skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's a theory out there that our universe is a pocket universe inside of a supermassive black hole. My relativistic gravity is pretty rusty and was shaky to begin with. If that theory isn't pure fantasy, and we were a pocket universe, and large masses were spinning above the event horizon, we'd experience forces from those objects, right?

I'm still kinda fond of the Flatland theory myself. Us poor 4 dimensional beings can't figure out how to build tools that can take 5 dimensional measurements, so we see weird behavior we can't explain.
Can they handle it now? Today? For the whole country? Because the problems are already here and people are advocating UBI so ideally we need those magical robots yesterday.
Except Google, all the websites listed as example got more crowded in the last 3.5 years
Too much for small classes/records imho e.g. `new Name("First", "Last")` vs. `new Name(first="First", last="Last")`

Also, IDEs can help with parameter hints when is needed.
Feel free to add any of the dozens of lower back exercise you'll find if you google "bodyweight exercises lower back" to your regimen rather than take some guy's word for it.

Even the pushup uses lower back muscles, like any plank.
My experience with python is that the autocomplete in the REPL is good enough (autocomplete would be better but I don't like the idea of depending on specialized editor configs so it's not worth it in my mind.) If you don't know what fields your classes are then maybe your code isn't organized or documented well or you should be using type hints.

For really messy javascript or things you don't know well autocomplete helps though.
I don't have studies, but the idea is they never have to learn it because the computer just does it for them. So why bother?

It's anecdotal, but growing up the students who relied on their calculators never really learned to do mental math the same. The difference was palpable.

But I'm not a formal teacher or expert when it comes to the psychology of learning, so I also welcome studies on this subject.
It's properly spelled "Encyclopædia Britannica" https://www.britannica.com/topic/Encyclopaedia-Britannica-En...
Sure [1], but safety through redundancy is much easier than automation.

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLIo8jO9VUU
Try the OSD335x.

https://octavosystems.com/octavo_products/osd335x-sm/
I meant that it's worked out pretty well for Java. ML -- one of my favorite languages, alongside Java and a couple of others -- has also managed to avoid being used by anyone, really. But look at Java now: it has generics and higher-order functions, and it's getting a uniform treatment of types (Project Valhalla), and pattern matching [1]. And so while ML introduced those features in a research context, Java is the language that has made and will make the world actually use them. Being ahead of your time is often just as much of a mistake as being behind (as far as product design goes).

As to the question of "holding programming back," it is yet to be seen how much of an impact these features have in practice. Same goes for what ML "lacked." I personally like some features more and some less, as do you, but I don't think anyone knows which programming language features really push programming forward.

[1]: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~briangoetz/amber/pattern-match....
Either of the following suffices to account for the evidence:

1. Expansionist civilizations that encounter one another reliably obliterate one another. Non-expansionists don't spread out.

2. Advanced civilizations have no need for goldielocks-zone planets. Where mass is needed, Kuiper-belt objects are more convenient sources. The notion of Dyson spheres seems especially silly: even extreme primitives would have confined fusion power, and have no need to rely on primitive, diffuse stellar radiation.

Both could be true, along with others not listed.
Is there a specific reason we're still doing ground based datacenters? With satellites becoming ever cheaper, sure we at some point should be able to get a significant datacenter up there right? Are we waiting for the bigger rockets to accomplish that?

That thought exercise should give you 90% of the answers to your question. The atmosphere and light pollution from cities are pretty easy to counteract with location and bigger optics.
Done, thanks! Mobile web games are harder to include because there's no app store to get data from.
I'd say it may envisioned theoretically (better materials, new photo-sensor processus, you-tell-me, physics say we have a much higher bound).

But in the short-medium term, the cheapest course that delivers is to use normal telescopes and interferometry (say on some orbit between Venus and Mars). I'm pretty sure it's also a domain where narrow AI may help because finding "anomalies" in space is a lot like finding anomalies on X-rays to find malignant tumors — something AI apparently can do well. Both problems fit incredibly large datasets + ultra low resolution of said anomalous blobs, and discrepancy with normal ones barely statistically significant (well below what human eyes may spot).

This is how I see the immediate future of space-based observation: lots of small things that cooperate extremely (increasingly) well with each other, "networks" more than "giants", much like down here on the ground.

It's just easier, cheaper, and lets you grab a lot of low-hanging fruits. Meanwhile, space-based fabrication can kick off and take the time to reach 'self-sustaining' velocity.
It's a language feature, so esp. library developers would pick it up over Lombok to reduce their dependency graph.

That said, I also like Lombok's annotation style more, I can pick & filter which members are relevant for `toString()` and `equals()`
I mean sorta. But think about the incredible variety of life on Earth. Read some science fiction. I'm not saying our search space / our expectations are perfectly broad enough.

But I've never seen any sign the people involved in SETI are doing this with blinders trying to find bipedal creatures with a mouth that breathes oxygen and are about 1-2 meters tall.
> so how do they end up getting exposed?

the author cites "allowing developers to connect to the host with the www-data user", and this is a very specific form of incompetence.

www-data is the name commonly used by debian and debian-based distros to run apache and other http servers. it's literally, just designed to run the executable, not to upload new version of webpages or anything.

there are countless ways to avoid this pitfall, the simplest that comes to my mind is creating another user for uploading stuff and adding such user to the www-data group.

at the end of the day... meh. people might start a campaign about how not to use the www-data or something else, but not-very-techy people will find another way to misuse a webserver.
I think it's perfect for parameter objects
Mostly inexperience/doing this with first timers played the major role

> The number of regular jumps by experienced enthusiasts done during this period is estimated at 50,000, giving an incidence of injury for regular parachutists of 0.02% – reflecting better expertise and training
The single best thing I did to fight back pain: Start juggling.

I work 10-14 hours per day at my notebook without any external monitors and at changing locations. So, my typical posture is cramped over a 12 inches display. I started to juggle 4 years ago. Initially 1 hour/day – nowadays whenever I have time or something at hand. Usually 10-15 minutes/day with some extended excises at the weekend. I did not have a single problem since then. Try it :-)

Bonus: Juggling connects both sides of the brain. It makes you happy and intelligent. As well it helps overcome e.g. anxiety, ADHD..

- Start with 1 ball and level up to 3 balls – with regular practice it will take you ca. 1 month

- Look at YouTube, but practice at your own speed - 3 balls is totally fine

- Picking up the balls from the ground is part of it – embrace it
Son who traded off more famous, successful and talented father dies.
I am only half trolling. In your "nothing good will come out of it" you seem to imply that "good" means "good for society" or something like that. A lot of people in the world understand "good" as "personally profitable and/or enjoyable". So yeah, you can say that nothing good will come out of using this data, but a whole lot of people out there are going to disagree with that.
"We are survival machines – robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the selfish molecules known as genes. This is a truth which still fills me with astonishment"

- Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene, 1976

Dawkins talking about the first sentence, about 1980:

"...that was no metaphor. I believe it is the literal truth, provided certain key words are defined in the particular ways favoured by biologists. Of course it is a hard truth to swallow at first gulp. As Dr Christopher Evans has remarked, "This horrendous concept - the total prostitution of all animal life, including Man and all his airs and graces, to the blind purposiveness of these minute virus-like substances - is so desperately at odds with almost every other view that Man has of himself, that Dawkins’ book has received a bleak reception in many quarters. Nevertheless his argument is virtually irrefutable" ...

http://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=58430
>irrigating them for 20 years

And there is an assumption that there is enough freshwater to do this.

"A third of the world’s biggest groundwater systems are already in distress"

"Water scarcity already affects every continent. Water use has been growing globally at more than twice the rate of population increase in the last century, and an increasing number of regions are reaching the limit at which water services can be sustainably delivered, especially in arid regions"

https://www.unwater.org/water-facts/scarcity/
Where they gone?
It's strange how different things mean to different people; Some people see web pages as images and so minimalism is an aesthetic decision while others (most people here probably) see a tree of boxes and the aesthetic minimalism should (usually) be a consequence of a simpler description of that tree.
I think you meant to ask who would want to memorize the docs and never ever need confirmation they are remembering correctly?
"mile" is typically abbreviated as "mi".
Hey HN, Will you give my VSCode theme a try?
>The ideal way to teach spelling is (1) get kids to read a whole lot, (2) show students their mistakes in context when they make them on as short a feedback loop as possible, without judgment.

I'm not sure I agree with this. This doesn't teach the fundamentals and rules of how words are put together. Learning to spell isn't memorizing lists of words, it's learning the rules of English and how words are actually put together so, even if you don't know how a word's spelled, you should be able to at least be able to make a good guess based on your knowledge of English. The spell checker doesn't teach you any of this.
This is just one person's anecdotal experience.
Won't know until we try =)
No, not ekr. There's much worse.
They had a successful launch today in fact:
https://spaceflightnow.com/2020/01/16/ariane-5-va-251-missio...
If you make it to easily search all of the text you read on any screen (desktop + mobile) over the past day, you're gonna have a huge win there
Market economy is far from a law of nature. Even most human activity is cannot be understood as market driven.
I don't fully buy his exact theory either, but it doesn't matter -- it cured my wrist pain anyway. The specific mechanism of action is less important than the core premises, which are:

1. My brain is capable of generating the sensation of pain in various parts of my body.

2. My brain has been conditioned to generate pain automatically (and unconsciously) in response to certain stimuli.

3. It is possible to recondition my brain to remove this automatic response.

The surrounding body of theories and recommendations are just methods for accepting these premises and completing the reconditioning process. For most people, accepting the "diagnosis" is the hardest part. The pain feels very real and very much caused by structural problems in the body. Personally, it was only after I had accumulated a sufficient set of evidence ("the nature and exact location of my pain is not consistent," "a nerve conduction study found nothing wrong," etc.) that I was able to begin reconditioning. The turning point came when, after I started to see some reduction in pain, I began experiencing strange symptoms in other parts of the body (e.g. headaches, which are rare for me). This aligned perfectly with what Sarno's book said would happen. After that, I was able to "buy in" 100% and the rest of my pain was gone within a few weeks.

I suggest reading Aaron Iba's blog post on the subject; it's what convinced me to give it a try: https://aaroniba.net/how-i-cured-my-rsi-pain
we are on java 14 already wtf?? I really don't like the new frantic release cycle. Cassandra is still stuck on Java 8...
I 100% recommend watching that talk near the top of the article. It's a short talk of 20 minutes but even if you have only time to watch the first 3, that's where the most entertaining part is so still recommended.
Cool, so a group of conservative groups will get to functionally ban books that they think are inappropriate.

Given their past behaviour this will be:

- anything that touches on or includes lgbt content or characters.

- anything that claims creation isn’t true

- anything that “promotes” “alternative” families

- given their nature also anything promoting non-Christian religions

Remember these are the groups that have banned or tried to ban the diary of Anne Frank, to kill a mockingbird, evolution, ...

But don’t ban religious documents that promote slavery, rape, sexism, homophobia, racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, eugenics, islamophobia, etc
But is it actually that varied when compared to the infinity of the universe? All life on Earth is carbon-based, to start with.

The assumption always seems to be that experience as we perceive it now is some sort of default, objective one. It’s far more likely that we are simply locked into a very narrow viewpoint. The scales are simply so large that we are unable to comprehend them in any meaningful way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_chauvinism
I believe Apple use TSMC, whilst Tesla use Samsung for their customs. So, outsourcing. I haven't heard of either going into the silicon business recently.
This is incredibly funny and probably an experience that most of these kids will remember — whenever they hear "TCP/IP", they'll think back to images, impressions of this day/class.

I love such not-so-random acts of awesomeness! Kudos, steverb.

Question: have you observed some of these kids then "level up" (over the next months, years; "days" is clearly too short to internalize I think) with regards to these topics, or general "abstractions", that made you think "hum, this is definitely very, very much like what I tried to teach with TCP/IP"?
Yet China continues to expand use of coal power and mining their vast reserves in the western part of the country.
Cybersecurity Takes Center Stage at World Economic Forum in Davos
https://factorcode.org/slava/dls.pdf

That said, effectively no one would benefit from switching. I like Factor, and stack languages in general, but from a difficulty perspective, they are MUCH more difficult than languages from the Algol family to use.
I'm seeing the same thing. All the embedded vimeo videos were either deleted or made private.
Why are you confident about any of these things? Unless you're simply stipulating a definition, and not worrying too much about whether it corresponds to 'consciousness' in the sense most of us care about.
Great point. I think part of this is that computers are now so ubiquitous, there is less call for making them approachable to people who are not using them.

Personally I like the friendly stylings of old which were empathetic to users' needs. Computers these days seem to take themselves too seriously, and we've lost a bit of the fun as a result.
It seems like you're assuming the difficult part about creating self-assembling replicators capable of sustained, error-free exponential growth across interstellar space and billions of years is merely coming up with the idea.

It's entirely conceivable that every space faring civilization which has tried has failed simply because the odds are so stacked against success, even once, at every step along that process. Just because the math is simple, doesn't mean the application is simple.

Hell, we don't even know what the odds are of becoming a space faring civilization to being with, and it doesn't seem axiomatic that every such civilization would even want to seed the galaxy with self-assembling replicators to begin with.
NIH Definition of a Clinical Trial:

"A research study in which one or more human subjects are prospectively assigned to one or more interventions (which may include placebo or other control) to evaluate the effects of those interventions on health-related biomedical or behavioral outcomes."

A phase 1 clinical trial is used to determine safety (including dosage) and involves far fewer people than a stage III clinical trial.

For Biotech startups, the companies value usually increases with each successfully completed trial. Conversely, the cost of conducting a trail also increases at each stage.
I think that the syntax has some hurdles, but it's not the parentheses: It's to mentally understand when lists and symbols are data and when they are code. That's a problem not found in other programming languages and at the same time it is an interesting feature. Lisp is not alone to have such hurdles - another example would be Haskell which is also more difficult to learn than the average programming language (lazy evaluation, type system, monads, ...).

Often Lisp had been used as a teaching language for computer science concepts (recursion, evaluation models, algorithms, etc.) and thus it was associated by students with novel concepts they struggle with and not with solving practical problems. A typical example is the SICP book. It's great, but mostly CS and mathematics oriented -> the result is that the feedback is mixed.
> especially if spreaded by trustworthy organizations

They not only spread, but they also create them. Media nowadays is in a pretty blatant exercise of framing conversations and not mentioning contrarian evidence for the agenda they are, most of the times very clearly, trying to push.

I always say the same. If you see a news piece that stinks propaganda, follow the author and go through his history or his twitter. Most of the times you'll discover a guy who has no shame, has not even the slightest intention of bringing you a reality that you have no direct experience of, and giving you the clues of what might be the truth.

An this people many times is not working for a no-name organization, but the WSJ, NYT, BBC, you name it.

In Spain this is so blatant and palpable that makes most media basically worthless. You're just reading opinions on events that they may not even made the exercise to check some sources or talk to somebody who has direct experience about. You have to look for who's the author and filter around it. Know their names. There's no other way around it.

IMO we are not even talking about bias here, it's like because journalists told themselves that knowing the objetive truth is impossible, then full swing the other way and be lazy, have no objections to blatant propaganda, and so on.

So reading, watching or hearing them is only useful as an exercise of know what they want people to think about. If you want to have any insight you really need to filter through names, and if you're lucky reach specialized media, which tends to be another totally different story, because obviously people who has direct experience of something is way harder to convince of some BS.

Edit: This may be useful for some people. I decided to use a custom CSS extension to highlight the authors that I did the painful process of checking their background and analyzer their reports. I can't do for everyone but it improved my experience in a few news sites, since remembering all names is difficult.
The idea of program as an interpreter of an input stream of instructions seems very intuitive to me.

On the other hand pure functional programming with all those monads IO monad hacks doesn't even seem to map to what we are trying to use computers for.

I would go as far as saying that not only functional paradigm but also Turing machines and lambda calculus are inadequate mathematical models for how we are using computers. In those computational models the computation is bounded - it converts a set of inputs to a result and then dies until somebody runs it again.

Most modern applications of computers are unbounded computations. The machine reads an input stream (eg. keystrokes and mose clicks) and produces another stream od outputs (such as instructions to modify pixels on a screen).
Ai is hardly hyper inflated. Everything from your phone to cars to planes use ai and machine learning one way or the other.
There were several widgets I used a lot - a fab BBC radio widget rage let me listen to radio channels (bring up the UI instantly and then dismiss) same for a widget that controlled my MAMP servers and a web clipping of a page showing the status of various systems I monitored
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21997642 - with comments by Alan Kay and an old friend of Gary's.
IMO that really is the point of weapons at the end of the day: to scare your enemies into giving up some resource. Any damage caused is only to remind them that they should be scared.
Work Remotely as Quality Assurance Engineer at Spire Systems Company – Apply Now
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_feedback

Hopefully this loop is starting.
Production code likely should use neither double for currency nor LocalDateTime for a point in time.

But for the purpose of the article, which is about Records being a new type of Java class, this is kind of irrelevant.
It appears that The Boring Company uses both off-the-shelf TBMs and their own designs (and, I think, also a customized off-the-shelf TBM). It would be interesting to learn which one they used here.
In matters of layman discussion, would you trust their input more than someone with no formal education in physics?

To go with a more practical example, say a news report comes out that some new exercise called joopies are better than burpees. Then say someone with a B.S. in Exercise Science says the article is wrong and says burpees are better than joopies. Without either peer reviewed research nor an expert with a Ph.D. (or other doctorate) to weigh in on the issue, would you think that joopies are better, that burpees are better, or that you don't have enough evidence to decide either are better.

And if you would recommend the third option as a matter of course, would the same hold true if we replace joopies with staring at a clock?
That would limit your resolution to the resolution of a LCD panel. Also just not how cameras work
The Chinese room isn't doing translation, I don't understand why you bring it up. It takes input in Chinese and responds in Chinese.

Also the Chinese room would express emotions, do word games etc, whatever's appropriate in the context. The people doing the lookups wouldn't know that they are writing a joke, but who cares about them?

> This is assuming the brain is doing math.

Well of course brain is doing math, see: 234-123=111 - this is math, my brain did this.

> Even deeper than that, it's assuming that math is something more than a specialized human language

If neurons arriving at solutions to math problems consciously is math, then why neurons arriving at these same solutions subconsciously isn't?