skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Have you a source on your travel statistic? I’d been trying to find something like that but the sources have been terrible. In isolation I’m not sure of the relevance of the comparison between NZ and UK regarding travel frequency. New Zealand’s largest economic sector was tourism.

Pretty much every tourist flew in, and tourists are in close proximity to each other for 4+ hours. It doesn’t matter how often New Zealanders fly internationally if tourists come in infected. The UK has international flights that last a 15-20 minutes. This could give you covid for sure, but it may avoid infecting the whole plane.

A total of about 3.8 million tourists arrived in NZ in 2019, a number equivalent to about 75% of NZs population. The UK had about 38 million tourists in 2018 (most recent numbers available) and that equates to about 56% of the UKs population. NZ had a lot of tourists relative to its population.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_New_Zealand

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_the_United_Kingdo...

Even now we are getting people fly in with covid every day, usually several cases and this is happening without there being international tourism anymore.

The UK doesn’t even require self isolation in all cases and having tried asking people to self isolate in NZ, we know exactly how it doesn’t work. Managed isolation is hard enough to get right.

https://www.gov.uk/uk-border-control

Overall, what happened in NZ was impossible in the UK due to a lack of will, not anything else. NZ was willing to sacrifice it’s largest industry. How would you describe the approach used in the UK? It doesn’t appear to have a particular focus or goal.
> With 60 percent or less of the national Hispanic vote, it is arithmetically impossible for a Democratic presidential candidate to win Florida, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico.

Please, show us the arithmetic, author. Don't claim arithmetic, and show none. An appeal to an empirical approach needs evidence, not a mere sentence saying it is so.
It's also unlikely because unlike Intel, Apple doesn't sell their chips to other companies and thus can't illegally deal or try to maintain monopoly power over those companies.
From the end user perspective: you could only use one application at a time. In most cases, switching between programs meant quitting the current program and launching another program from the Finder. There were a couple of exceptions to this:

* Some programs let you launch another program without quitting. If I recall correctly, those programs would remain in memory but would not run in the background. If you wanted to return to the original program, you would have to exit the program it launched. This was typically available in development tools.

* Desk accessories were device drivers that looked like programs. This allowed the end user to run small programs, like a calculator or clipboard manager, while continuing to use another piece of software.

The more interesting question is how did the system behave with multitasking turned on, since the original system software did not support multitasking. For a while multitasking support could be added with a separate piece of software. System 6 was the first version of the Macintosh system software to incorporate multitasking and it was turned off by default (if I recall correctly). System 7 was the first version where multitasking could not be disabled.

I suspect that multitasking could be added in a relatively seamless fashion to the system software since developers were supposed to use the Macintosh Toolbox (API), so things like memory management were always mediated by the operating system. The main user-visible quirk was the ability to partition memory, which ensured that properly written software would not overwrite the memory of other applications. (Granted, there was no memory protection, so it could happen.)
Pillow and blanket rental for 260? Wow.
You could switch and not buy Apple hardware. IMO, they became too heavy handed a pretty long time ago.
She never was his lawyer. She's a military prosecutor who can bring charges under the UCMJ.
> This is just silly number theory

I think you mean 'numerology' - 'number theory' is a serious field of mathematics; the former is the 'study' of numbers particularly in old texts (e.g. the Bible) etc. and finding mystical meanings or links between them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerology

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_theory

(Actually they already have 'not to be confused with' links between them - must be a common confusion.)
Also there is no code, so posting the GitHub link right now is moot.
So a commercial Ubuntu fork with some custom apps, got it. Still hardly groundbreaking though right? I'm thinking more of something like HaikuOS if you want something completely out there.
There’s other sources on Twitter that have linked the article.

I looked at the Stratford case too. Doesn’t match. It was a 42 year old adult with 2 other adults and 2 teens. Hsieh is 46. https://patch.com/connecticut/stratford/man-severely-burned-...

And if you look at original TheDay house it’s a waterfront mansion...clearly owned by someone wealthy along with matching the timeline.
When you're halfway thru a packed 12 hour flight in economy, a park bench will seem like a 5 star hotel! You'd curl up on the cabin floor if they let you, or beg the flight attendand to zap you with a taser to knock you out.
The AnandTech article is not bad, but I have heard that their tests misrepresent some microarchitectural details that they didn’t manage to guess the underlying design of correctly.
If AI papers were pharmaceuticals (a parody commercial)
> A related and relevant observations why are courier companies not a natural monopoly? If the marginal cost of delivery were high, a courier company with higher volumes would naturally make more profit, and so the market would push in the direction of fewer bigger couriers.

I think you are onto something, that the courier business enjoys huge advantage from economies of scale. However, I think that there is no actual monopoly, because the advantage of higher volume in last-mile delivery probably
saturates fast enough that you can take it all at relatively low total levels of volume.

For example, if you have higher volumes, you can optimize courier routes so that they waste less time driving around. However, at some point fixed per-package overhead like parking getting in and out of the truck, walking up to front door, etc become so large that time spent actually moving between deliveries becomes smaller and smaller part of your time, and so optimizing it becomes less and less valuable. Then, the issue is how much volume you need to hit that level, and I think that the answer is "much less than monopoly level".
Ivermectin is effective for Covid-19: meta analysis of 19 studies
`sudo spctl --master-disable` to disable Gatekeeper, and `csrutil disable` in Recovery Mode to disable rootless/System Integrity Protection. Just like that, it's a Mac from a decade ago in openness.
Nice article, on the whole, and usefully provocative.

But I have misgivings about making these close connections between information theory and scientific theory-making. As everyone knows, information theory leaves out any notion of semantics, as it should. But the important thing about our theories of the world is that they have meaning to us. The scientist searches for something that makes sense of the world, not an algorithm for computing a series of numbers. The theories that we search for may not have the smallest Kolmogorov complexity; the criteria that they satisfy go a lot deeper.
I like to think that probability is the ratio unknown/known, information available divided by all possibilities.

You know that a coin has 2 faces (known=2) and that if you toss it, 1 face will be up (unknown which=1).

The ratio is more about something in the mind than intrinsic to the objects.

That helped me understand why in the Monty Hall problem, when you switch doors, the probability of getting the prize increases.
90s (Windows 95 and later, or any version of MacOS) personal computers weren't easier to use in any dimension than modern ones; 80s pre-PC ones, and DOS PCs, were only in a weird masochistic enthusiast sense where it took less work to get to a prompt for an fairly obscure and limited programming language/CLI, but more work to actually do anything significant with it.

Any given hardware platform tended to be a more stable target over it's lifetime in the pre-PC era, which is a kind of simplicity (not really ease, but once you've climbed the learning curve the ground isn't shifting under you.) OTOH, any given hardware platform was likely to fade into irrelevance sooner and if you wanted to swap to something with decent current support more of what you learned would be irrelevant, so even that stability was of fairly limited utility.
Having adopted a lot of quasi Buddhist frames in recent years, I increasingly look in askance at the self esteem framework.

A friend was going through a crisis of confidence in their professional life, and was basically saying, I think I’m not a good psychologist, and the fact that I “wasted” 10 years training for this makes me want to kill myself.

Their buddhist teacher (In practice, a therapist, and also by education the teacher is literally a therapist) responded: so what if you’re not good at being a psychologist? What if it’s true? Isn’t it better to know?

Being emotionally invested in our specialness/abilities/whatever is a trap, because we’re not special, we all have deep limitations in our capabilities. Whatever you’re the best at: there are people better than you. There are people who are probably better than you at every single thing you do. So what? Part of the Sunday chanting service: “let us overcome the inferiority complex, the superiority complex, and the equality complex.”

None of which is to say we shouldn’t treat ourselves lovingly and with compassion. We definitely should, and it takes a lot of work and growth to do that, and pretending we’re not limited is a false solution.
libmagic is quite primitive and can't reliably handle the complex data types, like, MS Office documents with embedded objects (especially the versions before 2007), files with common container types (jar/war files are detected just as zip), etc. - the signature language is quite primitive from my point of view. Plus it's quite slow...

I've spent a long time (> 10 years) developing code for detection of file types (without relying onto the file extension), and extraction of the data... And everything was need to be done very fast & reliably. The last project was the content detection for the filtering web proxy, where every millisecond counts. And for signatures, there was a lisp-like language that allowed to describe very complex detection rules, although it's sometime was still necessary to go to the C++, for things like, OLE2 parsing, XML parsing, or listing files in Zip files, etc.

From the open source alternatives, it makes sense to look to the Apache Tika that has both content detection & extraction capabilities, although it's written in Java...
If Apple becomes too heavy handed, market forces would come to the rescue with an alternative. It’s a multi billion dollar industry, and competitive.
"Micro tyrants" - love it. It goes well with my own term, "petty injustice".

I do object to "it's harder to understand than magic". I think that's a failure in communication, in pedagogy, and perhaps most broadly, the poor priorities of our major information systems, which include homes, schools, churches, the boy scouts, and all mass media. The profit motive should itself be deeply suspect with respect to any information service.

I don't believe it is difficult to understand the nature of your phone and how it works. You hint at it with your term - it's about size. Your phone is essentially a vast machine (truly vast, like a city block) that has been shrunk down. Your screen is a camera into that tiny city, so its like a microscope. As we move around, we can mark particularly interesting or useful views, so that we can come back to them (and even arrange them side-by-side). We find that we not only have the ability to see, but also to emit into the image, changing it, adding to it. (It might get tricky once you recognize that movement itself must constitute an emission if we are to be consistent, and this would be the invitation to look at the text of the code, which ideally be written with this intuition in mind.)

But yes, let us put an end to all the micro-tyrants and the petty injustices they subject us to!
I'd highly recommend the film you mention, Paul Schrader's Mishima[1] to anyone, not just those interested in the author, though of course especially them. It's one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen, and Philip Glass' music (which I agree is some of his best work) just makes it that much better.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishima:_A_Life_in_Four_Chapte...
Confidence is repeated domain specific success, the saying goes.
I believe what you are describing would be part of what people call a growth mindset where there is not really a fixed point of completion.

So a statement like, “Wow, you are good at reading!” might become “Wow, you are getting so much better at sounding out those really tricky words!”.

The first statement is more self-esteem building where the second is more highlighting an area where growth has happened and can continue to happen.

To me the first also feels quite lazy and anecdotally speaking from my kids, they really like when I actually pay attention and give feedback on specifics of what they are working on.
The problem is are you willing to deal with 5000 different return policies, 5000 different merchant policies, 5000 different shipping times, etc?

Amazon eliminates all that friction. I can one click buy something and know when it will arrive, what the shipping will be, and the rules on returning it.
It sounds like you've thought this through pretty well. Once you add in networking and a web browser, it might not be possible to avoid all that complexity.
On the M1 this should work on any core.
As far as crypto goes, Bernstien's DNSCurve was a better and far more distributed privacy solution that DoH (anyone can add it to their nameservers, no centralization), but lacked supporters other than OpenDNS.

http://dnscurve.org
I got here too late to watch it, but in the future if you want to expose a local service like this, the OSS inlets project has an add-on for TCP services like SSH and Mongo etc. Might be of use instead of doxing your home IP / location (are you in North Denmark on SEF?) https://docs.inlets.dev/
I thought this would be http://hackersdictionary.com/html/Some-AI-Koans.html .
If you're serious about using Linux as a backup, you can't be very tied in with the Apple software ecosystem. So if Apple concerns you that much, why even buy an M1 MacBook?
How to Optimize Your Business with Data Integration
One of the more interesting parts of Unix is that there was not a system level way to have records. This was especially wierd given other systems in use at the time spent a lot of time dealing with this exact issue. Just the other day there was a discussion here on HN about file system APIs, and many of the comments were about this peculiarity of Unix: why isn't there one true way to store stuff that is smaller than a file? The answer is probably, well, different uses of data require different things smaller than a file. There isn't really one true way at that point. Also, storage media changes a lot over time.

Coming to Unix from another (larger than a PC) OS was strange because it felt so stripped-down, yet capable, largely because of the extreme power the shell gave you to concatenate functionality. I've never read this particular document, an it does really explain this capability well.
There's an element of class consciousness because low-confidence tends to be the outcome of an impoverished and unprivileged upbringing.

Compare with an upper class upbringing which tends to come with a sense of confidence and entitlement. Reality often responds accordingly.

Generally we seem bad at noticing and rewarding genuine competence and much better at noticing and rewarding confidence, even if it's wildly unrealistic. And even if it comes with a spectacular record of failure or obvious evidence of limited integrity.

So imposter syndrome may not be so much about an unrealistically low feeling of competence, but about not having internalised the performative social signifiers of confidence - to the point where someone can navigate them without having to second-guess them consciously.

In other words there are two different games being played, and being good at something is only one of them.
I love this comment, and while I don't have kids, small kids seem to like me, and I seem to get along well with them. I love the using almost, and of course it's probably also a tone of voice and also showing attention. But I do the same thing with words, giving praise like "so close" or "try it again" with excitement. I also like framing things like games or adventures.
I think it would be better if the chips can be in-house only, but hackitoshes and hackiniphones have to be legal. The OS/userland interfaces are incalculably wider so those are the more important ones to disembargo to encourage competition.

I know I would be much happier buying Apple hardware to run free software if I didn't feel like I was feeding the walled garden (because Samsung-made hackiniphones don't pay 30% to apple).
Ask HN: What is the best edit/delete setup for Internet forum content?
I'm building an Internet forum with posts and nested comments like HN. What do you think is the best edit/delete policy for posts and comments?
Hanging is a relatively humane way of the death penalty. I mean that's why the Table of Drops exists. It calculates the size and weight of a person, along with the length of rope and height of the drop. It basically has come down to a science in its own right determining what is the proper height that'll snap someone's neck and asphyxiate them, but one strangle them gruesomely or sever their head off.
I agree plenty of history happened in between, but your notion that they're unrelated is absurd. Nobody today learned English from Alexander Hamilton, but nonetheless we not only understand the Federalist Papers just fine, we live by many of the ideas he expressed. Culture is handed down.

If you'd like to better understand that, I'd suggest you read Kendi's "Stamped from the Beginning", who gives an intellectual history of America's racist ideas. I also think you're mistaken to lay the current troubles at the feet of formal segregation policies, which were only active in one part on the US. Maybe go read "Sundown Towns", which shows that all across America we had towns with de-facto segregation without formal policies. And it takes only a glance at modern maps showing race to see we haven't solved the problem.
I read his book a few times and it’s very weird. His work is not the modern interpretation. It feels purer but also much less helpful. It won’t encourage you to start a get rich quick blog and sell memberships to others, for one.
Well said.

I would like to add one aspect, which is that if everyone is equally amazing, there isn't much that you can do to improve your situation in life. In a sense, it can be empowering if you know that your job situation is bad because you didn't pay attention in school, because that also means that there is an obvious fix.
It is a funny statement, I like it. But due to a different reason: all we know about reality is our theories. How we could state, that rules of the universe are simple? As I see it, we could state, that our theories are full of simple rules. But the universe have no theories nor rules outside of human's mind. It is completely our inventions, our dreams, our hopes that the universe have some rules.

We could state that our simple rules works, but what does it mean "to work"? For example, a spider sees reality not like us, it feels vibrations of it's web, runs to a source of vibrations and start to bite, to wrap intruding object with web. It would do it to a tuning fork, if you pressed it to spider's web. His simple rules of reality works though. Despite the fact that sometimes spider bites steel of a tuning fork without any benefits for the spider.

How could we know that our theories not just extended version of spider's? With the same issues, like they make us to do something absolutely pointless. How could we evaluate this fact? To ask our theories? But our theories already predicted that this pointless thing we do would be a good thing. We might ask our theories again and we'd get the same answer.

This statement seems as a tautology for me. Our rules are simple, because they are simple. Our theories work because they tell us, that they work.
Target is always underplayed here. In many cases, you can have product pulled in 20-30m.

I was on my way to a meeting in Manhattan last year and it was pouring rain. I ordered an umbrella from the highway just north of the city, and had it in hand within 15m.
watchOS lets you call much of the UNIX APIs, you (as third-party developer) just aren’t allowed to make command-line tools and daemons.
At this point it's clear trump will flip at least one if not 2 states and if that happens there is a real chance he wins through the congressional vote.
That's close, but for me nonattachment is about working to diminish the reactivity, so it's about more than patience.
I'm not sure if there is a goal here, just pointing out how times have changed. I shift between we should throw out the whole modern desktop and completely redesign it from the ground up to resigning myself to the understanding that the complexity is unavoidable in a fashion if you want networking, USB, web browser, GPU...etc.
"weak Americans fading away will be a good cultural and physical rejuvenation for the republic"
Seriously?
What exactly constitutes a "weak" American. Do you consider this some inherent generic property or do you recognize the socioeconomic/environmental circumstances that greatly constrain how most of downtrodden America developed and continue to live.
What do you mean by "fade away"?
Kinesis was the worst AWS tech I've ever used. Splitting a stream into shards doesn't increase throughput if you still need to run the same types/number of consumers on every shard. The suggested workaround at the time was to use larger batches and add latency to the processing pipeline.
A novice was trying to fix a broken Lisp machine by turning the power off and on.

Knight, seeing what the student was doing, spoke sternly: "You cannot fix a machine by just power-cycling it with no understanding of what is going wrong."

Knight turned the machine off and on.

The machine worked.

---------------

Always beautiful to read those.
Oof. My little company is refactoring some five year old architecture design choices. Ugly. Process isn't visible outside the refactor and the work is tedious. Can't imagine what a service refactor is like at A. I bet it sucks
The European parliament has always seemed like to me what the US's Articles of Confederation was. There was no centralized authority and states could defy policies as they saw fit.
This. Kind of, since I just don't drink any soda but I still find that skipping breakfast and having late lunch (or dinner only) is much easier if I didn't have carbs for breakfast. Coffee and a waffle with syrup will make me hungry by lunch. Coffee only or with butter/coconut oil means no hunger until much later.

It's like the body "knows" there must be more carbs out there if you recently had some and wants more. If there were no carbs it "assumes" there aren't more so if no extra food is added (we ate all the mammoth meat yesterday and now we gotta go hunt first) I'll just use up the fat stores.
Not a kernel expert, but I am curious, couldn't we load that AMD driver conditionally?
What Makes a DSL Bad and how we can do better
The seeds of lockdown were sown 300M years ago