skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> How do you get out of flat-earth on your own, without re-living centuries of astronomic research? How do you get out of moonlanding negationism, without personally examining all the retrieved moon rocks? How do you get out of antivaxxing, without personally living through pestilence? (well, at least Covid19 should help with that...)

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. But watch out for that first step, it's a doozy.

This essay provides a lot of the necessary advice to accomplish such a thing, but I suspect one must actually possess sufficient unconventionality to exercise it, not just perceive oneself to possess it.
I don’t think anyone knows exactly what they’re looking 100% the time.

I have to redo captchas all the time so don’t feel bad!
Recently I made a video presentation about geometric algebra, including the formulation of Maxwell's equations in GA:
https://youtu.be/7hlDRLEhc8o

Also, my implementation of geometric algebra in the Julia language, Grassmann.jl https://github.com/chakravala/Grassmann.jl

It helped me truly understand Maxwell's equations for the first time, understanding that it is not just some physical artifact but actually a natural foundational idea in pure mathematics applicable to physics.
> That's not what he's saying. That's just one possible interpretation of it.

That why I put "perhaps" in my characterisation of what he's saying - even if 0.1% of people decide that the solution to them "not thinking for themselves" is to create a startup, pg comes out ahead.
Somalia too had Dhuusamareeb, which in Somalia directly means 'can't stop farting'. I understand the president recently issued a directive of a name change for the city.
Flatt has written elsewhere that the motivation to use Chez was not speed per se but better maintainability and portability, and that required rewriting more of the C core in Racket itself [0]. Doing so would have slowed down all of Racket considerably, but by using Chez it became possible without a big speed penalty. At first there was such a penalty because the rewritten stuff was still slower than C, but with tuning that has mostly gone away.

[0] https://blog.racket-lang.org/2018/01/racket-on-chez-status.h...
I am talking from my experience from living in the south of Spain. I know your argument, I know the kind of people who support it, and I know what it is and what it means.

You mentioned a common argument, I told you what I think of it.
The advantages of social hierarchies seem straightforward to me:

1) Tree structure minimalizes communication complexity. It minimalizes both latency and total cost of communication/decision process, which has usefulness for both business and military. Efficient decision process allows quick and decisive power control, which often has superlinear advantages. The other side of coin is that longer and more thorough decision process could lead to better decisions, which may have long-term advantages.

2) Social hierarchies are not cause of struggle for power, but they ritualize and tame it. With that, they limit costs associated with struggle for power in a similar way how ritualized animal fights limits wounds, which would happen in real fights. In social hierarchy each actor acknowledges its level of power and allows surrender without destruction. Ideally, the power struggle within rules of social hierarchy also makes it more meritocratic (e.g., people with better business skills get on higher level in bussines hierchies).

But your institutional memory makes also sense.

I personally struggle with it, as i have strong emotional aversion to both submit or claim power over others, but it is not hard to see advantages (and also disadvantages) of social hierarchies on rational level.

BTW, looking on your nick, aren't you by chance JS1 from abclinuxu?
This "competition" between geometric algebra and differential forms makes me uncomfortable.

As far as I see (and I'm not an expert), they are just different ways to express very similar concepts. They are still not exactly the same, since the geometric product is not defined in DFs, and there is no hodge star operator in GA, for example, but everything you can do using one formalism in practice can also be easily done using the other one. What am I missing?
"Making the world a better place through ${place your product core feature here}"
This isn't the only study, and this isn't new information they've found.
Interesting, Johns Hopkins said they deleted the study because it "was being used to support false and dangerous inaccuracies about the impact of the pandemic", and not because it was incorrect.

Regardless of if it's correct, I think this has become such a political issue in the US that the American left would be very hard pressed to publicly accept this study's claims.

I really hope that statisticians are able to look past their own personal convictions and look at possible ways our assumptions may have been incorrect. (Personally speaking, I wear a mask, I don't think the coronavirus is a giant conspiracy by the lizard people etc. but I do recognize that the modern scientific community has a tendency to think one way, and then remain cemented in that way for a while.)
So basically you have no idea about what the situation is (nor do I) but you choose to believe that Amazon is in the right. That's called bias.
I'm type 1. I used to believe artificial sweeteners caused the body to raise its blood sugar because the drink is perceived to be sweet, but when I got a CGM I was able to verify that they do not. I'd be interested in a switched label test with CGMs and T1s because a potential insulin response would be absent.

I realize this study is qualified (type 2, preprandial < 200mgdl, lab setting, fake labels, short term) and laud the potential connection between stress and elevated fasting glucose (seems similar to the connection between sleep and elevated glucose.) I've read the study and am just adding a personal anecdote to the thread.
[Meta] May I suggest editing the title to "Johns Hopkins published a study saying corona is not a big deal. They then deleted it."

I don't see "nbd" that often, and I suspect most Hacker News readers aren't going to realize what "nbd" is either. I opened the article because I thought "nbd" was some medical or scientific term.
This is the show that sparked me to pursue engineering. Cannot recommend it highly enough. The original was a masterpiece.
It's not a bug, it's a feature. Take the time while it's buffering/whatever and enjoy the world.
> nebulous dismissals

this sounds like a good band name

sorry about the offtopic comment
Public Time and the Privacy of Time
Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh assassinated
I think a useful reference here is the idea of "wicked problems", which is a kind of problem where the structure of the problem makes it hard to solve - because you cannot even know what a solution is until you make your problem statement more precise (but by that point, you have already determined a solution). This is not the case for all "large" problems, but it's definitely a case for organizing a liberal democracy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem
It's not that harsh. He wrote some good things in the past, but his recent essays are very simple minded and anti-scientific. You can't categorize people like you are in a middle school and be taken seriously, human behavior is very complex, no one can be "conventional- or independent-minded", it's always both simultaneously or rather neither, as those ideas don't describe human behavior even to a slightest degree. I get that in the US people are used to the idea of classifying everyone into simple buckets, given how political propaganda there divides people into classes, like democrats and republicans, etc., so pg is comfortable with such idea, but it doesn't make it less of a nonsense.
Just as the case with US disrespect/neglect of provincial specific good restrictions, other countries also don't fully enforce our [American] notions of intellectual property rights.
The standard advice is to make sure you understand something before you make a card about it, but I've never seen an adequate description of what people mean by "understand" in this context. If a card fails (but follows the other rules), it must mean that you didn't properly understand in the first place, which isn't particularly actionable.

There are two distinct kinds of knowledge: tacit knowledge, the ability to perform some task, and rote knowledge, the ability to recall facts. In most domains, tacit knowledge more useful and harder to come by than rote knowledge. I have come to believe that "understanding" in the SRS context means learning how to do something, how to select an appropriate fire extinguisher in your example. Cards formulated according to those guidelines, then, encode related facts. The idea seems to be that recalling the facts will also reinforce the tacit memory.

An alternative is reinforcing the tacit knowledge directly, which requires a completely different approach: Each card should be a prompt to perform some task you care about, with all relevant context (and possibly extraneous context). This has a reasonable chance of succeeding if you use a premade deck, because all of the information is present. Unfortunately, this isn't how most shared decks are structured.

I've been using a variant on incremental reading for this: I took some books from Project Gutenberg and split the text up into cards and blanked out a word towards the each passage as a Cloze deletion. If I'm successfully following along with the argument that the author is making, then I can usually predict the missing word despite having never read the passage before; otherwise, I need to spend more time with the passage.

Other skills have separate decks: I have a piano deck, for instance, that contains sheet music on the front of the cards with a few bars marked for special attention (or blacked out). I review that one on a tablet while actually at the piano, playing the pieces. I use a photo editor to split up the scan into small parts and throw them all into Anki; it seems to work just fine without the pre-learning that's usually recommended.
> clever then the world

*than
Big Tech Podcast: Cory Doctorow on the True Dangers of Surveillance Capitalism
> They complained that 60% of people on minimum wage can't afford a 2 bedroom apartment in the USA but coming from Tokyo my first thought was "why is the standard a 2 bedroom apartment?"

Perhabs to have a second bedroom for kids?
I mean, if we're being honest, even I don't "give a shit" about what I'm working on beyond building something fun/cool that enables me to make a living.

I want to hire someone who is good at what they do and brutally honest that they're taking the job because they need to feed themselves and take care of their loved ones and have enough free time left to finish their instrumental guitar record or whatever.
Loved these series, from the first release around the 70's on Ambrose video (checked them out from the Library), to purchasing Connections 2 from The Store of Knowledge in the San Jose area (long since closed), to the shorter version 3 (updated, but not as many).

Burke has a gift for showing how disparate technologies are actually related - And much to learn along the way.

Helps with games of Trivial Pursuit, too - Good for the holidays :)

Highly recommend.
this is just an advert for a product? do we allow that?
and 12-hour clocks. I can never remember if "am" morning or afternoon.

Why is 12am before 1am? Makes no sense at all.
> The uncomfortable truth is that most people don’t give a shit. For example, it’s absolutely shocking that the common paradigm for engineers at Google is to come in at 11am and leave at 4pm. In no world can you be working 5 hours a day and be giving a shit, and so the conclusion is that very little meaningful work gets done at Google. Maybe a bit of a hyperbole, but not far from the truth. That culture is broken.

Maybe some Googler would like to comment on this?
Seems no one gave a shit about this 20 hours ago when it was last posted https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=alexw.substack.com
Reminds me of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8C5sjjhsso
Nice work, this will helpful in app version! keep the good work up!
Alexandr Wang is 23 years old and he became tech lead at Quora 7 years ago (?!). I assume the guy has been pulling 90 hour workweeks since age of 12 or something.

Just wait for your first RSI my young friend, and then we will talk again ;)

I'm really curious how he feels like about holidays, I assume people in Europe cant't give a shit having 4-6 weeks of holidays yearly, right?
Embezzlement to use union funds for personal expenses? That’s pretty low grade corruption. This sort of thing happens in private corporations and it rarely gets prosecuted unless it’s huge.

We tend to hold Union officials to standards of conduct more similar to public employees and elected officials, rather than their private sector counterparts. I’m not sure that makes much sense.
> In no world can you be working 5 hours a day and be giving a shit, and so the conclusion is that very little meaningful work gets done at Google

Even working “only” 5 hours/day, not including weekends, would make work the single most time-consuming item in my life (excluding sleep).
This is apparently the result of an "assistant program director of the Applied Economics master’s degree program" downloading the CDC data and playing with it. It's not even a study, it's just someone putting together some graphs. It's not clear that they have any experience in interpreting this sort of data, which is probably important. Random economists poking around datasets they don't understand have a habit of coming to weird conclusions that disappear when looked at by subject matter experts.

I'm not sure it even counts as a study, where was it published? Is there a preprint somewhere? Is it just a PowerPoint presentation?
I know two people I’d consider sorta materialistic (camera and tech gadget budget in the 10,000 a year territory), that are just ok living in a small space as long as it is the cheapest option. They don’t talk about the footprint of tiny home living, they talk about the cost savings.
I think it’s a direct result of failing to understand other people. A lot of nerd culture is about instant gratification at the expense of everything else. That’s objectively poor decision making, but also makes other people’s actions seem dumb by comparison.
One useful piece of advice that I have received is that there are tradeoffs in giving shit at work. This article mentions downsides of not giving a shit, but doesn't mention downsides of giving too much shit, that is, getting too emotionally attached to the work you are doing. Especially in big companies projects get cancelled or requirements change or managers assign work that doesn't even make sense, and if you are emotionally attached to your work when this happens it can cause interpersonal issues, low morale or unhappiness in general.
I wanted to but the title would be too long so I couldn't do it.
It's not even a study. It's just someone presenting a powerpoint. There's no published paper.
Yes, thanks! HN is one place on the web where the commenters graciously hold each other to a high standard.
I think this either belongs in SHOW HN or doesn't belong here at all since as philbarr ( the other commenter ) said, this is just an advert.
Interesting that this comes days after Trump supposedly gave "green light" to Israel to attack Iran.

Also, if I were an Iranian in ANY way involved in the field of nuclear anything, I certainly wouldnt be advertising myself as such.

I'd likely just call myself a veterinarian or something.
> I agree with the gist of hiring people that care about their craft, but asking them to care about the company is harder.

Exactly! Pride in one’s work is what you want. Hiring people who care about your company when, for most people, it’s another notch in their belt, means that your hiring pool is severely constrained and you’ll pass over many people who take pride in their work (and who would therefore benefit your company tremendously).

Stop pretending your company is anything more than a capitalist endeavor that pays people for their time.
Are these examples of captchas that have failed you or just questions that come to mind? I ask myself the same sorts of questions but then haven't actually had captchas fail me for it much.
The quality is not necessarily there. Anyone can put their handheld Egyptian travel footage up on Amazon and call it a documentary.
The author is setting up himself for a lot of disappointment. I am not sure why he expects employee number n*100 who gets 0.1% equity (if at all) to give a shit about his company (that he himself most likely has a huge stake in). Also, it's comical he cites one of the most successful companies in the world (Google) and criticizes their work culture. That culture clearly works for Google since they are wildly successful.
Yes, those PC Card addons for Mac/Amiga/etc are endlessly fascinating to me. But with the benefit of hindsight, the crucial factor wasn't just being able to run DOS applications on your fancy propriety computer, it was riding the PC Compatible rocketship as it blasted off. Creative Labs and 3Com and Tseng and many others showed that there was more value in manufacturing a popular expansion in the massive PC world than in owning your own closed platform bow-to-stern.
Doesn't Jason Fung recommend starving yourself to stay lean?
Security questions are completely pointless anyway and you should just always treat them as an extra set of passwords and store them in your password manager. I have changed from using randomly generated items to vaguely plausible sounding nonsense instead since sometimes you have to actually read these things back to a human.
One of the things with both tiny houses and micro-apartments--leaving aside precise definitions--is that by the time you account for some minimal set of amenities such as bathroom, a kitchenette even, corridors/stairwell in the case of apartments, etc. cutting space to the bone doesn't really save you all that much in absolute terms while forcing a lot of compromises.
I would say independent thought is a limited resource, and you should allocate it wisely.

There are many things you can "think for yourself" about that wouldn't return much for the investment. For example, if I rejected english and made my own language that would probably be a long-shot. For a while, I wasn't interested in using math formulas until I could prove them, in hindsight maybe I'd say spend that energy getting better at people skills.

I think you'll find 90% of things are done the right way, and if you deviate you're probably doing worse for it. So it's worst being deliberate about. I don't think independent thought is an ends in itself.
Excess deaths doesn't help, either. They just attribute it to people who were killed by the prevention measures themselves, like "couldn't go to a doctor during lockdown" or "froze to death because lockdown eliminated their jobs". They can't actually prove any of that, but it's sufficient to let them claim doubt, while shifting the burden of contradicting that doubt to other people.

Occam's Razor would say "People dying of a deadly disease, noted on their charts by their doctors, is the most reasonable explanation of excess deaths during a pandemic" rather than "A simultaneous conspiracy of doctors in every country attributing every death to a disease, except in countries where measures were implemented following the recommendations of epidemiologists". But hey, denialism means never having to say you're sorry.
I've never been able to run Docker on my MacBook Pro without the CPU's going crazy and the energy usage skyrocketing. I opened a ticket about it, but there have been other related tickets that have been closed without any real resolution: https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/4323

It unfortunately prevents me from using Docker for local development. I'm hoping things change with M1.
I don't think it's about whether it does harm learning it: I think the problem is the relative barrier to entry that it creates for people who don't already know this information. Friction like this reduces social mobility and access to services for many.

As for your last point: that would apply to anything. There is _always_ something worse to get worked up about.
Embezzlement by a union official does more to hurt unions than embezzlement by some random public official hurts public perception of the govt.

Union leaders talk about fighting for workers. Pay your dues, they go to fighting for worker rights. We’re here to look out for you.

When the people representing you start stealing your money it makes you wonder how much they are looking out for you.
I worked at a bar that had those stacks of pull tab cards. Random cards in the stack would give you cash that you exchanged the card for.

The manager of the bar would know which ones were redeemed so if it got low and he knew the big money cards weren’t won yet, he’d go play the machine until he got it.
I'm pretty new to HN and didn't realize all of it was moderated by one person(s?). That's a gargantuan job, thanks so much, Dang!

Does Dang ever write about what it's like to moderate HN, and what tools s/he/they have at their disposal? Also, is Dang almost like a Satoshi or is it a real person??
That’s cool.

What do you make of the algebra of the dihedrons? https://youtu.be/lqH4BLHGsFw . It’s a “sister algebra” of the quaternions.
This is true, but that again someone had to approve this before it was put up on their site.

That is what any serious institution would do.
Great, so you bought an different type of RAM in a completely different form factor and paid a different price. This is on “processor package” RAM and will thus have an entirely different price basis than a removable stick would, not even factoring in the Apple Tax.

Furthermore, how is that relevant to the point _I_ was making about needing more than 64gb of RAM? If you both want to tangent, fine do so, but don’t try to put words in my mouth while doing it.
Too many times you give your all and when there is a bump you get flushed down the toilet, it’s not trust inspiring. Luckily I did found companies who cared, but it’s a minority. The best advice I can give is : make your company human. Give and take, be there for eachother, care. Sounds simple, but in my experience not many companies tick these boxes.
I agree with critical thinking, but the comment I replied was about using electricity generated probably by renewable that is stored as hydrogen. So the hydrogen cabal would use the renewable camp tech, the only people worried by that would be the batteries people(mining, creating, selling, recycling this batteries).

IMO electricity will be the better tool for most of the jobs but not all and we can't transition to electric over night.
Simply because sugar is more calorie dense.
I agree with the second criteria but not the first. People with passion about something might bring that passion to work. In my experience, they're more likely to bring something they're already passionate about to work and make the rest of us passionate about it as well.

Trying to find candidates that are passionate about the company before they join doesn't seem right. If we're only aware of how the company appears from the outside (press releases, company website) how are we supposed to have a real attachment to what the company truly is? Best case scenario is them being attached to how the company markets itself, which isn't a great approximation. That said, there might be something here I can latch onto into the form of:

1. Hire people passionate about something.

2. Promote people passionate about the company.

However, I still see some problems with the above. I would need time to chew on it before basing any personnel decisions around it.
I've lived my whole life in the UK where the 12-hour clock is commonplace and I also still can't remember this either...