skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thank you for replying! It is good to hear from other people who really understand!

It's hard sometimes, because even people who are sympathetic and want to help just sometimes really don't understand.

It's like "I know I'm not dying. That doesn't have any bearing on the fact that I'm currently having a massive panic over feeling like I'm dying!"

It's been 15 years since that first attack, now. I still have a few every year -- and things that used to scare me a bit sometimes now break me unexpectedly. I've just learned not to be too embarrassed by it, and I've learned how to explain it to whoever happens to be with me when I melt down, and I've learned (through experience) that those feelings are just my anxiety, and not impending doom.

Most people who know me well know about my anxiety, but if you let me casually, you wouldn't know.

Except when I get sick, I function quite well these days. When I had what I still think was the coronavirus back in February, I became a wreck again, (symptoms of shortness of breath are probably the top trigger, since they'll start the anxiety, which then makes the breathing worse, which is the anxiety spiral all over again) but I recovered after two weeks, and am actually holding up well in my locked-down world.

I was probably no fun to talk to during my illness, so I owe thanks to all my friends who listened to my panicked whining for two solid weeks
That's really it: you can grab all the code and schems from there. There was a community but it shut down when the FAA regs about drones >250grams came out.
I basically agree with the points.

Ironically, the first point makes me realize that half the work to bring in a product in an entreprise is to deploy and set it up -properly with authentication- while the other half is to get the budget and approvals to buy it. Thus it's rather relevant to the thread in an unfortunate way.
Right. Except for all this fanfare. Why is it necessary to celebrate the writing of two papers like this?
You're 100% right that Cortex is designed for the production use-case. A lot of our users are running Cortex for "small" production use cases, since the Cortex cluster can include just a single EC2 instance for model serving (autoscaling allows deployed APIs to scale down to 1 replica). For ML use-cases that don't need an API (a lot of data analysis work, for example), Cortex is probably overkill.

As for your second question, we definitely want to integrate tightly with version control systems. Since right now we are 100% open source and don't offer a manged service, we don't have a place to run the webook listeners. That said, most of our users version control their code/configuration (we do that with our examples as well: https://github.com/cortexlabs/cortex/examples), and it should be straightforward to integrate Cortex into an existing CI/CD workflow; the Cortex CLI just needs to be installed, and then running `cortex deploy` with the updated code/configuration will trigger a rolling update.

If you're referring to version control for the actual model files, Cortex is un-opinionated as to where those hosted, so long as they can be accessed by your Predictor (what we call the Python file that initializes your model and serves predictions). If you're interested in implementing version control with your models, I'd recommend checking out DVC.
>It's just bizarre to watch how once unassailable Intel is totally floundering in multiple aspects of their main business.

Isn't this just history repeating itself though? We could easily replace "Intel" with any number of previous market leaders that have fallen by the wayside.
Would the following be a correct way to determine whether there's a problem?

* First call setlocale(LC_CTYPE, "en_US.UTF-8")

* Next feed the UTF-8 string representation of every Unicode codepoint one at a time to mbstowcs() and ensure that the output for each is a wchar_t string of length one

* If all input codepoints numerically match the output wchar_t UTF-32 code units, then the implementation is officially good, and should define __STDC_ISO_10646__?
To keep the ponzi going
LET'S GO BACK TO 6-BITS
My website runs contemporary Debian on a 128MB VM. You don't need special measures to run in 256MB.
That's fair, I only know what happened at Stanford. Side note to anyone reading this: don't go to the sleep clinic at Stanford. If your doctor refers to there, ask for another referral. There's a reason they have 1.5 stars on Yelp...

And I totally agree about the CPAP – any morning after I accidentally take it off in my sleep (pretty rare, but happens especially as the seasons change), I feel like absolute garbage. It's amazing what actually breathing through the night can do for you.
The headline switches from singular to plural halfway through.

I love this idea though. The manufacturers should get onboard with “emergency BiPAP” mode to make this happen without users having to do an elaborate hack.
Many antique computers are simulated by SIMH. If you have the corresponding software, you can operate on your desktop a simulated computer's software development system. For example, DEC VAX (VMS or Unix) has a relatively simple and sane assembly language.
What's std::array then?

> combines the performance and accessibility of a C-style array with the benefits of a standard container, such as knowing its own size

https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/container/array
ASCII doesn't have a direct representation of all the punctuation used in English print, like 66 99 quotes, and different kinds of dashes (distinct from minus). For non-print, it's entirely fine.

Typesetting should be handled by a markup language anyway. Adding a few characters to Notepad doesn't create a typesetting system. A typesetting system needs to be able to do kerning, ligatures, justification. Not to mention bold, italics, and different fonts.
Not if you go broke on your first or second hand. Most of us only have enough cash to play one or two hands. If you're the son/daughter of a million/billionaire though, you get to play way more hands, and thus have a much better chance of being successful.

Talent doesn't increase surface area, it increases the probability of success. Wealth is the only thing that can increase surface area. See the problem here?
If someone came up to me and said, "there are integer fingers in one hand" I would be the opposite of confused.
Same. I liked that GitHub really nudged you to be open unless you were willing to pay to keep it closed (well, sure, you can go ahead and setup your own server or find a competitor you like, but in the base form, if you want to be part of the ecosystem, be open) and am wondering just how many student projects are now staying behind locked doors because GitHub wants to catch bigger fish.

Not saying they're a philanthropic organisation that should promote open source to the kids or anything, just agreeing about an almost certain side effect.
Hah, honestly I think I replied to the wrong thing.
Sure, it wont be portable between any architectures, but a lot of times you know you will be on a little endian platform where types are aligned to their sizeofs. That covers a lot of ground and the performance gains you get from optimizing with this in mind is significant. There is value in C being able to be portable, but there is also a huge value in being able to write non-portable code that takes advantage of what you know about the platform. C needs to acknowledge that that is a legitimate use case.
I've had to coach a couple people in situations similar to yours on this. Similar input to boltzmannbrain -

Spend 5-10 minutes before important meetings reviewing the content to be discussed and determining if there items that need to be discussed, resolved, or that you feel you have expertise on. Write down what you can add to these points or questions that you have. Before the end of the meeting, look at your list. Are there unresolved points on there still? If so, say something like, "before we end the meeting, I have a couple quick topics" then state them.

During the meeting, specifically listen for topics on which you have expertise and either 1) write down your input if you're too shy to speak during the discussion (or if the person running the meeting sucks and lets some people dominate the conversation/isn't inclusive) and share them via the method above, or 2) add your input during the team discussion.

If the meeting organizer asks for team input and you have something to add, just say it. You don't have to wait for someone to call you out by name. It's also OK to disagree as long as you do it tactfully.

In some cases, your team and/or manager will not be good about inclusion and you might need to talk to someone about this to create more opportunities for you to contribute during meetings. Running meetings effectively is a skill like anything else, and a lot of organizers aren't all that good at it. If you find you're never asked for your opinion or, more commonly, interrupted and/or ignored by other people in the meeting, talk to your manager or mentor about this and see if they can help modify team behavior to be more inclusive.
It's true that regions are different, but I don't see how that translates. Can you be specific? How would a plan for Queens County, NY differ from one for Waukesha WI, except in trivial stuff like dates?

Some outbreaks are smaller, but you'll note that they all leveled off at roughly the same time and on the same schedule. That's because we locked down on "New York's schedule"[1]. If we didn't, these places which seem to have "handled" the outbreak would look like New York.

The plans should absolutely be regional in that the lockdown rules should be based on infection rate thresholds, etc... But to do that they all need exactly the same per-capita testing resources. It's the same plan.

[1] Really that's not true. We locked down on Seattle's schedule, because they moved first on most things. Seattle had by far the biggest early outbreak, but peaked earlier, peaked lower, and is now one of the better managed areas in the country. Cuomo gets all the attention but it's really Jay Inslee who saved us all.
> Tiny messages get beaconed out and the phone that is listening has a hardware filter so it only wakes the phone in the background if a beacon with the matching ID comes in.

Can anyone explain what a "hardware filter" is in this context, please?
The ability of the infant brain to pick up as many languages as surround it is a testament to its incredible plasticity, not an indicator that it's "easy".

If you doubt that, good luck becoming even halfway productive[0] with a second natural language as an adult in anything close to the amount of time it takes to become productive with a second programming language.

0. Productive, while a fairly weird word choice, can here be taken to mean "able to consistently engage in and with non-trivial communication" the way that productive in a programming language can be taken to mean the same for non-trivial features and tasks.
Acquiring luck is a skill on its own, please see my meditation:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06XKPJ9ZY
Gotta use the 1000 Swiss franc bills.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22855600

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22230168
Looks cool, it's great to have another good open source ready-to-fly option.

I have some concerns about larger PCB quadcopter designs because I can imagine that fatigue due to flexing on the PCB over long-term use could cause issues with the PCB delaminating or solder joints failing. On the ArduBee particularly, you can see a lot of surface-mount components mounted on the arms. I'd love to read more about any lifetime testing they've done on the PCB.

Of course there's always the risk of just crashing your drone and breaking it, but that's no different than other drone designs!
Django + Turbolinks + Stimulus.js (also by basecamp, intentionally works great with turbolinks) is my goto nowadays.
Wouldn't the delay of feedback result in more conservative changes? If we're detecting the peak with a delayed measurement, then the instantaneous measurement would be even further past the peak.
It's more like a $2xx,000–$4xx,000 paycheck…
Why is the April section of the "removal of intervention" curve below the "with intervention" curve? Particularly since there are actual "hospitalizations" data points plotted along the former?
> For example, his "emulation cones" are a new name for a very old and extremely well-studied idea. The term "rulial space", similarly, is a new name for an idea that's well-developed in programming language theory.

What are the names for these old, well-studied things in programming language theory, so we can look them up?
> Among the many many many red flags, Wolfram claims to have discovered that complexity can emerge from simple rules in the early 80's

Total red flag. His obsession with this - though - does not seem ill placed. As far as smell tests go, I think this thread is worth pulling.
He had luck + skill, but he would not be successful if he did not start with wealth, from his rich father.
Problem is the travel between counties, at least in CA. There's a lot of travel that could cause reinfection.
I'm a big fan of Gerard t' Hooft's Cellular Automata Interpretation. Most of the things described by Wolfram were already there, in fact, I would argue that most of the things with strict connection to real physics were already described by Gerard t' Hooft in a similar manner (energy and momentum interpretations are very similar)

However, they are different in that Gerard t'Hooft has a single ontic state where Wolfram has branching from undeterministic applications of rules. I'm not sure how Wolfram can derive unitary evolution.

The graph rewriting is cool and novel. I do agree that cellular automata are somewhat limited. Their most obvious limitation is having Manhattan distance. 4 or 8 directions to move through in lower level is something that effects large scale. But most of the models wolfram proposes still produce some grid-like structure, and in some sense his visualization is misleading.
The L3 is split per core? I thought it was only typically L1 cache that was per core, with L2 and L3 being shared across the entire die.
Ok, thanks for the additional context. Was there any mention of actual targets for these things? Ex. "I'd like to see a 10% reduction of hospitalizations and at least 1M tests."
A better way to contact trace
When David and I are done revising the proposal, we would like to send you a copy. If you would be interested in reviewing, can you please let us know how to get in touch with you? David and I can be reached at {svoboda,weklieber}
@ cert.org.

>once you have the heterogeneous operations, is there any reason to keep the others around

The two-argument form is shorter, but perhaps that isn't a strong enough reason to keep it. Also, requiring a redundant 3rd argument can provide an opportunity for mistakes to happen if it gets out of sync with the type of first two arguments.

As for the non-generic functions (e.g., ckd_int_add, ckd_ulong_add, etc.), we are considering removing them in favor of having only the generic function-like macros.
Yeah, we do know that. Or a reasonable amount of information as to approximate 'know'. This specific topic is about the possible use of a very real potential backdoor in software that a company wants people to download, though.
Five-eyes exploiting infra and pressuring service providers to share info is not as germane to the discussion as the likelihood of the CPC interfering in software that can be argued to be well under their control.

Distrusting Google for their cooperation with government spying in no way precludes avoiding or criticizing Riot's software choices due to the risk and known behaviors of China's government.
I'd argue for some standard tests for UTF-8 strings:

- Basic - UTF-8 byte syntax correct.

- Unambiguous - similar to the rules for Unicode domain names. The rules are complicated, but basically they prohibit homoglyphs, mixing glyphs from different character sets, forwards and backwards modifiers in the same string, no emoji or modifiers, etc. Use where people have to visually compare two things for identity or retype them, such as file names.

- Unambiguous, light version - as above, but allow emoji and modifiers. Normal form for documents.
The YAML configuration is something I have to learn that provides no value-add outside of GitHub. If it was at least based on Docker, you could re-use existing technical knowledge or teach people something that's valuable in other contexts.
A grocery store is a "market" and yet it never has been and never will be a "free market" in the idealized sense. You know, everybody knows, that it isn't some sort of free-for-all with product placement on the shelves, right?

The store is competing with other stores, but the management determines what to do within the store without either voting or unregulated competition.
Racket News – Issue 29
m5stack, the company which puts esp32 and esp8266 into nice boxes has recently teased a m5stack atom drone (atomfly).

https://twitter.com/M5Stack/status/1244209693045567488?s=20

the m5stack atom is a little esp32 in a box.

https://m5stack.com/products/atom-lite-esp32-development-kit...
Yup, it’s good, I use it with the recently introduced WebAuthN support although it would be nice if it supported passwordless/usernameless login with resident keys
I for one, went ahead and signed up!
My favorite line so far. Opening up areas of the country in an uncoordinated fashion is like having a peeing section in a pool...
> on-prem
You can also buy them used, which is perfectly legal.

Insurance is nice because they pay for the supplies (some of which are supposed to be replaced pretty frequently). However, I've found that it's pretty easy to stretch the life of any component, as long as you clean it thoroughly each day.
They did great with Yahoo Japan. Also they pressured the government into guaranteed solar energy purchase rates and they built huge solar farms after the 3/11 Fukushima event.

How did their Sprint investment eventually turn out?
Github donated the money ICE paid them to charities that are directly counteracting the bad things ICE is doing.

Isn't that clearly better than just forcing ICE to install Gitlab?
One thing to add to that:

People are not just wildly different in their opinions but also in their demeanor. I used to develop a fairly popular app (GeeTasks), and I had fans in my forums overflowing with enthusiasm for the app and hostility towards an occasional detractor. I would have assumed they were paid to do it, but then I most certainly did not, and I can scarcely imagine that my competitors would.

Having witnessed this first-hand I given up on my formerly impeccable shill-detecting skills.
Not a fraud for the customers, at least in the short term. But I think it made even less sense as a business, so I think it's just as much of a con job for the investors.

Think of it as akin to a Ponzi scheme. Early Ponzi investors do fine. They get paid a real rate of return, and often can even withdraw their money. Does that make it less of a fraud? Nope. It just means the house of cards hasn't collapsed yet.
That right they shouldn't because they engage human rights violations as a matter of policy.
Upstream of Red Hat SSO, Red Hat IdM is the commercial product based on FreeIPA.
> I've just wondered a for a long time why so many official things still done primarily through mail.

Easy. Two reasons: universal service and no standard ID.

If you aren't homeless, you always have a physical address that can be delivered to. A physical address is a piece of the earth than can be proven to exist or not exist, and even audited by various means. "Virtual" services like phones and internet are not universal for many types of people. For a professional, access to the internet or mobile phone is very reliable. For many others, you are one missed payment or reload away from losing that number forever.

No standard ID is the other thing. There's no root of trust for humans, and no good way to link you to who you are. Biometrics are only available for limited use cases (mostly criminal), and almost all forms of "trust" (in the identity sense) are tied to physical locations or events. Your driver's license or passport (if you have them) is linked to the record of your birth, marriage (if your name changes), your place of residence, and one or more bills or other business records.

The system as it is has many flaws, but you can't fix it without a strategy. Getting rid of a service like the mail or monetizing it in a way that spikes the costs undermines many expected parts of life for almost no benefit.
Coronavirus almost brought down the global financial system
There's a compiler attribute in GCC to promise that a function is pure, i.e. free from side effects and only uses its inputs.

This is useful for parallel computations, optimizations and readability, e.g.

sum += f(2);
sum += f(2);

can be optimized to

x = f(2);
sum += x;
sum += x;

Would the current motto of the consortium forbid adding a feature such as marking a function as pure, that would not just promise, but also enforce that no side effects are caused (only local reads/writes, only pure functions may be called), and no inputs except for the function arguments are used?
This looks cool. However, am I the only one that first saw Bullish▲ and thought it was really Bullshi▲, in other words a slightly censored Bullshit? Especially if reading the motto "Buy high sell low" quickly all at once.
I think that sometimes it makes sense to enforce strict limitations early on (eg: overly strict input validation). You can then remove such limitations in later versions of your software, after careful consideration and after inserting the necessary tests. The reverse usually doesn't work. If you didn't have those limitations early on, and your database is full of strings with characters that should never have been allowed in there, you will have a hard time cleaning up the mess.

This seems especially true to me in the design of programming languages. If you have useless, badly thought out features in your programming language, people will begin to rely on them, and you will never be able to get rid of them... So start with a small language, and make it strict. Grow it gradually.
It's possible. Do you have any specific examples?

My experience with forward looking statements has been that people interpret something with many caveats as promises with no caveats.
C++ has features in its syntax so that you can write objects that behave like arrays: support [] indexing via operator [], and can be passed around (according to whatever ownershihp discipline you want: duplication, reference counting). C++ provides such objects in its standard library, such as: std::basic_string<T> and std::vector<T>. There is a newer std::array also.
Are all of the images in https://dave.autonoma.ca/blog/2020/04/30/typesetting-markdow... supposed to be broken?
We've started using Keycloak as a SSO solution for archlinux.org. if you're interested in helping out with Keycloak on an open source project, send me an email!