skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Wtf? So you take the statement that we can recover and shouldn't believe in doomsday as let's just kill each other? What are you, a Stalinist? ... But I guess you want that since you're a nuclear war advocate.

Do you understand sarcasm?

> You realize the rhetoric of life being over as we know it is increasing suicide rates. People are literally killing themselves because they dont want to live in the narrative that life as we know it is down hill from here.

There's actually little to no "rhetoric of life being [permanently] over as we know it [due to COVID]" except as a straw man. There is rhetoric arguing for temporary sacrifices for the greater good, and also rhetoric downplaying or denying the situation to argue against making those sacrifices.

A proper appreciation of the seriousness of the situation is not "being a fucking doomsday prophet," as you said; rather it's the mindset that steels one to make the sacrifices that need to be made with the hope that they'll work.
Some cultural notes: UK Conservative politicians have started claiming that our rapid approval was because of Brexit.

UK med regulators have said that's bollocks. They say the med was approved under existing EU regs.

MHRA say that no corners were cut. They claim the rapidity of the decision was because all parties were in alignment: they want a safe vaccine, so all funding was available when it needed to be and all evidence was rapidly assessed.

https://twitter.com/ShaunLintern/status/1334078198318059520?...
Yeah, wow. This is one of the more aggressive examples of "open"-but-unrunnable I've ever seen. I think your opinion is dead on.

And if this isn't intentional, then the level of effort is so low how could you trust the software with such a complex and subtle problem? It is clearly intentional, but they didn't even give themselves a plausibly deniable story.
Would be awesome if Spotify had a winamp mode that accepted winamp skins :)
I tend to be pretty interested in opinions that go against the grain when they're interesting, but when it's just "anyone with a brain"--that's just rhetoric and not even very artful rhetoric at that.
Look at state-wide restrictions. Effectively every state has them and they cover our large cities as well as rural regions. You can see a very rough overview here in one of our major papers: https://www.usatoday.com/storytelling/coronavirus-reopening-...

The degree of the response varies. Most states have a program to close “non-essential” commercial and public indoor spaces or limit inhabitants. Masks are typically required indoors.

In rural areas you’ll see lower compliance rates, but also fewer outbreaks due to the lower population density and fewer social opportunities.

It is technically closer to nothing than a very aggressive lockdown, though, even though that does not make for an effective study of no response. US residents have not been forbidden from leaving their homes.
>Maybe? Again, it depends on what your definition of "best" is. If not enough people in Toronto think it's important enough to have a robust public transit system, then it doesn't happen. I'm very confident Toronto has the resources required to complete an ambitious project if desired.
>If the project isn't a good use of resources, indecision and inaction is the better outcome.

I wish I shared your confidence, but this suggests otherwise:

https://toronto.citynews.ca/2018/09/26/transit-the-number-1-...

I find it difficult to accept that this is the best outcome by any metric I can think of.

>Unlike in China, these discussions already happen regularly, and the key difference between the status quo in China and the West is the decision making process, so that's where the conversation is focused.

Is it? The conversation is focused on how China is authoritarian, not on how the Western (I really should say North American) decision-making process often leads to poor outcomes and stagnation when it comes to public projects.

This IS getting pretty far off-topic from the actual article, so I'll stop here.
If you say "OK google play spotify playlist xxxxxx" it should work.
“considered” does a lot of work in that definition, to the extent it can be taken seriously at all.
Unfortunately the problem with self-hosting these things is actually obtaining the content (mainly regarding movies since iTunes song purchases haven't been DRM protected for a long time). Getting the right set-up for removing DRM from your uhd/hd blu-rays is hard since hardware is constantly being updated (you might have to purchase second-hand blu-ray readers), and downloading them is technically illegal even if you have the physical media - not that the FBI is going to indict you for having a personal media library. I imagine books have the same issues if you're trying to get unencrypted digital versions of them.
My favourite WinAmp skin is still Drone. I still use it on my windows box today. It has a great docked mode. WinAmp doesn't work as well on high-dpi screens though, sadly. It's still a solid media player though.
Digital health sensor CapMedic potentially improving patients’ inhaler use
> The question is whether this will ever get through the senate

Is it really though? I assumed it was 100% for show, to have something they can use in campaign ads. I see 0% probability of it coming to the senate. So the House is just passing a bunch of laws that look good on their resume.
Dealing with Google's version of IMAP, CalDAV and CardDAV is with the standard that everyone else follows. Every single program (mbsync, offlineimap, vdirsyncer) needs a special section on how to configure for Google alone. It causes a lot of heartache when you try to migrate.
> Fuck malls. They're reaping now what they sowed a long, long time ago when they killed the family-owned business on main street.

Well, you understand that a mall is just a covered street you can't drive on, right? With some shared infrastructure? In the rainy wastelands of North America, it turns out that people like that kind of thing. It's appealing to not worry about cars when your children are scurrying about. It went more upscale than anyone needed - the prototypical "bazaar" turned corporate - but it's hard to argue in the big flat commons the occupies much of this country that it's really a waste of space.

Time was there were a lot more mom-n-pop style stored in the mall. It was an easier place to start one, you just lease your space and all the facilities are provided for you!

Malls may have damaged Main Street, but it was the big box / department stores that really did that, and it was through efficiency and better logistics pushing prices down, and corners being cut every which way, that they did so - not just by virtue of their size and location. Nobody gave a shit that Main Street was dying because they could get their own needs for less than before.

Now, imagine if we could keep the logistics, but force the profit back into the communities where the spend is happening. Paying retail workers a lot more is a good way to look at doing that.
My wife and I have been using an app called Todoist(no affiliation) and have been loving it. Groceries is a shared list either of us can contribute to or check off of at any time.
As I said, the write up was quite interesting, so don’t take it the wrong way! A long read - including the journey taken to get there - can be educational itself (including wrong turns, proof of concepts etc).

The only reason I posted the tweet was because the lede was well and truly buried at the end of the article, and you may have lost some readers’ interest by the time they get there.

You could have started with something like “This is how I managed to post a self referential tweet [link]” which would both bring it up front and centre, as a means to entice readers to find out more.

Sort of like how some TV episodes begin with “[record scratch] You may wonder how I ended up here...” – deadpool is a movie that begins in that way, for example.

For really long posts you might want to have a kind of table of contents that sets up the structure which you can link to parts.

Anyway, don’t take my abbreviated summary as negative; I enjoyed it.
There's also the question of maintenance.

America's problem isn't with building new roads, it's with maintaining them.

Building new is easy. Let's see how China fares in 50 years when it has to maintain an aging infrastructure.
We know about how much investment was made in SpaceX. And the idea that SpaceX has for 10+ years sold launches as loss leader simply doesn't add up.

The opposite is more likely, they were profitable already for years and then the made re-usability happen and their margin should be huge. They have not really lowered the price since they introduced re-usability.
What I mean is that: what they intend and what they say to intend are two completely different things.
Trump went against several sacred cows: tech, CIA, FBI, corporate news, military machine constant wars.

Did he actually, or did he just blab about them on Twitter?
I find the network and addressing model to be the worst designed and least interesting part of Urbit. That's the part that reflects Yarvin's political ideology, but I also think neoreaction is political flat Eartherism. Pretty much all of neoreaction boils down to refusing to account for survivorship bias. The average old thing looks better than the average new thing because crappy old things were forgotten.

The interesting parts are the functional programming approach used, which is somewhat novel or at least novel in its execution.

Another reply compared it to DNS, which is valid, but DNS does not have artificial limitations like Urbit does. DNS is also in many ways a bad design, not because it's inefficient but precisely because it encourages a feudal model that artificially constrains what the Internet could do. DNS was maybe the only viable model back when the largest machines online came with a whopping few megabytes of RAM, but some kind of distributed replication approach could be done today.
The poster you're responding to is addressing how these drugs get put into the categories, not what the categories actually say they're for.

American drug enforcement is tied as much to racism (marijuana with hispanic immigrants, crack cocaine with black americans) and politics (like hallucinogenics with the anti-war movement) as it is to science. Far more so.
This is why I love HN, fond memories
I don’t even bother using them for timers anymore since it’s usually easier to do it on my watch. Voice assistants are limited to navigation requests while driving for me
My experience is that I have to proactively educate myself as best I can about the physical risks of daily living. This includes a staggering amount of items: food, clothes, containers, cookware, makeup, cleaning supplies, paint, home goods, medicine, electronics. It's an impossible task, but I see a lot of people doing the same: building a personalized set of things to watch out for. (Buy organic, wash produce/grains/beans, avoid anything scented, avoid homeopathic, avoid styrofoam, avoid hydrogenated oil, avoid Teflon/PTFEs, avoid perc, avoid food dyes, avoid plastic fabrics, on and on)

Government has a role in making this information accessible at the time of purchase or use. I can read the food ingredients, the fabric material, the cancer warning, the VOC rating. And I can make a simple decision about what to buy if I so desire.

But there are untold cases where the information is not easily accessible, where it's difficult to identify a trustworthy source, and where we are advertised products that actively hide their harm.

I would like to have more confidence that I'm buying safe products. I don't know what the solution is, so I just keep adding to my list.
That's just unsubstantiated nationalistic nonsense.
In fact, just about nothing changed, except that I have noticed teenagers seem less interested than ever in cannabis.
Tool becomes external because a customer needed the functionality. Regression was silent until the customer found it. “Whoops, we couldn’t possibly have seen that coming”.

It happens.
'tech' is kind of a broad brush. But Nintendo is even older than old behemoths like GE and IBM.
Oh, that explains it. I'd steer clear of that. I have two very large Asian grocery stores in my city and there ain't no way I'm going to eat premade frozen bao, gyoza, or noodles manufactured at some sketchball factory in Shenzhen!
Prompter
Not quite a one-off pod, but very close to that. It will automatically create a builder pod for you if you don't already have one, or you can specify one with whichever runtime that you want (containerd or docker). It uses buildkit to do the builds and has a syntax which is compatible with `docker build`.

There are also some pretty cool features. It supports building multi-arch images, so you can do things like create x86_64 and ARM images. It can also do build layer caching to a local registry for all of your builders, so it's possible to scale up your pod and then share each of the layers for really efficient builds.
What a dunk on a bad excuse for an advertising espionage tool. I fully support this level of pettiness.
Nitpick: federal only applies to countries like the US or Germany, which are federations, I think the term you were looking for is national.

As to your other claim I'm not so sure I agree with you: Italy has decriminalized all drug use a long time ago, but legalization of cannabis seems at least a decade away. In the current political climate it's ok to say that addicts should not be jailed, but there is still a lot of moral panic around distribution.
Article written in 2016, mind you
Yes, Sickle Cell trait exists in that area because it is protective. Sickle Cell Disease occurs when someone has two copies of the gene and having two copies goes bad places.

Maybe I am missing something and the plan here is to leave Sickle Cell trait alone and only subject people with Sickle Cell Disease to what amounts to genetic experimentation. I find that ethically questionable, but perhaps there are people who think that makes sense.

To me, fixing this means getting rid of the mutation. The mutation exists because it is protective. If you remove that protection without first removing the reason it exists, I find that also morally questionable. First, eradicate malaria from the region. Then eradicate the trait.

You could reduce incidence of the disease dramatically without coming up with Frankensteinian medical experiments by testing everyone for the trait as a condition of getting a marriage license and trying to get carriers to stop breeding with other carriers. It would be a social intervention, not a medical intervention, and it's completely humane.

Of course it wouldn't make headlines as being ooh, shiny new tech and some people would no doubt have a cow about it for some reason or other, like "What right do you have to tell me whom I can love?"

But as someone with a different homozygous recessive disorder (who also has a child with the same thing), that was more or less my policy after I was diagnosed and was getting a divorce. I didn't wish to risk getting pregnant by a carrier again, so I did what I could to protect myself against that scenario.
I can attest to one thing though. Thanks to that legalization if I ride my bike on lakeshore trail sometime on a nice still evening I can't literally breathe in spots so high is the concentration.

I am all for legalization though. Just fucking limit this smoking to some less public spots.
Hi! Small tech company that uses k8s here. Much of the complexity is irreducible and has to go somewhere, and it's much better to have it in a single, stateless, well-defined place that's also easy too introspect.

I've seen way too many Ansible nightmares grown out of deceptively "simple" mutable VM deployments.

k8s makes our life so much easier because it eliminates a whole bunch of other complexity. Easily reproducible development environments, workload scheduling, sane config management...
Whips. Not kicks. Jeez, dude. :)
> None of which was the hedge fund's doing,

This is where I differ. When there is an entire financial industry built around the idea of making billions off of the failure of something, what on earth makes you believe they have no incentive to spur it along?

> It has just been transferred from the pockets of one investor group to the pockets of another investor group who have arguably demonstrated that they better understand how money is productively spent.

Spent _on what_? Are financiers and capitalists just an interchangeable commodity? Do you really think they all have the same interests, the same agenda?
Does anyone know what kind of UI library Winamp uses? I mean, if it's opensource, we can probably use it to build a lot more fun UIs since it's so "skinable".
I'm not talking about the micronutrients we measure, I'm talking about the ones we don't.

Just a super-quick Google search reveals, for example:

> Dr. Stephen Rennard of the University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha. He conducted laboratory tests to determine why chicken soup might help colds, beginning with his wife’s homemade recipe, handed down by her Lithuanian grandmother. Using blood samples from volunteers, he showed that the soup inhibited the movement of neutrophils, the most common type of white blood cell that defends against infection. Dr. Rennard theorizes that by inhibiting the migration of these infection-fighting cells in the body, chicken soup essentially helps reduce upper respiratory cold symptoms. The researchers couldn’t identify the exact ingredient or ingredients in the soup that made it effective against colds.

The idea that we understand and have catalogued all the compounds in meats (or vegetables) and fully understand how they improve our health is far, far from true.

I'm not talking about "magic" compounds or anything... but just that our body functions optimally on a wide variety of nutrients, of which we study only a relative handful.

Even for things we know of, like how important the iron in beef is -- would lab-grown beef contain it as well? Would it come "by default" or would it have to be specifically included?

[1] https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/12/the-science-of-chi...
Define "tech"?

Nintendo was founded in 1889.

As just one counter-example; I'm sure there are plenty more/earlier: Siemens was founded in 1847 (edit: by building telegraph equipment and infrastructure).

Edit: I'm sure there must have been earlier companies involved in "tech" that are still relevant? Maybe let's think about "tech" as "information technology" companies?
No, we're their numbers...
Agreed, this is not a factory job for a few dollars here and there.
More like the difference between beer and kombucha, no? Liquor would be more akin to THC concentrates. I don’t think the effects of CBD are comparable to THC with respect to getting “high”, though I don’t know much about the other cannabinoids. Are you speaking from firsthand experience?
That's a great point. Similarly it's also a great opportunity for them to push the limits of reusability. A rocket failure with a paying customer's payload is Very Bad. But the risk tradeoffs look a little different if it's your own payload and you already have an assembly line churning out replacements
The new Android 11 power menu screen has been a life changer for me. I now control my lights with my phone 90% of the time since it's literally one power button click away, and I always have my phone on me.
Alexa Play notifications gets all manner of crazy for me
> The days where "being in IT" made you a rockstar that could command a premium in individual negotiations are, best I can tell, way in the past.

Are you kidding? Salaries have never been higher in tech. Senior engineers make more than $400k (sometimes way more) at Google and other large companies.

It is likely that engineers at FAANG companies would make less money if they join a union, because the union would level people out by negotiating a standard salary for workers at similar levels at all companies. I haven't seen anyone refute this.
Yeah, but all the mid-sized cities (and suburban towns) on the news that aren't in my area are indistinguishable from small towns in the middle of nowhere.
This is anecdotal, but one thing I have noticed about Californians is that there is a sense that government inaction is worse than government action. In other words, if there is some problem (real or perceived), the state can't simply do nothing about it. And, the politicians of California are enthusiastic about creating new bureaucracy to enforce the newly minted laws. Which they usually pay for by creating some specific tax/fee on some specific transaction or type of product, which then creates more complexity and bureaucracy.
When you smuggle cocaine and get caught, you can be sentenced for tax evasion, since cocaine is used as a local anaestethic for eye operations.
This is exactly the experience I’ve had at American national parks. Signs don’t state the time but distance and the envelope drop off is used extensively. This is coming from someone that did a road trip through all 48 continental states over a 3 month period and we camped all the time and only stayed in hotels/motels once a week.
I'm going to focus on this specific kind of authoritarian government, the Leninist one-party state.

The main reason why it lasted so long in China is because it is now operating in the economic system and condition it was designed to work under.

Indeed, this system of governance was designed by Lenin and his cronies precisely to operate under and regulate State Capitalism. It's not designed to work with a planned economy, or with a completely capitalist economy, or with an agrarian economy, but explicitly with State Capitalism (see: NEP).

Secondly, it's not actually supposed to last. This kind of government was designed to last more or less 70 years under the correct economic system, it wasn't designed to last forever.

China happens to be a case of the government system operating in exactly the correst economic system during the period where its supposed to work.

The rest of it is just typical "democratic" centralism, self-criticism, a strong ideological backing, and the ability for flexibility and reactivity at the local level, as well as a good dose of fear.
Levitating Moon Lamp
>> literally every second vehicle you see is a campervan

Sounds like a driving hell. Clarkson would be beside himself.
The probability of getting this exact combo may be 1 in 42,375,200, but the probability that you would have brought this combo at least once over the monthly competition's 11 year history is about 1 in 300,000. And also presumably the probability of humans selecting this particular combo is quite high due to the nice pattern.
It's really a lot more normal than I expected it would be so soon. It's very common to see people standing in public smoking weed, while it's almost always illegal to drink alcohol in public.

Friends in Toronto don't even buy a bottle of wine for a Friday night dinner with friends anymore, they buy weed.

Just the other day I was with a group of people who went out of their way to hide the beer cans they were walking with as a Police car drove past. They were openly smoking a joint the entire time.

> Like are senior members of society such as judges, doctors, military officers, teachers, politicians, etc completely comfortable smoking cannabis in public or would that still cause some surprise if they were that casual about it?

I don't think it's common to see people like that drinking alcohol in public, and weed feels kind of the same now.

From a legal standpoint, anywhere you can smoke a cigarette, you can smoke weed.
Here's a more visual website with built-in search: https://skins.webamp.org/