skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I resent your comment as low effort. This is a rather non-nuanced take on history. What happened, happened. History does not really work like that.

To make it concrete - my great great grandma was born in shtetl, in the pale. She was illiterate, and her village was pogromed often. The revolution allowed her daughter to get some education, and her granddaughter to become a leading civil engineer. For this I am grateful. That being said, I also understand the futile impossibility of even attempting to "what if" history.
"Royal Rose, 39, owner of a tattoo studio in Greeley, Colorado, told Reuters.

Rose said she was reopening her shop after closing a month ago, not because she wants to but because bills are piling up and she feels she has no choice."

I don't think people will be rushing out to get tattoos...
IMO the only way GDPR would have worked the way its advocates hoped is if the enacting statutes created a private right of action. (I don't even know if private rights of action is a thing in the EU.)

In the US some (though not enough) consumer protection or civil right laws expressly grant plaintiffs the right to bring their own lawsuit in court. There are edge conditions depending on the laws or jurisdictions involved. For example, some laws provide a private right of action only if the state agents decline to pursue the case. While other laws may require the plaintiff to give notice to some agencies first.

Otherwise, laws that may look bold on paper become toothless based on inaction by the state agents that must enforce them. In contrast, if a law includes a private right of action and reasonable fee shifting provisions, private attorneys will pick up the slack and then some.

For example, in the US, the medical privacy regime, HIPAA, is considerably weakened by its absence (as far as I know) of a private right of action. For example, if your medical privacy is violated by your HR department or your doctor, you cannot sue under US Federal HIPAA laws, you need to sue under some other law and prove real damages. Note, there may be other laws that cover the same facts, such as, state privacy laws, or the like. And, in some circumstance, proven HIPAA violations may be used as evidence of negligence, or the like, to meet the requirements of the other laws.
When you wanna run for the Whitehouse, you gotta play it safe.
Three UFO videos officially released by the Pentagon
The elderly still need to interact with society. Infected but asymptotic people are even more dangerous to them, because they can still get infected.

If the 22 year old check stand worker at the market goes to a bar and gets COVID-19 and then spreads it to the elderly patron they serve, that's bad.

How can you protect against that?

Also, they are now finding that COVID-19 causes strokes in young people. Those deaths were not counted as COVID related.

We just have no idea how this virus works or what it does to the human body.

Every health official says "stay home". I tend to agree with them.

The solution is not to "open the economy", it's for the government to step in and help people.

Why are we the only country that is begging to reopen? Perhaps it's our social safety net that needs reevaluation, not our lockdown.
I suspect credit cards are serving as the “safety net” for many American families right now.
Audio Recording Setup
For me it's been:

- NewEgg for electronics

- Walmart/Target. You have to be careful with walmart as that they have an open market place

- Aliexpress for assorted small things that I can wait on

- Abebooks (although they're owned by amazon :( ) for used books

- Vitacost (owned by koger) for supplements/vitimins etc

I've gone through 2018, 2019, and 2020 so far without placing a single Amazon order.
IANAL. I imagine a manufacturer would assume liability for an appliance based on an open source design, assuming the design uses a typical open source license that disclaims liability. I'm not aware of a reason why an open source design for a physical product would be different from open source code in this respect. If the manufacturer paid to get the designs reviewed by an engineering firm, maybe they could pass the liability off to the firm for a design defect, depending on their contract?

A lawyer told me once that open source code used in a nuclear project could maintain liability for the original author, but I can't find any evidence to support that. The Paris Convention seems to place strict liability on the nuclear operator with no mention of such an exception.
Weird. I've never went to a camp or hotel with gaurds before.
You've quoted the conclusions, but in the spirit of the STAT article, can you also quote the relevant scientific debate in your article, and what specifically leads to such bold conclusions (e.g. "owe an apology", "wasted time and effort", "statistical error", "screwed up", etc.)?

I skimmed through the article and, because I'm not a statistician, I could not follow what was so blatantly wrong, if we were to charitably assume that the two sets of authors may have different premises or interpretations.

Edit: In the spirit of the STAT article (edit: removed extraneous text), I searched for "Ioannidis Gelman" (the latter being the author of your piece) and found: https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/04/20/feud-over-stanford-co...

> In response, on Sunday, the Stanford study’s authors said they are planning to soon release a detailed appendix that addresses many of the “constructive comments and suggestions” the team has received.

> “This is exactly the way peer-review should work in scientific work, and we are looking forward to engaging with other scholars as we proceed in this important work,” said Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya, professor of medicine at Stanford University, who along with colleague Dr. Eran Bendavid, also assisted with the USC study.

Edit2: I'm not sure if this is the appendix referred to (probably not because the file has an older date in it), but there is a statistical appendix in the cited article: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/suppl/2020/04/17/202...
Water and sewer too.

Copper telephone and electricity are the only two utilities you can count on in the most rural 10% of America.
Stockholm has about 1300 deaths per million (excluding our systematic late reporting) and it's still increasing and no sign of the curve tapering off.

Also, probably the wrong country to praise a capital G God about, but that's just a cultural thing.

(yeah, everyone says it does since a week ago but data is reported late and it has been showing a downward trend the last few days for many weeks, it's not)
> If life isn’t exciting then you may want to change it.

I, like many people, need to exchange my time for a paycheck. During this time I often have to pay close attention to minute details in a text document, and think through implications of design proposals. As much as I enjoy it and feel very fortunate to have such a comfortable and mentally stimulating job, the fact is that it just isn't always going to be exciting. I imagine that dedicating myself to any worthwhile effort over a long period of time would result in many periods during which optimal excitement levels are not achieved.

I'm in the position to already know exactly what my life would be like without coffee, as I grew up Mormon and believed I was personally commanded to not drink coffee or tea by the creator and sustainer of the universe. The result was: I was sleepy at inopportune times. It didn't matter how much sleep I got, or how interested I was in the subject matter. I just got sleepy when I needed to sit still and pay close attention to things. It wasn't ever a huge deal, and I was able to work around it, but that's just how it was. I don't think my sleepiness was particularly unusual or extreme. I just think that humans aren't optimally evolved to sit in math lectures or review intricate documents on a daily schedule.

As soon as I started drinking coffee, there was noticeable improvement. No more than 2 cups per workday. One in the morning, another in the afternoon. My sleepiness all but went away entirely. Ever since then I've been slightly more productive. Like I said, it's not a huge thing, but it's an obvious improvement. If I gave it up as part of some righteous attempt to remove my excitement crutches or whatever, the long term result would simply be: I'd be sleepy more often.
We were on an exponential growth path before. Now we’re not. It’s impossible to prove that an intervention made things not happen, but this is the predicted outcome.
In Canada there are some good options for certain items.

Recording gear: Long & McQuade.

Tools: Lee Valley.

Photo gear: Henry's.

Amazon provides a way for me to avoid Walmart.
They don't want to be beholden to an arbitrary goal they've made in the past - they want to be able to move the goalposts forward or backward and (hopefully) translate the latest advice from experts into actual policy.

I agree with you though - some better expectations-setting would be nice, and probably encourage more people to comply.
Firefox on iOS also works
Deaths per month is not what matters. Its death per infection that matters. And theres no evidence that SF is doing any better in that regard.
It sounds like you're saying it's not easy to calculate and we don't know whether or not it's "doomsday" in scope.
Further, the more invasive might be less effective because less adopted.
In certain parts of the world (tons of Australia, parts of Africa) literally every single building has a solar hot water heater.

They are fantastic in hot climates, and should be littering the roofs in CA, AZ, TX, etc.
Fear mongering? You can literally see the exponential growth just looking at the number of digits in the first column of table 1!
You probably click on thousands of ads on HN :)

The difference between ads on HN and ads elsewhere is relevance. You self select for useful ads by going to HN. Because I regularly search for things that I actually need on Google and youtube, I end up clicking on lots of ads on those platforms too.
I found class components really....wordy binding this to this all the time and lifecycle methods could become kinda wild after a while doing all these checks for a bunch of things...and imo that just trended towards these bulky spaghetti class components / lifecycle methods.
Ransac Algorithm Intuition
There are cases where you need them, but it's relatively rare, they definitely shouldn't be your first choice.

I'm fuzzy on all the current Linux use cases, but do remember one of the main users of rb trees was CFS. It's a neat scheduling algorithm.

Java 8 specifically: HashMap is implemented with linked list chaining. This is already not very performant, but you can only do so much with Java being a reference heavy language. RB trees are used if the bucket chain grows excessively long - so it's addressing an edge case, speeding up some worst case scenarios.

Dense hash tables based on open addressing outperform bucketed chaining. Look also at abseil's swiss table or folly's f14 if you want to see how they've further advanced to take advantage of the hardware.

In general: flat, dense, linear structures are king for performance.
Agreed. A lot of the privacy hullaballoo I read on HN feels like tin-foil-hattery. Who cares what kind of app you have tracking your GPS on your phone, when every surveillance camera in London knows exactly where you have been?

If you want real privacy, it has to come from getting the right privacy aware, privacy understanding, people in power. Anything short of that wont make a whit of difference.
It's a bit of a trope by now, but there is a lot of truth in the common argument that if converting your class component to hooks makes it feel more complicated, you probably had subtle bugs in your class component -- usually an edge case you hadn't bothered to handle. The main quirk of hooks is that it makes problems in your components a lot more visible. I don't view this as a bad thing, but I totally get that it's frustrating.
Are you a small business owner? You seem to have very strong opinions aligned with your take on their point of view, so I'm curious.
Seems that both sides, lock-down-until-proven-safe and stop-all-restrictions-yesterday, at least in the US are more focused on spin than facts.

What we need is an open and honest discussion, where conflicting opinions are not ridiculed or shut down but vigorously debated. This would put a premium on clear logic substantiated by numbers and estimates on error bounds. And explanations that an average engineer can follow; not super-complicated things that require a supercomputer to run and a bunch of PhDs to interpret.

In the end it comes down to figuring out what additional risks we, as a society, are willing to accept to stave off specific erosions of personal freedoms and economic impacts. If we do not learn to make this choice consciously it will be made for us by whoever is loudest today (and swapped by whoever is loudest tomorrow).
In a video promoting his study, he said the WHO said 3.4% of people who get infected would die. Which seems like a blatant lie with a strong agenda:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwPqmLoZA4s&t=12m54s

What they actually said was:

> Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died

He also says it doesn't seem to have a higher chance of killing you than seasonal flu for each person infected:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwPqmLoZA4s&t=1h9m50s

And says in there that Imperial college was dangerously wrong to use a 1% IFR estimate in their modeling. I believe this interview was near or after New York City's city fatality rate was already over 0.1%, yet he was still saying Imperial's estimate was an order of magnitude off.

Throughout the whole thing he cherry picked countries with recent extreme case growth and thorough testing to take advantage of the death lag and claim they point to a tiny CFR (and IFR). In each case it steadily rose after case growth slowed and lagged deaths continued, as expected.

In the Ioannidis serology study, one of the researchers's wives recruited people who wanted a test, saying it would let them know if they could get back to work (potentially biasing things for people who suspected they had had it).
I looked it up for C, and as far as I can tell this has not standardized. (The Defect Report I read, which seems to have the latest opinion, literally calls such things "wobbly values". I'm not joking.) The TL;DR of Defect Report #451 seems to be that this is needs some work from the standard. In the case of an automatic struct or whatever (so you can't pull the bytes out from under it and reuse it) I think the consensus seems to be tending towards Heisenburg-ish values that have values that can change between reads, and certain library functions will be legal to call on them so that they "collapse" the state in the view that you've just created. For your case, I would have the question of whether two objects (e.g. a char array and a struct carved from that array) can share the same memory; in this case I would intuitively tend to agree with you that the padding bits are visible from the longer-lived object, kind of like an ad-hoc union. But I am not a licensed language lawyer, so I am not quite sure on that point.

I appreciate your edits, by the way ;)
Performace of CSS variables – any other tests put there?
You must not know many people with tattoos. ;)
Zoom 5 comes with GCM encryption on all platforms
Most states are still dreadfully far behind processing unemployment insurance claims. A lot of people who should be getting slightly bigger checks haven’t yet seen a dime of their unemployment insurance.
The faster the young and less vulnerable get the disease and get over it, the faster the older folks can be let out. It's really not complicated.

This disease is too contagious to contain. The only way forward is through. Lockdowns merely delay the inevitable. Yes, some people will die. We can't stay home forever. It's not just the US that wants out, but you go on thinking like you do and enjoy your privileged bubble.
It's also in Ultralytics' repo which is very frequently updated.

https://github.com/ultralytics/yolov3
Australia, New Zealand and Taiwan.

Well, not completely eliminated, but it will be eliminated soon enough based on current trends.
Is Mucky Moose already copyrighted? I'm not very good making puppets.
sloooooooooooooooow. No, really, do you want a full flush every time you do a memset? That would be horrendous for performance.
Those aren't really metrics - it's very subjective. e.g. I read those 6 metrics and I'm like "ok, Bay Area can lift SIP".
The 3DS has an IR port, but almost nothing used it. Again, except Pokémon, which uses it for local trading/battling, presumably for at competitions when there would be too many people for wireless (that's what I found in a Google search).
memset definitely writes to padding bytes, as noted by several other folks here. you observe these padding bytes during serialization and deserialization (disk, network, memory mapped buffer, etc.)

Note this is important enough that compiler folks consider it a bug if it doesn't work correctly. see https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92486 for a recent example involving memset and memcpy.
This comment shows a shocking lack of scientific literacy.

You can't "disprove" data. Data are the root facts that science is based on, and all data from trustworthy sources is treated the same by all scientists. Nobody ever "disproves" data.

What can be proven or disproven are hypotheses, the truths about underlying mechanisms of the world that we seek to learn about through data. A hypothesis about how something behaves can be proven or disproven with data, the data itself is absolute truth. A good hypothesis explains the data that we see, a bad one will be contradicted by data collection.

There is no such thing as "just a theory". In common parlance sure, but in scientific speech "theory" is a technical term that refers to a hypothesis that has stood up to all feasible tests that could have disproven it. Gravity is a phenomenon, observed by lots of data, all of which discovered so far confirms the theory of general relativity, upgraded from hypothesis after gravitational bending of light (which the hypothesis predicted)was observed in 1919.
What I actually had in mind with my comment was the hydroxychloroquine trials. The interpretation of those results has been just saddening to the scientist in me. They've all been weak studies, for various reasons (many of them quite valid!), and so the results just don't have much power. And yet, the partisans jump on everything they like to push their agenda: Miracle cure! Worse than drinking bleach! Et cetera.

My reading of the data to date (note: not including anything that might have shown up in the last few days) is more nuanced. Hydroxychloroquine most likely has a small positive effect, but the data are consistent with anything from a modest negative effect to a modest positive effect to absolutely nothing at all. From its long history of previous use, the drug has known negative effects, but these are unimportant or manageable for most COVID-19 patients. However, any positive effect it may have is limited; the studies to date, albeit limited, have been powerful enough to detect a "miracle cure".

None of this says a word about mechanism of action. Someone is bound to say, "But what about zinc? You need to consider zinc!" The thing is, we did. These analyses are independent of mechanism of action. It's entirely possible that hydroxychloroquine's small positive effect is mostly or entirely caused by zinc interactions. Or not. We don't know! We'd have to do a study designed around zinc to test that theory out.

In my opinion, again as a science-y but not doctor-y person, is that giving hydroxychloroquine to COVID-19 patients in most cases will not hurt them, and might help a little bit. The biggest danger, I believe, is that people think it's more powerful than it is. We should not stop and think that hydroxychloroquine is good enough or a "cure". Because it isn't. And if a patient receives hydroxychloroquine instead of better care because people misunderstand science, that is a failing.

(The above is definitely a tangent. But getting it off my chest somewhere was good for my mental health!)
Good question. It depends on the publisher. I usually look up both. If Amazon is significantly cheaper (tens of dollars), then I'll order from Amazon. If they send me garbage, I'll order from the publisher and return the Amazon book.

I may be in a niche circumstance, but most of the books I order from the publishers are within about $5 of Amazon. I don't know the exact count, but I have approximately 600 books. Worth it to have nice ones!
Yea I am wondering the same thing. I am REALLY lucky to have saved a lot and be in a good living situation where I can quarantine comfortably. But what the hell are people doing who were paycheck to paycheck? I would not blame them if they had to start stealing from supermarkets
I want to pump this cool air into a server closet with an outtake but I'm sure there are problems with that... Anyone tried?
Peer review is not censorship.
Be a citizen or permanent resident, or have important business in the country.

Midsommar is celebrated on the countryside with the family. Get IKEA delivery of foods (available in some US locations), boil a ton of small potatoes and get some wormwood(Swedish:malört) spiced vodka.