skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Huh? After the build server checks out the code, write malicious code to the source files directly just before the compilation step. No merge conflicts or breaking changes unless the added code failed to compile. It's reasonable to guess they had access to the source from the build server, so they could reproduce this environment themselves and test on their own.
There may or may not be some interesting reasons for choosing rust, but also the original article does not even include Rust in the title. It seems like Rust is mentioned solely for attention in this case. Would "A better way to search through academic literature" have been popular? Probably. How about "A better way to search through academic literature written in Java"? I assume not.

Regarding moderation, its a thankless task which I don't envy and its hard to draw a line over nitpicky article titles when one has been voted in already.
> The update might not be "forced" in its installation

It's forced passive-aggressively. Update notifications are sent daily, sometimes 2-3x in a day. There's no opt-out or blocking the system notification. Users can only defer and the defer options change each time.
I agree. I was just pointing out my example as the case this kind of story may be aimed at helping to change.

Baltimore inner city. No amount of well-intentioned BLM protest is going to change the day to day lived experience of someone in that environment. It has to be change in the community itself.
No, scarfs don't work.
Now you see why social media is so powerful. People just bitch and do nothing about this stuff, it's the perfect tool for pacification. Right now I'm bitching but next I'm going to go play video games, so you can see how it works even when you know it's there.
The article says they realized the error Tuesday and did nothing about it till the residents staged a protest. It very much seems like they were hopping it would blow over.
Lightning strikes aren’t evenly distributed on the globe. Carmack is a skyscraper, the average human is a normal tree.
"Single most important", even if technically true, can also be misleading.
Well, yes, no, and maybe.

It depends on the giver and on the receiver; and therefore how healthy the relationship/exchange is. Let me explain:

* if the receiver is a narcissist/sociopath, for starter they won't value the "gift" received, nothing will ever be enough, and they always seem to attract plenty fo givers

* if the giver had the disease to please whereas their own worth is depended on being told "good job" or similar, it will eventually deteriorate since in the mind of the giver, what they give will always be > what they receive and won't end well.

* Then there's victimhood chic, where people feel that they need help on everything 24/7 and becomes a co-dependent relationship between them and - slowly but steadily - the entire world; and rapidly reaches a point of impasse since the needs keep escalating and the help keep diminishing

Buddha had the 4-part solution:

1. Help yourself

2. Climb a mountain, tell nobody

3. More suffering is needed

4. The enemy is a wonderful teacher
Our bodies are composed of information too.

LOL basically you have to accept that our current scientific understanding is that our minds are embodied constructs (your mind doesn’t exist in any meaningful way without your brain, which is a physical organ and fundamentally and essentially integrated with the body).

Thought itself is embodied.

Your argument proves the necessity of physical contact for human health.

Our biologies - our brains and bodies - require the information (chemical impulses, electrical impulses, etc) provided by our senses when embodied physical touch, sight, sound, the body heat of another person, etc, occur.

Unless a perfect simulacra of physical human interaction (including the ability for us to move our own physical bodies) was created, there will always be a lack of the information (consider the chemicals released by exercise, by a hug, and impact of said chemicals on the brain, the combination of chemicals from eating with the chemicals of being close to someone you like) which our embodied minds require for health.

You’d have to put a brain in a vat and feed it every single electrical impulse and chemical it would normally receive from being part of the body.

Otherwise you lose information and god knows what happens.

I don’t deny the value of interaction via the Internet, etc.

To imply it is anywhere near replacing the information density of embodied physical contact is just a sign of a lack of information - education - about all this stuff.
I hear ya. My maternal grandfather died of Alzheimer's, and my mom died of Frontotemperal Dementia at 67. I'm worried I'll get one of those, especially the latter. I'm hyper vigilant about myself as well.
Unreliable narrator [0] is literary device that any writer can chose to use, it has nothing to do whether the described events are facts or fiction: it can be used for both. I don't think at all that 1984 uses this technique, but if it did it could be interpreted that Smith was receiving mild torture but describing it as brutal.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreliable_narrator
Well before 2000, since at least the Gulf War
It is a tax on money after the first $30M, so that is

$20M * 0.004 = $80,000

Which does actually mean my numbers are off, in that I accidentally calculated the guy with $50M in wealth having to pay $800K in wealth tax, and he actually only has to pay $80K. So, thank you for pointing out that this proposed tax was even more trivial for anyone that it would have affected than I'd originally thought.
I understand that. In aggregate, it’s not a large additional amount for the state of California. How is it meaningful outside of CA insisting they would like to have it?
I highly recommend both books by Sanjoy Mahajan (who has a background in theoretical physics), especially “Street-Fighting Mathematics: The Art of Educated Guessing and Opportunistic Problem Solving”.

http://www.sanjoymahajan.com/works.htm
Yep, I also stuck with AltaVista for a couple years (or maybe Fast? Long time ago) because the I didn't find Google's results significantly better. I don't think it was the operators. In the late 00's Google's operators were the +traditional +plus +to +and +terms. They didn't introduce them immediately? Boy I was pissed when Google extracted that into 'verbatim mode'
That crosses into personal attack, which is not an effective way to advocate for kindness, and also not allowed on HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
It’s a difference in fundamental values.

As a thought experiment, ignore the moral implications of tracking and look at things in purely economic terms. From that perspective, tracking is sort of like a charge for using the Facebook app. Since Apple forbids apps from disabling functionality if the user declines tracking, they’re effectively forcing Facebook to provide their service for less compensation. If this were an actual paid service and Facebook were being forced to let the user opt out of payment, you wouldn’t just say, “Making a payment setting default to free but still allowing the user to change it leaves the user in control. Facebook objects to this because nobody wants to pay money, so nobody is going to turn it back on.”

Of course, that argument is totally invalid if you believe privacy is a right. In that case, it’s fundamentally illegitimate for Facebook to treat it as a form of payment in the first place. That’s the view espoused by the EU with the GDPR and California with the CCPA. It’s the view Apple has explicitly made into a tagline (“Privacy is a fundamental human right”). And it’s a popular view, so Facebook can’t just go out and argue they’re being short-changed. Instead, they’ve made the economic argument only in terms of indirect claims about unnamed smaller websites supposedly being unable to survive – while muddying the waters with vague warnings about “freedom” and “forced updates”, and trying to insist that tracking is actually a benefit to users. It’s a largely incoherent argument, because they can’t say what they really believe: that privacy is not a right.
Well... plants breathe CO2, so. :)

I actually wonder if, in 100 years, how the oxygen content will increase if this greening continues?

It'd be wild to consider a 27% oxygen environment on Earth in the year 2100. Which would also cause problems of its own, as I imagine you might have a higher risk of fires, since you have more available oxygen.
Agreed. Want to gently critique:

> sadly we're tied to these primitive bodies

Our bodies (and the sensations and emotions produced by them) are not primitive. They’re super sophisticated and we are nowhere near being able to replicate them.

There’s interesting work btw on the fundamentally intertwined nature of emotion and “rational” thought.
Foxconn tells Wisconsin it never promised to build an LCD factory
https://medium.com/race-class-history/tibet-the-dalai-lama-f...
> History does not show this to be the case at all, The World is becoming a better place for everyone [1]

Driven predominantly by growth, which will taper off. We are an unusually explosive period of growth at the moment, and it's already starting to recede. Growth is fueled in many cases by population expansion which has almost completely stalled in many places.

For an introductory read on the topic, I recommend Thomas Piketty's Capital in the 21st Century.

> The problem here is the fact you are not pushing for everyone to "give", giving is a voluntary act, taxation is compulsory done under the explicit threat of violence. It is not an act of "giving" it is an act of taking.

I believe that the taxes you pay were never your money to begin with. I'm not giving the government my money, the government is ensuring that society has what it needs to care for everyone. The mechanism that it uses to do this needs to tap into either wealth or streams of finances, but neither is theft or taking from what I see. An analogy, salmon ladders in dams allow an important resource to flourish and don't generate power. You might call that 'theft' or 'taking' power from the dam. I see it as 'never the dams to begin with'. (In case it's not clear, the water is money, you are the dam. Are you entitled to all the water that flows to you? You say yes, I say no, we disagree but I don't think there's an objectively correct answer.)

Counter to the opinion that taxes are theft, I believe that austerity is theft. We can agree to disagree here if you'd like.
This is basically an article about a meniscus study with some background. Why the hell would that be relevant?

It’s bringing up controversy out of nowhere that’s probably getting that comment the reception it’s getting.
> Cloudflare runs a sandboxed V8 runtime in-process with its Nginx servers

Maybe nitpicking, but that's not quite right. The Workers Runtime is a separate process from nginx and is inside a heavy second-layer sandbox separating it from the rest of the system. Multiple Workers Runtime instances exist on each machine to serve different tiers of customers, and each instance may additionally create further subprocesses to provide extra sandboxing adaptively.

Here's a diagram: https://blog.cloudflare.com/mitigating-spectre-and-other-sec...

(In that diagram, the "Inbound/Outbound HTTP Proxy" boxes are, at least at present, nginx, but the big middle box is a new server architecture written from scratch.)
There's a difference between "elective" and "useless".

Cosmetic surgeries are elective, where as surgeries that the patient is made to believe will help them with an ailment but wont, are useless.
Rather like the SF earthquakes, the surest indicator is the time elapsed since the previous one. But, like the earthquakes, knowing that ones is overdue doesn't make it arrive on time.

Financial crises tend to be cascade failures. One previously-sound institution blowing up takes out another that was owed money from it, and so on. The response of pumping money into the economy like moderator coolant into a failing nuclear reactor works, but makes everyone uncomfortable. And maybe one day the crisis will outrun the pumps.
I read your comment a few times and didn't understand what had happened at all. I figured it all hinged on the term innovator's dilemma, since you used it a few times. So I looked it up.

Wow. Mind blown.

I think we're all familiar with disruption, but Innovator's Dilemma poses a theory or framework as to why it happens. It's rather brilliant and seems to fit every case of market disruption I can think of.

Incumbents serve existing markets and don't care about the small markets served by disruptive startups. They're making small, iterative improvements to their product.

Disruptive tech eventually hits parabolic improvement and by this time the incumbent can't catch up.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Innovator%27s_Dilemma

The competing S-curve idea is brilliant.

Thanks for sharing your anecdote and helping me learn something fundamental today.
>I cannot believe it can reverse them

Yeah definitely, I wasn’t trying to claim it was some sort of panacea. I’d be surprised too if it helped cure something like Alzheimer’s.

Still, we’re learning surprising things about how our bodies work every day, and how seemingly unrelated parts are actually very interdependent. For example, we’re now seeing that the bacteria in our guts, our microbiome there, has a range of ways it maintains our health beyond just serving our digestive tracts.
I don’t play games, but reading this commentary made me laugh!
They just censored Greenwald so much he quit so .. funny that
Took me a few minutes to figure it out. chipotle_coyote comment make sens if the tax is 800k.
50m*0.04 = 2m = 800k+600k+600k
The tax is not 800k but 80k though. So it should be 80k+960k+960k.

So you could pay the tax, draw out $960K a year (I mean, you can live on that, right? Not a hardship?), and still have another $960K left over.
I skimmed through the article, and seems similar to literate programming: https://github.com/gicentre/litvis

Would be grateful if anyone could explain the significant differences between the two.
This has been studied in game theory terms.

The best strategy seems to be to give people the benefit of the doubt initially, being kind and altruistic without reservation. But as soon as they don’t respond in kind, you update your strategy immediately and stop extending any generosity beyond baseline courtesy. The ball is in their court now. If they switch from selfishness to altruism, then you can match them. Otherwise, don’t let yourself be exploited.

I’ve found this approach has simplified many social decisions for me. Even things like whether to say hi to a neighbor passing on the sidewalk. I used to not always be sure of the best way to handle these situations. If you give a hearty greeting and are ignored, you feel lame and rejected. If you ignore them and it turns out they are friendly, they could see you as unfriendly, or they might also be on the fence, waiting to see what you do, and by ignoring them you miss out on establishing a friendship that could be valuable to both of you in the long run.

Now it’s easy: I say hi the first time I see someone and treat them warmly. If they aren’t friendly back, I don’t worry about it. I simply ignore them now unless they make an effort to change the dynamic (happens more than you might think, actually).

This way you don’t miss out on the good people, don’t sweat the bad/manipulative people, and remain flexible in case someone was just feeling shy or having a bad day. Game theory ftw!
Isn’t slowing it the whole point, especially now with vaccines in the horizon? Slow it enough so that

1) hospitals aren’t overwhelmed and

2) less people die unnecessarily
On the other hand, search engines of those times gave you what you asked for, not what it decided was best for you. That option is gone now, and searching for many niche topics is no longer possible. If that's what you're looking for, it might as well be 1990.
This is easy to resolve by staggering doses which I know at least other hospitals are doing.
That should definitely be a factor considered, especially in any area where a doctor shortage could occur. But a month sounds like a long time for <35 years olds in good health.
The US is an anti-majoritarian country of the elites that has enough advertising to convince people that they feel free while the elites control every aspect of their lives. While there are levels to this, it would be a huge mistake to regard this place as fundamentally good outside of a few sentences snipped from the declaration of independence.
Very much so, and it receives little attention, while the consequences receive a massive amount, and are often targeted as what needs addressing, rather than the underlying problem.
Calling a game's bugs to be of the "Bethesda" type only tells me that its a mess of a game.
Algorithm? They probably mean a HR spreadsheet.
Thanks for your fantastic explanations!
From an HN point of view Rust is so frequently discussed that it's probably better not to orient a submission like this in that direction—it will probably get sucked in the generic direction, and the diff here (new academic search engine) is more interesting.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
I've had none of the issues you mentioned above.

I've had some graphical issues sure, and a bad guy spawned inside a car once. That's in 80h so far in the game.

Everyone's experience is different, but don't say people don't pay attention. If they break the immersion for you, just stay away from the game for a while. It was the exact same situation with The Witcher 3, took a good 6 months for it to get good.

But they are still supporting that game after what, 5 years? I'm absolutely sure they will with this aswell.
I think we do have those organizations with trust.

If you want facts only news, go to apnews or reuters. They are the mastheads of impartiality, or at least as much as possible with humans.

However, the NYT is what I consider as investigative journalism that includes informed speculation. A lot of stories that otherwise never would have seen the light of day were broken by the NYT, however at the time of publishing there was a degree of uncertainty given the nature of the story. The uncertainty means they could be wrong, even if the odds are high at 90% correct. However, I would argue both are valuable, just understand which you are reading.
I understand that. In aggregate, it’s not a large additional amount for the state of California. (Most of CA’s income is aggregated from many sources.) How is it meaningful outside of CA insisting they would like to have it, in a way that precludes the taxed entity from claiming they have a meaningful use for it?
Posting one and linking to the other in the comments, as you did, is the best way.
When you are kind to others, that tends to create a connection and a shared space with others. You belong more.

But what if you only make anonymous donations, or help others in ways that are "kind" but do not allow others to connect with you? What's the contribution of kindness as "morally positive actions", and the contribution of kindness as a "social(-izing) activity"?
Here in Germany everyone is wearing a mask within the mandated areas.
This is SUCH good advice. In college and for a few years out of college I was terrible about doing this. I had easily 30+ domains I carried for a few years (some I renewed, some I replaced with other "ideas"). After thinking about it a lot I realised that spending money makes me feel like I've accomplished something without having to really do any "work". I had to break the same habit when it came to buying things in general, I used "retail therapy" to make myself feel better and feel like I was solving a problem. Oftentimes buying that thing was not necessary for the change I really wanted to make but it made me feel like I was making an effort when really I was just throwing away money.

Domain names are the same way, I would purchase a domain for a project I dreamed up in my head thinking that buying the domain would motivate me to work on the project (wouldn't want to throw away that money after all right? right?). All it did was give me the endorphin rush I desired and then let me go back to doing whatever I was doing (which was not working on said project).
Why not just move to a place like Idaho or Wyoming instead? You can have it right now instead of dreaming about it.
Yes, people love stories like the space pen vs the pencil. The supposedly educated engineer getting shown up by the clever average joe with common sense. There's always someone smarter than you, but see well actually they're not that smart because they're not street smart.
> Covid is pretty contagious, but you really need to be around someone for ~15 minutes to have a good chance of infecting them

...if you are the only one around them who is infectious.
First impression is positive; relevant results and a reasonably straight-forward UI. I appreciate the warning about the slow-loading graph (which did load after a minute or two).

Two things that might be tweaked:

* The search didn't behave in an ergonomic way: I typed a query ("graph neural networks") and great relevant stuff came up immediately in the dropdown. When I hit enter, however, I got an error that read "Invalid search: Check your spelling, enter a DOI, or another paper identifier
or." I would have expected my action to take me to a search results page that listed what I saw in the dropdown (which I regard as a preview of the top hits) so that I could peruse the selection carefully.

* I wanted to load a paper to take a look at it and it took me a while to realize that I could click the "Yes" above "Open Access" to download it. Since one of the big use cases for a site like this is the eventual consumption of these papers, I suggest making a "read/download paper" call to action more explicit.
Most of the people in the USA denying mask use are right wingers who choose to listen to politicians rather than scientists, that's the 90% problem, not what you're pointing out. Their leaders tell them masks don't work and they listen. Others listened to scientists and we're better for it but if half the country is ignoring it, it greatly reduces the effectiveness of masks. The CDC backtracked within a month or two that masks could be a good idea even homemade ones to limit the aerosols. To say anything else is nitpicking, we've have 6 months and people still deny it. Nothing you pointed out would have changed it since Trump double downed on not wearing a mask and his luddites followed behind him.
Yeah, this was my reaction as well. The reason I found Caliphate interesting was not the details of Chaudhry's story, which I experienced as were portrayed as dubious and in need of verification throughout; I certainly finished the podcast feeling uncertain whether Chaudhry had actually done any of the things he claimed.

Instead, the reason I've recommended this podcast to friends is that it spends most of its time on a fascinating exploration of the journalistic process. How does reporter verify claims made by people about events in a war zone? The people you interview have a reason to lie to you, sneaking across borders doesn't generate passport stamps, and reliable records are hard to come by.

This latest news feels like an interesting addendum to all that; I'd have expected any other podcast publisher to do an additional episode or two covering the new evidence and grappling with what that changes about the conclusions one can draw (certainly Serial has done a number of updates on new evidence about its past stories).

That said, my sense is that the NYT is taking this extreme action in part because they in retrospect are unhappy with the fact-checking process for the podcast, and I could see that sort of concern motivating this type of retraction/disowning despite all the uncertainty the podcast itself presented.