skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The parent meant statically typed. Meaning it shows the errors at compile time.

Yes, you can check at runtime, the problem though is that especially on Python 2. Those checks don't happen very often.

Python 3 though will crash if you try to use bytes as text or vice versa. The python 2 though it will do an implicit casting and execute code, which will run and look like it runs correctly until you get an unicode characters, then it will crash.

Java won't even let you compile such program. You could get somewhat similar protection if you annotate types and use mypy to check them.
I'm not aware of one but I'd love to know about it. I wonder if it was a postcard you sent? There are a couple native apps that focus on postcards that are doing well.
> Larry Page and Sergey Brin were grad students in computer science, which presumably makes them "engineers." Do you suppose Google is only good because they had some business guy whispering in their ears what customers wanted?

Larry Page and Sergey Brin originally wanted Google to be a pay-to-use service and were against ads. I don't know how they came to their change in business model, but I suspect it was after they hired people that weren't engineers to help.
Teacher's low-tech laptop hack to display handwritten notes for online class
You are talking about the full chain of trust. I'm an talking about a single link of that chain, the ability of the operators to know their hardware is not under the control of some foreign state actor. This is the topic of the 5G wars. It's a necessary but clearly insufficient condition for what you ask.
We need a moon base
Math is the foundation of science, right? Things in science are provable because of the rigorous mathematical proofs applied to data, correlating with reproducible results, is my perception.

There are many models of societies currently and previously in existence that can be measured, compared, and correlated with predictable cause and effects.

Society is not constant, it's probabilistic, like many topics in physics or other hard sciences.

Society has natural laws that can be mathematically derived and applied. Why can't science be applied to non natural processes? The point of science is to build a model that can be used to build other models, or ultimately be applied to game the subject.

Are you saying we learn physics just to learn it, not to manipulate it to somehow benefit ourselves? Don't we use research in physics as a tool to shape our world in exactly the same way we use research in social science to shape society?

Your definition of science seems to only exclude some folks from the term that are doing the exact same work in a different subject. The word science doesn't preclude a subject. I don't think your contrast is sound.
It's sort of hard to me to imagine why one would like to edit out public and trivially available information about oneself. It only draws attention, and not in a positive way, like a hopeless attempt to conceal something obvious.

I can see the point when one's house is already behind a tall wall, invisible for passers-by, and it gets revealed on the Google maps 3D view. Blurring it out makes sense then.
Yes, the article was clear on that. There are methods to produce it "naturally" or in a lab, but no explanation fits the amount of gas they have detected. So either they do not understand conditions on Venus, there is a new method to produce it or there is a microbe producing it.
I use it in VR a lot to revisit the places that I've traveled to or lived at, often many years after the fact.

It's also particularly nice for planning trips (I spent a significant amount of time "walking" my neighborhoods in Croatia and Montenegro before moving to each, and a good amount of time in Japan to plan out a ton of nice walks/views before spending time there.

I've also had a lot of fun (in VR and regular street view) "walking" through places mentioned in old parents/grandparents notebooks/diaries, where they lived/worked, etc.
>Why is that the case? And are there any promising theories for how we might overcome that problem?

I am still quite new to CRISPR so I am unsure what people are doing to solve this problem. As for why, I would say that the problem is that, like most proteins, Cas9 just bounces around using brownian motion and there is always just some probability of it being near the wrong piece of DNA at the right time. There's not much that can be done about that! However, we can do something about Cas9's binding affinity to sequences that are similar, but not idetnical, to the target sequence. One could imagine Cas9 binding (with lower affinity) to a sequence of 20 bases that is incorrect on a couple of bases. Indeed, much of the off-target effects come from this. So if one could modify Cas9 to only bind to the exact sequence that should reduce off-target mutations.
I wouldn't say "vast" majority. Windvane self-steering gear is quite common on long distance cruising sailboats. I would personally not rely solely on an autopilot, though it's nice to have in addition, for when motoring.

The exception might be an RPi driven DIY autopilot where you can carry spare actuators (and spare RPi's), but that still requires electricity so would be useless in an emergency where you lose power (thunder strike or water shorting the batteries).

All in all I find it weird why this is happening now all of a sudden . We've been overfishing for decades and it's not like there's been a large increase in maritime activity lately.

Mybe they just finally had enough and snapped.. Would hate to see the sea become a hostile environment for humans, but we also have it coming.
Since the website is down, I clicked on one of the links qagg.news.

I'm actually surprised at how well-designed the site is to vacuum in the human mind.

As someone who is well-aware that the Qanon stuff is bullshit, my first thought on opening the link was 'fascinanting,' and I wanted to explore more.

Unfortunately, I could see how someone could get sucked into this.

Most people don't objectively assess the world around them, they rely on heuristics. If your heuristics are based on information relayed to you by those around you, rather than a mainstream average of the interpretation of what's going on around you (from reading NYT, WaPo, a more educated friend-group) in your community, why wouldn't you fall for this?

At some point, I hope there is a shift in the high-school curriculum to make sure that every American gets a class that at least somewhat resembles this syllabus:

1. Introduction to bullshit
2. Spotting bullshit
3. The natural ecology of bullshit
4. Causality
5. Statistical traps
6. Visualization
7. Big data
8. Publication bias
9. Predatory publishing and scientific misconduct
10. The ethics of calling bullshit.
11. Fake news
12. Refuting bullshit

https://www.callingbullshit.org/syllabus.html

There is a lot of anti-news sentiment on HN. Unfortunately, when people ignore the news, don't live in a more-educated area like SV, and rely on their community for their interpretation of the world, this kind of thing seems like a very natural extension of that.

We tend to get off in the weeds on discussions of bias and such, but we really should be concerned about what happens when you totally divorce from reality by utterly abandoning information about the world around you from a mainstream source.
In the early days of Internet, host naming was not yet standardized.

The UK academic network used a least-to-most specific naming scheme (JANET NRS) (like, uk.tld.institution.machine) whereas the US adopted the most-to-least ordering (eg. machine.department.organization.tld).

As the DNS became the dominant name-to-IP mechanism, the JANET NRS faded away, and we're all now used to most-to-least specific host names.

But hey, at least the most-specific bit isn't in the middle.
So although Government generated IP titles are prohibited except by one-off statutes, the government can engage in work-for-hire or any auto-acquire titles to accomplish the same thing, which is what it does.

So this is how it owns patents, copyrights, closed source software, etc
I wish science articles would stop making the front page of HN. So few experts, for many opinions.
>just because you can label one particular branch “master” doesn’t make it genuinely special, and any special treatment you give to one branch is merely your convention.

It does matter, depending on your motivations. If you think the reason for living is that you're a great person whose continued existence will benefit society and/or your loved ones, then sure, it doesn't matter as long as the copy is identical. If you simply want to stay alive and experience/enjoy more of it, then having a bit-for-bit identical copy might not achieve your goal.

For the latter option, consider the following thought experiment: suppose say you want to do an enjoyable activity, such as going on a one week vacation, but you can't afford it. Would you pay 50% of the cost (which you can afford) so a clone of you go on vacation?
The point you are missing is how EU antitrust works, in the EU there is essentially a split between the Commission specifically the Directorate General for Competition and the competent authorities (aka the regulators) in each EU member state.

The DG COMP investigations are usually triggered via complaints raised by member states however they can also decide to investigate it own their own, once they done if any action needs to be taken they would authorize the regulators in each member state to take that action they do not enforce actions themselves.

However there still needs to be a violation of either Article 101 or 102 for them to investigate, this is quite different from the Chinese case where NXP and Qualcomm had to seek permission from the Antitrust regulator, in this case if NVIDIA requires one it would only be from the UK regulator and there is currently no freaking way that Brussels would interject in the midst of Brexit.

A year, 5, 10 down the line they might decide to open an antitrust case if they believe that NVIDIA's practices warrant an investigation, but currently there is no way for them to block the sale.
Part of the problem with “cold fusion” was the claim that it was fusion, which it pretty clearly wasn’t. If the claim was merely that they’d observed apparently unexplained release of energy, or even that they believed they’d detected fission byproducts down near the limits of their instruments, it would have been more palatable. If they’d decided to release their ‘results’ in a peer-reviewed journal instead of in a press conference where they kept the details secret, they might have been treated better by the community. The problem with Cold Fusion wasn’t that it was bad science—-it was that it wasn’t science.

The Em Drive lacked the snake-oil showmanship of Cold Fusion, so it got treated better. It was also described well enough for the experiment to be replicated, and a few confirmations make it interesting enough to explore.

I think this is most likely to turn out to be experimental error, not a cause a revolution in electromagnetic theory, but it is worthy of the investigation, which Cold Fusion never was.
That's a valid point. Power from fossil fuels is not better. Accidents happen far more often (tankers sinking and spilling millions of liters of oil into the sea), but somehow people seem to fear fossil fuel energy a lot less.
There is some hypothesis in the RISC community that this sale will be a boon for RISC-V. With NVIDIA at the helm, ARM is no longer a neutral third party, so we may see a bunch of investment into RISC as it replaces ARM's SoC prevalence.
Phosphine Could Signal Existence of Alien Anaerobic Life on Rocky Planets
My previous employer/mentor always used to say:
"Version numbers are gonna fuck you."
Actually it is. What you suggesting would completely break those operations. Compared just not getting what you want. In any way you can tell python how to behave through normalization of the unicode.
Extrapolating based on the last 17 years doesn't make any sense. 17 years ago you would have made a very different prediction based on the 17 years before that.
What if they don't like the taste of apes? What sort of mammals do they like?
The best thing I can see to come out of this is some sort of standardized, more easily replicated test apparatus for precise measurements of very small thrust in vacuum chambers.

Such as for testing things that do actually produce thrust, built into low cost satellites, such as very small ion and hall effect thrusters.
Exactly, rocket science is pretty easy to a physicist but rocket engineering is absolutely not.
I was in S20 and also W10, so I did a remote batch and a non-remote batch ten years apart. Overall, it was indeed more work to get to know your batchmates, and the serendipity was gone a little. However, on the flip side, all the structured pieces were very on-point -- e.g. weekly talks, written materials, office hours, and advice.

With few exceptions, I would recommend YC to anyone on the fence.
The other choice is to share business logic, reimplement UI for each platform independently, using platform-specific APIs.

Cross-platform GUI always leads to compromise.
Is it? I am pretty sure that v[x] where x >= n is UB.
The DG COMP isn't able to give the CMA direction atm, the sale doesn't violate article 101 or 102 and no member state has raised a complaint against it.

This isn't about Brexit being a distraction, it's about their mandate and optics.

Until the 31st of December the DG COMP actually needs not only to show that there is a sufficient reason to investigate the deal, but that the CMA ruling wasn't in line with the TFEU.
The space shuttle was meant to be reusable - it was built 40 years ago in 1980.

I'm not saying there is no new tech, it just all seems incremental, not revolutionary. When I was younger every day it seemed there was something new. Today, not so much.
This has nothing to do with his point
>The other ding against SwiftUI for Mac dev seems to be that it’s only supported in Catalina, and it seems an awful lot of Mac users have held back from updating, so the user base might be diminished.

The majority updates fast - even more so when a 2nd update (Big Sur) comes out, few will hold to before Catalina.

With macOS it makes no sense to "hold out" from upgrading long. You are either prepared to get on with the program and move on, or you're left behind, worse than e.g. on Windows etc.

On the other hand, this makes the platform faster to move forward, adopt new things, and keep a more consistent UI doing so (Windows still have 5-6 UI layers from previous APIs/decades, depending on the app you use -- even for internal MS apps, e.g. you can still open an ancient version of the control panel from within the current one).
Not quite sure of the location of a business you're thinking of visiting, or even if they're still in business? Find their store on streetview.

Need to know the parking restrictions on that road, or the turning restrictions, or entry restrictions? Look at the signs on streetview.

Want to check the buildings you'll be turning at in advance, so you can make a short journey without looking at your phone? Streetview.

Want to know whether that street looks good to bicycle on? Streetview again...
Apple's goal is to protect their share price.. Nothing else.

Everything Apple does is in service of that goal.

This is why they are hardline on AppStore policies, and why they are hardline against Independent repair.

Any PR they have about protecting the user is just marketing
I think we can't ignore the weight of the nuclear reactor though - we are not lifting just the truck, the reactor has to carry it's own weight. And a 1GW reactor will dwarf the 36t payload I think.
If you need a business person on your team, it's because you need business and you need to be a business, and that's what the business person should be doing. Marketing, closing deals, arranging funding, talking to the lawyers, talking to the accountants, doing HR. If they're really good they're also managing the business process, making sure everyone's happy, communicating and performing and on target.

It's not actually multiple persons that you need on your team, it's different roles. The technical person, the product person, the management person, the visionary, the organized person, there's probably a dozen more personality traits that are helpful if not essential. They could all be in the same person, but it's more likely it's 2 or 3. They don't all need to be founders, but the more committed they are to the company, the better that aspect is reflected in the company, and the more succesful it might be.

Google didn't need any marketing, they just needed engineers, so they hired engineers, and people who could hire engineers, and people who could manage engineers. By the time they needed something else they were already making so much money they could afford to motivate excellence by monetary compensation alone, not every start up has that luxury.
I'm sure they do, however if the CMA clears the deal the DG COMP can't block it politically in general and lawfully if there isn't a clear violation of the TFEU.
So if they eat phosphate minerals on earth, what are they eating way up in Venus's atmosphere?
Mandy Patinkin: The Princess Bride Sword Memories
As we force people over a certain age into retirement, perhaps this should happen for code bases as well.
I Pay $13 a month for 2GB and unlimited talk and text. Most phones have 2 Sims and can use esim. Truphone is much better internationally. https://www.truphone.com/us/consumer/sim/
It has free incoming calls and you only pay for outgoing.
Toby Ord's book The Precipice does a good job evaluating them. Top contenders are AI, bioengineered viruses, nuclear war, and climate change, with natural disasters that we fail to avert/mitigate, like asteroid impact or supervolcano eruption as a distant aslo-ran.
"X is what Google used to be." didn't strike me as a comment about the paperwork of corporate restructuring, but rather a comment on how Google isn't doing interesting things anymore. And I don't think anything changed in that regard. They just pulled non-core businesses such as X into Alphabet Inc. That doesn't mean that what X is doing used to be more important to Google than it is to Alphabet now, it's just paperwork.
>It seems like it's worth a try, since the alternative is certain death and non-existence.

but only if it's free, right? Otherwise it turns into a variant of pascal's wager.
> Are they homebrew (which is becoming more common in the raspi world)?

Homemade autopilots are unfortunately still quite rare, although the technology does exist. You basically need an RPi, a motor controller and a motor, with Pypilot as software.

https://pypilot.org

Also check out the OpenPlotter project mentioned there. I'm using it with a RPi with a 7" touchscreen.
> In Python, whether 2 or 3, as a developer you do not have the luxury of informed reasoning whether something is bytes or a string, because your functions' input parameters can be either.

I guess they can be, but the code might also work on an int tuple, even though the operation doesn't make any sense. Here's a case where duck typing does something, but it doesn't make sense.

import functools
def sum2(vals):
return functools.reduce(lambda a, b: a + b, vals)

Python's built-in sum won't work on strings or lists of strings (so much for saying the language is duck typed), but this will. It's also weird because addition is associative, but not with strings, so changing a+b to b+a changes the behavior and gives you a very cute answer to the "reverse a string" algorithm:

reverse = sum2

In practice, every legitimate use I've seen for duck typing might as well use what would be an interface in Java. I see duck typing as interfaces without the formality of declaring them. If you violate the implicit contract, funny things happen, and this is why Typescript got so popular and Python added type annotations.
>you just need some hierarchy, event handling, windowing and layout and you have a basic toolkit.

Yeah. Once you add hierarchy, event handling, windowing, and layout to a rendering engine you pretty much have a basic toolkit.

Kind of like once you've hand built a cpu, gpu, logic board, hard drive, and so on, on top of 3d-printing a case, you have a basic PC.
It'll take a while. I'm on Debian 11 (testing) and I'm also getting python 2.7.18 for just `python`.
Well Read Students Learn Better: On the Important of Pre-Training Compact Models
Pleeeeease tell me you’ve actually been asked this question in an interview
Give Excel to an uncontacted tribe and see how well they go with it.

That we assume reading, numeracy and fine motor skills which until 5 centuries ago were the preserve of less than 1% of the population in the West are not part of formal education or training should tell you all you need to know about how much cultural knowledge we assume people need to have in their daily life to function at the level of a 10 year old.

That 4 years to learn to read is considered normal but reading a 100 page manual is considered unreasonable shows us how much popular culture is lagging behind our tools. Given how technocentric our culture is, this is a situation as ridiculous as Mongols complaining that they need to learn to ride horses.
7,500,000,000 millinewtons = 7.500 Meganewtons

1 Watt = 1 Newton-meter/second

You're missing some values.
Doctors on average know more about medical subjects than non-doctors. Engineers generally know more about engineering than non-engineers. Climate scientists know more about what’s going on with the climate than non-climate scientists.

Facebook-educated woke people who think everyone is just some con man and they know more than them are simply people with too much confidence. Laying evidence out in front of them will only make them angry or mock it because it collided with their world views instilled by clownery they saw on TV or from equally “woke” people.

Are doctors wrong sometimes? Of course. Are some particularly bad doctors wrong a lot of the time? Yes. Are a massive group of doctors out there “hiding the truth” and people with no formal education have the real solutions, but their answers are being suppressed? No.
I often copy (not synchronize) remote files using rsync instead of scp because rsync will batch the small files, and scp does not.

Or zip up (or tar) the small files, copy over the large archive, then unzip.

They are having the same issue here: A lot of small files each transferred one at a time, instead of in a streaming batch.
It's my device. I should have the choice to override the standard use case to unlock the phone's full functionality at the expense of battery life. I almost always have a charging cable with me, and a 20,000 mAh powerbank. Furthermore, there is a lot of room to increase charging speeds, but most phone manufacturers have dragged their feet because extremely fast charging speeds aren't necessary for the standard use case. However, that "standard use case" is outdated and needs to be reevaluated.
We could already pretty much assume that, seeing how life appeared on earth almost immediately (geologically, anyway) after it was physically possible. Even panspermia is kind of a stretch when explaining that timeline. But yeah, an independent origin would clinch it.
Even if you were moving 25TB of data on a server under your physical control, it could be a significant engineering effort. Maybe not 14 person-days but at least a few.

What's amazing is that some teams assume the same operation will be more performant in the cloud, despite being wrapped in layers of HTTP-based API abstractions.
I’d easily pay $100+ for a native macOS client for GMail that is not a poor IMAP substitute like Mail, Thunderbird, or Outlook. But I’ll wait for v1 before I download anything outside of the app store ;)