skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I guess what Semaphor is saying is that there is no nesting. Taking a look at "docs" as an example, you have these entries in "Top Pages" from https://plausible.io/plausible.io:

- /docs/self-hosting 4.1k 5.7k 67%

- /docs/ 2.1k 2.7k 30%

- /docs 1.6k 2.1k 15%

- /docs/self-hosting-configuration 1.2k 1.8k 57%

You have to select "/docs/self-hosting" directly, and once you done that, you don't see the subpages of that page anymore. If you select "/docs" you only see docs, not "/docs" + subpages so you can see the most popular blogpost and only pages under "/docs"
You read my mind! I moved out of a big city after lockdowns, and I realized that many of these little ambient noises or mental frictions which I had grown accustomed to -- it turns out that once I cut that out, it reduced my stress levels. I think there are a lot of parallels to draw from there to the workplace or other walks of life.
Oh how I'd love to see their list of profound statements and the pseudo profound bullshit!
I don't know if this person is saying they disagree with their friends on politics or if the vitriol in their friends' political speech is harmful to them. If the latter, I sympathize: most political conversations today are so filled with hate that "direct harm" to listeners is not unreasonable to claim.
Which implies that at least one of you is dishonest or irrational or too lazy to continue the debate. ;)

See: Are Disagreements Honest? by Tyler Cowen & Robin Hanson, 2002
I get the sense that the people who self reported as being good persuasive bullshitters probably aren’t fooling people to the extent they think they are. They’re just not aware of how transparent they are. And if those same people are also susceptible to fake news and pseudoscience, it kind of adds up to them just not being very smart.

Or perhaps, it adds up to them not being the kind of people who always take two ideas they have in their heads and test them to see if they are consistent with each other. After all, it takes work to try to figure out if you’re actually seeing the truth. And it takes work to realize you’re wrong about something and to update your mental model of the world. Maybe accepting/sowing bullshit is just easier.

If I’m trying to convince someone they’re wrong about something, the way I try to do it is to find a contradiction in their position. I point out two things they believe that can’t both be true at the same time and then I let them trace out the consequences on their own. But evidently for high bullshit individuals, that might not work, since they might not see self-contradictory ideas as a problem. How would you convince those people of anything? I’m not sure.
In geometry, it's conventional to use Greek letters for angles. If you have two angles, theta/phi or alpha/beta are reasonable names for them. Probably better than angle1/angle2 (in which the names are mostly "noise"), but if the angles play specific roles then it may be better to use informative names: azimuth/altitude or whatever.

In finance, there are lots of traditional Greek-letter names. Using gamma/delta/theta is probably _more_ immediately comprehensible to your audience than, say, secondOrderUnderlyingSensitivity/underlyingSensitivity/timeDerivative. (Of course, in this case you don't get to choose which Greek letters you use.)

There are other contexts where particular Greek-letter names are traditional. Again, usually you don't get to choose which ones you use (at least, not if you want to get any familiarity advantage from using them).

When doing algebraic manipulations, sometimes it's convenient to give one set of variables Latin-letter names and another "parallel" set corresponding Greek-letter names. E.g., if you're doing plane geometry, maybe one point is (x,y) and another is (xi,eta). In software, this is probably a strictly worse strategy than calling them (x1,y1) and (x2,y2) or something of the sort.
Sure, we are careful to keep her included in all conversations regardless. Also there isn't much going over her head and she loves to change the subject with a joke which amuses me the most.
Well the next step is to select language primitives based on their character length: > vs >=, + vs ++, == vs ===, var vs const, map vs filter. Or you could select the appropriate function argument count based on total character count. So many opportunities to improve readability.
About how expensive is it to rent a botnet and pull off an attack like this?
Water damage isn’t covered by Apple’s warranty. You can pay extra for AppleCare+, which covers accidental damage; however, you can do the same for just about any phone, and have been able to do so for years.
ordering pizza via computer, about a decade earlier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94d_h_t2QAA
That is data though. You might want to know more about those bot hits. You might want to ip ban certain ranges that aggressive traffic comes from.
What the author described is the difference between coming from a rich family and a poor one. There are many poor people of many ethnicities that face the same exact problem.
Somebody better let Denmark, Finland, Italy, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland know they are barbarian societies for want of a minimum wage!
Was Moses High? Was the Original Eucharist Psychoactive?
> also great hackers of the kind that you won't find anymore in regular startups.

Amazing, this is exactly what I was trying to put my finger on. I was kind of getting a gut feeling of this very special kind of OG hacker vibe which is quite rare, and honestly that's a /huge/ part of what made me interested in the space to begin with. It's as you say, a variety that you won't find anymore in regular startups, and that's exactly what makes it so exciting.

Thanks for sharing, I again really appreciate your perspective :)
Can the owner of the nft of a digital art start to sell printed copies in the real world and profit? Or other words, have the commercial rights to it?
Yep. I work with ear protection on (of the sort you'd use for mowing the lawn) most of the time for precisely this reason. I've found my anxiety levels are much lower after several hours of wearing them.
Deploy your first Machine Learning Model
That is not a uniquely black experience.

You could remove race from the whole thing and the same would be true for anyone coming from the same economic starting point.

This is not a black tax. All those struggles are the same regardless of race.
You're right, didn't look closely enough to see the timestamp. Saw it in the screenshot in the post and thought it was a recent comment.
How Web Components Are Used at GitHub and Salesforce
>That is, they drink their own kool-aid, and therefore the line between their pseudo-profundity and reality starts to disappear.

Largely helped by a society that would deem it too impolite to challenge them on it.
Depends on the tea, but I use 4g/125ml water and steep around 10 seconds for the first infusion. If I were to attempt the same with the stuff they put in Lipton tea bags, it would match your description perfectly, but if you use quality teas from China, it’s a whole different experience.
I don't think comparing zig's comptime with rust macros is actually that apt of a comparison. I tend to think of rust macros as syntactic sugar. Zig's comptime permeates the language thoroughly and in fundamental (and IMHO very pragmatic) ways. Top level const expressions are automatically comptime, modules are comptime structs, static polymorphism is used all over the stdlib (e.g. std.mem.eql), heck std.debug.print is written without special compiler tricks thanks to how cleanly you can use comptime in zig.

I think the idea that zig is a very sharp knife is true, but the overlap of footguns and comptime is not as big as one would think (@fieldParentPtr mistakes comes to mind, but that's sort of about it)
Show HN: Buy My Side Project
Bullshitting is manipulative storytelling. Some of what a bullshitter says is true. Some of it they even believe is true. Some of it they desperately want to be true. What's outright false they would say is unimportant and deflect rather than argue about.

But they're saying it to get something they want or avoid something they don't want, and they'll tell any remotely plausible story to make that happen. Bullshitters change the story to fit the situation, often in real time as it develops.

Lying is more straightforward in that the liar is saying something they specifically know is not true to deceive the listener.
Humans evolved to run on less water than our closest primate relatives
According to this talk [0] the reason is that the newly established car industry encouraged a massively unsustainable development pattern that eventually led to the bankruptcy of the city and since its the first city to be built with this pattern it was also the first to fail. Lots of other cities are suffering the same fate. New low density development at the edge of town at the expense of the self sustaining downtown core and then at some point the maintenance costs exceed the tax income and you get a city wide decline.

[0] https://youtu.be/Em7nqDqQ8oM
NFT is an initialism [0], not an acronym. Acronym is used when you say the initials as a single word (eg, “nift”). Initialism is used when you say each letter distinctly.

[0] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/initialism
> But it's also worth noting what a dishonest dodge it is for these huge companies posturing like "oh we care so deeply about this issue,

They have to say this. The executives of these large internet companies get dragged in front of congress regularly and some politicians built their entire careers on passing punitive targeted legislation against said companies.

> as though they can't build whatever pipeline they want to get the candidates they want to get.

That's what they're doing when they're trying to influence the curriculum of computer science departments.

As an aside, I remember flipping through AP (high school level) computer science tests and got a kick out of how the state education board tested students. Here's an example

Consider the following code segment.

List<String> animals = new ArrayList<String>();

animals.add("dog");

animals.add("cat");

animals.add("snake");

animals.set(2, "lizard");

animals.set(3, "fish");

animals.remove(3);

System.out.println(animals);

What is printed as a result of executing the code segment?

(a) [dog, fish, cat]

(b) [dog, fish, lizard]

(c) [dog, lizard, fish]

(d) [fish, dog, cat]

(e) The code throws an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException exception.

https://www.apcsaexam.org/uploads/1/0/7/7/107712547/ap_sampl...
Please support Web Monetization if you want less ads on the web
I read this quote from Andrew Wilkinson (co-founder of Tiny Capital):

"There are all these cool products that are on Product Hunt. Every day you think "that's cool". But most of them fizzle."

I know this from my own personal experience and I think this is also true for many other developers like me. We build fun little side projects, launch them on Product Hunt, but let them fizzle afterwards.

"A lot of the time it's started by a developer and the developer doesn't understand how to market and grow something."

And even when some of the developers do have the knowledge how to market and grow something, they're often not interested in it as much as creating something.

... read more from my blog about why I built this: https://saashacks.io/buy-my-side-project

I hope you like it!
There is nothing more frustrating than dealing with a BSer. Unfortunately I have found that a lot of effective BSers are actually pretty smart which makes sense since they tend to have some credentials to back up their arguments.

The other hard part about dealing with BSers at work is that oftentimes they are saying the types of things management wants to hear, ie "yes of course our team can build an entire hardware product in 8 months, it's easy!".
"People are full of shit man, really. But I don't mind people being full of shit I just don't like when people bring their full of shitness to me, right? And try to make me feel uncomfortable about how I'm full of shit to make me full of shit like them so that they feel more comfortable about how full of shit they are. you understand what I'm saying? I didn't really understand it myself but I know someone understood what I'm talking about." -- Patrice O'Neal
The biggest issue for LED matrix displays is not construction, but 1) density of the display and 2) size/power draw requirements.

You need to consider there's half a million of LEDs in a typical signage device. These consume and heat-up significantly compared to an OLED/LCD panel.

For a panel of the same size, OLED/LCD has higher density, which allows to pack more information (or have better quality signage in general).

It all depends on the usage scenario. In an indoor setting with fixed lighting, a larger LCD screen can be just as readable as OLED, can be very large nowdays (or tiled to achieve the same), and cost a fraction of a LED matrix.

OLED could definitely replace LCDs entirely, but it's still very expensive when it comes to larger panels, which is why it's just slowly replacing smaller displays at the moment.
Not quite as seamless as Zig, but dstep is an external program that leverages libclang to do the same thing (and generates a D module for you), as well as e.g., smartly convert #define macros to inlineable templates functions :)

https://github.com/jacob-carlborg/dstep
At my work, we call it the sales team.
Just about none of them are useless. All of them were used somewhere. That's how they made it in the book in the first place.
Two examples of times I have used Greek letter variable names: (a) Often times the Greek letter is the standard way of referring to a concept, e.g. "beta" in a linear regression. For these situations, the Greek letter would be used in spoken language to refer to the concept and is more clear than trying to describe the underlying concept in English. (b) If you implement a non-trivial mathematical equation, it is clearer to use the variable names which are found in the published equation than to try to rename them. To understand the equation, people will need to read the published description anyway, and it is easier to map one to the other if you don't change the names. Likewise, if you are implementing your own equation, you will usually use Greek letters in the paper, and for consistency, you should use the same variable names in the code as you do in your paper.
Right, but isn't that exactly the irony, or at least the hypocrisy? That people with the most liberal sensitivities seem willing to accept this level of visible human suffering for whatever personal benefits they get from living there?

People will stereotype Texans as rugged individualists ready to shoot you for stealing from a fruit stand, or Chinese as some heartless mass that will run you over and go about their day. But I don't see any cities in those places with such visible social problems.

Those drinking the SF Kool-Aid will tell you it's because of the weather being a magnet for homeless people, or some other such nonsense. As if nowhere else in the world keeps temps above freezing year round.
I'd like to see more performance analysis.

10 years ago I found there was little benefit for async i/o to a disk, even though it great for networking.

With SSD it coukd he different if you have a very long q depth, but he shows charts for copies over nfs where async i/o might find a lot of latency to hide.
They are, but in recent years the wealthy have ginned up the race wars to get everybody fighting and distract from the real issue of income disparity which continues to get wider in the US.
I'm an academic in an economics department. This paper is trash.

The published version of Peter Wakker et al's critique [1] is remarkably polite. You have to read their supplementary information [2] for the full, hilarious horror. Here are some juicy quotes to tempt you:

"The EU [expected utility] value does not actually have to be realized or consumed in any sense.... However, Peters erroneously thinks that the EU value must actually be realized in some sense.... EU involves imagining, a priori, some outcomes that later may not have actually been received. This procedure involves imagining consequences that will never happen. But we do this every day, and such is the nature of every probabilistic decision. We do not need to believe in “parallel universes” or the existence of “multiverse clones"...."

"A more fundamental problem in dynamic decisions is that we do not just maximize our entire wealth at the end of our life, but intermediate consumption patterns virtually always play a role. For nonquantitative outcomes, growth rates cannot even be defined. Dynamic questions as discussed here are central, for instance, in economic growth theory and in life-cycle consumption theory."

"Peters suggests that economists should primarily study intertemporal processes, the topic of ergodic theory. For example, he suggests that risk attitudes and risky variance are not important and that interpersonal variations are not important, and then, in one blow, that neither is any economic theory."

"Peters’ claims that, because of the ubiquity of time, we should always study intertemporal growth. Similarly, a risk theorist can claim that we always face uncertainties and, therefore, we should always study risk theories.... In the annotated bibliography Wakker (2020), the keyword “own small expertise = meaning of life” gives references to other authors falling victim to this ubiquity fallacy.

... and then there's the experiment. Oh boy, I'd forgotten that part!

"Meder et al. applied expected utility and prospect theory in a way that we call static: they applied EU and PT to each choice in each round separately, as if it was the only choice made and as if intermediate outcomes were actually received. This static analysis is incorrect. The intermediate outcomes are not outcomes received and consumed by subjects."

Translation: Sorry, kid, you failed your midterm.

tl:dr; This is nonsense, an embarrassment to the authors, and an embarrassment to physics. Yet it pops up on Hacker News from time to time as a Deep Mathematical Takedown of Economists by Physicists!!!!... No.[3]

[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-020-01106-x

[2] https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs415...

[3] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
That argument suffers considerably from a quick glance at how we treat our minds. If I take a quick survey of nutritional and intellectual fast food habits I can't pick a winner. It's bad on both sides and it doesn't even make much of a difference whether I look at society at large or no further than in the mirror.
Some rich dude has bought the "first tweet" for $2.5 million, despite the fact that it's publicly accessible [0]. I imagine it's about showing off how rich they are. They could achieve the same result by throwing $2.5 million into a furnace.

https://twitter.com/jack/status/20
I dont know about theres a "use".

Remember that crowdfunded, over engineered juicer? It was some $400 and claimed to do like 100 pounds of force on a pre-juiced juice packet to squeeze into a glass for you. Some other article showed you can just squeeze these packs by hand into your glass with barely any force. This was "the Keurig" of juicing.

Total shit show of over engineering and solutionism.

I see the same thing with crypto and NFTs currently. Everytime I have this discussion in person, I always say that I do believe there will be a viable digital currency of some sort in the near future. The current gen of tech has proved the want, which is important, but now a real how is needed along with commonsense.

Like, theres a real want for an easy to go, healthy juice. Just bottle it and sell it that way. Why go through the extra step of a juicer if the shit is already juiced. I won't doubt their drinks were good. But they got caught up in solutionism gimmicks. Digital currencies are caught up in the blockchain gimmick.
I apologize if this is too unsubstantive of a comment.

I primarily want to say how much I like the parent comment's writing. It is very evocative — "the tea sat tangibly in my stomach", eg, is the sort of description I'd expect in a well-written novel. Kudos nimbius.

Separately, I fully agree w/ the above point about a 2:100 ratio being well too much. The tea shop from which I buy generally recommends ~2g loose for a 175ml cup, but I still find this to be too strong at anything except a minimal brewing time. I tend to use about 1g/cup, ie a bit over 0.5% by weight.
Yes, it is like cleaning an oil spill.
Unfortunately the author oversimplified their argument. There could be a case for the “black tax” as a form of reparations, but never even discusses the long history of the government thwarting any gains black people attempted over the years. Such a shame.
> It might be controversial, but are you sure the current way is wrong?

No, current way is the most optimal I can think of in current situation. There are better ways, but not widely implementable currently.

As for more garbage - yes, there would be more noise, but ALSO more signal (in my humble opinion). Signal in this case is useful things, which would be multiplied by usability, which is a net win for me.
I never shall forget the alacrity with which Johnson answered, striking his foot with mighty force against a large stone, till he rebounded from it, 'I refute it thus.'

— James Boswell, The Life of Samuel Johnson
What kind of social engineering did this guy do to get a wikipedia page and a whole "law" after his name so people can quote it forever.

We've had proverbs for millennia about this. But no, let's use a silly Italian name to make it sound academic or something.
Eat some sardines and cod liver too for vitamin D. Scurvy doesn’t occur, fresh meat contains vitamin C, about 10-15mg per lb.
I spend a good 10 mins staring at the figure just before the header "Electrification of Vehicles" (I wish the author had numbered his figures properly). I still don't really understand what this chart means or says. Can anyone explain?
To take it further, imagine an even more futuristic procedure where a tumorous right brain is replaced alongside a healthy left brain. Who are you then?
ISO on why they refuse to make ISO standards publicly available
Perhaps they're bullshitting, and it's one of those fake studies? :)
Quiz – Which Eastern European City Would You Live in as a Digital Nomad?
Take the quiz to find out which place suits you
It maybe depends on who's going to be interacting with the code in what ways.

If you expect the code to be changed infrequently but read frequently, and if you think the justified version is easier to read or harder to miss errors in, then that could easily outweigh the cost of noisier diffs.

(I'm not sure whether I actually believe the following argument, but:) The increased likelihood of merge conflict is not necessarily a bad thing. If you've got a bunch of variables, structure entries, or whatever, that are related to one another, then if A changes one of them and B separately changes another this very well may be the sort of thing you need to look at carefully and explicitly, which is what getting a merge conflict forces you to do. And (maaaaybe) the more closely related nearby variables (etc.) are, the more likely people who like justified code are to justify them.

Full disclosure: I sometimes justify things in code, in cases where I think it helps to clarify relationships between nearby lines. I don't remember ever getting a merge conflict as a result, or having colleagues complain about noisier diffs. But I've generally worked in small teams and I've often been the only person working on a given bit of code, and what works well in that context is not necessarily the same as what works if you have a much larger group all poking at the same code.