skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You point the exact problem here.

As a scientist the first test is intuition. The second test is having people getting better with treatment. The third test is conducting a full, deep study with the utmost scientific rigor.

So now there is a dilemna. People die in front of you. You try something. It seems to work. It uses a widely-used set of molecules (Hydroxychloroquine + azythromycine (+Zinc in some protocols). Will you try it, or will you make a double-blind study with half the people at risk of dying ?

History of aviation. People just couldn't believe that it was possible.

http://www.wright-brothers.org/History_Wing/Aviations_Attic/...

"Not wishing to be miserly with his information, Root sent an eye-witness account of what the Wrights were doing to the Scientific American, with a letter telling the editor he was free to use it. But the editor was not to be taken in and made no effort to investigate what Root had dropped into his lap. Though the Scientific American printed in 1905 many articles about flying, nearly all were about devices that maybe ought to be tried."

I don't fail in anything, I just don't need to engage in endless debates about methodology. Half of the studies in psychology fail to replicate. There are problems everywhere in science, because geniuses are still rare and now ostracized because they produce new researched and are judged by lords of the old order. If you scratch hard, you can always find something.

Some people criticize, others just act. The people who create are always going to be the targets of the people who spend their time criticizing.

Now it's time to act. Not pull over waiting for some authority to decide for yourself. The list of publications is here to show that this available treatment doesn't come from a magical hat.
You'd think that! You'd think that about something very simple, too, like door hardware. Eastlake (mid 1800's) style hardware has all these beautiful engravings on knobs, plates, hinges, even little places like the mortise plates that are rarely seen. Surely today in the computer age the doorknobs on half-million dollar homes must be more beautiful than these. But they're not.
Extensive discussion a few days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22707935
If you notice, I'm talking about number of deaths, not the number of cases. I do understand the limitations of confirmed cases stats.
> it was because they didn't understand the need for it

You keep making this claim but unless the person you knew was on the Keynote team I doubt they had any actual insight into the process.

There are a million things you could do. It is important to layout things in priority order. For example, unifying desktop and mobile implementations and file formats so when you do add collaboration features in the future the two can interoperate. Or adding a high-fidelity web experience so people who don't use your apps at all can collaborate. Perhaps those two things are important to get right before adding collaboration?

(Hypothetical, I don't have any knowledge of any of this).
Hi!

This project started with me going through "Writing An Interpreter In Go" (https://interpreterbook.com) and "Writing A Compiler In Go" (https://compilerbook.com) books by Thorsten Ball (however I've decided to implement it in C instead). Later I've decided to continue working on it with the ultimate goal of making an easy to use library out of it - something you can place in your source tree and immediately start tinkering with. I've also expanded upon the Monkey language (https://monkeylang.org) by making it more mutable and adding additional constructs such as loops and modules. A lot of time was spent on making it faster by not allocating memory where possible so it should be reasonably fast (pointers are kept in IEEE double NaN payloads so there's no need for allocating memory when doing numeric computations). It's still work in progress and I expect there to be plenty of undiscovered bugs but it should be quite useful already if you need a drop-in scripting language in your application. The language itself is also quite easy to use with it's C-like syntax and useful error messages.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22692769
You're right, my comment would have been more valuable if I'd included some alternate technologies they could have used instead, but I believe that the criticisms still stand regardless, because the approach itself is in question. You don't find out once you've reached scale that the underpinnings for your distributed KV platform are not actually free of global locks for writes! That's something you verify and test for yourself before building your empire upon it. If an alternative exists, you use it. If not, you need to build it.

To answer your question:

> what would you have picked back in _2011_ when Cloudflare was getting off the ground?

Not only "would have" but did pick and use (well before 2011) an abstraction around SQLite because our team first evaluated our read vs write requirements and found it to be an adequate option rather than going crazy trying to find a nosql solution worthy of including on our resumes.

The Cloudflare article is somewhat skimpy on the details of their benchmark, so these numbers are not an exact equivalent but, here, I just threw this together: https://github.com/mqudsi/sqlite-readers-writers

P99.9 for reads with two writers is 2ms as compared to their 1215ms, and this is with full ACID compliance and write synchronization.

You don't need to be an expert in creating these systems, you just have to be able to test and validate your architectural decisions before building upon them. It takes only an hour or three to pick a library and write a similar benchmark for any KV store you're interested in (although the exact benchmark would have to be tweaked to match your expected needs).

(That said, lmdb is a great choice and I've recommended it here on HN before... except they ended up replicating on top of it a lot of what SQLite provides for free. Their transaction logs are almost like SQLite's WAL which I used in my benchmark, except going with SQLite would have skipped the entire second half of their Quicksilver solution since it they wouldn't need to manually handle transaction logs, split payloads, and manually reassemble to avoid fragmentation.)
Show HN: SQL access to Covid-19 data
There’s a ton of phenomenal efforts to record and post COVID-19 data publicly. The next step is querying and joining across it. In that spirit, my co-founder, Jonathan Mortensen, and I spent the weekend building a way to quickly query and join the COVID-19 data sets with SQL.

Using our tool you can, for example, join the John Hopkin's data set (tracking infections and fatalities) with CovidTracking (testing data). We’re adding in census data and other useful epidemiology reference data, too. That's not been available before! We’re almost to the point where the data sets will update automatically, so you can be sure the data is always fresh. Please check our tool out and give us feedback: https://bit.io/covid

Note that this tool is intended for folks who already know SQL and can connect to us via tools that speak SQL.
If you do not trust people then why did you hire them?
Node-Postgres 8.0.0
Daily Scamming
Because ovpn is not as efficient as wireguard.
Got a link or reference for what you're speaking of?
I had a similar idea on Saturday and wrote a puppeteer based script which monitors Tesco.com and then pushes a screenshot to my phone if it finds a slot: https://github.com/paulmaunders/delivery-slot-bot
Well part of it is having the right five people. They’d need massive experience with scaling websites. But if you know how to wire things up, there’s no reason AWS couldn’t handle it.

If you want to run your own server farm or offer lots of live customer service then the equation changes.
I've been following you since you made your own aerogel.

Now that you're working with thought emporium, are you worried you might one day be replaced with headcheese?
Books, like movies, videogames and often software tools, aren't substitutable. If I like Photoshop, or want to use it because it's popular, I'm unlikely to accept GIMP as a free alternative. If I want to read or watch The Expanse, I'm 100% not going to read some random free e-book or dollar paperback, because that's a different book. You can't substitute Shrek for Star Wars, nor Slime Rancher for Call of Duty.

Commodities don't get pirated. Commodities get market competition.
Oh yeah, by the way, disclosure: Me too. :)
Unfortunately for you, people have been using neutral language to start daily flame-wars and getting away with it.
Show HN: Support Local Business – a donation/giftcard website built for Covid19
I think I overgenerlized this specific point of my OP. Have a look at my response below. How much this is a factor probably depends a lot on the length and intensity of conflict, which is what you allude to here.
How have you figured you are bad at soldering? Have you had training and _even_ then, remained bad at soldering? Or are you, like most of us, just winging it?

I had some soldering lessons from people. But their technique, one way or the other, was flawed in some way.

This is what I suggest: https://www.youtube.com/user/paceworldwide
They started from a new clean-sheet design. You can read about it here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_(microarchitecture)
The biggest supply chain risk?
> Are they merely taking advantage of most places having a skeleton staff

This. Art thieves don't care for conservation, they are just extremely opportunistic. I expect this is just one instance we learnt of, simply because of the author's name being known to the mainstream. There is probably much more stuff getting stolen right now in Italy and Spain, which we won't know about for months or years - or even at all, unless we read specialist media.
Mercedes F1 to make breathing aid
Oh there will be NN coming out of this project...in a manner of speaking.
Maybe there are way more “theaters” than we even know.
Libsquashfs and squashfs-tools-ng 0.9 released
From what I have seen, the single threaded tasks are slightly better on intel but even in this linked article the AMD chips are winning slightly in single threaded. And in multi threaded the AMD CPUs absolutely blow away intel by a huge margin at a lower price.
How do you know small labs are more productive? Are we trying to do science for society or trying to be a jobs program? These two objectives are not necessarily synergistic.
Intel made missteps with their 10nm process, and manufacturing chips in house. Yields for their new process are too low for retail demand. Additionally clock speeds are higher with the more mature 14nm process of Kaby Lake, which is itself a more refined version of Skylake. With low yields, manufacturing is too expensive, and performance isn't much improved, leaving Intel little reason to bring these new chips to market. As a result, they've been refining and refreshing chips since Skylake. Kaby Lake introduced a bump in core count, as a response to AMD's release of their Zen microarchitecture.

AMD overcame these challenges in several ways. They're fabless, choosing to partner with semiconductor manufacturers like TSMC rather than manufacturing chips themselves. TSMC's current 7nm process node is one generation ahead of Intel's 14nm node, roughly on par with Intel's 10nm node. Smaller process means more efficient, and often more performant.

AMD also created a new architecture using a "chiplet" design and an interconnect (Zen), rather than the older monolithic die used by Intel. This increases yields and simplifies manufacturing, while making chips modular. Chiplets containing a number of cores can be combined into a single package to create various SKUs, targeting different market segments.
Excellent engineering management that has figured out a good architecture to re-use a few designs across a number of market segments. Years of investment previously in automated layout that let them iterate more rapidly and migrate from fab to fab as needed. Serious problems with an over ambitious node on the Intel side which resulted in flailing by Intel management.
A song that was constructed to reduce anxiety
There have been many occasions in my life where I've pirated some Adobe product. I was about to do so again a few months ago and was worried about downloading malware until I had the realization: "Wait, I have a job now. I can just buy the software!"

It felt good to give Adobe my money, and I am not certain I would have paid for the product today had I not donned my peg-leg and eyepatch growing up.
That’s an abstract view of value, based entirely upon your own personal views and opinions. The labor is only worth the equilibrium point between what somebody is willing to pay for it, and what remuneration somebody is willing to accept for it. The truth is that for all of these low skilled industries that are seeking pay rises, there is currently an influx of available labor that could fill those positions. If they are not willing to work for that level of pay, there are most certainly others who would be willing to do so. They do not have the power to prevent people from applying for those roles, should they become available. The only card they have to play is to exploit the threat of a temporary disruption to service. They may have some luck exploiting this, but it can only get them so far. It’s also no different from any of the other price gouging that’s often derided here on HN. When huge portions of the population are facing unemployment, there is no reasonable basis for demanding pay rises, especially in low skilled industries, where the labor can be so easily replaced.
I built a new workstation in December, and I like my computers to be as quiet as possible, so I looked for a huge cooler and a top-quality fan.

Reading reviews of coolers and fans was just eye-opening with regards to AMD's recent success. Most reviews proudly mentioned some Ryzen product, and barely any mentioned Intel at all (and most coolers are compatible with both).

I realize that the build-your-own-PC enthusiast represents only a minor fraction of the overall market, but seeing AMD's reputation going from "the budget CPU" to becoming the new Coca-Cola whereas Intel is now Pepsi, all in the span of what, 2 years? was amazing.

The server and laptop markets have other dynamics (a few large buyers, instead of many individuals) and I'm not sure AMD can compete with Intel on these dynamics, but I really wish them success.
> where do we store them? how do we justify the expense?

You either store a large surplus of them in warehouses, or ensure you can rapidly manufacture them even if the world around you goes to hell. That should be the responsibility of governments, and it's one of the main reasons to even have one - a government doesn't have to justify everything in terms of costs, it can evaluate some non-profit metrics like, I don't know, saving lives in case of emergency. Alas, something happened after the Cold War, all western nations went collectively insane, and got rid of most emergency surpluses and any kind of buffer in the system.
Apple's most likely going to move to custom ARM processors for a lot of their laptops.
My gold lies in a foreign land, buried deep beneath the sand.
Likewise Uber. It's a taxi logistics website, but apparently they need 22,000 employees to run it. Drivers not included, of course.
Beginners Guide to Guitar Chord Changes
Another factor usually ignored is the effect on substitutes. That student who can't afford several hundred dollars for Photoshop? Maybe everything they actually need to do can be done with Pixelmator and they could afford the $30 for that. But they pirate Photoshop instead.
Let's just say that I'm more informed than most about this and the most likely scenario is that they are collecting information so they can reach out with job offers to those that come up with novel improvements.
Wars are opportunistically encouraged and joined by psychopaths, of course, though armies often don't want those people because they aren't mission oriented. When they rise in the ranks it can be terrible.

My point is that the majority of people don't "join the dark side"
Hello, and thank you ! Exploring the dependency graph of this paper is a good starter [0]

[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41421-020-0156-0

Yes, you start with molecular studies, then in-vitro, then in-vivo, then in humans, and in the end, sometimes it gives good results, sometimes not.
From ten to about one million. There are major caveats though: The middle volume boards (4-5 figures) were far more complex mixed signal boards with 10-20 layers and clock speeds ranging from several hundred Mhz for RAM busses to 1 ghz for MIPI to 2-50ghz for radios. Those projects had special needs and required quite a bit more manpower during the fabrication stage for layer alignment and in the assembly stage for tuning, since they exploited some nonlinearities in different components for high precision synchronization.

The large volume boards (6-7 figures) where consumer electronics focused and extremely price sensitive so the combined savings from colocation of fab and assembly were often significantly more than any savings automation or logistics in the United States, especially accounting for risk.
As far as I understand the mentalitet there, you don't have to worry too much.
Hmm. I dunno, I think there's something to three specifically. One is singular; AFAIK two (and any even number) has a symmetry; so three is the smallest number of things you can have in a set and have it be a set, instead of a unity or symmetry.
While you're correct about the social conditioning, I think it's a ecosystem sort of feedback loop. "Real men dont need shelters" so then we dont make them. So then when men need shelters they think "See? Other men dont need them, I must suck it up and be a realmens"
I hope Big Tech isn't writing the regulations, which it is already attempting to do (https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/ne...). This is one of the easiest ways to burden startups that do not have the resources to comply with regulations written by and for Facebook, etc.
>A good example would be all the money spent trying to find a cure for baldness. Imagine if the funds were directed elsewhere if there weren't so many people willing to spend money curing baldness.

Both of the currently approved drugs for baldness -- finasteride and minoxidil -- were originally designed for other purposes: BPH and ulcers respectively. The actual research effort spent to find a "cure for baldness" is not that large. Plus, androgenetic alopecia is a likely symptom of prediabetes[1,2]; to that end, "high consumption of fresh vegetables" has been found to reduce the risk by more than half[3] and so research on baldness is not necessarily about hair loss per se.

1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5073072/

2: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6340244/

3: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00403-017-1799-z
Big fan of Thinkpad. My 2017 MBP died (again) a few weeks ago and I can’t get it respired due to travel restrictions. So I took out my old T420 and loaded Linux. Forced to use it for a few days and have to say I like it a LOT. It’s bulkier and the screen is no where near as good. But it has 16GB RAM, the keyboard is amazing, it feels solid and I have USBs. I still occasionally use OSX on a 2010 Mac mini but recognise I’m not missing the Apple ecosystem at all. Quite a liberating feeling as I thought I was fully tied to it.
What makes healthcare.gov so complicated that 4 people can't handle it?

Less is more in software. Some of the best software ever written was written by one person (or a very small team). The more people you add to a project the less cohesive the code base becomes and the fewer people there are that can see the big picture.
These reviews look great for the 35/45w TDP chips. I can’t wait to see what the 15w (Ryzen 7 4800u) chips that would go in an XPS13 look like when they are released
>I've also seen, repeatedly, that most biologists (both wet-lab and computational) will just waste more money rather than using it to scale up productivity.

While I agree to an extent, it's not necessarily possible to 'scale up'. I helped run a project off around $40,000 of grant money. Our goals were research and education. About half went to pay my coworker and I about $15/h, another large chunk went to gas. The rest went to equipment and stuff. We couldn't charge for anything, we had no product to sell. We made brochures and buttons we gave out by donation, our work was in no way marketable. We had to justify everything we did by proving the value of the animals we were studying to agriculture.

There's a ton of scientific research that isn't directly valuable in the short term. Especially when it comes to biology. As it is, much of the work is just gathering data because we have painfully limited knowledge of our ecosystems. But the more we learn, the more we understand how important they are for the long term functioning of the planet.

It's exceedingly difficult convince a logging company or an oil company, the government they bribe, or the public in general that caring about the long term gains of researching these things should come before the short term gains of exploiting them. At least in my experience.
> By the late 1870s, scientists learned about bacteria.

Bacteria had been discovered in the 17th Century, the moment the microscope was invented. I think by Robert Hooke, but I could have misremembered that.

What was new in the 1870s was the germ theory of disease.
by who can pay?
Back when <insert-SQL-database-vendor's-name-here> "Forms" SDK's and tools where the way that data-centric applications were developed, do you think there was any consensus on naming and components?

You might have been able to leverage some conceptual knowledge from Oracle's tools to the ones associated with Postgres, but everything was different at the syntactic level.

When <insert-software-development-corp-here>'s GUI toolkit were the way that data-centric applications were developed,do you think there was any consensus on naming and components? Not all. People using MS GUI tools would flounder amidst Cocoa, and vice versa. Qt users would have to constantly read the GTK manual, and vice versa.

You might have been able to leverage some conceptual knowledge from one vendor's tools to the ones associated with another's, but everything was different at the syntactic level.

It might be a good idea to settle on some "global" definitions and components, but that hasn't happened before, and I can't see any particular reason it will happen for applications developed around the web platform.
This division isn't unexpected. Compare the Mac OS toolbox and the Windows API for UI elements. UI's widget toolkits are built atop the graphics and input APIs below them and tend to end up tightly interwoven (and the projects that attempt to provide a spanning set of widgets across different graphics / input UIs seem to tend to end up looking like a lowest-common-denominator solution with the clock rolled all the way back to the late '80s / early '90s concept of what "good UI" looks like).
It might be wrong, but it also might be right.

>any significant breakthrough in biology tends to make vast swaths of medical science irrelevant and in a sense a waste of money

But most research in pure biology is irrelevant. So you're effectively mistaking a type II error for a type I error in your argument.
It’s like I am reading the rough draft script for Office Space 2