skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Would it make sense to scrap the planned particle accelerator, and instead give $1 million to every person who actually understands the Standard Model and current research to devote their lives to something else?

No. That's just the talk of some "theorists." In reality, before any new discovery is made, there have to be some useful measurements that go beyond previous limits. To learn anything fundamentally new, we have to have new measurements. It's as simple as that.

There is a whole bunch of people/interest groups that try to sell the public that the basic research (as in experiments) is not needed. Unfortunately, they get a kind of support from some theorists that raise doubt in most of big investments in experiments (including particle experiments). But such arguments are very biased, when not plainly deceiving.

Whatever the limits to our measurements are now, they are at the same time the limit of what we can know. Investing more in pushing the boundaries is always something worth doing, and that includes doing further experiments with newer accelerators.

Moreover, at the time the technologies are first time developed, nobody can promise you that they will be used for the benefit of people. But they are used exactly so, often using them in totally unexpected way.

Take as an example MR scanners -- the complex super strong magnets, in the style as they were earlier used in the accelerators, actually change the orientation of the molecules in your body, and we can measure all that and actually diagnose the diseases.

Or take PET scanners: the substances given to the patients before these scans are actually produced in the cyclotrons. Do you think first cyclotron (also physics) researches could even dream that such devices will be used to help diagnose cancers?

http://www.bccancer.bc.ca/our-services/services/pet-function...

I can go on and on.

No theory can replace experiments. We need all the experiments we can do, and all that could go beyond the current limits.

Want the example from computer-related areas? All the modern achievements in AI came from the possibility to process more data, much faster. It was again pushing the limits, and that was simply necessary to move anything. Correpsonding software development under the limits of, for example, eighties technologies would not bring us to that what we have now. It's always about achieving the new limits. Theory for the sake of theory, without the experiments and practical implementation simply can't make the breakthroughs achievable by reaching new limits.
Have you ever bought something?
I'd say we should cross that bridge when we get to it.
So I was one of the first people on WSB to post options YOLO around 2015, back then it was nothing but rainbow dick banners and penny stocks. I had previously interned at a brokerage and had just graduated college with a degree in physics(I understood the math behind options). Not hearing back from quant trading firms because I guess BSc is not enough for them, I said fuck it and started taking speculative bets on my own, lost half before I went all in on what I believed to be a fraudulent stock that was getting crushed, bought really far OTM weekly puts and was lucky that the CEOs collateral was liquidated which further tanked the stock. I then just bought AMD SQ when it IPOd and put the rest into ETFs and only traded small amounts on options the side. Just funny to see how far people ran with it. I tried warning people that while I wasn't a "pro" and I was playing up a degenerate trader/4chan character I was aware of the risk I was taking but we know how that turned out.
A 3 MW wind turbine producing at 30% capacity factor generates

3000 * 0.3 * 24 * 365 = 7,884,000 kWh per year.

4 trillion kWh annually would require

(4 * 10^12) / 7884000 = 507,357 turbines

Not 3.5 billion.
So your theory is that they're terrible traders, and your evidence is that they made huge profits on call options?
Would Apple or Google be able to get a backdoor to Signal?
Edit: nevermind, I think I understand what you're suggesting.
Remote Code Execution via McAfee WebAdvisor
Should have used Kubernetes on GCP or AWS, next time own your own infrastructure.
Bulma user here. I tried tailwind but it never works for me but the Bulma another hand it works perfectly well.
This is trickling down to failed deploys on my end.
These UIs look great! Does anyone have any great resources, examples, where one could learn CSS/SCSS to create stuff like this. I know CSS/SCSS enough to edit existing codebases and tweek, but I would not be able to create these from scratch. I would love to improve my design skills.
Effective change requires shifting the system. Personal choices for coffee cups, cars, etc are largely irrelevant besides wrangling your own guilt.

A actual change needed for airlines is to tax airlines at the cost of emissions and pollution they produce and have produced historically. This can be analyzed down to the supply chain level - how much does it cost to build, how much pollution is produced in the process. How much wetlands have been damaged by airfields, etc.
While I agree with your point, if you're going to critique law enforcement this only goes halfway:

In the US, the idea of the publicly funded law enforcement officer can trace its lineage back to antebellum slave catchers.

Much like they now (and forever) frame any perceived difficulty as preventing them from doing their job, they've successfully re-framed their role in society as protecting and serving (people) instead of protecting and serving (property rights), despite that obviously not being the case.
So I was one of the first people on Wallstreetbets to post options YOLO around 2015, back then it was nothing but rainbow dick banners and penny stocks. I had previously interned at a brokerage and had just graduated college with a degree in physics(I understood the math behind options). Not hearing back from quant trading firms because I guess BSc is not enough for them, I said fuck it and started taking speculative bets on my own, lost half before I went all in on what I believed to be a fraudulent stock that was getting crushed, bought really far OTM weekly puts and was lucky that the CEOs collateral was liquidated which further tanked the stock. I then just bought AMD SQ when it IPOd and put the rest into ETFs and only traded small amounts on options the side. Just funny to see how far people ran with it. I tried warning people that while I wasn't a "pro" and I was playing up a degenerate trader/4chan character I was aware of the risk I was taking but we know how that turned out.
If your immune system was able to beat it once, it is primed to quickly take it out the second time (probably before you even have symptoms.)

This is the entire premise behind vaccinations.

Regrettably, some viruses-- such as flu -- come in several different strains during a season; an immunity to one may not result in an immunity to another (but, an immunity to any strain of influenza seems to limit the severity of infection with other strains.) And some illnesses -- such a the common-cold -- are caused by several totally different viruses; an immunity to one doesn't make you immune to the 200+ other types of viruses that give you "the cold."

But, I've seen nothing to date indicating there are numerous COVID-19 strain floating around. That would be unusual.
Obviously these conversations are from the perspective of future archaeologists
> Secret Weapon

How secret can it be if an article interviewing insiders reveals it?

This smells of puff piece marketing nonsense.
MongoDB is a an actual for-profit company, so of course it has marketing. CouchDB is an open source apache project. You are comparing apples to oranges.
In the book "The Pleasures of Reading in an Age of Distraction", by Alan Jacobs, he advocates reading "at Whim". It was a welcome antidote to the notion that one ought read a lot and read "great" books. It's a good, quick read that will give some thought-provoking ideas about the reading life.
Media Detox – reducing the amount of useless Information you consume
This is a world where (at least it seems to me) the same people are against net neutrality legislation but want the government to regulate Facebook. By the time you get into the nuances of why the tech companies support encryption in some cases, you've lost the PR game.
Three things intrigue me about this:

1) why did they release this today? They've had time to clean it (that door is spotless on the inside), and to wire in electrics [or they were there and this is a fraud] -- so why today, what's happening that they're keeping out of the news ... (it happens, witness Boris's "bus collection" story).

2) who in this day and age installs brass light switches, where did they even buy that switch this week (presumably this week, or how long have they been sitting on it)?

3) does Parliament really need it's own locksmith, or do they mean they booked their regular locksmith to come?

Anyway, nice little puff piece.
unless you already know what you're doing (ie, not me), it's hard to tell the solid investment advice from intelligent-sounding bs. in general, it serves as a good example of what not to do.
Has anyone here tried to use couchdb directly within an elixir/erlang OTP application? As like, „mix install“? Would kill for couchdb as a library!
Google has a donation matching program of up to $6K per year. E.g. if I donate $6K Google will match $6K so my total impact is $12K. There's some kind of vetting process but I've never had a problem with it (i.e. every organization that I've wanted to donate to has been eligible for the donation matching program). I'm curious to hear if all of your companies have similar programs.
Why meteoroids explode before they reach Earth
I wished i knew how to do this.
Congratulations on building your time machine. And welcome to 2020. 165kb is nothing these days and only takes a fraction of a second to download and processes even on a slow computer. You're going to find all kinds of other cool cool stuff you didn't have in the 90's. Did you know you can build and deploy an entire application without ever running a compiler or touching a physical machine now? We have REPLs were you can interact with your application live, in real time. It is a really amazing time to be building software now. So, again, welcome.
Well, it depends on what "the space" is. Every set of vectors (in a common ambient space) spans some space—often called the column space of a matrix, if they are the column vectors of the matrix.
> I would also add my experience is that the people are great. It's not get rich quick, so the people here are driven mostly by mission and interesting problems, which leads to a generally high level of positivity.

This is a great point and I've found this as well, even if the mission drive is not there, others are just glad to be working on something that isn't one way or another selling ads and grounded in the real world (sun/wind/energy) so makes for a great group of people.
Do these come as custom element ? Just wanna abstract away and deal with higher level UI elems.
It's perfectly reasonable to read a quarter/fifth of a book and decide that you don't like the style, premise or whatever. Sometimes I persevere and enjoy the book after all but perhaps that's just acclimatisation.

People who walk out of films, though...
Nope his theory is that most trading is algos, and you can mess with algos, by doing crazy stuff.
That's the whole point. Wheels = $550, Wheels + Lock will soon equal $799+

Apple deliberately does this nonsense to later improve it later only for them to sell it at a higher price. You're the bigger fool for buying the first version of a new form factor, which is always a red flag in Apple products.
> for the most part talented people want to work on something they find meaningful

Which in most cases is not economically viable so you have talent that gravitates towards maximizing total comp to achieve financial independence
I've heard this argument a few times, and I don't think it passes legal muster. A computer is much more analogous to a fancy paper notebook than a part of your brain.
Wikipedia says chloroquine is 'a quinine' - is the only joke that the amount in tonic water isn't enough to have the desired effect?

That is (historically) why it's there (and called 'tonic') after all, for malaria, which is also mentioned as a use on the chloroquine page.
> Anyhow, I disagree with that top-down approach, which seems to be very... European. I much prefer to follow a more logical path where the problem preclude the introduction to the solution.

I agree that it's easier to learn that way, but it's not much use when solving real-world problems; you can learn the techniques relevant to the solution once you know what they are, but, if you haven't met them before, you won't recognise that they're the right ones.
I could totally write the main races involved here (and I do when speaking in public) but no only this would triggers too much people, it’s also wrong to generalize a situation in two words, especially in an international place were readers don’t have the background about the situation nor the linguistics abilitiy to acquire it.

Moreover, plenty of non-White French are integrated in the national community because they speak French, they eat our foods, think mostly like us, and follow our laws and traditions or at least don’t spit on them openly. So, it’s unfair to them to put them in same bag by throwing around anathema based on ethnical background.

On the other side, there is a visible portion (about 10%) that openly hate France, its culture and its people. They routinely kill people for religious matter, degrade churches (one every two days per Vatican numbers), harass women in the street, physically attack people often in gang (120 daily knife aggression countrywide), do thefts, etc. All the crimes listed here are like 80%+ committed by people with visible foreign origin. But sure, stating an opinion is the real problem, while aggressing people for being White or non-Muslim is totally not racism...

PS: and before someone come with "you read too much the news", I have numerous stories of female friends being robbed (including one being robbed two times and beat by 3 guys in the same day), and also an acquaintance almost killed in a famous terror attack. Each and every case have been cause by non-White non-Asian people. And of course, not even 1/50th of that ever happened to me or my friends abroad in countries which have a immigration policy that makes sense.
I went through a similar thought process a couple of years ago before starting Feature Upvote.

Until then I had spent too many years on a technically difficult consumer product. It had drained away my life force and my passion for coding.

In my case I decided my next product should be:

- B2B

- target SME's

- a simple CRUD app: a nice UI on top of a simple database schema.

It is a nice business to run. Pleasant customers, simple to maintain and support, and quite lucrative.
I can't answer your question exactly. I came around only after Cocoa was established.

This does make me wonder if the transition from Carbon to Cocoa is analogous though. Win32 comes off as more of a "functional" approach to programming (C) and UWP is looking more object oriented (as to C++). It makes me wonder what kinds of conceptual advantages are being brought on board by moving from win32 to UWP. I think that conceptually I am in favor of the transition, and I'd wager that all the issues that arise are common to a functional to object-oriented transition.

But that real questions: What are the benefits? Is it conceptually easier to grasp thus promoting more developer interaction? Are we expecting speed benefits (are the performance losses expected and in range?) Is it a false dichotomy to only look at Functional vs OO? Maybe a context-oriented data approach is more appropriate?

Dunno.
YC was successful before it was popular.
"If you want to start a company working on a better way to build homes, gene editing, artificial general intelligence, a new education system, or carbon sequestration, you may actually be able to get it funded, even if you don’t have a degree or much experience."

I encourage anyone to give hard startups a shot, but there are tons of PhDs/Postdocs out there who would make amazing founders -- they should make the leap! Often feels to me like recent undergraduates get more encouragement to launch startups than recent PhDs/postdocs -- which is a weird miss especially when it comes to hard startups where PhDs have the advantage of deep understanding of a hard field.
>This was the last straw that made me delete the app and my account entirely a few years ago.

Why not just disable notifications, or just uninstall the app without deleting your account? Facebook can still be of use to you without you being of use to it.

I've long used Facebook only for messaging and managing events because it's an effective and ubiquitous platform for both of these things.
From a support engineer perspective, I found severity levels very helpful. PagerDuty describes it well here: https://response.pagerduty.com/before/severity_levels/

From a developer perspective, I've had a hard time whenever I see the two labels Priority and Severity used together. I find I need to apply some sort of mental kung-fu every time to remind myself what this article is stating. (e.g. Low Priority, High Severity) The reality is, it IS confusing. Kudos to Blue Label Labs for effectively managing it well.

(edited: include an example)
"Here at bleh we've developed a revolutionary method for transmitting your TCP/IP packets on-chain using AI to perform network level flow control."
So an "application" that literally just displays Hello World and no indication of uptime.

Right, I'm convinced.
If the law men have to state a reason for doing a lookup [and get fired if their motivation is nonsense] I wouldn't have a problem with it. If we film people committing crimes we should be able to figure out who they are?
EULA’s can say anything, they are still bound by contract law. That’s generally minimal protection, but it’s still useful.
Once some things are off the menu, people need to work really hard to change things. And, more importantly, violence can be used against those people - I mean throw-them-in-prison type of violence, not more. Just like with freedom - in order to preserve it, you need to, "paradoxically", shut some toxic persons' mouths forcefully (eg. "hate speech").

Yeah, sure, you can philosophise in the most general terms but that's not how you get people and companies stop doing wrong things. You get them when the people/entities who want to re-bring the despicable things back into discussion can be fined / closed / put-in-prison etc.

I don't argue for eco-fascism. But with some things we need to be ruthless, especially in order to be able to carry on our peaceful, understanding and democratic discussions concerning all the other things!
>I'm sorry but that sounds wildly idealistic.

Kinda like "hey urribody, let's build a bunch of solar panels and wind farms, maybe build 3 or 4 nuclear plants too and we'll save the world"?

Or kinda like Y Combinator wanting to turn most of the Sahara into algal pools, where the desalination alone would use more electricity than humans currently produce, have worldwide implications on weather patterns due to the evaporation, and cause considerable impact on the health of the Amazon by drastically reducing how much dust crossed the ocean to fertilize it? http://carbon.ycombinator.com/desert-flooding/
To be fair, mathematics uses = to indicate assignment as well, e.g. for summation limits.
I think most people are pretty good at retroactively creating a narrative around whatever they find themselves doing to imbue it with meaning and purpose.

I think most people do want to work on something meaningful, but few start with the purpose and then pursue that.

Then given the difficulty of actually getting into what you want (either access restrictions via things like admission, the randomness of technical interviews, or the thing you want not being very lucrative) - you're better off doing what you can until you have the money to be free. Unless you can tolerate lots of risk, don't worry that much about having a family, or have some existing family wealth.
Earth has temporarily gained another moon
Enforcement works. Drug use went down from 1990 - 2007. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3787412/
Related from 2016: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12091638
In never-ending war, security experts battle malware, deepfakes, nation-states
Multicluster Kubernetes with Service Mirroring
How would you signal the difference between:

1. We have the wrong .png asset in the database

2. Our entire rendering infrastructure is suspect
If integrity is an issue you can just add a poly1305/ghash tag to the message. They are not encryption algorithms so it is unlikely that they are going to be banned, and just like OTP they are provably secure. In addition they are not difficult to implement (or execute by hand).
and all proprietary
I love the spirit of this, but I'm not sure this reflects reality as well.

There are some examples that come to mind (boom, openai), but I think many more examples that have a different impetus.

The most common successful impetus i.m.o is "tinkering"

Playing, solving something lightly, and realize it's taking off like crazy.

I think this can be a better light to follow, because it removes the pressure of thinking of the excellent idea out of the bat. Just play, show stuff to users, and see where it grows.

Examples of these kind of successes: Facebook, Instagram, Gmail, YCombinator, PG's first startup, etc
I don't mean this to sound snippy, but where would you go? Most non-US countries I'm aware of have even worse restrictions around speech, encryption, and so forth.
That's just the usual title thing: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu.... It's their job to puff it up, ours to puncture it.

We've replaced the title with a representative phrase from the article.
> UI bugs that prevent the user from doing something are medium severity.

But who is "the user"?

Bugs are high severity based on the principle that if we put ourselves into the shoes of a user who is affected, we understand that the user is affected badly.

However, a crashing bug can be such that only a very specific, rare way of using the program makes it happen. Only a tiny minority of the users who are doing something very specific might be affected.

Quite possibly, "the user" might even be actually "the", as in the one and only one who is running into it.

Furthermore, the severity of a crash bug can be mitigated by whether the affected users have a workaround: can they alter their use of the program in some reasonably small way so that their workflow can continue.

> A design flaw in a bridge that could lead to collapse isn't low severity just because I may never cross it.

That's only so because you've made it a requirement that there is a single parameter called "severity" that may be associated with the bridge, which is a reasonable thing to do. But then we have to imagine it from the point of view of the worst case user: the user of the bridge who is on top of it when it collapses. The severity estimate comes from "how bad could it possibly be".

A bridge I've never heard of in some country where I will never set foot that is on the brink of collapse is certainly not of any severity to me.

Furthermore, a bridge that is in such a state can be cordoned off so that nobody may go over or under it. If nobody may use it (other than trespassers who go past the danger signs which inform them that they do so at their own risk) then there is no "worst-case user" (that we rationally care about). In that situation, the bridge's stability issue is no longer of the same severity, even though it is in the same state as before.
As a recipient of emails intended for other people this is exactly how I wish it worked