skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make with this comment.

If you’re to point out that Slow Lorises aren’t venomous, then you’ve quoted the wrong part of that article. Your quote only setups the proposition and ends with “not quite” without actually explaining why they are “not quite” venomous. The section just after is the most interesting part.

> Slow lorises have needle-like teeth called dental combs or tooth combs on their lower jaw. Paired with the constant licking of the brachial gland, it is not surprising that one would assume the dental comb plays a part in injecting brachial gland exudate into unsuspecting victims (Hagey et al., 2006). However, this is not the case.

Used for grooming, dental combs might look menacing to some but their function is less sinister than one might conjure up. A bite from a slow loris is painful due to their sharp pointed teeth. Illustration of slow loris teeth from Loris Conservation. The dental comb is on the lower jaw, shape like a spade.

Wilde (1972) reports that the victim of a slow loris bite immediately succumbs to anaphylactic shock (extreme allergic reaction) followed by hematuria. In spite of that, the victim fully recovered. There is no clinical evidence of toxic substances in slow loris saliva to support the notion that they are venomous (Wilde, 1972).

But even then, the article is only looking at very old studies that examine Slow Lorises bites in humans for which there is very little data. Whereas the entire thrust of this article is that Slow Lorises bites are primarily used as a weapon again other Slow Lorises, rather than a defence against predication.

In short I question the relevance of your comment and quote to the posted article. It’s obviously tangentially related, but it seems to be making a point about the least interesting part of the article.
Well said. Blame the act of crediting being used for auctions. It hurts the losers, winners, and users. Only govt (sort of) wins.
This is incredibly confusing. I'm not sure if I'd note it is an article, it feels like there's no direction or point to this compilation of statements. If this is to advertise a company, I'd hope for a little bit of direction and organization to it -- especially if it's being billed as written by a Python and ML instructor.
Good software engineering is all about managing what subset of the project should be an abstraction and what part of it needs to be a custom data structure/algorithm/multi-threaded processing routine to meet the behavior and performance requirements. The question is how much of your time to you want to spend writing the abstraction to suit your needs or how much are you willing to bend the requirements to fit something off-the-shelf.

If few of the operations your software needs to do are just business logic and database transactions, you expect to be called each time the thing needs changing, and the only people making the changes are going to be programmers, then it would be foolish to import some heavy-handed external framework: You should then abstract only to the extent that it makes the business logic easy to understand and makes the tedious part go faster.

If, instead, you have a 'typical use case', with database inputs and database outputs, and an army of domain experts who aren't programmers using the tool, then it absolutely makes sense to use some heavy, featureful, off-the-shelf abstraction. If you've never had that situation, then that tool does probably look unfamiliar and undesirable.

But be aware that both kinds of environments exist. Also be aware that it's the tendency of a growing or acquired business to move from the former to the latter.
Oh yea, once you learn how to do it, it sounds real fuckin' good

It just takes literal years to learn how to do something on a clarinet that is just pushing a button on most other instruments
No, but it's a great ideal for a blog post! When I have a chance, I'll let you know.
Biff is open source but "alpha quality software"

https://github.com/jacobobryant/biff
From Wikipedia: "The total fluid volume of the interstitium during health is about 20% of body weight".

Wow. How could we possibly have missed this? Medical researchers must tend non-quantitative.
I think he's talking about the windows credential manager for HTTPS authorization for cloning/pushing.
Interesting, it's very slow for me, and usually triggers warnings from Safari for excess resource consumption.
Earlier this year, I decided to join Twitter as a means of professional networking and to keep up with what researchers in my field are doing.

But the toxicity of discourse across Twitter, particularly on anything approaching political, was too much to handle and I deleted my account.

Has anyone else had this sort of experience?
A browser vendor could just decide to prepopulate the cache with 20 MB of the most common minified JS libraries, though. That would only fingerprint the browser version, not the user.
Docker in Production? (2017)
The article specifically says that it include people that were not critically ill.
It hangs all the time for me, video scrubbing halts the entire tab, and it uses a lot of CPU sometimes.
It is my firm belief that companies will be larger and have more influence than (all) countries (combined).

It’s also possible that the groundwork has been laid already with Google, Facebook, and Apple (along with other non-tech companies).

IMHO every dollar you spend is more of a vote than the political votes.
And for Bukowski. His advice for people who suffer when writing was "Don't try". In truth though, the guy was a complicated enough character that I'm not sure that he was saying that in earnest.
So this is what the Tesla self driving beta is all about.

Who needs AI and all that when you get somebody from a third world country at low pay and qualified by completing GTA V.
Ask HN: Is Microsoft preferable, from a privacy point of view, to Google?
In the recent thread about Edge coming to Linux, some users wrote that a Microsoft controlled Chrome-based browser is preferable to over controlled by Google from a privacy point of view.

We know that Google collects vast amounts of data about us through all its services. No question about that.

But depending on which thread one reads, Microsoft may be seen as less privacy-invading than Google or, alternatively, scolded for all the ads, Cortana being creepy, them pushing everyone towards Bing, and requiring internet connectivity for playing simple games that used to come with Windows for free.

So which is it? Is Microsoft preferable to Google from a privacy point of view?

Or is Microsoft just easier to compartmentalize, because if they have your calendar and email, but not your web searches, they have less of a complete view into your life?
Agree that containers are Firefox #1 killer feature and incredibly useful.
Maybe the stop density is different, but I just don't find that an issue, you'd have to be outside of zones 1-3 to have to walk more than say 5-10min in any direction to hit a tube station. (That'd be interesting actually: heat map of how far away nearest station is from any given point.)

Flip side is my knowledge of London geography is pretty appalling. (Relative to say where I grew up, not necessarily to other people. The range of local geographical knowledge is probably worse here than in NYC.)
The fact that your comment is still the most up voted should be part of a future psychology study where people become extremely biased towards good news when scared
That was one quick bite.
If you would use the heat from earth's core to run power plants, presumably by leading in water and running a steam turbine, wouldn't that eventually heat up the atmosphere since you pump out the heat in the core faster than it would naturally?
oh man thank god, what a weird desperate play with no partner vertical TV manufacturers to show content and constraining to mobile devices basically made this unusable as a streaming platform
It's more of a "Image Processing ML Projects" you should implement in whim of showcasing the same on your resume and land an ML job without a PhD.
That seems a bit witch-hunty given that doing the opposite and putting out new products to flood the market place even if they aren't successful would also be called monopolistic subsidization.

Just because a business practice sucks for consumers and it is done by a big company doesn't make it monopolistic. Anti-trust shouldn't be a "free for all gripes welcome" fest.
> ??? Most currencies are backed by something. USD's are backed by TBills, Euros are backed by some kind of asset.

Oh yeah? And what assets are these exactly? It sounds to me like you're just describing things without intrinsic value that are "backed" by other things without intrinsic value. There is no economist that would tell you that government currencies or bonds have "intrinsic value"; they're just paper. Their value can go entirely to zero (and this has happened many times in the past).

> "There's lots of things with fundamentally no intrinsic value " like what?

Anything collectible has no inherent value. Think baseball cards, art, whatever. They're worth money only because they're rare and people are willing to pay big for them. But the actual intrinsic value of the materials in a rare painting worth hundreds of millions of dollars might be a few bucks at best.

And yes, precious metals do have intrinsic value as defined by economists. Currency doesn't.
You could generalize this to "to X better, develop a habit of X."

Consistency beats intensity 10 times out of 10.
(2013) https://www.livescience.com/40981-new-ligament-found-in-huma...

A new ligament discovered next to the ACL
Wow, that honestly happened much sooner than I thought that it would.

Will be really interesting to see if anyone steps up to buy the content... but from what little I watched it was all pretty rough.

Seems like a lesson learned about raising money to solve something people don't care about... in this case a first-class mobile experience...

Who knows, maybe in 10 years we'll all be like "Quibi was really ahead of it's time"
As another poster points out, this won't work for e.g. IMAP usage.
You can technically write whomever you want on your ballot. In most states. At least in PA where I live every slot on my mail in ballot had a write in box.

The problem is that there is no coordination of the people to actually change the status quo. Too many people are still content with it. From both sides movements like BLM, Antifa, Occupy, the Tea Party, the alt-right, etc represent at most a tenth of the nation. And by-and-large the other 80% not participating in political activism at all largely either A. don't believe in the ability to organize a movement for change or B. don't want it at all.

This is not to say it would not be in the self interest of a vast supermajority of Americans to seek such change - for example, universal public healthcare would be a tremendous boon to like 4 in 5 people at least. Better elections, with election day being a public holiday, universal mail in voting, and any of the myriad alternatives to first past the post voting would all improve the conditions of like 95% of the country. The problem is that most people were taught and conditioned to be non-participatory and largely will not become so no matter what anyone else does or says . Even if things did get bad. Even if there were tangible impacts to their day to day experience. Conditioning is an extremely potent force and a combination of American corporate news, American public education, the cultures of swathes of the country raise their kids on, the material conditions you live through and your life experiences within them, etc all contribute to the apathy and attitude.

Thankfully the dial is moving in a positive direction, I think. Anyone under the age of 40 to greater and greater degrees was unable to grow up in an isolated microcosm of Americana that conditioned them into non-participation. The numbers still aren't great, but they are getting better, and unless we see systems collapse take us all offline it will hopefully keep improving moving forward, albeit centralized private social media has done a lot last decade to stymie progress.
I think it's extra slow in Safari, for some reason. Just like Google Maps is also slower in Safari than in Chrome. However, overall I would say Safari is the fastest browser out there, based on my own browsing habits. Also most memory efficient.
Can HTTP/3 be enabled in nginx now? Should it be? Is it a simple config change? I assume that would take care of serving static assets, but would reverse-proxied apps behind nginx also need to be upgraded to HTTP/3?
The two main things I notice:

Some websites basically crash the computer on Firefox but run fine on Safari. Mostly JS heavy sites.

The energy usage of Firefox is way higher than Safari, which in turns makes my fans spin a lot harder. Basically some sites will peg the CPU and hit max fan speed, but the same site just sips energy on Safari.

Video streaming is a prime example of this. I can use twitch on Safari and it uses maybe 30% CPU. Twitch on Firefox uses 150% CPU.
For anyone interested in this topic (and Indian government in general) I highly recommend Dr. Arun Shourie's book "Governance and the sclerosis that has set in". It gives a detailed look at the telecom mess and the kind of mentality that causes it.

Dr. Shourie was a cabinet minister in early 2001 and was single handedly responsible for Telecom reforms that made even these auctions possible. He wrote the entire book on this experience.

Few points:

1. India had several telecom "circles" based on the political borders of the states and handful of players (I think 6 or so). All 6 of them had lawsuites against each other and with government so around 50+ lawsuites over petty things. Dr. Shourie worked hard to clear every single of those lawsuites without having to wait for the courts to resolve it.

2. Indian regulations requires the cell towers to not extend their range beyond the political boundary. People who wrote the rules refused to acknowledge the fact that you can't stop radio waves based on political borders.

3. You had to apply different licenses based on how you will use the spectrum. For example for voice you had to apply one license and for SMS another license, for data another license. Also, a separate license for inter-circle communication. Which means if you want to allow your Mumbai customers to be able to send SMS to Delhi customers you required a separate license for the two circles and separate license for Mumbai to Bangalore communication. Also, separate licenses for ISD, international communication.

4. Indian government also insisted that they get to control how telecom company will roll out their towers. So if you erect a tower in Mumbai you must also erect a tower in some village even if you don't have any customers there. If you fail to do so, you will be fined.

5. Indian government also wanted (and actually did) to ban services like Skype because they would enable voice over data thus making a separate voice license pointless. For many years VoIP was illegal in India.

The body responsible for these hair-brained regulations was a technical body called DoT.

Not only Dr. Shourie worked hard to resolve most of these regulations and replace them with something sensible, he insisted that if telecom companies are not interested in even bidding for some circles we should give them the spectrum for free. No telecom company was even interested in applying for spectrum in many parts of India (something unthinkable today) which were then given on first come first serve basis.

Later when telecom revolution happened and spectrum value exploded through the roof, some people wanted to investigate Shourie for corruption for giving this obviously valuable spectrum for free. Even the supreme court of India had trouble understanding why the spectrum that sells for billions today was not worth anything 20 years ago.

Having known Dr. Shourie personally, he is one of the smartest and competent individual Indian government was thankful to have working for them.
Ok I looked up the more recent version of the game, apparently it has in fact capitulated to populism and no longer emphasizes realistic tactics. Supposedly many servers will kick you for camping now.
Did Quibi ever poach any top talent from the other established competitors? I can't remember seeing them attracting any key hires besides the legacy founding team.
A big piece is certainly COVID-19. Training centers are mostly shut down for public safety.

I don't think that's the whole reason, though. Were companies truly that desperate, they'd find a way. Many training classes this year have moved to part-online, part-in-person, for example, which helps with COVID safety, convenience, and cost. But demand is way down.

Ultimately, I think it simply boils down to money. We've gone through the better part of a year where most big projects were shut down, and if they were lucky, restarted months later, slowly, with restrictions. When you put a damper on every part of the economy (except Netflix and Purell), everything suffers. As a wealthy friend of mine once said: it's all about cash flow.

Reduced demand, few open training centers, DOH class size limits, limited spare cash from unemployed workers for class/book/cert fees, trainers who live elsewhere and might not want to get on a plane, etc. It's like hitting the breaker in Jurassic Park. You don't just flip it back on and get all the lights at once.

(I'm not saying we shouldn't have hit the pause button. Public health is critically important. I'm just saying it should be no surprise that labor and training got hit badly by it.)

It's hard to imagine a situation where it would not be worthwhile to have a trainer spend 8 hours teaching and certifying one new driver, if any real demand existed. Guess how much a good trainer costs for a day -- a single pallet often holds material with greater dollar value than that.
Stable 1.2 Gigabit/s Internet achieved in moving train in Switzerland
A bit tangential to your point but firefox for android isn't bad. I am using it to type this.

Not as snappy or polished as chrome on android to be honest.

I personally switched to it because I felt I give enough data to Google as it is. Probably not a great reason, because they still get a lot of data from me.
I think this failure was the result of an already segmented TV on demand market. Too many options and adding a new one for x reason was just not appealing to public
This needs to applied to the Indus script, stat!
Agreed - just letting the tape run for the duration is best. It's a shame that it has to be done in real-time. I don't see why (from a technical standpoint) the process couldn't be done at a faster speed. It's just that the hardware isn't made for it and there's not market. The analog-to-digital processing could be done by a faster chip or even software at this point. Something akin to the high-speed dubbing of analogue audio cassettes.

And it leads to that other challenge worth mentioning: Even though DV is technically a lossy format, it results in really large files.
"Intrinsic value" is a phrase that has a specific meaning in economics, and you are not using it according to that definition. The current ability to pay taxes with a currency is not intrinsic value by the standard definition of the term. That currency could drop to worthless tomorrow and would be worth nothing. Go ask holders of Weimar Republic marks how much intrinsic value their currency ended up having. None! The value was hyper-inflated out of existence and the country that accepted it as tax payment no longer even exists! But if that currency had been made out of actual gold, then it would've had intrinsic value, and it would still be valuable today.

Guess what ... your dollars today are not made out of gold. They have no intrinsic value.
WSJ independently confirms (for those who don't have a subscription to The Information): https://twitter.com/BenMullin/status/1318996449884078084
$2B gone in 6 months must be something of a record for burn rate.

A starting investment of that size probably qualifies it for a record in the fat (as distinct from lean) startup size category as well.
Anybody surprised? streaming is super saturated at the moment and unless you have proven legacy content its tough to make a dent
seems like this was a "oops wrong time" money overinvestment? like they made a serious play to enter the market and then, bam everyones back to TV only... great your market has just died essentially and the essential workers don't care for new age apps for content quite as much as the free time on the facebook shuttle crowd
If you set twitter feed to "the latest tweets as they happen" (as opposed to "show top tweets first"), you don't get the "so-and-so liked this tweet" etc in the main feed. Combine that with turning off retweets for people if they're retweeting annoying garbage and you don't have to mess around with lists.
Meg Whitman is laughing all the way to the bank.
YouTube was delivering an average of 100 million video views per day in July 2006, months before the Google acquisition for $1,650,000,000 that same year. It's inaccurate to characterize them as a "tiny startup."
Just got around to trying it for the first time last night. I waited until they had an app on Android TV. Nice app. I was surprised that most of the videos looked good on the TV, I had assumed they were designed for portrait mode.
As many previous comments said, the article includes mild disease
> raising money to solve something people don't care about... in this case a first-class mobile experience...

It's easy to look back and say that. I wouldn't have guessed people cared about temporary video messages, but look at Snap.
If we’re just designing a system that is just as good as humans, your argument makes total sense. But it looks like we want a system that makes fewer errors and doesn’t doze off and has no alcohol issues. So it’s perfectly acceptable to want something that can also see a little bit better in the dark.
They aren't letting anyone withdraw their crypto.
The Swedish entry should also include "räksmörgås" (shrimp sandwich), as a useful word to enter into computer systems to see if they handle the Swedish umlauts correctly. Now that Unicode is common, this is less of an issue, but it used to be considerably worse.
Wonder if any of the content will end up on other platforms or if it'll just be lost.
Being 13x faster is not a compelling enough reason to use Node, in my opinion.
1. Many telecom companies in other countries that use auctions have pretty decent returns. See, e.g., ATT and VZ among others.

> other solutions exists - e.g. revenue sharing - which work very well

The terms of the revenue sharing need to be worked out somehow. That "somehow" is typically via some sort of competition for scarce resources (spectrum), e.g., an auction. Sure, the gov't could just set a price, but the inefficiency and lack of price discovery inherent to that approach is precisely the issue the auction seeks to address.
I was going to mention "The War of Art". Great read. At one point Pressman writes "inspiration is for amateurs". He's all about honing your craft so that you're ready when inspiration does strike. Great advice.
I was amazed to see that it is already for sale. I expecting to see a prototype.
It is also Google.
Yes, that's one approach. It's a very conservative approach though, to stay far away from new technologies until they're firmly established. There's a lot of money to be made by getting into things when they're still on the bleeding edge though, and the entire startup community exists to take advantage of that fact.

The real question is, is it still early days for Bitcoin, in which case it would make sense to get into it now (albeit still risky)? Or are the early days over and all those gains have already been realized? You'd need a crystal ball to know for sure.