skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: What’s your relationship with social media like today?
I’ve had a rollercoaster of a relationship with social media. In general, it’s been an unhealthy one where—if left unchecked—I find myself distracted, and ultimately seeking out attention and validation from folks I love, and many more I don’t even know. In short, I become much more of a “people pleaser”.

Last year I left social media completely. I filled my new free time with some things I love: reading, convos with friends, side projects (I built two web apps!), and watching sci-fi movies. Yet, the draw of not having any social media and building my “social capital” began to creep into my conscience and bother me.

I read a bit more about social media and its effects. I know it’s not all bad—these platforms have brought a lot of new, interesting opportunities and connections for many folks. But seeing some of the negative impacts on me and others, I began to sort of despise social media.

Today, at my worst, I feel like social media is the new cigarette: we’re all using it, and the negative impact hasn’t been fully realized yet. At my best, I am able to say “I’m happy it works for some. But it doesn’t work for me.” I am frustrated by this confusing, complex relationship that I have with social media. I am both drawn to and pushed away from it.

I’m curious what your relationship with social media is like today? Is it healthy? Unhealthy? How did your relationship develop into what it is today?
Find the best cannabis stocks recreational & medical marijuana dispensaries near me with great reviews and affordable prices. Browse store menus and local deals at Goowonderland.com
> Great article, especially considering how careless most "data scientists" are when they assume the arithmetic mean is going to be meaningful

That comes from the fact that they don't understand the data they are dealing with (as you said with dimensions). You cannot use the arithmetic mean on interest rates because it does not make sense to add them up. If you just go for the geometric mean "because it's a rate and I have read online I should use geometric mean" then you won't learn why you need to use the geometric mean.

Frequencies also don't add up.... But wavelength or time do. So their inverse can be added. So their inverses can have an arithmetic mean. So you can physically meaningfully do the arithmetic mean of their inverse, and inverse the result back again
NTFS requires that files be manually converted to the compressed format. They're uncompressed in parts as requested, but this is only kept in RAM. I'm not aware of any built-in background task that converts files to/from the compressed format.
THis is not an emulator, this is another Flash interpreter.
Castor – A graphical client for plain-text protocols written in Rust with GTK
No, it cannot. That's a good point I overlooked in the Twitter thread.
The legislation outlining the tariffs in its version from 2006 [0, p. 577] lists the import tariff for a “video camera recorder” at 14%, whereas the version from last year [1, p. 601] lists it as “Free”. This seems to be the result of a WTO agreement [2].

[0] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=uris...

[1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELE...

[2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%...
they all went to harvard so obviously if you question them you’re in the wrong
Yeah, I agree the author is abstracting so much that the object he's defining doesn't have any useful property left.

I genuinely smiled when the article says "any function". "Any function" in math means any function :-)

There's a reason why theorems involving arbitrary functions start with a list of qualifiers as hypotheses.
> But Linux doesn't have the concept of a "subsystem", that's pretty much a Windows NT exclusive (inherited from its core predecessor OS/2)

Mainstream OS/2 doesn't have "subsystems" in the sense that Windows NT does, so it is mistaken to suggest that Windows NT got the idea from OS/2.

Something like the NT "subsystem" concept is in the abortive IBM Workplace OS which became OS/2 PPC edition. Workplace OS is based on the Mach microkernel and designed to run both Unix and OS/2 as "personalities". But this was never released for x86, and the PPC port was only ever released in beta form and abandoned before GA.

I think Windows NT more likely got the idea from Mach than mainline OS/2. Mach calls them "personalities" not "subsystems" (although some people will use the word "personality" when talking about NT). If you look at the internals of macOS/iOS/Darwin/XNU, the Mach personality concept survives in highly vestigial form – XNU has its core Mach APIs (Mach personality) and BSD APIs (BSD personality). In principle Apple could add some third personality (e.g. Windows personality, Linux personality, Android personality, etc) but they probably never will. (CMU Mach was always intended to support multiple OS APIs, but the CMU Mach developers only ever implemented a BSD Unix personality, and Workplace OS's OS/2 personality was one of the few cases of anyone ever implementing a non-Unix personality on top of Mach; the BSD personality of XNU is a descendant of CMU Mach's original BSD personality, but updated with a lot of newer code from FreeBSD and also of NeXT/Apple's own devising)

NT drew a lot of influence from VMS, and VMS also has "subsystems", although VMS' subsystems have little in common with NT's other than the name. Other operating systems also have subsystems – for example, the Job Entry Subsystem (JES) is a major component of IBM's mainframe operating system z/OS (formerly known as MVS), but z/OS subsystems and NT subsystems have little in common other than the name as well. "Subsystem" is popular as a generic term for an OS component.

Also, as other respondents have pointed out, WSL1/WSL2 are not subsystems in the classic Windows NT sense.
Banks and airline reservation systems tend to use vertically scaled "mainframe" architectures. In this model you need very high availability so hot-swappability is important. Linux even has hot-swap CPU support for systems like this [1]. Some IBM systems have dozens of hot-swappable hardware elements. Power supplies, CPUs, network cards, RAM, disks.

[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/core-api/cpu_hotplug....
The downvote for mentioning downvotes is fair (it's against the guidelines here.) I read the article, of course, so the rest doesn't make sense since branching/speculative discussion is just fine.
Cool tool but for some reason reason I was expecting more support for museum and library galleries and less for porn sites. :D

I guess they’re already downloadable though a command line tool could be convenient.
Or get one of these:

https://www.amazon.com/Clocky-Rolling-Sleeper-Bed-Room-Run-a...
In the end, it comes down to the optics.

The (incredible) tiny sensors in smartphones aren't big enough to get past a certain fidelity. Combined with very small working ranges on the lenses and the limits are pretty hard. Hence the three lens set-ups now on the newer models.

Granted, the optics here are just the coolest things. 'Digital' lenses are some very slick stuff and the engineering is the best you can get.

But in the end, you just need longer working distances and bigger lenses. The optical physics are just the laws you have to deal with, same as Newton had to. No amount of engineering can get past them.

One thing they could do is to put a 'periscope'-like mount on the side, have the sensors slide up and down inside, and slot in a few lenses based on the optics. But the mechanics and likely slow speed of such a device would wear-out very fast and would be very susceptible to drops and dings.
That's a really interesting take.

I stopped journalling because I noticed I was interpolating the missing bits of my memory while writing down the dream. It became more like writing an imaginary story inspired from my dream, then recording my actual dream.

But that said, I definitely think this is good way to force myself out of the loop.
It is called LPAR.
Last time I set it up on my Pixel 2 it took a few app clears to get it going, along with doing the initial setup on the same wifi network.

It did end up working great but no one here uses SMS (WhatsApp is practically a monopoly), I already had Google Photos for photo sync, and apps/screen sharing was Samsung-only.
Sorry, I pulled an americanism and had the US primarily in mind :-). Scandiwegia is a lovely exception and should be rightfully proud of that.
A perfect sending congestion control algorithm would need to trust the receiver, which we don't usually get, on the internets.

It is possible, in TCP, to lie and make the sender flood the route, by acknowledging packets not actually received. Protocols that allow requests for retransmission of ranges enable exploiting this loophole, but it does not seem often abused.

When you can trust the receiver implicitly, you can accept reports of end-to-end forward packet transmission time from it, and feed those to a predictor. When the time is increasing, the sending rate is too high; when decreasing, the rate could be higher. This allows ignoring packet loss as a signal, which is good because it is very noisy; it is caused by many things other than congestion.

Given a predictor, control theory provides easy means to tune sending rate exactly to the instantaneous capacity of the channel, and vary as other traffic begins and ends.

(Interestingly, round-trip time does not work for this. The channel carrying ACKs has completely different characteristics, so RTT is nearly useless. That does not stop people from trying!)

TCP, at its best, fails to use most of the channel, when RTT gets long. It is possible to adjust the sending rate in real time to consume exactly all of the usable bandwidth that TCP does not, so that TCP sees no effect from the better-controlled traffic, and is only slowed by sharing with other TCP streams.

The above is the basis for the Aspera file-transfer system, for which IBM still gets huge license fees from military, medical, extraction, and media customers.
Only if a human puts it there.
What nobody talks about is the link between this rubber pollution and safety. Modern cars have huge oversized tires with massive friction potentials. In normal driving we never get anywhere near those friction limits. It all sits in reserve for that time we need to stop now. Our cars can stop on a dime in an emergency, far far shorter than current regulations mandate. Compare any new car today to a classic car from the 60s or 70s (on the old rubber). Our stopping distances today are half or even a third of previously accepted norms. The price for that ability: rubber on the road. It is a choice we have actively made, one i doubt many would reconsider. Who here would buy a non-polluting tire if it meant your car stopped even 25% slower?
Thanks. I've used YouTube-dl to download it and be sure I still have access to it after it is removed.
Java can be written to not create any garbage objects whatsoever. First allocate sufficient objects in named pools by type and explicitly initialize and reclaim them. Second do not use Java expressions that allocate iterator objects such as for(String myString : myStrings). Local block scope objects are allocated efficiently from the stack.

In Java, a custom String pool can be created that allows == comparisons instead of equals() comparisons.

Java threads can be pinned to physical cores and spin locks used to waste CPU while awaiting requests. The local CPU cache stays hot and ready.
The one potential effect of this that I'd love over git is being able to check in local changes that I never intend to upstream. E.g. I could have a local change adding some editor config files, or modifying some compiler flags in the Makefile to suit my local config.

With git my typical solution for this is to basically keep rebasing them as uncommitted changes with `git stash`, until I inevitably lose them. Or keep a separate branch, and keep explicitly rebasing (and stay on my toes not to accidentally push the commits).
'wine aunt platform' is a phrase that will stay with me
Interesting article. Thanks for sharing!

My dream platform:

1. Single binary install on nodes, and easy to join them into a cluster.

2. Resources defined as JSON with comments in a simple format with JSON Schema URLs denoting resource types - I should be able to run 1 container with 3 lines of resource definition.

3. Everything as a CRD... No resources or funcionality pre-installed and instead available via publicly hosted HTTPS schema URLs.

4. Pluggable / auto-installed runtimes based on the schema URL or a "runtime" field: containers, vms, firecracker, wasm, maybe even bare processes, etc.

5. A standard web dashboard with a marketplace which can install multiple containers, vms, wasm or via a copy-pasted HTTPS URL, or a standard electron app which lets me connect to clusters or manage local deployments on my devbox.

6. Apps can provide a JSON schema with config options, which map to env vars and volume mounts and can be displayed in a user friendly way in the web dashboard.

I feel something like this could standardize even more than kube. I'd love if one system allowed me to manage AWS EC2 / DigitalOcean / Proxmox instances, as well as manage services on my devbox for daily use (like daemons, etc.)

With that said, I do like a standard format across service providers. While I do find kube complex at times, I like that something "won" this battle, and I also like the push towards containers vs vms.

I'd love to see kube start pairing down and innovating toward making things easier for smaller clusters. Anyone know if there are discussions about that going on, or if there are resources for managing kube in smaller teams? Anyone interested in this?
That's a good point -- I overlooked that when I read the twitter thread. Thank you for correcting.
> I'd especially be interested in examples regarding multiple channels / branches (one development and several production branches), and then backporting a fix into older versions.

I've been maintaining to versions of my SSH library for Rust, called Thrussh (https://nest.pijul.com/pijul/thrussh).

For some context, the Rust asynchronous ecosystem is undergoing a change, with a fundamental library called Tokio going from version 0.2 to 0.3. Some crates have made the change, others haven't. So if you're like me, and some of your code implements both an SSH server and an HTTP server on the same event loop, you might want to stay with Tokio 0.2 (since Hyper, the main HTTP library, hasn't published the move yet), while allowing others to benefit from all the bugfixes you find, and start transitioning now.

The cool thing about doing this in Pijul is, you can work on your Tokio-0.2 version, and push your changes directly to your Tokio-0.3 version without having to care about cherry-picks, merges and rebases explicitly. Do this locally, test, publish.

> How is the workflow if this applies cleanly to rel.22, but not rel.21 anymore? What if the same conflict happens in rel.20, rel.19 and rel.18?

Good question. In Pijul, conflicts occur between changes (not between commits or states), and are solved by changes. This is in contrast with e.g. `git rerere`, since the solution to a conflict depends only on the changes that introduced it, not on anything else. This means that once you've solved the conflict in rel.21, you can push it to rel.20, rel.19 (it's the exact same change, with the same hash).

> What if the conflict resolution changes every single line, but I still want to record that, "Yes, this fix is also in rel.17, even though it does not look like it".

Excellent question. Two answers:

- If you're really doing this, then your intention cannot really be guessed from your change, which sort of defeats the point of using changes, and you will get another conflict. If you fix that conflict again though, that fix will apply to any "branch" (Pijul users call these "channels" because they are not exactly the same as Git branches) that has the two changes.

- There is ongoing research to extend the theory to allow large restructuring of code to commute with edits to that code. Note that no other system handles that well: Git and Mercurial don't even consider commutation (but their merge heuristics handle refactoring correctly sometimes), Darcs doesn't do it at all. Since our goal is to get something that works 100% of the time, we have to be a bit more careful.
I sold my very first piece of software (aged 13) leveraging the Amiga RAD disk.

It was called ‘RADBench’ and essentially installed a mini version of Workbench into the recoverable RAM disk, so you could work better with floppy-based files by having key executables in memory.

It’s still out there somewhere on the Internets.

Ah happy memories dear old Amiga.
The Fermi Paradox Project
I try. Maybe I might make one person think differently. Thanks for noticing.
I think the key to achieving this is building Web of Trust on top of the fact checker relationships and connect them to the users, so that you can see exactly how you are connected, and whether you can trust the individuals.

Today, the sources of whatever information you read, even from the most credible sources, are obscured. Whether it is CNN or a peer-reviewed journal article, the most information you will get about the author is a name, a picture, and maybe a bit of their publicly available data.

With Web of Trust, the level of trust you should assign to an author, and by extension the information, can be instantaneously computed by adding up your own trust references.

If I assign my trust responsibly, and you assign your trust to me, then everyone I trust is by extension trustworthy, and the information metadata can reflect this.

If you don't think I assign my trust responsibly, then you can remove me from your trust circle, and my assigned trust will become irrelevant.

It's not a perfect system, it's vulnerable to attacks, it requires eternal vigilance, but it's the best we've got going for us today, IMO.
> Imagine if the mall where you rent your store takes 30% of your revenue (plus a negligible fee)

If they give me free rent and hand me a lot of customers, sure why not?
Thank you for taking the time to craft such a thorough response! I had moving all infrastructure to terraform on my backlog already so that’s validating. I might try the k8s platform offered by Linode since I am there already, but I am constantly reading about how people use DO so maybe it’s more feature rich or something, I have just been a Linode fan for many years is all hah, and the pricing isn’t bad
The worst (A response to Dustin Curtis “The best”)
Why do they keep doing that, it makes dependecy management etc, more complicated. Sometime ago they did that with JavaFx, while still retaining AWT as part of JDK: what a baffling move, discard the best GUI framework on the platform, while including the most obsolete one.
This is a romantic characterization that's rooted in only believing people who are "on your side", which is what is destroying society.
Error States
I agree with the author that optimizing for virality as the bottom line is a disaster than can only go on for so long. Its consequences are obvious at this point, and it's not leading to good places anywhere it is applied en masse. (For those unconvinced, I encourage to read about how the most viral and captivating content is often content that purposefully instills anger, fear, outgroup-hatred, schadenfreude, etc)

But deciding that we 'just need to fact-check' things more seems to be a very incomplete solution. Much is said about "who gets to fact-check?" but I think even if we assume the people fact-checking are good (morally) and mostly very correct (veridically), this solution will still fall extremely short.

Even if you perform good fact-checking, there is little evidence that this will achieve your goal, which is not actually correcting text on the Internet, but correcting peoples’ beliefs in their own minds, which turns out to be pretty difficult (telling people they are wrong while removing content they want to read is likely not the best way, even so).

Remember that many rights that you take for granted were only gained thanks to the failures of past powers to control the narrative as strictly as they wanted to. While I don't think that anyone can control 'the narrative' so to speak, especially not a single company or government (that currently exists), we will still see ceaseless attempts at such; the temptation to correct everyone is just too great (https://xkcd.com/386/, anyone?), especially if you believe you're on the side of Virtue (which it turns out, almost everyone believes).
I tried it studylib this weekend and it's much better than expected. Thank you very much for your work and I'm sorry for my first negative reaction.
It's extremely hard to understand how things are on the inside without direct experience. This makes it difficult to even discuss the topic, even if you find people have the empathy for it. There are also too many vested commercial interests in keeping the status quo.
FB (and instagram, whatsapp) do something weird with all media files. They assign a unique ID to each image/video/file and they don't let you download if you try to remove that ID or change it. It changes every time you reload the page. Maybe something to do with that.

Plus there is also massive rate limiting. Especially instagram, since it is only images.
Yeah I totally get what you are saying. I have also noticed that my dreams adapt to outside sounds/lighting changes in realtime. What's more spooky is that the entire dream preserves it cohesion and nothing feels out of place, even when the events outside (in the real world) are completely random. Like sound of the door closing or someone walking by the bed, all of that integrates seamlessly into the dream.
> I'd love to have someone prove me wrong.

Nobody is going to do that for you. Sorry, but truthers are in exactly the same bucket as moon landing hoaxers, antivaxers, and flat earthers. The burden of proof is on them. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. "I believe in X, prove me wrong" is Argument from ignorance [1], where one asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
No, that's why Boeing, Raytheon, et al are impervious to their mistakes. McK is impervious because they contract in such a way as to never actually have to deliver anything. A sea wolf sub is a tangible deliverable. You can tell it's not fit for purpose in a physical fashion. You can always BS around the kinds of soft deliverables that are specialties of McK.
State of Data Science and Machine Learning 2020
> One man's facts are another man's lies

This is pretty absurd. We should be fighting disinformation instead of legitimizing it. Not all “facts” are based in a healthy reality. See: 2020 election “fraud”
have you used a web of trust system you liked, that works well w/ an existing social platform? I'd try one if you have a rec.

fwiw I wrote one of these and mine sucked
Ooh, yes, I have this problem with Git too. I maintain it mostly by keeping stuff constantly unstaged, but there’s a lot of git tooling that doesn’t respect my working area and dumps things in the wrong place. (And there’s a lot of people who don’t understand the point of staging at all…)
Get an industrial card.
Formula 1 issues copyright takedown to video on their own YouTube channel
This is incredibly useful for a project like Nixpkgs.
Sleep performance anxiety is a real thing. I’ve had to deal with similar issues. I try not to put too much weight when reading these studies (because they are anxiety inducing) and stick to a healthy bedtime wind-down routine as best as I can.
> Who here would buy a non-polluting tire if it meant your car stopped even 25% slower?

I wouldn’t. The regulations are outdated and for heavier cars like Evs you need all the stopping power you can get.
Focus on What’s Working: 4 Ways to Share Appreciation with Your Team