skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's actually disagreement about oceans self cleaning (or not).

From https://inhabitat.com/the-fallacy-of-cleaning-the-gyres-of-p... (and Flotsametrics):

> to clean the ocean of floating plastic, you don’t need to go out and get it, it will come to you. Yep, that’s right. Oceanographer Curtis Ebbsmeyer, author of, Flotsametrics [33] describes a rarely talked about phenomena that occurs naturally in the ocean called Gyre Memory. Gyre Memory demonstrates that upon each orbit of a gyre, the gyre will spit out about half its contents. These contents will then either enter another current or gyre or wash up on land. As this repeats, it means that eventually, all the plastic in the ocean will be spit

Slat's reply, from https://theoceancleanup.com/updates/responding-to-critics:

> There is no data to support this statement. Actually, using the best models currently available (the Van Sebille and LebretonModels) we attempted to quantify the natural loss of plastics from the gyres, producing a figure of <0.1%/yr. Based on communication between our modelers and the makers of the models, we eventually decided to exclude this figure from the report, because the models are unreliable near the coast. But it’s safe to say a gyre does not spit out half of its contents per rotation. Unfortunately, it appears that the plastic that’s already trapped in the currents of the gyres does not simply go away by itself.
> The Rule of 3 is a great rule, except when it isn't.

"Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools."

It's unfortunate that you had to deal with a fool, but that's not a indictment of the particular rule that they picked to follow off a proverbial cliff.

Edit: fixed ambiguous quote formatting.
The post above is a perfect example. He says engineers are "creators" and to say "creators" lack "creativity" is nonsense.

This is displays an immense lack of analytical skills. First off, there exists in this world people who are bad at their jobs, shoe makers who are bad at making shoes and artists who are bad at art. So it definitely makes sense that engineers can lack creativity.

Another way of putting it: Creators can lack creativity. This is not a contradiction.

Additionally I didn't say "no creativity" I said "lack" meaning that their's a spectrum and (software) engineers tend to have less of it when compared to someone like a fine artist.

Also this engineer literally looked up the etymology of the word "creativity." This was an unnecessary detour and displays lack of the ability to think more generally. I'm using the word "creativity" in the same sense as how 99% of the human population uses it. No need to look up the definition of "creativity" just to assist in your arguments.

Of course I'm not saying All engineers lack creativity. I'm saying, on the job, and in my own anecdotal experience... most engineers lack creativity. It's a small few who keep the ball moving forward.
Many of those seem to have been around for well more than the 1 year deprecation minimum, and most of them appear to be some combination of Alpha/Beta products or language runtimes. Alpha/Beta products aren't really on-topic, and the language runtime stuff doesn't look all that different from how AWS does runtime deprecations.

https://docs.aws.amazon.com/lambda/latest/dg/runtime-support...
When a person creates X as part of their job, the company owns the IP. When an AI creates X as part of its job, the company owns the IP. When a person creates X on their own, they own the IP. When an AI creates X on its own... we aren't there yet.
Okay, I see what you mean; I guess if I were a Rust programmer I'd solve that by using rustup to install a fixed Rust release for development.

However the Firefox project has decided to always require the latest stable Rust release. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22022834

In practice for C++ I've found it expedient to whitelist some subset of functionality from newer standards, because there's often useful features that already work in the major 3 compilers, but it'll be another 3 years until the last of the compilers adds the last obscure bits for full support of the new standard.
> * The use of gender-neutral names like Alex and Jun instead of Alice and Bob. - As long as you are using a variety of names, this seems redundant.

Alice and Bob are actually standard names for cryptography, though. They weren't names that this professor plucked out of thin air. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_and_Bob
Conspicuously missing for me:

- Always-visible word count (added recently, but missing for nearly a decade)

- Custom text styles—you can modify the existing ones, but not create new ones with new names
For what it’s worth, the topic has never been whether “you guys” is “masculine” but whether it can refer to groups of mixed or not-all-male gender. I do find it odd you have consistently avoided ever making a statement about the gender makeup of groups to which the phrase can refer. I believe it is possible for the phrase to be masculine in a sense and for it to still refer to mixed- or arbitrary-gender groups.

Can you confirm without ambiguity whether you are indeed talking about the same topic as me?
Google Whistleblower: Google doesn't care about human rights [video]
> The anonymity is a major issue though

The LLC have a name, it is an legal entity. It is owned by other people/financial structure just like Coca Cola, Alphabet or Amazon. Since it's private, you don't get to know. All of these are perfectly legal and to declare this case as illegal is opening a can of worm on the other side.
Yes but actually no.
https://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/documents/292...

https://www.law.com/2020/01/09/law-grads-221k-loan-discharge...
> The first two points don't seem to have anything to do with _why_ bankruptcy shouldn't be used for student loans.

n.b. I'm not suggesting this is a GOOD system, just explaining the reasoning behind it.

I mean, they kinda do; Student loans are unlike most other loans in that there's no collateral. Mortgages have houses, USDA loans have farms, etc. They could theoretically "repo" your diploma, but that would be a token gesture and wouldn't really make much sense anyway.

In most other contexts to offset this you'd just get charged an exorbitant interest rate (which indeed does happen for many private student loans) or go through a rigorous qualification process, but the government offers low-interest loans and in return says those debts aren't dischargeable (thus removing the 'risk' of default).
You can get an FHA loan two years after bankruptcy. Twelve months in limited cases. An FHA loan has less desirable terms than a conventional loan but not so much so that it would dissuade anyone from getting $100k in student loans dismissed.
straight to my junk folder even if you really have a pot of gold to give me
One example:

> My boss invited me for a one-on-one chat where they politely asked me to revert my change. I was aghast. The old code was a mess, and mine was clean! I begrudginly complied, but it took me years to see they were right.

The first they sounds like the boss and the colleague were in the same room, but it can't because he says one-on-one. Still, presumably both the boss and the colleague wanted the revert. But the second they is really ambiguous. Was the boss right or the colleague?
It's black and white in law that student loan debt is dischargeable in bankruptcy, and the newsworthy thing here is apparently the judge applying the main legal test as articulated in the case in which it was created rather than pretending to apply it while adding new and perversely punitive terms.
Real wage increase is the same as nominal wage, bigger than productivity increase. Real wages already have productivity and inflation factored in, so any extra nominal increase would be beyond productivity.

> Even that doesn't necessarily increase inflation 1:1. Your models are off.

Assuming you use the example rich demographic I gave, what would be an example scenario that systemically breaks the 1:1 ratio?

> You can't talk about a single demographic because multiple demos buy the same products.

I know what you mean here but you can bypass the dependencies between demos by letting the system play itself out and taking the numbers when you have access to them. You can pick any demographic or a person and you can get their personal basket, calculate inflation, calculate their purchasing power and how it changes every single tick just from their credit card statements. It doesn't matter what other people buy when you can see the actual purchases for each individual. What other demos buy is already taken into account in the numbers you see in the credit card statements so to speak.
The threat, some argue, with the Ocean Cleanup is not so much to "traditional", underwater fish, but rather to an obscure floating type of species known as the neuston [1]. Marine biologists are warning about the impact of the OC on this species because so little is understood of their value to marine life.

[1] The entry is very short on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleuston#Neuston
this is the funniest comeback I've read on this website. Plus it's true.
You can't end the conversation by appealing to prevalence, either. Unequal representation does not imply discrimination.
That's because counselors, as a general rule, aren't routinely asked to build bridges. Engineers on the other hand do have to interact with other people, and more importantly, build things that affect people.

Counselors also aren't generally defensive about their inability to build bridges.
>What can we do to counter it?

You may want to keep an eye on the global protest trend.
Initially read to me as “climate escape”. Not sure if intended.
Well, py2 -> py3 is obviously one.

Before that, well it's been a while. But with and yield were added as a keywords (breaking any code using them as a variables). The xreadlines module disappeared at some point (I'm sure a few other modules have died along the way). At some point you couldn't raise anything you wanted as exceptions any more. Oh, and the source encoding declaration. That's what I remember off the top of my head.

Minor things that are handled in things that are maintained, sure. But many things are also built once and then expected to run for a long time - especially in the role shell scripts usually fill.

Note, that I don't argue that any of these changes were bad. They were all good changes that made the language better. But, they resulted in old code breaking. One extra headache to deal with for the poor schmuck that was responsible for upgrading this server or that to the latest OS release.
This is not just a phenomenon of titans, there are plenty of mom-and-pop operations too. I worked with someone who got in a fight in the office with her father over the phone. He was pissed she wouldn't accept a $250,000 deposit into her US account from her uncle's account (his brother) in China. The goal was to buy a house in the name of her cousin in LA.
This suggestion sounds totally crazy to me. Yes, go ahead and profoundly impact your brain chemistry. There is emerging research indicating there could be serious long term effects of SSRIs for a significant percentage of the population. And there are definitely lots of side effects. Taking them for this seems crazy. Why not instead have an orgasm and then pleasure your partner until you can get erect again, at which point your will have more stamina. Or make sure to masturbate before your date. There are solutions that are way less invasive than SSRIs.
In corporate finance it wouldn't. They would look at your cash flow and ability to service the debt. Personal finance is weirdly moralistic and backward looking.
> When an AI creates X as part of its job, the company owns the IP

I'd say that depends. If something is created by AI randomly, owners of the AI didn't create it. It's all about the level of autonomy. If AI simply follows instructions and is a dummy tool - then yeah. But if it does stuff on its own and isn't a conveyor of the owners creative intent - then owners of the AI didn't make it, they shouldn't own the result.

And besides, if you claim it's doing it as "part of the job" and that's why owners of the AI should get it, then give the AI job related rights first as well ;)
It's not wrong for an individual to choose an investment vehicle that aligns to their overall strategy.

However in an overall social sense, I do think that residential property investment in itself is wrong because I view housing as a utility and a basic necessity along the lines of water, healthcare, fire/police services and internet.

The issue is actually a simple trade off - whether it's more important to ensure people can own their own homes, or that people are allowed to use real estate as an investment.

I don't blame individual investors for this, but I do support the idea of introducing laws to limit property speculation. Bear in mind that I'm from Australia, where property investment has become a cancer that has drawn money away from productive assets (like startups) and into property, which is relatively speaking non-productive rent-seeking (outside of its effect on the construction and design industries). There's no net output from acquiring debt to buy a house so that you can do nothing but sit on it and flip it three years later for profit.
Fair enough, but at least they had plural you back then: thou.
I have to say, I'm very confused by this, and I'm not really sure what you're trying to say.

> As a BSD user, it wouldn't matter to xem at all

I can only assume "xem" is some kind of "BSD thing"?

> It's you the Linux user that it matters to... AT&T Unix itself actually has a different history to what people who bandy about the erroneous "SysV/systemd" dichotomy think...

I did actually say I didn't care much either way, in part because I really didn't want to derail this thread into a sysv/systemd flamewar - I only wanted to know why I might use BSD over Linux.
Parent mentioned MBTI only as a side note. And the point stands regardless of this detail: there is a diversity of thinking styles, temperaments, whatever you want to call it. Whether (and how) those styles are quantified or not, people, quite naturally, often end up with careers that fit well with them.
The ruling: https://www.scribd.com/document/442408640/In-Re-Rosenberg-Ba...
>because money laundering

and this in itself bases itself on a whole pile of pre-assumptions about what's right and the proper scope of the state's and individuals' rights should me.

We argue heavily about the dangers of tax evasion but the fact that government consumption of GDP and spending worldwide is at near record levels doesn't deserve reconsideration?

We discuss how "dirty money" is laundered through real estate but how much discussion centers around the sorts of laws that make that dirty money become such in the first place. Many activities that require money laundering are extremely debatable in their illegality, but this gets put by the wayside because money laundering = automatically evil, intrusive laws of all types necessary to stamp it out.

Then there's the whole issue of simple privacy. Yes, maybe people should have a right to at least some financial privacy, even from governments and corporations, let alone their neighbors. Transparency has its benefits but when you've created a taxation and financial monitoring system so pervasively, parasitically intrusive that any private attempt at keeping ones financial assets is considered suspicious, then this might just be a problem with the system, not so much all of those who want a measure of privacy.

It's odd that many in the hacker news crowd, who supposedly value digtal privacy from intrusive ad tracking and the growing tendencies of surveillance capitalism seem to throw the entire underlying philosophy behind these notions right out the window when it comes to elements of financial privacy, for property or money.
Nonsense, I've lived in several and it was great.

$500/mo rent and much better quality of life than a similar $4000/mo place in SF.
On POSIX systems, the line between file and pipe doesn’t exist. If you create a named pipe w/ mknod or mkfifo, you would interact with the named pipe as you would a normal file. Or block/character device. Etc.

In case of unnamed pipe the fds just exist as long as the process is running, then it disappears. Point is it’s irrelevant what you refer to as pipe, at the end of the day some file-like object is either written to or read from. And really, that file-like object is actually just a buffer.
I don't think that's true at all. If you use Ubuntu, broken packages are ultimately your responsibility unless you're paying for support from Canonical. In both Ubuntu and Arch Linux, changes will be handled carefully by the maintainers to try to avoid breakage where at all possible. The difference is basically that on Arch you're supposed to be able to handle basic sysadmin tasks yourself, which means that Arch Linux will ship breaking changes (with a mailing list warning) that require you to run a command or two yourself. Even with that qualifier, this is uncommon.
>You'd be surprised how much money flows through the medical system

I wouldn’t, I just know that the crowd targeting hospitals for wire fraud is very different from the sim swappers.

It’s possible that this may change at some point, but that hasn’t happened yet and probably isn’t going to. Phishing is so easy and successful that SIM swapping just doesn’t make sense for these targets.
Agreed!

Multi-repo makes integrations harder, because you find out about breakages later -- which means that it might be harder to identify the cause and more likely that someone depends on the behavior that broke you by the time you notice it.

But, multi-repo makes local development faster and cheaper -- you're insulated from the churn of everybody else's check-ins. You don't have to constantly refactor everything every time some dependency makes a minor tweak.

You get more done and have a smoother development lifecycle -- but you're going to keep falling behind your dependencies unless you invest in keeping up -- and that part of the process is more unfun the less often you do it.

I currently live in a monorepo. I don't love it. But I've also not loved the multi-repos I've lived in, so... shrug
sudo apt install ipcalc

ipcalc 192.168.0.0/24

and even better...

ipcalc 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0

There's also ipv6calc
Yes you can create them within the editor, and we've recently added support for importing SVG's.
It sounds silly but happiness should be the metric. If everyone is happy you presume employment is probably good.
Put a little stone in your shoe every once in a while. It'll change your gait for you at the cost of discomfort whenever you walk.
Great example of founder effect in action. This population will be studies for as long as humans keep the thread history intact.
Sounds like you're doing a bit of the same, and assuming that without discrimination outcomes would be different while ignoring any examples of cross-culture gender differences.
No, no, no; it's "Everything in moderation, especially moderation.". :)
Or parsing the output of the ls command. (-:

* https://unix.stackexchange.com/a/129120/5132
> Maybe they’ll look at your major

That wouldn't make much sense, many students aren't accepted into a major until a year or two into their education.

"Intended major" would also be a poor choice, as I think we all know many people who intended to go into one field and ended up in a completely different one.
Tempting troll article, but "Why are X so narrow-minded" is just a rhetorical question aiming to undermine any other interpretation than the assumption behind the question itself!

The same can be said of any role, position or profession. Just yet another master supression technique.

This is not to say engineers can never be narrow-minded, the statement is both true and false, for diverse situations of each X..
You can do this, but only when the company is issuing new shares, which they do sometimes.

Otherwise, when buying shares, someone in the distant past did invest into the company by buying shares they issued. You are just taking over their share of the company. Which makes you now the one who provides equity to the company.
Wow 70k, that is much lower than I thought. What's the salary trajectory for them? Like 3-5 years into the job?
> The article explains that their fully interpretable model actually got within 1% accuracy of the best black box model. Which was within cross validation error. That was at a data science competition whose explicit goal was to encourage people to explain black box models.

That's awesome, but this was a single model for a single application being measured against presumably by a limited test criteria/benchmarks. The point still stands that the recent narrow AI "renaissance" is largely due to deep learning, which is inherently black box. There is a lot of work going on in making deep learning more interpretable precisely because it's so prominent today and because its lack of interpretability is a huge con.

Machine vision for example has come a long way due to deep learning. A lot of autonomous car companies are relying on it for perception. All of these companies hate the fact that there is no way to tell when the classifier will fail or why it'd fail. When using deep learning in finance setting, its lack of interpretability is a huge downside.

Despite this deep learning is being used because it provides an appreciable improvement in performance over the alternatives. Certainly there could be alternatives to deep learning that may perform just as well or even better. But finding those alternatives for the vast number of applications deep learning is being used for today is much easier said than done.
This American Life: Before things went to hell

https://www.thisamericanlife.org/665/before-things-went-to-h...

An epic immigration compromise was in the works in the 90s... So what happened?
Congratulations, you have proven the point of the article :-)
https://github.com/AndreyMiloserdov/jpexs-flash-decompiler
How big is your scale on a scale of 0 to crippling debt?
Oh, we definitely haven't yet.

But the fact that we can't currently do so doesn't mean that it isn't relevant to the philosophical discussion of whether the mind is a separate entity from the brain.

It seems likely to me, though, that we'll be able to really make progress on that question in the next century or so for this very reason.
That would have a very regressive effect on those who don't have the capital or credit to outright own their home barring largly outmoded
boarding house style rentals. That property tax would be passed on to the renters.
SURELY the US Gov't will appeal this all the way to the Supreme court - - they have too much to loose (and the corporate banks that hold all these loans are rattling their money cups right now at the Gov't.)
Or to play the other side, why would anyone want to hide from public knowledge that they own a property?

All property records are public. You can go to the city or county and get the names of who owns any property in that area. But now 30% of those properties are owned by companies who's owners can't be identified.

So actually the public is losing access to something they already have. There is public benefit to the land registry being public. That is being lost.
> If anything, engineers tend to look for flaws, leading arts majors feeling hurt.

are you sure you’re not an engineer?
Always seems to me that political culture is long lived and difficult to change. Seems really common that revolutionaries once they take over find it impossible to govern without mimicking the previous government. AKA how the Soviet Union ended up looking a lot like the Czarist Russia. Ditto a bunch of former states. And how China seems to be slipping back into rule by mandarins under an figurative emperor.