skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You're getting downvoted for what seems like a harsh policy. I think it's definitely understandable that most people want to make the switch as easy as possible, and that's the reason for the delay in discontinuing Python 2. But I would make the case like this:

The slow approach failed. Chances are, most Python 2 code was written after 2010. By switching earlier, yes, you make the switch harder for the handful of people who actually did port their code, but on the other hand you avoid the exact same porting difficulties for many more because the majority of Python 2 code would never have been written! Someone upthread mentioned scientists, for example, who were still writing their analysis code in the late 2010s and are now confused about why none of it runs.

To be sure, it's worth thinking about why it failed, as many other projects have been able to get away with a longer deprecation periods. But its seems like there is a case to be made, in pure consequentialist terms, that Python would have been better off killing Python 2 earlier.
So the problem with this is that I don't care about how long I have lived, but how much longer I still have to live. And novelty doesn't change that.
How did they know my address from having a Google account?
There are numerous ways to approach the problem you're facing, but first of all it'd be good to understand the core problem you're running into. Unfortunately, without too many details this is all going to be a little abstract.

Based on the detail you've provided, it seems one problem you're facing is access to industry domain experts who can both validate what you're doing and also perhaps help you refine the product and market access.

If that is correct, I'd suggest that you don't, at this point, look for a non-technical co-founder but rather just approach people with domain expertise in the industry that you're trying to target for advice and validation by requesting a short conversation. LinkedIn can be a very good source and depending on how you approach the people and your own profile you may get a very good response from people. Anywhere above 20-30% response rate would be very good just to set expectations, it can be higher or lower but don't be disheartened.

Depending on the domain you're targeting there is a much much larger pool of people who will offer you initial advice than who will be willing to join as co-founder. Once you get connected and they accept, just talk to these people. Get input, and also ask for further connections, as in is there someone you should be speaking to that they can introduce you to. Use them in future when you're looking to make a sale or for early adoption and again, for advice.

This will kick start your journey and you will find people. If you find someone truly awesome and nice, who is also interested in what you're doing, you can ask them to be an advisor. If you find someone who is interested in joining, then perhaps have them join. But be careful, and make diligent decision before having people join the team.
I went pretty deep on swift mac UI development at some point but I was left disappointed. I've realized that building your own gui toolkit isn't that hard. Right now, I'm building my own toolkit in Rust with this Rust nanovg clone called gpucanvas https://github.com/cytecbg/gpucanvas.

Here's another nanovg based gui toolkit in cpp https://github.com/wjakob/nanogui

Thanks to Rust macros, you can shape the language to be essentially whatever you want.

I think that ECS (entity component system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entity_component_system) is the way go with GUIs.
Just make "Assume good intent" a part of your culture, and that will accomplish the same thing (and as a bonus, make your company a much nicer place to work).
I'm sure it was fun, but it does seem to point at a lack of focus. I suppose that's hard to resist when there's an endless pipeline of money.
Well, if I was black I'd probably like to know if my psychiatrist associated with HBD cranks. Or if I was a woman, I'd want to know if my psychiatrist wrote apologia for incels. And that's just two examples of the countless absurd hot takes hes had over the years.

Siskind dug his own grave here, and the NYT has done his patients a huge service.
Fully agree, which is why I pointed out the station fell short of their demo in my post.

I just don't see it as being deceptive in the way rolling a truck down a hill and suggesting it's operational is. Or at the very least, we're missing the smoking gun. Perhaps it is and someone who worked at Tesla or the blogger who posted about going to the station will come out and admit it was a big fake-eroo.

Finding the hill they pushed the truck down is pretty damning IMO in a way suspicions about Tesla's tech demo aren't.
Owosso is a half hour away from where I live. I knew of the AutoCycle when it was launched but had no idea that it lasted five years.
Scientists Identify 11 Fish Species That May Be Capable of Walking on Land
I have no good idea about the origin of users as lazy. However, there is a good argument for an origin of users as stupid. And this might be the close connection of Human Computer Interaction with Cognitive Science, which understands thinking as computational. Thus, the ideal way of thinking is computer-like and diversions from this are framed as due to limitations that cause problems and need to be worked around: The user is like a limited and erratically failing computer.

Gedenryd showed the problems of understanding the user and designer as thinking computationally in his PhD thesis: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/How-designers-work-mak...
> I've heard that a decent drummer can hit a note within 15 milliseconds

I find that easily believable. I think human reactions can be very fast and very precise if there is some kind of feedback - e.g. a clue, pattern or rythm to latch onto.

What I find harder to imagine is precision without any feedback - e.g. a human player pressing a button after exactly 15 milliseconds, without any kind of clock.

...but as you say, there may actually be some clues.
Probably. I don’t know anyone outside of work.
> I don't think the idea of a C corp belongs in quite the same league as the idea that murder is wrong.

Wrongness (subjectively, at least; let's avoid the question of objective morality) exists independent of government, and independent of liability.

But liability is a creation of government through law, just as much as limitations on liability are. Which is why government has the power to limit liability; if liability was independent of government, government would also not be able to limit it.
This is why the open source angle is so crucial. If the expertise is distributed well between the stakeholder states, it can produce more state sovereignty, because it is at least plausible to fork.

It serves the best arguments of both nativism and globalism, without really harming the values of either.
They used it to exploit 2 known timing attacks that were not previously fixed because they were thought infeasible to attack:

From article: In case of the HackerOne bug, it was already reported at least three times (bug IDs #350432, #348168, and #4701), but was not fixed, as the attack was considered infeasible to exploit. I then created a basic PoC with the timeless timing attacks.

From article: Mathy Vanhoef, one of the co-authors of the paper, had previously discovered a potential timing leak in WPA3’s handshake protocol. But the timing was either too small to exploit on high-performance devices or could not be exploited against servers. “With the new timeless timing attacks, we show that it is in fact possible to exploit the WiFi authentication handshake (EAP-pwd) against servers, even if they use performant hardware,” Van Goethem says.
This is so awesome, I just wish it could go back even further to 1 billion, 2 billion, ... years ago! If we know enough about the Earth's history and tectonics to depict it...
A lot statements by authors pointing out that life is brutal, and getting very depressing and deep about the topic, but not really explaining why. Life is brutal because its inherent to all living things being in pursuit of self replication whereupon success, such success is replicated. We are always in strife for the same space, energy, and resources with each other(each other being all living things).

Don't be saddened by it, or make it some sort of deep philosophical tragedy. It's as much fact as evolution, or as much fact as 10 - 1 = 9. Accept it and learn to love it for what it is.
> I'm not sure I'd understand how to use a door the first time I saw one.

You wouldn't. You'd see this great, menacing piece of matter in front of you. If the door was closed, that would be it for you. But if you saw it being opened, or better yet, encountered it open, then the fun would start.

You'd touch it and it'd move. You'd notice it has inertia. You'd grab it by the side or push, and see it move more. Eventually, you'd close it by accident, and then trying to move the door back would fail. You'd cry. Your parent/caretaker would come and open the door for you. You'd grab it again, and close it again. Then maybe you'd play a game with your caretaker, with them holding you in their hands and opening the door, and you closing it with a strong push, laughing at the noise. Some time later, you'd figure out how the door handle works.

Source: I have a 15 month old daughter. This is how she learned how to operate doors. Nowadays, when she doesn't want some thing we want from her (e.g. getting dressed), she sometimes runs ahead and closes the door behind her. She understands the door in more abstract terms now. But it took a lot of trial and error.

:).
Personally I find that troubling for the progress of humanity. We need big money (resources) to solve real challenging engineering problems.

Unfortunately it seems like a lot of the big money is going towards less critical 'problems' if problems at all, like social media companies.
OK that is like the best explanation ever. Thank you.
If you were working in a truly remote company, onboarding would be the first process polishied to diamond facet condition. I think your company is not "living on borrowed time", but burning through information capital saved during previous years.
From Wells and Huxley’s The Science of Life (1929):

It is difficult to imagine this world with
all its land surfaces lifeless; yet for more
than a half of its history Life played out its
drama under water, and the continents were practically barren. They were stark and bare, starker and barer than the utmost desert of today. Over the bare cliffs and desolate plains the sole breath of movement came from the wind and rain. A certain margin there may have been of faintly vitalized soil. From comparatively early times, a few simple algae may have trailed their filaments over the seashore or the moist borders of rock pools, or a few bacteria invaded the crumbling earth surface...

The face of the land was like nothing we
know today. There could have been no
real soil, for soil is largely a product of plant action. There was no carpet of plants and felt-work of roots to hold water like a sponge, preventing rapid run-off, and to blanket the ground from excessive gain and loss of heat; and so the work of frost and wind, rain and sun, was much more active. The heights of the land were worn down quicker and sediments more actively deposited, and the scenery was more angular and forbidding. Even long after the first appearance of land-plants vast regions of the land which would now be covered with vegetation remained desert or semi-desert, since all the earliest plants demanded a good deal of moisture.

Plants like grasses, which can thrive on dry steppes and prairies, are comparatively modern things. The Paleozoic Era knew nothing of them and the Mesozoic comparatively little. There was a desert flora and fauna in the Triassic; but possibly at least, the regions it inhabited would today be steppes or savannahs.

It is a good exercise of the scientific
imagination to picture this desolate and
desert earth, its continents cyclically rising out of the waters and submerging themselves again, occasionally undergoing a spasm of mountain-building or an ice age, but remaining essentially lifeless for well over five hundred of our million-year periods, in spite of the abundant presence and notable progress of life in the waters. Through all these ages, the lands remained unconquered and must have seemed unconquerable.
Facebook removes misinformation related to Oregon wildfires
I’ve got news for you dude, cronyism is a lot worse when selling to corporations.
In what world do some consenting adults not have more power than other consenting adults? Indeed, skills, circumstance, and capital all provide leverage. But consent, the most important factor in all this, is still necessary.

You support the effort, instead, to insert government in such a way to remove consent. Somehow things will be more fair if people have less liberty.

People don’t need do-gooders, bureaucrats, and legislators making every decision for them. Leave people alone to earn a living as they please.
Except that gpg also fails to make the hard things possible.

Want to verify a signed file against a key that’s in another file? Nope, not supported.

Want to load a private key into a smart card without wiping the key from your keyring? Not supported.

In general, gpg has a very strong idea of how you’re supposed to use it, and it makes it very hard to do anything differently.
Could you elaborate on what you found easy about writing a GUI toolkit? Not being snarky, but easy is the last word I would use to describe it.
> The only solutions are to reduce your pseudonym's visibility or staying fully anonymous in the first place.

Or maybe don't use a super secret identity that includes most of your real name, and your job, and where you work?
US election 2020: Bloomberg donates $100m for Biden in Florida
Thanks for posting this. I googled around and came up empty.

While I wish companies did more open data posts, I’m glad that researchers are filling the gap, sort of, by making data sets and analyses like yours.
Yes, every cell phone has something like this daemon. Google “cellular phone” to learn how cell phones need to triangulate nearby cell towers to determine which offers best service, and when to switch to a new one.

Please let me know when a phone manufacturer starts advertising the benefits of user freedom such as rampant malware stealing your personal information, dropping calls and bricking your phone.

The first iPhone didn’t allow apps at all. When it was introduced the expectation for phones were they were safe and secure. If the iPhone wasn’t it would have failed. It’s like you are arguing automobile manufacturers don’t advertise that their cars are safe to drive, so obviously it isn’t a feature important to customers.

And anyone can compete with a phone OS. You can fork Android for gods sake.
Deno uses V8. If you want to embed a JS runtime in C++ then just use V8 directly.

Deno is mostly written in rust.
Is there really that much choice for alternatives though? What else is installed everywhere, has a repl, huge standard library and tons of learning resources, no boilerplate to get going. I don't really like python and still consistently find uses for it.
Fore-Edge Painting
This was my take away as well.

What was somewhat surprising to me though was that, for all their technical ability, nobody at Makani foresaw the future of conventional wind turbine efficiency?

It just kinda seems like all of a sudden (in the documentary), they lifted their heads up, and 10 years had passed and conventional wind energy was dramatically improved. Case closed, that's it.
weird Q I was wondering about in regards to the epoch. (perhaps a stupid Q)

what would be the problems with choosing a new epoch (i.e. one where jan 1 is the same day of week as jan 1, 1970 and is 2 years before a leap year. (perhaps doesn't exist).

The worse case I see is that apps that calculate years internally (instead of via a shared library or like) would calculate them incorrectly. I'm wondering if this wouldn't be something that could be massaged around. Of course, it just pushes the problem down the road.

it also makes timestamps like this incompatible between systems that have different epochs, which could be an issue.

as I said, naive (possibly stupid) Q, just wondering if people have actually talked about it?
I didn't say easy, I said it's not too bad. Look at this toolkit for example https://github.com/yushroom/Fishgui. Once you have rendering (which nanovg handles), you just need some hierarchy, event handling, windowing and layout and you have a basic toolkit.

I like the control a lot, with Cocoa, I felt really constrained sometimes.
I can try to help you pass the SQL round. I’m going through DS/Analytics Eng interviews myself. I’ve passed all of my technical rounds, but failed the final rounds so far. Email me at aok1425 at gmail.
The request for more information will likely only be to confirm you are owner of the property / residing there.
As for the request, I simply stated "I want my house blurred for privacy reasons.". No questions were asked and the request was processed within a week.
I think this is because the ad networks don’t have insight to your purchase data. So they don’t know if you’ve bought and converted or not, but know that people who searched for something are more likely to buy if advertised the dickens out of for the next few weeks.

That’s my theory at least, but even Amazon will show ads for stuff I bought on amazon. Not sure if that’s just them being stupid.
Thanks for the perspective and GMPbench reference. I'm sure you're correct that RISC-V has a lot of optimization work to do both at the compiler and chip implementation levels.

I'm curious whether vector operation support in RISC-V might also make up for any apparent shortcomings in raw arithmetic throughput - I guess a lot of it will depend on the types of workloads involved.
Why can't we prevent wildfires / bushfires?
Why can't we prevent wildfires / bushfires?

The annually recurring wildfires near west coast of USA and Canada, and the bushfires near the east coast of Auatralia.
Why can't this be implemented immediately:
Satellites keep constant watch on fire-prone areas. Detect a wildfire / bushfire almost as soon as the first sparks occur.
Automatically generate alerts ... and trigger launch of firefighting aircraft (choppers, drones) to douse a fire within a few minutes of detection.
Use AI predict rate of expansion of fire (wind speed and direction data, realtime satellite thermographic analysis to give size, expected rate and direction of fire growth).
The satellites that can do this have been in place for years.
USA, Canada, and Australia have the resources to implement this before the next fire season.
Categorically demanding complete backward compatibility puts huge limitations on the development of the language. I agree that the barrier should be high, and I don't think many disagree that the Python transition was a mess, but for languages to evolve there needs to at least be some way to fix issues that are considered design errors.

There's no optimal or blameless solution here but I think in particular when it comes to the scientist use-case mentioned above, an entire decade is enough to address what is likely a relatively small codebase, it's not just a fault of the language, but also neglect or lack of resources in fields where programming is secondary in nature. (also btw detrimental to the quality of science, as recent cases have shown where programming errors basically invalidated entire studies)
Soldat 2
There is a component of the Gaia hypothesis which seems anthropomorphic, but this is a reductive way of understanding the theory.

The way you need to understand it is that most natural systems implement homeostasis on multiple scales, and information transferred between organisms has a somewhat communicable nature because organisms evolved and competed within a shared environment -- e.g human beings proteins are responses to environmental conditions.
I'd love to connect and collaborate, or point you to contacts who could collaborate with you. Please ping me at support@plumebio.com
I have said this for years: all the building blocks are here. What's missing is the integration, UX/UI polish, and of course, the resources to do so.

If enough public administrations are on board with this, then this could be game changer. We could have something that trickle down to the general population. Something on the same level of polish as Windows or MacOS.
Normalizing or Standardizing Distribution in Machine Learning
Just for clarity: In England that would be professional misconduct and something for his employer, and his professional regulator, to look at.
> "soul", for lack of a better word

A better word isn't all we're lacking. We don't have a clear idea of what that thing is, or whether it even exists.

> Clearly you won't be having the experiences of both bodies, would you?

Whether there is a "you" distinct from both bodies is the actual question to be answered here. If the experiment were done, my guess is that both bodies would swear that they were the original -- in much the same way, perhaps, that you would swear that you are the same "you" you were yesterday.
Would you share examples of what you’re describing?

Many private companies are funded by selling equity, which means a buyer was willing to pay a certain price for a portion of the company. FMV of such companies nearly always corresponds to a fraction of the price that the investors paid. Such companies are incentivized to claim as low a FMV as possible without drawing the scrutiny of the IRS, in order to minimize tax liabilities for employees when they exercise stock options.

Your comments imply that you’ve observed companies that deliberately inflate their FMV, the opposite of the common practice I described. Can you name companies and why you think they do this?
That's based on a single report produced by the UK and I don't think it's appropriate to damn the parent commenter so harshly based on that alone.

To contrast that report, in France, a country that actually uses nuclear power at scale, onshore wind is more expensive than nuclear and solar is only marginally cheaper [0].

And the renewables you mention aren't comparable to nuclear. Nuclear can be ramped up and down largely at will and doesn't really care what time of day it is or what the weather is like. Renewables need batteries. How does the cost work out when you include the energy storage needed to be as reliable as nuclear?

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#...
You have to draw a rectangle on the area you want blurred. I for example, only blurred my windows.
I’m curious if EU antitrust watchdogs will try to stop this.

The US will gladly accept it, since this is a massive plus for national security. This deal would mean a US entity owns pretty much every important chip architecture.

It’s already a huge strategic loss for the EU & UK that ARM doesn’t have European owners.
It's a standard, but it still requires a push service, aka FCM. It's not like the web browser is listening on an open port and the server is connecting to it. eg. if you go to https://gauntface.github.io/simple-push-demo/, you can see that the endpoint is fcm.
Why is it so hard for humans to accept that other animals might have feelings?
It's not just about Apple. Suppose you're an SoC designer without an architecture license who makes SoCs that successfully compete with say Tegra. Maybe you have a license to use Cortex A77. Lets assume that A78 is the successor to A77.

- Will Nvidia sell you a license to A78 to enable you to continue to compete with Tegra or are you stuck on A77?
- If you can't get a license to A78 where do you turn? RISC-V? Possibly but will you still have a business by the time a competitive RISC-V design emerges from somewhere?

The point is that Nvidia might play fair but the temptation to hinder those who compete directly with its own SoCs - where it will make a lot more money - will be great, and who will stop them if they do?