skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I would be happy to see if you have any citations of dubious peer-reviewed articles or conference proceedings to the extent of the infamous Tsai integration paper.

I was making a general point that citation count is not a measure of article quality, not that there are any specific SPIE papers that are quite as bad as that example. There are plenty of other cases where low quality (but not as bad) articles have lots of citations but higher quality articles have fewer. I raised it because you used citation count as a proof of article quality in your previous comment, but I don't find it to be evidence of anything.

(For the record, I just checked and the citation count is only 406 according to Google, not "thousands" as I claimed. The paper in question is "A Mathematical Model for the Determination of Total Area Under Glucose Tolerance and Other Metabolic Curves" by Mary M Tai.)

As it happens I have seen articles in SPIE that do have a similar flavour: a well-established existing area of mathematics that has been re-"discovered" in a more limited form in another context without acknowledgement. But it's nowhere near as bad as the trapezium rule paper: in fairness, that area is something you wouldn't learn about even in a typical undergraduate mathematics degree, and the articles were not limited to SPIE journals (but I think it reflects equally badly on those other journals). I'm afraid I'm not willing to name names in this case, both to protect my own identity (it might give away my field) avoid mudslinging at a particular individual.

> The idea that you overreach on the veracity of journals from the SPIE is just highly strange as you make overarching claims of dubiousness to the point of fraud...

I'm sorry, I couldn't quite untangle this sentence. Are you saying that I'm approaching the point of fraud because of my accusations against SPIE? (The "as" in the middle doesn't quite fit with this interpretation.) I've told you, I'm going on genuine articles I've seen and even contributed to. I have no connection to SPIE or any other competing journal and no personal reason to discredit them. Do you have any personal connection to SPIE yourself?
Understanding Naspers and their Tencent investment
I run Win10 for my personal dev machine. High performance on commodity hardware, without the Apple pricetag or Linux config headaches (particularly caused by GPUs in both instances).

It has WSL for a terminal and Docker for projects with environmental assumptions (node, postgres, etc).

It's not without quirks, but for me, it matches the productivity of OSX and Ubuntu while opening up possibilities they lack (like straightforward gaming, game/VR development, building the machine into a desk so it's invisible in my office).
Mobile phones use GPS, to be sure, but they also discern location by WiFi radio locations. If your phone is connected to BigCorpWiFi, then we know where you are. Even if you are in the BigCorp building connected to BigCorpWiFi with SmallCorpWiFi from next door detectable, we know which side of the building of BigCorp you are located. If you're on the street corner and your phone can see the WiFi networks of WiFi-1, WiFi-2, WiFi-3, we now know which street corner you are on without accessing the GPS chip. If the WiFi-2 signal is stronger, we know which side of the street you are on.

Forget WiFi. Walking down a street with lots of retail shops while Bluetooth is enabled receives pings from all sorts of trackers/beacons. We know where you are.

TL;DR: If you think location data is only discernible by using GPS, you are incorrect.
It is not broken in that way and I'm actually annoyed at myself for writing that :-/

If Firefox was broken broken all other browsers would be beyond broken IMO as none of the mainstream browsers really hold a candle to it for my workflows even today.

But compared to itself a few years ago the advantage over other browsers has diminished in every aspect I care about except maybe security.
The Mount Everest of evolutionary biology is to create life from inert chemicals. Science assumes it's possible but has yet to prove it can be done. This may be a significant step in that direction.
There have been cars where the bus connection to the ABS system was accessable in the wheel well.
3D metal printed pistons are ~10% lighter because they can have more sophisticated shape at the same strength. Reportedly this allows Porsche to increase RPM and get about 5% extra horsepower. It is still an experimental technology, not used in any road car. This is how they look like: https://images.hgmsites.net/hug/porsche-3d-prints-piston-for...
> You can simply ignore people you don't like, or you deem "intolerant", etc.

Simply ignore the internet-radicalised mass shooters! Ignore the people raising funds for murderers. Ignore the people gathering molotovs to protest, and the others encouraging each other to run them over with cars. I'm sure none of that stuff will ever happen to you.
Having the right to do something doesn’t make it a good idea. The issue here isn’t about Facebook having the right to do it.
How to access Amazon's new marketplace API
No, he's defending flashbanging a baby.
I don't think it was the act of physically removing seats that tripped it though. It was leaving the doors open.
I literally said that it's likely untrue in reality but that that's how it's depicted in the documentary. It opens with a guy being so burned out that he abandons being a father to his son and goes swimming every day and how much he loves swimming in the ocean and how awesome that is for him. That's a narrative, editing decision that baffled me!
Unfortunately I trust Facebook far more than most Americans to properly discern truth.
You've clearly selected your data to match your existing understanding of the world.

You've selected one carefully curated statistic and used it to justify a sweeping generalization you already held about "Marxists".

You also are "lying by omission". Yes, autocratic governments that call themselves communist have killed a great many people in famines and political killings.

But so have many democratic governments and non communist autocratic governments. (To say nothing of the hundreds of millions of deaths at the hands of Capitalism.)

Look, we can disagree politically. But please at least do so honestly and in good faith.
Anyone have pointers to the history of IP addresses becoming tradeable, as opposed to just being allocations and up to registrar to reallocate?
Let’s say I own a bullhorn shop. In fact, I have purchased every bullhorn shop, distributor, and manufacturer of relevance in the world.

Someone, a self proclaimed Nazi, comes to me, the owner of every bullhorn, to buy a bullhorn in order to convince others to be Nazis. I, a Jew, refuse to sell the bullhorn to the Nazi.

Am I being overly simplistic? Probably, but I don’t see where my analogy fails. I fail so see the strength in the “Facebook controlling the content of the platform it owns destroys our constitutional rights” argument.
Why would anyone want Windows to rebase to Linux?

Personally I want Microsoft to open source the Window Kernel.
Or disable/jam the antenna and joyride indefinitely
And just like that Google disappeared the full URI from Chrome browser's address bar. The Internet of my childhood died quietly today.

: /

Ref https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/08/13/google-resumes-its-...
This is not a great example because a string conversion by nature requires error-checking and should not be a simple return-by-value.

A string can contain anything and certainly not conform to its expected type. With a normal “error” return code (and overload-friendly type-specific parameter to find the converted value when successful), I can handle any type without magic and can also check errors. Futhermore, the return-parameter approach encourages me to actually think about errors instead of ignoring them (their function example of f(from_string(...), from_string(...)) is terrible).
A year of paying contributors: Review
> For the record, I disagree that it is a logical fallacy in all cases.

Isn't that ambiguous?

You could mean:

> It is not a logical fallacy ever.

or

> It is not always a logical fallacy.

I suspect you mean the latter but some might intepret you as meaning the former.
There are dozens of car companies, so the market is working. Government regulation exists because your desire to buy a “simple” car impacts my ability to breathe. You can buy very simple vehicles for off road use.

Fixing broken cars became a cultural thing because cars really sucked and you had to waste a fair portion of your life fixing them. Things like emission regulation brought metrics and standards to the industry and resulted in better cars. The typical lifespan of a car is 2x what is was in the 80s (200k miles or 12 years).
Coronavirus pandemic to cost Americans $16T, study finds
Let's not hide behind the technicalities.

Facebook makes your content available to a much larger audience than you might otherwise have access to, which is to say publishes it in the common English meaning of the word even if, under US law, it's not regarded as a publisher w.r.t user-generated content.

In your terms, Facebook might be a mere conduit of speech, but there is nothing that says it has to a perfect/unfiltered conduit.
nobody needs to agree about anything, progress is a measurement of historical average direction over timespan of decades
> It comes from the fact that code depreciates like a car.

If a business owns a car that they use to make a profit, guess where the car is in the balance sheet?

> Having the biggest codebase(car) is not a benefit.

Sure, lines of code is not how you measure the value of code as an asset, just like tons of gross weight isn't how you measure the value of vehicles as an asset.

That doesn't mean code, and vehicles, aren't assets.

“Lines of code are a measure associated with maintenance cost, not asset value” is a reasonable statement. “Code is a liability, not an assset” is not.
Amazon Introduces Distance Assistant
Focus on stage of company, not name of company (for your career)
Somehow you completely missed the point of the paradox of tolerance.

You cite it as if it wasn't completely contrary to what you are saying. Facebook's acts are being intolerant to beliefs they disagree with.

The paradox of tolerance states that "society must be intolerant of intolerance" thus society must be intolerant to Facebook's intolerant actions here.
As a former professional player whose last two employers use poker as a marketing tool for hiring, I strongly agree. If you want to be good at a game, learn that game specifically.
This confounds the difference between a platform and a publisher. If you chose what to publish, you're a publisher. That means you chose to speak, or not to.

A platform does not chose, but merely let's people speak -- or if it doesn't it interferes with free speech.
Three Places to Start in Defending Against Ransomware
A few things to counter here:

1. Considering the sloppy bullshit that is the root cause of 95%+ security vulnerabilities today, I think talking about "0 security" bugs is a distorting strawman.

2. No one said no recalls. The issue here is Microsoft is going after the exploiter rather than the bug, taking the law into their own hands over dubious pretenses.

That's somewhere in between taking the drivers licenses of Corvair owners and recalling the Corvairs themselves. (We could make a better anology if a black hat actor triggered the car defect.)

3. This could easily be precedent for scenario:

1. Security researcher finds bug and discloses it
2. Big crop declines to pay up / doesn't fix in timely manner, etc.
3. Security researcher goes public
4. Malware is made with exploit
5. Big corp goes vigilante on malware like this *and* sues security researcher, using this trademark justification in *both* cases.
I'm down for "an hour or two me time" and 100% agree. It just wasn't made clear in the documentary, so the viewer can only go off evidence provided.
Reclaiming Populism
The paradox of tolerance completely falls apart when you get into the details. Who decides what shouldn't be tolerated? There is no objective measure of that.

The USSR didn't tolerate certain speech either because it was a threat to their system. They used the exact same rationale that they needed to be intolerant to prevent the system from falling apart.
A Most Excellent answer, thanks!
I found that the programming model in unity makes avoiding race conditions more inconvenient than in other types of programming. Specifically the component and game object initialization orders are not specified unless you do extra work to manually initialize everything in some clunky init code
Except that the cost of producing that is not actually high. Individuals have built cars out of parts in their own garage. You don't think there is anyone willing to make millions of dollars by producing a thousand of them for the thousand people who want them?

But not if the fixed regulatory overhead is equal to the margin on twenty thousand cars.
I'm not sure David Irving can be called a scholar or a valid source considering he has been firmly debunked, and lost his libel suit because he lied and made up sources.

To quote one of the expert witnesses at his trial:

> Irving (...) had deliberately distorted and wilfully mistranslated documents, consciously used discredited testimony and falsified historical statistics. (...) Irving has fallen so far short of the standards of scholarship customary amongst historians that he does not deserve to be called a historian at all.
It's more likely that this article has a stimulating headline that many people will likely upvote without even reading. The poster is a karma farmer.
First of all, I have to say that your work on the C/C++ grammars is amazing.

My comment was mostly a reaction to this section of the blog post:

> I could only find a single mirror where I could download [the archives c++grammar1.1.tar.Z and c++grammar2.0.tar.Z].

If you happen to have the spare time to set up a public repo (GitHub or whatever), I think it would be great. It would surely help with long-term availability of the files, and people would have a somehow "canonical" link they can reference when they want to cite your work.
I would guess that the most common medical condition for needing to use disabled spots is "can't park".
Trouble is that Holocaust denial isn't spam, bots, threats of violence, abuse, or scams. It's a different interpretation of history, something that is protected under the First Amendment. Except these sites aren't considered public forums for some reason, even though they've supplanted the public forum in modern society.

When a handful of corporations determine the Overton Window in society, that is a cause for concern.
I wouldn't say they are less limited, so much as you are able to trade your money for resources a lot faster.. You can scale quickly, but at some point the monthly cloud bill come due, and code optimization starts to look a little more appealing :-)
My guess is the product you want to buy is on offer, but not at the price you are willing to pay. Do It Yourself is the market solution for people who want something different than what is offered in the mass market. The internet has enabled truly insane levels of DIY capability. Capitalism is not a charity. Therefore people that want products that cannot be sold profitably in the mass market can make it themselves, or buy it from the hobbyist/enthusiast market.
> why is the product I want to buy not on offer

Because the folks that ask this type of question are few and far between, and rarely serious. Otherwise, at least one manufacturer would have brown diesel wagons with manual transmissions. ;-)

Maybe 1 in 1000 people wrench on their own car. Manufacturers don't cater to that. They design cars to be appealing to the other 999, and they design the mechanical bits to be as cheap as possible to assemble in a factory.
Where was this at the inception of Facebook?
SkyCool is modifying an ancient practice to create carbon-free cooling systems
I usually really like what Slava writes, but I didn't like this one at all.

Just a few things I disagree with:

- 'Talent', as it is defined in the article, is not the most important factor in most jobs (though granted he writes that this article doesn't apply to most jobs)

- IQ is not a good measure for intelligence. Intelligence is way too diverse to be broken down into a linear scale, even when it comes to just engineering or 'talent', as he calls it here.

- Personality is way more important than he makes it out to be. It can't just be broken down into 3-5 factors. This isn't a scientific process. In my experience, this is where most of the value of personal interviews is.

- I found the last section disgusting to read. He's advocating for manipulating the candidate into accepting the job by asking successively harder questions, even though you've already made up your mind. What a great start to your business relationship. And then justifies this by saying that 'people want to suffer'. This is almost like negging in romantic relationships. Just awful.

Slava, if you're reading this, I'm disappointed. I respected you for your experience and your writing but this is making me quite sad.

EDIT: As lots of people have written here in the comments: On a second read, I agree this could indeed be satire. If so, well played Slava, well played!

I don't think so though, unfortunately. This is what the 'everything is measurable and science has all the answers' mentality brings, if taken to an extreme. These days, science, data-driven approaches and 'measure everything' are more religion than anything else. Even if this article is satire, I think there's enough people out there that think this way.
It's much worse. At least with `git clone` you can verify that the code you're building matches something you trust. You have to trust the code and your make tool. You can inspect the code if you're concerned and validate that it's going to do what it says.

It's true that the vast majority of the time a "curl | sh" works fine and does just what you expect it to do, but that's not really the point. The point is that you have no idea what that script your piping will do. You also have no idea whether in this case the binary it fetches is actually built from the code the service says it is; downloading the script first and inspecting it is a good idea, but still not as good as building directly from the code.

This is why we see people do things like publish a hash sum alongside binaries they offer, or use a digital signature. Then we can at least verify that a binary matches what the author says they released, or better yet ensure that the binary was produced by a trusted source.
Civil law systems have "The abuse of rights principle". It means that legal right can't be used in the purpose of _only_ causing annoyance, harm, or injury to another or violating or invalidating the rights.

In the EU the principle is codified in the article 17 of the European Convention on Human Rights and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. They both prohibit the use of rights in a way that they nullify or weaken the rights provided by the agreements.

The principle also exists in the European contract law and property law. You can't use the property rights for the sole purpose of causing annoyance or violating other rights.

---

https://definitions.uslegal.com/a/abuse-of-rights/

At least one of four conditions is required to invoke the doctrine:

(1) the predominant motive for exercising the right is to cause harm;

(2) no serious or legitimate motive exists for exercising the right;

(3) the exercise of the right is against moral rules, good faith, or elementary fairness; or

(4) the right is exercised for a purpose other than that for which it was granted.

---

edit: In the common law systems it can exist under names like "nuisance, duress, good faith, economic waste, public policy, misuse of copyright and patent rights, lack of business purpose in tax law, extortion, and others" see: Abuse of Rights: A Pervasive Legal Concept https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=17...
There's also the point that the DoD has officially stated that it considers the objects in these videos to be unidentified. Unfortunately they haven't provided more information on how they reached that conclusion, but one would tend to assume that they would have had their experts consider possible alternative explanations before making such a statement public.
Any kind of Motion, scrolling, movies, games... etc... refresh rate matters.

Sure, cinema movies are 24fps, and they do manage, but you are usually not 2 feet away from the screen.
Black police officers disciplined disproportionately for misconduct: IU research
I do like that most linux flavors I've used only have one settings menu per category, instead of [Number of windows UI revisions] menus per category.
First P2P computer game with hidden information
You’ve made a huge implicit assumption here: that efficient arbitrage requires low latency. It may well be that case that, right now, most of the arbitrage of the sort you’re discussing is done by HFT firms, but I see no reason at all to assume that a market in which latency is less relevant will not be efficiently arbitraged.

There are certainly human beings who manually arbitrage some markets even today, but that tends to be more complicated kinds of arbitrage. The only real connections between latency and trading strategy that I know of are:

Certain strategies don’t work if you aren’t the fastest kid on the block.

Certain strategies are too complicated to do if you are the fastest kid on the block. (For an example of the latter, you are unlikely to succeed in reading news reports, doing complex analyses, and executing trades based on your analyses in 100ns. No amount of money spent on top-of-the-line nVidia gear or tensor processing units is going to change this.)
> Windows would never sacrifice it's backwards compatibility.

The times have changed, it's not 2008 anymore. Microsoft doesn't really sell Windows upgrades anymore. They don't need to convince the user to purchase a new version of Windows by saying it won't break their programs. Now it's all Windows 10.

Microsoft will update the operating system users use and if it breaks something, oh well. There is no real competition to Windows anymore. Previously, the competition was staying on the previous version of Windows. macOS? This breaks programs even more often. Linux? Good luck getting an user to use that.
Why Facebook Can’t Fix Itself
Not a FB user myself, but do they not put fact check warnings on links deemed "untrustworthy"?

That ship has already sailed IMHO.
Of course they are called "arms" in the second amendment
It's funny you say that, because legally, the police have no requirement to protect people, as established by a long tail of caselaw; Gonzalez v. Castle Rock, DeShaney v. Winnebago County, and most recently Lozito v. New York City. Even in cases where you would think they were legally bound to protect you, e.g., if you had a restraining order against someone and called on the police to enforce it, the justice system in the US has found that they have no legal duty to do so.
But it's not really in black and white, every Nth row and Nth column is in color (where N is something like 5?). Still kind of interesting, though.
WTF-16 makes the distinction that invalid sequences are allowed.

* http://simonsapin.github.io/wtf-8/
...and it's headed in all sorts of directions simultaneously.

Then add a few more decades and everything changes in ways you could not imagine.
Sorry about that. I’ve edited to add a /s.
This is very nice and easy to use, good job. Where are you sourcing these hadeeths from? Is there some sort of public API or you compiled all the hadeeths yourself?

Also have you submitted it yet to r/Islam on Reddit? You might get more positive feedback