skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Indeed we disagree. I’d say the reluctance that’s relatively wide spread in particularly among engineers to even try and reduce risk as much as possible (within a limited scope) and framing that as „predicting the future“ is a huge fallacy that doesn’t benefit anyone. There’s just not only the 2 extremes - completely and reliably predicting the future vs. just going off with no plan - but there’s something in the middle.

Also the big picture That one could look at in the beginning of a project and base an estimate on is more often than not not what you end up with at the end of the project anyway.
Sure, but there's really no harm voting if you really are completely ignorant -- you and the people like you will just be noise in the final tally. But most people aren't completely ignorant, and the return on going deeper in the political process isn't that great if all you're trying to do is decide how to fill out your ballot.

Largely speaking pretty much everyone sponsored by a major party is plenty qualified on paper, and candidates tow the party line so close that you don't really need to know all that much to make a decision. Don't get me wrong, it sucks that parties have such a stranglehold on people that people who I'm sure have plenty of complex nuanced opinions are reduced to a color but my distaste for that doesn't change the reality of how they will vote.
It's worth noting that upstart successful parties like the Green Party in other countries start from the bottom up (local councils -> state representatives -> national office), because being familiar and having a track record is a great way to earn trust that you deserve the next highest position.

The US Green Party strategy seems to be to go for the jugular in the Presidential election, inevitably lose, and then fizzle out because there's no baseline party to fall back onto.
New Improvements to Firestore Security Rules
Im personally waiting for a good 4k HDR > 60Hz monitor that is USB-C. Would be perfect for gaming and office use plugging in my Mac & PC.
1951 Pont-Saint-Esprit mass poisoning
> $200 is quite cheap for a 27” monitor. A good non-gaming 1440p 27” costs about $300-400 not on sale.

I think grandparent post meant 1920x1080. Depending on your needs (no adaptive refresh rate, no color accuracy, only one HDMI input and one VGA input, no rotating stand, no vesa mount), you can get a 27" monitor for about USD 100. For most programmers, two 27" 1080p monitors ought to be sufficient.

I'm just amazed I never realized that a 27" 1080p monitor is barely over 80 pixels per inch. I'd imagine that doubles to a respectable 100+ ppi with 1440p monitors but I suspect it isn't worth paying more than twice the price in my context.
The liability in these cases was related to alleged negligence related to facilitating straw purchases. And, in the PA case, possibly selling bullets to an underage buyer.
Stop telling your engineers what to do
Hear, hear, but the last time I suggested exactly this idea on HN (on a Mochizuki related article IIRC), my comment was downvoted into oblivion by folks who felt I was attacking the "purity" of their trade.

To this day, I'm still trying to figure why math types seem to deeply hate the idea that a proper proof of a new theorem should be published in a formal, machine-verifiable language (e.g., Mochizuki's proof, which no one seem to understand, much less verify to be correct, could just be fed to a machine, end of story).

I have some hypotheses:

1. Much like "traditional" artists, who saw the Photoshop-like tools as degrading to their art, they feel that using machines to help with proofs would somehow hinder, limit and dirty down their trade.

2. The existing tools are way too primitive to be any kind of useful. This, I can resonate with. I am not knowledgeable enough on current formal proof software, but last I looked at (~10 years ago), they made me feel like I was back to coding in assembly. If indeed the tools are still too primitive, then it's just a matter of making them better. And it seems to me like Math, if anything, really lends itself damn well to hierarchical building to reach better and better level of abstraction.

3. Many folks mix-up automated theorem proving (which is hard for machines, because it requires intuition leaps) and formal proof verification (which, unless I'm missing something, really lends itself well to mechanization).

Anyhoo, I suspect that in spite of all the philosophical push-back, we will get there, if only because many modern proofs are so huge, they get to the point where they consume multiple mathematician-lifetimes worth of work. There's basically no other route.
Weird, I felt the exact opposite. In the article I can use the pictures to understand exactly what all of these mathematical terms mean.

No one who graduated college with a degree in English is going to know what "multiplication is associative, there is an identity, and every element has an inverse. Multiplication is generally NOT commutative." means, and that's the first sentence...
whats the post-keybase landscape?
Some blogs link to websites in citations with rel nofollow, but there's no organic seo in it

<a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/" rel="nofollow">HN</a>

someone ought to reinvent el goog again
> If you read the rest of my comment beyond the first line (particularly my blog link),

I read, and I think your argument is hollow, and, assuming your goodwill, you are not understanding the matter at all, and if not, I see an ill intent.

I do not appreciate all what you say at all. Any argument against encryption must be quashed without exceptions, and second thoughts.

It is only since the start of 21st century, the experience akin to "legs broken, skin flayed alive, and head cut off" has been a grim reality for far more than a million people by now, mostly for, really, nothing. What are talking about this! And what you talk about?

Attack this argument, not something not even having a passing genuine relation to the matter.
Yes, that's exactly the point - it's not required to ask for permissions - they still want to.
I agree. I'm just suggesting that there is not really a fundamental distinction between genocidal corporations and non-genocidal corporations, rather that the issue probably comes from deeper.
I think he's growing into it - seems like his streams have become much looser and fun over time - I wouldn't have thought a super-gm could do chess content and not be super serious about it all the time.
I believe the theory that it's 5k iMac panels that Apple rejected. I have a few stuck pixels but I never notice because they're so small. I have a blue stuck-on in the lower-right quadrant and I can't even find it now.

I haven't bothered calibrating it.
In the above setting, we don't have computers _finding theorems_. We're using computers to _machine check_ our proofs; The process of verifying whether a proof is correct or not is mechanical when a proof is broken down to its smallest steps. The proof assistant simply assists us in making sure we haven't missed anything.

If you are interested in humans and machines working together to find proofs, then boy do I have a story for you: http://math.iisc.ac.in/~gadgil/presentations/SummerCSIISc.ht...
There are instances in every large corp in and out of the Nasdaq of lying, don't be a hypocrite.
Yes the financial aspect isn't easy to get past right now, and the curved ones especially right now are a premium cost just because the option is still so new, but the curved ones do about what I tried to do in manually angling my previous dual monitor setup with added advantages in gaming (because I could actually use the center point and periphery in game rather than the center being bevels and in the way if I tried to span games across both monitors). Plus, all the usual financial concerns from the current state of the world and everything that has been going on.
What phrasing would have been better in your opinion?
Let's not lose the point. The question at hand is, "who should be responsible for the cost of plugging a well when it reaches the end of its life?" The answer to that question does not tell us whether or not a well should be drilled near a school.

If you're from Oklahoma, Texas, or another major oil-producing state, you have probably seen oil wells situated near schools, neighborhoods, or other sites that may present a hazard to young people. California is one of the largest oil producers in the country, so I'm not surprised that they have oil production in urban/suburban areas. Weird? Maybe. Unhealthy? Probably.

Drilling at the site precedes the establishment of the school in 1927, as there is a large oil field beneath Beverly Hills into which around 100 wells have been drilled from four clusters, one of which is the school's property. That oil field was discovered in 1900. A single year's production at the school used to produce millions of dollars' worth of oil (not including natural gas).

So, at some point administrators in the district weighed the pros and cons and said, "ok we'll tap into that revenue source." Whether that was a weird or not-weird decision, I think it was reasonable to assume that the well operators would follow lawful practices and would not be able to duck the cost of plugging wells at the end of their life. Venoco certainly made a lot of money from its decades of operating those wells.

California backed the school district in this dispute. The California State Lands Commission went after Venoco for the money, but a federal judge in Delaware affirmed the bankruptcy court ruling and denied California's claim.

I think this situation says way more about bankruptcy law and bonding requirements for oil and nat gas wells, than it says about well placement. This is not an isolated problem. As bankrupt producers like Whiting and Chesapeake are sure to be followed by other firms in the coming months, we are going to see more examples of the same.

Bonding requirements should reflect the real cost of plugging wells, and creditors of bankrupt petroleum companies should not be permitted to recoup assets before those assets are used to cover the cost of mitigating environmental hazards.

That principle holds whether the well is on a school district's property, on private property nearby, or out in the middle of nowhere.

Should we hold school districts more liable than other landowners for the costs of plugging wells? Or should a licensed well operator be expected to set aside money for plugging the wells that it operates?
I'm certainly no fan of Google, to say the very least. That said, they've kept Blogger relatively unchanged, which is nice.

At least count your blessings that making blogging platforms must not impress promotion committees nearly as much as writing new chat apps.
> Maybe not so good for those who were especially attached to either the vibrant city life or busy office life.

Meh, if there's less people living in cities that's cheaper rent for me.

What's interesting is what impact this could have on the carbon footprint. Generally speaking, higher density living is associated with lower carbon footprint per capita.
No. That's one reason we have separate words for things that work and things that are suitable.
The Go+ language for data science
>You have now posited the requirement to support as many as 8 stores

That's a surprising read of what I said. I named a couple of companies that might be interested in running a store. I do not belive for a second that all of them will, nor did I suggest that that developers are required to support every single one of them.

I highly doubt that there will ever be more than three general purpose stores per platform, and perhaps some specialist ones that most developers don't use (e.g. for games, enterprise apps or to serve specific countries).

That and the threat of possible new market entrants will be enough for stores to compete a little bit more for developers and lower their fees from the current egregious rent seeking levels. It will also reduce the risk of getting banned outright from your target platform.

It seems the only point we really disagree on is the additional burden developers would face if there was a bit more choice. I understand what you're saying, but I believe your fear is grossly exaggerated.

Yes, reviews will cost a bit more overall. But that will easily come out of the incredible margins of current oligopolists.
There's a particular bit of wishful thinking endemic to software project managers, in particular: the belief that almost everything useful is also predictable, and that what's left accounts for only a tiny fraction of the overall effort. A bit of reflection should make it obvious that the opposite is true: if it was so easy, somebody else would have done it before. Yet, like every 15-year-old who believes in their heart that they'll grow up to be rich and famous, the manager always assumes that they're just the first person to think of cloning Facebook.
This is very real; anecdotally, I am considering vacating the Washington D.C. metro area for this exact reason. The biggest difficulty is uncertainty of government roles, e.g. back to work/office, in the future depending on the posture of the administration. The market is booming here and there aren't any slumps in pricing or inventory.
I consider this wrong on all counts and I don't see where you're coming from to make these claims. You obviously benefit from performance gains on the server and client in standard use-cases.

A Node.js server's main thread is nickel and dimed by a thousand little cuts. A faster hash implementation can reduce loop delay by a nontrivial amount. This isn't heavy processing.

Same with the client. Any sort of game could have a good reason to be doing hashtable lookups in a hot loop on the client. This isn't heavy processing in some exotic use-case, it's rather elementary. And perf trade-offs especially help slow clients. And freeing up the main thread lets you fit in more nonreducible cycles.

Also, moving work to the server because your client implementation is too slow and then generalizing that to "always do work on the server", is tautological. Where you do work is fundamentally a business logic / product design concern that is only a performance concern in the suboptimal case where you can't fit the work on the server or client. So faster implementations move what are performance concerns back into the realm of higher level product design decisions.

These aren't symptoms of "doing it wrong". This is just plain jane software engineering.
If you're using a recent Ubuntu with a 4K display, the best way I have found to make things readable without making them huge is by enabling "Large text" under Universal Access. This sort of mimics the old Unity scaling, except you have to set your Chrome to 150% and your console font size separately now. Works for me on both Lenovo Carbon X1 and 32" Z32 desktop monitor.
A key distinction is that in a ROM, only one row is active at a time. But in a PLA, multiple rows can be active simultaneously.(This is from "The Architecture of Microprocessors".)
People are doing more than that. A former colleague caught folks working remote overseas as well.
So what other VCs are out there funding moonshots? I'm curious, cause I'm working on a moonshot of my own.

It's still fairly early-stage (self funding, saving money by doing a lot myself + hiring Russian aerospace engineers) so if there's anyone here on HN with a spare 20k/100k/1MM they want to spend on awesome futuristic technology, my email's in my profile :)

I'm keeping the specifics of my company under wraps (to everyone but potential investors), but the idea is radically improved long distance transportation here on Earth with a near-zero carbon footprint as one benefit.

I've considered various US gov't funding options, which can be really nice (they don't take any equity & some are pretty lax with how you spend the money) but those take a while to get, and you generally need someone who's got experience writing proposals if you want to have a good chance.
If you don't have end-to-end encryption, then yes, Zoom can man-in-the-middle your conversation. That is how we know Zoom doesn't have end-to-end encryption.

That doesn't mean end-to-end encryption is pointless, if that's what you're implying.
I’m a big global warming person but I still have to ask this.

If there’s way more methane in the atmosphere than we thought doesn't that mean co2 is contributing less warming?
It just such a poor solution to the problem. The DEA has hundreds of suppliers. I don't think attacking GM for selling them Suburbans is going to make much of a difference.

Plus, from the commenting here of HN, it appears there is a large group of people that want more regulations on facial recognition irregardless of its use within the DEA. These conflations of messages do resonate very well with me. Reforming the DEA and adding regulations to facial recognition are two important issues that stand on their own. The solutions to the issues are more the responsibility of government rather than corporations.
You don't need most of the lines drawn in this TUI.
You should use slight differences in background color instead.

Lines can be useful for separation, but in this case you should always favor horizontal over vertical lines.
The West Village is a bit of an outlier when it comes to rent because it is in NYU-land, and people attending NYU are not shy about taking whatever it is they need in loans to pay the expenses of going to NYU.
Can someone shed some light on the landscape here? I thought there were only 2 possible ways to use Signal; the mobile apps and the desktop. Is this CLI app somehow talking to them? If anyone can make a client, then what's stopping someone from building better mobile apps and indeed a web client!? Other than of course the sheer effort that's involved obviously.
I don't know anything about representation theory, but the way you describe it I thought "how's this different from a homomorphism." All elements of a group (e.g. any x, y in your example), are invertible by the definition of a group.

The wikipedia sentence definition makes more sense to me: "a "representation" means a homomorphism from the group to the automorphism group of an object"

This seems natural, since if you take _any_ algebraic structure (e.g. a ring), then its automorphism group is a group. Which is a reason why group theory is worth studying - since _any_ algebraic structure can be studied using group theory by considering its automorphism group. (Also, an automorphism group is just the set of symmetries, so group theory can be described as the study of symmetry).
> For example, reflecting the triangle and then rotating it 120 degrees reorders the vertices the same way as if you’d merely performed a different reflection.

With pictures, from the article.
I declare burger king!!
> Maybe not so good for those who were especially attached to...the vibrant city life

I think it's good for those people too, because urban housing prices will also go down as people move away. It could become more affordable to have that vibrant city life alongside the others who actually want to be there and don't just have to be there.

I'd personally be really excited to see Austin's skyrocketing growth and gentrification take a hard slowdown. So many of the locals and local businesses that made Austin so charming and "weird" in the first place have been driven out by the swelling cost of living.
Benzodiazepine use before conception and risk of ectopic pregnancy
Yeah I don't think they've budged on that in NYC much yet unfortunately.
Maybe in the urban core. I have friends who live in "Boston" who are in a rough triangle between Danvers, Providence and Worchester. DC is even more insane.
>So the focus in chess has moved away from manually exploring to find optimal plays and new opening styles as was the trend in the 19th century chess rennaisance to a focus on preparation so that a player can quickly find best moves, under significant pressure, in any given match.

There is a certain skill level, which I want to say is somewhere around 1400 to 1500 but it has been over a decade so don't quote me on that, where most the players at that level seem to focus on memorizing openings.
It ended up being what separates them from the players a one to two hundred points lower. This leaves them vulnerable to a bit of a hack, as using a non-standard opening can completely remove any usefulness of their memorized openings. It almost disorients them and makes it much more likely for them to make a mistake that can then overcome the disadvantage of such a non-standard opening. I loved playing in this area as I hated memorizing openings so I just used non-standard openings to not to avoid having to. Eventually I hit the ranking where players were good enough to take advantage of my non-standard opening more than any advantage from disorienting them and I quit playing because the only option to advance would've been to go back and memorize openings.
Now that unicode is everywhere I think it's time to use more brackets than [], (), {} and <>.

Python is the worst, where dicts and sets both use {} and tuples and "grouping" both use (), each causing real problems.

Some of many possibilities:

｟｠«» ⟦⟧ ⟨⟩ ⟪⟫ ⟮⟯ ⟬⟭ ⌈⌉ ⌊⌋ ⦇⦈ ⦉⦊ ||

Yes, you need a way to type it on non specialized keyboards.

An easy way is is to type it as (( or [[ etc, and let the IDE convert it.
Ah fair enough then. Yes, I had not considered this case of blackmailing.
A teenager’s guide to building the world’s best pandemic and protest trackers
Diluting blood plasma rejuvenates tissue, reverses aging in mice
"raspberry pi but with NSA"
No, but in 2002/3 we would play Quake during our CCNA classes every now and again instead of class work. The hardware was old so it was the original quake.

I played a lot of MOHAA[0].

[0] -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medal_of_Honor:_Allied_Assault
Apple’s New Map, Expansion #9
There is absolutely no way this gets the vocal "conservative" core of the Go community's approval. For better or worse.
Probably because of shortened commutes. But if many commutes disappear altogether, that could offset it.
i think it's typically 40x, but yeah, although IME it's not super religiously followed. a lot of landlords are fairly reasonable when it comes to working things out if you're close, especially now as vacancies are way up.
Does anyone here have one of these? I'd love to hear about someone's day to day experience using one.
Just change the wording to illegal speech instead of vague definition like indecent speech.
I find fuzzing fascinating but it seems to only be used in protocols and tools such as compilers, networking protocol implementations etc. Does anyone have experience using it for business logic?
> There’s plenty of valid arguments against banning strong encryption

There are no valid arguments against encryption

> And yes, law enforcement eavesdrops for law enforcement purposes

Lawful eavesdropping is an oxymoron
Only tangentially related, but encoding text into the subpixels themselves is still one of my favorite github repos I've stumbled across in a good long while :)

https://github.com/graphitemaster/breaking_the_physical_limi...
Do you know of any good writeups for this particular kind of process? I too did fuzzing of network devices before it was called fuzzing and am interested in trying it again with modern tooling.
Because employees talk. If word gets out that the company is in a tight place before management addresses it to employees then that erodes trust in leadership.

If people distrust leadership then when they do finally acknowledge something negative (eg. we're having 10% layoffs) then employees rationally assume things are actually far worse than that (eg. we're having multiple rounds of layoffs) and will behave accordingly (eg. leave even if not laid off).

On the other hand if leaders build trust by acknowledging reality then when they announce that things are bad people are more likely to behave proportionately and trust that things are only as bad as announced rather than 'reading between the lines' and assuming they are 10x worse.
High School Robotics Team Will Put Your Payload on a High Altitude Balloon