skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The issue isn't whether the marginal cost of replacing it is reasonable, the issue is why does it need tools and skills that people don't already have.
I had a friend with a 2012 Leaf that experienced similar degradation. It was a problem with the early model year and Nissan's choice to use passively cooled batteries.
it seems like you're saying the same thing, but with different definitions.

The key to both you and the article is that the base memorization of discrete rules and facts is not sufficient -- the real value comes from being able to dynamically connect the rules yourself in new contexts (rather than having them simply handed to you, to be memorized)
No. It's also because life is short. 100 years at best, ~60 good useable, productive years if we're lucky and don't get hit by a bus or have health issues, is a laughably short lifespan.
It's almost like both are useful for different things, and you're not gonna have any luck forcing people into one or the other for everything.

Also, I don't understand what point you're making. The square bracket stuff you've added doesn't work. You haven't managed to correctly communicate the fact that the person was woken up in the middle of the night. Which is what local time is extremely good at and global time cannot do -- putting a specific time in context with the rhythms of the day. Which, you know, is very important for most normal communication. I can't even schedule a worldwide meeting using global time; I have to use the local time of each participant individually to figure out what the best time is that maximizes the # of people calling in during the workday and minimizes the # of people that need to be up in the middle of their local night.
As a counter argument, this does not fall outside of the business or legitimate concern of the people in a representative democracy. The court should judge according to the law, but if the people do not like the outcome of the law, they might want a different law, and in the end, we will have the proceedings in the public record. If the people have no business in this, we should also make sure the same millions of uninformed users can't get access to record of the court proceedings as well, lest they think to form opinions even afterwards, as it did not concern them while it went on.
Why does the coronavirus hit men harder? A new clue
If that approach had been taken, then Microsoft would have killed Apple completely before the iPhone was invented, and we wouldn't even be having this debate.
Incrementalism strikes again!
I think you are on to something with that. I gave the Occulus experience a try at the World Trade terminal (both the Star Wars and Avengers experience) and it really felt like a type of interactive cinematic experience. We were given guns, the wind would blow in our face when we looked out of the helicopter, walked around the corridors, etc.

The whole space looked like it might have been 1200 square feet.
>Sex differences in immune responses that underlie COVID-19 disease outcomes

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2700-3
No, the correct statement is that there is no Turing Machine that can, given any program, decide whether it will halt.

The "given any program" part is crucial.
People are now terrified of putting down a screen and being left alone with their own thoughts for more than 30 seconds. It's horrifying what's bouncing around up in that dome, and having to process it.

But this is exactly what we did before. We got bored, we were wasting time, we were experimenting, and that's how great ideas came around.
One in ten times you try to cross the finish line you get

[ * ]A stop job is running for ...
[ *]A stop job is running for ...
[* ]A stop job is running for ...

and can't cross the line.

Side note: While I joke about this, I respect Poetterings determination and engineering skill, even if I disagree with him.
Unsound with respect to what?
People in those latitudes are just screwed either way then. There's literally not enough daylight to go around in winter. If you're not waking up in the dark then the Sun is setting when you're only halfway through your work day.
By the sounds of it Facebook’s note didn’t say “buy from us”, it simply notified users that Apple will take a 30% cut.

I’m loathe to care either way here because I don’t think any giant multinational needs me to speak in their favour, but the part that grinds with me is that Apple blocked it under a rule about “irrelevant information”. Given that FB created this feature for community events the fact that 30% wouldn’t be going to the host of the event feels like very relevant information to me. If Apple wants to have a rule that says “we decide what you can and cannot say” then they should just make one rather than hide behind other rules.
That's not as radically different from Western culture as Western culture likes to pretend it is.

We have traditions like a man asking her father for her hand in marriage. We change her last name to signify she has transferred identity from her father's clan to her husband's. We treat marriage as very much a financial contract and divorce tends to hurt women financially much more than it does men.

Etc.
Viewing this as business productivity versus distractions is a false dichotomy, though.

Life isn't just a series of context switches between being productive at work and wasting time at home. The goal is to be intentional with how you spend your time.

For example, coordinating a social dinner with friends isn't work, but it also isn't a waste of time. Going to the gym isn't typical productivity, but it isn't a waste of time either. Even playing video games to catch of with old friends isn't entirely a waste of time.

However, the modern world is full of traps that will lull people into spending their time in ways that feel enjoyable in the moment, but feel wasteful in retrospect. It's easy to pull out your phone and scroll Twitter for 30 minutes, but it takes more effort to pull out your phone and call and old friend or a grandparent for a check-in. It's easy to drop on the couch and select from an endless series of TV shows on Netflix and Hulu, but it takes a little more effort to go for a walk or go to the gym. Afterward, which of those two activities feels like a better use of your free time?

> The psychological rigidity and social sacrifices required of always being productive (with little to no unstructured leisure time)

Is this really a common goal, though? I've been around some extremely productive and successful people in my career, but none of them held any illusions about minimizing leisure time. I've also been in some high pressure and highly competitive environments, but the number of people who adopted an "all work and no play" approach to life was vanishingly small. In fact, the people who are most motivated at work are often most motivated to arrange the after-work get together, or the weekend trip for the group of friends, or to invite people over for home-cooked meals so we can catch up.
Printing the manufacturer’s suggested price on the outside of grocery packaging is common.
The latest cars are constantly collecting data, so automated driving errors likely could be treated as a discrete problems. Process would likely be:

1) Determine damages like we currently do, and manufacturer, which is likely to be the same as the insurer, pays out.

2) Manufacturer has a fixed amount of time to show that they've re-trained the system on the problem scenario and scenarios close to it such that it no longer occurs given similar conditions.

3) Push the update to the fleet, the same accident should never happen again.

If we could do this with human drivers, we would be in great shape.
A cobbled-together history of hyperreal
> What good is a proof if literally no human being can understand it?

It establishes the universal truth of a statement. So we absolutely do learn something. Until you have a proof, the statement might also be false.
You have no idea which opinion is in the minority. In reality most non-tech people don't even know that Apple rules the app store with an iron fist. One benefit of Epic's lawsuit is the publicity giving millions of young people an inkling of what's going on.
You know what's faster than quick charging? Swapping a battery.

You know what carries less risk of fire than quick charging? Swapping a battery.
> If you believe otherwise, please tell me whether the following program halts

That's a logical fallacy - just because I can't show whether P=NP doesn't mean nobody can!

Turing-Church is a conjecture, not a theorem. There have been arguments made against it [1].

[1] https://arxiv.org/ftp/cs/papers/0207/0207055.pdf
Open disclosure on day 0 it would seem.
A good question is, who built the corners? They might not be justified. You seem to get this as well.
There will be some of that, but also - cubicles are coming back, so we are not going to be packed like sardines in noisy open-plan spaces. We might need all that space after all.
This is why we never got to a nuclear winter. Our idiot leaders would have careened us off a cliff into oblivion if our friends from the sky hadn't come and deactivated all of our nukes like parents taking away childrens' toys.
That's not perfect black. The black of your OLED is still reflecting and diffusing ambient light. It's still just dark gray, just like any black object next to it.

"Perfect black" is something more akin to Vantablack. [1] Which you are not going to encounter in any normal setting.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vantablack
Google is in such a strange state. I deal with Googlers several times a week, and their defining characteristic is hubris. It seems like their arrogance blinds them to the fact that their credibility has been in a free-fall for years. Publishing articles like this is just laughably tone deaf.
MongoDB has killOp which will allow a user to kill any operation they have an operation ID for:

https://docs.mongodb.com/manual/reference/method/db.killOp/
Ah yeah opinions being valued is a good one

I dabbled in thought leadership for a while, with a PR agent, and its nice to have a voice and really awesome google results but I didn’t/don't like being considered like a journalist on rare occasion

In unrelated anonymous profiles (lifestyle/wealth/meme/model pages) I have used followers and engagement as currency. As in used to obtain goods and services. Its great because you never spend it and it works worldwide.

But I prefer just having access to experiences without undermining my ability to obtain goods and services, food and shelter in the future. I mostly have that, and there is very little limitations I will consider in achieving that. It sounds like you have that.
> to make the death-metal of open-source games.

The original DOOM is open source, I think.

Update: Found it! It's here, but it's the engine only:

https://github.com/id-Software/DOOM
> no one is going to be breeding batteries like cobras, regardless of the reward.

Yes they are. You can buy Li-ion batteries of the mAh size commonly used in phones for $1-2 in bulk on AliExpress. Any price incentive to return them is going to either be too low for most people to bother, or so high that you'd have an incentive to produce batteries just to throw them away.

> If a token reward motivated people to scrounge disposed-of electronics pulling out lithium-ion batteries for return [..., it works for bottle deposit programmes!]

This works for bottles because e.g. on a Friday night in a major city trashcans downtown are going to be full of drink bottles. This works because there's a lot of them, they're big and obvious, and people consume them in large quantities.

A battery in a phone that you keep for months or years isn't worth digging through general trash for.

I recycle my own batteries because it's easy to do while I'm at it for some feel-good about reducing pollution. I'm not against recycling. I'm just saying that I don't see how a price incentive for this makes sense.
Agree. I also prioritize why then usually how with what dead last. I focus on why because it helps simplify and clarify requirements.

However the who is our current customer set, which we knew already. Customer's will balk at a great why if it doesn't align with their sense of value for the money they pay.

So in fact after the first cut of why there will be refinement as business people check through as customer proxies and how much effort it takes. So why in the absolute sense is neither independent nor so superlative that it stands on its own.

Why helps with strategy and the long game (right requirements now means less labor redo later) but we will always have a primary dependence on who -- customers who assess what we do.
A lot of knee-jerk Google-hating in this thread, which I think is unfounded in this specific context. Google’s AI safety and AI bias toolchain is by far the most robust that I’ve seen. Seems to me that they are investing much more heavily than other players.

Note that this is a different issue than data privacy, which Google rightly takes flak on. AI bias is referring to questions like “if I train a network to (sentence criminals, price insurance, ...), how do I detect if the resulting predictions are racially biased?”

The conversation on this subject by lay folks is rife with statistical ignorance, and Google has done good work communicating and clarifying the conversational starting points. This is a hard issue because it takes ethical trade-offs and forces you to specify mathematically exactly how you want to handle inequality, which is a subject that most people haven’t thought through rigorously, and would rather hand-wave away with virtuous sound bites.

For example, see http://research.google.com/bigpicture/attacking-discriminati...
Things immediately spring to mind:

1. What good is a proof if you don't understand it. My answer: it is super useful. You now know something is true. You may not understand why it is true, but you can use it and build on it. For example, if I write a piece of code that relies on an impossible to understand proof generated by a machine and gain a x1000 speedup with a guarantee that my shortcut will always work, there's a ton of value in there. But the utility argument is rarely something that resonates with Mathematician, they usually leave these disgustingly material details to others.

2. The modern "proofs" of important theorems, albeit produced by humans, are equivalently impossible to understand to the vast majority of Mathematicians. Mochizuki's Inter-universal Teichmüller theory is an extreme example of this (exactly one person on the planet understands the proof, assuming he's not a full-blown charlatan), but it's the same deal in other sub-fields of Maths. Can you claim to be able to explain/understand the classification of finite groups? The proof is so large and assembled by so many people it basically takes investing one's entire career to come to grasp with it.

3. It won't lead to new mathematics. I don't think it's true, for two reasons: a) who's to say the machines won't invent new mathematics. 2) falling back on humans, once you know something is true, even if you don't understand why, it's like a guiding lightbeam in a dark forest and there's a very good chance that knowing something is true will lead to a simpler, human-graspable proof.

There's is a very strong reek of stakhanovism [1] that emanates from the whole "math against the machine stance", it's just sad.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexey_Stakhanov

[EDIT]: an one more thing : what is this "understanding" you speak of? that's a rather fuzzily defined concept. One way to codify "understanding" is to make something graspable by a human mind, by - sort of - compressing/reducing it to things that are already known/grasped. But then, there's a very good chance that some things just won't lend themselves to such treatment (incompressible if you will, such as theorem whose minimal proof just won't fit in a human mind). I'd still like to know that they're true.
Printf is perfectly acceptable when a string is being printed without format-specifiers. You are abstracting your limited experience to be true for all situations.

For a simple example, how will puts print a string without a line termination?
Thank you for highlighting the West's rules/systems-driven approach vs the mentoring approach in Japan.

I an indeed infinitely curious about the personal design philosophies of all the secretive greats. I guess there's something special inside all of us (game designers), and we just need to find it and nurture it. Books are good for starters, and up to a point.

PS good luck with Railgrade!
Because the light emitted from the LEDs of the display is focused towards your eyes by a very reflective film behind the panel while the light reflected off a book's page is heavily diffused due to the roughness of the paper.
I think 70s-90s appliances are a lot easier to repair than phones, you usually can source the parts from a local electronics shop, and they don't require the dexterity of a surgeon to work on.
I believe the psychology behind making an e-payment comes in many forms. If you really want to listen to music ads-free on Spotify you will pay for Spotify even if it means going outside of the app. On the other hand if it is the type of payment that is more on-a-whim in nature, etc, then perhaps it’s justifiable for the os (i.e. whereon the experience runs) to take a fair share.

As an iOS developer who started writing Obj-C 8 years ago and witnessed and felt first-handed the overall evolution of the language environment (which subsequently led to the birth of Swift and its continuation into what I considered to be the most interesting thing about Apple now), I think 30% is fair considering it has and would continue to contribute to (and in some sense incentivise) Apple’s decision in allocating (what occured to me as) an amazing amount of resources in improving the iOS (and Swift) developer experience.

Great languages (and great developer experiences) don’t come cheap. And I won’t be surprised if the top executives of a multi-billion video game company fails to realise that.
Hey komali2, why'd you have to go and describe me this sharply on a Saturday morning? Is it that I accidentally crowded you out at the Four Barrel pour-over bar and now you want your revenge?

I've heard it said about running: it doesn't get easier, you just get better. I'm beginning to think that that is true of life in general. My greatest source of dis-ease (rather than literal disease) is the feeling that I'm not living up to my potential. Been with me since at least third standard/grade.

While I've never been to Stockholm (heard Noma's a good local joint), I'm at the place where I'm more afraid of getting too comfortable than I am of never being at ease. I'm trying (and usually failing) to think of things one bandaid at a time rather that the whole million at once. Setting my goals real low: to suck less rather than to be good/great. Help's a lot that there's one or two things that I legitimately feel I'm damn good at.

I'm curious, especially on the topic of stringing-together-unix-tools-on-a-whim, have you found any little tricks that apply to that area specifically rather than to the general concept of productivity?
Interesting! I didn't know Ford brought Microsoft back on board to try and rescue the disastrous v2. No surprise that that it didn't work out, though. If I remember correctly, the UI was Flash and the hardware was vastly underpowered.
There are real problems deploying biased systems. Facial recognition is a big issue. That’s not a problem of users, but of the creators.
People will still need to get out of the house. I hate working from home. I need my commute to wake me up, but not TOO much of it.

I think the future might be shared work spaces (WeWork) but in suburbia - so people can come to work, but not necessarily having to spend 4 hours a day on a commuter train.
> They can't not use it

They could very well not use it.

I’ve chosen not to develop (or learn how) iOS native apps. For now. Almost everything I want to do could be a web app and I’d take the cost of maintaining servers for shelf space, distribution and offline storage. I’d have to use email for notifications. Notifications are optional at point of consumption anyway so they can’t be relied upon, so this UX impairment is minor.

The PWA argument doesn’t work for me. Most of the features I might choose to use PWA abilities for can be implemented in other ways.
True. Yet humans are embodied beings in a physical world. This affects their mathematical taste in at least two ways. Humans will prefer axiomatic systems / problem spaces that have some bearing onto the physical world. Humans will also prefer axiomatic systems / problem spaces that have some match to their sensorial systems, and the sensorial systems are shaped by the physical world.

That being said, we are not too far from embodied computers, coming online soon as autonomous cars and autonomous killer drones. While this will not immediately give raise to physical biases in computer mathematicians, computers will become, for all intents and purposes, subject to the same physical reality which shapes humans.
That's pretty stupid since it's the one thing he actually demoed.
Wow. Very well said, especially the part about "internalizing the fact that I am the one not doing that too." That resonated with me in a painful, aching way.

I'm turning 30 soon. That is by no means "old", but it also isn't "young." And I also made a minefield of my 20s, to the point where I'm worse off today than I was when I turned 20--a constant series of bad decisions over and over again.

The good thing is I'm trying to recover from all of it now and fix what I can fix, but the bad thing is that I'm seeing my friends and peers leap past me, people who I was competitive with all the way into college. I know it's not helpful to think like this, but I can't help it. We journey on.
Another reason to love Puerto Rico and move here - our time zone, Atlantic Standard Time, has no daylight savings. All my fist shaking at the clouds in EST/EDT, welp, I solved it!
Intel Core I9-10850K CPU Benchmarks: Cheaper, but Nearly Identical to 10900K
This things are the actual problem with apple.

Having a rule which forbids you from anyhow state anything anywhere in the app which might discourage people from buying on apple is a direct restriction of the free marked.

And not the only one they have.

I still remember that apps had problems stating that they are compatible with the peblle smart watch once apple brought out a smart watch.
As a human this explanation is emotionally satisfying. It appeals to my sense of human exceptionalism. However how many true but unprovable theorems do we know about? Has anyone ever bothered to compile a list of true but unprovable under the axioms xyz? I would think it is exceedingly hard to manage such research as every axiom set xyz would require companion axioms abc to be provable, and such theorems (at least the non-trivial interesting ones) are possibly hard to reach.

This intuition for unprovableness may just be a mechanism for escaping local minima that gets lucky often enough.
Totally agree. FYI, a finalist in NPR's recent podcast competition had a nice take on this exact problem: https://soundcloud.com/alex-morgan-658034862/why-instagram-i...
Interestingly though the shutdown did more to remove pollution and improve diets (more home cooking vs. fast-food) than anything else we've done over the last decade.