skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
answer is: it depends.

If it's doing new things like running inference (say, recognizing things using a machine learning model) it might take more power.

But sometimes it could use machine learning to replace previous functions and do it better with less power.

one example I can think of - most cameras have some sort of "motion detect" function. If machine learning could recognize people or cars or whatever is "interesting" better it might give fewer false positives, or transfer data less often. It might even use less power.

On the other hand, if it could detect people, and then further detect WHO they were, it might take more power.
I don't think I am confusing anything. Google has deliberately oriented Google Search to better serve queries over lookups in recent years. For example, adding BERT. You don't need a semantic NLP engine to look up keywords.
They could put a preference in the profile page. But I think that switching the theme would be the browser's job.
This is a massive Proof of Concept (both the README and the code is a mess), but I've been postponing releasing this since November, and I'm sure some of you will find it useful.
For all the talk of "resume driven development" I think most developers - unless they are playing around with side projects and non-essential experimental stuff - prefer to do the simplest thing that will get the job done and keep the site maintainable, and the reason they resort to more complex and advanced frontend solutions is due to onerous requirements from stakeholders for more and more intricate and complex UI. It's another question entirely whether this more intricate and complex UI actually delivers business value or provides a better experience for the end users, but that question is above the developers' pay grade.
If you don't have UBI or a decent enough safety net - or even a good enough minimum wage - it isn't a real choice, though. It is always a coerced choice, especially at the bottom rungs.
Aside from the general tone-deafness of this move, shouldn't the management at the warehouses be the ones wearing the thank you t-shirts? To you know, thank the workers...

I'm sure those workers would probably prefer and deserve a bonus and a heartfelt individual thank you though.
The biggest factor which is not considered in antitrust law is the fact that large corporations, by virtue of controlling a lot of capital, have access to a larger share of all the new money which is created out of thin air and injected into the economy as credit.

Economists are quick to point out that the new money which is created of of thin air is not given outright, but rather, it is loaned out - Therefore, by virtue of having to pay it back, corporations do not have an unfair advantage.

I disagree with this conclusion because an entity's access to loans is based almost entirely on how much collateral they possess - This necessarily implies that those entities which have more capital are able to take out bigger loans and thus derive more profits from these loans.

For example, if you have $100K in a particular asset (e.g. stocks), you can use that as collateral to borrow an additional $100K and you end up controlling $200K worth of assets in total.
So if the yield on those assets is 10% per year, you will end up getting 20% per year relative to your own capital. 20% of $100K is $20K.

So according to this principle, a company which has $100 million in assets can borrow an additional $100 million - This means that an asset class which can generate 10% yield can be bought on leverage to generate 20% yield on the initial capital.
20% of $100 million is $20 million. This means that $10 million of that profit was derived entirely from credit which was printed out of thin air by banks. That $10 million is free money and was given solely on the basis of existing capital.

This is why the rich get richer; it has nothing to do with value creation. Whenever banks print money out of thin air and inject it into the economy, everyone in the country who receives a salary in that currency ends up paying for that equally because of dilution in the value of their salaries.
In effect, this means that, salary earners and small capital owners are subsidizing big capital owners. This is what is fundamentally unfair about our financial system and why big corporations have to be limited; they're not successful because they're efficient, they're successful because they own more capital than everyone else and can thus access most of the newly 'printed' fiat money.
Time_it a case study in Rust macros
> Not everyone thinks or feels the same way you do.

Well, it seems to me that those who don't just never had the opportunity or good fortune to hold a job they enjoy doing. Isn't that a problem worth fixing? I mean, I doubt that desiring a fulfilling life is a niche thing.
What was the query?
We've outsourced the cost of development from the developer to the user.

Noone wants to write low level code because learning it costs money, so instead we just throw more hardware at the problem until it goes away...
But only on one day a year ;-)
The 17M is the data set from detailed primary care records linked to 5,683 of the deaths recorded in English hospitals in the time period. The data could be improved by linking to more primary care records - but the population of England is 56 million so they already captured almost a third.

Sadly there will be more data as there are more deaths, and this team will be able to pull more analytics out. However 5,683 is a big enough sample size to find some interesting information on hazard rates.

For the team doing the analysis, plugging data analytics into 17 million primary care records is definitely a significant achievement. Medical records are intended for use by doctors and letting researchers into them has confidentiality issues. The process they followed was covered in the paper and seemed thorough.
As a vegan, I learned that there's D2 (comes from plants) and D3 (comes from animals), and they are the same as far as I know. Not sure about using them for treatments.
Why a new major version?
I love it! Looks natively enough.
Personnaly, the COVID episode is the final straw. I live in France rural area. Amazon brings huge benefits and comodities there but I can't stand their attitude towards employees anymore.
State pensions are the most obvious comparison to UBI with respect to being a fixed livable income paid to people for the rest of their life. The system is sustainable because people have to work before they start receiving their pension, not because pensioners [with intact cognitive facilities] are extremely creative and productive when freed from the need to work to pay the bills.
Italian Covid-tracing Android app needs location permission to work
FreeCAD BIM development news – April 2020
A great inspiration for aspiring tech-entrepeneurs, for which the "VC-hockeystick-picthdeck-series-x"-cirkus sounds like a nightmare.

Easily my favorite post this week.

Thank you very much for sharing this.
>Everybody would jump to Swift [for new projects] if it meant a cross-platform GUI framework.

Not really. I'm sure there are plenty who will just stick with Qt based options or even Electron.

I've seen a lot of stuff built in PyQt by people who aren't strictly developers and who learned Python only because it fits with some other aspect of their job. There isn't a lot to incentivise them in learning a new language.
I don't know your setup, but a few Ideas:

- program just runs 1 month, put a raspberry in epoxy

- generate a long password (long enough so it doesn't matter you saw it a few times), find some reminder service or ask a friend to mail it back in a month, delete all local evidence of the password

- generally sealing all relevant equipment with a lock could work. Key has to go to someone else.
That is not what I meant. Learning Rust was the best thing that ever happened to my Python Code for example. Does this mean I never use OOP patterns anymore? Not at all.

I just think more about hoe best to structure my code. Sometimes a OOP-like pattern works well, sometimes something else works better.
Obviously in this case the mental health of these students is tragically coming in second place.

Beyond that it's also naive. I can't think of a faster way to destroy a work force's future variance in creativity than by having them all optimized for an opaque algorithm.

Many of the world's most accomplished found their genius through events and choices that cannot be optimized for. Heart break, substance abuse, loss - to name a few.
There is need to translate existing Objective-C code: on platforms where the Objective-C bridge is unavailable (Linux and Windows), Swift code can not call Objective-C code, nor toll-free bridge with Objective-C types, and therefore Objective-C types cannot be subclassed.

For non-Apple platforms, you have to use a different implementation of Foundation — which has pretty good but not identical coverage to Apple's one.

As a side note, it's always seemed clear to me that when Apple provides a new technology, they provide a stop-gap solution, like Carbon, for developers who, for a variety of possible reasons, may not be able or willing to use the new tech, like Cocoa.

The bridge between Objective-C and Swift has always seemed like Carbon to me.

Fortunately, unlike when Carbon was canned and rewriting for Cocoa seemed like a real chore, I don't think Apple will can the Objective-C bridge any time soon — but for Swift code now targeting or intending to target non-Apple platforms, it may be best to start thinking about migrating away from relying on the bridge now — decarbonify your Swift code.
That seems very drastic. At least simple, explainable-logically sound models for short term dynamics should still work?
>So what you're saying is...

What I am saying (sorry for not being explicit) is that increases in productivity have not helped the poorest because they have been robbed of said benefits by price inflation, which is a symptom of an inflation of the money supply.

>The whole point of UBI is to reverse that by having the simplest, most transparent rules possible for who gets what money

My expectation is that those who collect rent on low income housing will benefit more than those who pay the increased rent. At the end of the day low income people will have more money, but all of their expenses for basics like food and rent will increase.

>Of course taxes would need to be levied to fund it, as with any other government expense.

Recent history suggests that this is simply not the case. Budget deficits would be a more reasonable expectation. Either way, increased taxes will similarly create increased prices. Those with lesser incomes will suffer the most.
Working on a gameboy emulator on and off. I've never done that before so it is mostly research work but it's fun nonetheless.
Hatim Dersi
There are a few standard tokens meant for tracking, like the utm_ parameters [1], which you could safely strip out.

That said analytics software and publishers will simply adapt to using other names.

[1] https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/1033867
Sure, I wasn't trying to argue against a green new deal or anything, just to give a justification for a UBI in a way others haven't. Clearly they aren't mutually exclusive, unless you're the sort of person who thinks a UBI will mean nobody works any more.
Do you believe permanently raising wages to offset black swan events such as the COVID-19 epidemic is a wise move? What about the next black swan event? Are they going to be paid enough then or they'll need a pay rise again?

Healthcare professionals are paid much more compared to the average UK citizen. Especially doctors, the average pay (100k pounds) is in the 2% of the earners. Emigrant doctors couldn't even dream of finding comparable wages in free market scenarios in their own countries and come to the UK.

I think the best we could do collectively is to pay out generous bonuses to frontline nurses for the duration of the pandemic.
And in case anybody comes in raving about how Vulkan isn't supported on macOS, that's fine, Vulkan-to-Metal compatibility layer libraries are available.
Follow the link.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Laberge

Michel started a prototype fusion reactor in a shed that turned into General Fusion. Einstein was of course a patent clerk. It all starts somewhere.
firefox does;it works great
AMP is just an ordinary page on google domain. If you're going to hard-code some anti-Google behaviour in Firefox, it means to start a war against Google. Not the wisest decision when Google is the main revenue source for Firefox AFAIK.
Just continuing the discussion, I fully agree with you on principle. I stand by the fact that FIVE is not really a good constant. You will not change five unless you also change the code to handle it, so it just adds another part to modify. And if you never intend to change it or reuse it.. well the only point for making its symbol is to give it meaning, which FIVE does not. But well at a point it's like discussing colours.
The difference is they were free to read any book by any independent author if they chose to. Netflix and Hollywood are much more centrally controlled and homogeneous than literature. YouTube is censored short form and many content producers make content that is more shallow than the most shallow adventure story because it gets more views and it is advertiser friendly.

The other difference is that Plato's Republic sits not too far away from 'The Crocodile Whisperer' in the book shop and library. YouTube and Netflix feeds on the other hand are tailored to what the user already watches and what they will most likely get them to click next, stuck in a loop never broken by serendipity.

The immediate availability of entertainment in the form of TV and movies on Netflix makes the idea of finding, picking up and reading a book less appetising and harder. The more someone reads (even if it is trash) the faster they can read and the wider their vocabulary becomes. This makes it easier for them to pick up more substantive books later on. Instead we see a generation of young people glued to their phones reading text written by their peers, watching the same trash they would read but without any of the benefits of reading.

The need for entertainment drove many young people to read in the past and that is a good thing!
Yılmaz Ofis Mobilyaları – Ergonomi ve kalitenin tercih sebebi
> Now if you think your 'right' to put your own body at risk, you've failed to understand how contagious the virus is and how much you put others at risk by thinking you matter more. This will only prolong the quarantine, and this is why everyone is super concerned about the second wave and pandemic history repeating itself because some people are so arrogant and don't see their privilege compared to the at risk.

I'm arguing that people who accept the risk upon themselves should be free to do what they want to do - and those who are afraid of the virus keep themselves "quarantined".

If you are in quarantine, you are not being put at risk.

Why do you think that some people's livelihoods are more important than others that you can justify locking them up in their homes to protect those others, who have elected upon themselves to live a life of fear?

You are putting lives at risk by enforcing a lockdown. This is not a one-way street. Why is your justification any better than mine?

I'm suggesting that far more people are going to die because of the lockdown and its secondary effects than the combined waves of COVID. The rational conclusion is that the cure is worse than the disease. The position of the lockdown should be reversed in order to spare the greater number of lives.

"There are no solutions, only trade-offs." - Thomas Sowell.
Indeed it isn't. That would require Apple's proprietary frameworks and macOS-specific utilities that support their Apple-only toolchains.
Repairs and maintenance will be there forever. Some of the things, like public transport, will probably need people to operate as well. But you can transition into things that help people more directly - mowing lawns for folks or helping with vegetable gardens. Offer meal delivery to folks, offer house cleaning, make sure there are enough qualified day cares.

You could make sure nursing homes have enough staff so the staff is less stressed. Lots of folks can learn to be a CNA pretty easily, and it is a better job if the shifts are well-staffed and not overly long.

We can rethink the 40-hour workweek and perhaps shave 10hours a week off of it. We could have maximum workweeks folks are allowed to work (even at top rungs). After all, if you need to work 60-hour weeks to complete things, you probably simply need another employee.

And to a point, yes, we will need to constantly upgrade. In the last 20 years alone, we've needed to upgrade both the cell phone network and the internet infrastructure and have done a poor job at that.

We can also look beyond one's own borders and help those in need without expecting anything in return. Famine is almost always man-made by not properly allocating resources: There are folks without clean water.
If high labour costs would be so detrimental to society then we Scandinavians would still be boarding those transatlantic steamers. But we aren't.
Fenix is pretty much a complete rewrite of firefox on mobile, and they haven't implemented every extension api yet which is why only a subset of extensions are allowed currently.

I've read that you can sideload any extension you want (although I've not tried this personally), it'll just be coin flip whether it actually works or not.
Good news. I'm feeling a strong reluctance against languages that only work on one platform.
"Give me enough medals and I'll win you any war"
Some fastfoods, with quick preparations and basic food can actually benefit from services like DoorDash. If they don't like technology, are not marketing specialists, live mostly offline, then it can bring them many new customers. So I think it's up to the restaurant to decide. Premium restaurants may have money and skills to have their website with their delivery ordering system and returning customers. It varies, I guess...
Wait, no "gif"???
> If the stock market is wrong, what will force it to correct?

How about not "correcting" the corrections in the first place? Let the market actually be a market, don't inject huge amounts of money into it?

Not to be confused with helping out ordinary people who need money for spending.
Check out this CNBC interview with one of the warehouse organisers who was fired. (Which led to Tim Bray quitting.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15HUGc7R8hw

At one point it almost seems like he is suggesting to this poor guy that it is unreasonable for him to protest for better working conditions because "people like me" need to be able to place orders on Amazon while in lockdown. Imagine the difference in salary between the guy working for CNBC and the guy working in the Amazon warehouse. Feels as if we are watching some dystopian fantasy film like Hunger Games.
Fun fact: The CEO of Goldman also makes pretty bad EDM music

https://soundcloud.com/djdsolmusic
For some people, a job is what they do to pay the rent, and fulfilling activities are other things. For some people, the very fact of getting paid to do something effectively ruins it, given all the rest of the obligations that go with holding down a paid job; even artists with patrons find themselves having to create art that gets in the way of the art they really want to create.

So unless this "fix" involves some kind of radical social engineering, it's just not going to be "fixable". You got lucky; you are the kind of person who find fulfillment in being paid to do your job. There are people who don't have that, and given the way our society and economy works, never will. Many of those people, myself included, are fine with that. It's OK. What many such people are less fine with is how much those other people like you want us to be like you.
Back in the day, I used to PGP sign Usenet messages. I used a news reader where I could specify message ID. So I signed text that included the date and message ID.
> without some extra effort

Thanks for the riddle! I guess you could use iframes?

Edit: Ohhh and you could use data-urls as iframe src, so as not to make a large number of requests.
> there's a lot less code running with your code

Tell me if I am wrong, but is it always true though? Unikernel libraries definitely are largely not as proven as Linux kernel. Then how is unikernel secure than Linux system call?
Software also has a good chance of being the exception to the rule, not just because of the lack of capital and coordination needed to start writing it but also because the open source software movement is pretty unusual in creating stuff people would happily pay for for fun.
Most people's hobbies aren't that useful
That might well be, but your view of how consumers should behave is not what happens in the real world. A lot of things in the world should be some way you imagine but they’re not.

Otherwise amazon (or Walmart) wouldn’t exist, because everyone would support their local store. But they don’t. Prices matter.
As the program and kernel run in a single address space, yes there is no separation from your application corrupting parts of the kernel.

I'm not very convinced about the security story around unikernels, but for balance the other side of the argument is that there's much less code around in a unikernel - no shell, no command line tools at all, no compilers or interpreters, just the code required to run the program and talk to the hardware (real or virtual).
So it has become a casino, people are not investing, people are betting.
My understanding: They are not changing the extension model, Firefox Preview simply doesn't have the full extension API of old Firefox implemented yet. Some people are always ready to assume the worst when it comes to Mozilla and threw a hissy fit over the fact that Mozilla is running an open Beta with Firefox Preview [1] that is only slowly coming up to full extension support, hence the 'controversial'.
I came late to the party (I got hold of it I think in 2005) and I had the same experience.
I've had the exact same experience you described. Realizing i3 is the way to go and apps shouldn't manage tabs themselves - trying to stop Firefox / Chrome from doing so - realizing it's not simple and the no tabs extension is problematic. Trying qutebrowser and giving up because it's limited.

I've settled on NoTabs Firefox with a userChrome.css that hides the tab bar until Firefox someday supports native no tabs.
How many Germans actually work in healthcare? Doesn't healthcare in Germany constitute very large portion of immigrants workers?
I’d say electron became popular thanks to HTML, not JavaScript. IMO HTML is by far the “easiest” to use GUI framework because it is so unconstrained. It will end up a mess, but eventually you can get the result you want. This is not the case with native frameworks which come with a larger sets of rules on how they can be used.
Another performance benefit (unsurprising in highsight) comes from removing KPTI and similar Spectre mitigations. These have really made system calls in regular kernels expensive.
By offering pay for people to do it instead of assigning folks to do it because they, "need to work". If you can't get people, you aren't paying enough or your work conditions are bad. Some people don't mind these jobs if they aren't forced - and at least a few of the folks forced to work will feel like they are wasting away.
Thank you, I was confused by the term "active cases".
It is ridiculous that you've boiled it down to those two options. The 3rd is cutting executive salary and paying low wage workers. Also amazon is not cheap compared to my local competitor and aliexpress, people buy from amazon because of convenience.

And amazon makes profit on non-AWS products as well, don't be silly. I can literally google their financial statements to prove this.
I meant nurses (and other underpaid NHS workers) not necessarily Doctors sorry if I didn't make that clear.