skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Was poisoned several years ago.

Couldn’t prove it, because doctors flat out didn’t care.

Life long problems from it, not going to be a long one.

Since doctors only treat symptoms There was no centralized care.

Family doctor refuses to file paper work, says that is specialists job. Specialist all day that’s general practitioner.

Since everyone passes the buck getting disability wasn’t practical.

Getting a new doctor isn’t practical as it looks like your shopping around.
Great book! I think I will read the whole thing.
I don't argue with that. My comment was more general, not about the Palo Alto area and its property tax laws. I don't live in California and not familiar with the specifics of housing in the Bay Area. My main comment was in response to "black lives matter but they can stay a town or two away from us - like in East Palo Alto.".
One request - after you toss in the garbage and the lid closes, make it "chew" for a couple seconds by rapidly opening/closing the lid over a small distance!
You can use <div role=button tabindex=0>.
No, People Aren’t Fleeing America’s Cities for the Suburbs
1. This claim needs benchmarking.

2. Linux is already moving in the direction of having easier-to-use internal interface over small, fast, and tricky ones. For kmalloc in particular, the memory management docs https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/core-api/memory-alloc... recommends kzalloc (which zeroes data) and suggests a function called kvmalloc which calls either kmalloc or vmalloc depending on the size of the allocation. It unconditionally recommends kvfree (which handles alloations from either kmalloc or vmalloc) instead of asking you to use kfree or vfree as appropriate.

3. In this particular case, kmalloc is inlined because it calls krealloc(NULL, ...). This could almost certainly be equivalently handled by inlining the other side of it. (Again, benchmarking.)

4. LTO is a thing.
Without that I think many would lose trust in Python and just switch language.

I mean it has only been 11 years since Python 3.1/2.7 and that's probably a common lifespan for maintenance mode code projects? 3.5 is still supported and that one is 5 years old. Why the hurry.
I think passive safety is really where the good designs are, but what most people are worried about is a core that can't have any kind of criticality incident.
Actually it's only 2 spaces.

Like this.
Not this.
Another segment of citizens is looking for predictable leadership, one that has a discernible, cohesive strategy in handling both domestic and foreign relations. To me, that sounds far more certain-- or there are two competing definitions of what 'certainty' is.
DeepFactor Unifies Performance and Security Monitoring
> using acronyms without ever defining them.

I don't agree. The article quite clearly refers to Intel MKL, which is widely known at least in the number crunching world. Plus, it's just a blog post.
I am also Houstonian and can second this. The heat sucks and the humidity makes it even worse. And it goes on for much longer than most realize. They'll mention that other places also have a few hot days while ignoring that for the better part of the year (roughly April through October) it's not fun to be outside. I don't care if the grocery store is only a mile away, I'm still driving.
Likewise. Not even using RAID 5 or 6, just RAID 1. Completely destroyed all the data on both mirrors. Truly terrible. When the error codepaths are this poorly tested, it does not inspire confidence.

I believe the bug which caused this is now fixed, but who really knows what other nasties linger on waiting to be triggered.

In comparison, ZFS has been a dream. I even moved terabytes of data between a Linux system and a FreeBSD server simply by swapping the discs over and running "zpool import". Superb data portability.
Tagging onto this to mention another informative reddit post on the subject, posted today 01/09/2020 which suggests that a previous workaround is no longer possible:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/ik4bt9/intel_recently_...
I think it's the cost of the bureaucracy and systems that are a major failing, not privacy itself. The litigation involved is also expensive. I'm trying to get my kid's record transferred to primary care from two hospitals and it's a nightmare. I feel like most of the frustration could have been avoided if the personnel involved were properly trained. The costs of visits and treatments include this overhead.

It doesn't matter if the signature is on paper since the files are digitized and thus exposed to attacks. Not to mention that fax isn't really more secure than email. I have yet to see a provider near me who will accept a scanned document through email, but maybe that's different in other areas. Medical files go for a high price on the black market, but they are still fairly prevalent.

This is different than a hospital, but quite cheaper than a normal primary care visit ($200ish).
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-13/pittsburg...

Anyways, there are tons of problems and costs in the system.
I would hope that increasing density doesn't require much upfront investment. It's definitely true that density creates more strain on public goods like roads that are disproportionately funded by yesterday's taxpayers. I guess that is a pretty reasonable externality to incorporate into permitting fees.
Running that Tesseract output through OverProof corrects the scen/prevent/attead:
https://overproof.projectcomputing.com/showRequest/159891472...
Multiple citations, but this one seems to be what's referenced by the title: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-020-06067-8

Interesting to note that it is a discussion of models and general implications, but is not actually a study of itself.
Good point. I think it’s a little more than that. Given a rare exceptional work of CG artist and an analog photographer’s rare works - vast majority of the people would gravitate towards the latter. It then leads me to think ease of access to tools (drone vs Photoshop), expediency in creating the works (a weekend shoot vs. 3 hours) and the costs ($400 trip + $800 drone vs. $29 Adobe subscription) is what makes it worthwhile? Is this type of art boiled down to the grunt work one has to do to achieve a result?

I personally resonate with conceptual art that abstracts away the physical processes and work on an ideological space (Francis Bacon, Milos Sobajic, Vladimir Velckovic, Shahabuddin Ahmed, etc). But that’s just me, and I certainly am not in a position to criticize anything in art. Just want to inquire and understand.
Thank you for this comment. Your comment is the only one on this page that gives a fair look at both sides and is a breath of fresh air compared to all the negativity in the rest of the comments. I wish that everyone could live in an area that matches their preferences without someone else trying to destroy everything they love about their home because it doesn't fit a preconceived notion about what a proper city should be.
That's true for many US cities but it doesn't mean it should be that way. In Europe for example there are many safe cities that are great places to live and raise a family but also have businesses and everything else you find in major urban areas. I can also give examples of such cities in the US.
We certainly live in strange times.

My life and those of my loved ones goes pretty well. But I see issues in my social circle.

People realize their lifes suck.

They worked all week in a shitty job, just to go to a party, concert, or the cinema at the weekend.

They worked all year in a shitty job, just to have 2-4 weeks of holidays that were fun.

They were in relationships that only survived, because they were able to take some time without their partner.

Nobody in my social circle died of Corona, but a few people killed themselves or broke up with their partners of over ten years.

That showed me how thin the layer of "goodness" around many peoples life really is.
Popularity is not quite the same as PR. But yes, it's about the number of engineers and projects using it, and the growth of such adoption. If technical merits were the only criteria for making a difference, I think it's fair to say we would have a very different technology ecosystem today. :)
Yup - that got a very brief mention in the article as "Google is working on automated C++ conversions"; there's also https://github.com/google/autocxx which builds on top of it.

C++ is a richer language than C and has more information about ownership (e.g., if you return a std::string you know how ownership works; if you have two arguments that are a char * and a length it's much less clear), but additional annotations in the kernel's C headers to convey this level of information in a machine-parseable way would be awesome.
lots of interesting replies, thanks. i'll aggregate my thoughts into single comment to keep this discussion more focused.

it seems to me the only rebuttal is "sure, self-models can exist but it's concievable that they can exist without an observer, so why is there an observer?" and to me it sounds similar to "sure, an eye can exist without abiogenesis, so why do we only find it in organisms that resulted from abiogenesis?"

an eye is just a collection of amino-acids, nothing prevents an eye from spontaneously assembling in a primordial soup and we recognize that's absolutely impossible. however i would posit that due to configuration of physical interactions in our universe, it's virtually guaranteed for an eye to develop in any life-form that is exposed to star's radiation in earth-like conditions.

similarly, just that we can think of p-zombie doesn't mean it's a simpler system to natually occure. we don't have understanding of building blocks of consciousness like we do with chemistry and biology but the answer to the why question seems to be quite simple: we observe ourselves because we evolved to. and we can find more and more primitive examples of self-observation in more and more primitive animals, so it's not some binary phenomena.
A History of U.S. Foreign Policy from Z to Shining Z
Too new of a release on Arch. Still shows 2.83 in the repo and that is now 404ing. I'll check tomorrow.
Can wearing or not wearing a mask to protect oneself from covid-19 be regarded as an example of natural selection at work? Where mask wearers are most adapted to survival in their environment and non-mask wearers are not?
> Btrfs is here to stay

btrfs was removed from RHEL because RedHat themselves don't have the time or energy to support it or support systems using it. That's going to hurt adoption. Ubuntu is working actively towards ZFS as an available/default option, and once it is there's not much point in using btrfs unless you have specific use cases. Everyone else I know either uses ZFS or XFS in production. For my systems, I would definitely not trust btrfs with critical data.

Here's the thing: btrfs is 'fine', but it's not 'good'. It's the only filesystem since 2001 where I've suffered unrecoverable filesystem corruption as a result of a power outage (on a fresh 18.04 installation last November) and had to salvage data and reinstall.

The tooling, in a lot of cases, does the opposite of ZFS and touts it as a feature. For example, snapshots are not recursive and they say that this is great for if you want to snapshot / but not /home; this is true, but it also means that I cannot subdivide datasets.

For example, on ZFS I divide up /var/lib/mysql/ into /var/lib/mysql/tablespace/ and var/lib/mysql/logdb, for example, since both of those have different access patterns and block sizes (16k and 128k respectively). ZFS lets me do this to optimize reads and writes, but I can also atomically snapshot them both. btrfs doesn't let me do an atomic, recursive snapshot at all (and I'm not sure if it can handle different block sizes per subvolume either).

Basically, ZFS is a better, production-ready, enterprise-proven, and surprisingly intuitive filesystem and volume management system, and has been for 14 years. btrfs has weird tooling, incomplete features (which they don't just remove from the roadmap for some reason), data loss issues, and the only large-scale use I've heard of it Facebook, who also work on it (easier to use btrfs when you've hired all the experts).

With Ubuntu shipping ZFS enabled by default, most reasons to use btrfs go away; it's not mainlined in the kernel, but that doesn't matter if your distribution has it enabled and supported by default.
To be fair, in the supercomputing community (or, more generally "high performance computing"--HPC), certain acronyms for libraries are very well-known: MPI, HDF5, FFTW, BLAS, MKL--no one is going to bat their eyes at seeing those names without an acronym expansion.
haven't read the study, but i'm guessing it has to do with viral load
I had a very feeble idea about the history of Britain - the sequence of the main events - when I left school. I learned far more from finding out about the architecture, dates, and benefactors of the various buildings in the centre of Cambridge...
> But what are these benefits that other languages bring on the table? From the article it appears that proponents of the new toolchain mention memory-safety as the primary concern:

Of the venn diagram of languages that provide more safety than C (and that is, either require it or make it hard to bypass), and languages that people know know or are likely to know in the semi-near future, Rust and Go are probably the big contenders.

ATS may be easier to interface with the kernel in, but is random peripheral company writing a kernel module driver likely to know it and use it? Theoretically, everyone can write most or all of their modules in Coq, right? So why don't they? Why is ATS different?

> So the natural follow-up question to that concern, it seems to me, would be whether there's something in the existing C/GCC toolchain (or around it) that can resolve the raised concerns without adopting a whole new toolchain (Rust/LLVM)

You're mistaking the aims of a project to specifically adapt Rust to the linux kernel and what they focused on. This note is frm a Rust initiative, not a kernel initiative, why would they focus on doing something in a different language?

> and without having to extend the existing interface with language-specific suffixes like "kmalloc_for_rust".

I addressed this in the last comment. Did you have something new to bring to this aspect of the discussion? It feels like you're ignoring how I noted that this is but one option people are discussing, and using it as a reason why the whole thing is a bad idea. That doesn't make sense.
Good luck at ever convincing Judy Faulkner she needs software developers that'll cost $700k+ a year.
On the ground operator can also make those calls? Really, it's like fleet-specific air traffic controller + rc pilot.
You make some good points, in alot of ways comparisons to the MS of the 90's is tricky. Apple has less market share, but alot more users - and the market is shaped quite differently (only 2 hardware makers, where back then (and even now) there are hundreds of hardware makers for computers). Microsoft also had no means to prevent people from installing outside software on the device, which iOS does - to the tune of over 1 billion users.

There are whole industries built on iOS now, which was also true then, but due to the much more limited hardware landscape and single means of installing software, this now plays differently with competition than just browser bundling.

I don't think whether Apple is using monopoly power is the appropriate focus here; they can be anti-competitive without being a monopoly, and due to the fact that they control >1 billion users and control their hardware, there's a fair question to ask about this anti-competitive behavior.
Not if it doesn't affect the reproductive population
> Do you smell smoke coming from the vents?

This is not the most common way to detect a fire in an aircraft (unless GA). The most common way is "FIRE" being indicated in the annunciator panel.

> Pilots have to learn the schematics of electrical wiring behind the dashboards.

No they are definitely do not. They will only know the wiring if they are also mechanics.

They need to know which fuses control what, but that's a much higher level.

> They are expected to do problem-solving in case of malfunction

Also no. The first thing to be done is triggering the memory items. Those are memorized. Zero thought here. Pilots have to (and generally will) fall back to what they have been instructed to do.

Next there's the checklists. They will execute the checklists line item by line item. No thinking happens here either, nor it is supposed to.

If all those fail... usually you'll read the resolution in some NTSB report.

> The first time asymetric thrust was used to pilot a plane (ailerons and elevators didn’t work), it was done without being in the books

Not sure if that was the first time, maybe first time in an _airliner_. Also in that particular incident, they had an experience commander, first officer and an instructor for that specific model of aircraft working together (the instructor was handling the thrust levers).

That was also a very extraordinary incident.

> flight crew performance was highly commendable and greatly exceeded reasonable expectations

> I wonder how this can work with computers

During the Columbia incident, the computers didn't know the wing was melting. But they detected a deviation from the flight path, which they tried to correct with control surfaces. When that failed, they added RCS thrusters too. The 'wing melting condition' wasn't programmed, but still they managed to use all available resources.

For more on how we could allow craft to 'intelligently' respond to failures, take a look at the Remote Agent, from NASA's DS-1 mission.
Note that this requires a paid license to use the registration forms feature.

> ...Please note that advanced registration forms are a paid edition feature.
> I saw another developer today say their app was "rejected" because the reviewer asked "How does the app utilize Touch Bar and where can we locate these features?"

This might not be an Apple policy, as much as a reviewer just holding the app maker hostage until they get their personal feature request approved.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24336755
And I've only had a passing curiosity of supercomputing, a few years ago, and the only acronym you listed that I have no idea about is HDF5.
If it's "just phone", then pretty close, I think.

If it's Android/iOS replacement, then not at all.
What’s the Opposite of Gatekeeping?
Unless non-mask wearers are seen as more attractive and so have more offspring. Too soon to know.
> Not allowing competitors to build a store on your property isn’t anti-competitive.

The difference is that in the real world, there is more property.

In the digital world, there isn't, unless you count Android -- and the problem with that is you run into the "Well why don't the company men just leave the company town, then?" It's the "let them eat cake!" argument and it doesn't go over well.
On the one hand, we don't know for sure if the number of virus particles one is exposed to correlates to severity of disease with SARS-CoV-2 in humans because we don't have rigorous studies that say so. On the other hand, it would be less surprising if it were true than if it isn't, and we should probably proceed on the assumption it's probably true. (Though I'm not an epidemiologist except to the extent that we've all become amateur epidemiologists these days, so don't take my word for it.)
Want to bet ?
So, it's a bookmark..
Not as much as voting for Trump or being a programmer.
I'm fairly certain he meant "natural selection" in an analogous way, where those "selected" are the population that doesn't contract the virus.
This article speaks in a very authoritative tone, but the assertions aren't fully backed by the research it links to.

And it bothers me that the quote, "dramatically less likely" is not a quote from the linked research, but seemingly just a pull quote of the article itself.

I support people wearing masks, even if it turned out to only be marginally better than not wearing one, but this article is borderline overreaching.
Understanding How the Time-Based One-Time Password Algorithm Works
Is it possible that a very very low exposure can cause your body to ramp up an immunity response? I'm wondering if fatality rate has gone down because most people by now have had some exposure to the virus: not enough to get sick (not even asymptomatic), but enough for the immune system to prep that something is in the environment.
It's not because something seems smart that it actually is.
GPT - 3 is ridiculous in that it doesn't have semantic understanding. Text generation is the wrong task, it's cool to watch and actually fuel hype on the ML train but what you're really looking for is semantic parsing, which GPT or openAI has nothing to do with and is mostly underfunded.
I agree with you in theory. I really hate that the fast.ai course uses their own fast.ai library.

Numpy is a bit different though as it “fixes” inefficiencies in Python’s typing system. A list of Python integers is actually a list of C structs so none of the values are sequential in memory. A numpy array of integers is sequential in memory and so the performance gains are massive.

It’s not so much a library as it as a way to access efficient data types/structures. I think any mathematical programming in python should start with numpy.

If the author had used Pandas extensively I would agree with you completely.
The mortality braze is high among elders who likely had their children already or won't get any. Younger people suffer from other conditions primarily.
There's also macOS going from 10.15 -> 11. (Goobye Mac OS X!)
I've not confessed to or recanted anything, silly; I merely have outlined my position more clearly so that you don't have any ridiculous dodges like "that's what an atheist would say."

I don't have a straw man. I have any deity which is like Jehovah, with Jehovah himself as a special case. Any deity is subject to self-defeating arguments and open to criticism from science.

I am not a naturalist, but that's the closest position that you can imagine, I guess.

Anyway, if you don't actually want to talk about QM, then we'll just have to talk about how Jehovah's followers keep trying to do something about COVID-19, but all of their appeals have led to nothing. Meanwhile, science and technology give us models for understanding, combating, and preventing the pandemic. Are you really going to pledge yourself to your deity and cough your lungs out?
> the single sensor

And this is the problem. We wouldn't have autonomous aircraft without sensor redundancies. Even pilots have multiple redundant instruments.
Many, many links in that article, but in the only study I see, this is not an experiment, it's observational study.

There are lots of reasons to believe wearing masks might be correlated with other mitigating behaviours (hand washing, going out less, etc), which would also reduce contact with the infected.

Also, I see no mention of studying possible side-effects of universal, permanent mask wearing, which makes this study irresponsible at the least.
Imagine Google is a public utility.
Would it be worthwhile for the society to spend that much manpower to funnel the feedback brute-force way like that ? To me, it clearly is a waste of money for the society, and an inefficient and pointless way to improve the product.

This kind of deontological approach is not very useful unless it's applied to a morally important issue, and even then, an utilitarian/consequentialist approach is needed to cross-check to make sure deontological approach doesn't go astray.
That explains why the government has continued to spend more and more money every year for the past 60 years.

Yup! GDP doesn't help at all! Only Bezos.
Natural selection is a very specific natural process: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection