skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Analysis: Nvidia chief pledges ‘legally binding’ commitments to UK for Arm
Depending on the wavelength of the infrared even noisy and blurry may be notable or it may be mediocre for their setup. All the important details are in the paywalled paper so which type of infrared they calibrated for is unknown.

Just too much stuff missing from the article to actually judge for technical merit.

And plus making one for visible light is likely the main challenge as micro machining precision optics is not subject to moore’s law type scaling. Though I wouldn’t put it past Apple to sink billions into it if it helps making camera modules a few mm thinner.
However when the democrats win the election (president and senate) this fall then democrats will be able to add 3 more members to the Supreme court in order to counteract the Republicans heavily slanting the SCOTUS with Roe v Wade advocates.
You’re a better man than me.
The other problem with most online communities is that there's almost no limit on output. All else being equal, someone with an active offline life is going to have a smaller presence than someone who's terminally online, someone who spends more time listening to others is going to have a smaller presence than someone who spends more time talking, someone who puts more effort into their posts (proofreading, look up evidence) is going to have a smaller presence than someone who haphazardly shoots off comments, and someone who reserves comments for when they have something important to contribute is going to have less of a presence than someone who comments on things they don't know anything about.

Things like mods (most people don't have the time commitment), voting (terminally online people will be able to vote earlier and more often, driving the conversation), front page thresholds (a small group of people acting as filters for new submissions), and time limited submissions (the longer you wait to comment the more likely the conversation will have died) just skews things even more.

For all the discussion about the low quality of online conversations, there seems to be very little discussion about the environments we've created and what kind of discussion these environments encourage.
It's by design.

I've said, and I'll say it again, from 1776 to 2020, the US was never really a democracy. The power was not in the hands of the people.
funny enough, minecraft simplified this kinds of things to an extreme
> One of the mechanisms for amending the USA constitution is via a 3/4 vote of both houses of Congress.

I believe this is factually incorrect. I'll offer Article V of the Constitution as my citation. Do you have a contrary citation to support this claim?
None of this changes the fact that Apple is using technical measures to prevent Epic from developing software for Apple's “open” platform, the Mac. Everything else is some distant tiny noise from another conversation. This is the moment the frog has been boiled.
Most of these statements were made in 2018. A lot has changed since then, and these statements where made when Samuel Alito's retirement was being floated. RBG is a totally different ball game.
They do have a say. They're free to contact their senators just like citizens from all the other states (on either side of the issue).
You mean when they barely had a majority in his first two years, and that only with the conservative Blue Dog Democrats, and then nothing but bitter opposition trying increasingly unprecedented obstruction tactics for the next six? Remember how most of the people who whine about the ACA not including a public option forget that this came down to one person (Joe Lieberman) because they couldn’t get the votes otherwise?

That’s a great example of WHY you need to vote in every election: it’s not enough to get a narrow win, you need a margin to get much done. If you want candidates more to your liking, you need to start organizing at the local level and building a movement: politics go to people who show up. The GOP has minority approval for most of their positions but is in power because their voters show up at every election.

In the United States, one especially important thing to focus on is electoral reform. Currently, most voters have a binary choice where not voting for the Republican candidate is effectively the same as voting for the Democrat or vice versa. The best long term thing we could see would be more ranked or run-off voting so it’s viable to run multiple candidates.
Clinton carried the popular vote in both 1992 and 1996.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_United_States_presidentia...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_presidentia...

If you're talking about Hilary, the majority of Americans did vote for her, not Trump.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidentia...

Edit: As erichocean pointed out, I am incorrect. Although Hilary received the most votes of any candidate, the majority of Americans did not vote for her. I think that my point still stands, however.
And often, implementing that solution is much cheaper than inaction, and people still complain about cost.

Except when the solution is war.
Ultium sounds like the ultimate element name! Certainly better than Oganesson or whatever wacky names IUPAC chooses.

In seriousness, this is an exciting time for electrification, GM put serious engineering effort into this lineup and from the looks of it they expect to be going all in this decade.
Nobody is seriously proposing that the US ban successful Indian companies, or that India ban successful US companies (the pushback against Free Basics did not rise to anywhere near that level). This is strictly about global retaliation against PRC Internet policy that is practically forced by geopolitical game theory at this point.
Trump will win! sorry.
Like anyone can take Collins at her word anymore.
I’m probably gonna do it. I’m not sure I could do the other thing... if the world burns, at least I burn in her camp. I’m ok with that. I’m excited you might be there too!
>The left has been talking about stacking the supreme court since Kavanaugh.

Considering the court has had a Republican majority since 1989, I don't blame them.
Voting is a very tiny part of what needs to be done to actually fix this mess. Voting alone can never fix these kinds of issues.
>It's completely possible—and I say preferable—to hold starkly contrasting political or legal views, but still like one another. We need more of that.

Disagree.

The system is confrontational; it's shaped this way so as to reduce the chance of buddy-buddy underdealings and negotiation.

The system is confrontational so as to promote fairness and prevent bias.

Creating yet another environment by which the judges can exert control over the law by winning personal favors among each other must be avoided. That's exactly why things are set up such way within the US government, Supreme Court not-withstanding.

All that said : I have never considered the supreme court to be fair and unbiased. Compromising for the sake of cooperation, sure. Effective, definitely.

> It does not appear that whatever friendship that existed between Scalia and Ginsburg impacted their rulings and dissents on the matters before the Court.

You'd never really know. That's why it should probably be well avoided.
> a few mm thinner

Isn't a typical consumer fish eye lens for an iPhone a couple of cm in depth? Sounds like we're talking a more than a few mm here
Octopaxen.
Congress can't meaningfully restrict its own actions by passing laws: any law passed can be repealed by a future Congress by the same procedure as long as there are majorities.

Which isn't to say that there's no point in purporting to do so: you may hope to require a politically costly public vote (avoidance of which was a significant feature of the Garland no-hearing: with nobody else "on the record," outrage focused solely on the politically-safe McConnell). How effective this is isn't really clear though: voters seem to usually want "their side" to take full, uncompromising advantage when they are on top, and increased polarization means that the fear of alienating independents/moderates isn't as much of an issue, because there aren't any of them left.

Rules and procedures such as the filibuster are weaker still, as they require only a majority of a single house, and no cooperation from the President. We've seen that borne out as the parties out of power became more likely to use the Senate's procedures to stall the party in power, and the fairly quick recent dismantling of those procedures in a bipartisan fashion.

Constitutional amendments can do all sorts of things and their high barriers to passage make them solidly entrenched, but it's very difficult to imagine any issue commanding the necessary supermajorities to pass an amendment on any subject in today's America.

As for Democrats or Republicans in power after the election curbing this kind of partisanship, I wouldn't bet on it. There may be some pushes to try to codify
I've come back around to single-purpose devices.

Kindle: read books

Nintendo Switch: play games

TV: watch films and shows

Getting into the "mental mode" to do one of those things requires using the device built for it, and putting away my general-purpose phone/laptop. The great thing about focused single-purpose devices is it's impossible to get "lost" clicking around and wasting time.

If I'm on my Kindle, I'm not scrolling through the news. If I'm on my TV, I'm not getting lost down some YouTube recommendation rabbit hole.

The more I started turning my laptop into single-use (cutting out social media, focusing on productivity), the more "bored" I was at first, but then I realized that's actually a good thing. In addition to all the above I have my piano I can practice on, too.

Being bored is good. The modern web and especially social media vehemently disagree, and so our incentives have diverged.
So is this the LS of electric motors?
> The FP32 doubling, is one of the most important bits here. But fortunately for programmers, this doesn't really change how you do your code.

Early benchmarks are showing games under-performing quite a bit in the worst cases. The crux of the issue is that it's not /exactly/ a no-compromise doubling of FP32. Each data path per SM can either do 2xFP32 or 1xINT32/1xFP32 per clock cycle. So if your game or application has any significant INT32 operations scheduled, all of a sudden you're back to the number of FP32 cores you had last generation, though you get the benefit of parallel INT32 execution.

It's a pretty cool architecture overall though.
You've shifted your argument. Previously it was that you shouldn't vote because you didn't want to support democratic representatives who "don't have a backbone", now it's that you don't want to vote because it doesn't matter.

I'll also note that your vote for president has no impact on the senate's membership. It's entirely a non-sequitor.
If you don't vote the party line then you get shown the door during your next election. They turn off the money spigot and nominations stop coming and they help your opponents (same party) get the R nomination. None of the current R senators have the backbone to go against that. Oh they say they will but when the day comes to vote, it's all just hot air.
I like the unintended consequences of this. But maybe I’m shortsighted.
The majority of Americans did not want either as president. It's not my opinion. It's the opinion of the majority of American voters.

However, the law does not elect a president according to whether or not the American people wish them to be president.

Seems like a technicality to me.
You must not be from around here.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(epithet)
Reading what??
Perhaps they could not get their hands on Unobtanium otherwise that would be better.
If those senators stall their own party on the highest visibility vote of their careers, then they're done.
Google Graveyard is in maintainance mode, and is not accepting new burials I'm afraid.
Thanks for the feedback.

File paths are always tricky and I will add something that removes some bad characters.

Noted on the visible bodies, I haven't had much time to verify the output so I will look into that this weekend. Thanks again.
One can do that and demand that people stop doing immoral and destructive things. No need for "just" anything.
It not because you can isolate your friendship from duty that other people can do the same.

What may seem natural for you isn't for others.

Thus system are designed considering that.
The Democrats would not be able to expand the size of the court until they could pass legislation.

This threat assumes that Democrats would take this action once they control the House and Senate.
Sure, the Democratic-led Senate confirmed Reagan's appointment of Anthony Kennedy in 1988.
Incredibly reminiscent of early del.icio.us too. https://www.flickr.com/photos/joshu/765859193/in/album-72157...
For an add-on lens yes. It’s probable Apple already has prototype lenses optimized for thinness that are less than a cm thick, since a lot of the bulk is unnecessary if it’s directly integrated to the sensor.
> So now we’re claiming the entire US monetary system is going to collapse (and as a result most likely the worlds monetary system)?

No, that's not why outspoken critics of an incipient authoritarian regime would not be likely to be able to collect or enjoy their winnings if the regime was successful in establishing itself. The monetary system is in no way part of the issue.
Have you looked? Not seeing means you should probably turn on the light switch. You are in a dark room.
Can you cite something other than the conservative National Review?
How's it different from flying somewhere for vacation?
No doubt, but it is already worked out.

And it turns out to take up a remarkably small area of the die. So, unless it actually slows down execution, it is a small tax that is overwhelmed by benefits of volume production.
Unobtanium Drive could be reserved for their corvette hypercar.
This is an important confirmation but it's not new. Researchers at Columbia have been studying far UV on coronaviruses for a long time, and it's well-established that far UV kills them.

The problem is that far UV lights are rather expensive at the moment.

https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/far-uvc-light-safely-kil...
The underlying TLD holder.

Usually all dictionary words, domains below 3chars, domains below 4chars, etc.
> but the truth is the senate wouldn’t have confirmed him and so they didn’t vote for a hearing.

This is not necessarily true. McConnell does this to protect his fellow senators from having to decide between party and state, potentially hurting their re-election chances if they side with the party. Majority leaders regularly stop things going to vote not because they wouldn't pass, but rather because it can create strife and bad feelings within the party.
That's really just the "end of the Supreme Court" argument. If you pack the Supreme Court once, it'll happen every time a new party has the senate and the white house.

Especially since you yourself suggest packing it to give an immediate "Democrat" majority, when it's incredibly likely, even without a new nomination, the Supreme Court remains republican for at least 8 years.

Personally I think this is what democrats (and people like you) are hoping for. It'd give an excuse to pack the court day one and maybe not immediately lose all public support.
It's not "common" because election-year Supreme Court vacancies where different parties control the Senate and Presidency are "not common." Republicans filibustered the nominee when LBJ sought to appoint Warren's replacement, leading to Warren not retiring. Then before that, Eisenhower, a Republican, got an election year nomination through by nominating a Democrat.

Then you're back in the 1800s. But we routinely look back to the 1800s to establish what is accepted practice in our government.
Wouldn't it be better to compare fuel per passenger per hour rather than per km? It's entertainment not transport so the KMs travelled doesn't seem so relevant.
I wrote 5 simple things you can do to improve calm, productivity and focus using your phone:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/5-simple-immediate-hacks-impr...

My favorite personal tip is to turn off colors on the phone and run in pure black and white mode :) I've done this for about 2 years now and I loove it!

IF you try any tricks to reduce reliance, stimulation and/or distraction on your phone, go into Screen Time (or Android equivalent) and take a screenshot of how much you've picked up your phone in the last 7 days (because Screen Time doesn't maintain history) so you can compare later on to see if you've improved!
Exactly, in my religion/culture eating Halaal is forbidden, because of 100s of years of wars with Muslim Rulers. Forcing or scaling Halaal to transform the market that we non users have no choice will be totally unacceptable.
She’s going to furrow her brow and try to explain why flip flopping and selling her vote in exchange for McConnell not killing her post-senate career (she’s down by ~12 points to her democratic challenger) is fine because McConnell had already learned his lesson.
HEPA filters are way cheaper than far UV too.
I think they were referring to the elected Republicans, not lay people. I'd be curious to know which elected (R) Senator/Congressperson you would consider kind and selfless.
> If you're saying the PGP use you imagine would be more secure than the Signal use that actually exists...

To present an iron-man argument instead of a straw-man, imagine they were comparing Delta Chat to Signal, and pointing out that Delta Chat does encrypt subject headers[0], and that Signal users typically don't use temporary phone numbers (which are harder to obtain than temporary email addresses).

If you want, you could try comparing Signal's proprietary network versus the global SMTP network in terms of how secure they are against traffic timing analysis.

[0] https://delta.chat/en/help#how-does-delta-chat-protect-my-me...
The "conservative" National Review went back to every Supreme Court appointment in history and made charts showing exactly what happened to answer your question. The New York Times, with its "moral clarity" performed no such analysis and presented no such charts.

So no, I won't cite something else.
I had a much longer response typed - but deleted it when it stopped even making sense to me.

"white silence is violence"

googles

Still no idea how that could be applied to my post - but I am most definitely white, and after a bit of introspection, can't think of anything I've constructively done to address racism outside of late-night internet posts.

So whilst I'd like to think I was "non-racist" - I do now feel a bit shitty that I entertain the cognitive-dissonance of being "anti-racist" and "not having ever done anything that was anti-racist"

Then if I cookie-cutter myself out to everybody else - I now see how racism flourishes, whilst the majority tut-tuts.

Was that your point?
inspirational? it was her greatest weakness, there was not any other single judge working harder against her

I'm not going for the nazi reference, he wasn't that evil but Scalia was literally trying to drag the United States back to the 1950s if not even further, decision after decision he never found an expanding right he didn't want to slaughter
Something of a nitpick, but you can believe one person is guilty pre-trial without thinking everyone is - there simply needs to be enough evidence to pass your own burden of proof (there's no obligation on a person, outside of a jury, to uphold the 'beyond reasonable doubt' standard), or that you believe there is no room for reasonable doubt even at this stage.

A person unconnected to the case commenting online has far less of an impact than a court with the power to impose criminal sanctions, so using a lower standard of proof isn't particularly harmful.
43.0% is a plurality; a majority (57%) of people voted against Bill Clinton in 1992.

But you knew that.

Clinton also failed to get a majority of the votes in 1996, as did both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in 2016.
Sigh. Still without the Bitmanip instructions.

Meaning, no popcount :-P
Depress your opponents base and deny them a divisive issue to campaign on.

It would be a perfect game theory move to do it, no merit in holding out.
> They are the most conniving and soulless individuals that exist

The Trump Republicans are far better in terms of war crimes. Not "better in terms of war crimes" is some sort of crowning achievement, but its hard to get much lower than srone striking Americans on foreign soil. To say Trump isn't an improvement over Busch just boggles my mind.
293 days the Senate didn’t vote on Merrick Garland because it was an election year. Can they wait 45 now?
No, because border crossing crimes are federal crimes and carry a much heftier penalty. In this case, talking about doing something like this wouldn't even be criminal if done orally but digitally it is.
> Every submission and comment must teach everyone something, expand views, ideas and contribute to society in some way. I don't think you telling how much trash you're picking is contributing to society.

I don't know about that. Last year the OP and friends worked to pick up and document trash and now, a year later, that information has been used to make informed decisions about how to keep our streets - and society - cleaner.

I'd argue that OP has quite definitively _contributed to society_.

If he'd just posted "I picked up some trash" - I could understand your comments, but he's done the work, gathered data, written about it, etc. So w/r/t to _teaching something_, I know more now than I did before reading his post.

Quite frankly, I could attempt to compare your contributions to society (aside from the snarky, dismissive comments on HN) but you've opted to hide behind a new, anonymous account. If you believe a submission is off-topic, just flag it, creating a new throwaway account just to disparage it seems a bit extreme.

And please understand, I don't say this to disparage you or insult your incredible intellect - just in the hope that perhaps I can _expand your views_ on how OP's submission is of interest to members of this community.
Agreed. The whole article reads like a mix of Hollywood Hacking and a puff piece.

Very likely something happened, but it almost certainly wasn't like this.
Your argument seems beside the point. Confrontation does not preclude friendship.
Contradicting reference that was posted elesewhere in the thread: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2019/...
You can have your cake and eat it too by waiting, though.

The looming court seat was a very effective driver of votes for Trump in the previous election, at least that's the conventional wisdom. So have a go at seeing if that will work again. You can also spin it as being respectful, serious, and considered by waiting.

Even if you end up losing the Presidency, and even the Senate, you're still in power for enough time afterward to make an appointment.

The only things I could think of working against that would be: the idea that you just make the appointment immediately and tout it as another success to your base, or perhaps a fear that since it's Ginsburg's seat that's vacant, having it open is actually a more mobilizing force for Democrats. There's also, I suppose, the possibility that you make the move right away on the theory that this upcoming election is likely to be contested and could reach the Supreme Court.
Is this stable to use as a daily driver?
The link does not support your claim (or its own). The Senate did not consider and reject Merrick Garland, it refused to consider any Supreme Court nominee by Obama.

Of course, I'm splitting hairs between "refused to consider" and "voted against". But it's similarly splitting hairs to say that the party of the president makes meaningful difference as well.

Frankly, there's no good faith interpretation of McConnell's stance here as anything other than (ab)using his power to shape the judiciary.
Because people in Tibet recognize him as a non-Beijing authority.