skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why not social media groups? Wouldn't people by nature use those sites more?

Also, I'll try the codecanyon tip :)
Probably just a jewelry box and some old letters.
The term ctor refers to good old type constructors. It's a common abbreviation, and it's even the keyword for defining constructors in .Net IL.
[citation needed]. Traffic, usage, diversity of usage, investment, all of these are higher than they've ever been and still trending upwards. What definitions are we using by which we can look at these numbers and claim the internet is being "killed?"
"Avery Pennarun is one of the founders (aka apenwarr.ca). Avery’s one of the most knowledgeable folks about TCP I know and has been building virtual networks of all kinds 20+ years."

I really appreciate his (imo) inspired work on 'sshuttle'[1] which he no longer maintains. I really wish this project would get the attention and development it deserves...

[1] https://github.com/sshuttle/sshuttle
How are connections handled if both devices are behind NAT?
> I don't think it's impossible

Only a very small percentage of users are willing to pay for an online service, that's < 2% usually. It's also very difficult and costly to accept payments for small amounts and do the accounting, sales tax / VAT properly. Ads are comparatively much easier to setup.
Wasn't YouTube a separate entity under Alphabet, and not a part of Google? That alone would be a $100B company
500mg is the max for ace a doctor is recommended to proscribe (on it's own). 150 is well below the max for ibu. Also I think you may have mixed up the grandparent commentator that stated they were a doctor and the parent that may be a doctor but hasn't made that claim here.
According to their comment on yesterday's post, they are doing an "advent calendar" of blog posts with one post each day.
> Nasdaq runs [https://financialservices.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hhrg-116-b...] more than 40 different algorithms, using about 35,000 parameters, to look for market abuse and manipulation in real time.

Click link:

> Nasdaq North America Surveillance team monitors 3 equity markets, 6 options markets and one futures market with real-time surveillance and post-trade surveillance of unusual market activity. The surveillance department is monitoring the markets for Insider Trading, Fraud and Manipulation, including manipulation through trading—pump and dump—and order book manipulation—spoofing and layering, as well as handling events in the market such as clearly erroneous transactions.

> The surveillance program today is using algorithmic coding to detect unusual market behavior running over 40 different algorithms in real-time, looking for market abuse and manipulation. The patterns have sophisticated algorithms that use approximately 35,000 parameters. In addition to real-time surveillance, there are over 150 patterns covering post trade surveillance, which are used to identify a wide range of potential misconduct.

> The activity is monitored across equity and options markets, with some market-specific alerts and some alerts encompassing data from all markets.

So they have 40 different predictive models running in production (a lot!), and 150 hand-written (or single-pattern) rules. They also employ active learning with experts and this reduces their training data needs with 95%. 40 models using 35000 features, is 875 features per model on average. All this bickering is typical.
Honest questions asking for explanation are almost guaranteed to result in a negative vote sum.

Boo hoo hoo. Oh no, lost some internet points. Anyone whose opinion is worth a damn will applaud you asking honest questions; especially here, on defensive poser central.

Make myself feel better for what? Maybe I needed to include the /s tags...

You've gone for the "I wasn't being serious" defense, pretending you didn't mean it. However, your post wasn't remotely sarcastic and contained far too much detail and defensiveness, with a tone taking itself very seriously. You're convincing nobody.

What exactly do you now claim you were being sarcastic about? "The prose seems to resemble something dark and beautiful and meaningful"; that's sarcasm, is it? So you're saying it IS something dark and beautiful and meaningful? "And the bytecode just couldn't be more boring to me." Right, so you were saying the bytecode was some of the most interesting code you've ever read? If your post was sarcasm, you're truly terrible at it and should switch to irony or satire instead. Little bit of literary term privilege there for you to sarcastically pretend to object to.

FFS, this is the anonymous internet. If you can't be honest with yourself here, where will you be honest with yourself.
I don't believe blogspot allows you to turn off http, just (optionally) redirect it to https.
Who needs CEOs when it's machines all the way down? Presumably two or more AIs will have some method of reaching consensus.
Here's a good example. Someone I know is an AWS consultant. And, within that, he's fairly focused on billing/costs. He thinks it's helped him to be well-known for a specific set of things rather than be someone called in to consult about "public clouds" generally.

The counterpoint is that it needs to be a big enough market and one that you can service. Another thing to be careful of is that markets move on. I've known consultants who were world experts in some company's products or specific technologies. And then that company or technology ceased to exist and they really weren't sure what to do with themselves.
I have not tried the very latest generation, but I have tried previous generations. For me, it's really amazing/engaging/compelling for a while. And once the novelty wears off, it's not. I've also tried creating my own VR content and it's the same deal when I test it on people: really neat the first time, but interest quickly declines.
This isn't an insightful comment, but I just said out loud "what's Waymo again?" after having seen the name here and there for the past decade. Kinda feels dead on arrival.
Google makes it a pain in the ass to get to the non-AMP version. You have to click the little (i) and then the link.
> If getting into college were merely a matter of having the quality of one's mind measured by admissions officers the way scientists measure the mass of an object, we could tell teenage kids "learn a lot" and leave it at that.

It is equally naive to think some idea of "quality of mind" or what someone has already learned in their first ~17 years is what they should go by. This is just shifting from one bias to another.

Evaluating a human being, reducing them to a number or a boolean, is hard, and people tasked with doing this, no matter how confident or how much thought and intelligence they put into it, will get it wrong, often with bad consequences. So perhaps we should take such systems lightly, stay humble, and not get overconfident in our judgements.
I think what he's saying is that the approach is wrong. The highly industrialized school system is the way it is because of scale. His perspective is the initial point (paraphrasing: tests should be the same as taking a blood test).

To add to that point, take a urine test: people have been hacking it for years. The purpose of the urine test is to see what residual byproducts from certain drugs are in my system. I can hack it by using someone else's urine or imbibe on drugs that have a short lifetime in my bloodstream. Otherwise, to pass the test I have to not consume drugs.

His complaint is that people who pass the tests really shouldn't have. It's like a principal assuring parents that a strict urine exam is given to all teachers only to find out all the teachers who work for you are drug addicts (drug addicts who can hack the pee test).

His reference to private schools teaching students how to hack tests resonates with me as social workers teaching drug users how to hack their pee tests. I take that to mean that if teachers are doing their best but resort to teaching how to hack tests then their needs to be more work done outside of the teacher-student system.

[This is where disparities due to parent's wealth and income come in:] Students who have access to tutors can get the help they in a way having a teacher can't. A teacher can be a tutor, but cannot be a tutor for everyone (an issue with scale).
Wow! That’s amazing if true. The question is was “login” entirely resent again or if the last three characters of “login” were sent.

If it’s the former, it’s unbelievable.
Novel protocols have their uses, and when that use can be demonstrated they can find their niche. But their value has to be extremely high to justify the opportunity cost of using them over something more established.

To turn the question sideways a bit, there's nothing stopping some conglomeration from developing an alternative to 802.11 standards. All they have to do is create the hardware, convince people to use the hardware, create software to adapt a novel protocol to the higher layers of the networking stack to make it usable by application software (including addressing all of the ways that a new lower layer inevitably breaks an abstraction or two), and create the tooling necessary to make an ecosystem of non-802.11 wireless devices easy to install, maintain, and interoperate.

... But outside of particular special applications where something about 802.11 protocols or the frequencies they communicate upon makes them an ill-fit, there aren't many reasons to do so. Good enough displaces perfect in the common case.
Exactly my thought and setup.

I used to install and upgrade everything myself until I discovered docker and docker hub.

Together with watchtower I have zero maintenance on the versions and everything updates automatically.
12 seconds and 1.9MB isn't anything to brag about either, especially considering you needed an ad-blocker to get there.
I dont know how what you did is legal.

From https://www.outline.com/dmca.html

Notice to Users
If someone else might own the copyright to it, don't submit it. Outline is for reading pages that:

you own the rights to, is in the public domain, constitutes fair use, or you have consent of the copyright holder.

If we find you repeatedly submitting content that does not meet the above criteria, we will block you from using our service.
We can have a bug discovered, patched, tested, validated, and deployed same day. If it is small. Usually a bug may or may not make it in this sprint depending on criticality. Then we will fix it in some number of days, qa the next day and deploy that same day. Multiple deploys per week or even day happen on my team.
TIL the benefits of eating less refined carbs and intermittent fasting is still up for debate to some folks.
Non-AMP page:[1]

Alphabet's problem is simply that they mostly failed. Robots - fail. ISPs (Fiber, Loon) - fail. Self-driving cars - in test, but a long way from profits. Android predates Alphabet and is really part of the ad system.

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-04/alphab...
The tech industry has unfortunately adopted the methodology of centralized hackable tests as the canonical gatekeeping method in the form of programming interviews.

Most big tech companies don't care about how good you have been at delivering some value through creating software: they want to see you deliver a very specific type of performance at a whiteboard. Interviewers are given specific math puzzle questions to ask. Interviewees are explicitly told by the same companies' hiring departments that they should aim to hack the system by studying books like "Cracking the Code Interview".

This is an industry that prides itself on supposedly making data-driven decisions through A/B testing. When it comes to hiring people to make those decisions, everybody just plays along to a decades-old script.
When reading through this I was sure this was about Folding@Home but turns out this was a different project! Strange that Folding@Home isn't even mentioned, if I recall it correctly, you could install Folding@Home easily via the store on the PS3, and a normal user could contribute. The Verge article seems more focused on customized machine (rooted to run Linux and stored at location) instead of using the standard OS and letting the contributors have the machine at home. Folding@Home seems to still be running to this day as well! Plenty of information about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folding@home#PlayStation_3
The biggest complexity comes with interactions between features.

For example, "move semantics" in C++ -- while useful -- trigger tons of questions about interactions with other features.

Duplicate features (for-of/forEach) are a problem, but a lesser one.

---

FWIW,

* Array.prototype.forEach iterates over an array

* for-of iterates over an iterable, including arrays

* for-in iterates over object keys (strings)

To your point, for-of is the more general form of forEach, so IMO there isn't much reason to use it now.
Why would Stackoverflow and Wikipedia cover all queries for a web search?
The keto diet is a low fiber high saturated fat intake diet. The effects of low fiber consumption and high intake of saturated fat are well established, and they certainly aren't inflammation reducers. Also, fasting is not without risks.
Just because you didn't like the name ? They have the least disengagements and more miles than anyone (with a LIDAR).
Why Are Cops Around the World Using This Outlandish Mind-Reading Tool?
Could Iran’s Revolution Unravel over a Four-Cent Price Hike?
FTL travel of anything (matter, photons, EM fields, gravitational fields) would result in potential causality issues. I don't know if there are models of universes where GR doesn't apply; that would be interesting, but the causality problems might make such a universe uninteresting even if it were possible. I suppose that's using the anthropic principle as justification for GR?

Metric expansion does not result in causality issues because it's an isolating phenomenon (one that slows down interactions between things) rather than an interconnecting phenomenon (one that would speed up interactions between things). Therefore it's at least possible, and observations (which you can read a brief summary of in TFA) back it up.
Syncthing is not a hosted service, rather its a p2p way to sync files and other things between your devices. It relies on the bittorrent protocol, so you don't need to have a central server. What you can do though, is install it on a NAS as well, so that files are also synced to a central location.
how can universe be expanding faster than speed of light? general relativity doesn't apply here?
Why not just employ 100% since a high government employment number seems like a virtue?
I skimmed that essay. Zealous activities to make existing users happy seemed to be the emphasis. It's possible that there were zealous activities for acquiring users mentioned somewhere, but I missed them because they were less emphasized.
Interesting. If you’re actually using “Zero trust” to attempt to convey “zero trust architecture”, in the BeyondCorp sense, I’m more confused than before.

The central premise of BeyondCorp and similar approaches is about no longer trusting based on network location, and instead always performing trust based on device identity and other factors. This is why PKI plays such a pivotal role in BeyondCorp: your organization’s CA signs certificates, which are present on every device, and that combined with additional forms of user authentication enables trust regardless of network location. Leveraging a WireGuard VPN is largely a step “backwards”; it moves back towards a VPN-style world where you allow access by requiring endpoints to step inside a conceptual network boundary (by connecting to the VPN). In practice, the Wireguard model has several advantages over that, but it’s explicitly different from the BeyondCorp/Zero Trust approach.

Edit to clarify:

“Zero trust architecture” doesn’t refer to whether endpoints trust a central service/provider, it refers to whether corporate assets base their trust determinations on the origin point of client traffic. For example, in a non-Zero-Trust environment, corporate assets might assume clients connecting from the local network are trusted, and require roaming users to VPN in. By contrast, a Zero-Trust environment might use MDM-provisioned certificates and MFA on all connections, regardless of the network placement of the endpoint.

“Zero trust” as colloquially used by service providers tends to mean “you don’t have to trust us”. This is largely because “zero trust architecture” doesn’t really make sense as something a provider provides, and also because providers have latched onto “zero trust” as a buzzword.
My take on this:

Having a great product, building things people want (i.e. the "non-hackable" parts of building a startup) are necessary but not sufficient requirements for building a successful startup. What YC tries to teach is all the other parts (how to deal with VCs, what metrics to focus on, how to manage your time, etc.) that are also necessary, but not the core of what makes a good company. These are the "hackable" parts if you will. But you're very likely to be unsuccessful if you only have those hackable parts right, but still don't have a product people find useful and want to buy.

Since you're not posting anonymously, I'd be curious if you could offer more information on what parts of YC you think you hacked, and how your startup turned out.
Self segregation.
Apple didn't institute a repair program for "whiners". They didn't change the construction of the new MBP keyboard because people whined.

I work indoors 99% of the time, in relatively clean environment. Have had 2 keyboards that had issues with keys sticking, double tapping, or failing to register presses. Compressed air would sometimes work for a while, sometimes not. Have to take it in and wait multiple days for it to be fixed. My company has had multiple 2017 and 2018 macbooks need to be sent in for service because of broken keys (I'm migrating to my new machine this weekend so they can send my 2017 in for refurb/repair).

You've been lucky, and I'm glad you haven't had issues, but many of us have. We're not all as lucky as you are.
I turn on the faucet and fill a glass of water. Taking a drink from the glass, I feel less thirsty. If someone turns on a faucet, and as a result feels less thirsty, then that that thirst-removal must be inherent to turning on a faucet, right?

This is obviously silly, but follows the same reasoning that you have stated. Drinking water reduces thirst, not running water from a faucet. Redesigning a website to be less bloated results in a better mobile experience, not designing around AMP. It is possible to redesign a website without using AMP.

Causation does not imply necessity.
I'm really curious about the trade-off between memory usage and latency. Can the work be parallelized, or does it mean you now need 5x+ the number of servers for the same amount of traffic? That would quickly counter (thought not entirely) the reduced memory requirements.
> the PS4 can’t easily be turned into a cog for a supercomputing machine. “There’s nothing novel about the PlayStation 4, it’s just a regular old PC,” Khanna says. “We weren’t really motivated to do anything with the PlayStation 4.”

The article doesn’t really explain in detail the difference that made the ps3 an attractive buy for making super computers over regular PCs. Can someone elaborate?
It would be. But it doesn’t make money. Someone has to pay for it still.
no, rent is (non-value-creating) income from simply owning capital. capital put to productive use, along with labor, generates profits, which is compensation for value creation.
a few years ago, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11684424
David from HASH here. I know that panic all too well...

GAMA is great -- and we're big fans of the team! They've done an awesome job raising the profile, and improving perceptions, of ABM/MAS-type modeling.

We're approaching things in a rather different manner, with a specific view to decreasing the time and complexity involved in building real-world (versus toy) models. We'll be drip-feeding invites (and more info) in the coming days.
FOSS Zombies
From Wikipedia about another, similar project (Folding@Home)

> At the time of its inception, its main streaming Cell processor delivered a 20 times speed increase over PCs for some calculations, processing power which could not be found on other systems such as the Xbox 360.[36][190] The PS3's high speed and efficiency introduced other opportunities for worthwhile optimizations according to Amdahl's law

> The PS3's uniform console environment made technical support easier and made Folding@home more user friendly.[36] The PS3 also had the ability to stream data quickly to its GPU, which was used for real-time atomic-level visualizing of the current protein dynamics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folding@home#PlayStation_3
Hey Anil, I’ve been playing around with Glitch and following the company and think you and team are doing a great job.
Check out their advice on startup school, e.g. the "fundraising" section:

https://www.startupschool.org/library

I've watched many of the videos on YouTube. I would say that each speaker consistently emphasizes the need to "build something users want" before making a big press launch, before applying growth hacking techniques, before talking to investors, etc.

They always say that in the first 5 minutes of the talk, and then go onto more tactical stuff.

They do teach you about hacking investors, or maybe more charitably seeing it from their side, and seeing their motivations.

I think it's true that you can't teach the "build something users want" part, so a lot of the advice is lower level than that.

Advice about building things tends to sound very vague and general, and for every rule there's an exception. Probably the most memorable advice is "live in the future and build what's missing", which I think is true, but hard to implement if you're not the right person.

Whereas the hacking tactics are more specific and actionable (although more likely to be out of date).
The top papers I included are purposefully recent as they are recent reviews on an emerging area of research.

Having read a lot of papers this year, my conclusion btw is actually that recent papers are much better than older papers. One, newer papers allow you to spelunk through older papers in the citation chain (all peer reviewed work has substantive reference lists), and two, and state of understanding of basic human biology is miniscule and for emerging topics (like chronic inflammation, or human metabolism) our understanding has changed enormously due to recent discoveries (at a much improving rate).

As an FYI, the inflammasome wasn't even discovered until 2002 [1] so you can basically be guaranteed that any prior research is going to be missing some key context. This is repeated for many pathways and processes that we take for granted (and a lot of it has barely filtered out to clinical practice much less pop culture) and will this will be repeating itself for quite some time, since we're still discovering so many new things that turn our understanding of biology on its head (just a handful of examples off the top of my head: role of microbiota (the wild west!), vagus nerve communication, autophagy, epigenetics, circadian clocks, and yes, most of ketone metabolism, particularly BHB as a signaling molecule).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflammasome#History
Yeah just whatever works for you personally!