skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Are you alluding to "The Bitter Lesson" [1] by Rich Sutton [2]?

[1] http://incompleteideas.net/IncIdeas/BitterLesson.html

[2] http://incompleteideas.net/
These don’t seem like remotely significant issues, especially given how infrequent these directives are.
Dont equate reason with capitalism, thats just silly.

MDMA may cause you to experience a something and it might feel profound, but only through sober reflection on that experience are you able to learn anything.

Don't get me wrong, I think these substances are worth trying out. I just wouldn't want to fall in love through a drug, it would not feel genuine.
For EU to take action against Hungary you need all other members to agree. Unfortunately Poland and Hungary are backing each other up and veto any action against the other.
> When you're born into that type of system

The trouble is that the way out is not easy. We can no longer keep talking about "you're at a disadvantage because you're born into x." Even if it's true, mentally it paints a victimization culture that brings people down. If you tell someone the major of their problems are due to their class, or the history of their people, or police or some other bogeyman (both real and imagined), how are people going to see a way out?

We can't keep blaming. Maybe the narrative needs to be, "Yes, the scales are not as fair as they could be. Maybe they're super unfair. But fuck em. Show them what you can do, and don't stop until you beat them at their game!"

I don't know if that's naive or overly simplistic, or if it's just some form or noble lie or noble truth.

A lot of it is luck too. My father grew up during a war, his family lost everything and had to start from scratch. He made it through University where his two brothers struggled to learn English. They all grew up in the same situation, and he's told me he didn't know what made him different. Higher IQ? Stronger drive? Who knows.
And there is no "large groups" exception to walking in the middle of the road blocking traffic.

Free speech does not allow you to break other laws. Your freedom stops when it destroys the freedom of your fellow man.
You accidentally described an even more practical solution than increasing the naturally limited (e.g. good commercial spots in the city center) supply: make neighbourhoods unattractive by building communist era style apartment blocks in beautiful areas to drive prices of victorian houses down...
Strange, usually if a font is rendered with that issue, it would be in several other letters, as well.

That is often from the font renderer using an “even-odd rule” in vector rendering.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Even%E2%80%93odd_rule

What is your OS & browser version?
Conformist or not, resiliency and building relationships still play a part.

Given faculty positions are (very) limited, it seems resiliency might be the most important factor.
Well... they can just start another index. As long as that isn't prohibited
Why the U.S. Is Still Richer Than Every Other Large Country
Regarding the use of the 'aggressively conventional minded'. When I was younger I would think that these kind of people were mostly just detrimental to society but I have come to see that they sometimes have a use. It is this kind of people who were the first to see that immigration and multiculturalism have their limits. For instance, salafism cannot just be seen as just another opinion that people can have. Of course, the 'agressively conventional minded' would put it in a bit more stark words than 'have their limits' and would also extend their warning messages to far greater groups than actually warranted but the other three types of people might just close their eyes to the whole problem. Generally, the 'aggressively conventional minded' can be helpful when a society is in danger of degrading into lawlessnes. They will be the first to sound the alarm and sometimes they are right.
The French Revolution, A History by Thomas Carlyle. It is a truly massive undertaking, an 'in depth' account if there ever was one; and Carlyle's focus on the 'various types' of people involved is quite clear.
This is basically the same for me, plus the commute. The office manager doesn't get in until 8-9am and he was the only person who could unlock the office, and would leave around 5:30pm, meaning if you want lunch away from the office, you aren't going to hit 40 hours per week.

Where as now, I start my day around 6-7am (I wake up "early" every morning), I try and quit around 4pm, and take a 1-2 hour lunch sometime between the two. This schedule is only possible working from home. I now hit 40 hours per week week every single week that I work all 5 days, where as before I would hit 30 hours. And even weeks where I only work 4 days, I still hit ~35 hours after shrinking my lunch.
Nobody is doing that. Only small majority of Hungarians are ignorant or far right.
You could perhaps argue that antibiotics have allowed farming practises that might not be otherwise be economical that produce more suffering for the animals.

NB I don't know if this is true or not, but it certainly seems possible.
Marketing. And it's not just news or why fizzy water and clothing and everything else that's sold to make you feel special. It's why we like pickup trucks now. And why we think everyone should have a gun. And why drugs seem so dangerous. And even why our notions of "left wing" in American seem awfully far to the right if we step back out of our typical context. All the result of marketing.
Also, "here is a taxonomy I made up and coincidentally I just happen to be in the category that is the best. "
Agreed, though I've found Seneca's letters to be more insightful (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistulae_Morales_ad_Lucilium), as well as the The Enchiridion (http://classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/epicench.html).
A therapist or coach recommended this book called the Power of Habit. https://www.amazon.com/Power-Habit-What-Life-Business/dp/081....

The central theme of that book is that people attribute dumb behaviors to things like chemical dependence, when in fact it's a behavioral habit. The classic example from the book is people trying to quit smoking. You kick the physical dependency in a few days - the headaches and irritability go away, but smokers still relapse months or years afterwards. Why? It's because the smoking formed a habit to their brain, and their brain associated good feelings with smoking.

Read the book. But if you don't: Your brain has trained you to feel good when you read the news. You break this habit by replacing the good feeling of reading the news with a good feeling from some other, positive, healthy activity. Example: every time you get a desire to pull out your phone, do 10 pushups instead. You get a little physical exercise, and your brain starts associating positive feelings with positive activities.

Also, why the hell do you have notifications turned on if you're worried about the phone or the news being addictive? It's like asking to have cravings amplified. Turn off badges, notifications, etc. Check it on your own time and terms.
Your politics are definitely out of the liberal mainstream, but they don't have to be to get labeled a bot. Just criticizing the current democratic nominee will do it.
no one ever changes oil in a diesel in those conditions.
a belt - maybe, if it breaks.

otherwise one just does not shut down the engine, auxillary heaters or not.
Asking questions that imply you've never bothered to read anything about the topic isn't a good way to try to get other people to engage with you.

But if you're looking for a brief overview, you could read https://www.amazon.com/dp/1444791877/
I think the best takeaway from this is that the software industry makes lots of claims about development processes, but so little actual research is done in trying to validate those processes. It's all mostly based on opinion.
It certainly comes across a bit like Peterson's "everything is either order or chaos and chaos is bad," but for tech people who claim to be independent thinkers while all reciting the same old anti-regulation ideas.

I especially find PG's claim that "the people who run Silicon Valley are almost all independent-minded" to be questionable.
This is silly. The world isn't balanced like that. Many improvements have no disadvantage. More efficient photovoltaic cells, not needing hfcfs in pressurized spray cans, discovering that you can add a bit of carbon to iron, ...
Actually, the latest budget agreement at EU level contains added clauses to fight precisely this problem. They will have to be enforced, of course (which in EU terms is "only" large fines), but it should be fairly downhill from there.
That Flour You Bought Could Be the Future of the U.S. Economy
EU should be able to enforce the agreements those countries made or kick them out.

Functioning democracy is not just elections. It's also free press, academic freedom and freedom of speech etc.
Ooh this is one I haven't heard before. Now I'm thinking.
> But innovation isn't good per se.

This is a thing that is known to most people since the end of WWII, with it's genocides – in fact what you describe is a very modernist view of the world: societies are continuously progressing into the direction of the light, with technology making things better all the time. In this world view the arrow of time has a clear direction and it is forward, while the roles of the protagonists is equally clear cut.

Many people don't really get what the postmodernists wanted: they were sick of precisely that lie. In their eyes things are not always getting better and more rational while knowledge and wisdom increases. Things get forgotten and vanish, good things get replaced by cheap things, confusion happens, intelligent people make immoral decisions while dumb people become heros etc.

It is this "dirt of reality" where things aren't as clear cut as many thinkers like them to be. This is not a problem per se, unless they try to make the reality match their ideas instead of the other way around.
> Imagine if we promoted approaching flawed and broken software architecture like this

We do. All the time. It's why half the shit we work on is covered in a thick layer of technical debt and the other half is written in self contained microservices.

A software stack from a company that's been around long enough is going to be more random, redundant and glued together than the processes in our evolutionary biology.
You just have to remember the last time a particular log message was logged, and don't log it again until until some amount of time has passed.
OP said there was one too many non-Black Zuckerbergs, which I took to mean the one we have was one too many, that is, they may prefer he were Black instead? I don’t know what they meant, I just steelmanned it. I agree that bias exists, and it would be better if it didn’t at all in any way, but markets price in bias as well as risk and other factors, likely racism too, unfortunately. Predicting investments of others via their sentiment toward individuals and other groups is an idea I just had, and I don’t even trade or own stocks. This seems elementary to me.

It will matter to Zuckerberg personally because he doesn’t seem to rate well with some people, which isn’t necessary, but helps you get elected, generally. He seems to really care what people think about him in a value-neutral “we’re all just talking” kind of way, which actually isn’t a bad approach, but I want to see how he does live on stage with professional debaters. That’s essentially what Congress is these days: modern sedate mortal combat for American lives in our Colosseum, battles put on for the rich and famous while everyone else watches and cheers, watches and jeers, or scalps entry coins out front.

https://depts.washington.edu/chidint/journal/2015/03/glory-h...
I disagree - i take pride in my laziness.

Although i try to minimize the whole group's effort, not mine.
Right, maybe I worded that too strongly, it doesn't make the experience useless.

I wanted to emphasise that even if you experience something that feels profound in an altered state, you should still reflect on it and examine it when sober, and only then you can truly learn something useful.
What did people think about that book ?

I enjoyed it but felt like it was a bunch of other peoples ideas (Taleb, Kahneman, Levitin, etc) strung together.
The Salafists are just the Islamic version of the evangelical churches in America.
Agree. in this case he entirely misses that the aggressively conventional are serving a purpose that’s incredible important. This is classic stuff going back to the Tower of Babel, and theories about conservatives vs liberals functions in society (ie disruptives and preservationists).

After reading The Righteous Mind (best book of the decade, IMO) and generally gaining an appreciation for how blind we are to how good we have it (the aggressively independent types moreso, they are chronically unsatisfied and in a way pessimistic about progress, blind to the incredible luxury we live in now), I find myself really understanding the role and purpose of the conventionistas in society and I’m glad for them! They are the buffer between the woke mobs, they fight to keep the system from moving around too wildly. They are wrong of course (heresy is a good example), but so are the unsatisfied independents as well.

Not that these map perfectly. There are many conservative independents and vice versa, but your main thrust on pg generally:

1. Defining things so they create categories for people, usually framing it for some self-serving purpose

2. Putting himself in the good category and spending very little time thinking over why the “bad” one may not be so bad.

Really hits home.

Side note: I found his last essay on Orthodoxy Privilege to be a real stinker. That he felt the need to write about “privilege” of which he is gluttonous, and use it as a chance to redefine privilege to his ends, was an impressive level of dissonance.
>Strikes me as personal writing that ought to be kept personal

Spoken like a true aggressively conventional-minded person.
Isn’t work from home basically putting business back into neighborhoods?
Check out this article on this exact topic: https://vistaserv.net/blog/90s-fonts-modern-browsers
I would argue that you cannot parse out the "good" technology from the "bad" technology as that would require full knowledge of downstream consequences.

Embedded in every technology there is a powerful idea, sometimes two or three powerful ideas. Every technology has a philosophy which is given expression in how the technology makes people use their minds, in what it makes us do with our bodies, in how it codifies the world, in which of our senses it amplifies, in which of our emotional and intellectual tendencies it disregards.

As soon as we build tiny cameras and software that could interpret pixel values and classify it, there was going to be facial recognition used against people.

P.S. I don't think it should, but I don't see how you can stop that. My personal feeling is that access to knowledge and technology is what prevents power imbalance.
I for one am pleased by the fact that disinformation campaigns by climatists have not been able to fully exploit weaknesses of democracy, although it is horrendous that despite of that enormous amounts of money are stolen through taxation and channeled into the pockets of the rich through renewable energy scams.

Disinformation, like free speech, can't hurt us unless we put ourselves in a position where others decide for us (democracy). The USA used to be great because of its system of government that protected the individual from both the federal government and democracy. That's no longer the case.
Apple 13.3″ MacBook Air with Retina Display
You probably don't know this word, but you're literally advocating for ochlocracy, which is the very thing I was talking about in the upstream comments.

The mob has an infinite well of issues, the mob will never be satisfied. That's exactly how it transitions into totalitarianism. Pandering to the mob just adds more fuel to the fire.

Police brutality etc. are issues that should certainly be addressed, and there's countless other societal issues that need to be looked at. But dealing with those and pandering to the mob are orthogonal issues. We have a democracy, the rule of law, and a government structure specifically to define a process for addressing such issues. These are the mechanisms that differentiate the western world from the soviet nightmare my parents escaped. It's so bizarre and terrifying to watch people openly advocating for discarding them and embracing mob rule. Americans have fought and died to uphold these values, and now a pocket of their own citizenry wants to demolish them.

> You have to tackle issues which cause them to be aggressive towards racists to begin with

Pretty heavily loaded language there. Anyone mob targets = racist? There's far too much evidence of the mob targeting non-racists to even pretend that this is what motivates them at this stage. 'Racist', or rather the newspeak co-opted 'Bigot', is now just the current incarnation of 'Communist', 'Kulak', 'Witch' and whatever other generic labels for the enemy of the mob. The mob never runs out of enemies, the mob never runs out of issues to get angry about. It's Lord of the Flies at a national scale.
That isn't true - the actual damn scammers are still legally liable. Even assuming they made it completely impossible to prove their linkage (unlikely) it would still be just as illegal.
For a counterfactual if I somehow figured out something with chaos theory deep enough that doing something utterly innocous like knocking on a door would cause an accident that result in the ceiling of the Whitehouse collapsing and killing all inside I would still be responsible for murder among many other crimes even if nobody could discover it much less prove it. Premeditated planned actions to end many lives and carrying them out are still murder and I would still be responsible for them.

It isn't a legal shield any more than you not being prosecutable for the death of Abraham Lincoln is - because it is the completely wrong person to try to prosecute!
Show HN: A bite-sized news feed for remote work content
> I am not quite sure I understand that view. Why is the statement “America was built on fundamental ideas of freedom” a political or identity point?

Because freedom cannot be untied from politics and society. The initial constitutional congress defined freedom for those who owned land. Obviously with time it expanded to all white men, then all white women, and so on, but not with out a inherently political fight.

A fight which we may not encode into law, but which is effectively encoded into law by uneven enforcement of law.
A funnier version of the same <more or less> set of ideas is "The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity" by Carlo M. Cipolla. ...And unlike Paul's essay, it comes with illustrations!

http://harmful.cat-v.org/people/basic-laws-of-human-stupidit...
Since we do not make enough BH4 (tetrahydrobiopterin) with this enzyme deficiency we cannot metabolize the amino acids needed to make serotonin, dopamine, and Nirtic Oxide. And then some of these amino acids turn into trace amines that act like meth.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaneurology/fullarticle/7...

https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/382815/fnins-12-0...
Isn't part of the point of the article that some books were best sellers and yet they are forgotten?
if you are doing customer reporting, sooner or later you will need these two priority things ( more so than charting features)
1. Delegated authentication ( think Okta)
2. Fine-grained row-level security to slice the same data in the report based on authorization.

We have had good experience with Tableau but had to do some custom Rest API programming for #1 .. Feel free to PM
This is strange to me. I’ve always found Go to just click, and I can write code very quickly. I used to work at a Python shop, and I would prototype in Go to make sure things were reasonably correct before porting to Python (and then to watch the performance, type safety, and a good chunk of the maintainability evaporate, to my great dismay). I wonder if this comes down to differences in how programmers think about programming?
Since the effects of regulations put in place around climate change are enjoyed/suffered by all citizens, and not only scientists, it's appropriate that everybody gets to dictate what those regulations are.
requires account?
It's a myth that Houston doesn't have zoning. They don't have use based zoning but they still have plenty of requirements such as parking minimums and lot sizes that serve as de facto zoning.
> The average walking distance to a pub

This is commonly referred to as "Staggering distance" :-)
You know what Orbán has in common with, say, Kádár? They were both "democratically" elected.
Driving to Slovenia with three friends
Indeed, and to paraphrase my PhD adviser, we currently have more research dollars than good students to spend them on.
> different people conform to the norm, regardless of the virtue (or lack thereof) of the norm itself.

But this is exactly what I'm disagreeing with: there was widespread and popular opposition to slavery from its invention. To act like "everyone was doing it, everyone thought it was ok" is absolutely just not true.

The people in favour of slavery were largely the wealthy, powerful minority who benefited from slavery.

> The many anti-slavery individuals of the past still largely did nothing for hundreds of years until popular opinion and material conditions changed tides.

This is such a strange statement. "anti-slavery individuals did nothing"? Who do you think achieved abolition?! You seem to think that abolition was some passive force which happened as a result of "changing tides": I, on the other hand, seem to remember that there was a war fought about it (in the US at least).

Furthermore, slavery didn't begin and end in the united states: abolition was achieved in many other places before it go to the US, in fact the US was something of a holdout for slavery in the west.
There were countless slave rebellions, some quite successful, and political action absolutely achieved progress towards abolition in many places around the world.

> But in doing so it makes it even more apparent that the anti-cancel-culture crowd is passive and ineffective, making his point clearer.

The "anti-cancel-culture" crowd, by my estimation, makes up the vast majority of positions of power in the US. For god's sake the president routinely decries cancel culture and a large part of his appeal is the fact that he's "un-PC".

> He could have made the same point regarding conformity by citing the Stanford prison experiment if he wanted to

The Stanford prison experiment was a complete fabrication and research fraud. (honestly: you should look up modern information on it. I had kind of thought it was common knowledge that it was bunk, but I suppose it did have a large cultural impact)

> I'd be willing to bet a dollar that there are personality psychology studies that even correlate 5-factor personality traits to moral conformity.

I don't know, but my point is that Graham has clearly picked superficial personality traits that flatter him by associating his idea of himself with his idea of abolitionists. Regardless of whether the idea of "personality types" is valid or not, it's clear that what Graham is doing here isn't.

> Unfortunately popular culture is bit too much of the opinion that there are no underlying personality traits that predict future behavior nowadays.

Again, I would completely disagree.
I don't know what the psychological consensus is, but from laypeople it seems clear that "personality traits are important" is an extremely mainstream view.
> The question begs itself: can a democracy with no independent, local press be considered a democracy still?

The press doesn't have to be a centralized, edited company. Citizens can report news independent and locally.

Indeed, this type of journalism is resistant to the oppression of government, and the bias of media conglomerates.