skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm joking but.. This Citroen has the answer! A petrol powered heater

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_Berlingo_%C3%A9...

"Heating

In order to minimise battery usage, a petrol driven heater is fully integrated to vehicle. It typically takes 5 to 10 minutes to warm and provides excellent cabin heating."
Matt Levine on this very topic:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-01-13/the-ro...

Lots of agreement and disagreement.
Designers and statisticians disagree on what makes a good information graphic
> Changing the thrown exception is an incompatible change in Java.

Not if you're throwing a more specific exception. So the second and third methods are compatible with the first one, but not the other way around.

> The vast majority of Java code runs on perfectly well in Android.

The vast majority of Java applications use features not available on Dalvik, ever-changing though the vast majority of their code would indeed run.

> This is what they did. Oracle's argument is that a clean room implementation of the Java API is also copyright infringement.

They did a clean-room implementation by looking at the specification of the Java API. They did not reverse-engineer the API from working programs or from decompiled binaries, and are not claiming that they did. If they had, you would have probably seen minor differences in parameter names, thrown exceptions and a few other places.
What's the exit / return for the investor? You're better off just sponsoring it or finding sponsors for them and splitting the proceeds or just giving it all to them. But investors? I don't think there's a rational strategy here.
> Sweden seemed to have a valid legal case that he avoided for multiple years taking refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy.

No, it had not seemed to have such cause.

First, even assuming the complaint against merited an investigation to begin with, the fact that the prosecution did not choose to charge him formally on the basis of the evidence available to it means the charge did not merit an international investigation (especially one which amounts to just questioning the accused).

Second, Sweden asked that Assange be held and/or extradited for questioning or interrogation. It is not clear why an uncharged person (even if not a journalist) should be arrested without even being officially officially charged. I am not well-versed in UK law (especially UK constitutional law, as they don't have a constitution) - but I doubt that's valid.

Third, suppose Sweden did have a legal right to require a questioning/investigation. Assange offered, throughout his time at the embassy, to undergo this at the Ecuadorian Embassy. The Swedish authorities did not accept this offer. Remember, by Swedish law Assange was never considered more than a suspect, and assumed to be innocent; meaning there needed to be a good reason to refuse such an arrangement.

Fourth, the person whose claims opened the investigation against Assange withdrew (most? all?) of those claims; and Swedish authorities eventually closed the case.

and there's more...

but the last point worth mentioning is that as early as 2013, Sweden wanted to _drop_ the extradition request, but the UK authorities _dissuaded_ Swedish representatives from doing so (!)

More reading and references on Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_...
I'm no expert on this issue, but it seems to me that the question here is not merely whether the ocean cleanup will harm marine life, but also whether not cleaning up the ocean will harm marine life. They're not there for something inconsequential, they're there to clean up the plastic, which many people assume is harmful for marine life.

So the question isn't whether the cleanup is harmful, but whether it's more harmful than the alternatives, including not cleaning up.

And since both parties point out how little we know about this, I would expect the answer to this question to be: we have no idea. So that's something that needs to be tested: how much of various kind of life is there before the cleanup, and how much is there after an area has been cleaned up?

Until that is done, we can have no idea how big the impact will be, and in which direction that impact will be. Maybe neuston life will survive the cleanup. Maybe it will recover quickly. Maybe it won't. There might even be organisms that have adapted to the presence of plastic; what do we do with that?

In any case, suggesting that cleaning up plastic from the oceans is going to be a disaster seems to me just as presumptuous as assuming that any particular method of cleaning is going to be totally perfect. It needs to be a process of discovery. Cooperation with the scientific community is absolutely vital. But doing nothing doesn't sound like a good option here.
I would say then that you cannot prevent this system imprisoning people, save Snowden or help minorities by reducing surveillance or leaving it as is. Unless there is a clear causal link pointing from it to these facts.
no one will use it to ride to school or work for 3+ months out of the year. This is the Northeast, with constant rainfall and low winter temperatures; short of wearing heated gear, much of the year will be miserable to ride that bike on anyways.

A lot of people here seem to never have actually ridden bikes. I have, did so for 20 years, and it gets very miserable, very fast if the weather is nothing short of perfect.
> I'm mean I've seen the curves but cant find the math behind them. You often see weak references to Keplers law which doesnt even apply, so that leaves me very skeptical.

Huh?

This is directly derived from 3rd law
Needs fuel efficiency and MPG numbers in contrast to conventional jet liners.

Double the speed could consume roughly 4 times the fuel, per distance. A point I would like to see them address with concerns relating to fossil fuels and climate change.
New Plugin – Wordpress to Gatsby Exporter
Dart Essential Training 2020 90% Off
Show HN: Dnsbeat – An Elasticsearch Beat to Monitor DNS Zones
> Assange perverted the original intent of Wikileaks, and warped it into a tool to serve his own ego and personal vendettas.

Citation needed.

> He absolutely got what he deserved.

Being egotistical (what you claimed) warrants permanent imprisonment without trial and torture? I find your words hard to take seriously after this claim.
The torture was outsourced to Egypt and Syria and Guantanamo Bay contractors. The gig economy!
I sold my car and now drive one of those Zebra mopeds in SD. Next time I buy a car, it will be electric.
> What are you doing about Windows 7?

Same thing I've been doing for the last ten years or so, using Linux.
This sound pretty interesting, I wonder if the bar to entry is so low for an individual that external investment is not needed.
> Oof. The last thing I'd want to add to an already horrible commute is a supercharger stop, or more.

The Tesla had enough range that if I was able to charge regularly I didn't need the supercharger, but it was a nice backup if something prevented me from charging.

Also stopping halfway through the drive and grabbing a snack while at the supercharger wasn't really a bad thing.

>Kinda a pain in the ass in a garage

I have a standard 7ft garage door and they can fully open with about 2 inches of clearance at the top. Not really a pain at all.
How did American exceptionalism, specifically, give the world anything? Would people not have invented things if they didn't believe that America was magically special?
Google Map API for Android Essential Training 2020 90% Off
It's not all historical accident. The US also bought into a vision of an auto-centric future that featured multi-lane highways right through downtown neighborhoods. This vision was pushed by specific people, notably Robert Moses[1], who advocated strongly for highway systems over public transport, and who succeeded in having a number of dense urban neighborhoods demolished to make way for highways.

There was also the General Motors street car conspiracy[2], which saw car companies buy up privatized public transit only to run it into the ground.

The fight against this future being imposed is also fascinating reading, particularly the work of Jane Jacobs[3]. She correctly saw past the hyperbole to the unfortunate consequences, fought against the vision but lost.

The reason not much infrastructure is being built these days is simply that cities are running out of money and credit. Every road built comes with a price tag for building it, and an ongoing price tag for maintaining it. The building price was so often done on credit (bonds), but the maintenance price is usually not considered. Given that roads bring in basically zero income for a city, every road built comes with an obligation for the city but no way to pay for it. In the past credit was issued on the assumption that future growth would somehow provide some payback, but after 50 years cities have hit the growth limits and still not seen any payback. Strong Towns[4] is an excellent book on the subject.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Moses
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_consp...
[3] https://shelterforce.org/2016/05/10/jane-jacobs-defender-of-...
[4] https://www.strongtowns.org/book
Those ‘chameleon metals’ change surfaces in response to heat
Facebook Open Source 2019 Year in Review
I wonder how many great marketing opportunities/channels are written off because they seem to deviate from the values of focus or frugality? And inversely, how many distractions are hiding under the cover of unconventional marketing? I genuinely don't know.
Sounds pretty much the way facebook works - you ensconce yourself in a bubble of opinions you agree with. Not that there's anything wrong with that if that's what you want, but don't try to fool yourself into thinking that the discussions will suddenly improve in "quality" if you filter out the people that irritate you.
Does anyone else feel like the abstractions and models in physics have gone passed the point where the casual outsider (even a technically and scientifically minded one) can no longer intuitively understand it?

Because that's how I feel. There are so many things I just don't understand now like:

1. I originally thought the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle was a natural consequence of using particles (photos) for measurement. Instead however it seems to be a fundamental property of the universe, which I only learned after finding out most of the mass of hadrons comes from the relativistic motion of quarks and it explains why hadrons don't collapse to a point.

2. What does it even mean to create more space? The universe is expanding. Ok, I can accept that. But what does it mean?

3. I find the models for dark matter and dark energy to be... unsatisfying. I realize there's experimental evidence for unobservable mass but it feels like a fudge.

4. Of course we still have no quantum model for gravity.

5. I don't really understand what a fundamental force really is. Like why does electromagnetism have a repulsive opposite but gravity doesn't? When I tried to look into this I ended up down some rabbit hole of "gauge forces" and got completely lost. Why is the Higgs Field not a force?

6. Why are some predictions of the Standard Model so incredibly accurate (like the magnetic moment of an electron IIRC?) while others are so incredibly inaccurate (eg IIRC the QFT prediction of vacuum energy is off by 120 orders of magnitude).

7. Why are there exactly three generations of particles (ignoring the Higgs)? What does a generation even mean?

I could go on. I don't for a second mean to suggest any of these notions are wrong. It's just that the models have gotten so complex (it seems?) that it just feels like something huge is missing, something that will eventually seem obvious in hindsight. Or am I just a lemur trying to figure out how an airplane works?
Narratives about people’s motivations and goals seem to hold much more weight than the objective facts, which is that he published information that was true, that the public did not have prior.
Moving the goalpost? Yes they have, and sometimes they haven't. Just like most journalistic organizations..
I think most Nomad users are well aware that Kubernetes can do all it can - and vastly more.

If anything is wrong with Kubernetes, it would be the complexity of it and that it has a steep learning curve.

It seems it's best to have a small team of people to manage it and to solve solutions to problems that arise.

We started using Nomad last year and one thing I can say is that it's relatively easy to use and works well for its intended purpose, especially for us hybrid-cloud folks.
d. Offer a degree in return for a percentage of future income rather than a fixed payment.

"Graduates of Outer Bumfuck University average an annual income of $60,000! We offer tuition at Outer Bumfuck for your choice of:

- $10,000 per semester
- 2% of your income for 10 years, per semester (deferred until your first full-time employment)"

There are obvious holes in this plan (e.g. a short-term cash shortage, the potential for abuse by students), but it seems fundamentally sound. It also provides counter-pressure to inflating the job prospects of graduates, since the university comes up short in cashflow if their stated numbers are wrong.

This system also provides a sort of insurance plan for college students. You'll never be stuck with loan payments exceeding your income, since your total cost is based on your income!
Scaffolding Your First Dojo App with the Dojo CLI
I'm on my second Tesla. Model S (2016 facelift) and now a 2019 Model 3.

Love them. The Model 3 interior is amazing. So simple and elegant. But that is a personal taste.

The only thing I've really noticed on the Model 3 is the road noise. I've owned a BMW before, and it is a bit louder in the Model 3. Some of it is due to not having an "engine noise" to cover some of the road noise up. But it is not a big issue at all with music/radio playing. Sometimes if I'm trying to have a phone call and I'm going over 75/80 Mph (yes, within the speed limit where I live), I'll have to talk louder for sure.

In the end, I would not trade my Tesla for anything. Last year, I rented a Porsche Turbo S for two days because it was something I had always wanted to drive. It was fun, but I wanted my Tesla back afterwards.
The CIA will ever be judged by its failures while its successes will be invisible, classified, and by the nature of their success, known to almost nobody.

Statecraft is messy business. If you don't get your hands dirty you either don't matter or you don't last.

It is hard to judge these things fairly. Acting like we live in a perfect world and everyone who doesn't match that needs to be burned at the stake... well that's not helpful. Acting like the state gets a free pass for everything it does because being a government is hard makes us more and more terrible until something breaks.

Yes, a state in a leading world position needs to have a morally flexible arm to get things done, but that arm also needs to be regularly held in check, even if it's just for show.

The CIA and related agencies need pressure to keep them on their toes and doing the "right thing", but not expectation that everything they do will be entirely honorable. If you want that kind of thing, you have to move to somewhere small without much attention which has the luxury of honest opposition to all disreputable state behavior... because it is not in the position to be obligated to respond. (looking at you, smaller western Europe nations)
Tutorial on Using Rollbar Logger in Ruby on Rails Application
This is not conspiracy, but it's truth. People who have very little leverage or access to superior deal flow should NOT be investing in startups, which, with very few exceptions, provide minimal, if any returns.

I plowed hundreds of thousands of dollars into startups that I wished I put in more "mundane" investments with better overall returns.

Startup investing is for those who seek:

* Some sort of personal glory

* Delude themselves into thinking it's a high quality investment

* Have had a one-exit "success" and now think they understand everything about everything

* Are in it for the philanthropy - building up "startup ecosystems". No, the next big hit will most likely NOT come out of Cincinatti or Indianapolis. Maybe the odd strike of lightning success, but there's no way to power an ecosystem with a few meager millions of dollars

* Are playing with other people's money

Angel investing is for the foolish or those with some sort of substantial inside edge / track on success that lets them beat the odds.
That inconsistency was subject to an immense amount of scrutiny by thousands of scientists for over a hundred years. Albert Einstein received a Nobel Prize for resolving the inconsistency. The theory that ultimately resolved it is called quantum mechanics. That's no longer an inconsistency.

Better examples would be the inconsistencies between general relativity, which demands curved spacetime, and quantum mechanics, which prohibits curved space. This is a very real inconsistency at the heart of modern physics. Many, many people are actively working on solutions for it. Search for Grand Unified Theory or Theory of Everything for more information. Candidate theories include string theory and its derivatives, loop quantum gravity, etc. There are plenty more.

The problem is that designing experiments for these theories is Hard. Big-O Capital H Hard. My flight's about to board, maybe I can expand on it during my layover.

Dark matter is another example. Observations of the speeds and orbits of stars in galaxies and galaxies in galactic clusters are not consistent with our measurements of their masses. Plenty of candidates for dark matter have been and are continuing to be tested.

Candidates include MOND, which supposes that our theories of gravity need to be modified when acceleration is astronomically low. We have designed experiments to support or disprove these theories and most of the results have landed on the side of disproving them. (search for "bullet cluster" or "dark matterless galaxies")

Another candidate is MACHOs. ("MAssive Compact Halo Object") Basically the universe is teeming with small black holes, brown dwarfs, loose planets unassociated with any star, basically a lot of stuff we can't see. We have designed and executed experiments to search for these, but the results have concluded that there are insufficient such objects to explain the inconsistency.

The third candidate with traction is WIMPs, or "weakly interacting massive particle". Basically theorizing that there are other types of unobserved particles that have mass but do not interact via the electromagnetic force, which makes them very difficult to observe. There was hope that neutrinos could explain all these, especially when it was demonstrated that neutrinos have mass. However, experiments trying to bound the mass of the neutrino have shown they are not nearly massive enough to explain the observations. Experiments are ongoing to find these particles, but have yet not discovered anything we can't already explain. However, there's a problem: maybe they're just too difficult for any experiment to observe. In that case, we might be SOL.

These are just two examples. All of science are all the other examples.

The idea that this person is the only person probing inconsistencies is pure hubris. It's not a useful starting point for a conversation, unless the point of the conversation is to talk about how awesome you are and how much everyone else sucks. Which is all I got from this article.
Look at what Satya did - he directed a broad effort at the entire organization (a book, etc), and simultaneously pushed the ELT to get in line, firing them one by one when they or their directs didn't comply. They're all in line now, as are their directs.

The broader culture change takes more time, but the ship is definitely moving.
Fool me once. Fool me twice. Oh heck, fool me three times. But I'm not going to be fooled again. I've stopped investing in startups (so-called angel investing) when I realized that it's a fools' errand to invest in super early stage startups or in "convertible notes" or "pre-seed rounds" without any sort of informational or operational leverage. I'd rather invest in myself and other asset classes.
> Toyota of course has the top-selling hybrid, and introduced a plug-in hybrid version recently.

I thought that was in 2012? Of course "recently" is kind of subjective.

Edit: Ah, so they only introduced plug-in hybrids in the United States in 2016. Wonder what took them so long.
> But physicists have given up on figuring out what it IS.

It depends on what you mean by that. What they've given up on is trying to find some sort of anthropocentric analogy. It's understandable that this is unsatisfying, since analogies are fundamental to how we understand things. Unfortunately, there's no reason to believe that a good analogy will exist.
On retention, yes. On closing deals with 0.01% of rich people, largest funds, I can't imagine how.
> Wikipedia published information it received

They lost that cover when they decided it would be a good idea to have an "insurance file." They're clearly willing to pick and choose _which_ information they pass on based upon what benefits _them_.

> would you say the same about any journalistic organization?

I would not, but then again, due to the above, I don't see them as a journalistic organization anymore.
I love the work done and made freely available by both spaCy and HuggingFace.

I had my own NLP libraries for about 20 years, simple ones were examples in my books, and more complex and not so understandable ones I sold as products and pulled in lots of consulting work with.

I have completely given up my own work developing NLP tools, and generally I use the Python bindings (via the Hy language (hylang) which is a Lisp that sits on top of Python) for spaCy, huggingface, TensorFlow, and Keras. I am retired now but my personal research is in hybrid symbolic and deep learning AI.
The government derives its powers from the consent of the governed. Consent cannot be given if not informed.

There is no way a government with a million people with Top Secret clearances is operating with the consent of the governed.
The (def-struct) stuff is part of the assembler ! Not the Lisp.

Same with (def-enum) etc.

I am going to have to write a document to clearly state where these boundaries between the Lisp, the C-Script and the VP layers. I realise it's not that obvious sometimes.

Chris
That is the assertion of the extradition request. Whether there is evidence is yet to be determined.
Fine old threads are interesting; lousy old threads show that things don't always get worse. Win-win!
So if I were to buy a Tesla today I should expect their service department to be problematic for possibly 10 years?

That doesn’t sound odd to you?

I get when they were selling the roadster or early S. But 10 years from now?
Depends on the vehicle...Our C5 Corvette didn't get teh last minute deflectors and used to spill water on the rear speakers when opening in the wet.

They fix a lot of problems, but the customers demanding new designs every few years means we still keep fixing some of the same problems over and over.