skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is something about this way of reasoning that seems faulty to me.The reason the Wuhan laboratory was studying coronaviruses in the first place is that there is a large reservoir of the virus in the area. In other terms: diamonds are hard to find, but where you find diamond mines you also find diamonds, ergo: diamond mines must create diamonds.
Why did you stop worrying?
Indeed, mitugating DDOS effectively requires frequently making drastic changes to your network on short order.
I haven't played slay the spire, but I've been enjoying monster train which is mostly the same game.

I would consider the core loop to be each encounter/game. This is a core loop that's shared across most card games whether that's gwent, hearthstone, magic, or Yu-Gi-Oh. It is the smallest self-contained unit of gameplay. The minimum viable loop would be each turn, but you can't really stop and pick up the game between turns, right?

All of the other loops, the build-play-build loop, the "finish a run" loop, the "cross-run-progress" loop, are all features that are enabled by/rely on the core loop of gameplay.

In analogy to tennis and the OP, each hit of the ball is the minimum viable loop, each point is the core loop. This is enhanced by the match loop and on top of that the "tournament" loop.
Interesting article, i will check github at weekend, but assuming atari resolution 40x192 single channel and float size 4 byte and 140000 image you got 4300800000 bytes roughly 4gb data. I wonder if they talk about complete training time
The virus is also the direct cause of many Cancers of the immune system, it causes more than 500k cancer worldwide most of them Lymphomas
Where have I seen this before? No algebra in 8th grade, try to get the students to develop an intuition for math...ah, yes, I remember: my own 8th grade, in 1967. It was called The New Math, and we got a smattering of set theory (enough to distinguish intersection from union), trivial geometry (nothing about axioms and theorems, afair), and number base systems. Ostensibly this was to make us think about the basics of math; afair, it did nothing of the sort.

My Junior High went the New Math route, but some of the other Junior High schools that fed into the same High School did not. The result was that I, and all the other freshmen from my school, were a year behind the freshmen from these other schools. (The New Math helped us not at all.)

I did well enough in math over the next few years that one of the High School's math teachers persuaded me to take Algebra II and Trig both in my junior year (everyone else who was in to math took them in sequential years). That allowed me to take calculus in my senior year, along with a dozen or so students from the Junior Highs that had not dabbled in New Math. The rest of the students from my Junior High were not so lucky.

The excuse that not teaching algebra in 8th grade "ensures that all students enter high school with the same mathematical foundation" sounds like something someone who felt threatened by math must have come up with.

BTW, I did not become a mathematician, but it did prepare me for other STEM disciplines. Geometry in particular was a revelation in a way of thinking that for me bled over into many other disciplines.
Former ICANN CEO is now co-CEO of the private equity firm that tried to buy .org
https://xenproject.org/developers/security-policy/#organizat...
The left has abandoned the pursuit of equality (equality of opportunity) for the pursuit of equity (equality of outcome), but now the left is changing the definition of "equality" to mean the definition of equity. It's an Orwellian game of doublespeak and they're good at it.
The article says it hasn't been created yet.
C'mon Hong Kong belongs to China and always was. It was just leased to UK and this lease had ended in last century. China just wanted to reap benefits of Being Kong economy this is why they given them such a huge autonomy . They can change it anytime as this is their property. If someone would follow your logic Hawai is also US occupied country ...
Same link from 2 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23845579
It's amazing that 3-4 seconds is considered a reasonable target in 2020 when 8 seconds was a target on freaking dialup. It's like having a Ferrari and considering outrunning a horse a success.
Serious question, is there are reason to have a GPU and that many cores?

My assumption would that either the GPU or the CPU is the bottleneck, most likely the GPU. Why not spend money for more GPU and fewer cores?
I wonder how that works in a world where more than a few competitors are willing to chainsaw apart the upstarts.
That could be split as a setting in the user-specific header with the visibility part handled client-side. A bit more work, but it's not impossible if it's worth it.
At what point does Vue start to break down?

Either because of logistical limitations, or programming limitations, or throughput limitations, or user load limitations, or even if the program you want to build is beyond what Vue was designed for.

Say, if I want to build a large website like a Salesforce web application, or a warehouse fulfillment and inventory management system, or something of this nature. Where it has a lot of web pages, and different processes to handle different calculations, and what not. And it ties into some back end database of course.

Can Vue handle such a level of complexity? Or is Vue better suited to handling smaller sized apps, with smaller quantities of users?
with a titan and a threadriper for instance what would be the results?
> Related to the origin hypotheses, the hypothesis of zoonotic outbreak from a wet market in mid-Dec no longer seems as relevant

Perhaps in your mind, but this is not at all a fair representation of the general scientific consensus - most still hold the weight of the evidence leans towards a November '19 origin in Wuhan
The fact that such a critical problem can only be detected by a human noticing it is, itself, part of the problem. Having multiple people look at the change instead of just one is a little bit better, but it's still just a band-aid. Ideally, there would be automated processes in place that could prevent and/or mitigate this kind of thing. (If we were talking about software instead of configuration, how would you view an organization that required every commit to be reviewed, but had no automated tests?)

One possibility would be to parse the config file and do a rudimentary simulation, taking into account traffic volumes, and warn the user if the result would be expected to overload any routes.

Another possibility would be to do something a bit smarter than just instantly, blindly propagating a change to every peer at the same time. If the bad routes had been incrementally rolled out to other routers, there might have been time for someone to notice that the metrics looked abnormal before Atlanta became overloaded. (I don't know whether that's feasible with BGP, or if it would require a smarter protocol, but it seems like it would be worth looking into.)

Finally, it seems like if a config change is made to a router and it immediately crashes, there should be systems that help to correlate those two events, so that it doesn't take half an hour to identify and revert the change.
Use corporate devices to take corporate backups. Don't download them onto your personal device.
And yet folks who complain about not being able to speak never mention the things they can’t talk about.

I’ll give you a hint, it’s never their field of expertise, and in fact, 9 times out of 10, it’s racialized genetics, one of the single most well refuted subjects in the field of genetics.
> Which players are going to aggressively lobby for this?

Corporate executives, of course. It is in their interest to ensure they maximize their benefit at all stages of the business life cycle. Any attack that could negatively affect executive compensation at any time will be staunchly opposed, out of principle.

Their arguments we can anticipate, we have seen already in this thread: the business needs their unique talent and deep knowledge, they are doing the business a favor by not jumping ship, it is only just that they be compensated...

> What you're saying is intellectually lazy and bordering on /r/conspiracy. You shouldn't stop identifying, understanding, and petitioning to fix the problem simply because you think you might get some pushback.

I believe the more fundamental problem is mythologizing of corporate executives, and I am not afraid of pushback, such as I am receiving in this very exchange.
You have a bigger name to blame. It is much easier to tell customer Amazon is down, or Cloudflare is down, rather than explaining something that customer dont want to hear.

And if everyone else on the AWS / CF is down as well, then it is no one's fault. We all keep calm and just wait it out.
Ensuring that the appropriately-knowledgeable people for various types of changes, as well as appropriate testing processes, are part of the change management workflow is a part of good change management.
S3 will scale as much as is needed by itself
The line of thinking is seductive, believe me, but that's the thing about circumstantial evidence - it is very likely that there is a coronavirus infectivity research station next to a massive source of bat coronaviruses, that was in fact why the lab was there!
> 2. some kind of actual change was/is required to snap most people out of just going about their business as usual.

If the basis for such change comes from state diktats rather than understanding and willingness of the population to adopt such from their own initiatives… it's not surprising things are turning out the way they are.

> That expensive course of action should have been used to regroup and implement a sensible containment plan. Instead that time was basically wasted, which is need the real tragedy.

Short from martial law, my confidence in any government to succeed in such from the get go is nil. Bull in a china shop.

> But I would have thought that a pan-partisan shared threat like a pandemic would have put more people on the same page.

I would think the same thing to if the incentives for most people to be on the same page were there pre pandemic… they were not. Now there's a free for all of conflicting ideologies, while still being crushed under the weight of decades of malfeasance that has only been exacerbated even more.
It's fine that they made mistakes and there were an outage, shit happens to everybody.

What is really scary though that half of the internet stopped working. That's not ok!
You are just being thick on purpose. DHS was deployed because the federal buildings have been getting destroyed. If the local government doesn't want to do it, then the feds have to protect their property. You need to stop believing the media propaganda and think what you would do if your building is getting destroyed.
People misjudge the landlord market there are yes tons of huge corporations or “family businesses” with a portfolio where a default doesn’t really matter but the vast majority are people with 1-2 additional properties that feel like forgiving rent will make them not be able to make the mortgage against the property and then they’d default.

So the “heartless” landlord situation may be a bit more nuanced than these articles seem to indicate. Where it’s legal to evict, landlords might be looking at their own finances and feeling like they don’t have a choice either.
Damn that sucks, sounds like a stressful Friday evening for all involved. Thanks for taking the time to answer.
That’s a heck of a lot of steps to get to that conclusion.

There is a massive amount of misinformation around COVID-19. Check out this Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misinformation_related_to_the_...

All the things that the article posits have been looked into and the conclusion from most of the scientific community is that it is extraordinarily unlikely that this came from a lab in Wuhan.
Because they don’t care about their users.
Last time dns quit on us (and literally half of the internet went down), we ended up developing a backup plan.
Why differential privacy is awesome (2018)
Don't underestimate useful things, tricks, and theorems though ;)
“Ethos” Capital?
Alternately, find the entry point to a chaotic interaction and design rules around structured exploration of that interaction. Then adjust into a legible, well-paced gameplay loop to taste.

That's how you can come up with a game like pinball(ball-on-plane physics), Tetris(tetronimos), or Sokoban(box-pushing on the grid) - interesting interactions with a lot of inherent complexity, and core loops that are immensely mundane in description. This strategy applies as well to conventional narrative: Set up some absolute rules of the world, then start simulating what happens.

Loop-based workflows are useful in terms of establishing the "economic model" and fleshing out the core concept, but they've only really been in the practiced parlance since the rise of MMOs and subsequently popularized through reduction to the simple compulsion loops that now drive most mobile games. They really don't deserve the central role they've been given lately.
Do you think pagerank works?

Do you think it's unscientific?

Should we look at websites in random order after a search?

Don't confuse the fact h-index has significant issues with the idea it is useless.
For the record, I don’t work for cloudflare. I was merely pointing out that failsafe and bulletproof tools for every situation is a myth in my humble opinion. If you have seen and work for organizations that know how to do this better, good for you.
Fascinating read.

I suspected life could be thought as a self replicating and self improving algorithm like physical process.
Very encouraging to see the information theory and biology are being used in this context.
Your customer doesn’t care, as they don’t have business with cloudflare.
Your fault is in not having plan b.
Indeed, understand-ability is a double-edged sword in cryptography. In general it's best to follow Kerckhoffs's principle and make sure you understand why it works, or risk that your adversary learns more than you do.

> Quantum computers can't break modern symmetric crypto.

Much like we don't have proofs that it is classically secure we also don't have proofs it is secure in a quantum setting. But absence of proof is not proof of absence. In fact we know that Grover's algorithm halves the strength of any hash function. In general you should assume that symmetric cryptography is easier to break on a quantum computer than on a classical one because they are strictly more powerful.

In case of RSA and Elliptic Curves, we known there are theoretical quantum algorithms that undermine the security. But for Lattice cryptography there are actually proofs that they remain secure in a quantum setting.
Not to mention that his Google comp was in the neighborhood of 9 figures.
Seems like the COO's fault for getting so much of their wages in stock. If you don't want to take risks, you shouldn't be holding onto stock.
So executives reap massive gains during both profits and losses. They literally cannot lose. Yet somehow this is moral while millions get laid off and are tasked with "pulling themselves up by their bootstraps" because capitalism...

Capitalism in its current form has no morals at all.
Not OP but likely because there was nothing they could do.
Sounds like a great use-case for torrents.
How can we use technology as a vehicle to create art?
That honour belongs to Twitter
We need to do something about BGP.

Just in the past year Verizon, IBM, Apple, now Cloudflare have seen outages from BGP misconfiguration. The Verizon issue took down a significant part of the internet.

BGP is a liability to society. We need something which doesn't constantly cause widespread outages.
>If you have seen and work for organizations that know how to do this better, good for you.

Let's be clear: I'm not talking about some small subset of fantasy companies. It is a strict compliance requirement for many of the world's largest industries that you must have things like change management processes, incident response playbooks, and testing in place. A "myth" it certainly is not. Again, it's a fundamental thing no different than the most basic security requirements that we also expect (which is no coincidence, as one of the components of many security frameworks is proper change management controls). I'm not saying it has to be bulletproof and perfect (in fact, it never will be), but you still have to have something.

Put another, possible more easily understood way: "don't test in production" is a requirement (some times even a legal requirement) for most companies once they reach a certain size. It's not just a funny saying that devs joke about.
Isn’t it a cheap way to win hearts?
As a customer I’m not really interested in what happened, I don’t want it to happen.
While technically the board of directors sets executive compensation, one must remember that those board members are largely executives at other companies and the executives are often board members elsewhere. So in practice it’s a circlejerk and executives do set their own compensation via implicit quid pro quo.

Also, you appear to be confusing morality with legality. Screwing over line employees up to and including looting the pension funds to pay executive bonuses is legal (see Hostess bankruptcy for an example), but it’s also immoral.
> Is it really a bad thing to not know algebra at the 8th grade?

Knowing it is a better thing
They don't set their own pay. It's set by board members that are probably executives in other companies.

The C level engineered an entire system where it's impossible for them to lose.
The rule is don't put company data on personal equipment unless you're authorized to do so. If the company data is an archive or backup, you probably want that authorization in writing.

In small companies, personal equipment might get used incidentally, but if you work for a company with a budget, their data shouldn't go on your machines.
Right, in the conclusion they refer to "means, timing, agent and place" which seems to frame this like one would prosecute a criminal trial in the absence of "smoking gun" physical evidence. If the researchers at the heart of all this were located far from the epicenter of the outbreak, then you'd need to find a good explanation for why it started where it did, which is why I think it should be mentioned as a distinct point of evidence.
I've actually helped manage a company in financial distress. Here's reality:

- First, most executives have little impact on the specific event that put the firm under. (I was a senior marketing person; the building burned down. Fire safety was most assuredly NOT within my purview or even something I could ask about)

- Running a business in financial distress basically sucks. Take your job and make it 10 X harder. You're basically running a startup, except your credit is officially shot, your employees know layoffs are coming, your competitors and customers know you're vulnerable, and key personnel with families are saying to hell with this, I want to be sure my kid is going to college (and bailing out).

- I'll go one better, speaking from experience. Most key executives can take part of the business with them. So when they leave, part of what little is left of the company leaves with them (customers, technology, capabilities). What are you going to do, sue? bwahahah. Good luck, your lawyers are already swamped...

- Most executives are actually reasonable talented people. They have value on the open market. Often significant and freed of any golden handcuffs they once wore.

- Oh yeah... there is a high probability of failure or other drastic changes. So promises are worthless. Our leadership structure changed three times in five months. You have no guarantees that the person who made a promise will be in a position to honor it (or even be around). Turnarounds are a cash-only game.

So unless you like working for free - in hell... the current system is the only way to get decent talent to stay.
I doubt this is for the profit in that industry itself. It's probably more to do with the negotiation power they can get if they control an important export to the USA, maybe partly using avocado distribution chains for drugs, and maybe money laundering.

Violent criminal activity is not attractive from a business perspective. Security is expensive, paying bribes is expensive, mistakes are expensive. Without the huge money influx of drug trafficking (which is an insane source of profit) to maintain an army, it'd be more cost-effective to simply not have one.

Don't get me wrong, these aren't good people and right off the bat would probably still be involved in lots of corruption, blackmailing and even murder. But I doubt they'd be able to afford a paramilitary branch and maintain violent conflicts without the profits from drugs.
There's no accepted definition of intelligence so how could he be correct [0]? He's using a culturally defined comparison which unsurprisingly places him on the winning side.
If you make comparisons on the basis of race (which is a social construct[1]) where the result demonstrates "racial superiority" then it is racist.

It's social and cultural influences all the way down.

[0]http://www.aboutintelligence.co.uk/what-intelligence.html
[1]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization)
Bad things happen, and I'd rather we foster a culture of honesty rather than pretending.
Even the title seems intentionally written in a misleading way...the OP correctly kept the original title but it is by design misleading with that use of which
Früher war mehr Lametta! Also known as "Wir bauen uns ein Atomkraftwerk!"

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpEYKv6mGNI
Perhaps, but I'm not convinced that was the real cause of British naval dominance during the latter part of the age of sail. Their real advantages were that the officer corps was at least partly a meritocracy, and the government provided enough funding for realistic training. By contrast the other European navies were so badly managed that they often basically beat themselves through sheer incompetence.
The reliability of those who write papers is fairly important. How do I know that data hasn’t been falsified? How do I know what is correct?

There are reasons why some publications are treated more seriously than others. Reputation is very helpful for the layman. The very fact that most scientists have said they feel it was a natural outbreak speaks volumes to me. This paper is just a vast chain of speculation, and I think it needs to be treated with a great deal of caution.
Facebook is a pretty good example of how neither of those things actually help, and if anything only amplify the harm that comes to marginalized people who have good reasons to not use their real names or faces.
Here's the palm tree labeled "South Dixie Highway": https://goo.gl/maps/NjrFy7686RQfuJJ29
Red Rock Coffee is raising $300k to survive — help save the 2nd floor
Reinvention as Subversive Activity
Whenever I see people complain about C level exec's salaries I see one of two arguments used in favour of it. First, people will say that their compensation is tied to performance either through bonuses for milestones or stocks. Second, people will say it's compensation for risk. If you still get most of the money after running the company into bankruptcy then neither of the two applies.

The only reason I can see paying out in this case is if the exec was brought on to turn the company around and this was always a known, likely outcome despite anyone's best efforts. I'd also argue that in that scenario they should have negotiated more salary instead of stocks and bonuses.