skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm sorry, what's the difference? If you want to eat, have food available, and force yourself not to eat until a certain hour, how are you not starving yourself? Especially when you do this many times over a long time
I hate this less than bulk spying on individuals (not suspected of a crime). At least these bulk targets are more likely to be people with the means to defend themselves from thin-skinned or overreaching govs. However, I admit that doesn't change the overall ethics much.

A larger issue is that after decades of US being a leader of bad international behavior, many worse Govs are emulating and building on our invasive strategies.

Predictably, the US ceaselessly whines & lashes out at nations who follow our blueprint. I'd prefer my US Gov put on it's big girl panties and own up to the problems it designs.
The Casimir Effect in one dimension: https://en.m.wikiversity.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics/Casimir_...
Yeah, I get the sociological aspect, but I don't think I've heard someone use the word nerd for at least a decade. It's a blast from the past.
Then why are they framed as realistic questions? Sure, the most secure way of handling them might be what you suggested, but that is not how they designed to be answered. Security questions are created to verify your identity when password does not work (e.g. when they are forgotten). Answering them in unrelated ways just create another password that will also fail under the circumstances that security questions are needed.
Sorry but I strongly disagree with your assertion that building a business is a zero-sum game. At the basic level, a farmer who sows a field and harvests a crop is making the world one harvest richer, and no one poorer. Ditto for the carpenter making a table or mechanic fixing a car. PG addressed this long ago: http://paulgraham.com/gap.html

Scientists turn money into knowledge. Entrepreneurs turn knowledge into money. It's a virtuous cycle. Scientists lament that they don't get their "fair share" but it's wrong to blame innovators, better to reevaluate their own economic strategy. What if we had private research institutes turning out cutting edge research? Or vertically integrated ones that commercialized their own discoveries, like Spacex?
It stands for Digital Ocean. https://www.digitalocean.com/

But yes 100% agreed, especially this one as it's really hard to google for..
That's a very good point, and puts things in perspective.

Buying an ethically sourced computer does more for freedom than buying a computer with zero proprietary software or firmware. As things stand, it's possible, but severely constraining, to insist on a laptop that has no proprietary software. [0] As far as I know, it's not possible to buy an ethically sourced laptop.

[0] https://ryf.fsf.org/categories/laptops
Barracuda Backup was also written in PHP - including code to backup VMware servers, receiving data from the Windows agent, and connecting to Linux servers via SSHFS/CIFS, etc.

It worked surprisingly well, using similar multiprocessing techniques.
> Bobrick and Martire explain that if you want superluminal motion, you need negative energy densities. If you want acceleration, you need to feed energy and momentum into the system. And the only reason the Alcubierre Drive moves faster than the speed of light is that one simply assumed it does. Suddenly it all makes sense!

Uh... what?
CRUD REST API Using Node – Express – MongoDB
CRUD REST API using Node | Express | MongoDB
Building a CRUD App using Node, Express, Mongodb and Mongoose.
Source code : https://github.com/navinreddy20/NodeC...

Support by becoming a Member : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC59K...
I looked up one of the devices mentioned here: Juniper’s 2U-sized PTX10002. Turns out the list price for PTX10002-60C-AC-R is $720,000.00. :-o

The traffic volumes these devices are intended for are truly mind-boggling to me (as someone currently building a small 25Gbit network with sub-$1k parts).
The first thing you should learn is how to operate your own brain. It's the most sophisticated information-processing "machine" in the known Universe but it doesn't come with a manual.

Fortunately, many have been written. In addition to conventional stuff like memory training, vocabulary building, etc. I highly recommend exploring (self-)hypnosis.

To your question: your mind is much larger, if you will, than the part you're conscious of moment to moment. You can learn to let it do thinking for you. (In fact, you have: language, walking, etc. your mind learns and operates vastly complex systems. That's why the brain is so large. It uses something like 20% of the oxygen you take in.)

Subjectively, you cram your brain with information (mostly via reading and direct experience. Take a train trip, etc. Get out and gather primary data.) Then sleep on it, often literally. Next thing you know, in the shower, or while buttering your toast, out of the inky blue will come some great insight, or a solution to some problem. (Be sure to keep a pad of paper and pencil handy at all times, esp. by your bedside.)

HTH, ta!
Yes, exactly. Most mature industries are no longer run by the founders who own a lot of stock, but professional management with far less compensation.

The real questions about the military industrial complex are:

(1) Are we producing the right systems for today's defense environment? (hard to say)

(2) Are we doing this cost effectively for the country? (not at all)

(3) Is the structure of the industry healthy to best achieve 1&2 without being subject to regulatory capture / corruption? (It's an oligopoly of rent seekers with a revolving door between the gov't and industry, so very likely not)

Whether it makes people rich is beside the point. The question is whether it makes us safe at a fair price. It doesn't seem like you can say it does so.
And if you buy directly from brands that do not sell through local shops (like Dare or Canyon) it can be even cheaper.

I commute on my carbon frame bike and use steel one only in winter now.
> it's just code, after all

I think I found the root cause problem here ...

good on Gust.
Except he's not selling cheese, he's explaining how to make it. Which is fair use, and so they don't have anything resembling a case.
That heuristic is a very antiquated mindset that largely just measures one’s relationship with formal education. One can be a great mind and never discuss “grand ideas”, simply because he’s too busy helping himself to the content of your metaphorical pockets.
Switzerland – Europe's Silicon Valley for Developers?
That’s essentially what a union is: a mechanism for collective negotiation of employment contracts.
Why is the SSL cert from *.store.yahoo.com ?
In many domains of science I will agree with you: success in physics is unlikely if you don't have a strong physics background.

But many modern technologies are much less mature. For example, a good general background in software engineering helps, but following state of the art is not critical (and may be counterproductive) for building new products. My 2c.
"Note: This paper has not appeared yet. I will post a link here once I have a reference."
Oh sorry, I meant to say iterative, not imperative.

Basically all loops in Clojure are implemented in terms of recursion (loop/recur) and not jumps. Which is why there's no break, continue or return statements.

Whatever categories you assign them in, I was more trying to show the differences between Python's for and Clojure's doseq. And also show that neither are your classic for-loop.
Can somebody explain why can't the Docker devs come up with a native Docker version for MacOS?
There aren't any legal issues with this either. He's not selling the cheese, he's explaining how to make it. That's fair use, and the recipe for Grana Padano is public (defined in the law).
Perhaps. If, for the sake of argument, we accept that as true...might it be also true that they are other things, simultaneously?

Who knows what ideas (and communications of ideas) really are, how they really work, what influence they exert on the very fabric of the environment (this infinitely complex, magical soup that we refer to as reality) in which they (and we) are contained, and what the infinite, recursive downstream consequences are of this influence.

At the end of the day, they "are what they are" and "do what they do", and the same applies to their (unseen, unrealized, misunderstood) systemic consequences. We can culturally deny such things (just as conspiracy theory culture collectively denies many things) all we want, but this does not stop it from being actually true. Mother Nature does not require our agreement when organizing the structure and affairs of the universe, but we may mind a great deal when the system she has designed (that we rarely try to truly understand) serves up the consequences of any wilful ignorance that we may be guilty of (see: Planet Earth, 2020).

An extremely large number of people confidently (and sincerely) make claims that seem to suggest they have a deep, accurate understanding of all this complexity. My intuition suggests that these people may not actually be as correct as they perceive themselves to be.

>> Find a way to get rationalists out of believing that these examples are an accurate representation of the beliefs of the conspiracy world in general, and you may be well on your way to a universal solution.

This is but one instance of a much larger problem. But solve this one, and you may have unknowingly solved many others.

FTA:

You can also take more explicit measures to prevent yourself from automatically adopting conventional opinions. The most general is to cultivate an attitude of skepticism. When you hear someone say something, stop and ask yourself "Is that true?" Don't say it out loud. I'm not suggesting that you impose on everyone who talks to you the burden of proving what they say, but rather that you take upon yourself the burden of evaluating what they say.

"Saying things out loud" certainly has consequences (which come in many forms....loss of friends, ostracization, downvotes, etc). I wonder...might there also be some downstream systemic consequences to not "saying things out loud"...like for example when some of the things that are not said out loud are ~unpopular/unpleasant to ponder, but also true and extremely important.
Not sure why you're responding in this manner but sorry if I offended you, I really didn't mean to. Maybe you see something in his work that I don't.
> Not even a single mention in the essay.

> Silence
> Deep Work

important components for thinking?
I have a tech cofounder who lives abroad. How easy/convoluted would it be for him to come to the US through L1 sponsorship? Does it even make sense?
Hi Peter,

Thanks a lot for doing this. My partner is on a cap-exempt H1B (academia) and is a citizen of a European country. She has her work authorization, but the visa in her passport is expired, and to my understanding she needs that to re-enter the U.S. should she leave the country. As you know, visas are not being issued until at least Dec. 31st by presidential proclamation. After that, it seems consulates have a huge backlog of visas to issue, so assuming the proclamation is not extended, it seems the time-limiting step will be getting an appointment. It is our understanding that until then, she cannot leave the country without risking her employment, as she may be unable to return to the U.S. for six months or more (which violates the conditions of the H1B).

I have two questions:

1. Is our information correct? We have found conflicting information from "official" sources (universities, lawyers, ...)

2. I understand the desire to prevent abuse of the H1B system. Is there some way in which these travel restrictions on active H1B holders prevents abuse? We're both very frustrated, but the worst part of not being able to see family is that there seems to be no logical reason for it.

Thanks in advance.
She was so poor she couldn't get a nickname?

If food was scarce like it was in the western world in the 30s people are more likely to remember a favourite food. My mother ate boiled onions everyday the one time she had a piece of bread would be extremely special and a memory to cherish.

Those of us living in the western world now would have a harded time picking a fav food because there is so much choice.

Your comment has a lot of first world assumptions about third world countries through the len of time without understanding your own history.
Somewhat more charitably, I think he’s writing about very basic things, which a different skill than writing about new and exciting things. Such essays are more useful to some people than others.
I'm very mystified why this is called "news" about warp drives. The article is about an as-yet unpublished and un-peer reviewed paper that describes a general type of spacetime configuration which _might_ go faster than the speed of light. That is cool, but not really something we didn't have before.

Also, any article that ends with a phrase like "while it may look now like you can’t do superluminal warp drives, this is only correct if General Relativity is correct" does not bode well for practical applications of the subject matter. There is also the logical fallacy that it might be the case that GR is incorrect and you still can't do superluminal speeds.
> It’s the music that counts, not how it’s made.

Exactly. That's why PaulDavisThe1st's suggestion was IMO completely reasonable. Mixing is a skillset that not only takes time to master, but also requires that you keep your ears healthy - which is something that many musicians don't always do (myself included). Not only that, a professional mixer understands that you can only mix for so long in a single session before your ears become fatigued and you can no longer trust them (until you give them rest).

I would argue that if someone cares primarily about the end result of the music then it should be easy to put aside their pride and allow the experts to do their job and help them sound better.
Who said the video was taken down?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TKJN61aflI
What a bizarre suggestion in this context.

I get that remote development is a thing some people prefer, and if you have an underpowered machine it can be great to just use it as a thin-client and get all the power and performance you need without running down your battery or spending a fortune on local hardware.

BUT... you're recommending this as a workaround for limitations in expensive "Pro" local development machines, as part of an encouragement to go ahead and buy them.

Why not follow your advice and buy an old refurbed Macbook. Or any 2nd-hand machine of any brand. Or a low-end Chromebook.

To clarify: I'm not saying remote dev is bad, or you shouldn't recommend it. It's just really really weird to do so in this specific context.
Hi, thank for your answers. I'm already working professionally and it's very helpful to get proficient in some areas, but it's hard to force/motivate myself to study other non work related topics on my own. The main benefit is that by having a MSc from a reputable organization, I'd increase my future work prospects. Also there are subjects that aren't available as MOOCs, but also the fact that most MOOCs lack the rigour that I'd wish for, save for a select few, which sadly are about basic introductory topics.
I use a password generator for the answers and save them in my password manager. One time I had to read 20 random characters to someone on the phone as a response to my favorite food
Want to know why you are being downvoted?

1 - Your comment isn't about content of the article. I don't use apple hardware or software. There are tons of apple posts, especially about the M1. How would it work out if all the people who aren't part of the apple ecosystem hit every apple story with a "Sheesh, not another apple article! Can't we get something more interesting?"

2 - You are free to submit things you think are interesting. Be the change you want to see, etc.

3 - People who whine about being downvoted tend to get more downvotes
I'm supposed to take it every 6 months. Though they've got it whittled down to 15 depressing minutes of "don't help anyone and try not to be seen by the cops"
Yes. That's what you did. It's called stereotyping or bigotry. I am not one of those "kind of people." I don't happen to live in the south of Spain, or even in Europe. In this case, your stereotyping happened to be off-base. I don't even drink wine or eat fancy cheese, so i have no dogs in this race.

My experience is that all "kind of people" are right about some things, wrong about others, and you're better off engaging critically issue-by-issue, rather than discounting an argument based on "the kind of people" who happen to make that particular type of argument.

You're also better off not imputing meaning. There's a pathway to sensible actions:

* Understanding facts (objective reality -- we should all be able to agree)

* Understanding viewpoints on problems (which comes down to values and opinions -- and we definitely won't all agree)

* Coming up with plans (which come down to figuring out how to meet the needs of as many people as possible).

If you short-circuit the top ones because you think it will lead the wrong course of action, you're promoting polarization and standing in the way of meaningful civic discourse. You're also willfully ignorant, since you learn the most engaging with people you disagree with, rather than discounting them (as we do in two halves of America) as liberal snowflakes or racist redneck hicks.
Conventional-minded people don't like to think of themselves as conventional-minded. And in any case, it genuinely feels to them as if they make up their own minds about everything. It's just a coincidence that their beliefs are identical to their peers'.

I'm not sure about this. I think people are aware of what is conventional, and that's why they gravitate towards it. It's a risk-mitigation strategy, or in the case of curiosity, the explore-exploit trade-off at work.

Life presents you with a bewildering array of options. It greatly helps to establish what the conventional choice is. It will generally be the safe option, a path well-trodden. You can try to reverse-engineer why it became the conventional choice, gain an appreciation of its advantages, maybe tweak things to find a slightly more optimal solution for your personal circumstance... but sticking with convention qua convention is generally justified. People don't 'accidentally' make the same choices as most others, they deliberately identify what is conventional and follow that path. Go to university, buy a house with a mortgage, get a car on PCP, marry before having children, etc etc

Likewise for a small child there is no downside to curiosity, only upside. As an adult, there is an awareness that you need to earn your daily bread, before all else. Working with people who seem to just follow flights of fancy, risking their livelihood, can be infuriating.

And then there is the whole meta-question of conventional thoughts versus conventional statements. If you believe something that is widely disbelieved, and you speak up, you're sticking your neck out. When I see people do this I tend to get the impression they have not really calibrated their bet on being right against the reputational risk they are assuming.
> Sorry but I strongly disagree with your assertion that building a business is a zero-sum game.

It isn't either/or. Nearly all businesses do "create value". Nearly all businesses also compete for a limited supply of customers, because nearly all markets can produce more outputs than are needed.

The ratio between the two matters a lot to the character of the company.
The Four Elements and How They Apply to Companies
One thing I would add is that it's much easier to appreciate existing solutions when you try to build your own. Often these "I could code something better in a day" thoughts turns into thinking "it's a tougher problem than I though".

Other times, though, either I learn something, or end up making something that is much better for me to use. I would suggest at some time every programmer try build their own limited scope library if they find existing solutions do not meet their requirements.
I don’t know how anyone notices the names of people on HN but dang seems cool
Fair point. I should have said they instead of us.
Your best programmer will likely remove thousands of lines of code from your application and replace them with just a few lines.

For a manager there is no universal metric other than the hard work of understanding what your employees are actually doing.
FWIW, I agree with the rest of your post. while I enjoy some of PG's posts, he often makes the classic mistake of presuming that expertise in one specific area makes his opinion on other topics relevant.
That looks interesting! Will definitely check it out. And for those who want to some Anki routine like adding cards via Emacs, see https://yiufung.net/post/anki-org/ (Power up Anki with Emacs).
In fairness if they asked that it would be exclude the human the way streetview maps works now
I think ordering of exposure makes a difference. Being submersed in prior art and then trying to come up with something novel is much harder or less likely than having conviction around a novel idea/experience and then digging into prior art to strengthen your offering.
Sounds like a wonderful idea. But the reality is probably quite different. I remember one company I worked for getting rid of my manager, meaning that the company owners dealt directly with the IT team. It was an absolute disaster, as they were clueless about IT. I lasted less than a year after that.

Good management is something that you barely notice. When you have bad management it just gets in your road and hinders you.
Israel may see the recent U.S. election as a decidedly negative, and possibly hostile, tilt away from Israeli support, therefore making such a targeted killing necessary.
That proof (and the more general statement) is not correct because it makes assumptions about infinite summation of divergent series that are not true.

There is a link between the sum of natural numbers -- namely, the analytic continuation of the Reimann Zeta function has Z(-1) = -1/12. But the Zeta function is only defined to equal the sum of inverse powers for Re(z) > 1. And under a specific definition of summation (Ramanujan summation) you can say that "the sum is equal to -1/12" but that isn't the same as normal summation.

Mathologer did a fairly in-depth video[1] into why this proof is wrong and what the actual link is between the infinite series and -1/12. The upshot is that even if you use more complicated definitions of summation, you cannot define sums of the kind 1+2+3+... to equal a finite number.

If you assume the infinite sum of 1+2+3+... converges to a finite number you can easily prove a contradictory statement using the same summation properties assumed by that proof. Namely:

S = 1 + 2 + 3 + ... = -1/12
S2 = S-S = 0
= 1 + 2 + 3 + ...
- 1 - 2 - 3 - ... = 0
= 1 + 2 + 3 + ...
- 1 - 2 - ... = 0
S2 = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + ... = 0
S3 = S2-S2 = 0
= (1-1) + (1-1) + ...
= 1 - 1 + 1 - 1 + ... = 0

But we "derived" in the original proof that S3 is equal to 1/2, which is a contradiction. (You could derive S3 is 1/2 from S but that's what the article does in reverse.)

[1]: https://youtu.be/YuIIjLr6vUA
I agree with what you're saying, and I'm very skeptical of the argument you sometimes see that everyone ought to unionize out of solidarity. But some workers don't feel they can get a contract they're happy with on their own, and for people in that situation unionization makes sense.
I should write a manifesto about cooking for oneself instead of eating in restaurants, but then halfway through I'd think "why not both?