skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
At least regarding this particular piece, it seems to me (microbiology PhD) that we have a perfectly adequate definition of organism (I like a definition of life put forwards by NASA: a self-sustaining chemical system capable of undergoing evolution). It is a definition that allowed us to discover and formulate answerable questions about an interesting and novel (to us, at least) form of life, after all. Moreover, cooperative bacteria forming large-scale structures is not new to science (see, for instance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myxococcus_xanthus). What do you think needs to be added to the definition of organism? What do you think would be gained from that addition?
He Was Iran’s Homegrown Tech Star. The Guards Saw a Blackmail Opportunity
It's Volume 1.
> Maybe you all can agree that insurance and lottery are the same in that only a fraction of consumers come out ahead

Only a fraction of the consumers come out ahead if we only consider monetary value. But the whole reason insurance and the lottery exist in the first place is that there are other kinds of value besides monetary value. In the case of insurance, it's peace of mind. In the case of the lottery, it's whatever entertainment value comes from being able to visualize yourself winning, even if your chances of actually doing so are tiny.
This doesn't seem like a big deal. I imagine every CEO of such a big company would dare to ask for special treatment from Apple. Not doing so would be a dereliction of duty to their shareholders.
Relieved to learn that other people dwell on this as well. My anxiety stems from the idea that modern corporations are incentivized to ruthlessly optimize for efficiency--short-term gains--thereby outcompeting corporations that are structured for longer-term outlooks by engineering redundancy (which you call stability) into their processes. I don't know how to begin to incentivize the idea that efficiency is not the end-all.
Of course. But not everyone is good at that.
Congratulations on launching. I have to say honestly my #1 feedback is the video - it is way too long and does not convey to me the relevant details about your product as you described above. Attention spans are short, and if there is a broken icon image in the video (at 1:49) I will immediately stop taking the product seriously.

Definitely agree that communication software can be improved.
Illustrations would definitely help, you’re right. It’s in our issues list, and I have some ideas about simple ways to address that. Issues list is on Github incidentally https://github.com/genmon/aboutfeeds

Podcast: I’m not close enough to this world to know. Has podcasting answered the discovery question by centralising directories, or are podcasts still discovered “in the wild”?
<sarc> Yes. Very much special treatment: "we hope that Apple will also make these options equally available to all iOS developers" </sarc>

Epic seems to be fighting the good fight against a company abusing market power. I hope they win.
Time in a Box
I mentioned we take privacy seriously, and that includes complying with all applicable privacy laws - whether that’s GDPR or other laws like CCPA.
The French model of high taxes that can potentially be offset by subsidies and grants is an interesting one. I've heard stories of companies getting an employee early on who's sole purpose was applying for these grants and subsidies.

Now, I think the one issue the French (and really European) tech sphere should tackle is low salaries for engineers. France has stellar engineering schools but lose so much talent because local companies are simply unwilling to match the international offers their graduates are getting. That brain drain erodes the talent pool and make the tech scene less attractive in the long run.
But nowhere near as fast as a missile that weighs 1% and has a much higher power-to-weight ratio.
Yes, efficiency requires a fixed output goal. Because you want to minimize input while sustaining your desired output target.

For example, how can I make all of today's deliveries with less delivery trucks?

While productivity requires a fixed input goal. Because you want to maximize output while sustaining your desired input goal.

For example, how can I deliver more products per day without increasing the size of my delivery truck fleet?

Often time, improving one can improve the other, but not always. For example, someone could ask, how can we grow profit? Okay, one way is to be more efficient, thus spend less money to make the same revenue. Alright, maybe we use cheaper materials, so now produce the same amount and sell the same, but our margin has increased and we make more revenue. Someone else could say, we need to be more productive. Okay, so you invest in better marketing, and scale production to meet increased demand. You are as efficient as before, but more productive.

So I feel like, reducing the process from X,Y,Z to only X is about productivity. You still have the same number of employees, but since they don't need to waste time doing Y and Z anymore, they can produce more output. That said, you could choose to apply the gains to efficiency as well, for example, hey, because I eliminated Y and Z, I can now cut my workforce in half and deliver the same output.
That concept of efficency as opposite of stability seems a bit fallacious in the strong case - inefficency itself can and has caused systems to collapse which is the exact opposite of stability.

Cache/reserve and efficency is itself complicated and situational if it helps or hurts efficiency. Overfitting it could make it fragile but it also depends upon relative costs for what a blind pursuit of efficiency goes for. If something is cheap enough like data storage there will be plentiful slack because slimming it down is irrelevant to efficiency - why bother going with custom 4KB chips when economy of scale means a 250 MB one is cheaper and better? It just isn't worth trying to cut corners there.

A laggard damped system would take longer to get into a "bad state" assuming the environment doesn't demand rapid changes as the baseline to survive. Bad state is relative as always - one can doom themselves both by leaping onto the "next big thing" which isn't and by sticking to the buggy whip and musket when others have cars and automatic rifles.
I agree. Kaggle’s great. Though, personally, I’d prefer a collaborative interface to help improve my model accuracy for example, than a competition type interface.
So... basically pass/fail? Who's gonna get that far but type 'F' instead of 'A' into the HTML they author?
The 90 minutes is probably with the instructor, who will also prevent you from damaging things.

Most of the things in hotel rooms are replaceable. This is arguably not as replaceable as towels or a mattress.

Probably helps electricity usage too, even though that's probably small to a hotel for even 24 hours usage.
It is simultaneously possible for the results to have statistical issues while also being good enough to provide utility as evidence for drawing some conclusions. You can both be right.
You've worked on two apps. Besides that you've been a part of the evangelist ecosystem for a tremendously simple framework. You are not what I could call an expert in using Redux.

You are almost certainly an expert in Redux's internals but that's not what we're discussing. In fact the root of the problem is exactly that you've conflated one for the other.
If a chemical plant sets up in an area then pollutes the environment during the course of business, it is required to clean up the mess. Known risks are required to have mitigations ready, and sometimes-expensive procedures must be followed to ensure safety.

Bitcoin (and everything like it) is very much at the "Pollute the environment with whatever the hell I want" phase of its existence. That should change.

Bitcoin should be taxed to recover the externalized costs it imposes -- basically, compensate the victims of bitcoin-enabled crime.

Is only a small fraction of bitcoin usage related to crime? No problem -- the tax will be very low.
SF ClickHouse meetup organizer here. Thanks for the shout-out for the SF ClickHouse Meetup. We're looking forward to hearing about SplitGraph on September 10th.
I think we fixed this now, was a bug in how we did our client introspection query rewrites (wasn't actually DBeaver-specific).

Could you try again when you have the chance?
Because of 5 minutes you don't go into another language?

You must be a fast learner then, when 5 minutes is too much.
Hah, I knew sooner or later Google would kill it off. Songza was a great buy, (They did semi-curated musical playlists by genre/mood/etc) had a better name, and made "Google play music" actually semi-decent.

Then Google let it sit, and rot, and die slowly on the vine over the past ~4 years. Guess its off to Spotify.
Nope,that’s not correct. Even in English health insurance is not tax, unemployment insurance is not tax...
And by the way what you call ‘charges’ is historically‘cotisations’ (fees).
> nitpicking out individualized acts of violence to discredit a large, decentralized movement

That would forbid criticism of any violent decentralized movement.

> There's a strong false equivalency being deployed there.

I don't think there's any equivalency. There's no widespread looting and assault from the center or the right here.

Antifa specifically are willing to use violence to suppress disbelievers as part of their manifesto, and have handbooks re: playing to the invisible audience, goading people into fight responses, etc. However I suspect you know this already. And that you're doing that it now.
> Notably, the Act did not change the official name of the state. It merely provided the description for the State. The Constitution of Ireland provides that Éire (or Ireland in English) is the official name of the State and, if the Act had purported to change the name, it would have been unconstitutional as it was not a constitutional amendment. The distinction between a description and a name has sometimes caused confusion. The Taoiseach, John A. Costello, who introduced the Republic of Ireland Bill in the Oireachtas, explained the difference in the following way:

> If I say that my name is Costello and that my description is that of senior counsel, I think that will be clear to anybody who wants to know. If the Senator [Helena Concannon] will look at Article 4 of the Constitution she will find that the name of the State is Éire. Section 2 of this Bill declares that "this State shall be described as the Republic of Ireland." Its name in Irish is Éire and in the English language, Ireland. Its description in the English language is "the Republic of Ireland."
Ask HN: Why do many sites now put username+password entry on different pages?
I just find it irritating when typing it in, AND it messes with password managers. But it seems to be happening more and more. What's the logic behind it? Is there some security benefit I don't understand? Or is it just me who hates this?
I despise deceptive marketing
In the early part of this century I had another startup and Internet radio was just starting. I found louisianaradio.com which was headquartered in Lafayette and I had it on in our office all the time. The two guys running it at the time even sent me a bumper sticker I put on my pickup. Sadly it is no more but I understand they run a record label in Lafayette.
Fair point, the frequency will probably go up. Also, they are now on the records as being (a) not capable of keeping their stuff secure and (b) willing and able to pay up which is blood in the water for the sharks.
Seems reasonable to host this on https://github.com/ipfs/ipfs
I never got into LFS, when I finished my build I was probably exhausted by all the sed'in and patchin' and didn't have a single clue about where the piece fit.

I did end up with a flawed system with funny bugs. I couldn't access the network with the usual tools but elinks managed to bypass something and get a TCP stack somewhere. But it failed to render properly on tty. No surprise I had no clue what I did wrong but it made me realize how much plumbing there was.
> It has no generics, which means no real containers, no generic functions without dropping all typing, no type-hinted arrays.

These things are a little advanced for the likes of me. Any chance you'd be so kind as to give me an example of something I can't easily do because of not having this?

> It's definitely fast for a scripting language! So, that's fair. But it's still way slower than many other good backend languages

But those languages require compilation and deploy cycles that are way longer than just getting files on disk, so the total cycle time of development may end up being longer in many cases. It's a tradeoff. PHP probably shouldn't be used for performance-critical things, sure, but then neither should any other dynamic language.
It is only "attacking Facebook" as much as it is also just "stating again what is already publicly known about Facebook".

This was all in the news: Facebook lying about not being able to connect WhatsApp and Facebook, then trying to weasel their way out of their previous statements.

For all the problems Telegram has they don't seen to have our raw messages more than GMail has your raw emails.

Yep: unlike WhatsApp and Signal they can, technically produce them. (Edit: I forgot to mention: WhatsApp chat logs gets uploaded unencrypted to American Cloud providers. I have less against the police and Americans than many other here but lets not pretend end-to-end encryption helps for anything when you backup the data unencrypted with everyones favourite villain it seems: NSA)

And yes: like with GMail if Telegram has done exactly what they said and done it properly it would probably take cooperation of at least two sysadmins on different teams and it woumd also probably trigger alarms east and west.

At least that is my understanding.
Why do they always reference the nearness to the Sun, rather than just to us? With 8 light minutes between us and our nearest star, and light years to the dwarf stars they are as close to us as the Sun. Your average person is going to read the statement as being near to the Sun almost as if they are close to it but far from us.
Related from a month ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23787526

If curious see also

2019 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20149111

2016 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11829373

2012 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4488162

2012 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3677350

2011 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3171448

2010 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1779665
It is, what it is :)
I haven't seen the S-1, so I don't know.
Read the emails between Epic and Apple that led to Fortnite’s App Store ban
> Not of much use without generics. `array` isn't a particularly useful type.

No, but you can do function foo(SomeClass $x) {...} - doesn't that fulfill the use case for most people? Objects are basically fat types, in a sense, no? And since the OOP hierarchy is respected, I can use interfaces or abstract classes here and get basically what I want...?
Given my experience with GL programming across all three, Intel is definitely not the first choice.
That's one bottleneck, but you're missing another bottleneck entirely. In many problems, we load the entirety of the data into the GPU's RAM anyways (some games do so with the entirety of their assets during load times). It doesn't matter that the data is already in RAM, because we care about how much data can come from GDDR to registers (in GB/s). You have to get the data to your compute units. This is your memory bandwidth.

GDDR RAM wants to be accessed in bulk - large rows at once. Things are easy when each thread wants a subsequent byte, but if not things become much slower. Caching and other techniques can help mitigate this, and they're (imo) the place for a lot of creativity in architecture design. Having more potential FLOPS just means more ALUs.
I guess my point is that, in everything I've read and experienced, JIT isn't about efficiency to an extreme (drop to 1 supplier, have 1 uberefficient factory, have 1 expert). You still maintain a buffer, and if possible multiple suppliers. The source of JIT (in manufacturing) is primarily Lean or the Toyota Production System. Those do not endorse zero-buffers or sole-sourcing for the purposes of efficiency. The purpose of reducing buffers is to expose inefficiencies elsewhere. And you find the right level of buffering for you based on your suppliers and risk tolerance.
I agree, I'm having a hard time understanding why people are defending Apple ... Epic is one of the few companies who could afford this fight, kudos they initiated it.
We think the design of the language will support that in the future, but we need to write a GPU-based runtime that lives inside of the runtime and get it to decide when to offload work to GPU first, and that will take time.
You may want to see why Thunderbird had to create their own foundation just to fund their project. Firefox makes most of its income from the search engine deal with Google it seems. Looking at the Mozilla Foundation (not to be confused with the corporation which is what maintains Firefox) their initiatives dont even mention Firefox. They really need to make it very transparent where your money ends up.

They list a buncha awards and convention type events, that's not helping Firefox at all.

https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/initiatives/
I think you're both talking about different ideas here. Efficiency is good. But redundancy is also good (necessary, even, for a resilient system), and the problem is that you can always increase efficiency by removing redundancy, so it does get removed by short-sighted efficiency-optimizers.

Topically, in the past week we've seen two giant companies, Adobe and Canon, lose unimaginable amounts of user data. If they had had backups, which are a form of redundancy, this would not have been a problem. But the backups were too expensive--too inefficient--and so now customer trust in their service is absolutely destroyed.
I'm almost excited to blow another hundred billion dollars on designing a next-gen aircraft without any G-Force considerations. Current jets designed around a human pilot can already achieve mind-boggling performance of over 10G on multiple axes, what would a blank slate aircraft with none of those limitations be able to do?
"...the goal of LFS is to build a complete and usable foundation-level system. This includes all packages needed to replicate itself."

http://linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/prologue/package...

Buildroot's target systems don't include a compiler - it's more for real-world embedded linux system generation.

https://buildroot.org/downloads/manual/manual.html#faq-no-co...
If I might make a gentle counterpoint: if we didn't follow a rigorous reductionist process, the article you are commenting on wouldn't exist and we wouldn't know a thing about bacteria forming large-scale structures in order to take advantage of spatially separated resources in their environment. I wouldn't say that our blind spots exist because scientists follow a reductionist line of inquiry; instead, I think our blind spots exist because we are, to some degree, born ignorant in a universe of evolving life. Now, of course the reductionist process can't tell us everything, but I think it is possible to recognize and appreciate what the process can help us understand.
> Both objections have to do with php-fpm.

To be fair the last time I seriously worked with PHP was back when mod_php was still cool. I was able to serve thousands of users on a dual-core Xeon box ~15 years ago - I can only imagine the performance is better in many ways now.
Misleading headline.
I think “house of suns“, which is not R.S. is maybe one of the best sci fi books I’ve ever read. I’ve only also read chasm city by him but I thought “House of Suns” was leaps and bounds better
The Escape
Better use a purely functional build system, like in NixOS, where you can download binaries and have the guarantee that they are the same as when you had built them yourself.
President Trump Signs U.S. Decree Banning Deals with WeChat and TikTok Owners
Regardless of what you think about the trade-offs to security, at the end of the day the purpose of the computer is to serve it's user, and do what they instruct.

It's not Microsoft's machine, and they oughtn't try to overrule what people try to do with it.

(And yes, personally I use Linux. But I don't think that ought to be the bar for having your devices do what you tell them to)
My study of American history has led me to support the idea of ending the government of the United States as it currently exists. We'd menace a lot fewer innocent people if the union were chopped up into about twenty pieces.
This is certainly damning data, but having a telephone in Belarus does not necessarily mean that person voted in the prior election. This is good evidence, but not a mathematical proof.
Australian “Firehawk” Raptors Intentionally Spread Wildfires (2018)
If you are strong everywhere you are weak everywhere. The article is you plain out wrong. The problem is the lack of a strategic reserve, not efficiency in itself.
Comments moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24238096.
I study empathy, and have often said that efficiency is the opposite of empathy. Whatever we want to call it, the human element is overlooked when we strive for the single dimension of efficiency. Hannah Arendt famously talked about the banality of evil. During the Holocaust, the counting and categorizing of people was flattening or reducing to that important human element we all share.
In this case, they had a backup and restored from that.#

The attackers also only encrypted about 0,02% of the systems, but the university paid because the attackers threatened to make the stolen data public.
Same advantage as buying a car from someone you don't know versus buying from a known fraudster and bully?

Yes: in Telegrams case I might possibly, maybe at some time be taken advantage of.

In WhatsApps case it would surprise everyone greatly if one isn't - sooner or later - take advantage of.
Ah, true almost all the time! :) There are only a handful of folks that have an impressive balance of understanding what hot and how to make an impressive product/solution.
Previous discussion here from a couple weeks ago. I thought Google is transitioning Play Music to YouTube Music?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24057146
Don't Learn JavaScript and React at the Same Time
I think quibbling about terminology misses the point. If you think about it as the total cost per employee, it seems like a a lot that doesn't actually go directly to the employee as take-home pay. I think a lot of that is good, and replaces other external costs, but it's still a lot of extra money a small company will need to budget just to hire someone.

And things like tax credits are only useful if you have the cash on hand immediately, and can wait up to a year to get it back. A brand-new venture may not have that.
Oh, neat! I went through an earlier version of the online course when I was just trying to understand what this "deep learning mumbo jumbo" was all about, and it was the clearest, and easiest to follow, and most interesting one available, by a long shot! One of the assignments had you train an image recognization model based on google image results, and after a shockingly small amount of work and time I had a model that could distinguish a picture of a game of Go from a game of Chess almost perfectly. That was a huge eye-opener for me.

That was maybe 1-2 years ago at this point and I had wanted to take another look. What a perfect opportunity! And I'm excited it sounds like there might be a little more discussion of non-DL ML and applications in tabular data (where I'd have the most likely use for it), as well as the nitty gritty like deployments and use in production!

Any progress on the Swift front? Is that mentioned / used / discussed at all in this new course?
But Tim S. explicitly said that he did not ask for special treatment. This is just that.