skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Tesla didn’t care because there was no impact on them for their poor logging configuration until a regulator stepped in (as the costs were borne primarily by the customer).

They probably also do want cars with lifetime supercharging dead (which are primarily MCU1 vehicles).
On the other hand, that is a strength in that it's an excellent control for family environment, parents' socioeconomic status and educational attainment, neighborhood quality, etc.
It’s shocking to me that people can’t remember literally one year ago when among others Dr Fauci told us that wearing masks was ineffective in stopping the spread of the virus.

We understand why he did it, there was an absolute crisis of PPE and there was fear that medical staff wouldn’t be able to get any masks because of regular folks hoarding.

That’s fine. No one is denying that he’s a very smart, well-intentioned health scientist doing his absolute best to help the country.

But don’t pretend he didn’t say what he said.

He said it on 60 Minutes, and he explained why he said it months later to the Washington Post.

Here’s the real problem — despite his good intentions, when people in authority tell you that they had, or perhaps still have to, lie to you “for your own good” — that’s not a hallmark of a free society. That is the hallmark of an authority which considers the public a problem to be dealt with and it dissolves trust.
Many administrivia reasons.

It would be useful for me that I have some way to assign certain rights relating to me, to someone else.

I am not married, but I have been living with someone for 12 years, and neither of us has plans to change.

But legally, I don't know what happens when one of us meets a misfortune and the other needs to speak for us. Luckily in our case, we both have plenty of other blood relatives all alive and reachable and all on good terms with each other.

So, if say I am incapacitated, and some functionary at a hospital won't accept my partners decision about what to do, both my partner and the functionary can reach several other generally accepted proxies in the form of my mother, my brother, and even more cousins. My partner will be able to say what to do only slightly indirectly if not directly.

And we both have our own jobs with insurance and retirement savings so neither of us really needs to be legally acknowledged to receive benefits like military death benefits or retirements etc.

So for us we can pretty much get away with having NOT addressed these issues.

But they are real issues that generally should be addressed. A legal document on the books would provide a clean path to resolve a lot of potentially messy situations. What if our families didn't all like or respect each other? What if one or both of us had no known and/or reachable bood relatives? What if one of us actually needed to be recognized as a claimant on the others insurance or retirement or property like a house?

Probably a lot of such things could just as well be handled with legal documents other than marriages. Like if I take a job that has spouse insurance benefits, that could just as well be whoever I want to write on that form, rather than having it be determined by my marriage document.

But it would still be useful to have a catch-all document that expresses my wishes in any situation not handled elsewhere.
...and another person who completely misses the point, and don't understand why people eat meat.

Which delicious vegetarian dishes offer the same taste and texture as meat dishes?
You're point is, to me, the most important. But in addition when you hear a number like 70-75% it's pretty clearly an estimate or guideline. It's not as though he was sitting there looking at the number 82.71, where 82.70 is wholly inadequate and 82.72 is overkill and saying 70-75, he was setting a goal and then realizing it could be set higher.
The Palm Pilot Story (2019)
My friend who have constant problems with his teen girl and no with boy is exactly that case. He constantly takes issues with her make up - but had her in dancing group from childhood where makeup is basically required. Constant issues with interpreting her cloth sexually - while she did not understood that yet.

Taking issues with a lot of things that are clearly unfair. She does more sport then boy and have good grades, but somehow she is lazy because she did not went biking over weekend.
I didn’t experience anything like the grandparent post even in places with higher proportions of religious people in the US. I even attended catholic and Lutheran schools as a kid, and no one cared about my religion (or lack of).
What are these average temperatures? Why should I trust they are accurately computed? Why should I trust they are meaningful? Why should I trust that the model will hold and it's not just a bump? How do I know estimates of historical temperatures are accurate?

These are all questions for which the only two answers are to trust the scientific community or to essentially become a climate scientist yourself.

Just to be clear, please note that my intention is not in any way to call man made global warming into question - I fully believe that it is the most pressing concern for the global economic system. I'm only trying to point out that logic is not enough to accept even basic facts - you need a good deal of understanding of natural (climate vs weather, greenhouse effects) and human processes (the scientific community and its workings).
Apple, Hyundai, Kia talks on electric car hit speed bump
Interesting! While I realize I have seen those style cans, nearly all cat food cans in the US that I've seen are shorter than they are wide. There seem to be two standard sizes, both with the same height (I think; they might be slightly different, but close) but different diameters.
the average person does not think a car will last over 20 years... on average people keep theirs for closer to 10... what are you basing that idea off of?
It's especially bad when you consider one of the main selling points of an EV is simplicity and reliability. Or at least that's one of the main arguments I've heard over the years (there are lots of other reasons obviously).
When xmr.to existed, sure. Not anymore.
I disagree. Regulatory capture is a clear and present danger to the United States, and it is contributing to a breakdown in accountability across all sectors of the nation's economy and society.

So I offered it as an explanation for why the FDA could be well-respected and reasonably functional, while the United States fails to address some acute public health issues.

Things could be much worse; at least they don't turn a blind eye when huge sums of money are not involved. It's still very rare for a drug's approval to be pushed through via fraud, and there are a lot of diseases that need treating. They have a solid track record, even now.
> isn't divorce a pretty healthy outcome to a marriage?

It's a bit of a provocative way of saying things, but I am surprised at how conservative (in the social sense, not political) the other comments are, defending traditional family values and arguing that divorce is always a failure

Divorce can _absolutely_ be a healthy outcome to a marriage. If your marriage doesn't work after a time, the healthy option is to stop it. You can argue that you should try to "save your marriage"... but if neither you or your partner really wants to, why would you have this duty to try and salvage it rather than move on? At least if you don't have kids, as divorce tends to have bad impact on them apparently, although I think it's mostly because they're brought up in a society that teaches that divorce is failure and that a family is a mom and a dad.

Of course nobody is saying that divorce is "the most healthy" outcome, it's just "pretty healthy" in a whole range of situation, though not all. And there's divorce and divorce: sometimes it involves incredible drama, fighting and stress (not very healthy, although staying married probably would be worse in this case), and sometimes it's smooth, shake hands and go your own way.

Anecdotally: my parents divorced when I was ~15. It was smooth as far as I could see, although I imagine that unfun things happened that led to this. It made absolutely no difference to me, and I saw them bloom and be happier than I ever saw them: my father went from being a 9-5 robot to doing sports, be involved in local associations and take an unexpected interest in african art. My mom started doing photography and developped a passion for dance. I entirely credit their divorce for how much happier and interesting they got!
I have an original retina MacBook Pro, ordered the day they were announced, before the presentation was over, in fact. Works fine. I have ThinkPads that are even older. Tesla was cutting corners, no doubt about it. As the regulatory burden increases, they'll adjust. It is an interesting idea though, a first-order example of regulation moving a market.
The average vehicle in America is sold after 6.5 years. Tesla may consider their duty lies only to that first buyer, not to any thereafter.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2017/01/04/passing...

The irony is that hybrid/electric vehicles are being owned longer than fossil-fuelled vehicles before being sold.

This is definitely a Tesla mistake, probably simply owing to lack of corporate experience and long-term planning. Could even be poorer access to (specialized auto-grade) parts owing to their small scale in the past.
https://old.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/8vxnz0/psa_for...
And they'll replace their meat with what? More sugar? Bread? Sugary bread? I think you underestimate how big of a deal food is to people. I believe that any change will be towards food that's even worse for people.
> my answer to the animal cruelty argument is just to buy the top-shelf, pasture-raised meats.

So the solution is to pay more. Got it.
I don’t think it’s even in the middle. News organization make money on fear and anger. So most of them seem to agree that you should be afraid of angry about something. Interpolating between news sources still leaves you at risk of fear and anger that in reality is entirely unwarranted.
"OpenPOWER ISA developed from PowerPC, with the RS6000in the 90s.

- NUMA approachIRaw brute-force performance pissed all over the competition at the time"

and

"Libre-SOC combines the best of historical processor designs,co-opting and innovating on them (pissing in the back yard of every incumbent CPU and GPU company in the process)."

This sounds like a lot of ego-driven cheat-beating.
The people using my system never skim my document. Lawyers tend to scrutinize it. As for the document being a war-and-peace epic yes, this happens. Mostly because people cannot write technical documentation. The hugest system can be distilled down to a single diagram which should require no words of explanation.

By way of example - here's a conceptual design for an insurer wishing to participate in a panel of protection providers.

https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/images/consulting/conceptual_de...

If you're in this world all of it is self-evident, none of it a surprise, and you understand the flow. That document leads to other more detailed designs that each address one distinct rectangle in that image.

At some point all of this will become a specification. Again the immensity of that depends on the ability of the authors. On their ability to manage complexity, and their skill as technical writers.

Either way yes, when the wheels fall off that document becomes the truth, the one everyone goes to to settle disputes. And with a capable team it never gets to that because the documentation is succint and agreed to, and what is delivered matches what was specified.
It's mentioned in the readme, but CSM doesn't provide any information as to the resources being accessed, just the service and action, so the best this tool can do is generate policy with wildcard resources.

Not ideal, but I guess it's better than running your system with a wide open policy.
No, it's not like saving lives, because whether someone is alive or dead is agreed upon by all. This is a positive statement.

Whether a view is bad or not is a normative judgment, not an objective fact.
I agree. The marketing innovation that has made plant meat successful (at least where I am) has been marketing it to meat eaters in the meat aisle, stripping away the vegetarian identity association
Are you sure it was dust from the Sahara? I used to get this in Panama, I always assumed it was soot from traffic and fires.
Heise.de published a description for an open source holographic microscope which can generate 3d views.

This said, mine doesn‘t work, and the guys behind it aren‘t really helpful or friendly. Physicists, what can I say?

Sunk 300€ into it, misses some crucial information on calibration and useage according to me. However, others seem to have gotten it to work, so maybe I am not the brightest candle on the cake…

https://github.com/holmos-ipm/

https://www.heise.de/ratgeber/Holographie-Mikroskop-mit-Rasp... (paywalled)
FWIW, I enjoy eating meats, and do not feel very concerned about the moral aspects. However, I still tried some Impossible foods just because of the novelty, and found that it would be a fine substitute in many cases.

Many people who drive electric cars now do so because they are “cool.” A large part of that is thanks to Tesla, making electric cars that are comparable and maybe even simply superior to gas cars, depending on how you look at it. The hype behind impossible foods may be largely unwarranted, as great plant-based foods are already available. However, the thing that is great about impossible foods and similar ventures is that it doesn’t ask you to compromise, and it’s cool and trendy. Someone may not care about the moral side of things and yet will probably still feel enticed to try it just to see, and if it’s good enough they could legitimately switch on a whim. This is not the same as asking someone who has eaten a diet involving one thing for decades and asking them to replace it with totally different things.

Many people have more strongly held convictions about having to change their diet in ways that impact their eating experience than they have convictions against the actual concept of plant-based diets. These meat alternatives could be very useful if a plant-based diet is to be the future (perhaps alongside lab grown meats?)
Why We Fight over Fiction
It’s funny how a little line on a graph can flood you with emotion. I looked at the little line for 10-14 years and seeing that it’s not zero..
That’s one product of animals... not the one I was referencing though. You might consider doing a search for “primary sources of fertilizer” before down voting me.
I suspect it will be like a lot of older car electronics are now. Aftermarket parts makers will start making drop in replacements to fill the need.
Yep, I wrote the tool to help narrow down network problems at our bare metal hosting provider. Our system used lots of long lasting TCP connections, 1:1 between systems; persistent packet loss was problematic.

For some reason, they wouldn't let me have access to router link stats ;)
The main issue with relying on education, teaching fact finding, the scientific method, etc., is that the average person is honestly just not very intelligent or capable of the level of thought that we'd be asking from them. If politicians, major companies, are allowed free reign to blanket them in partisan propaganda and disinformation, no matter how much we try to educate them, they're not going to be able to see through it, reject it, and come to their own decisions based on data, logic, first principles, etc.
If the 3d printed steak tastes anywhere near as good as one taken from a well-treated animal, yes.
>True plant-based food should have a health benefit at least, especially over meat.

Why?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26050877

TL;DR: My bank wouldn't let me use their online banking because I had run a Tor service sometime in the past.
TIL I live in "southern Europe" (Germany).
I honestly don’t know what you mean by the “swoosh” - the initial fade animation?
Ask HN: Burned out and almost financially independent. What to do next?
Hi

I am 34yo, have worked 10 years in high demanding tech/finance companies (both startups and large companies) as a software engineer. For the most part, I didn’t enjoy the corporate world. My last stint is particularly grueling, I work 70 hours a week in a fire dumpster and am severely burned out.

Reflecting more deeply on my experience, the root of all issues is that I didn’t like any of my bosses, and I’ve had several. The feeling of being owned, constantly pushed and pressured to deliver for irrelevant deadlines, and having to take orders is just something not in my nature. I think it might be some sort of inherited trait. My father, who has been a very small solo entrepreneur his entire life, used to say “I had opportunities in the corporate world that would have made me 10x more successful, but I wouldn’t trade my independence for anything else in the world“. Growing up it felt incredibly silly to hear that, and I remember making fun of him for the "lost" opportunities, now I get it.

I am trying to understand what I can do in life to insulate myself from people who can control me and make me feel miserable. Having always had this goal of independence in mind, through luck and aggressive savings I amassed $3M in liquid net worth (nearly all in index funds, no TSLA here), and my spending is low, at $40k a year (excluding employer-subsidized healthcare).

I just need to figure out what to do next. I feel I still have value to bring to this world, but, having been a corporate soldier my whole life, I have become so conditioned to being just a highly functioning cog in a big machine, that I have no idea what I could do. If I close my eyes and dream, I see myself having a solo online business (not consultancy though) that I can conduct while living a slow-travel lifestyle around the world, staying in one or two places a year. However, I cannot think of a single business idea that I could pursue on my own, my skills are heavily specialized in backend development/SRE, and again I severely lack ideas.

No plan on ever having kids or getting married, and my partner is supportive of any decision I take.
The benefit of being protected by the divorce. Divorce is here to protect the "weaker" (sorry probably not the right word) party.

For example if they have kids and one of the parent stops working to raise the kids, divorce will make sure that person is not left without anything.

There is another civil union (the PACS) and as far as I know the main (and maybe only) differences is that PACS do not get divorce (you can part much more quickly, each party just get their own stuff and that's it) and something related to ineritance taxes. So that's the main reasons why people marry I guess :)

To be fair, I'll add that it's also not legal to marry religiously if you are not married civilly, so some people probably get married civilly just to be able to marry religiously.
> But don’t rob yourself of trying to understand why everyone else doesn’t want to use desktop software to get a book on their Kindle.

Yes, that's a good point. I originally had "Why would you want to go without Calibre when it's so multi-functional?", but changed it to "Who knows why you'd want …" in an aim to sound less confrontational. I seem instead to have gone the other way!
He also said it was a mistake later, owned up for it, as you describe.
They also deliberately went with a non-automotive grade screen (Innolux G170J1-LE1), knowing that the 17 inch size would make the car stand out.

And, I assume, knowing what that would mean later.

https://www.thedrive.com/tech/27989/teslas-screen-saga-shows...
Leadership Fantasies (2014)
> it is intriguing to note that Dr Kabatek and Dr Ribar found one type of couple who seem immune to the daughter effect: those in which the father grew up with a sister.

Can anyone with grown daughters and a sister speculate as to why this may be the case?
In my experience, the most outspoken pod-dwellers sneak out at night to get crappy McD with extra bacon. It’s a bit like these anti-gay preachers being caught having gay sex.
I'm sure that's a factor, but I imagine it's more complicated than that.
"Each edition of the local paper packaged news, opinions, sports, and entertainment. The fun and widely read sections in the back half of the newspaper funded the important but less profitable ventures in the front half. Without the newspaper bundle, journalists wouldn’t have been able to conduct original investigative reporting. But backed by the security of its business model, journalists acted as the Fourth Estate, defined as the group with the explicit power to advocate for policies and the implicit ability to frame political issues."
> Maybe that's part of the issue of why this is not a more popular topic yet

I do think it's kind of under-discussed (it's not the only thing, a lot of niche topics like this, especially around food, don't really get covered much unless they're popular). The thing is that the people who do talk about it are usually in opposition to the meat industry, so most of the articles you find online are going to be written with a pretty obvious bias. As someone just looking for more information, that might bother you or it might not.

The EWG has decent stats online that are presented neutrally and that you can parse through if you're trying to dig into some of the details of how all of this works: https://farm.ewg.org/region.php?fips=00000&progcode=total

The vast majority of subsidies are towards "feed" products like corn and soy. In a lot of ways, corn's impact in particular has been a lot bigger than just on meat -- we saw a big shift towards corn-based products (including ethanol) that came as a result of this massive increase in resources towards both producing corn and researching uses for it.

You can also see the impact in products like soy, which, coincidentally with being one of the second-most subsidized foods in the US, is pretty cheap in the US. If you're looking for a meat "substitute" that is actually easy to find at much cheaper prices than meat, tofu can be a very cheap replacement, at least in my experience. I'm being a little bit deceptive there, because most soy is used for animal feed, it's not like we're just throwing funds into tofu. Even there, the primary reason we're subsidizing soy is to make it easier to raise meat. But it does still have some impact outside of the meat/dairy industry.

In comparison, our subsidies towards vegetables and fruits are basically nonexistant (I think ~50 million a year for "specialty crops", but I might have my numbers wrong). It's actually kind of startling how cheap fruits and veggies in the US are given how few resources our government puts into encouraging their production.

If you're curious, you can also look into checkoff programs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_checkoff_program) that basically boil down to a mandatory tax on commodities like beef/dairy that is then redistributed to organizations that promote those commodities wholesale, rather than specific brands.

Checkoff programs are not a direct subsidy, but they raise their own set of concerns about free speech and government involvement in advertising and direct promotion of commodities that might not be in the public's best interest to be so heavily advertised.

Sorry, I know that's not the same thing as just listing an easy-read casual resource, but there aren't many neutral casual resources online, at least not that I'm aware of. Because it's a niche topic, most of the explainers are being written by people who specifically want to draw attention to the problem and are writing from a vegetarian/vegan perspective. Which is what you would expect from a topic that doesn't get brought up very often, but it does mean that if you don't want to rely on those sources, you have to do a bit of digging.
If you click past the landing page to the explanations you’ll see LaTeX there.

Clicking dynamics leads here:

https://www.complexity-explorables.org/explorables/ride-my-k...