telling them.
Fake rhino horn invented to ruin poachers' market
We're working on a cheaper way to do it:

https://www.saildrone.com/news/autonomous-vehicles-cost-effe...
That doesn't sound right to me. I purchased my home about 3 years ago and if I remember correctly on top of principal I would end up paying an extra 40 percent or so in interest. To pay 2 million on a half million dollar loan your interest rate would have to be insanely high (like 30+ percent). In my case my mortgage was only about $300 more than the apartment I was living in previously (very expensive area) so it would've taken an extremely long time to save up the cash to purchase our home. The house has also appreciated nearly 50% since I purchased it, so if I had waited it would have been too expensive for my budget
Not to mention the capital costs of building a nuclear plant far excede renewable new-builds. Why spend 20 billion and deal with the costs/risk associated with 50-year financing when you could spend a few tens of millions and throw up a few smaller renewable builds where they're needed and start seeing returns on invetment in 2-3 years rather than 15.
>If you are unattached you should absolutely not buy a home in a suburban area, or anywhere really.

That's nonsense. You shouldn't feel you have to buy one for financial reasons. But even if you're unattached, as I was when I bought, many of us like having a place of our own with more room than an apartment that you can change as you see fit.

Yes, it limits mobility to a degree. But I've changed jobs several times since I bought my house.
OpenMemDB: A Wait-Free, In-Memory Database – ScienceOpen
Yup, the fact that if you dare to study the science objectively and ask, e.g. how much of the warming we’re seeing right now is attributable to humans? You’ll get effectively socially ostracized, meanwhile that’s literally the most important question in the whole climate debate.
I'm sorry but you are out an outlier. Most girls have pink princess things and get told they look pretty in that dress and do jigsaw puzzles made of Disney princesses. I wish all girls had roles models like your daughter but it's just not the reality. (Source: woman with many friends with daughters)
Looks like a very beautiful place! Of course everything mellows out and becomes "normal" with time.
YES. You should absolutely buy as soon as possible. I went through this when I was 30 before I got married and wished to hell I'd done it sooner.

1) You don't need to put down 20% anymore. If you have a W2 job and good credit, you can have your loan backed by the government in what is called an FHA loan.

2) Think of home ownership as putting a stake in the ground, but not being tied to that stake. You may only live there for a couple of years. You get a better job, get restless, that's ok. Move! You can rent out that house or sell it and pull some of the equity out of it.

3) Prices keep going up. Buying lets you lock in a fixed monthly rate, removes the fear of rent increases, etc. Heck get a condo and live downtown, live anywhere. Buying means taking control of your living situation and not having to be at the mercy of others.
People are belittling relative poverty and think that only absolute poverty should be addressed.
I hope this this view comes from ignorance and not from cruelty. We are social animals. Relative poverty reduces opportunities and ability to participate in the society. Relative poverty affects health and even decreases cognitive capabilities.

1776 Adam Smith in "The Wealth of Nations" framed poverty as relative powerty.

>... By necessaries I understand not only the commodities which are indispensably necessary for the support of life, but whatever the custom of the country renders it indecent for creditable people, even of the lowest order, to be without. A linen shirt, for example, is, strictly speaking, not a necessary of life. The Greeks and Romans lived, I suppose, very comfortably though they had no linen. But in the present times, through the greater part of Europe, a creditable day-labourer would be ashamed to appear in public without a linen shirt, the want of which would be supposed to denote that disgraceful degree of poverty which, it is presumed, nobody can well fall into without extreme bad conduct. Custom, in the same manner, has rendered leather shoes a necessary of life in England. The poorest creditable person of either sex would be ashamed to appear in public without them. In Scotland, custom has rendered them a necessary of life to the lowest order of men; but not to the same order of women, who may, without any discredit, walk about barefooted. In France they are necessaries neither to men nor to women, the lowest rank of both sexes appearing there publicly, without any discredit, sometimes in wooden shoes, and sometimes barefooted. Under necessaries, therefore, I comprehend not only those things which nature, but those things which the established rules of decency have rendered necessary to the lowest rank of people. All other things I call luxuries, without meaning by this appellation to throw the smallest degree of reproach upon the temperate use of them. Beer and ale, for example, in Great Britain, and wine, even in the wine countries, I call luxuries. A man of any rank may, without any reproach, abstain totally from tasting such liquors. Nature does not render them necessary for the support of life, and custom nowhere renders it indecent to live without them.
As terminology, "homeless" is technically useless. Whenever and wherever it's used, someone can strawman "homeless" onto people with a different set of circumstances than those being talked about.

The population in the program is not homeless in the sense of "I call this town home." ER frequent flyers are frequent flyers because they live near a particular ER.

Yes, there are people who provided an apartment will leave to sleep in the bushes. "Homeless" lumps them together with people who won't. It lumps them together with people living in their cars. Squatting in buildings. Couch surfing among relatives. "Homeless" tags people lacking shelter security with the mental illness, panhandling, substance abuse.

The problem with "homeless" is it lumps people with intractable circumstances with people with very tractable problems. "Homeless" pretends there is a universal problem and therefore demands universal solutions. But the spectrum goes from passed out on the sidewalk to $200/night RV parks. So does the need for resources and services.

This program is not for everyone. It won't meet everyone's needs. That doesn't make it a moral hazard.
i wouldn't worry about Zinc, men need 11 mg/day, women even less. The common battery, the Leclanché element, already consist of Zinc, but it is not advisable to recharge them (danger of explosion). In the 90s people even claimed the could safely recharge the Leclanché element, so I could imagine the have overcome these problems
They got lucky by investing in Alibaba and cashed out. Made 100bil that way and suddenly everyone thought Masa was a genius. Saudi princes started giving him free money and the rest is history.
The nice thing about satellite orbits is that they are extremely steady and predictable. Over long time scales, a satellite's orbit drifts due to many effects, such as non-uniformity of Earth's gravity. But over short timescales, its motion is very precisely determined by its orbital parameters.

In particular, there's a precise relationship between a satellite's orbital period and its orbital radius (technically, its semi-major axis). A one-centimeter variation in altitude would result in a timing error of several hundred microseconds per day, which is enough to be detected using precise clocks and Doppler effect measurements.