skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That could explain it, but it doesn't make it any less crazy. I'm tempted to use K-for-Kelvin in my code now, just to fuck with anyone who works with a worse IDE or tries finding things with grep.
It's frustrating to me, watching this culture we've built where developers feel they need to be ashamed of making money from their work. There is absolutely no reason for you to feel the need to justify building a business off of your software product, but I can completely understand why you do.

Our "group" spends so much time and effort indoctrinating its members on this idea that profiting from your skills is a bad thing, and that the only true way to be a developer is to give your work away for free as Open Source. Even silly things like negotiating for a market rate salary from your employer are frowned upon as caring only for money.

But that's all backwards. There are good reasons to release your work product as Open Source, and those all share the quality that they give you or your business some tangible benefit. So it's simple: do the benefits of open sourcing your thing outweigh the downside? If yes, go for it. If no, don't. But don't spend even a second worrying about whether it's the "right" thing to do for silly moral reasons.

If there was one thing I could change about our industry, it would be to remove the 5 year Open Source Indoctrination brainwashing session you need to go through at University before entering it. Because we'd spend a lot less time being taken advantage of later in life.
Nowhere near "everyone" is on Twitter. I have to admit that I don't know a single person who is (I'm sure some of them are, it's not like I ask everyone if they use some specific platform).

The point is that a lot of media people is, and posting there gets you exposure. But as this group of people is much smaller than your proverbial "everyone", moving them off Twitter is a much easier affair.

I have often thought about what would happen if a small number of very high profile Twitter users with a wide reach to various different groups decided to set up their own servers (Mastodon perhaps) and asked their followers to go there. How many such high-profile users would you need before Twitter's momentum completely stops? I argue that that number is very small.
This is true in the short to medium run.

Trees and plants are net consumers of CO2 when they grow, but become neutral when they reach maturity, so they are more of a carbon buffer. The buffer can be freed when they burn or rot, both of which happen naturally.

The best way to permanently take away CO2 from the atmosphere is to cut off the trees and somehow store them where the CO2 cannot escape (and to free space for new trees to grow). Some of the carbon from dead plants is stored in the soils, but this takes a lot of time to do.

In the long run biofuels + carbon capture can be carbon negative.
> psuedo-intellectuals

This is so deliciously ironic.

> runs a psychiatry called "Lorien", lives in a group-housing-community called "Valinor"

Um...okay? What's your point? That those are funny names? No one gives a damn what they're called, and I fail to see what the problem is with running a psychiatry or living in a housing community. Do you also hate on ophthalmologists that run their own firms and college students living in community dorms too? Or what about all those monks and nuns that live in group housing and also practice medicine? Nothing about either of those things implies any amount of instability, or lack of adjustment.

> are his opinions on all the countless fields and topics he writes about (in implied expert capacity) worth listening to?

I don't think anyone is arguing that Scott is necessarily an expert of many of the subjects he covers, least of all himself. I think he's made it abundantly clear over the years that this is a side gig for him that he does for fun, and do broaden his understanding of the world. Even if he isn't an "expert", that doesn't mean he can't still do research and blog about it. Do you think that no one should ever talk or write about anything that they are not a world-class expert in? Cause that sounds really, really boring, and also basically impossible. From the first post on his new blog[0]:

> And finally, the highlight of my last blog was its loyal and active readership, who constantly corrected my errors, resolved my lingering questions, and inspired most of "my" best ideas.

To me, this doesn't sound like something a world-class expert would be saying. But hey, I'm not an expert on experts, so my opinion is invalid, right?

It's not my intent to convince you to like him, but I think you are exactly the type of person Scott had in mind when he wrote his first ever SSC post about emphasizing charity over absurdity[1]. It's okay if you don't like Scott's writing, and it's okay if you don't think he's worth listening to, but I just hope you slow down and try to genuinely understand why people might like his writing, and focus on those reasons for your argument instead of leaving an inflammatory comment making only very surface-level arguments. I would very much like to practice charity as well and genuinely understand why you don't like his writing, but when your argument boils down to "he's a neckbeard blogger who has opinions about many things", you're not giving me much to work with.

[0]: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/youre-probably-wonderi...
[1]: https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/02/12/youre-probably-wonderi...
Heard this but with with NSA agents instead of programmers :-)
I’ve found out that my VPS hoster mounts disk of my VM when I power it off and writes some config changes (which broke network because their scripts were buggy). That creeped me out, so I decided to encrypt my disks. So encryption is useful even for better stability in uncontrolled environments.
I'm not familiar with a distinction between a more common usage and a more jargony usage of those two words. Is there one? Actually, I don't think I really understand any usage of the word "humanist" very well.
I think its really going to boil down to how much it would hurt revenue for other industries in Australia to lose google revenue vs. how much revenue google would lose...
Yes, it briefly had this abomination of a logo before adopting a more sensible identity:

https://logodix.com/logo/715204.gif
Shooting yourself and then later going out to lunch is simply impossible; it is not a paradox.

A paradox is when two contradictory things are true at the same time.

The grandfather problem is a paradox if time travel is possible. If it isn’t possible then it is simply an impossibility.

> And for largely the same reason: both scenarios violate causality, so the universe can't be shaped that way.

So you agree that time travel is impossible. Great... we agree. However I was discussing this with someone who apparently thinks that it is concievable... I wasn’t merely making up impossible scenarios; I was demonstrating how their theory gives rise to paradoxical scenarios.
Please be careful where you sow milkweed..the plant contains and will leak latex ..this can cause skin burns/allergies and should get into eyes or mucus membranes.

[..] Thick, milky latex (sap) is present in all parts of the plant. ... Common milkweed, Asclepias syriaca, is native to North America and is one of the most important northern plants for the monarch butterfly. Monarch caterpillars and butterflies are bitter and poisonous to birds, due to a toxic alkaloid in the latex.[..]

[..] Caution: Do not get milkweed sap in your eyes (such as rubbing your eyes after touching the sap); wash your hands thoroughly after handling the plant. Also, some people may develop an allergic reaction when the sap touches the skin.[..]

And the welts and scars post latex exposure and dermal damage wont go away easily. It’s also painful.
Never mind shooting for the moon; they were very late to a cloud game that they should have owned because they were too busy shooting for the moon.
We need more surveillance. Call the NSA and CIA fast.
OTOH if you wanna see who planted the bombs, see who will profit later.
I don't get it. Do people not read the article first ?

There's no "deplatforming" happening here. DDoS-Guard is using IPs from Belize (a country in latin america) using a shell company there. That's against the contactual obligations. So the Latin America IP association (lacnic) is simply reclaiming the fraudulently assigned IPs.

Some of these IPs were used by Parler.

Please read the article first ....
I guess it depends. I use the Windows Terminal, and I have high astigmatism and myopia. I find it very readable using the Cascadia Code font. Btw I agree about dark backgrounds being less readable but I can’t get away with light backgrounds because of eye floaters.
Cargill open-sources Splinter, its ‘blockchain-like’ supply chain software
Google Escalates Dispute with Australia by Threatening Search Shutdown
Worth noting that Valve is one of the few companies that makes a conscious effort in favor of freedom of speech. They refuse to moderate for ideological reasons and not just cost.
The real problem is that WE, as a community, demand certain licenses from the tools we use. If Elasticsearch didn't have such a permissive license, we simply wouldnt have used it, it wouldnt have become popular, and there would be no demand for AWS to provide it as a managed service.

So is ES to blame for having a permissive license? Or is it AWS for making it trivial to use? Or are we to blame for dismissing any license that isn't OSI approved (and even then, we still snort at things like Affero GPL!)

IMHO, if there IS a "bad guy" in this situation, its us...
You could get into ethereum staking as they move to proof of stake. Obviously swapping BTC for ETH first
I was responding very specifically to "But why should the right to dox be the default? Why shouldn't respecting everyone's privacy be the default?". I'm not speaking in the context of the article because the article depends on a whole bunch of other articles that were deleted, not linked to, or not published:

> I think the New York Times wanted to write a fairly boring article about me, but *some guideline said they had to reveal subjects' real identities, if they knew them, unless the subject was in one of a few predefined sympathetic categories (eg sex workers)*. I did get to talk to a few sympathetic people from the Times, who were pretty confused about whether such a guideline existed, and certainly it's honored more in the breach than in the observance (eg Virgil Texas). But *I still think the most likely explanation for what happened was that there was a rule sort of like that on the books, some departments and editors followed it more slavishly than others, and I had the bad luck to be assigned to a department and editor that followed it a lot.* That's all. Anyway, *they did the right thing and decided not to publish the article*, so I have no remaining beef with them.
it does feel like the whole issue blew up so much because AWS & Elastic.co are unable to work together. We many never know the details, so can't say who's in the wrong here.
> there's no reason Kafka's starting experience couldn't be the same if someone cared enough to put the time and effort in

There's always a perverse incentive when the software provider's model is to monetize through support, consulting, and offering the software as a managed service. If it's too easy to run, then why would one pay for any of these services?
Also, the external pressures to be the first on the moon instead of the USSR we're quite high.
> Thats assuming they engage with the logic at all, which is an assumption you cant make

Even people with psychological conditions have the capacity to modify their behavior.

> preventing terrorism is generally considered better than just arresting people after it happened

That premise came out of 9/11 when the terrorists didn't care if they died. In ordinary cases such as these you don't need a precrime unit because catching them after the fact provides a deterrent that prevents them from doing it to begin with.

But also, the police already do that. They send under cover officers into extremist groups and get warrants to conduct surveillance on individuals suspected of plotting violence. Then they get arrested for the plotting violence, not for speech.

> Unless you are suggesting we ban all moderation, no echo chambers form due to selecting information sources you only agree with and information sources pandering

The largest sites could exclude only that which is illegal.

> censorship at least gets rid of the non true believers

Until you actually implement it and end up censoring a bunch of stuff which is true, preventing some other lie from being corrected. And then people find out about that happening and lose faith in the censors, start looking for "alternative" media that doesn't do that, and get sucked back into conspiracy theory land.

> the reason stuff like qanon spread so quickly is because they used sites like facebook

The reason it spread so quickly is that Facebook promoted it, because their algorithms reward controversy.

And that's the real problem. If you carry on promoting "engagement" there will just be some new conspiracy theory, which you don't even notice until there are already a million people sucked into it and somebody gets killed. Stop doing that and there is nothing to censor.
Carbon Engineering: We believe humanity can solve climate change.
What to Expect from the First Public Working Draft of WCAG 3.0
That would be an interesting experiment to determine if DDG, Bing, and the like could be viable enough alternative. If not, it would be an waking call to think about it.
The quality of comments on Slate Star Codex were part of what really made it great. (I assume Yates came to mind because of the comment to that Bruno post. That and many of the other comments to that post did a great job criticizing the argument that curious, intelligent people such as scientists must be irrepressible contrarians.) I hope that continues on Substack.
I think there are niche use-cases that would warrant the cost/complexity trade-off. Namely cloud infrastructure for databases where you might be processing large amounts and transferring all that data first to the CPU is pretty ridiculous.

I think the complexity problem is solvable. If you can build such a thing for memory, you can reuse the same general concept for storage like NVME/SSD/spinning disk. It’s entirely possible this is warranted even in consumer devices as quite a bit of OS operations deal with modifying/querying memory whereas doing offload can win you some serious wins (making the machine feel way more snappy/interactive + more powerful to execute things locally).

I don’t have hope for traditional CPU designers so the question is whether someone can both design a memory system with this power AND a computational model that makes this easy to adopt in major languages while offering a perf win (given that a memory fetch costs ~100ns for ~256 bytes). It’s challenging and unlikely to come from x86 land where back Hw compatibility is extremely important. The innovation may eventually come from mobile land (which is where Apple is coming from) where memory controllers are custom designed and part of the SoC anyway, changing with each revision, so the hard part remains again how you make this fast, efficient, able to handle multiple concurrent programs (or at least have the OS control coarsest which program’s memory accesses were being prioritized), and language integration (so you can hand off an algorithm and it would be executed without upending existing software design knowledge). The OS integration could be even more intelligent - if the process/thread is spending its time processing memory without returning results to the CPU, just put it to sleep until the result is available (separating memory access and CPU utilization, resulting in drastically better utilization of cycles rather than naively waiting for each memory stall one at a time).

So tldr I agree with you totally. This is not going to happen if memory manufacturers continue to go for the “cheap and large” memory route. I do see hope that such concepts may be explored if we get more innovation in the CPU space.
If you really want though, you can write a web server in a single python lambda:

(lambda flask:
(lambda app:
(app,
app.route('/')(
lambda: 'Hello World!'
)
)[0]
)(flask.Flask('__name__')).run()
)(__import__('flask'))

See https://gist.github.com/e000/1023982 for more horrible examples
Ask HN: How do you read and explore an undocumented codebase?
When working with a large third-party library which is open source or a large undocumented codebase left over by a previous developer, how do you go about understanding the codebase?
This case is likely going to be more hairy than AWS wants it to be.
What manual unlock codes? You mean the TOTP backup? It's documented. But she won't need if she has the rest.
It’s called reductio ad absurdum.

Absolute free speech would have to include ISIS, a group that would (and has) killed people for what they say.

If you admit that absolute free speech leads to illogical and impractical consequences, then the only remaining question is where to draw the line.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
The iconic lore is enough!

And a reboot EV means chance it is well made and overpowered.
You can try this https://krisp.ai/zoom-noise-cancellation/
I guess it depends on who’s managing your elk. I’ve been running elks stacks for just about 8 years in some form or another, AWS’ was very poor in availability compared to what it should have been.

There was a bunch of issues honestly, large messages got truncated, huge stalls in throughput (like 300-500ms of freezing), the fact that it was missing a bunch of features and was slower to query was just icing on the cake.
Yes in principle, but probably not for this idea. If a startup was really wanted to take this on, they would be very well funded. At that point, they could easily license/buy any IP monopolies owned by Google.
Aws has an advantage of the manpower. They can easily move ahead of origin and ES can never catch up.
My argument leans heavily in the fact that electronically magnifying a painting does not work for most, whereas amplified voices do. Otherwise everyone can just Google the paintings right? The magic is seeing it in real life. Which has practical limitations hampering the business case.
I suppose I opted in as a result of just clicking through some dialogues during install.

The only strong reason I have to keep using Firefox is to support ongoing development of an alternative to chrome's rendering engine on PC.
I shudder to imagine what the world of software would be like if discovering bugs in your code would limit your career prospects similar to how negative results or methodology errors do in scientific research.
Critical Security Vulnerabilities Discovered on the Amazon Kindle
Did you try this https://esc.sh/blog/wsl2-no-internet-vpn/?
How is "rationalist" pathetic? What's it's revealing of? In what ways does it signal that he's right? Did you even read why he uses that term? [0]

> the type of person who surrounds themselves with other hardcore Tolkien fans and makes subtle Tolkien references in everyday life don't tend to be what you'd call the most well-adjusted people

Yeah, God forbid I surround myself with people who really enjoy similar things as me and like to make references to pop culture. That would just be so unbearable! You must be a lot of fun at Comic-Con. I don't think most people would agree with you here, and it just makes you sound absolutely insufferable to be around.

> I just realized both the previous and the new name of his blog is an anagram of his name. Again, this sends a certain signal

I want to believe so badly that you're trolling here. I don't understand how or why using an anagram of your name sends any sort of "signal", it's just a fun way to come up with a name that means nothing. This might be one of the biggest reaches for something to be angry about that I've seen in a long time.

[0]: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/youre-probably-wonderi...

EDIT: fixed a typo
A much better description would be "distributing usage to others" instead of just "using".
Which is much better analogy for what is going on here.
Sorry, meta question. What exactly is a Launch HN Post? I found the first one (9mo ago, dang, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22767151 ) but it didn’t really describe the purpose.

The purpose seems to be obvious; a YC backed site is launching. The interesting consideration is whether these are actually fresh launches or just awareness campaigns.

Btw, cool biz. Makes sense. I’ve spent way too much time doing by hand what you’re providing an out-of-box solution for. Good luck!
Feed Sonama does some version of that. The distribution part. But that would work in Sonoma county. Sonoma is an Ag county. It means you can have a cow or pig in your backyard garden and that’s fine.(not exaggerating) Not so much in Bay Area where we have a housing crisis and no such thing as unused lots. Or electricity.

I know because I tried. Then there is liability, insurance and red tape and legal translations. It’s hideous and exhausting.
Why? Both are a disenfranchised voice complaining with violence. One might be more valid than the other, but that doesn't mean one is inherently better.
Neat site. Thanks for sharing! There’s an endless list of cool ideas being worked on. Searching through it all can be done in so many ways.
I wouldn't call this a strategic failure. Google is a big SpaceX investor.
A serious HW perf improvement will, generally improve everything, including shitty algorithms. There’s a reason that through the 90s and 2000s serious developers routinely ignored spending significant time optimizing code because the hardware doubled the speed of ALL code every ~12-18 months. So even though there are low-hanging fruit for software optimization, such low-hanging fruit can be missing from already heavily optimized code (eg games, scientific computations etc) and is orders of magnitude more expensive than “run this on newer HW for faster perf”. If you can do this “transparently” (max some OS/compiler integration and you can use the new Hw for perf wins), then the cost economics are powerful. If it’s a special-purpose piece of HW then it gets trickier and will be relegated to accelerating certain memory-heavy programs (like GPUs accelerate certain kinds of mass-data algorithms).
the problem is it doesn’t actually solve problems or improve lives in any real way. if they wanted to do that they’d give people mosquito nets and teach them how to read

it’s just corporate PR so people can fawn over them like your post and want to work there or use their products
I love the BMW system. The knob is very tactile and its always clear what exactly you're doing. The control is right by your hand, and you don't have to reach for anything. I've driven the Toyotas which have a touchscreen, and it feels much more vague, and often takes me a couple taps to get the desired outcome.
BotPenguin- A Free chatbot Creator Platform(no coding required)
Ah yes, Azure for Postgres. Where you can count on your weekly outages and issues!
You'd have to account for bit rot though
they missed cloud not because they were too busy. They thought of their internal cloud infrastructure as a competitive advantage to be kept to themselves. Very similar to the Intel's thinking of their own fabs which has brought Intel to the current failure.

Wrt. moonshots - one need to have huge political capital inside the company to carry the high risk of large investment. I.e. one has to be Jobs or Musk. Even Yang failed. How Nadella succeeded it is kind of a miracle. It looks like there are no people of that caliber at Google these days, and without it you have a CFO touting "investing for long term" which in CFO mind obviously means investment like buying real estate and not a technology moonshot.