skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Bullllshit.

"Greta Thunberg - January 11 at 7:36 PM:

Some people have been asking who manages this page. First of all, since last spring I only use Facebook to repost what I write on my Twitter and Instagram accounts.

Since I have chosen not to be on Facebook personally ( I tried early on but decided it wasn’t for me) I use my father Svantes account to repost content, because you need an account to moderate a Facebook page. The rest that is shared on Facebook is reposted from Twitter and Instagram by the guy who founded the Greta Thunberg Facebook page long before I knew it existed. His name is Adarsh Prathap and he lives in India. Since a lot of people thought it was my official page in the beginning I asked if I could co-manage it and he said yes.

All texts posted on my Facebook page has of course been written by me, just like everything else."

Source: https://www.facebook.com/gretathunbergsweden/posts/103195633...
Consider it this way. Suppose we all agreed to never use numerical values in the units section of an equation... then in this case we'd need a symbol for cycles in cycles per second aka Hz.

If we leaves Planck's constant as is in E=h(cycle/second), then the units would end up as
Joulecycle... odd right?

That's what brought me to writing the formula as

E=utf

I guess it should really be

Delta E=u(delta t)f where u is in joules t is (seconds per cycle) and f is (cycles per second)
While I mostly agree with you, this is not really a counterpoint to Hossenfelder's position. There is no denying that experimental physics has produced great results in the last 40 years, but the theories underlying these results have remained unchanged during that time.
Being in the industry of identifying target variants from cohorts for pharma - I doubt 23andMe has a chemistry research organization dedicated to independently developing their own drugs.
Highlights from Git 2.25
This may be an unpopular opinion but the real issue (biologically) is that we don't need all the men. We only need a tiny percentage of men.

So how societies sometimes dealt with this excess of men was to send a good number of them off to war. Also occupations used to be much more hazardous so many more die working.

The days of bundling laggers up in a red coat and sending them off with a musket to make the queens empire a bit larger appear to be coming to a close. But in my opinion, we still haven't addressed the underlying problem evolution has left us with. I don't have a good answer either.
People look over the pond and they see, oh, Germany has universal health care and pays half as much per capita. They then conclude: "if only we got government more involved, we could do that too."

That last bit of logical reasoning is, in my opinion, not supportable. Let's look at the things the government already does in America in compare it to what the government does in Germany. Germany spends $11,000 per student on public education. We spend $12,800 per student. But our schools are much worse. Transit is the same story. Germany spent $250 million per kilometer to build the U55 line in Berlin. New York spent $2.2 billion per kilometer for its most recent line: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/1/1/14112776/ne....

So yes, America is exceptional. For whatever reason, we are uniquely bad at running public services. Contrary to popular belief, its not because of "lack of funding." (The American government does less, but in the areas it does something, like education, it usually spends more to get worse results.)

Americans understand this intuitively, and that's why they say "it won't work in America because." They may not be able to pull up statistics about how their municipal water/sewage system is poisoning kids and destroying the environment, but they perceive that their government just doesn't do a good job. When polled, they say so. Since 2006, 80-90% of people polled reported being "frustrated" or "angry" at their government: https://www.people-press.org/2015/11/23/2-general-opinions-a.... Even in 1997, 2010, and 2015, all during Democratic administrations, only 1/3 of Democrats thought that the federal government did an "excellent" or "good" job running its programs. For the population as a whole in 2015, 33% said it did a "poor" job, and just 20% said it does an "excellent" or "good" job. As of 2015, 53% would rather have a "smaller government" offering "fewer services" than a "bigger government" offering "more services."

The most remarkable statistic is for millennials: https://reason.com/wp-content/uploads/assets/db/140488628178.... When you ask millenials whether they want a smaller government providing fewer services (with low taxes) versus a larger government providing more services (with high taxes), 57% want a smaller government with fewer services, while just 41% want a larger government with more services. Basically, when you ask millenials--the most pro-government demographic there is--whether they want more of a European-style government, they say "no" with a 3:2 margin.

Yes, America is exceptional. Americans hate taxes, hate their government, and frankly, on various measures, their government isn't very good at what it does.
Most devops tools are built on Linux for Linux, then ported to Windows later as an afterthought, so I don’t think platforms are much of a factor. It’s a defect in the production pipeline somewhere, something like feedback from potential users not reaching developers until it’s too late. It doesn’t help that, in some cases, vendors just impose what is going to happen, and the community is simply forced to put up with it.
Thanks so much for sharing the info on your AMA session. Big fan of TruPotency; been following you guys since inception. Hope to be a part of your awesome team soon!
I don't think people will care until the issue has become large enough that it will start impacting others in society indirectly. Eg not enough tax revenue being generated or not enough men willing to fight in a war.
An API is not a 'plot' - it's a very specific articulation of information.

An API is more like a set of chapter headings and their descriptions.

It doesn't matter that they are 'not a solution' to anything.
> I think the actual pain in Python 2 came from the misguided decision not to adopt UTF-8 as the default character encoding

The decision of a default encoding surely dates back to Python 1.0 or earlier, which predates not just UTF-8 but even Unicode itself. Python is an old language!

And if the assertion is that Python 2.0 should have made the tumultuous Unicode jump when it released in 2000, I could get behind that (especially in retrospect!), but enthusiasm for both Unicode and UTF-8 was not nearly as high then as it is today, so I don't begrudge them for not jumping at the opportunity.
You don't have to be accredited to invest. However, other accredited investors won't want to share the cap-table with you.
Interesting you mention http headers. I had a program converted Python 2 -> Python 2 which was crashing occasionally, and it turned out it was because I was being sent a http request which wasn't valid unicode, so decoding failed.

I had to switch back to treating headers as bytes for as long as possible.

It is a stupid client which doesn't send valid ascii for http headers of course.
https://99percentinvisible.org/article/cities-paved-dung-urb...
Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen has China to thank for landslide re-election win
Sourcehut Q4 2019 Financial Report
In general, when someone states something that is not settled fact, they are stating their own opinion. Yes, I have stated my opinion on the topic as a reaction to what I read, which is I believe the purpose of hacker news.

> You're theorizing and your theory is most likely wrong, and only minimally likely to be true. Due to the fact that for any issue, there are more theories that are wrong than right, those are the starting odds of theorization.

Certainly, if one picked theories at absolute random. Random theories would be things like 'men aren't working because elephants are gray' or 'men aren't working because a new sunspot occurred' or 'men aren't working because harry potter is really a chimpanzee'. On the other hand, if theories are picked in accord with the data presented in an article on the topic, and with an understanding of human nature, as well an understanding of the limits of causation (like, realizing the color of elephants does not typically cause changes in employment), then there is a much greater likelihood of theories being correct.

I would really recommend phrasing your comments better. Aside from being absolutely ridiculous (theories that humans formulate are very rarely picked at random, and you cannot pretend to understand the probability distribution of their truth value), your very comment is predicated itself on an arbitrary theory (that humans do indeed pick theories at random from the very large, perhaps infinite set of theories). Applying your own logic, your own theory is very likely to be wrong as well.

> And now more directly addressing your partocular theory, why do you believe people would rather choose video games over a vocational activity given exposure, access, and training to both?

Because video games are fun and I would rather sit at home and play video games if the government were paying me money and my parents hadn't made me afraid of going to hell if I defraud the government. Behind every man's opinion is his own assessment of his own character. I am not a saint, and I doubt most men are.
Great article, but I'm curious about a spelling error in it that I've seen more and more recently:

> Move so you are peaking out of the right edge

Obviously, "peaking" should be "peeking".

I don't recall seeing it much until relatively recently, and it seems to have become very common.

Have I missed something? Was it always a common homophone error? Or is there a reason for it peaking recently?
Hi there. Would you mind forking this extension to Firefox as well, please?
Those tools were not popular at the time for sure. I remember that Python-Future only got traction sometime after Flask has been ported to Python 3.
Yes. I've been working and investing since the late 90's. It's never been like this. Very crazy.

And hopefully the kids making 300k/year+ are smart enough to save and invest 50% of their income.
This article omits that Caddy has had long-running experimental support for HTTP/3 for a couple of years now: https://caddyserver.com/docs/json/apps/http/servers/experime...
> The idea that we could _build housing and give it to homeless people_, or just pay for everyone's basic healthcare needs (even if you could still get better by paying more), raises the ire of a significant portion of the population here.

Does that surprise you that people who earned their own houses and their own healthcare through their own work resent the idea of skimming some of the fruits of their labor and giving them to people who didn't do so?

Look, this thread started with suggestion that "we're going to have to undertake a huge cultural shift and accept a large XX% of the populace just sitting around, vaping and playing video games all day". I don't like this bait and switch, where first I'm forced to support people who just want to live life of leisure, and when I complain about that, I get slandered by suggestions that I want to _punish_ unlucky chaps with medical bankruptcies.
You can’t really compare you deploying kubernetes to a bunch of raspberry pis to people normally deploying them to cloud hosting services or using managed services.....

Totally different use case
Yup. For example there's a draft proposal for DNS-over-QUIC: https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-huitema-quic-dnsoquic-06.htm...
One argument would be that China for some time has maintained the world’s largest biological weapons program which dwarfs anything the US and the Russians have even when combined.

In fact there is a rule of thumb from the Cold War...US - Nuclear, Soviets - Chemical, Chinese - Biological. Indeed most plagues have originated in China due to the population density and the prevalence of swine (there is a reason many religions don’t consume certain types of meat and in particular pork, it’s correlation with plague goes back thousands of years).

Besides these biological weapons which can be quickly looked up online at US Think Tanks and places like the Army War College...China has also maintained a pretty firm grip on HackerNews.

Twice now as a cybersecurity researcher I’ve come across Elasticsearch clusters employing Logstash in combination with a filebeat that streams in HackerNews topics and comments. This ingestion pipeline seems to be set off if you hit enough “hot words” after which time an Elastalert is sent out to presumably trigger human-in-the-loop to comment and pounce on any criticism. Based on the architecture that I saw in both cases this is a straightforward if not modest and not that sinister interpretation of the infrastructure. Yet it is still very concerning in the aggregate.

In conclusion, China could use these innovations for weapons to kill not as much us as their own people. Additionally their attempts to monitor and at times squelch free speech abroad goes against...a lot of things that people who live in Democracies would agree is valuable and worth protecting.
It sounds like that only because scientists reformulate their models in terms that people are familiar with. Actual physicists don't work in terms of the gamma correction factor; they work in tensor fields that don't look anything like conventional arithmetic.

But they can pare all that down to something expressed in terms people are familiar with. And that has the bonus purpose of helping them understand why the familiar terms were familiar: the "correction factor" is small under circumstances we encounter, and only becomes large under circumstances we rarely do.

If that intrigues somebody enough to learn the actual physics, they'll encounter a completely different and more-encompassing formulation which looks not at all like overfitting. One that turns out to be more elegant, in fact, cramming more information into less notation. But it's information nobody needs until they're doing fairly advanced physics, so we're not going to be teaching it in elementary school any time soon.
>Sulla already existed, the idea that "tradition" will keep us safe from ambition has been disproved.

There isn't anything else besides tradition. Government in all of its forms ultimate exists and runs in a manner compatible with the consent of the people. Documents, laws, institutions, policy, what have you... they all derive out of that consent, that tradition, that mythology. You have to maintain the mythology as it grows and transforms over time. Tradition can't rule with a dead hand, it is alive with each citizen, each generation. Nothing is forever.

>What kind of organization is immune to an intelligence agency?

Nothing is perfect. Intelligence agencies aren't all-powerful, and the legislators, judges, executives, and population aren't hopeless. An independent judiciary, senators with long election cycles, and a population with freedom of the press are all resistant to the influence an intelligence agency has.

>Again, we have conclusive proof that this failed with the Nixon plumbers.

Did it? Nixon was forced out of office, he didn't win. Checks and balances aren't about preventing misbehavior, they're about fixing it when it happens. How it worked with Nixon was, as far as I can determine, satisfactory.
Did you have a large ecosystem of third party extension modules that also had to obey the flag day?
All the more reason not to bother with IPv4.
1. Blame stupid pop-sci books. Anyone reading an actual QM book will know it's an intrinsic property.

2. again pop-sci books.

3. You and anyone not blinded by non-scientific factors...

6. The math we use for those calculations is adhoc bullshit and no one has been able to place it in a solid foundation.
This is my pet topic, but:

How can we expect to make progress in our theories if we haven’t even agreed on a consistent interpretation of today’s quantum theory?
From a brief look at the Rust side -

Actix uses Tokio

Quiche doesn't

Quinn does but doesn't look quite ready and I don't see any integration attempts with Actix yet.
This is a good takeway from that page:

> I guess this means 1213486160 is going on my list of magic numbers. Also, it means that 2008-06-14 23:29:20 UTC is, in a strange sense, "HTTP time". If you see either that number or that date (with possible adjustments for your local time zone) showing up in your life inexplicably, this might just be why.
Since the participation rate for women peaked around 2000, the participation rate for men and women both declined a few percent. The curves are essentially parallel.

The graph is from "Labor force participation: what has happened since the peak?" by the Bureau of Labor Statistics at https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2016/article/labor-force-partic...
Yeah, I assume deaf as well. Just funny that neither she nor wired caught it.
cynically it's because you can quantify the contribution of a sales person - they added xMM to business this quarter. the same kind of itemization/attribution is very difficult for software. the infamous patio11[1] blog post about how to leverage credible bottom line contributions can be used to get paid more as a dev.

but more genuinely i do think sales does bring more value. customers aren't rational actors so closing a deal isn't about features or stats or whatever material a software dev contributes. it's about value prop and trust and meeting needs and all the language sales people use.

[1] https://training.kalzumeus.com/newsletters/archive/consultin...
A lot comes down to whether the market views Tesla as a car company, or a technology company. The pessimistic view is that they’re a car company and the valuation makes no sense compared to GM, Toyota, or VW. The optimistic view is that they’re a technology company that — if they manage to stay alive — will produce value from both their core offering and the edges of their business, much the way Amazon has with AWS, or Apple is doing in Services.

Personally, I own a nominal number of shares and root for their success. But at the end of the day, it’s a Random Walk on Wall Street and predictions (good or bad) are largely speculation.
Not really? I've always found what I needed.

The worst kind of answers are those who just post a code snippet without any context.
Learning miasm: Part 2: Analyzing instructions
Scientists Create “Living Robots”
But that’s not really anything new or unusual, is it? Women have always stayed home to look after children more often than men.
So no, lol
Given up on what?
Look at the chart. There are now a lot more women in the labor force than there were in the 1940s. Back then, they were staying home with the kids. Now, women are having children later and often working (at least part time) once they have them.
the best feature of the GPE phones was that they came with the bootloader unlocked.
Looks interesting. Is this open source? How can we contact you?
Nothing blocking right now - The battery lasts over a day.

Some apps are weird, but you get used to it.
At this point, why wouldn't you use Excel?

What use cases do you have that go beyond Excel?

I say this as someone that develops pipelines in notebooks and workflow frameworks.

Snowflake.
Busy Designers' Guide to Framer X: A 4-Week Plan
> It is a stupid client which doesn't send valid ascii for http headers of course.

...or a smart malicious actor.
Right, this is more controversial than people think. I've seen studies that you don't actually see a higher rate of mortality until the hours are ridiculously low. Like less than 4 hours, on average
The SEC is discussing changing this: https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2019-265

"The proposal would add additional means for individuals to qualify to participate in our private capital markets based on established, clear measures of financial sophistication."
One Librarian Tried to Squash Goodnight Moon
An ancient viking stone has revealed fears over a problem that still looms
Was just going to say that.
Mercurial still can't have a "flag day" as Macs are still distributed with Python 2, and not 3. Therefore it would make Mercurial significantly worse for mac users if it didn't support Python 2.
The irony is that its actually not that well positioned in autonomous driving, which could be the only thing that could really driving the incredibly valuations it has now. GM, for instance, by most reports is significantly ahead of Telsa.
APIs are not code. They are functional interfaces that code interacts with. The decision to have a function called `sqrt` and put it in a module called `math` is not creative, and it is definitely not artistic.
Elon Musk: ‘Teslas will soon talk to people if you want. This is real’
The interesting thing I always found with Windows phones was how easy it was to remove any and all bloatware on their phones.

Don't the One Plus and Android One phones come pretty clean with only a few Google apps on them?
Please make your products work with URLs
No it's not, I am just talking about a reality without judging it. Regardless, this is not money but copying of information, with some similarities and some differences which we would all do well to recognize.
I understand your point of view but on the other hand we can make the parallel with Perl 5 and 6. Having incompatible forks of the language share the same name is a pain for everyone involved. I can completely understand the "mainline" python maintainers not wanting to have to deal with that.

Besides if the Tauthon people are serious about maintaining their fork long term it needs to become more than a mere fork and a real language ecosystem of its own, in the long run having a different name will probably help with that, assuming that they ever get there.

EDIT: Also reading the rest of the thread I realize that the post that you linked out of context is slightly misleading (but I blame github's aggressive folding more than you here). Guido's answer comes after the following exchange:

stefantalpalaru: "Disregard Guido's objection. The "Python" trademark doesn't extend to "py2" or "py28". Read this for details: https://www.python.org/psf/trademarks/"

Guido: "Isn't the whole point that we're trying to solve this without lawyers?"

stefantalpalaru: "The whole point is that you've been sabotaging Python 2 for years and when someone does what needed to be done from the start, you come up with silly objections."

Guido: "OK, bring in the lawyers."

In that light, and given the other poster's ridiculously inflammatory take, Guido's answer seems rather level headed and appropriate IMO. He stands his ground, so to speak.
Greg says as much in the article: in hindsight, porting to Rust would have worked out better. Which is a pretty bold statement, but very interesting to hear from someone with intimate experience to back the opinion up.