skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't see how the overall trend is relevant to this specific issue. I also don't understand why you are ignoring "sexual mores" or even what that specifically means. Does that include every increase in personal freedom related to gender and sexuality? It would be weird to ignore those because they are obviously the biggest increases in freedom over the last 50 years since many of the biggest changes of the civil rights movement occurred just outside that window.

If you do want to ignore all those issue, I will point out that freedom of speech is more prominent today than it was 50 years ago. After repeal of the fairness doctrine, the loosening of obscenity laws, and various court cases including Citizens United most recently, free speech rights might be at an all time high in the US.

Also there are examples of freedom being lost and regained in gun ownership. The assault weapons ban in the US that lasted 10 years is one that comes to mind.
> the editors - seem more concerned with coming up with Kafka-esque processes to introduce to the community than making the actual work of making an encyclopaedia.

Yeah, there probably are widespread cultural problems.

Hyperbole aside, I imagine most of “the actual work” (as you say) of maintaining any open source volunteer encyclopedia for decades has got to be the community culture and processes, not any technical artifact.

If you think the work of Wikipedia is “just” the words in articles, well, this is the same mindset of everyone’s favorite debunked critique of early Dropbox.
>Is it as fast as having more DRAM in all possible scenarios?

Is it as fast as having more DRAM in any scenario?
Yeah, first orbital docking was done 1966 on Gemini 8. The architecture for Apollo was decided much earlier already (it did include the lunar orbit rendezvous and docking which was indeed risky).

We now have 54 years of repeated low earth orbit dockings so maybe the architecture designs could start taking that into account.

Even SpaceX is planning on doing orbital refueling.
> The people contributing to WP - the editors - seem more concerned with coming up with Kafka-esque processes to introduce to the community than making the actual work of making an encyclopaedia.

I might take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:RecentChanges maybe reload it a few times. What percent of the changes are to policy space? (the article name begins with "Wikipedia:") And what percent are to regular articles / discussion of articles (article name is normal, or begins with "Talk:").

I think you'd be surprised because the vast vast vast majority of edits are to the articles themselves.

> Perhaps the only area where editors are as zealous they are about creating obscure processes, is in policing what content should they should fit into the their volumes.

This is important. I'm not sure if you're referring to notability, or sourcing, but both are critical to making an encyclopedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_no... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources
Surely with regards to outcomes, there's a good argument to be made that one shouldn't admit guilt. But from a more, idk idealistic perspective, the world would be a better place if everyone promptly admitted fault and committed to doing better? I personally quite liked the advice given, and wish I had held myself to it more often in the past.

I think there's definitely some truth to what you're saying, but I also wonder how much this is a problem offline, I've not encountered it heavily, but I'm also not a particularly online person.
That's a peculiar way to describe things. I would consider being "elitist" almost synonymous to being "toxic", and thus 4chan being about the least toxic platforms on the list of major English social media, far below Reddit, Wikipedia, Twitter, HN and so on.
"I love macOS but my next laptop won’t be a mac and my next phone won’t be an iPhone. Divesting from the ecosystem will be painful but we’re well past any grace period at this point. "

same here. I hope this will lead to a leap in quality in alternative mobile & desktop OSes, because at the moment the situation looks pretty bad.
My 10 megatrends:

1. Resources especially water will become scarce in certain high population areas causing severe unrest and migration out of those regions.

2. Due to increased automation(spreading through all industries) income inequality will hit an all time high.

3. Due to climate change(fires/floods) and large insurance industry losses some areas will now be considered un-insurable.

4. Give the covid pandemic record amounts of money will be funneled to healthcare, expect some large scale diseases to be conquered, HIV, many forms of cancer.

5. Electric cars will be ubiquitous.

6. Large Media will suffer a near fatal collapse(changing consumer patterns ie cord cutting, distrust, polarization).

7. Military around the world will utilize more and more robots/AI in fights, most planes will be run by AI(no pilots), ground attacks will feature more robots also. Same with water, AI controlled submarines and boats.

8. Tech fatigue will set in with a significant part of the population with some people avoiding most forms of social media and smart devices.

9. A reverse of the people moving to big cities occurs, more people moving into smaller towns happens, this was triggered by covid but continues as more and more jobs are able to be done remotely.

10. Fusion reactors will become a reality with cheap power being achieved.
I don't see that at all.
You can still end up in a theocracy with an inquisition for everyone who doesn't follow the dogma.

Religion is perfectly exploitable for this and has been more often than not in history.
Should we contact the police?
It argues against a 'straw man' that I personally have talked with people that think that nuclear war would certainly destroy all of humankind.
As well, its not arguing against the nuclear war being Super-Bad, the conclusion even talks about an idea for making nuclear war less dangerous so that it is less likely to kill off as many people.

> Nuclear caused extinction is actually a preferable outcome, I'd rather just instantly die than live in a brutal post sociatle apocalypse.

I do happen to disagree with this, but that is a personal decision and I understand why you would prefer that.
Essential Japanese: The Mental Model [pdf]
Huemer's proof relies on insanely strong premises, especially his second premise, which end up fighting against a strawman of hard determinism.

Under his definition of hard determinism as laid out by his third premise, his second premise becomes "whatever should be done is done," which is a crazy strong axiom under any reasonable definition of "should." "Yesterday you should've gone to school, therefore yesterday you went to school" is the sort of conclusion you get.

A hard determinist simply doesn't accept that definition of "should."

To see just how crazy strong Huemer's axioms are, substitute any other term for MFT. Everything up to step 7 works. So Huemer's axioms amount to the statement "under hard determinism, whatever I believe is true" (as Burner states in premise 6, but restricts to MFT).

No wonder then if you then introduce the premise "I believe hard determinism is false" you get a contradiction.
>the lockdowns never will truly end

unless, somehow, it should turn out they were really bad for business in which case out they go once no longer needed.

on edit: clarification at end.
"Ten years" reminds me of the Decenarian maths in "Anathem." There are other little concepts in that novel that point to the value in taking one's time, such as the "chalk, ink, stone" mediums, and which ideas are worth expressing in each. I'm also reminded of the slow food movement. Perhaps we need a "slow software" movement?
I don't think I'm confused. I'm well aware that the word "libertarian" is used to describe a vasty range of beliefs, but I gave a realistic description of mainstream libertarianism in the United States. The Libertarian Party opposes food and drug safety regulations and workplace safety regulations, for instance.
This only works if all involved accept their initial axiom, "So you've made a mistake and it's public…".

In my experience getting consensus from all involved that a mistake has indeed been committed is the very hardest part of the whole process.
Interesting idea, although I'd argue that if it should ACK like UDP, retransmit like UDP and control flow and congestion like UDP... You should use UDP ;)

However, firewalls are usually much more permissive to TCP than to UDP. I wonder if there is any project that encapsulates UDP-semantic datagrams into TCP-looking segments?
>This is the first time in my life that we've tried to apply transitive risk logic to justify curtailing of individual freedoms.

Seems wrong to me, too. There exists no society (that I'm aware of) where the decisions of an individual don't have second or third order effects on other members of the society. We manage and deal with this risk every day of our lives. Sometimes it flat out sucks. However, you can't control for it without raising a lot of very, very uncomfortable questions about what personal choices get to be made, by whom, and under which conditions.

This boils down to how you see the world, I guess. Much like any of the usual contentious political topics, both 'camps' view the other side as morally reprehensible.
Maybe Apple users are more honest :P

or maybe there are 4x more Androids than iPhones
*its (cause if there's one thing we do well, it's pedantry!)
The study considered "screen time" as an unvariegated whole[1]. That is confusing. Screen time is not a singular activity - there's an infinite diversity of things that you can do on a screen - some great for your health, other very poor.

It'd be like a study came out saying "food proven to make Americans overweight" because, on average, people eat junk food. Strictly speaking that is true, but it's not useful information.

[1]: Alright, it considered "non-work screen time" as an unvariegated whole - but my point still stands here.
It Came from the Live-Boot: A True Linux Horror Story
Sitting Bull is in interesting company.
COVID is not going anywhere. It is here with us and is not a light switch to be turned off. Eventually, everyone will get it. By hiding in your closet and afraid coming out is not the solution. I live in here in Mountain west where there is a lot of skepticism about everything with COVID. Not that it's not real, but how to approach get past it. For example, I believe that flattening the curve means staying open and going on about your normal lives. As we have seen, shutting down and then reopening only seems to cause spikes again.

If you get it, you get it. It sucks. It sucks a lot worse for some than others. But so does heart disease, cancer and any number of things I could get and die from.

To live your life in constant fear is no life at all.
They did last time, and in the middle of the Palmer Raids at that. The necessary and proper use of pulic health orders during pandemics has been thourougly adjuticed in the US, and has a basis in precedent centuries old. This is hardly a regression.

Why don't you worry instead about whether we get a trial before we get shot or locked up?
Appying Computer Vision to Build GUI for Raspberry Pi Applications
Is there anywhere you know of with more details regarding those Grayshift boxes, or do we not publicly know much about them?
I strongly disagree with this opinion. The US space program is incredibly practical, particularly in the last 3 decades.

* An unbelievable amount of scientific data about biology and microgravity comes from the ISS. To say this is “aimless” only is true if you believe humans will always live on Earth and only Earth.

* A wealth of fundamental knowledge about the universe comes from spaced based telescopes. These are helping us understand the laws of nature, some of the most raw R&D.

* There are significant military applications to our space program. These range from GPS, surveillance, communications, and potentially weapons. There are some government space launches that we know very little about their mission because it is highly classified. The Space Shuttle had a use case for rapid troop deployment. There is significant military applications to the engineering knowledge of rockets. The difference between a rocket and a missile is mostly the application.

* Our exploration of our solar system provides possible future avenue for economic development. There is more fresh water, raw minerals, and energy inside our solar system but outside of Earth than there is water, mineral wealth, and energy on Earth. Certain things we consume are non-renewable, and we will need to find sources for them outside of Earth.

* It gives hope, inspires young people to become engineers and scientists, and gives us a feeling of awe as we go through the process of understanding our existence in the context of the cosmos.

EDIT: This isn’t to say there is major bloat inside the space program, and that NASA is not in need of a significant culture change.
>That depends entirely on what you are trying to achieve. If you want to move beyond self satisfaction and actually effect change, you need to be concerned with how your message is conveyed.

This is a conflation. Trying to be rational is valuable independent of what message you have. Messaging is secondary. When messaging becomes primary, the truth suffers, and freedom dies. I'd rather be self-satisfied and correct than highly influential and wrong. The latter is far more dangerous.
Obviously so based on Apple’s numbers.
Really glad my local Thai restaurant handles their own delivery. I just call them and they already know my general order as it's on file with my phone number. I prefer going to direct as it's a better way to support them.
The non-governmental market size for conventional super-heavy launch vehicles is zero.
@dang I'm wondering why this disappeared off the front-page?
When software companies switch to on-demand flex labor at below minimum wage everyone on this site who supports Prop 22 will be singing a different tune.
No. But the emotional consequences to the rejected elite are the same as to the rejected wannabe elite. And if they are too many of the wannabe elite, the social consequences are the same, too.
"... you will"
it would be so great to see support for other languages like Java, Python, Go etc...
I worked for Prime (minicomputers) as a youngster in the early 80's. They supported PL/I and many parts of the OS (Primos) were written in a systems dialect of PL/I they called PLP.

The PL/I condition mechanism was an integral part of the OS and fault handling. For example, a floating point exception or integer overflow was detected by hardware, caused a fault, the information from the fault was packaged into a condition frame (an extended stack frame), and a condition was raised. The OS looked backward through the stack looking for an "onunit" (aka condition handler) that handled this condition - basically like try & except.

Condition handlers were very flexible, with the option to partially handle the condition then let it continue with older frames, ignore the condition in this handler and let it continue, or completely handle it.

If no running program had a handler for a condition, the default OS handler would run, which often raised a new condition and printed an error message. If the problem causing the error was corrected (for example, some files were deleted from a full disk), you could use the REN (re-enter) command to return from the disk full condition and the system call causing the condition would be automatically re-tried, sort of like when EINTR occurs on a system call and it has to be (manually) retried.

Instead of using numbers, conditions had arbitrary names and arbitrary data could be associated with a condition.

In hindsight it was very similar to Python's try/except/finally error handling mechanism. There was a condition called "cleanup$", which was executed whenever a procedure was aborted because of a stack unwind to allow it to close files, delete temp files, etc.

I wrote an emulator for the Prime and you can see all this with:

telnet em.prirun.com 8001

There are all kinds of manuals online too, including a full PL/I implementation, all from the 80's and early 90's.
I guess while he was an outsider I'm not sure that he would have proven to be authoritarian in the way Trump is. I'm mostly worried about our democracy and not necessarily so much about policies.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-ana...

"Using these age-specific estimates, we estimate the overall IFR in a typical low-income country, with a population structure skewed towards younger individuals, to be 0.23% (0.14-0.42 95% prediction interval range). In contrast, in a typical high income country, with a greater concentration of elderly individuals, we estimate the overall IFR to be 1.15% (0.78-1.79 95% prediction interval range)."
Most of them can use either, although TCP gets you terrible performance for the reasons mentioned in the article.

Modern VPNs will usually attempt UDP first, falling back to TCP only if that does not work; unfortunately, OpenVPN doesn't seem to have that option and requires manual configuration in my experience. This means that many sysadmins configure it to use TCP for the higher success rate in most environments.

IPsec is UDP only, as is Wireguard.
I think, the main takeaway is that computing should be (still) about information. Currently, it's all about media and media use, and the major vendors of operating systems have turned into media houses and/or data transit facilities (regarding their revenue model). And it shows. (Compare Big Sur – this is certainly not an interface that's about information processing.)
> HTML and CSS are all you need, with some vanilla JS

For a modern web application?! Absolutely not, the things the OP mentioned (webpack, 1000 node packages etc) are essential.

Even on the IDE side, I have...100 extensions installed?
I have to jump in and plug Anvil (https://anvil.works) here - it's a Python web app builder very explicitly modelled on VB6 and other RAD systems.

Drag'n'drop UI, Python in the browser and the server, one-click deployment - we're aiming for exactly that niche!
>But from a more, idk idealistic perspective, the world would be a better place if everyone promptly admitted fault and committed to doing better?

I'm not sure about that.

I think there needs to be a distinction between a private apology to specific individuals for specific wrongs vs public apology to an undefined amorphous set of people. The former is certainly the right thing to do and it also offers hope of redemption because the wronged individual can accept the apology and forgive (or not). In the latter case, there is no acceptance, there's only the mob who wants to make an example of you because they now have 100% proof of your guilt.
Probably an autopsy, then funeral arrangements. Lawyers flying lazy circles over his estate.
How to turn your Raspberry Pi into a crypto trading bot
> The students are also trusted

That is a tall bet :D

If anyone is going to try out crazy stuff for the sake of curiosity/pranks, it would be students.
Germany seems to lead in terms of requests/population by a longshot.
Calories in/calories out ignores that fact that the _type_ of calorie matters a great deal. It also ignores the fact that the body is capable of moderating its metabolic rate in response to energy requirements and supply.

If calories in and out were _really_ all that mattered, I would be able to calculate my energy needs precisely and then eat exactly the right number of cupcakes (and only cupcakes) every day for the rest of my life. And yet we intuitively know that would be extremely unhealthy. Why is that?
People keep saying it is lock-in without any justification.

Notice that these things can all be disabled.

Lock in really has nothing to do with things like SIP.

It has to do with things like platform differentiation.

I.e. software and device support for which there is no good alternative.
Food and health regulations are explicitly opposed by the Libertarian Party of the United States. The word "libertarian" covers a vast range of beliefs, but my description is very reasonable.
Because this political system couples your support for a set of policy choices to your support for a particular leader, and people perceive that in order to support their team's policy positions, it's simply unavoidable that you may have to accept a poor leader.

Seems that simple to me. It's easy to say that if there was a left-version of Trump who promised to implement sweeping tax reform to tax the rich, create a real public option, save the rainforest in Brazil and plant a new one in America, and truly address racism, that the left would say 'forget his policy goals, even if they are so aligned with what I want, I will speak out against him and vote for a republican in the next election'. But perhaps many would see it as still the lesser of two evils to continue to support the poor leader in order to signal support for their team's policies and hopefully implement meaningful change.

If we had a different form of democracy, perhaps decoupling leadership from policy choice, would we still be able to elect a Trump? Don't think so.

Perhaps the two party system (and the way it has evolved despite not being part of the constitution at all and warned against by George Washington) would be the easier thing to change than the political system per the constitution, but still. It seems the coupling is the culprit.
I think it is good to have compassion for other people's frustration. Everyone has made sacrifices this year. I don't think any person's experience should be dismissed. The best way to inspire compassion in others is with your own compassion.
Meanwhile, his group is right this minute stoking fears of voter fraud.

https://www.scribd.com/document/481968428/True-North-Researc...
> there are so few limits in "software world." No pesky laws of physics.

Computability theory has a similar flavour, though. There are hard rules about certain things not being possible.
It looks like you're including preservation requests in the Google number; Apple doesn't report these. If you only look at requests for user information, the numbers are 10,197 for Apple and 26,186 for Google.

Interestingly, the rate at which both end up turning over data is nearly identical (85% for Apple and 83% for Google).

---

EDIT: nostromo points out that Apple does report the preservation request numbers in a separate section on the detail page. So inclusive of preservation requests, the comparison would be 12,719 for Apple and 38,042 for Google. However, I think Apple is right in not including these in the main number since preservation requests are asking the companies to preserve data that they might otherwise delete in anticipation of a future data request -- which would be counted.
It was always a tiny minority of the general population that had real knowledge and capabilities of creating the actual technological equipment widely used by the said general population. In the same vein, there are no less people capable of low/OS level programming than before, and you can't expect every proficient user, even a power user or e.g. the now numerous web developers, to be at this level of ability.
Yes, but do we live in that idealistic world? I would answer with a very firm no.

The world would be a lot better place if everyone did (any number of things), but perfect compliance is just never going to happen. We cannot get people to not murder each other over shoes or sports teams. Any plan which depends on this compliance is doomed to failure.