skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The tendency to blame the victim in grade-crossing accidents exasperates cognitive psychologist Green: “That lets the authorities off the hook. Then they don’t have to redesign the system.”

And why should they? Some people die, but how many times more people do cross successfully?
It can have another (dual-) use as armored bulldozer. See

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer
This is what bothers me most about the story. If someone is "internet famous" for blogging under a particular name, but not famous at all in their private life under their real name, their blog handle is newsworthy and their real name is not. It would be like reporting on an actor or musician and insisting on using their birth name throughout the story, with one reference to their stage name at the beginning of the piece.

I doubt the NYT has a lot of pieces on "Declan MacManus" in their archives -- if they can just use "Elvis Costello", they could certainly stick to calling the SSC guy by the name he uses online.
For Sale: Proof That Legendary Scientists Were Real People, Too
Meta: I have had the same question as well and I'm sure that I will have it again in six months. IMO this submission has potential to be a regularly re-submitted post like 'Who is hiring?'.
> which platforms do you go to for nuanced, rational discussions

Outside HN, I talk to people I know personally who I know enjoy nuanced discussions. And that's it.

> And, more broadly, how can we (as technologists) foster that sort of collegiate culture online, given the global scope of the Internet, the permanence of anything we post, and the inherent anonymity of the Internet stack.

I am leaning heavily towards old-school blogging right now (without comments - people wanna comment, they can go write a response post on their own blog), including links to other blogs of interest. Maybe webrings, although I'm not very familiar with the social dynamics there and what the pros/cons are when compared to a more casual linking between blogs. Mastodon is also on my radar but I just don't know anyone personally who's into that.

> be a part of and reinforce existing communities with this ethos

I think this just needs to be done with people you already know. Ask 'em "Hey, wanna start a club?" and then go do so. Trying to make it bigger than that is a threat to getting it started in the first place.

> advocate for technology and culture that could make this the norm.

Not gonna happen, I think. My perception is that people who appreciate nuanced discussion are the minority in the global population. But that doesn't mean we have to roll over and accept Twitter. We can still make our own digital clubs.
Pilots have trained for years on flying in general and the specific performance characteristics of their aircraft.

Controllers on the other hand has years of training about traffic patterns, communications, managing airspace, etc. Most controllers are not pilots, although a significant number are, even those are not likely to be flying around A320s recreationally. Needless to say they deal with thousands of types of aircraft every day and may have only general ideas of how those aircraft may perform.

So, who is in a really good position to quickly know what the critical speeds in a landing are?
Amen. And this very forum is one of the worst offenders in that realm. Everyone is welcome to post their opinion, except the ones who actually care.
Spotting a Fake Lightning to Headphone Adapter
I guess that depends on what you do. I've never felt that I do not have enough ecosystem in Delphi/FreePascal but I know there are areas where I would not be lucky if I ever went there. Then again on few occasions I had no problems creating pascal headers from C libraries I wanted to use. There are tools that depending on particulars can make it almost automatic.
Can someone elaborate on what is meant by 'estimating a parameter with a natural experiment'? This seems to be the key difference but I don't quite get how this would work. What would be your input data and how would the process differ from an ML approach?
> what is genuinely new and what is a rehash.

I struggled with this in grad school, as it often felt I was rereading the same material in multiple journals, and the examples of my successful peers appeared to me to be the same paper with 8 different introductions!

But the example Rota gives of Riesz is illuminating: by refining an idea over time, not simply rehashing, the product improves and eventually becomes "perfect". I think this is the original and benign intent of what has often devolved into the appearance of "publish or perish".
In addition to everything others have already said, I think one of the hardest parts is continually dealing with occasional upstream outages and API changes. Initial automation setup is exciting, repeatedly revisiting it after it worked just long enough to forget almost everything is a chore. It's a good fit for "as a service" outsourcing to full-time experts.
Hard disagree. WASM is as good an opportunity as any to enforce better security habits, and indeed seems to be designed specifically with browser security/sandboxing in mind. "Killing" WASM does precisely nothing to fix the status quo around JS insecurity.
game industry has made great progress within short period of time. Many of people have made their career in game industry.
> they aggressively re-publish their existing results. Very low read- and citation counts are common implications.

I think it's generally the opposite to a great degree. Some people spend their PhD and postdoc doing one large piece of work, overly concerned about its rigour/correctness/validity, eventually publishing just one paper that they're happy with (perhaps a summary of their thesis). Others publish smaller pieces of work frequently, at conferences, workshops etc. In this time the latter will have built up a public academic profile, while the former may be essentially anonymous to the field. This will be reflected in greatly more citations and reads for the latter.

You could argue that there's value to the former approach, but if you can't disseminate your work effectively - i.e. nobody knows that you or your work exist - then it's useless (imo).
Here in Spain the hospitals got full for a month or so. They have been coping fine for a couple of months after that, yet none of my cancelled appointments have been rescheduled yet.
How much it would cost me per month if I am to subscribe to the top three streaming services in the US?
The IRS already knows that information...

The question is not whether you have anything to hide, it’s about whether you have anything to hide from law enforcement.

HUGE diffeeence.
Do you realise what comedy is? This guy was a comedian who had performed on stage, so he certainly fits the bill. Think of all the current celebs who have said far worse on stage.

I'm British, here, almost all good humour is targeting/focusing around some group in some way (e.g. Monty Python, Fawlty Towers). We call it black comedy because it's horrible out of context.

So, are you in favour of getting rid of comedy?
It is also less expensive and more accessible for mid/large volumes. We have built-in volume discount in the pricing that reduce significantly the price at scale
While individual trajectories of non-linear systems are not predictable, they all end up on an attractor and usually all we are interested in, is the attractor.

That is when performing a test on a mouse we are not measuring what a particular mouse would do, but what the mice do on average. So as long as model behaves like a mouse it can be useful, even though it would not behave like any particular mouse.

Also it's important to remember that the question is not about all or nothing, when we get a model most likely instead of 100 experiments on real mice we will be doing millions on virtual mice, and then 10 on real mice to verify the results.
Twitter is dropping coding terms like 'master' and 'slave'
On the Moral Economy of Tech
> To have a nuanced discussion of politics, pushing partisans out of the room or at least quietening them down is the first step.

There's the fallacy though. How do you tell the difference between "pushing partisans out the room" and "pushing one side out of the room"? They have the same effect. A 100% "partisan" discussion looks calm and "nuanced" if no one is there to disagree.

You say you want a nuanced discussion, but how do you know you're not just sitting in an echo chamber?
The way it’s done now is to publish tiny incremental results. For example, you can get funding to study a class of a dozen drugs in a dozen exotic species. The results can be written in any number of papers from 1 to 144. Add two different test methods, and you can multiply as you see fit. If the journals reject a paper for being too small, just lump a few together and resubmit.
My wife’s grandmother worked for him for a long time and wrote his memoirs if anyone wants to read about him:
https://g.co/kgs/KpuXzs
You sure its not because of the explosion of web apps?
> In Switzerland […] EU/EEA licenses and US licenses can and must be exchanged within one year

But you don't need to pass any test, they just exchange the paper (at least for EU licenses).
Hot take from someone who has worked remotely for the past few years:

It’s not healthy.
Awesome work Gaurav & team!
'result' and 'Enter numbers:' are exactly the same thing - two QT labels. The example code just changes the first one's text. If you run the code, you'll see it by yourself.

PyQt is not really difficult, just boring. And a bit of magic was indeed the intended effect :)
There's no official handbook to bribing, but you can pass your papers to the officer along with some money tucked inside and you'll get back just the papers if the officer is corrupt.
Thanks to zoomable version I was able to relive times of dial-up modems again.
Note, that this is A COPY of Last Supper, mentioned in the article but not prominently enough:

"The Royal Academy of Arts and Google teamed up on a high-resolution scan of a copy of Leonardo da Vinci’s The Last Supper painted by his students."
In many regions any bogus data will be spotted fairly quickly. New mappers are monitored by the community and guided to documentation if necessary, and real abuse is dealt with (either by just reverting vandalism, or blocking the user outright via the Data Working Group).

Areas with local mappers will be watched even more closely.

All in all OSM often reaches a level of detail Google Maps can only dream of. In the Netherlands the number of outright errors is really quite small, and at least everything is pretty much up-to-date. Google Maps is still showing (and routing over) a trunk road in my home town that closed over a year ago.

> A map of the world seems like sooo much work to keep updated

It's really not that bad. Major infrastructure draws the attention of people who are fascinated by highways or railway tracks. The same goes for national cycling networks and the roads and cycleways these use. Major administrative rearrangements (changes in the borders of municipalities etc.) also draw a particular group. And finally, local mappers care about their local piece of map, often down to the newest projects. As a local mapper myself I find it a joy to be the first to map a new street or add a newly assigned name to some unnamed way.

It's also a nice hobby, because you visit parts of your town to survey you wouldn't ever come otherwise.
I'm more of a fan of Stuff Made Here:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCj1VqrHhDte54oLgPG4xpuQ

Has a nice variet of videos. As an example he is a vid on 3D printed sheet metal forming:
https://youtu.be/WuY2-OrT9ig

I enjoy how it shows his failure and how he learned and adjusts his designs and approach along the way.
No tricks, but I disagree with you here.

A government-run, publicly owned online communication platform has several problems that prevent it from being the utopia you expect.

1. What value does it actually provide that Twitter and Reddit and Tumblr (and even Facebook) don't provide? I've learned more about marginalized communities both locally and globally on Twitter than I have anywhere else. Seems that they have a pretty decent platform today.

2. It's existence doesn't mean those platforms go away, so it by itself doesn't stop Facebook from doing the ridiculous things it's doing today. Folks may choose to patronize those private platforms over using the thing you describe.

3. Economically disadvantaged folks won't have access to it without a separate set of programs to ensure every household is connected to the Internet at a reasonable speed, and that they have the tech required to access it. (COVID-19 has laid bare the economic disparity even in my relatively affluent school district.)

4. Are we talking "run by the US"? If so: globally, marginalized people may not be able to communicate there due to policies from our government (which we can over time theoretically control) or their governments (which we cannot.) If not: who runs it then?

5. I think you'll find that the US government routinely denies people speech. Police violently responding to peaceful protests around the country is just one example. The US would definitely have to control for speech that violates US law, such as SESTA/FOSTA.

6. This is all ignoring the fact that people are people, and even the best examples of online communities have examples of folks being rejected by the dominant voices in the community irrespective of the rules.

I think a public-owned online space is fascinating, but I don't think it'd be a magic bullet to solving these problems.
I am pretty sure that the last of your interpretations is closest to the truth, and it is really clear exactly what the parent is saying: people who are directly affected by or involved in the issue under discussion should be involved in the discussion of the issue.

A room full of rich white people discussing problems affecting poor people of colour is doomed to fail to capture the nuance of the situation. Not because white people are inherently too stupid to understand things, but because nobody can completely understand and articulate someone else's lived experience. It's not like this is a new or mind-blowing idea - representation is a key tenet of democracy, and should cover all the ways of segmenting society that are clearly differentiating.
<Raises hand.> I have. Sometimes successfully, sometimes not.

Two successes:

- I'd determined that a large email provider was transiting a sizeable fraction of all 419 spam I was seeing (and knew that this was likely broadly representative). Looked up the product title with "project manager" and similar terms, called the corporate switchboard, and asked for them by name. Phone picked up on first ring, I explained the situation briefly, fifteen minutes later I received a call from the manager in charge of that area, who leptnin touch over the next three months as the issue was resolved.

- Another time worksite had issues with another email service provider with glacially slow processing of our notification emails. Performed an executive email carpet bomb[1] after months of ineffective helpdesk attemps, with evidence of the issue. Was assigned a minder who helped resolve the issue.

Both were large companies (at the time), one I'm distinctly not inclined to consider favourably. Both responded exceeding expectations.

Then there is Google....

________________________________

Notes:

1. See https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/05/your-money/the-best-consu...
Do you think the economic effects would have been the same without a lockdown?

We had a pretty bad flu season a couple of years ago, but no lockdown and no economic downturn. Covid is worse than flu, but not orders of magnitude worse.

https://time.com/5107984/hospitals-handling-burden-flu-patie...
Discrete Optimization by Pascal van Hentenryck on Coursera. Fun class with great professor. Highly recommended if you’re interested in the subject.
Data science always seemed to me to be a profoundly boring job. Can anyone shed some light on what you find the most fascinating about it?
Eating seaweed can genetically modify the bacteria in our guts
But we are not ending with this kind of discussions here (even when we do it is discussed like why vim is better, why MS is good/bad etc) thats the point.

Like if you show me some examples from top 100 today, that is splitting audience 50/50, I think would be better.
> I see white people point to the absence of racism in a statistic and take it as proof it does not exist

I agree, and often I see it the other way around, with statistics used as the basis to build a racist discourse. The classic example is prison population statistics, and the even more classic one is Lombroso.

Plus, it's not like white people don't rely on personal experience and prejudices. There are psychological mechanisms to isolate "otherness" out of people you witness as "bad", you will just use the easiest one to pinpoint. So if you witness a bad guy who is white but from another town, you'll form a prejudice against people from the other town; if the guy is black, the prejudice will "scale up" to skin tone. The only way to offset that problem is to ensure everyone in the room comes from significantly different experiences and can somehow balance them out.
A guide to making better decisions
JPA works fine as proven by quarkus which uses hibernate. For JavaFX you should be using substrate from gluon to achieve this.
Maybe there is a way to post the court ruling itself. Might be more denser to read but would be free of all the fluff.

Edit: Edited link

Maybe this? [0].

https://www.courtlistener.com
Way before CGI was mainstream, Amiga helped it begin
These hints reminded me that we don't have "great scientists" anymore. Can you list recent Nobel Prize laureates?

Great scientists were basically people-institutions and all the mundane and scrupulous work was done by assistants, doctoral candidates, technicians, as we have an example of Hilbert and some much less known mathematician. There still exist relicts of this system in the academia.

With increasing emancipation and alternative opportunities this extend of exploitation of the nameless is not possible anymore, and this is good.
> bad journalism

Calling this piece journalism is overly charitable.

Here’s the source article, minus the snark and misinterpreted facts: https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/353072/facebo...
What? Do you have any source for that?
You can skip all that and just become a P.O.E.E Pope, just print out the card, easy.
Took the fast.ai course
Present Directly

Present Clearly

Iterate On Your Work

Specialize: Add as much new detail to a single piece of work.

Everyone has specialized skills, there's fame in using them to their fullest potential to explore many areas.

>There are two kinds of mistakes. There are
fatal mistakes that destroy a theory, but there
are also contingent ones, which are useful in
testing the stability of a theory.

Use the Feynman Method
>keep a dozen of your favorite problems con-
stantly present in your mind, [...] Every time
you hear or read a new trick or a new result, test
it against each of your twelve problems to see
whether it helps.

Give Credit To Others no matter how small

Summarize Everything Clearly and as long as is necessary: show your work second.

Your position as an authority will change abruptly. (I'm have a harder time rephrasing this. Your work will go from "meh he's washed out" to "he's perfected his craft" for identical reasons depending on how well it's received)
haXe @ haxe.org
Possibly, they might also think the only purpose or use of psychology is for that effect. I'm studying psychology in my spare time and it is an amazing tool for unlocking human potential. The only reason to know about 'dark patterns' is to grow up and find better ways to capture value through digital media by actually doing something for the user.
Even if coronavirus actually exists I would still consider COVID-19 epidemic to be mostly a social experiment, basically the extended version of War of the Worlds [1]

Governments are testing how many idiotic rules can they make us follow, preparing for the switch from democracy to surveillance-based totalitarism.

The actual mortality rates are not enough to justify all those limitations - most people infected by coronavirus don't even have any symptoms, majority of those who have symptoms will get through them as they would through a normal flu. If anything, we should order the old people (say 70+) to stay home, as they seem to be the only real risk group.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_Worlds_(radio_d...
It is interesting that streaming content economically is pretty hard at scale. That was a big moat for Netflix for a long time, but every year it gets filled in a little more as other companies figure it out.
I'm using liquid metal on my X201 tablet and it still hits about 80-85c under full load.
If people are cutting Barclays slack, perhaps it's because the guy on Twitter is painting this as a satanically evil deed when it was probably just someone making a stupid mistake.

Additionally, the aggregate bandwidth cost of delivering that JS file during its lifetime is probably less than $0.05. How many copies of this file would need to be concatenated to equal the size of David After Dentist?

No one levels up on the Internet — and especially Twitter — by being calm and reasonable.
Show HN: List of free to use illustrations and vectors for your next project
I remember reading a commenter on HN saying that most problems are solved going to the toilets. I hope no one installs bossware there as well.
There is a long known effect that open access articles get more citations compared to non open access articles (e.g. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040157 ). So I do not see why this should be very different for Sci-Hub articles. However I agree that the claimed effect might be exaggerated by confounding. More interestingly proper deposition of the data corresponding with the article increases also the citation rate ( doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230416 )
Covid Lockdown versus Economy Was Always False Trade-Off
About time.
Tech industry need a black guy to be murdered to enhance the necessary changes, otherwise it would be the same exact thing. smh
And my current position is to be completely opposed to cancel culture. I'm considering it the contemporary ideological enemy. Just making my biases known :)

Ontopic, I just can't imagine any good place this can take a society. If you accept that some topics can be (politely) discussed and some can't, this is equivalent to accepting that people in power decide which topics can be discussed. Because, well... how else are you going to decide except by discussing them? And no, I see no trace of people being able to separate conversation from meta-conversation, as long as it involves the same topic.

Not to mention that it goes again an intellectual and political tradition going back to the Enlightenment. Every time we diverged from open agora, we went to very dark places. That's one hell of a Chesterton's fence. I want a big, big argument pro cancel culture before I can consider it.
I understand your perception, pricing and perception is hard. I want to reassure you that this is really way cheaper for people to start using the product and as a company it was a huge project to lunch this pricing, especially when you lower the price for such a large portion of users.

The previous pricing was based on indexing operations + search operations. The new pricing is only based on search request and in a lot of situation N search operations = 1 search request (disjunctive faceting, federated search, etc.). At the end, for the big majority of free users (> 99%) they have as many or more search request in the 10 free units than in the old plan.